BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 12 hours ago, northernraider said: 12 hours ago, northernraider said: Rob Port is usually a blow hard, but here is a great article in Saturday's USA today about college sports. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2016/04/17/ncaa-football-basketball-power-five-revenue-expenses/83035862/ Good article, I have read/heard some similar stuff in the past. I just wander if SU's & our $ are really that negative in athletics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 14 hours ago, homer said: Someone should ask Rob how many kids attend college who are on partial scholarships or walk on to sports programs, play in the band or major in programs such as sports medicine. Some of these kids than graduate and donate back to the university. I'm not saying subsidizing athletics through student fees is completely right but there is some ROI on college athletics. You bring up many positives and there are more. Athletics are in college because of their many benefits. And, there are many decisions being made now, up and above athletics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talksalot83 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 44 minutes ago, crb1 said: Very slim on details. You have no idea of what exact department/programs are being cut. You have no idea what the impact of these cuts will be for faculty and students. This is anything but transparent. No surprises, unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWSiouxMN Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 Updated Article from earlier today: Gives a couple more details http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/education/4012419-cuts-become-clearer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas rancher Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 What's wrong with you guys? Eight dollar dippin dots, standing room only on the concourse of a non sold out stadium, and upping hockey tickets are going to balance the budget! 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milford torgerson Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 On 4/16/2016 at 1:07 AM, Cratter said: Shouldnt they put on a "tuition waiver freeze" right about now? It depends. In some departments the grad students who were attracted with tuition waivers actually generate revenue via the research they work on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milford torgerson Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 19 hours ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said: Today we hear more from UND. Interesting article from Port: http://www.inforum.com/opinion/columnists/4010818-rob-port-no-tears-should-be-shed-cuts-university-sports What do NDSU and UND need to do to break even in athletics? Win more games? Is Port's NCAA info correct? As near as I can tell, Port ignorantly left out champions club and team maker donations. At both UND and Ndsu hes says that the difference between revenue from tickets and other revenue generated and the total cost of scholarships, coaches etc are made up from the university's general funds which is very much a lie. Most of it is covered by each school's athletic fundraising club 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnWinterSportsEngelstad Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 3 hours ago, Milford torgerson said: As near as I can tell, Port ignorantly left out champions club and team maker donations. At both UND and Ndsu hes says that the difference between revenue from tickets and other revenue generated and the total cost of scholarships, coaches etc are made up from the university's general funds which is very much a lie. Most of it is covered by each school's athletic fundraising club You get a college "A" for today! Well, from my prospective,anyway. Normally, I shoot a couple of arrows at the Bison, but not in this next minute. There is so much that could be said by both the University's (& thousands of alumni) that could put Port in the trash can. Both U's have successful athletic programs. These sports programs help NDSU & UND be a better place for students, and also to be better institutions. By the way, ACADEMICS will continue to make these 2 U's respectable institutions. Minute is over. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 4 hours ago, Texas rancher said: What's wrong with you guys? Eight dollar dippin dots, standing room only on the concourse of a non sold out stadium, and upping hockey tickets are going to balance the budget! First I never said it would balance it I said it would help, and charging 8 bucks for dippin dots and SRO tickets would generate more money along with jacking up the price of beer cause some people can't go a game without beer and would pay more for it. Tack on merchandise sales for a new logo (if not poorly designed) and again you get more money. Now let's discuss your option to balance the budget and generate money, without axing jobs, departments and sports. crickets still cherping Texas rancher 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 MIKE JACOBS: Revamp the university system, not just UND Quote Here are some possibilities, not forwarded as suggestions, necessarily. The system office and the Board of Higher Education ought to go through the 11 colleges and universities to identify duplication wherever