UND-FB-FAN
-
Posts
10,234 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
86
Posts posted by UND-FB-FAN
-
-
24 minutes ago, Old Time Hockey said:
I define Championship level programs as those that have a legitimate chance at winning a national championship. Not winning a Slummit League or a Big Sky league.
Does Oregon have a legitimate chance at winning a football championship? Yep
Does Gonzaga have a legitimate chance at winning a basketball championship? Yep
Does UND honestly have a chance in any sport aside from hockey? Except for the football long shot, none come close!
If someone from outside the area asks you about the UND basketball team, and you reply that we are a championship level program because we won the big sky, you get laughed out of the bar.
Its not the reason I am disappointed the WH program was cut, but it was the only other sport aside from MH that had a legitimate chance at a national championship. What really bothers me is that it impacts girls hockey into the youth level. Girls hockey is still a relatively new sport. When UND cut the program, it was kind of a slap in the face to all girls that play hockey in the area. While very, very few girls would actually would play for UND, the dream and role models were there for the local kids.
What I still don't understand is how Bemidji, St Cloud, and Duluth can make it work, but we can't?
The softball team travels much more. Do they have that many less scholarships? Are they coaches paid much less?
Could the WH program made cuts to get them in a better position?
So UND should just sponsor men's and women's hockey and football?
- Now that is laughable!
UND's men's basketball program did win the Big Sky Conference and they participated in the NCAA tournament which was viewed by 1.4 million people. So, your standards are flawed, because women's hockey wouldn't even draw 10% of that viewership even if they were a national championship team. Heck, even UND's men's hockey has difficulty reaching viewing numbers like that.
If you tell someone that UND tightly played the University of Arizona's top 5 men's basketball team, and that UND is the alma mater of NBA great Phil Jackson, you would have a positive conversation with said person outside of the area. If you want to work odds and be fair, @Old Time Hockey, that "outside of the area person" probably wouldn't want to talk hockey and would rather talk football and basketball (based on national interest levels).
Also, Bemidji, St. Cloud, and Duluth are Division II programs that require less program-wide funding. That one is not hard.
- EDIT: Also, Title IX compliance consideration.
-
17 minutes ago, Old Time Hockey said:
By the way, we are a hockey school.
With no women's hockey?
HA! Doesn't seem that way. The University of North Dakota is a public research university that happens to be the State of North Dakota's flagship university. It is not a "hockey school", or whatever ignorant-labeling you can come up with.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, HockeyMom said:
Start with this: Inform the team, players and recruit flying in from Boston more than 45 minutes before a press conference announcing it.
You realize in this day and age, with social media, that leaks are nearly inevitable and there will always be second guessing, right?
I understand this process is going to be very difficult for many people, especially those directly involved, but a single recruit is not worth the millions of dollars lost each year by UND's women's ice hockey program. Sorry, but it is the cold, hard truth.
-
7 minutes ago, Old Time Hockey said:
Now that's funny!
Championship level programs at UND. I got one that I could pass the red face test with. Other than that you would get laughed out of the bar.
You should maybe reconsider which bars you are going to then.
You may have been outside of the country, but UND just had four conference championship teams this season.
Women's hockey was not one of them.
National championships are hard to come by. Your argument is flawed in that many top programs around the country should apparently be "laughed at".
Should the Oregon Ducks cut football? Should Gonzaga cut their basketball programs? No national championships to speak of with those examples.
Your standards are a bit off.
-
3
-
-
12 minutes ago, HockeyMom said:
This thread and its comments make me even sadder than the program being cut.
How it was done was completely classless. And to read that the photo of the players being on the ice was a lie...come on! Former players found out about it and started showing up at The Ralph-that's how they knew something was up.
Have some compassion, people. These are UND athletes, recruits and coaches that had their lives completely turned around yesterday. And they found out about it on Twitter.
Compassion is important, but so is being fiscally responsible.
Well, since you feel it was completely classless, would you care to provide any alternatives as to how it should have been done?
It's pretty easy to criticize when you don't have to be the one coming up with solutions.
-
3 hours ago, gfhockey said:
i never went to any of the games but we are a hockey school
Those semantics are horseshit. That labeling and status needs to be adjusted.
It takes away from UND's other championship-level programs, including the ones that have relatively the most national following.
Most importantly, it gives people the incredibly false idea that UND and the State of North Dakota should sponsor hockey even if it loses millions and is played in an empty arena. Obviously not true with men's hockey but couldn't be more the case with women's hockey.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
14 minutes ago, KoolGuy2K said:Now they have a petition going to save women's hockey. Good luck with that.
