jdub27

Simple Dan: Teller of #AlternateFacts before they went mainstream.

Considering it is going to be around a 20% across the board on state funding to the Universities and the athletic department receives state and school support, I'm not sure how you could read it any other way. I guess they could just exempt the athletic department but the backlash would be huge (and rightfully so) if academics had to pick up extra cuts because they didn't do their fair share.

I used that assumption. But that means the increase (which is impressive but doesn't actually cover the full announced amount of FCOA) is being used entirely for scholarships/FCOA and isn't being used to fund what would on the surface should equate to a $1.3 million cut. I'm using the definition of school funds that USA today uses: "Includes both direct and indirect support from the university, including state funds, tuition, tuition waivers etc., as well as federal Work Study amounts for student workers employed by athletics department. It also includes the value of university-provided support such as administrative services, facilities and grounds maintenance, security, risk management, utilities, depreciation and debt service that is not charged to the athletics department." I'm having a hard time trying to figure out why the rest of the campus would have to look at their budget and make cuts why the athletic department would get to pick and choose and only look at less than 10% of their budget and trim that. The numbers don't add up. Maybe there is still excess funds available from the dining hall, who knows?

I have no clue where Caillou gets his numbers (but I know where he got his education!!). Per USA Today, in 2015, NDSU got $6.6 million from direct institutional support out of their $22.3 million budget (29.4%). UND got $7.3 million of direct institutional support out of their $24.3 million budget (30.2%). So pretty close on that front. This doesn't include student fees, which UND relies heavier on and was approved by UND students in a vote. NDSU students rejected NDSU's athletic department to raise theirs last year, mostly due to how bad they botched their presentations. Because travel and equipment and stuff... Using 2015 numbers (most recent available) and rough calculations, if the state funding is going to be cut around 20%, that means that UND and NDSU will have to come up with ways to shore up around $1.46 million and $1.32 million respectively for the athletic departments to take on their fair share of budget reductions. UND is doing what it needs to do and looking at cutting sports, mainly because they sponsor too many for their size at the D-1 level and can't possibly make them all competitive (and finally doing what they should have done a decade ago). NDSU obviously can't cut any sports if it wants to keep any hope at all for a move up or (at least the illusion of one) since the FBS requires 16, which NDSU currently sponsors, while FCS requires 14. NDSU's fundraising is up around $300K, which, assuming no other rising costs, still leaves around $1 million of what they hypothetically need, but that doesn't include any funding any of the FCOA. Maybe the Teammakers donations don't account for those funds but reading their releases, I have a hard time seeing how they wouldn't. Per the Forum article, apparently their budget for this year is slated to be less than it was in 2015, so it is possible they had done some reductions already to cover some of it but somehow the rest of the plan seems to be not hiring two positions that previously didn't even exist and that is going to bridge the shortfall. I am really confused on where the Forum got their data from, which actually make UND look better than they are. But looking at what is publicly available and seems to be more accurate, I guess I'm not following the numbers and have no clue how they make any sense but I'm sure now that the Forum did their "duty" and said there won't be any issues, it won't be brought up or questioned again.

UND has no answer for Willey or Bogdan. Guess that size shouldn't be able to move or handle the ball like that at this level. Need to get Bogdan his fifth. Go at him.

Won't argue his talent and I don't think that has nothing to do with why he isn't on the team. We've definitely seen bad team chemistry hold back teams in the past, possibly a lesson learned by the staff to try to prevent that in the future. Not sure if he caught on at another program or not, I wish the kid well and hope he finds success.

Sometimes there is addition by subtraction.

I assume you just mean switch UND's game correct? 2020 UND - @NDSU, @SDSU, USD USD - NDSU, @SDSU, @UND NDSU - SDSU, @USD, UND SDSU - @NDSU, USD, UND 2021 UND - NDSU, SDSU, @USD USD - @NDSU, SDSU, UND NDSU - @SDSU, USD, @UND SDSU - NDSU, @USD, @UND

Thanks for the update. I know a UM ticket holder who was still waiting to hear back but hadn't got any info yet. Minnesota was given a small allotment of tickets, as visiting teams are for any game, and reading between the lines, they are using everything internally.

I mean, it totally would have made sense to turn down a job that offered almost a 50% raise at a larger university that also isn't dealing with huge budget cuts, but people wrote him nice e-mails and that is clearly what changed his mind.

Fixed it for you.

UND's actually slightly positive on rebounding margin this year. Not sure on the thinking behind Walters but seems like all of UND's bigs have been dinged up at one point or another this year and with the senior talent, you do what you need to.

You can customize results here: http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/ncaapwcr.php

Short-term outlook, just looking at this game and nothing else: Boston winning moves UND to 9 and BC falls to 10. BC winning moves UND to 8 and BC stays at 7. Northeastern winning helps UND out slightly as well .

Interesting. I'm positive that they got some, though not many. Maybe they meant they didn't receive any that will be released to the public (just team/family/huge donors).