it exists and then eliminate it wherever possible. This ought to include administrative structures. UND merged the positions of graduate school and research vice president. It's an admirable example. Could responsibility for research be merged across the system, creating a single research officer working across campuses? Could the smaller colleges share an administrative cabinet? Total enrollment at the nine small colleges doesn't approach that of either of the research institutions. Yet each of the colleges has its own president and other administrative officers. Joint administration was tried with two of the colleges some years ago and didn't work so well. It's at least possible, though, that the problem wasn't structural but personal. Once upon a time there was UND-Williston, UND-Bismarck and UND-Lake Region. Get rid of the duplication and perhaps consolidate some of the administrative responsibilities. Put Williston, Bismarck, Lake Region and Mayville under the UND umbrella and put Valley City, Dickinson, Bottineau and Wahpeton under NDSU. Leave Minot on its own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 6 hours ago, darell1976 said: First I never said it would balance it I said it would help, and charging 8 bucks for dippin dots and SRO tickets would generate more money along with jacking up the price of beer cause some people can't go a game without beer and would pay more for it. Tack on merchandise sales for a new logo (if not poorly designed) and again you get more money. Now let's discuss your option to balance the budget and generate money, without axing jobs, departments and sports. crickets still cherping Texas rancher How is SRO going to generate money when there are thousands of seats no one is sitting in? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 1 hour ago, JohnboyND7 said: How is SRO going to generate money when there are thousands of seats no one is sitting in? Do you see how many people stand on those walkways during a game if those tickets were 5 bucks it will sell more then the price of a regular seat ticket. How is killing programs that have very little scholarships going to save a school lots of money. I am thinking of ways to help the budget not solve it 100%, so let's hear your idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 5 minutes ago, darell1976 said: Do you see how many people stand on those walkways during a game if those tickets were 5 bucks it will sell more then the price of a regular seat ticket. How is killing programs that have very little scholarships going to save a school lots of money. I am thinking of ways to help the budget not solve it 100%, so let's hear your idea. Those people are paying more to get into games now by purchasing a general admission ticket. You can't charge SRO when the games aren't sold out. You are also forgetting about travel costs, equipment costs and salaries. Cutting programs saves money. I just don't agree with the ones cut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 This article is quite revealing:http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2016/04/17/ncaa-football-basketball-power-five-revenue-expenses/83035862/ Quote By the NCAA’s reckoning, fewer than two dozen public schools can cover their annual operating expenses without money from university coffers, government sources or student fees. So why doesn't the NCAA fix the core issue, namely, sport sponsorship requirements. I'll say it again, so what if UAA decides to sponsor men's hockey and only men's hockey in their entire athletics department? So what if NDSU decides only football at a level they can support. So what if UConn sponsors women's basketball and only women's basketball. Eliminate this whole "n men's and m women's teams to play at Division X" elitist NCAA approach. It's time for a cafeteria plan approach in the NCAA: pick and choose just what you want to play ... and can afford. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 11 minutes ago, darell1976 said: Do you see how many people stand on those walkways during a game if those tickets were 5 bucks it will sell more then the price of a regular seat ticket. This makes no sense. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxper Slam 29 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 14 minutes ago, darell1976 said: Do you see how many people stand on those walkways during a game if those tickets were 5 bucks it will sell more then the price of a regular seat ticket. It's great that they buy the ticket and support the program, but if you're standing on the walkways for almost 3 hours just drinking beer, why should they lower ticket prices for you to do that? Go to a bar: it's free admission and drinks are cheaper. If you want to be at the game, sure; stand on the walkways, but CHEER! If it's a close game, get to your seat and make some noise with everyone else! The ticket isn't just for the seat: it's for the experience. Enjoy the game with other fans and not just your $7 cup of Bud Light. