Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

jdub27

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    9,708

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    132

 Content Type 

Everything posted by jdub27

  1. jdub27
    Anderson
  2. jdub27
    Their recommendations are not realistic and because of that, they failed to do what they were asked. I'm not sure how a reasonable person can say that providing unattainable solutions instead of addressing the underlying issue is them somehow doing the job they were tasked with. They complained about not having a say the first go-around and when getting what they demanded, they decided they didn't want blood on their hands. That's their prerogative but don't act surprised when people call it for what it is.
  3. jdub27
    Directed at the linebacker who took down their running back with an ankle tackle. Unfortunate play but the defender did what any other player in the situation would do.
  4. jdub27
    They should be more concerned about the adults in their fanbase who send tweets directly at opposing student athletes for making plays that they are bitter about after losing.
  5. jdub27
    The IAC publicly spoke out about not being included in the discussion when baseball and golf were cut. Kennedy gave them what they wanted this time and they pull this BS. By their own doing, they have completely relegated themselves as pointless. My gut feel is that there were some personal feelings getting in the way of some of the members on making a decision so they punted. Sports will be cut but now some of them think they will be able to sleep better at night taking the cowardly way out. There are cuts that can be made regardless of what conference UND is in. I wouldn't feel good if I was currently one of those sports.
  6. jdub27
    Going to be a perfect day to tailgate. Get out, enjoy the beautiful weather, eat, drink and they go yell loud.
  7. jdub27
    Get there early, walk around and you won't be disappointed or hungry. Stop and say hi to any group and you'll be taken care of.
  8. jdub27
    I agree with this 100%. However it is a completely different argument than what was trying to be made. The athletic department is claiming all of its expenses, it just isn't allocating them internally the way they should be. That has zero effect on the actual budget issue itself, which is what the FargoU fan was trying to claim. It finally got to the point where it forced their hand, though it was explored on how to get through it without cutting any sports (because that sucks to do), but someone finally put their foot down and is doing what is best for the long-term.
  9. jdub27
    Two different things. I have no disagreement that within the athletic department, they need to figure out how they are allocating certain expenses. However that is much different than the shell game that bison73 keeps trolling about yet giving no details on for the last how many months. How UND is accounting for things doesn't effect the athletic budget, just individual programs, which isn't the issue at hand. All expenses that should be attributed to the athletic department are within the athletic department (and I'd probably argue more so because of funds paid to the REA, though that should eventually shake out in the end). Now if UND was running athletic expenses through their dining or housing services and not properly allocating them to athletics, that would be an actual shell game that has an impact, but that isn't what is going on. At least in Grand Forks.
  10. jdub27
    What shell game? All expenses are accounted for within the athletic department, exactly where they should be. A shell game would have them running funds through other departments within UND. It can easily be argued that sport specific accounting needs improvement, but that has zero effect on the athletic budget. The cuts are related to state mandated cuts and a tuition cap that caused a prefixed deficit. I'm confused where you get that they aren't trying to increase revenues? There are two sides to the budget equation, both are being worked on. Only one of them can have a direct, immediate impact and makes for good headlines. But keep spinning your vague conspiracy theories. The timelines of what had caused this, when and how it was handled have all been laid out multiple times. But since you seem to be an expert, are you finally going to actually spell something specific out instead of continuing to claim things that have zero relation to actual events are somehow tied together?
  11. jdub27
    How was this unimaginable? It should have been done a decade ago and there are people within UND who stated at the time of the D-1 move that it was only a matter of time. What is almost more unimaginable is that it took this long. There are a lot of innocent programs, coaches and students who's programs bring in no revenue and cost a significant amount on the expense side (and for the record I enjoy watching many of these programs compete). Besides cuts, how else is there any possible way to balance the budget? Spread resources even more thin? State funding has been chopped so that isn't an option. The non-revenue sports are going to magically start producing revenue. Cutting the budget is the only viable alternative. I won't argue that I have disagreed with some of the decisions that have been made, processes used to come up with them and who has been effected, but there are reasons those decisions were made even though I don't agree with them. Communicating those a little more clear would helps things as well. It seems you are projecting a lot of anger and blame on someone who is finally standing up, cleaning up a mess long in the making and facing tough decisions that need to be made to make the remaining programs stronger. I'd love if UND could sponsor even more sports than they already do, providing limitless opportunities for student athletes. Unfortunately that is not a reality because that requires a lot of money that is not available. Based on current realities, UND needs to figure out what it is going to sponsor and properly fund those programs. I'm happy to see it appears that is exactly what they are working on doing.
  12. jdub27
    If anyone is confused this round of cuts are being handled the way they are, with the input from the IAC and presentations, this article from April gives you your answer. It also says quite a bit about how some of the faculty views athletics. There was no way the administration was going to do it the same way Schafer did it, especially with Kennedy wanting to get off on the right foot with the faculty, many of who already have doubts about him due to not being "academia". That being said, you'd think a group who wanted to be part of the decision making process would at least have a clue on the subject matter, which did not appear to be the case at all.
  13. jdub27
    Considering it gives out ~60 scholarships and has far and away the most participants, of course it is going to have high expenses, that is just simple math. It also actually brings in some revenue unlike the majority of other sports (both on ticket sales and donations). Its tough to say exactly where it falls because some sports aren't being charged the proper expenses.
  14. jdub27