Looking at the map early in the process, there appeared to be two or three small sections carved out with pretty much the rest available. My guess is there will be a very limited amount left for the public sale.

I don't think UND is all of the sudden in much superior conferences nor do I think they are downgrading. As I've stated many times, both conferences have their pluses and minuses. There are plenty of things I will miss about the Big Sky and don't care for in the Summit/MVFC. There are things I like about the Summit/MVFC that I didn't care for in the Big Sky. In basketball, both are one bid leagues. In football, both are multiple bid leagues. None of that will change regardless of which conference UND is in. Nor will it change history, which shows UND getting into the Big Sky and NDSU being denied twice. Different times, different circumstances, sure, but it still is what it is. I mean, it wouldn't be any different than a decade ago when there were NDSU fans who thought the Big Sky was the greatest thing ever and couldn't wait to join. Member?

There is no doubt that the football team is in the red on paper, but as a pure ROI, it is a much better deal. It offers around 100 opportunities for that price and that also doesn't take into account the 20+ kids who are on the team but paying tuition, that otherwise wouldn't be at UND nor the Champions Club donations that are given strictly because of the football program. On the flip side, you have a handful of women's players who aren't on scholarship and no major donations tied to the program existing. And the loss is being done for the benefit of 25 student athletes, or 1/4 of what football provides. While small on a relative scale, FCS football also provides the opportunity for much more exposure (marketing) for the University. One of them also shows growth potential, as even this year there was a large uptick in ticket sales to the tune of over six figures. WIH had two of the best players in the world, both who happened to be from Grand Forks, and still couldn't get anything resembling a decent crowd (outside the $1 ticket promotions against Minnesota). I get what I think your point is: Football loses money too, why isn't it being considered. The money football loses is overstated somewhat due to revenues that aren't included while WIH is understated due to having expenses ignored. Football offers 4x more opportunities than WIH. Football is also providing opportunity for local kids, with around 15% of the kids being from ND while there is currently 1 ND girl on the WIH roster.

Crawling back? Seems like UND got everything they wanted out of the deal. Lower travel costs and a home for their football team, despite the fact that it doesn't really benefit the MVFC. Seems like the Summit wanted a 10th team enough that the schools in the league had no issue adding an unneeded team to their football conference.

Sometimes you need to trust the source and I would in this situation. And there is a difference between hurt and injured. At this point in the season, there are quite a few players playing dinged up.

All that was already in the paper to handle the initial cuts. You aren't bringing anything new up. And none of it addresses athletics.

Not Alabama, but close. Just ask their play by play guy or head of media relations.

You actually are because you wouldn't have to it staff during games and open it up for practices. In terms of what the program costs, it is probably a small percentage, but it something. I think most people see both sides of the argument but rightfully have an issue that it was (and still is to some) considered untouchable with no factual reason given, especially when the true numbers and ROI all the sudden were discussed publicly.

Considering he tried to bring one of the biggest Duluth trolls out there, who has an absolute hatred of everything UND, over here to make his argument for him instead of doing it himself, seems fair. There is no shame in liking women's hockey, I attend a few games and enjoy it for what it is. However, it is his stance that it is unfathomable that women's hockey should even be in consideration for being cut, then not defending it while continuing taking half-informed shots on twitter at people who have laid out their arguments with actual numbers is what people rightly have an issue with. Seriously, the fact that he continues to not even see why it should be discussed while offering zero other possible solutions is mind-blowing.

You need to reiterate your stance because your seem absolutely bewildered that a sport that gives around 20 student athletes an opportunity at college should be allowed to lose over $2 million/year, yet it shouldn't be in the discussion for being eliminated. Many of the people who are against it have laid out the numbers on why and it isn't willy nilly. It is because the cost per participant and ROI are beyond a joke. I've watched games and attend since. I didn't need to spend a few bucks to do it because I got in free. It's a fun way to kill a few hours some weekend. That doesn't mean it makes sense for UND's athletic department and current budget situation. When they miss the tournament this year, that will make them 2 out of 15 in making the national tournament in a sport that takes the top 8 out of 30 (I'll will concede the rankings in women's hockey is broke). It isn't hard to explain that when you've already cut two men's sports recently and your athletic department is leaning so heavy against men's sports that they could have a legitimate Title IV issue, that maybe a women's sport should be cut. Since the mid-90s, UND has cut three men's sport (wrestling, baseball and golf, though currently saved by outside funding), added one men's sport (tennis) and added four women's sports (golf, tennis, soccer and hockey) for a net difference of -2 to +4 (since golf is not paid for by the university). If people want to scream about that, than they can feel free to look like idiots while the sane people look at the numbers. And if you think the would be "national" outcry then you need to step outside the REA press box and take a look at the real world. EDIT - Should add that Football did add scholarships, so on the men's side it is probably closer to even since the mid-90s, while the women's side has added 4. Despite all this, I still think they'll be saved and continue to be a giant anchor on the athletics department budget.