Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fightingsioux4life

President Kennedy Message on Athletics

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Siouxphan27 said:

There's no way a committee this large and evidently incompetent could keep the info you're implying a secret from the public. 

I don't think he's inferring that anybody knows for 100%. I think he's saying they're being directed to include the possibility of the Summit in their decision. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kennedy kept the list of safe sports from the public until he presented the list in the public, he could very well have said off the record to them that they can't make any sports cuts until we at least find out if we can switch leagues

Then make all the cuts at once. 

 

Think of it this way....what happened was better than them recommending to cut swimming  and women's softball (arbitrary random sports for sake of arguement) and have those sports feel like lame ducks and won't be able to recruit anyone/stop students from transferring and then in 2 months find out we are leaving the big sky and then we cut men's and women's tennis and keep swimming/women's softball

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SWSiouxMN said:

The IAC's recommendation to the president will be to stay at 20 sports. So, it's up to Kennedy now. More coming soon.

 

 

So if Kennedy doesn't follow the committees recommendation it'll all have been for nothing. 

Edit: I guess the committee was good for nothing no matter what Kennedy does or doesn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fightingsioux08 said:

Kennedy kept the list of safe sports from the public until he presented the list in the public, he could very well have said off the record to them that they can't make any sports cuts until we at least find out if we can switch leagues.

We could play conspiracy theories all day.

Herald is probably requesting a FOIA as we speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, fightingsioux08 said:

Kennedy kept the list of safe sports from the public until he presented the list in the public, he could very well have said off the record to them that they can't make any sports cuts until we at least find out if we can switch leagues

Then make all the cuts at once. 

 

Think of it this way....what happened was better than them recommending to cut swimming  and women's softball (arbitrary random sports for sake of arguement) and have those sports feel like lame ducks and won't be able to recruit anyone/stop students from transferring and then in 2 months find out we are leaving the big sky and then we cut men's and women's tennis and keep swimming/women's softball

 

This makes sense to me. Step 1, figuring out the league situation. Step 2, cut sports that aren't core to that league. I'd make no sense to cut any sports before knowing what league you're going to be affiliated with. My hope from the beginning is that they'd move to the Summit for all sports except for Football, which would stay in the Big Sky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WiSioux said:

Maybe all the ticket prices are about to sky rocket

Bingo, IAC recommended 25% increase in ticket prices across all sports.

Everyone knows if you increase prices, attendance will not change at all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

Bingo, IAC recommended 25% increase in ticket prices across all sports.

Everyone knows if you increase prices, attendance will not change at all...

Hockey fans aren't going anywhere, and football is on a tremendous upward trajectory performance-wise.

I think the market can absorb an increase (maybe not 25%, but that's academic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

Hockey fans aren't going anywhere, and football is on a tremendous upward trajectory performance-wise.

I think the market can absorb an increase (maybe not 25%, but that's academic).

Agreed, I think increasing ticket prices is a good idea, but the University better do their due diligence on what percentage increase is feasible. I think 25% is too steep, especially for hockey that already has high ticket prices.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, AJS said:

This makes sense to me. Step 1, figuring out the league situation. Step 2, cut sports that aren't core to that league. I'd make no sense to cut any sports before knowing what league you're going to be affiliated with. My hope from the beginning is that they'd move to the Summit for all sports except for Football, which would stay in the Big Sky. 

You make a very good point and I don't disagree with anything you brought up.  However, in looking at the core sport requirements UND could cut to position it self no matter what happens in conference affiliation.

Big Sky:  Men:basketball, cross country, football, indoor track and field, outdoor track and field, and tennis. Women: basketball, cross country, golf, indoor track and field, outdoor track and field, tennis, and volleyball. 

Based on that, UND has the following non-core sports:

Soccer, softball, M/W Swimming, M/W Hockey, M Golf

Summit:  M/W Bball plus 5 (or 6, I can't remember but lets assume 6 until someone can correct and I will adjust) M/W sports they offer of UND's choosing

Summit offers all sports that UND currently plays expect for Football, M/W hockey (dont offer), baseball and men's soccer (cut/don't have)

Lets say for the sake of the argument, UND goes down to 18 sports.  UND could cut swimming and be okay in both leagues. UND would have 6 mens sports for the Summit (BB, CC,ITF,OTF,Tennis,Golf) and 6+ for women (BB,VB,ITF,OTF,CC,Tennis,Golf).

Again, just a hypothetical, but it can be done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

Who just won, and won huge? 

UND President Mark Kennedy. 

1. He just owned the faculty. They complain when they're not involved in the decisions; but, when involved they completely renege. Based on this Kennedy no longer has to ask them anything. Why? He tried and they self-exposed as inept and unwilling. 

2. He has carte blanche now regarding Athletics. He can do whatever he wants. Whatever he may have in store he now has complete and full reign. 

Inept? Were they not asked to evaluate and report? Why is it so hard to believe that reasonable minded persons could conclude, upon a fair evaluation, that cutting sports was simply not in UND's best interests? How are any of us to sit in judgment upon the IAC?

If a jury returns a verdict you don't like, do you immediately blame the jurors? What about the prosecution, and the defense, and the judge, and the law?

