President Kennedy Message on Athletics

[BobIwabuchiFan]

How much did the Men's FB program contribute to the overall budget last year?  I'm hearing the biggest drain on the budget has been Men's Football for the last 3 years at least and with the stipends being added its really amped up the loss associated with the sport...Is this true or just some narrative being sold by the Academic side?

 

[jdub27]

5 minutes ago, BobIwabuchiFan said:

How much did the Men's FB program contribute to the overall budget last year?  I'm hearing the biggest drain on the budget has been Men's Football for the last 3 years at least and with the stipends being added its really amped up the loss associated with the sport...Is this true or just some narrative being sold by the Academic side?

Considering it gives out ~60 scholarships and has far and away the most participants, of course it is going to have high expenses, that is just simple math. It also actually brings in some revenue unlike the majority of other sports (both on ticket sales and donations). Its tough to say exactly where it falls because some sports aren't being charged the proper expenses.

[Oxbow6]

9 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Considering it gives out ~60 scholarships and has far and away the most participants, of course it is going to have high expenses, that is just simple math. It also actually brings in some revenue unlike the majority of other sports (both on ticket sales and donations). Its tough to say exactly where it falls because some sports aren't being charged the proper expenses.

To your last sentence we know there is a budget shortfall and some programs need to go but the financial/accounting methods in the athletic department are being done in a haphazard fashion?  Makes perfect sense to me.  I love it when a plan comes together.

 

Cue gfhockey......"Extend Fashion"!

[UNDBIZ]

11 minutes ago, BobIwabuchiFan said:

How much did the Men's FB program contribute to the overall budget last year?  I'm hearing the biggest drain on the budget has been Men's Football for the last 3 years at least and with the stipends being added its really amped up the loss associated with the sport...Is this true or just some narrative being sold by the Academic side?

With NO facility costs attributed to WIH and giving no credit to FB for Champions Club donations associated with FB season tickets or apparel licensing revenue or media contract revenue or sponsorship revenue, yes FB has "lost" the most money the past few years.  Like jdub said, one needs to remember football has 4 times the student athletes of the other major programs and it's a sport the community and alumni actually care about.

[gfhockey]

Contrary to some football alumni have deeper pockets then hockey alumni

 

hockey alumni just like to spend more

[geaux_sioux]

3 hours ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

We could have a really badass curling team.

Unis like Norways olympic team and you've got yourself a deal

[petey23]

5 hours ago, jdub27 said:

I thought something similar until I started looking into the numbers. Volleyball is the first one I thought of. Back of the napkin example (and again there are a lot more factors than this): Men's hockey is likely in the top 10% of funding, if not higher. That would mean VB would need to be top 30 in spending in D-1. That would require UND to spend around $1.6 million+ on volleyball, which means UND would need to add almost $1 million to its volleyball budget. The only issue is that Volleyball is 12 scholarships and MIH is 18, so you still need to find another (smaller) sport to fund at a higher level to get the proportionality down.

If you wanted to do basketball, the WBB budget would likely need to be around $3.8 million, which is an increase of over $2.5 million (and you still might be short a couple scholarships, but maybe close enough at 18 and 15).

This makes it clear that it is definitely possible to eliminate women's hockey, but it probably doesn't save the amount of money that everyone (myself included) thinks/hopes it would in the grand scheme of things. And again, this is all separate from the fact that WIH needs to a)have a budget accurately reflects what they are getting and b)looking at taking a little bit of haircut once the accurate numbers are figured.

Women's rowing would take about 300-400 k to be in top tier and the 12 scholarships are apportioned and you could have 50-60+ women on the team for the participation tier. If Arizona State can ad rowing we sure can. They could use the pool when we cut swimming.

 

From an article on title 9

 

Meanwhile, colleges across the country have raced willy-nilly to add women’s teams, sometimes with near-comic results. For example, Arizona State University — located in a desert — is adding varsity women’s crew, a fast-growing sport that owes its newfound popularity to the large teams (50 to 80) that it requires. Arizona State will flood a nearby 2 mile dry gulch for the team to row on; few if any team members are expected to have any rowing experience. (Crew is notoriously grueling, and few high schools offer the sport.)

At the University of Iowa, the new women’s crew team luxuriates in a budget of $440,000, boasting 12 apportionable scholarships, new boats and three paid coaches. Meanwhile, men’s crew — a club sport — struggles to make do with a stipend of $1,500 and secondhand boats.

 

[Goon]

17 hours ago, Blackheart said:

Just watched the videos of the presentations by the coaches/athletes trying to save their sports.  This has to be one of the lowest point in UND athletics history.  There had to be a better way to do this.

 

It's a travesty. The UND Administration is taking some hits for this, too. 

 

[SiouxVolley]

Miller and Schlossman keep writing hit pieces.  Been in a lot of corporate slim downs, and it's never pleasant.  Apparently they are pretty ignorant that thats the way the world is.  No athlete will lose a scholarship, even if their sport gets cut.  The coaches will be the ones hurt, but that comes with the territory of DI.

