UND-FB-FAN
-
Posts
10,872 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
101
Posts posted by UND-FB-FAN
-
-
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
-
-
16 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Again you think this magic money generated not from other programs should br paid out to other programs???.
Thats welfare. UND football cant stand on its own without welfare? Where does the money come from when nobody pays into the kitty?
The Engelstads essentially purchased UND athletics and you fail to realize it (or at least youre content with it). Football and basketball could finance far more on their own if they were initially funded in such a way to have competitive standards relative to their peers (principally coaching salaries and facilities - afterthoughts for the hockey program due to protection from the REA inc.). Also, it's not welfare when the hockey student-athletes play for the University of North Dakota, not the Fighting Sioux Engelstad Fund. UND, not the REA foundation, should control financing decisions, hands down.
-
16 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
LOL... wow what color is your sky?
A fiasco... wow, delusional.
So locker room being paid for with private money is evil slum lording but...
Mascot paid for with private money is "how dare you have an opinion on how private money is spent"?
Hypocritical at best but blatantly ignorant. Either way the jealousy is just sad ....and its ugly.
Pay scales are dictated by the markets of the levels of play of teams. No vast conspiracy to keep the people from NOT being paid....
Raise some money, go get Phil Jackson or some other alum to donate a huge pile of money and pay up, CREATE a world of advantage .... dont cry because you dont "GET."
Pretty sure it was just reported that REA was about to "plow" $800k into a new roof for the Betty. Did basketball generate $800k last year? Let alone a profit.... I wonder where those funds came from.... hmmmmmm.
p.s. It wasn't football.
While the millions of extra revenue that the REA holds - that could benefit UND football or other non-hockey sports - will again find its way toward the hockey program and not football and basketball coaching salaries/HPC phase II. The REA inc. pockets far more than it should for hockey and not UND athletics as a whole.
-
57 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Thats not an insult. How possibly could it be?... That is just the true and rightful levels of success that could possibly be achieved.
Will football ever compete in top of sport division, no.
Will basketball ever in our wildest dreams compete past the first weekend of the tourney, no.
Its not insultung, its just the truth.
Top of sport division is your metric? That doesn't work when the sport you are using as your comparison is niche and has relatively minimal following compared to the other top collegiate sports. You do realize the "none top of sport" football program south of Grand Forks draws more to a single game than any UND hockey game has, right? Or that football program that you called "mediocre" earlier in Montana draws over 20,000 a game to watch "none top of sport" football. Heck, even the tiny town of Brookings draws more to SDSU football games then UND hockey does. Bottomline is the discrepancy in national popularity between football and hockey is so great that your single "top of sport" metric is meaningless; other than to make those heavily biased towards hockey (like yourself) satisfied with UND's direction.
As for your earlier post about how this entire UND-REA agreement is detrimental to the other sports: well, the REA gets the majority of the revenue. There is no way to ensure that revenue goes to non-hockey UND sports that need the funding. Much of it goes towards the REA which benefits hockey (and very little benefits basketball and volleyball via the Betty per minimal upgrades). Much of the revenue that the Englestad Foundation does donate back to UND goes to UND hockey too via coaches salary, hockey scholarships, travel costs, etc. The current arrangement obviously is heavily biased towards UND hockey. The other sports would be better serviced if UND could directly obtain more of the ticket sales revenue than they currently do; hence, here we are back to the UND/REA agreement.
The issue of having the Engelstads control much of the revenue of UND sports rather than UND being able to allocate all of their revenue is the principal issue. This is the University of North Dakota we're talking about. I certainly did not graduate from Engelstad University. No matter how generous we want to perceive the $100M gift, the Englestad family still did NOT purchase all of UND athletics. The revenue sharing could at least be 50/50. The Engelstads are heavily biased towards a niche sport and a outdated nickname and therein lies the problem.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, jdub27 said:
The Fargodome was paid for by city sales tax and NDSU just rents the facility, the agreement would be similar to what UND has with the Alerus Center. Doubtful there is a revenue split on tickets, though there might be something in terms of suites or concessions but it will still not be comparable to UND/REA
It's night and day difference. NDSU capitalizes big-time on that agreement relative to UND-REA.
-
15 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
NDSU, SDSU, USD and Montana?... Shoot for the moon all-star.
But theres no reason that UND can't achieve such mediocre heights as you aspire to.
WITH the current REA situation.
I guarantee you, without the revenue the UND athletics DOES receive from REA, there would be a much more dire budgetary crisis in the athletic department. D1.... that would be a pipe dream, even at the D1jv level.
THE REA situation does not cost UND athletics money. If you cant understand that I dont know how you get through the day.
False. There are both primary and secondary repercussions of the REA agreement that do in fact cost the other programs. You really are trying to spin your agenda. Yes, the REA does dramatically impact the UND hockey program, but the other programs are minimally affected (certainly not impacted at the level you suggest).
Also, you're saying UND *can* reach "mediocre heights" with the current arrangement? Well, that certainly doesn't mean they will. Actually, the odds are far from their favor given the current situation. It is less than ideal for the non-hockey student-athletes of the University of North Dakota.
-
13 minutes ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Big 10?... are you insane? If you even for a second think that UND can or even SHOULD be modeled after the B1G model of athletic programs you are fishing for a life of dissapointment.
Football will NEVER be the #1 sport at UND, just live with that instead of holding onto the desperate hate filled jealousy. Football will not benefit by the demise of Hockey as you so pathetically exude.
Football can benefit by the success of the Hockey program... not its relegation.
and by the way the only chance in h e double hockey sticks of getting close to the B1G.... is in..... prepare yourself...
Hockey.
Attitudes like this guy is the root of fan base division. Embrace who we are, a hockey school. With a growing football program that can hope to succed on a smaller stage at some point.
It is what it is. Deal with it or dont but you can't change it.
I don't plan to change it nor do I plan for it to change otherwise; however, I do expect it to continue drowning UND in division I due to a division II mindset. No one around UND (particularly the "fans") can even comprehend change. The overly-conservative division II mindset is still at-large.
The athletic arrangement at UND, including the REA inc. revenue sharing agreement, is not conducive to overall DI success. It's not the hockey program I specifically blame; rather, it's the emphasis on the REA and Engelstad family - including the current revenue sharing agreement that is appropriately under the microscope today.
It doesn't have to be a "B1G model"; NDSU's model also works far better than UND's. Montana does real well. South Dakota State and South Dakota are both doing relatively well.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Frozen4sioux said:
Wow it didnt take long for someone to top the previous dumbest most idiotic post of the year from earlier today but.... you just went out and achieved didn't you.
congrats.
You're quite good at providing unfounded criticism. It would be neat, however, if you could actually explain such criticism. It's easy to throw rocks but not all that easy to withstand the retaliation.
Your views of UND athletics and, in general, successful college athletics are most certainly outdated and distorted.
Kennedy vs. Engelstad Foundation: GF herald feature
in Community
Posted
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.