    WS&D offers a max of 14 scholarships. I'm not sure how close "close enough is" (MIH is 18) and the only real way to find out is when you get named in a lawsuit. I also don't know how or if the "facilities" portion would play in to anything but the Hyslop would need some updates if they wanted to do more than just pay lip service to it. I know the facilities themselves have had a few things done but I would guess the locker room/student athlete areas are not where they need to be.
  15. jdub27
    I don't think its really a one or the other answer, but yes, percentiles play a part. I mean there around 50 schools who spend $20 million on football so there is no way that you can even come close to balancing that out on the women's side but if you can show you fund some or all women's sports at the top when compared to peers, than that is where the "tiering" defense or explanation comes in. Facilities play some part as well but there is so much gray area and everything so subjective, that some schools take it too far trying to be in compliance, which is where I believe UND is currently at. And yes, fully agree on your last part. Don't mistake my explanations for defending the decisions being made at UND. I'm just trying to help with some of the explanation because as others have noted, UND isn't doing itself any favors in the transparency department on the reason for some decisions being made. I know that it isn't black and white and there is a lot of subjectivity and I am positive that people may not agree with them or why they were made but at least presenting some of the reasoning would be more helpful than giving no explanations.
  16. jdub27
    Both of them would require around $2 million.
  17. jdub27
    Because this made me laugh, I looked it up. Due to small number of teams, UND would have to be pretty much at the top and would cost roughly $300-400K to get there. Red Ray could definitely provide some home lane advantage. Side note - Vanderbilt spent $700K on women's bowling in 2014!!
  18. jdub27
    I don't believe there is any sort of distinction with FCS and FBS, it is all D1 so they manage to not run into any issues. Also, I don't think UND has any desire to use them as a barometer for compliance. This is my interpretation as well. I think the bigger issue is that UND is low to mid in funding in all of its sports except men's hockey. Because it is an outlier and so high on the men's side, there needs to be proportional offset on the women's side. They have chose to use women's hockey as that offset. They don't have to. Without looking, I would feel pretty comfortable saying that all of their sports are supported in the top 10-15% of D1. Again, UND has one huge outlier in MIH that falls way out of the norm compared to the rest of its sports. Because of the huge difference, there needs to be an offset. Zero disagreements with either of these comments. I'm not sure why it isn't being explained better but really seems to make things worse. Again, the tiering thing is by no means the only thing that is being considered but from what I've been told, it plays a part and is likely the reason women's hockey wasn't even listed as being considered. Don't agree with it and still think their budget can be trimmed with no issues. Tennis would be around $700K more (note that the current budget is around $200K). S&D would be around $850K more.
  19. jdub27
    UND -3.5 (though it is at -120, which is the typical vig for FCS games)
  20. jdub27
    How many of those schools support their men's hockey program at the very top? My guess is not many and it doesn't take a lot to fall to the middle level of support once you factor in the B1G schools and a handful of the NCHC and Hockey East schools. Once you are in the middle, my guess is it is just one big gray area. When you are in the top 10%, it is a lot harder to blend in.
  21. jdub27
    I thought something similar until I started looking into the numbers. Volleyball is the first one I thought of. Back of the napkin example (and again there are a lot more factors than this): Men's hockey is likely in the top 10% of funding, if not higher. That would mean VB would need to be top 30 in spending in D-1. That would require UND to spend around $1.6 million+ on volleyball, which means UND would need to add almost $1 million to its volleyball budget. The only issue is that Volleyball is 12 scholarships and MIH is 18, so you still need to find another (smaller) sport to fund at a higher level to get the proportionality down. If you wanted to do basketball, the WBB budget would likely need to be around $3.8 million, which is an increase of over $2.5 million (and you still might be short a couple scholarships, but maybe close enough at 18 and 15). This makes it clear that it is definitely possible to eliminate women's hockey, but it probably doesn't save the amount of money that everyone (myself included) thinks/hopes it would in the grand scheme of things. And again, this is all separate from the fact that WIH needs to a)have a budget accurately reflects what they are getting and b)looking at taking a little bit of haircut once the accurate numbers are figured.
  22. jdub27
    Women's hockey is protected because they offset the funding of the men's hockey team. The level the men's hockey team is funded to ranks very high related to other schools that offer it. Because of the "tiering" portion of Title IX, there needs to be a women's sport that is funded at a similar level related to other institutions (see below). As bad as it is, women's hockey participation/scholarship number is very close to the men's team so the offset is just one sport instead of multiple and is unfortunately probably the least worst option. When you start looking at the funding that would be required to put other women's sports in the top tier to offset hockey, the dollar amounts become staggering when looking at what some of the P5 schools spend on women's programs. In women's hockey, there isn't a ton of huge schools that are dumping money in and it is easier for UND to be towards the top tier. That being said, not allocating any expenses of the REA to women's hockey severely understates the funding they receive and is a complete joke. That needs to be fixed and then the budget for the program re-evaluated to see if there are room for some cost cutting because there is zero doubt in my mind that the WIH budget is too high.
  23. jdub27
    That is at least a fair assumption instead of just saying UND would probably be on the road. Last year, WIU either didn't bid or got outbid by non-scholarship Dayton, to play in front of 997 fans (not a typo). Hard to say about SDSU. They've been outbid by Montana, Montana State and NAU the last three years for first round games. They did host EIU in 2012, but I'm not sure that says much.
  24. jdub27
    Based on what?
  25. jdub27

    2016 Stats

    jdub27 replied to darell1976's topic in Football

    Assuming those losses are quality of course... Because 7-4 with an FBS win and a win over a seeded team on the road would seem better than 6-5, but I guess that's just one person's opinion. And that's not even getting into other 7-4 teams resume... Hope the team wins out and is not a concern. The narrative about UND's schedule is already being thrown around.
×
×
  • Create New...