The SiouxSports.com blood lust is nothing short of shameful. Few among us could ever wield a knife against our peers so arbitrarily and with such ruthlessness. Professors and students? Come on. Go ahead and give Kennedy his hatchet and your blessing, but unless you were at the table, and at the very least until the members speak publicly, it's pointless to pile on the committee.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fightingsioux08 said:

I don't have any inside knowledge.  Even if there was a 25% chance that we could get in the summit, we can't figure out which sports to sponsor without knowing which sports we have to cut. 

Those sports we added when we joined the big sky should be the first cut as they haven't had any success, have no alumni that will donate to support them, don't have division 1 quality facilities.  I would assume if we can drop they will be cut regardless of how many sports we sponsor. 

So it makes sense that we don't drop ANY sports until we drop the big sky core sports so we only do cuts one more time (and like I said we can offset the negative press by saying that cutting those sports allows us to play the other 3 dakota schools every year so it was a necessary loss)

The only sport that UND added to join the Big Sky was men's tennis and that costs around 75 cents a day to operate.  

UNDs athletic department was fat and bloated long before the Big Sky ever came calling.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bincitysioux said:

The only sport that UND added to join the Big Sky was men's tennis and that costs around 75 cents a day to operate.  

UNDs athletic department was fat and bloated long before the Big Sky ever came calling.

I thought we added mens' tennis, womens tennis and one other womens sport.....maybe my memory is wrong.

 

1 hour ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

Bingo, IAC recommended 25% increase in ticket prices across all sports.

Everyone knows if you increase prices, attendance will not change at all...

I agree that men's hockey's attendance wouldn't change even with a hefty price increase....but that's the ONLY sport where I believe attendance wouldn't be affected.

At this moment, its a bad idea to raise football ticket prices as we just got good fan turnout again.  We need to keep prices where they are so we get more people going to the games, get them hooked on Sioux football and then they could increase the prices

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Find money instead of cut costs.  How about we do both. 

If anyone on the IOC reads this board, from a fans perspective the last thing you can do right now is raise ticket prices.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Sicatoka said:

Who just won, and won huge? 

UND President Mark Kennedy. 

1. He just owned the faculty. They complain when they're not involved in the decisions; but, when involved they completely renege. Based on this Kennedy no longer has to ask them anything. Why? He tried and they self-exposed as inept and unwilling. 

2. He has carte blanche now regarding Athletics. He can do whatever he wants. Whatever he may have in store he now has complete and full reign. 

We can only hope this is his plan. I have no problem with a president/leader making a decision, owning it and making it work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jdub27 said:

Their recommendations are not realistic and because of that, they failed to do what they were asked. I'm not sure how a reasonable person can say that providing unattainable solutions instead of addressing the underlying issue is them somehow doing the job they were tasked with. They complained about not having a say the first go-around and when getting what they demanded, they decided they didn't want blood on their hands. That's their prerogative but don't act surprised when people call it for what it is.

"Unattainable" is in the eye of the beholder, and for those of us who were not at the table, it's a bit of a reach to draw that conclusion. We're talking about professors and students, not economists and soothsayers. Optimistic, perhaps, but certainly not inept.

Quote

inept

 

 

[in-ept, ih-nept
Spell Syllables
adjective
1.
without skill or aptitude for a particular task or assignment;maladroit:
He is inept at mechanical tasks. She is inept at dealing with people.
2.
generally awkward or clumsy; haplessly incompetent.
3.
inappropriate; unsuitable; out of place.
4.
absurd or foolish:
an inept remark.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AJS said:

This makes sense to me. Step 1, figuring out the league situation. Step 2, cut sports that aren't core to that league. I'd make no sense to cut any sports before knowing what league you're going to be affiliated with. My hope from the beginning is that they'd move to the Summit for all sports except for Football, which would stay in the Big Sky. 

In general I agree with this approach. It makes no sense to me to cut any sports before we know our conference situation is set. I prefer the BIg Sky over the Summit, with home and home series every other year with the Dakota schools if possible. To me, a conference for football is a critical part of any discussion and should be the first consideration.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The committee must think that running our athletic department like a high school is a good thing. We cannot adequately fund 20 sports at the Division I level so that they can thrive and be successful and not merely exist. I hope President Kennedy takes a blended approach to this: Increase revenues AND cut sports. If we can get the number down to at least 16, that would make it much easier to raise the level of support for MBB, WBB and FB, all of which have tremendous upside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

http://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/letters/4138944-letter-und-should-consider-moving-back-ncaa-division-ii

I kind of expect to see similar letters from C. Bass and Mrs. Paul over the next few days.

Reading stuff like this, even an opinion column absolutely makes my blood boil. I wish we could fast forward these next two weeks and just get to his decision. It's really unbelievable with this University. I wonder what giant headache is next after this gets squared away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

The committee must think that running our athletic department like a high school is a good thing. We cannot adequately fund 20 sports at the Division I level so that they can thrive and be successful and not merely exist. I hope President Kennedy takes a blended approach to this: Increase revenues AND cut sports. If we can get the number down to at least 16, that would make it much easier to raise the level of support for MBB, WBB and FB, all of which have tremendous upside.

Although it's been put to bed (or at least I hope it has), I'm almost 1/2 surprised that the committee's response wasn't let's just move down to DII, so we can keep all the sports.

I couldn't agree more, I really think Kennedy seems to have the "common sense" gene that some seem to be lacking with this subject.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...