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 19, 2016 Author Share Posted April 19, 2016 7 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: This article is quite revealing:http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2016/04/17/ncaa-football-basketball-power-five-revenue-expenses/83035862/ So why doesn't the NCAA fix the core issue, namely, sport sponsorship requirements. I'll say it again, so what if UAA decides to sponsor men's hockey and only men's hockey in their entire athletics department? So what if NDSU decides only football at a level they can support. So what if UConn sponsors women's basketball and only women's basketball. Eliminate this whole "n men's and m women's teams to play at Division X" elitist NCAA approach. It's time for a cafeteria plan approach in the NCAA: pick and choose just what you want to play ... and can afford. Why not make all sports non scholarship? Why not vote no to the FCOA. Why not drop to D3. Why not put a cap on coaches salary at $100,000 at all schools. More than two dozen schools could cover there operating costs. They just choose not to as then they can pay coaches more and get more money. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 I'm not sure you read that correctly, Cratter. Just two dozen schools pay for athletics with athletics revenues. The remainder of NCAA members (900+ or so) have to subsidize athletics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 19, 2016 Author Share Posted April 19, 2016 8 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: I'm not sure you read that correctly, Cratter. Just two dozen schools pay for athletics with athletics revenues. The remainder of NCAA members (900+ or so) have to subsidize athletics. I'm saying more could. They chose not to. They chose to spend more on coaches salary and FCOA etc to try and win nattys. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 40 minutes ago, homer said: Those people are paying more to get into games now by purchasing a general admission ticket. You can't charge SRO when the games aren't sold out. You are also forgetting about travel costs, equipment costs and salaries. Cutting programs saves money. I just don't agree with the ones cut. Like I said I am just throwing stuff out there, and you can rename SRO to endzone seating. How much travel costs and etc etc is UND saving by cutting golf, really golf? If you want to balance a budget make a dent not a tiny scratch. BF did cut the wrong programs, maybe Title IX hurts his options but he didn't make a dent by cutting 2 small programs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 17 minutes ago, darell1976 said: Like I said I am just throwing stuff out there, and you can rename SRO to endzone seating. How much travel costs and etc etc is UND saving by cutting golf, really golf? If you want to balance a budget make a dent not a tiny scratch. BF did cut the wrong programs, maybe Title IX hurts his options but he didn't make a dent by cutting 2 small programs. I can't imagine the travel budgets of either of those two sports was small. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 2 minutes ago, homer said: I can't imagine the travel budgets of either of those two sports was small. http://www.undsports.com/SportSelect.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=13500&SPID=6393&SPSID=58598 Men's golf is all over the place from Louisiana to NC, to Arkansas to Calif and in between, travel is bad, so is baseball being in the WAC, but also so is all our teams in the Big Sky compared to closer teams in the Summit League/MVFC. Should we beg Douple and Patty V to let us join because travel would be less? There has to be ways to cut without axing sports programs. But at least it was the least important sports (at least golf was). 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 9 minutes ago, darell1976 said: http://www.undsports.com/SportSelect.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=13500&SPID=6393&SPSID=58598 Men's golf is all over the place from Louisiana to NC, to Arkansas to Calif and in between, travel is bad, so is baseball being in the WAC, but also so is all our teams in the Big Sky compared to closer teams in the Summit League/MVFC. Should we beg Douple and Patty V to let us join because travel would be less? There has to be ways to cut without axing sports programs. But at least it was the least important sports (at least golf was). You can't sponsor 21 sports and also complain about coaches salaries, recruiting budgets, etc. The decision while unpopular was the correct decision for the athletic dept. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 https://mobile.twitter.com/MattStephens/status/722451473263669248?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet Here is Boise State, sport by sport, in 2015. I'd bet most school's athletic departments look that way, namely, one or two programs "in the black" and all the rest "dead red". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernraider Posted April 19, 2016 Share Posted April 19, 2016 8 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: https://mobile.twitter.com/MattStephens/status/722451473263669248?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet Here is Boise State, sport by sport, in 2015. I'd bet most school's athletic departments look that way, namely, one or two programs "in the black" and all the rest "dead red". Thanks for this and two thoughts came to mind. 1) Boise State only has 16 teams and they are FBS and a major university. Puts into perspective the 21 sports at UND 2) Hard to believe women's basketball lost $813,000 for what is likely the most popular women's sport. Eye opening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.