Why haven't Schlossman and Miller wrote about the incompetence of the Kelley admin for having 21 sports, with most of them being DII Level?  Kelley didn't have the balls to axe them when they should have been, because his overriding concern was his own popularity.  Incompetent or corrupt previous administration decisions always lead to unpleasant issues today, but they refuse to put that in context.

[UND-1]

6 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:

Miller and Schlossman keep writing hit pieces.  Been in a lot of corporate slim downs, and it's never pleasant.  Apparently they are pretty ignorant that thats the way the world is.  No athlete will lose a scholarship, even if their sport gets cut.  The coaches will be the ones hurt, but that comes with the territory of DI.

Why haven't Schlossman and Miller wrote about the incompetence of the Kelley admin for having 21 sports, with most of them being DII Level?  Kelley didn't have the balls to axe them when they should have been, because his overriding concern was his own popularity.  Incompetent or corrupt previous administration decisions always lead to unpleasant issues today, but they refuse to put that in context.

They aren't writing about cutting sports. They are writing about how UND is going about cutting sports.

[SiouxVolley]

7 minutes ago, UND-1 said:

They aren't writing about cutting sports. They are writing about how UND is going about cutting sports.

So was the way Schafer cut baseball and mens golf more to your liking?

Cutting is never pleasant no matter how it is done.

[UND-1]

1 minute ago, SiouxVolley said:

So was the way Schafer cut baseball and mens golf more to your liking?

Cutting is never pleasant no matter how it is done.

Did I write the articles?  Stay focused.

[SiouxVolley]

4 minutes ago, UND-1 said:

Did I write the articles?  Stay focused.

Threatening to cut programs may lead to more donations to save programs, like men's golf experienced.  Stay focused.

[gfhockey]

Women's curling wouldn't be bad. Especially with a new curling rink being built 

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

24 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:

Why haven't Schlossman and Miller wrote about the incompetence of the Kelley admin for having 21 sports, with most of them being DII Level?  Kelley didn't have the balls to axe them when they should have been, because his overriding concern was his own popularity.  Incompetent or corrupt previous administration decisions always lead to unpleasant issues today, but they refuse to put that in context.

You mean, why didn't Kelley read the owner's manual? Yeah, the one that comes with a mid-sized public flagship in flyover country making the move to D1? That Best Selling masterpiece that explains exactly, step-by-step, how to manage a University athletic budget during a period of unprecedented state wealth and largesse? Yeah, the Weekly Reader paint-by-numbers of how to manage a budget that was growing by leaps and bounds, year over year, and during which everything thing the state's oily fingers touched turned to black gold. So easy an idiot could do it, right? The Kelley-bashing is ridiculous, and the outspoken critics on here are saying something about themselves.

If you have facts, or data, please dish. Otherwise, please go on about how Faison must never have pulled a Groenewold and painted a rosier-than-accurate picture and assured Twamley that things were just fine. Because if Schaefer and Kennedy were both 'surprised' by the situation in Athletics, it must have been brutally obvious to Kelley, right?

[jdub27]

If anyone is confused this round of cuts are being handled the way they are, with the input from the IAC and presentations, this article from April gives you your answer. It also says quite a bit about how some of the faculty views athletics. There was no way the administration was going to do it the same way Schafer did it, especially with Kennedy wanting to get off on the right foot with the faculty, many of who already have doubts about him due to not being "academia". That being said, you'd think a group who wanted to be part of the decision making process would at least have a clue on the subject matter, which did not appear to be the case at all.

Quote

Eric Murphy, a UND professor and State Board of Higher Education faculty adviser, said as a member of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee, he was frustrated the IAC and faculty overall weren’t consulted about the cuts. “I think you’d find most faculty aren’t surprised and in a way are going to be pleasantly happy that something was done to rein in athletics,” he said.

Rakow said the sudden announcement didn’t line up with Schafer’s plan of posting budget cuts for comment. “I think there have been questions about expenses and deficits of athletics budget, so it would be better to see these cuts in light of full transparency and why they were chosen,” she said.

But some faculty are calling for more transparency. “Faculty are concerned athletics takes academic’s money, and they're concerned about the lack of transparency in the athletic budget and how much they make or don't make,” Murphy said.

 

[SiouxVolley]

12 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

You mean, why didn't Kelley read the owner's manual? Yeah, the one that comes with a mid-sized public flagship in flyover country making the move to D1? That Best Selling masterpiece that explains exactly, step-by-step, how to manage a University athletic budget during a period of unprecedented state wealth and largesse? Yeah, the Weekly Reader paint-by-numbers of how to manage a budget that was growing by leaps and bounds, year over year, and during which everything thing the state's oily fingers touched turned to black gold. So easy an idiot could do it, right? The Kelley-bashing is ridiculous, and the outspoken critics on here are saying something about themselves.

If you have facts, or data, please dish. Otherwise, please go on about how Faison must never have pulled a Groenewold and painted a rosier-than-accurate picture and assured Twamley that things were just fine. Because if Schaefer and Kennedy were both 'surprised' by the situation in Athletics, it must have been brutally obvious to Kelley, right?

