UND-FB-FAN
-
Posts
10,879 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
101
Posts posted by UND-FB-FAN
-
-
2 minutes ago, tnt said:
Might need to tell that to UND "FOOTBALL FAN" and others that try to wedge one program against the other.
Where have you been the last couple weeks? The REA inc./UND agreement and current controversy has illustrated the "wedging" for me. I just happened to sense tensions of this sort years ago and have been outspoken about it. It's simply a fact that makes UND athletics less than completely functional as a whole.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, 90siouxfan said:
interesting thread, I think I am less of a football fan because of it.. carry on
Once again the programs get isolated. Support the entire University, not just a single program. I find it hard to believe many of these people are UND graduates.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, darell1976 said:
Good point, we have great facilities for basketball and football.
Not great when considering football coaching offices, meeting rooms, and locker rooms. This is what I said in my previous post and somehow the Alerus Center trumped that.
-
48 minutes ago, darell1976 said:
Facilities don’t mean anything if we can’t win on the field. We have an IPF while NDSU has a bubble and they win it all while we have only a shared conference title to show for it. It’s a good recruiting tool but that can only go so far when comparing to wins and titles.
??
Disagree. Recruiting is a huge part of winning, man.
NDSU's facilities are very nice within FargoDome; completely cater towards their football program.
-
14 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:
Agree with you both sports need to be funded better but what's wrong with the Betty? Or the Alerus?
They're fine. Salaries and HPC phase II desperately needed. Without those two things, UND is not a top school within both the MVFC and Summit.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:
But UND is it known as a "hockey school"......whether that is right or wrong yet you have no problem with the redistribution of that program's revenue. The current REA agreement needs to be renegotiated to better terms for the other sports but here shouldn't be continued excuses for the MBB and FB programs to underachieve revenue wise. When the Alerus is 70% full attendance wise and MBB is even less I don't see how that is all on the hockey program. BTW I have yet to see any one claim that FB and BB need to "entirely carry their own weight" but I could have missed a post or two.
Football and basketball need more support. That is simply the way it is. It isn't an excuse when facts and figures show UND football & basketball coaches are underpaid and the coach offices, locker room and meeting room facilities are less than adequate (especially for football). If those things weren't the case and attendance was still horrible, then your attendance argument would perhaps work. But until football and basketball have adequate level funding and facilities we don't know what they can actually be within Grand Forks as DI programs. They've never had that opportunity since the REA came on board during the DII era and revenue redistribution was not addressed during the DI transition.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:
Very valid points but at what point are those 2 sports somewhat responsible for generating revenue?
They aren't if UND continues to be labeled a " hockey school". You can't have it both ways; that is, label UND a "hockey school" but yet expect football and basketball to entirely carry their own weight. That double standard is ridiculous as it tears UND apart, as evidenced by some of the responses on this board. Despite what people may think, I have no problem with UND emphasizing hockey; but, it should be perfectly acceptable then for hockey to support to a certain degree the other programs. If you want to be the bell cow sport, then embrace it. Look around the country and see how it is done. This idea that UND hockey is a separate entity from every other sport is horrible and needs to stop.
-
4
-
-
Just now, Oxbow6 said:
Revenue in MBB and FB needs to increase.....period. However anyone wants to make that happen I'm all for it.
Impossible for the University of North Dakota to make that happen though, right? It would have to be from an outside donor apparently. No way the available funds internally could be renegotiated and redistributed, right? Some people have really strange views on how collegiate athletics work; the extraordinarily rare gift of the REA has really skewed people's ability to understand this.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
4 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:This is a fantasy.
I've lived the opposite. Others were treated like !@#$ on toast by the FB program and that was BEFORE they went on the D1jv run. Can't imagine the genuflecting that is required now.
D1jv run? You realize UND plays at the same level, right? You are really showing your true colors towards "other" UND athletics; it's impossible for attitudes like this to ever actually help UND athletics.