It's unbelievable how hypocritical people are with this entire situation. Never mind the obvious financial sense the cut makes, but the attendance numbers for women's hockey were atrocious. The fallout we are seeing is what happens when you label UND a "hockey school" - people think UND and the State of North Dakota should sponsor women's hockey even if no one shows up to watch it and it loses millions just because "UND is a hockey school" ..... ridiculous
From a semantics standpoint, I oppose the "hockey school" labeling because it takes away from the many other championship-level athletic programs at UND, not to mention the sports at UND that also have relatively high national following. Men's hockey is the biggest program at UND, but that doesn't mean financial sense should be blatantly ignored for hockey programs in general ... good grief people. Football and basketball are the most popular sports in the country and there's no reason living in North Dakota or Minnesota should force you to move away from that obvious trend.
-
8
-
I hope Zimmerman doesn't have to see the field in 2017, but if he does, it will be key that he is ready to go.
Like usual, many factors at play in his hopeful success if he does play in 2017 (God forbid). If the offensive line can improve, and with UND's stable of runners (Santiago, Oliveira, Johannesson, Gordon), UND could maybe grind-out a win with Zimmerman not having to air the ball out much.
-
2 minutes ago, dlsiouxfan said:
That's sort of how life works. Most things worth accomplishing are difficult to accomplish. It's difficult to win a championship in these sports because tens of millions of people are invested in and care a great deal about them. That's just not the case with women's hockey. It's easier for UND to win a championship and produce Olympians for the exact same reason why 290 people show up for playoff games. There just are not that many people who care about it.
Spot on.
1+
(I'm out of positive votes - HA)
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, Old Time Hockey said:
Football is a long shot! One NCAA championship in our entire existence. I was there. Problem is all of our programs besides hockey are long shots. Football has the best chance of all of them. After that program, the rest are no shots!
Then how would you characterize women's and men's basketball national championship odds? Relatively speaking, UND football is not a long shot. Hockey produces respectable odds but one must consider relatively less competition.
-
3
-
-
Just now, Old Time Hockey said:
How much money does Football, WBB, and MBB make?
They all lose money, but in terms of revenue and attendance, they perform far better than women's hockey. Even men's hockey has a net loss.
-
4
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, WiSioux said:
. But hey, at least I sport I don't give a !@#$ about was on national TV, go us.
You're in the minority.
Would even 5,000 people watch a hypothetical UND women's hockey national title? Doubtful based on popularity and following.
1.4 million (1,400,000, not 5,000) did just care about a game UND men's basketball was playing in and tuned in.
Is the majority wrong? Doesn't matter because the majority breeds $.
In contrast, the minority - which includes women's hockey in general - loses $.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Old Time Hockey said:Besides Men's hockey and football, which is a long shot, woman's hockey is the only sport we had a chance to win a national championship.
I disagree. If NDSU, Montana, and Montana State can win a national championship, why can't UND? Tremendous expense in sports not even sponsored by the aforementioned schools is one major reason for UND's shortage in football; now, after this cut, UND can actually make practical progress. Hockey is niche and UND's and North Dakota's budget do not allow for it, particularly in the case of a non-attended hockey program which was UND women's hockey.
UND football is not a long shot. Women's hockey with its 800 total followers was the long shot. The right decision was made today.
-
6
-
4 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:
209. 209 fans in attendance at one of the Ohio State playoff games. I wonder how many social justice warriors we'll hear from.
The numbers tell the story of this cut. It is entirely jusitified and necessary.
Still, there will be anti-empricial data folks trying to paint a different picture in arguing that the financial/attendance common sense should've been ignored (well, it's already happening).
-
1 minute ago, SiouxBoys said:
This might be the worst post I have ever seen...
It is. Period.
-
2
-
-
29 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:
Tough situation for the current student athletes and staff, but no question that long term this is the best move for the university.
I feel the same way. From a personal side, I feel horrible for the student-athletes and coaches. However, from a financial perspective and competitive perspective, this makes so much sense.
Before anyone begins pointing fingers and acting like they have better solutions, consider the statewide deficit as beyond UND's control and, thus, financial solutions limited.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:
There is resistance from a lot of fans with the new name and logo. This we all know. There are people that absolutely refuse to accept the new name and logo and will proudly wear their Fighting Sioux gear till the day they die and never utter the word "Fighting Hawks" unless they are ripping on it. That attitude is unfortunate, but kind of expected. People resist change. It's human nature. What many are saying here about Berry is that he needs to be supporting the University and the athletic department in the re branding initiative with the Fighting Hawks name and logo. He is an employee of the University. Not saying he has to be talking about hoe great the Fighting Hawks name and logo is at every press conference. But he is barely even acknowledging right now. Maybe there was one time he wore a Fighting Hawks polo during an interview. But 99% of the time, he is not. AS the coach of the highest profile sport at UND, he has an opportunity and IMO and obligation to support the new name and logo. Fans can show resistance all they want. But as an employee in the athletic department, he has shown little to no support for the Fighting Hawks name and logo and the re branding process UND is going through. And that is embarrassing.