If all the Big 12 schools don't have as many sports as UND when it moved to DI, it didn't take a brain surgeon to realize that UND was sponsoring too many sports to be competitive.

Any AD worth his salt would have told us that.  But Faison or Kelley didn't want to ltell the truth, and one of them had veto power over the other.

Give us a Stanford or Ivy League endowment, and you have some credibility.

[homer]

8 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

You mean, why didn't Kelley read the owner's manual? Yeah, the one that comes with a mid-sized public flagship in flyover country making the move to D1? That Best Selling masterpiece that explains exactly, step-by-step, how to manage a University athletic budget during a period of unprecedented state wealth and largesse? Yeah, the Weekly Reader paint-by-numbers of how to manage a budget that was growing by leaps and bounds, year over year, and during which everything thing the state's oily fingers touched turned to black gold. So easy an idiot could do it, right? The Kelley-bashing is ridiculous, and the outspoken critics on here are saying something about themselves.

If you have facts, or data, please dish. Otherwise, please go on about how Faison must never have pulled a Groenewold and painted a rosier-than-accurate picture and assured Twamley that things were just fine. Because if Schaefer and Kennedy were both 'surprised' by the situation in Athletics, it must have been brutally obvious to Kelley, right?

Yeah, it should have been brutally honest. A school the size of UND cannot financially support more varsity programs than schools in the P5 conferences with athletic budgets many times larger than UNDs.  

They also don't belong in the same division as Minot St., Mary and Northern St.  

It should not have been hard to see to be completely honest.  It should have been identified a lot earlier than now. 

[John W.]

Not seeing the trees becase of the forest...UND put in this position because of legislature...Only solution for ND budget shortfalli has been to cut....CA came out of crises by cuts and tax increases.,..,same for MN, cuts and increased tax  revenues...ND legislatively   asks for 7%, then 5%, then 10% across the board cut..,,Not just for universities, but all departments...There is NO more fat....Now it affects people and their lives...and now at the middle class university levels...earlier cuts affected the poor and working poor....but now when it affects middle class studnts and coaches...it gets'pub'...The U is not to blame for these deep cuts...Sure early on cuts may have trimmerd some fat..,,.but its beyond that now....November 8th...,turn out the real culprits...Would help, not only UND....but all peoples affected by public services

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

11 minutes ago, SiouxVolley said:

If all the Big 12 schools don't have as many sports as UND when it moved to DI, it didn't take a brain surgeon to realize that UND was sponsoring too many sports to be competitive.

Any AD worth his salt would have told us that.  But Faison or Kelley didn't want to ltell the truth, and one of them had veto power over the other.

Give us a Stanford or Ivy League endowment, and you have some credibility.

Apples and oranges...BCS vs FCS is hardly a valid comparison, and no Big XII state had ND's embarrassment of riches.  The difference in FB coach salaries alone would fund a handful of minor sports.  Now if you want to pin this on someone as poor planning, it belongs squarely on the administration that put D1 in motion, not the one that got on the ride after it was underway.

[homer]

11 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Apples and oranges...BCS vs FCS is hardly a valid comparison, and no Big XII state had ND's embarrassment of riches.  The difference in FB coach salaries alone would fund a handful of minor sports.  Now if you want to pin this on someone as poor planning, it belongs squarely on the administration that put D1 in motion, not the one that got on the ride after it was underway.

Again, UND does not belong at the same level as Minot and Mary. It's hard to argue UND is not at the level it needs to be.  Just can't support 20+ sports.  

[Cratter]

I just wonder what it'll be like down the road when there's comes another budget crisis (or say FCOA amount increases), but the low hanging fruit of cutting sports has already been picked.

UND already needs a half billion dollars in maintenance costs it doesn't have!

[homer]

25 minutes ago, Cratter said:

I just wonder what it'll be like down the road when there's comes another budget crisis (or say FCOA amount increases), but the low hanging fruit of cutting sports has already been picked.

UND already needs a half billion dollars in maintenance costs it doesn't have!

They will form a committee of athletic coaches to decide which college programs get cut?

[bincitysioux]

Sure the process is unfortunate, but not real sure what people are looking for here.  Schafer was heavily criticized for abruptly dropping sports with little to no apparent input from the university community, at least publicly.  Now Kennedy is being heavily criticized for apparently being too inclusive.  It's too bad but it is what is is.  Either way teams are going to be cut and feelings are going to be hurt.

I am quite confident that if Kennedy had done this on his own without the IAC, Brad and Tom would still be throwing him under the bus.

To me the biggest travesty about this whole process is the fact that the women's hockey program didn't have to be at the meeting last night to pitch their program.........

[The Sicatoka]

Crazy notion: Kennedy is crazy like a fox. Did he know the IAC was inept and put it on display. Why? After this does anybody want him to deal with them again? Or, for that matter, the IAC's parent the University Senate. He's just proven one body inept, and de facto maybe the other. 

Pretty bold for me to make that wild assumption. However, from the start he said the final call was his alone. I thought he did this as an olive branch. Who knows, it could be more than that. Remember: he is a politician. And politically he just took the teeth right out of the IAC and the University Senate.