-
7
-
4 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Literally the definition of welfare. Lets not try to make entities stand for themselves but rather just provide to them from others.
They ARE being enhanced NOW with some of the fortunate revenue generated by REA. When is it ever going to be enough? 50%.... 75%... 100%...
The entire point of negotiations ... can you prove that the Englestads don't pocket some of the revenue that truthfully belongs to UND via their student-athletes? Don't worry, your precious hockey is maxed out and a 50/50 split (hell even a 75/25 split) won't sink the mighty UND hockey program.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Literally the definition of welfare. Lets not try to make entities stand for themselves but rather just provide to them from others.
They ARE being enhanced NOW with some of the fortunate revenue generated by REA. When is it ever going to be enough? 50%.... 75%... 100%...
Although now it appears that the fight IS all about the logo. And the hypothtical windfall of merch revenue that the center court logo will generate.
Really KEM should compromise on this part as the logo is already "on the court" as it sits on the plan now... it really isnt that big of a deal, just would want the North Dakota wordmarks on the ends.
Why do you want to isolate all the programs as separate entities and not just embrace the entire UND athletic department? It's too bad there are "fans" of UND that clearly associate with only a single program and not several.
So what if UND hockey were to help out other programs; it ultimately would move the entire athletic department forward. It's amazing how UND hockey fans subconsciously represent the very mindset that inherently exists with the REA agreement: protect UND hockey at all costs, even if it comes at the expense of other UND programs.
-
1
-
-
UND hockey and the REA are in a tremendous position because they have an actual revenue stream; that's great. Many major DI programs (including hockey, football, and basketball) around the country, despite their size, are often turning net losses. It's the reality of collegiate athletics. Therefore, the overall goal here is not to make UND football and basketball revenue sources; rather, it is just to enhance them with some of the fortunate revenue generated via the REA.
-
2 minutes ago, snova4 said:
Do you think NDSU treats the football team equally as the tennis team? The sports that most other universities emphasize aren't the ones driving the revenue bus at UND.
"... particularly for the sports that most other universities emphasize."
Tennis never falls into that category.
-
1 hour ago, snova4 said:
Some of you amaze me. The impact on the community alone because of this one time donation can't be measured. I can say, as someone that doesn't live in Grand Forks, I've spent North of $10,000 since 2010 in Grand Forks that wouldn't have been spent without that building, and that's without attending a game the last two years (damn kids). How many more people are there like me? It's not strictly you blue bloods filling that building and the hotels each weekend. Without that hockey program, what does Grand Forks offer to outsiders that couldn't be found in any other mid size city in the Midwest? The only thing that's unique and an attraction is a hockey program that offers a better atmosphere than any pro game I've ever been to, and it's quite likely based solely on that building.
As far as other donors, I don't see anyone else ponying up over $100 million for anything, and even if they did, why would they want to? While Kennedy might be in the right, and at the end of the day a logo on the floor shouldn't matter, but you can't tell me that someone that spends that kind of money isn't going to want some kind of say no matter who they are, and the condescending response by Kennedy in the emails is going to give them pause, because if he's going to talk like that to someone that's spent that kind of money, he'll do it to anyone.
Finally, yes, North Dakota is in a budget crunch, that should have been foreseen, and it's not ridiculous to request a revisit to the revenue sharing agreement, but at the same time, the university has made some extremely questionable decisions in money allocation over the past several years when this budget shortfall could have been predicted. While this will blow up in Engelstad Foundations face, the university is going to have collateral damage from other donors because of Kennedy's arrogance. Seriously, he implied that he would sue a donor, you don't think that's not going to give other donors pause?
Although this post makes perfect sense, it is missing the overall issue of equality and mutual benefit within the entire athletic department, particularly for the sports that most other universities emphasize.
The UND-REA revenue sharing agreement is outdated; that's all. The terms of the agreement need to be renegotiated for the present DI landscape. No one here is trying to say the REA or the UND hockey program is the primary problem; actually, its part of the solution.
