nodak651 Posted April 20, 2015 Author Posted April 20, 2015 I don't understand why UND isn't taking the lead on this. They are only going to offer FCOA for mens and womens hockey? Doesn't show much regard for your other sports IMO. Is Faison afraid you cant raise the funds? Makes no sense to me why you would want to play catch up. I think most here agree with you.. 1 Quote
SWSiouxMN Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Do what GT is doing and will cover half of their stipends. Concert. Quote
Teeder11 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 I don't understand why UND isn't taking the lead on this. They are only going to offer FCOA for mens and womens hockey? Doesn't show much regard for your other sports IMO. Is Faison afraid you cant raise the funds? Makes no sense to me why you would want to play catch up. Nobody from UND has said anything about any specific women's sport. Just that there would be 18 COA grants that would have to go to 18 female athletes (sports yet to be determined) to offset the 18 going to men's hockey. 1 Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Nobody from UND has said anything about any specific women's sport. Just that there would be 18 COA grants that would have to go to 18 female athletes (sports yet to be determined) to offset the 18 going to men's hockey. And how does that change the meaning of my post? Quote
Teeder11 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 And how does that change the meaning of my post? They are not only going after FCOA for men's and women's hockey. Fact is there has been no determination at UND which sport(s) will be impacted by FCOA. I was just answering your first question. Quote
SiouxVolley Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 What if und went against the big sky's wishes and offered fcoa in football, mbb, wbb, could it be grounds for dismissal?Maybe the better question is: will the Slummit put the screws to its Dakota schools by mandating men's soccer, which is needed by the Slummit for its AQ? With men's soccer, that would force NDSU to add a Womens sport or two, leaving no money for FCOA. The Summit won't like if NDSU gives all their women and men FCOA, and that conference legislation would stop it. Conferences can mandate other sports, which negates FCOA advantages. But it assumes that NDSU has paid for their Fdome football offices and the $4 mill shortfall on the BSA? UND should just give their 27 spots in wbb and volleyball 67% of the FCOA. That would equal the men's hockey 18 full FCOA. Give the MBB 100% of FCOA and Womens hockey 67% as funds allow, as both would be around 12 or 13? Football getting FCOA amounts to adding 10 schollies, with no one getting more than an 80% scholarship with FCOA making it up to 100%. That what Liberty will effectively do, getting more players a full ride by including FCOA. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 They are not only going after FCOA for men's and women's hockey. Fact is there has been no determination at UND which sport(s) will be impacted by FCOA. I was just answering your first question. My point was UND should be offering more FCOA than 36. Makes no difference where the other 18 goes after the 18 mens hockey gets. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Hammersmith quoted a number for FCOA at UND. Remember, that number is a max that a school can pay -- the full cost of attendance. A school can offer a lesser amount. UND uses the first prong (proportionality) to comply with Title IX. UND's student body M/W ratio is basically proportional to its student athete M/W ratio. NDSU uses the third prong (interests and abilities survey). That prong is not the one the NCAA recommends using; however, it is still legal were NDSU to be challenged in Federal court. What NDSU should worry about is their vastly disproportionate M/W ratios and their very, very good womens club hockey team and someone challenging their survey techniques i.e. how come NDSU isn't looking to add a womens sport (good womens club team = interest and ability). Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Maybe the better question is: will the Slummit put the screws to its Dakota schools by mandating men's soccer, which is needed by the Slummit for its AQ? With men's soccer, that would force NDSU to add a Womens sport or two, leaving no money for FCOA. The Summit won't like if NDSU gives all their women and men FCOA, and that conference legislation would stop it But it assumes that NDSU has paid for their Fdome football offices and the $4 mill shortfall on the BSA? UND should just give their 27 wbb and volleyball 67% of the FCOA. That would equal the men's 18 full FCOA. Give the MBB 100% of FCOA and Womens hockey 67% as funds allow, as both would be around 12 or 13? You need to catch up. Conferences cant stop schools from giving out FCOA. The Summit wont try either. Quote
FargoBison Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Hammersmith quoted a number for FCOA at UND. Remember, that number is a max that a school can pay -- the full cost of attendance. A school can offer a lesser amount. UND uses the first prong (proportionality) to comply with Title IX. UND's student body M/W ratio is basically proportional to its student athete M/W ratio. NDSU uses the third prong (interests and abilities survey). That prong is not the one the NCAA recommends using; however, it is still legal were NDSU to be challenged in Federal court. What NDSU should worry about is their vastly disproportionate M/W ratios and their very, very good womens club hockey team and someone challenging their survey techniques i.e. how come NDSU isn't looking to add a womens sport (good womens club team = interest and ability). This is why I laugh at everyone that says NDSU could start a men's hockey program and not sponsor women's hockey. with the Title IX prong we use there would be no getting around it. One of the reasons why hockey at NDSU isn't ever going to happen. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 You need to catch up. Conferences cant stop schools from giving out FCOA. The Summit wont try either. That's not what Volley said. He said the Summit could make it tough on NDSU by mandating mens soccer. The money that would've gone for FCOA would have to fund mens soccer instead. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 This is why I laugh at everyone that says NDSU could start a men's hockey program and not sponsor women's hockey. with the Title IX prong we use there would be no getting around it. One of the reasons why hockey at NDSU isn't ever going to happen. Honestly, you'll see NDSU womens DI hockey before mens because of proportionality and interests challenges to NDSU Athletics under Title IX. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 That's not what Volley said. He said the Summit could make it tough on NDSU by mandating mens soccer. The money that would've gone for FCOA would have to fund mens soccer instead. Not going to happen. He knows it too. Quote
