President Kennedy Message on Athletics

[zonadub]

The only thing that should keep WIH on the roster is if the B1G is starting a women's conference and having a women's team is a requirement of inviting UND to the B1G hockey conference.

[UNDvince97-01]

I believe the decision will happen by tomorrow afternoon.  At that time, calls will be made to donors and alumni of those respective programs.

Because of that, I believe an official announcement could come by Thursday morning/afternoon.

Let's hope our Athletics Director and President of OUR University make the correct business decision for the University and UND Athletics moving forward.

I won't hold my breath.

[SIOUXFAN97]

3 hours ago, zonadub said:

The only thing that should keep WIH on the roster is if the B1G is starting a women's conference and having a women's team is a requirement of inviting UND to the B1G hockey conference.

was thinking the same thing...they get 2 for 1 but don't you need six team for a conference? unless they do an affiliate minny, wisco, osu, und, penn state, and one affiliate like UMD?  or wait it out for one school to add?  you would think michigan or michigan state would be a natural fit for wih?

[zonadub]

7 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

was thinking the same thing...they get 2 for 1 but don't you need six team for a conference? unless they do an affiliate minny, wisco, osu, und, penn state, and one affiliate like UMD?  or wait it out for one school to add?  you would think michigan or michigan state would be a natural fit for wih?

Yeah, my point was not that I think the B1G is going to add women's hockey, just that if UND women's hockey is saved, it should be because both teams are going to the B1G

[cberkas]

34 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

was thinking the same thing...they get 2 for 1 but don't you need six team for a conference? unless they do an affiliate minny, wisco, osu, und, penn state, and one affiliate like UMD?  or wait it out for one school to add?  you would think michigan or michigan state would be a natural fit for wih?

They came out a long time ago and said there would be no women's conference.

[cberkas]

27 minutes ago, zonadub said:

Yeah, my point was not that I think the B1G is going to add women's hockey, just that if UND women's hockey is saved, it should be because both teams are going to the B1G

When was UND going to the B1G?

[zonadub]

Not that I'm aware of. I just don't see any other reason to justify that $2 MM a year money pit.

[AJS]

7 hours ago, zonadub said:

Not that I'm aware of. I just don't see any other reason to justify that $2 MM a year money pit.

Like a lot of things, the way UND has handled this can be a case study in not what to do for other Universities looking to cut sports. I might be alone in this, but before the budget talk, I was in the dark on how much most programs at UND cost the University. I knew Women's hockey was expensive, but since there was no budget problems, it more or less didn't matter. When the budget crisis happened and there was a spot light on every programs finances, it became very clear which program needed to go. When that sport doesn't get cut today, it's going to go from a sport that was in the background for me, to one that I'll actively despise. It's not fair to them and I'm probably in the minority, but I wonder if there'll be any sort of resentment.

 

Edit: I know there's no easy way to do it, but for everyone involved, you'd think they'd rather just get blindsided like Baseball / Golf. Have the powers that be sit down and make a decision and then announce. Not string it out like they did.

[CMSB95]

I wonder if anyone here has knowledge or experience from other universities that have cut programs?

[petey23]

8 hours ago, cberkas said:

They came out a long time ago and said there would be no women's conference.

welp, then no reason for UND to keep it around.

[homer]

17 minutes ago, AJS said:

Like a lot of things, the way UND has handled this can be a case study in not what to do for other Universities looking to cut sports. I might be alone in this, but before the budget talk, I was in the dark on how much most programs at UND cost the University. I knew Women's hockey was expensive, but since there was no budget problems, it more or less didn't matter. When the budget crisis happened and there was a spot light on every programs finances, it became very clear which program needed to go. When that sport doesn't get cut today, it's going to go from a sport that was in the background for me, to one that I'll actively despise. It's not fair to them and I'm probably in the minority, but I wonder if there'll be any sort of resentment.

 

Edit: I know there's no easy way to do it, but for everyone involved, you'd think they'd rather just get blindsided like Baseball / Golf. Have the powers that be sit down and make a decision and then announce. Not string it out like they did.

I would guess a lot of universities would not want the true costs of sports to get out to the public.  Very few sports make any money at all. 