The budget crisis cannot be entirely explained by UND misspending; that is shortsighted.
Very few people, if anyone, are advocating the hockey program or the REA is a bad thing. It's the way it is presently utilized in the context of the overall athletic department that is to be debated.
My previous post again applies.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Oxbow6 said:
How did you conjecture all that from his one post?
The post of his you are referencing is factual in all 3 points he makes. There was nothing mentioned of inequality, logo, or revenue distribution. If you are going to present an argument at least keep in on the rails as to what was presented.
Please don't hyper-focus. Ironically, that's part of the issue at hand. The comments I made were in relation to this overall issue, not just the post I quoted.
-
1 hour ago, Davlun said:
Really, how many other donors do we have to give us a gift like this. It has made UND and Grand Forks a showcase of hockey. The gift has benefited our community in many ways.
That wasn't the point and it isn't the point. Bolstering hockey while isolating the other programs does not equate to a healthy athletic department as a whole. That is the overall concern here. The logo is simply a component of the overall issue. Yes, the Ralph Engelstad Arena is a tremendous venue. The hockey program is a top national program. But, the concern is still there that the University of North Dakota lacks in its other programs considering it's division one status and *potential* revenue redistribution opportunities.
-
2
-
1
-
-
-
9 hours ago, hky said:
There's a difference between eventually transitioning to a logo and having it shoved down your throat. Is it really that important to have it at center court? Really? A quick google image search turns up many courts with the school name or initial(s) rather than their nickname/logo: Duke, Denver, Minnesota, Michigan, SDSU...
You're missing the point. The overall relationship, or the lack thereof, between the University of North Dakota and the Ralph Engelstad Foundation is the issue. The logo just happens to be one of the stages by which it's set. The University of North Dakota represents the ideals of more than just those directly associated with the Betty Engelstad Sioux Center and Ralph Englestad Arena. If folks feel the REA makes or breaks the University of North Dakota, then I would really question those folks' values and principles.
-
3
-
-
14 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:
You are delusional.
All of your scenerios are built on multiple assumptions built into a generalized "what if".
Its rediculous, it shows poor analytical reasoning skills, and worse yet it irresponsibly mis-informs people who would believe your rambling bull$%!# is based in knowledge instead of your own manufactued hopes and dreams.
I have corrected your manifesto for ethical reasoning and to call oit your BS and flawed thought process.
You do more damage to University of North Dakota Athletics than any deal ever could.
There you go again, criticizing someone because they don't believe in your extraordinarily biased views. You are tremendously one-sided in your thoughts (REA, Fighting Sioux, hockey priority) and, quite frankly, self-centered in regards to the desires of the actual UND students and student-athletes.
You are exemplifying a trend that shows major deficiencies in your reasoning rather than everyone else's.
-
3
-
-
8 hours ago, Sioux94 said:
We have a couple big games early, Washington and Sam Houston........question.....which games after that are you most excited about? For me I think it is Montana........not sure I can handle another loss to them.
My thought for today is can UND beat a quality team on the road this season? It's incredibly important for both team's confidence and the FCS playoff committee rankings.
Washington, Sam Houston State, and I would even say Idaho are the three games that fall into that category in my opinion. UND needs to win at least one of those three road games to be a playoff team; the Idaho game would obviously be the favorite at this point. Assumption is that an average to above average team should be able to win most if not all home games; cueing Alerus Center home-field advantage ...
-
- Popular Post
20 hours ago, Sioux94 said:I almost wish they would try starting Johannasson or Brady on our first series. Both of those guys will power there way for some positive yardage almost every carry. It's kind of demoralizing when you go 3 and out on the first drive, I'd like to see positive yards and at least a couple of first downs on our first drive. Pound up the middle with the big guys on the first series (since we always seem to run up the gut anyway), then bring in Santiago on the second or third series and hope he can find a seem and break a big one.
