President Kennedy Message on Athletics

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

Kennedy attempting to rein in the hysteria and overemphasis on "conference affiliation"?

Quote

Which conferences we participate in is not entirely up to UND. The members of each conference are the ultimate decision makers. Nevertheless, the committee members should be familiar with the alternative options.

Far cry from Schlossman's "New UND President Mark Kennedy has made it clear that he wants his school to look at new options for a conference home for its athletics programs."

[UNDBIZ]

2 hours ago, GeauxSioux said:

If "everything" is on the table, I would be eyeing Women's Hockey.  I believe Idalski's contract is up on the end of this season, coincidentally.  Since UND has already cut two men's sports, cutting one women's sport wouldn't be earth shattering.  The costs associated with women's hockey have to be quite large in comparison to some of the other sports being mentioned for cuts.  Would cutting baseball, men's golf and women's hockey get to the $1.4M or would more need to be cut?

Edit: Additionally, the most recent comments seem to dwell more on the sports that will be discontinued than on conference affiliation. 

Just cutting women's hockey would get us well past the $1.4 million.  We'd be able to properly invest in M&W BB then.

[geaux_sioux]

18 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Just cutting women's hockey would get us well past the $1.4 million.  We'd be able to properly invest in M&W BB then.

And volleyball. I think that sport has huge potential.

[bincitysioux]

Seems like a simple three component process to me.

1)  If the Big Sky doesn't sponsor it, there is no need for North Dakota to offer it, save for mens hockey of course.  Goodbye Women's hockey, and M&W Swimming & Diving.

2)  If the Big Sky doesn't require it, there is no need for North Dakota to offer it.  Goodbye Soccer and Softball.

3)  Fully fund every scholarship in all women's sports to address Title IX concerns.  If that still falls short, then you look at keeping Soccer and/or Softball.

[Shawn-O]

28 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Just cutting women's hockey would get us well past the $1.4 million.  We'd be able to properly invest in M&W BB then.

Careful...you might piss the Marvin's off...

[jdub27]

7 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:

2)  If the Big Sky doesn't require it, there is no need for North Dakota to offer it.  Goodbye Soccer and Softball.

Related to this, any idea what the core sports of the Summit are? I'd be surprised if it isn't at least mentioned.

[UNDBIZ]

8 minutes ago, Shawn-O said:

Careful...you might piss the Marvin's off...

How many more daughters do they have?  Keep the team for 2 seasons until Lisa graduates?

[dmksioux]

51 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:

Seems like a simple three component process to me.

1)  If the Big Sky doesn't sponsor it, there is no need for North Dakota to offer it, save for mens hockey of course.  Goodbye Women's hockey, and M&W Swimming & Diving.

2)  If the Big Sky doesn't require it, there is no need for North Dakota to offer it.  Goodbye Soccer and Softball.

3)  Fully fund every scholarship in all women's sports to address Title IX concerns.  If that still falls short, then you look at keeping Soccer and/or Softball.

 

[dmksioux]

Not sure why my quote feature is so messed up.  Anyway, agree with what Bin says regarding sports and what the Big Sky offers.  As for Women's Hockey, has UND ever had a club team?  I'm assuming Title IX only applies to varsity level sports but maybe the women's hockey supporters would be ok if it was still offered as a club level sport and as others have said, fully fund the other women's sports to address title IX

[Benny Baker]

1 hour ago, UNDBIZ said:

Just cutting women's hockey would get us well past the $1.4 million.  We'd be able to properly invest in M&W BB then.

Holy.  Does women's hockey really lose over $1.4 million per season?!?!

[UND1983]

6 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

Holy.  Does women's hockey really lose over $1.4 million per season?!?!

[Teeder11]

25 minutes ago, dmksioux said:

Not sure why my quote feature is so messed up.  Anyway, agree with what Bin says regarding sports and what the Big Sky offers.  As for Women's Hockey, has UND ever had a club team?  I'm assuming Title IX only applies to varsity level sports but maybe the women's hockey supporters would be ok if it was still offered as a club level sport and as others have said, fully fund the other women's sports to address title IX

Yes, it started out as a club team and competed that way for a number of years before being elevated to varsity level. 

[cberkas]

Women's hockey is covered by men's hockey revenue. The only way I see women's hockey cut is if the B1G starts a woman's hockey conference.  

[PhillySioux]

1 hour ago, jdub27 said:

Related to this, any idea what the core sports of the Summit are? I'd be surprised if it isn't at least mentioned.