I for one have no problem putting the true costs out to the public.  If women's hockey stays, the expectations just went way up.  It also makes me appreciate the success of some sports with the limited investment they get.  

[The Sicatoka]

9 hours ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

was thinking the same thing...they get 2 for 1 but don't you need six team for a conference? unless they do an affiliate minny, wisco, osu, und, penn state, and one affiliate like UMD?  or wait it out for one school to add?  you would think michigan or michigan state would be a natural fit for wih?

The B1G started hockey when they had six current members playing the sport (UMn, UW, UMi, MSU, OSU, PSU). 

They're adding "Our Lady of South Bend" as an affiliate. We hear the whispers here about "an eighth MIH" school for B1G hockey. 

A conference really only works at six.

Who of that MIH group has WIH (right now as I type)? UMn, UW, OSU, PSU, "that whispered affiliate". I'd say Notre Dame might be a decent sixth. 

[The Sicatoka]

44 minutes ago, homer said:

I would guess a lot of universities would not want the true costs of sports to get out to the public.  Very few sports make any money at all. 

I for one have no problem putting the true costs out to the public.  

If the public knew the real costs (and losses), there'd be a big push to eliminate non-revenue sports. 

State Sen Blowhard J. Rumpwarmer*: "Why are we supporting all these sport programs? What value are they giving to my constituents who are 350 miles from campus and have no jobs and broken streets and infrastructure in their town? Why are we taxing fixed-income widows in my district so some college boys and girls can travel around the country playing games?"

I still say the NCAA is the issue. I fundamentally disagree with the NCAA notion that if you want to play Sport X at Level N you must sponsor Y other (total) sports. 

 

*Yes, he does sound like Foghorn Leghorn, I say, I say. 

[mksioux]

9 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

If the public knew the real costs (and losses), there'd be a big push to eliminate non-revenue sports. 

State Sen Blowhard J. Rumpwarmer*: "Why are we supporting all these sport programs? What value are they giving to my constituents who are 350 miles from campus and have no jobs and broken streets and infrastructure in their town? Why are we taxing fixed-income widows in my district so some college boys and girls can travel around the country playing games?"

I still say the NCAA is the issue. I fundamentally disagree with the NCAA notion that if you want to play Sport X at Level N you must sponsor Y other (total) sports. 

 

*Yes, he does sound like Foghorn Leghorn, I say, I say. 

I think on an even deeper level, universities know they need to keep athletics because it creates an emotional attachment to the university for a lot of alumni and the community.  Without that emotional (and sometimes illogical) attachment, people would be taking a lot closer look with a critical eye at everything that universities do.  

[The Sicatoka]

49 minutes ago, mksioux said:

Without that emotional (and sometimes illogical) attachment, people would be taking a lot closer look with a critical eye at everything that universities do.  

Indubitably. 

[iluvdebbies]

 

[UND92,96]

The fact that men's hockey-playing schools like Michigan, Michigan State and Notre Dame don't have women's hockey tells me all I need to know about whether it makes any financial sense whatsoever to have it. There are far less expensive alternatives that can still result in Title IX compliance.

[SWSiouxMN]

Well we will find out at 3:30

 

 

[The Sicatoka]

6 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:

Well we will find out at 3:30

 

 

Q: How do you keep idiots in suspense?
A: Find out at 3:30.  

[The Sicatoka]

Interesting that the presser is at the Gorecki Alumni Center and not Hyslop, HPC, or REA. 

[SWSiouxMN]

I can't copy the tweet but Todd Milewski says Women's hockey is cut

 

 

[MissSioux85]

I guess we'll find out soon how good his sources are.

[crb1]

15 minutes ago, MissSioux85 said:

I guess we'll find out soon how good his sources are.

If true that is really to bad. I do understand the financial implications and hope that some donors can step up and help the WH team. I feel bad for the students and will miss watching them play. 

[SWSiouxMN]

11 minutes ago, crb1 said:

If true that is really to bad. I do understand the financial implications and hope that some donors can step up and help the WH team. I feel bad for the students and will miss watching them play. 

He seems to have solid info.  It might be the real deal

[The Sicatoka]

19 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said:

I can't copy the tweet but Todd Milewski says Women's hockey is cut

When in Grand Forks, Milewski drinks with the #gobc.