jdub27
-
Posts
9,803 -
Joined
-
Days Won
133
Everything posted by jdub27
-
Can't see the source numbers for 2016, but using the aggregate report it looks like just short of $1.2 million for both of them, which I believe is over $900K less than UND.
-
They don't know or care. That's the sad part, in order to actually fix the budget instead of band-aid it again, something needed to be cut and anyone who has looked at the numbers cannot argue the decision that was made without bringing a whole lot of emotion into play. Their continued advocating for WIH sends the message that the they program they support is more important than the ones that survived (even if they won't come out in say it directly), despite cutting WIH giving many more student-athletes opportunities at UND (this of course doesn't even bring into the compliance part of the issue). Also very conveniently left out is that one is the Strength and Conditioning coach for the WIH team and the other is a Volunteer Assistant Coach for the WIH and a performance specialist at Altru plus they run a hockey camp together. While unfortunate, it does seem relevant that they have a personal financial stake in UND continuing to subsidize women's hockey.
-
It seems like the main argument for keeping WIH is that UND and the state of North Dakota should be the ones subsidizing various country's Olympic squads to the tune of $2 million per year. UND needs to make sure these numbers are out in front of this argument because if the USA Hockey incident is any indication, it seems logical that misinformation and exclusion of relevant facts is going to be the heart of the campaign. And at the low, low cost of only $8 million every Olympic cycle! Though remember, if you ever make a decision they don't agree with, they will use the platform you helped them build to smear the University!
-
Why does this keep popping up? The Big Sky does not sponsor swimming and diving but the Summit definitely does.
- 2,150 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- budget shortfall
- restructuring
- (and 1 more)
-
They review/increase them every 4 years.
-
So average cost per student athlete somewhere around 1/4 of women's hockey? Not to mention football also brings in Champions Club donations, which aren't included in revenues, and has had more fans in one game than WIH get's in an entire season. Or that football will be increasing ticket prices slightly, which will bring another couple hundred thousand dollars.
- 2,150 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- budget shortfall
- restructuring
- (and 1 more)
-
With all the interest that has suddenly popped up, literally all it would take is some students to indicate on their surveys that they would like it.....
-
Agree normally but listened anyway. Thought it was well done and McFeely let him answer and agreed with him on most. Went into details a little bit more on a few things. Worth a few minutes.
-
I used UND box scores. Not sure why there would be a discrepancy. I don't think anyone is excited women's hockey was dropped because they don't like it, they are happy that the administration finally made a decision based on actual numbers, because if you look at them, it wasn't even close. I attended some games and it is unfortunate it won't be an option for people any more but UND has dug itself enough holes making decisions based on "feelings of others".
-
Not quite. Averages for the 3 years the twins were here: 2010/2011 - 1,259 2011/2012 - 1,406 2012/2013 - 1,216 Total average - 1,294 WBB's lowest average during and since then was 1,469 (during their transition) and has been consistently a couple hundred higher. MBB's lowest average during and since then was 1,625 and has been consistently a couple hundred higher. UND also charges for tickets for those games.
-
To add on to your equation, S&D was splitting around 18 scholarships between 54 participants, meaning that the equivalence of 36 fully paid tuitions that were coming from S&D that most likely wouldn't have been here. WIH was at 18 scholarships and 25 participants.
-
Yet way more people know that UND won the Big Sky in basketball than would know if UND won a women's hockey championship and it isn't even close. So you think it would have been fair to cut 2 or 3 other sports instead of women's hockey? That is what it would have taken (minimum) to reach the same number dollar amount. Why is women's hockey a sacred cow and allowed to lose over $2 million per year to support 25 student-athletes? The budget cuts had to come from somewhere and anyone who takes an objective look at the numbers understands this. The fact that they made the choice that effects the least amount of student athletes should be applauded. Losing S&D was a much bigger loss in terms of ROI and participation and their costs was somewhere between 1/5 and 1/6 that of women's hockey.
-
Minnesota has an athletic budget of $111 million, that $2 million is 1.8% of their budget. UND has an athletic budget of $24 million (4.5x smaller), that $2 million is over 8.3% of their budget. UND was required to cut $1.3 million of their athletic budget because they have a state subsidy of over 43% to supplement their athletic budget. UM takes a 6% subsidy on their athletic budget. These are not comparable situations.
-
Their total net cost in 2016 exceeded $2 million. They have to raise that per year.
-
How many more people will sign it than their total attendance for the entire year? Looks like the line is set at 15,353.5
-
Should have went even deeper into the numbers but at least they put the total savings of the three programs, it's a start.
-
The only penalty UND will have be if to leave the WCHA. That was reported today. Unless they changed the plans, Phase II won't replace the Hyslop. Could do some interesting things with it depending on a few different things. I don't know for sure but was told that students no longer have access to the Hyslop pool anymore? If true, not sure how that plays into anything.
-
Yeah, it was right around the time UND and UNC applied as affiliate members and Douple ignored it. Those two ended up joining the WAC and then baseball got cut at UND. What's your point?
- 2,150 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- budget shortfall
- restructuring
- (and 1 more)
-
Tough to make UND start up baseball when it clearly isn't a Summit mandated sport. Especially after the Summit has already accepted them and didn't make it a condition. My guess is UND has to add a couple scholarships to a few sports, probably Men's Tennis since it currently has zero.
-
It isn't the fact that it lost money. It is the fact that it lost money like no other sport on campus and it isn't even close. Cost per student athlete was 2-3x any other sport at minimum. If you bothered to watch the press conference, cuts are done. UND went above and beyond and will soon be recognizing some conference realignment benefits. I know it is easier to have a knee jerk reaction instead of looking into the facts, but give it a whirl.
-
The people criticizing UND are completely ignoring this. The other option was to leave WIH and then cut 2-3 more sports, impacting even more student athletes. These cuts weren't done for fun, they were done out of necessity, meaning something has to go. Cutting WIH by and away makes the largest financial impact and while impacting the fewest amount of student-athletes no matter how you measure it.
-
Hard numbers do not appear to be included in press release or brief FAQ. Hopefully at some point they will be put out and put an immediate stop to all the false accusations that will be coming out.
- 2,150 replies
-
- 3
-
-
- budget shortfall
- restructuring
- (and 1 more)
-
Exactly. I hope the press release spells out the costs of what they are cutting and why, it is really tough to dispute the reasoning when the numbers are on the table. Obviously the usual suspects are already out crying sexism and Title IX but they have no clue on the actual numbers and won't bother checking into them. Apparently a sport that has a net cost that is over twice as much per any other student athlete on campus is worth it just because. I guess they would have been fine with cutting 2-3x more sports and student-athlete opportunities because somehow that is fair.
- 2,150 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- budget shortfall
- restructuring
- (and 1 more)
-
Because it has nothing to do with the team on the ice and everything to do with people not being able to accept change of a logo/name that has changed multiple times since UND was started. Absolutely not. The good news is we can now move on to something we'll agree on, confirmation already swirling on twitter and will be confirmed at 3:30.
-
One specific chant needs to stop. It's embarrassing whether people realize or not. Get rid of that and the criticism of those who won't move on will die down. Don't care about the rest of it but the name and logo are gone and not coming back, correct? I'm not getting rid of any of my Sioux stuff, still wear/display it and don't think anyone else should either. But I can accept its now a historical item and in fact it is not "Sioux Forever".