I completely agree. He is *officially* a University employee and therefore he should support the *official* nickname and logo.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, streetsahead said:
So are you of the opinion that it's not possible to both support the new nickname and still wear Fighting Sioux gear? Are we supposed to burn it all? I'm all for moving forward with the way our teams are marketed and branded, but I will also always wear my Sioux gear with pride as a nod to the past. If the new hockey jerseys look nice I'll buy one. I never felt the need to replace my Sioux jersey with a North Dakota one.
No, I do not have that opinion. I am making stark comments only to prove a point. I honestly don't care what people wear with one caveat.
My concern is that EVERYONE understands that the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo are no longer official, are permanently retired, and, as such, it is not appropriate to criticize UND administration, coaches, student-athletes and/or fans for supporting the current, official logo and nickname. Everyone is certainly allowed free speech and a right to their own personal opinion so long as it does not impinge on others; unfortunately, many "Fighting Sioux Forever" folks are overstepping these boundaries.
-
3
-
-
16 hours ago, hoops44 said:
Shanks will be a pine rider next year at D1....Hope he is not planning on getting more PT
My thoughts also. I can't imagine he gets much more playing time by going to another DI school.
-
1 hour ago, Oxbow6 said:
Again were you at the hockey game Friday?
Simple question.
No, but I received plenty of criticism during the regular season at the Ralph while using my season tickets.
1 hour ago, jdub27 said:I was. Some of the reactions I got to the Hawks shirt I had on didn't do anything to change my mind about there being a "hockey-only" group who's main concern is a retired logo. Not at all accusing you of being in that group, just stating my experience.
jdub27 confirmed my suspicions that some of the vocal "Fighting Sioux Forever" and "anti-new nickname" individuals made their way to Scheels Arena as well. I certianly saw plenty of Fighting Sioux gear on ESPN2.
1 hour ago, Oxbow6 said:So you were the "popularity" trend according to UND FB FAN Friday. That's awesome. Congrats!
Trying to spin this away from my intentions, huh? How do you not understand my post regarding this? jdub27 was not a part of the said popularity trend, but rather on the opposite side of it. Rather the popularity trend, as evidenced by social media and hockey game chants, is to oppose the new nickname and sport Fighting Sioux gear. Reread my aforementioned post more carefully.
-
31 minutes ago, lawkota said:
Has hockey embraced the new name? No.
Does the team go a bit over the top on the Sioux thing? Yes.
Does it hurt anything? No.
BTW, Men's BB is the only team that fully adopted the new logo and lettering on its uniforms. But Jones never gets mentioned as a Fighting Hawks trailblazer. Why is that?
Football put the logo on the their helmet during a time when apparently it was still optional; thus, I would argue they were the first to officially implement it.
-
4 hours ago, Oxbow6 said:
You're a piece of work..........and I'm being kind. Ridiculous comment to make but I get it coming from a FB only guy.
I hope that rock you've been living under has been nice and warm.
Reality check.
"Hockey guys" despise the new logo and nickname largely because of current "popularity" trends in social media and hockey game cheers and not because of individual critical thought. There needs to be leaders within the hockey community for mere consideration to happen. I am steadfast on this and I don't expect you to get it.
-
5
-
-
42 minutes ago, lawkota said:
2021 @ Utah State, September 11
Another solid addition -good work.
Go UND!
-
1 hour ago, ChrisUND1 said:
Yes, it gets extremely tiresome. Starts at the top though, if coach embraces the logo, watch what happens. Take a look at football and Bubba for example...
Exactly. Bubba Schweigert gets it; he is an AD type. Berry, although a great coach, just has too much conflict of interest in this whole "tradition" and "culture" situation. Of course, one could argue Bubba would have conflict too but clearly he took the logical road instead, which is great.
The hockey community currently breeds hatred for the new logo and nickname. There needs to be a change in the hockey culture before many fans begin to even fathom change and I agree that starts with Berry.
-
3
-
3
-
UND to cut women's hockey
in Women's Hockey
Posted
Which is upsetting in itself being there are so many folks who feel it is necessary to comment on the situation yet they are so uninformed.
Why are so many opposed to research and facts? A little background search would go a long ways in preventing emotionally-charged, subjective criticism.
I've seen several comments from people who do not even realize the state's budget shortage, yet they feel it necessary to attack UND's administration. Their source is the "culture of Grand Forks and North Dakota" ... wow, the public education system still has a lot of work to do.