FargoBison Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Honestly, you'll see NDSU womens DI hockey before mens because of proportionality and interests challenges. I don't think you'll see either happen for a very long time if ever. NDSU would move to a proportional prong, it would be cheaper than sinking money into women's hockey. That sport is an absolute millstone. But I don't think it matters. NDSU doesn't have a suitable hockey arena or a men's team, I don't see any title IX women's hockey lawsuits in the making. Quote
SiouxVolley Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 You need to catch up. Conferences cant stop schools from giving out FCOA. The Summit wont try either. It about forcing sports on schools that dont have them. Conference can do that, and bleed the FCOA money with additional sports. Denver got forced out of the Sun Belt for not having enough mandated sports, so they were effectively forced to the WAC because they didn't want to start baseball and softball and track. Bizons are sure slow on the uptake. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Honestly, you'll see NDSU womens DI hockey before mens because of proportionality and interests challenges to NDSU Athletics under Title IX. Its a money pit and that's not happening either. 1 Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 With all the twists and turns in the college athletics landscape over the last decade or so, I've come to expect the unexpected. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 It about forcing sports on schools that dont have them. Conference can do that, and bleed the FCOA money with additional sports. Denver got forced out of the Sun Belt for not having enough mandated sports, so they were effectively forced to the WAC because they didn't want to start baseball and softball and track. Bizons are sure slow on the uptake. I understand you want this to happen. But just because you have a vivid imagination doesn't mean its a reality. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 With all the twists and turns in the college athletics landscape over the last decade or so, I've come to expect the unexpected. Oh I understand what you are saying. But there are better options out there and NDSU knows what they are. Plus there are no compliance issues. But like you said it can get crazy out there. Quote
FargoBison Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Not going to happen. He knows it too. Yeah, the Summit isn't going to start mandating its members to play all the sports the conference offers, nobody in the conference would want that. 1 Quote
FargoBison Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 It about forcing sports on schools that dont have them. Conference can do that, and bleed the FCOA money with additional sports. Denver got forced out of the Sun Belt for not having enough mandated sports, so they were effectively forced to the WAC because they didn't want to start baseball and softball and track. Bizons are sure slow on the uptake. And now they are going to come into the Summit and force that on NDSU. Do they want to fund a baseball program? I don't think so, they will gladly stay out of that grand plan. COA will be a reality in the Summit, ORU and Denver don't fund their mbb programs the way they do to skimp on something that important. ORU also might want COA for baseball. Omaha needs COA in the Summit to balance hockey. I don't think the atmosphere is exactly ripe to try to kill COA. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 I know its not scholarships/money spent but NDSU participation rates are, shall we politely say, interesting: NDSU: 349/188 men/women (282/129 unduplicated) UND: 289/268 men/women (244/205 unduplicated) NDSU undergrad: 6100/4700 M/W UND undergrad: 6500/5000 M/W Run the numbers and the ratios are nearly identical. But, ... UND athletic participation ratio is 51/49 or 54/46 (duplicated or unduplicated). NDSU's ratio is 65/35 and 69/31 (dup and undup). I'm stunned at how NDSU can sustain this in today's equality minded world. Can anyone show me another DI institution with both football and wresting that doesn't offer additional womens sports to compensate those mens numbers? (NDSU has 8 mens and 8 womens sports.) NDSU is meeting Title IX by using the third prong; but, their proportionality is way, way out of whack. You have to wonder when someone will question their survey (to meet third prong) or their sincerity in providing opportunity for females in DI athletics. Just 129 females at NDSU are DI athletes. There are over 200 female DI athletes at UND. Quote
FargoBison Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 The athletically related student aid is 60/40. Coaches salaries, travel and recruiting budgets are very competitive. The NCAA approved NDSU's compliance when the school went DI. Quote
jodcon Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Not sure if this has been mentioned but Montana AD Haslam addressed it this week and said UM has no intentions of providing stipends at this time, said it would cost about $600,000. I assume that could change if push came to shove. Quote
bison73 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Not sure if this has been mentioned but Montana AD Haslam addressed it this week and said UM has no intentions of providing stipends at this time, said it would cost about $600,000. I assume that could change if push came to shove. He also said nobody infringes on anybody elses recruiting territory. Do you believe that also? His whole presser made no sense. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.