Hypothetically, If Im the Summit I wouldn't let in UND unless UND restarted baseball.  The league needs programs.

[Nodak78]

I believe Pres Kennedy is bring the accounting closer to him so he doesn't have an surprise in the futures that bite him in the rear.

Not sure what sports will be cut. But he wants champion teams not just for participation ribbons.  Align the sports to what conference we want to be associated.

Are we raising funds comparable to our peers.  If not raise some more.

I see him as decisive and that is a good thing.  He is laying a good foundation for the future of UND athletics.

 

[Shawn-O]

2 minutes ago, cberkas said:

Women's hockey is covered by men's hockey revenue. The only way I see women's hockey cut is if the B1G starts a woman's hockey conference.  

Scholarships, FCOA, travel would go away yes?  

[bincitysioux]

We really just need to get this thing down to 14 or 15 sports.  Axing baseball was a great first step.  Half the schools in the Big Sky sponsor 15 sports or less.  Before dropping baseball and golf, UND was at 21 sports.  Tied with Sac State for the most offerings in the league.  Followed by Northern Colorado who has 19 (which is where UND is currently at).  See a pattern here?  I'd prefer UND's athletic department look more like Montana's and Montana State's than Sac's and UNC's.

[jdub27]

57 minutes ago, PhillySioux said:

Hypothetically, If Im the Summit I wouldn't let in UND unless UND restarted baseball.  The league needs programs.

I don't disagree but on top of (to my knowledge) the Summit having never turning away a possible member, that sort of demand would actually require some sort of vision on their part. They had an easy fix for their baseball issue fall right into their lap when UND asked to be an affiliate member and took no action, not sure why anyone would think they would start making logical decisions now.

[UNDBIZ]

23 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

Holy.  Does women's hockey really lose over $1.4 million per season?!?!

In 2013-14 they spent $1.3 million and had around $40,000 in revenue (with all REA facility expenses attributed to the Men's team).  Rumor is the number now is closer to $2.5 million.  Regardless of the veracity of the rumor, I can't imagine it's gotten any better since 2013-14.

[Benny Baker]

Just now, UNDBIZ said:

In 2013-14 they spent $1.3 million and had around $40,000 in revenue (with all REA facility expenses attributed to the Men's team).  Rumor is the number now is closer to $2.5 million.  Regardless of the veracity of the rumor, I can't imagine it's gotten any better since 2013-14.

Wow, I didn't realize women's hockey incurred that much in expenses!  If UND stays in Big Sky, axing women's hockey seems to make a whole lot of sense from a saving's standpoint.

[GeauxSioux]

2 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

Wow, I didn't realize women's hockey incurred that much in expenses!  If UND stays in Big Sky, axing women's hockey seems to make a whole lot of sense from a saving's standpoint.

I was just typing the same thing.  You beat me to it.

[bincitysioux]

7 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

In 2013-14 they spent $1.3 million and had around $40,000 in revenue (with all REA facility expenses attributed to the Men's team).  Rumor is the number now is closer to $2.5 million.  Regardless of the veracity of the rumor, I can't imagine it's gotten any better since 2013-14.

Good god that is way worse than I thought.  What possible justification could there be for sponsoring this sport?

[UNDColorado]

Thanks for posting that Biz. That number is ridiculously high and if Womens hockeys stays that budget needs to be slashed. 

I love hockey, but I have a hard time watching Womens hockey. That hard truth is that it is not exciting and will likely never make any money. 

[UNDBIZ]

Here's the athletics budget info from the 2013-14 school year.  http://www.undsports.com/fls/13500/Athletic%20Dept/BusOps/FY%202014%20NCAA%20AUP.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=13500

From the Faison Press Conference thread under the Other Sports forum, where much of this has been discussed.

[The Sicatoka]

Instead of impressions or interpretations I like to go to the source. Here's what Kennedy has tasked the IAC with, to be complete by November 1. 

http://www.grandforksherald.com/sites/default/files/KennedylettertoIAC.pdf

So, given that, here's what stands out to me:

• He specifically mentions NLI day on November 9. What sport(s) sign on that day? That may be a "tell" in itself.
• He wants the cost of each program and the attendance. I see a former Fortune 100 CFO doing a cost/benefit analysis right there. 
• He has a hard end date - do this by November 1. Do it, do it, done. What a concept.