The whole "bring him in" mentality is wrong from the start. I know it's been beaten to death on here, but Rudolph has to play Santiago more in the slot this year or at least in 2 back packages. The good college offensive coaches are innovative. It's almost appears Bubba and Rudolph take pride in being plain and vanilla and don't want to even think outside of the box. Plain ol' offensive football won't work, I'm afraid, when you have mediocre at best offensive line play. To top it off, it hurts even more when you DO HAVE all-american backfield talent. Another imporatant consideration is that Rudolph may just be a poor in-game playcaller; I'm sure he has the ability to draw these things up but they stay locked up and uncalled during games for some reason. He's the kind of coordinator that calls an inside zone or draw when the going gets tough.
No reason why Santiago and Oliviera can't both be on the field 5 to 10 plays a game. This is the time of the year when Rudolph should he developing this stuff.
-
5
-
40 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
The ethical and logical flaws in your presumptive and innacurate conclusions, due to your psychotic fixation of percieved injustice, viewed through such a narrow objective lens..... are truly astounding.
How you can possibly be a functioning adult is either an impressive string of luck or the result of exemplary multi-tier support systems that enable continued survival.
14 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:I agree Hockey is no bigger than the University as a whole.
But make no mistake...
Kennedy CAN NOT win a fight he picks with Hockey. He doesnt have the capital, the staying power or the standing to be successful. He needs to find a better approach.
There you go again, perfectly representing said impulsive public opinion. You again try to personally insult me with some asinine survival of the fittest scenario in hope your unfounded points somehow stick. But, shortly thereafter, you again show your true hypocritical colors by claiming all that matters is capital and the untouchable hockey program. Those very points (capital - REA inc.; hockey vs entire university) are the very matters that need alteration. I agree with your comment that the approach Kennedy used obviously could've been different; however, his intentions I yet support as of now.
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
32 minutes ago, Csonked Out said:she is the same person that pulled a $14 million gift to her alma matter because they forced out the president in March that she wanted. She seems like she tries to control things on a university level with the foundation gifts and endowment funds.
Bingo, and hence, we have a pattern that supports my thoughts that this UND-REA inc. agreement has essentially sold the betterment of UND athletics as a whole into the hands of the Engelstads (and therefore nothing happens unless it's for hockey). Even if UND wanted to provide more funds to football and/or basketball, they wouldn't be able to due to the Engelstads. This gets brought up to McGarry by Kennedy and apparently she, as her history suggests, goes berserk and tries to use the impulsive North Dakota public opinion of Kennedy to aid her.
-
2
-
3
-
8 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:
You just don't get it. And that's fine, because there's no point arguing with someone who can't comprehend the financial logic. You simply refute everything I say with the same redundant narrative and then conclude with criticism of UND football/basketball and my education. That is not impressive by any standard, especially to people with collegiate athletics competence.
Your definition of "welfare" innately places you in a philosophical position against UND football and basketball. I disagree with it. I think more of the revenue that hockey generates - for at least a trial of a few years - should be used to invest in UND football and basketball. Investment basics 101. If UND football and basketball can grow in success, they themselves will have greater revenue opportunities. You, however, are obviously against that due to your bias towards UND hockey. You can't see that individually and that's fine I guess.
I just believe UND hockey could use a few year break from all of its generated revenue so that UND football and basketball could benefit from the investment. UND hockey already has the nicest facilities in all of collegiate hockey. Unfortunately, the REA inc. agreement with UND prevents hockey's status from completely benefiting other sports.
-
1
-
Kennedy vs. Engelstad Foundation: GF herald feature
in Community
Posted
"Anti-hockey" aim? Many "UND hockey only" fans exist, not so many "anti hockey" in my experience. For me personally, I have both UND hockey and UND football season tickets. A few of the folks that I have been sitting by at the Ralph dislike "other"!UND athletics; in fact, one individual has had NDSU football season tickets AND UND hockey season tickets for over 10 years. The Ralph is just a emblem of status and is used as such for some; little link to UND for some of these folks compared to it acting as a social event. These types do exist I'm afraid.