fightingsioux4life

And you think we shouldn't feel that way about every UND sport? The minimum expectation should be to win conference titles. For MH and FB, the maximum expectations are to compete for, and win, NCAA titles. Either we shoot for the stars or we should move back down to Division II.

I think he was talking about guys that left UND for Major Juniors, while whining about "lack of playing time". Derrick Byfuglien and Adam Tambellini immediately come to mind.

IALTO!!!

Nope, not even close.

Totally separate issue, although I would argue they are loosely related. We have been running this department like a Division II program since we moved up. And look where it has gotten us.

Didn't you get the memo? UND is Division I in name only. Our mentality is Division II. That is why we waste time with crap like this (sarcasm).

Building our other programs will not "short" men's hockey. Having a successful athletic department across the board will lift up everybody. And if you don't invest in programs, they will never have sustained success. That is what is wrong with your thinking; it virtually guarantees a hockey-only doctrine on campus. While NDSU runs their athletic department like a high-level D-I school, UND runs theirs like a D-II school (and sometimes, even a high school). And I am sick and tired of it. We are becoming "that other school in North Dakota". That is unacceptable.

Great points. Exactly what I am thinking about this.

If you under-fund a sport, it will never be able to "earn a bigger budget". Your thinking is self-defeating and not practical for an intercollegiate athletics program of our size and scope. Most schools have one big revenue sport to help fund the others. Hockey is ours. If we don't use the windfall from hockey to build our other programs, they will never achieve anything. If we are going to continue clinging to this hockey-only doctrine, we might as well drop back down to Division II.

Which means it is all that matters, right? If that is how we are going to look at it, we should just move back down to Division II.

This is what I have been saying too. But don't expect the hockey-only people to understand it.

Why can't people separate the high school and the college? I think BYU has the same thing in their town. I don't think I would have a problem yelling "Go Riders" at a UND sporting event. Now at a high school game involving GFRR and a certain other high school.....that is a little different.

That is just my opinion based on what I know. I am sure Kennedy is better versed in the fine art of diplomacy than I (and most people on here) am. The fact that she ran to the Heraldo and lied about not being offered meeting dates tells you that KEM is not an honest broker.

Envy? Why would I want to grow up to be a spoiled rotten entitled brat who thinks the world should just give her what she wants? Apparently, dad's lessons on how to treat people didn't sink in.

And the fun starts early again this year. I am sick of "starting over" with the O-line every single year. When is this crap going to stop?

Nobody has forgotten that. But that does not give the spoiled rotten daughter of a multimillionaire the right to run UND from Vegas. The line has to be drawn somewhere and Kennedy has drawn it. Good for him.

I voted Roughriders on all three ballots. But the adherents of the "Climax-Fisher Rule" refused to even consider it. #lostopportunity

Where will this "private entity" go? UND hockey is the main tenant. If they aren't there, the arena will bleed red ink. Unless you believe in Fetch and his insane AHL franchise theories.

And KEM needs to understand that she does not run UND because she is an only child of a multimillionaire. I think Kennedy will convey that message (more diplomatically than I just did, of course). And KEM will likely run to the media whining about how she wasn't bowed down to by Kennedy (again). REA and BESC were built for the sole purpose of benefiting UND in general and UND Athletics in particular. That was Ralph's vision when he decided to put $100+ million into it. They do not exist to fatten the wallet of KEM and her corporate associates.

Did I say that Mr. GOBC? #listeningskillslacking

A mix of blue chippers and 2, 3 and 4 year players works best.

Really? What are the odds that this spoiled-rotten heiress would ever give us a substantial amount of money in the future? I say the odds are very slim to none. Also, the very existence of REA, Inc. as a non-profit entity is predicated on the proceeds benefiting UND. I don't think that premise is met by skimming 52% of the FB revenue off the top. I don't think that premise is met by REA taking a lion's share of the profits for itself. As some have stated on here, if a non-profit organization is not being true to its charter, their non-profit status with the IRS could be jeopardized.......if someone had the backbone to report them. I'll let that last thought hang in the air for everyone to ponder.

If calling for strengthening all of our athletic programs is "anti-hockey", then I am not the one with the problem. This is not a zero-sum game. Strengthening our other programs will not make hockey weaker. It will make the entire department stronger. But the hockey-only zealots couldn't care less if the non-hockey programs rot on the vine and die. That has to change. Otherwise, we need to move back down to D-II. And no, I am not being facetious about that.

Yeah, that's right. I forgot it is the responsibility of the FB players to raise the money themselves holding 50/50 raffles. This is definitely on them. (sarcasm)

Anti-hockey? I have season tickets in REA for cripes sake! Our point is that if we are going to put together quality Division I teams, the "hockey only" mentality must stop. We aren't Division II anymore. And that means getting financial resources from wherever we can. The whole purpose of building REA was to do that.