fightingsioux4life

As for cutting football, that is something that would have had to happen around the time we moved up to Division I (after Dale Lennon left to go to Southern Illinois). That is what Omaha did. Unfortunately, we have invested big $$$$$ into a practice facility big enough for football. Also, the program is on the upswing thanks to Bubba and his staff. This is an option that is no longer open to us.

I think the Lamoreaux twins know all about "the real world", they have achieved more than a lot of other athletes. So please lay off the preachy rhetoric.

I am sure they don't give a rat's a$$ what the haters on his forum think of them, but that wasn't my point.

They didn't start it, but they made it relevant the moment they announced they were transferring from Minnesota. Also, they didn't commit to North Dakota right away because our coach was the dysfunctional Shantel "I can't get any Olympians" Rivard. As soon as the coaching change was finally made, they came home. They gave three years to the women's hockey program and they simply want future generations to have a shot at the same experience they had. That isn't "selfish" or "entitled" in my book. It is too bad it isn't financially possible for us to keep the program going and I do feel for the people losing their jobs over it.

A lock-out would be foolish.

That also does not surprise me.

While I do think the decision to cut WH was the right one, I agree with you on the current tone and atmosphere of this discussion forum. It is one thing to disagree with the Lamoreaux twins about this, it is quite another to make this personal by being mean, nasty and vindictive about differing viewpoints. The message is basically to "sit down and shut up". Well, I don't think the Lamoreaux twins owe us anything. If they want to petition Kennedy to reinstate WH, they have the right to do so.

Of course he said that. He isn't going to cut Ovechkin for leaving the team to play in the Olympics for Russia. The NHL is a star-driven league like any other professional sports league.

Good point to remind people of. There was more talk on the IAC about dropping back down to Division 2 than there was of cutting women's hockey.

The question is, what will NHL teams do if their stars leave their teams for the Olympic games? You will not see the Washington Capitals cut Ovechkin if he leaves the team without permission to play for Russia in the Olympics. Same with the Pens with regard to Crosby and Malkin. It will be interesting what happens between the NHL and the NHLPA on this.

She was, and will remain forever, a legend. RIP Beer Grandma.

Anytime, junior.

Amen. I don't agree with the Lamoreaux twins with regard to cutting WH, but I also am not going to get vindictive about it like so many other people on this forum. Olympic and IIHF women's hockey tournaments have been discussed on this forum for years. Now, all of a sudden, some people think it isn't worth talking about anymore. I for one will continue supporting Team USA in all sports and at all levels. The bitter, cranky malcontents can do what they want.

Very accurate statement.

Of course they do. The Betty, when full, is a very intimidating environment for a visiting team. Why else do you think the women won the Big Sky tournament when it was held in Grand Forks and haven't done it since? Basketball has been tried in the main arena before and it didn't work. It won't work any better now.

I am not impressed with their goaltending. I also heard that they were saddled with bad contracts when Hakstol got there and couldn't improve the team as much as they would have liked. I have watched them play this year and they are not even close to being serious playoff contenders yet.

This is my sentiment as well. Unfortunately, a lot of people on this forum have been getting nasty and vindictive towards anyone who thinks WH should have stayed. That is not necessary. We did what had to be done, let's just focus on the future.

"Yeah, they should get down on their hands and knees and literally kiss the royal feet of the Legislature, Betty Engelstad, Brian Faison, Mark Kennedy and whomever else is considered a power broker in UND circles (sarcasm)." Nothing is "free", by the way. The Lamoreaux kids earned their way onto their respective teams because they had talent that we wanted. They put in a lot of work (on-ice practice, dry-land training, lifting weights, ect.) to be the best they could be. And in exchange for all that, they received a first-class education from The Flagship of the North Dakota University System. That does not obligate them to agree with the hard, but necessary, decision to drop women's hockey. That is a fact that is falling on deaf ears on this forum. SMH. "Yeah, and while we are at it, let's ban them from campus!" (sarcasm) The vindictiveness I am reading on this forum is just sickening and disappointing. Criticizing a decision you don't like is not "bad mouthing the university". Kennedy and Faison are not exempt from criticism. They are in public positions that require having a thick skin. Taking the heat for the decisions you make is part of the job. I imagine 90% of the people reading this will probably cheer for Canada tonight just because they don't like the opinions of the Lamoreaux sisters. It is amazing how quickly people turn on you simply because you have a different opinion about something. I agreed with the decision to cut women's hockey. But I am not going to rip current and former members of that program for not being happy about it.

AMEN!!!

This was what I meant when I said some people wanted him fired. The bolded part above could be construed as threatening the man's employment. I imagine if Schlossman had the same opinion as most of the people on here that are complaining about him, those same people would be canonizing him.

Again, I agreed with the decisions made this week. But nobody "needs" to "give it a rest". When you make controversial and/or unpopular decisions like this, you will have a backlash. That is why they hired a Title IX consultant. Kennedy and Faison probably understand and accept that. But very few people on this forum seem to understand it. I do think Schlossman should be a little more careful about his choice of words (calling someone a moron isn't a good idea). But again, he is not obligated to agree with anything. Wayne Nelson whined and complained for weeks about baseball being cut last year, but he didn't get nearly as much grief as Schlossman is getting right now.

Sounds like people want Schlossman fired and anyone who disagrees with the decision silenced. Sorry, this isn't Iran or North Korea, it doesn't work that way here. I agreed with the cuts and recognize they are necessary. But to expect the people negatively impacted to be happy about it and to keep their mouths shut about it is pure wishful thinking. There is no law that says anyone has to like it.

Nope, that only applies to our team.

It was a sarcastic comment. He was trying to make the same point you just did, just in a different way.

I think he meant 1987.