Poll: Keep or Cut Women's Hockey

[SiouxVolley]

10 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Aren't parents great? 

They weren't yelling in German or Finnish or Swedish, but I guess that's possible.

[CMSB95]

1 hour ago, UND08 said:

Here's how I l would look at it if I were Kennedy.  We currently have 5 revenue sports (M/W basketball, M Hockey, Football, Volleyball).  UND needs to look for ways to increase revenue in these sports through sponsorships, advertising, ticket sales, etc...After that, I'd want to see a complete and accurate financial breakdown of each sport with PROPER allocations of expenses.  From there, I'd look at other mitigating factors such as:  conference requirements, Title IX requirements, quality of facilities (on-campus or not, condition), roster makeup (how many players are local and can we succeed with local athletes), and potential for success (are there inherent roadblocks to success, such as weather or geographic/cultural differences).  In my mind (and this is without looking at the numbers) I'd imagine the sports with the largest target on their backs would be:

1 - Women's Hockey (Title IX is the only thing that saves it, miniscule revenue and high cost even with improper allocations)

2 - Softball (No on-campus game facility, no local athletes, tough to compete with warm weather schools, lots of travel)

3 - Swimming (Aging but adequate facility, some local athletes but many not, higher travel costs)

4 - M/W Tennis (Big Sky core sport, so if a conference move is coming this could be expendable, not a large budget team)

5 - Soccer (On-campus facility that's adequate, access to turf/HPC, core of athletes from Twin Cities)

If UND were to stay in the Big Sky, my thoughts are that Softball and Swimming (maybe just men's) goes down the road to put us at 18 sports.  If UND moves to a Summit/Big Sky combo, I can see it being Swimming/Men's Tennis.  I think UND hurt it's chances at the Summit somewhat by cutting baseball, since the Summit could use core baseball teams.  It'll be interesting to see what shakes out.

If I could have my way, and "tiering" wasn't an issue...I'd axe women's hockey and Men's Swimming/Tennis to make it equal (and I'd cut Faison as well - thanks a lot Kelley!).  I think that would ensure that we don't have to do this again and allow UND a more balanced and competitive athletic department.  I'm sorry for some of you guys that think we need to give everyone an opportunity, but this should have been done the minute we left D2...We need to get out of the mediocre mindset and focus on getting the best bang for our buck!

Interesting points, however, I would like to say I don't think the university is too concerned about how much "Local" talent they have on their rosters.  The school offers a discounted tuition rate to a number of states.  Although I'm sure they would like to see kids from the state on the rosters, I don't think it's something that will make or break a sport.  As far as facilities being on or off campus, there are quite a few mid-major schools with facilities off campus and they do quite well. Yes, it may influence the attendance some I'll give you that.  With a facility off campus, sometimes it is cheaper than having one on campus.  Rent on a softball field may be $2-3,000 for the year.  No maintenance involved.  Personally, a move to the Summit is overall, in my opinion, the way to go and keep football in Big Sky...if they would allow it.  Your travel costs would be drastically reduced.  Take that money and put towards making the sports stronger.  Plus, you would be playing teams more local and I think that in itself would draw more people to attend the games.  You still probably have to put your teams down to the 18 mark, but with the change in conference, it would free up a lot of cash. 

[Big Green]

I think the problem is people compare the Women's game to the Men's game.  Obviously no comparison between size, speed and talent.  However, I really enjoy UND Women's hockey.  I do think they need to play in a smaller venue or block off 1/2 the lower bowl.  The closer you are to other fan's the better the game seems.   Attendance number are very similar to Volleyball.  I believe they have the same ticketing requirements.  Champions club member get in free and all others pay about $10. 

[UND08]

21 minutes ago, CMSB95 said:

Interesting points, however, I would like to say I don't think the university is too concerned about how much "Local" talent they have on their rosters.  The school offers a discounted tuition rate to a number of states.  Although I'm sure they would like to see kids from the state on the rosters, I don't think it's something that will make or break a sport.  As far as facilities being on or off campus, there are quite a few mid-major schools with facilities off campus and they do quite well. Yes, it may influence the attendance some I'll give you that.  With a facility off campus, sometimes it is cheaper than having one on campus.  Rent on a softball field may be $2-3,000 for the year.  No maintenance involved.  Personally, a move to the Summit is overall, in my opinion, the way to go and keep football in Big Sky...if they would allow it.  Your travel costs would be drastically reduced.  Take that money and put towards making the sports stronger.  Plus, you would be playing teams more local and I think that in itself would draw more people to attend the games.  You still probably have to put your teams down to the 18 mark, but with the change in conference, it would free up a lot of cash.

1 - The reason I talked about "local" recruits is two-fold.  The first is the more local your player base is, the lower the recruiting budget...and the cheaper the scholarships (even after reciprocity).  Second, a more local player base makes it easier to draw fans and generate interest.  That's why I listed it as one component in the bigger picture.

2 - Facilities - You are right...when I looked at facilities, I should have stated that not all off-campus facilities are bad (like the Alerus).  But Apollo Park doesn't seem D1 quality to me in the case of softball.  If we want to compete at a high level we probably need to address facilities for softball.

As to your recommendation, I think you are right about the Summit/Big Sky combo.  It is the best choice financially (if they'd have us...that is).  If I had my druthers, I'd rather see a mix of the two leagues as an all-sports conference with the following makeup

1 - UND (all sports)

2 - NDSU (all)

3 - SDSU (all)

4 - USD (all)

5 - Montana (all)

6 - Montana State (all)

7 - Idaho (all)

8 - UNC (all)

9 - UNI (football only)

10 - Omaha (all but football)

11 - Denver (all but football)

12 - Oral Roberts (all but football)

13 - UMKC (all but football)

That would leave 8 conference football games, 22 conference games in everything else (could divisionalize).  Travel would be better than the current Big Sky and philosophies would be pretty complimentary (other than maybe UNC and some of the non-football schools, but they fit in well geographically in this setup or offer some value in where they are located).  That being said...I'm not drinking the same thing that SiouxVolley is...so I don't think it will ever happen...but alas I can still dream.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

1 minute ago, Big Green said:

I think the problem is people compare the Women's game to the Men's game.  Obviously no comparison between size, speed and talent.  However, I really enjoy UND Women's hockey.  I do think they need to play in a smaller venue or block off 1/2 the lower bowl.  The closer you are to other fan's the better the game seems.   Attendance number are very similar to Volleyball.  I believe they have the same ticketing requirements.  Champions club member get in free and all others pay about $10. 

Agreed, I went to a UND v MN game at Ridder Arena and I thought it was a good time. It helps to have that arena specifically built for smaller crowds.

The Ralph swallows up any atmosphere they might have at UND women's games.

[The Sicatoka]

39 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Aren't parents great? 

Did you know if your parents never had kids you probably won't either. 

[UNDvince97-01]

13 minutes ago, Big Green said:

Attendance number are very similar to Volleyball.  I believe they have the same ticketing requirements.  Champions club member get in free and all others pay about $10. 

Attendance numbers may indeed be similar.  But what are the expense and budget numbers for UND Womens Hockey?  Whats the ROI?  Whats the potential of the program?  It peaked with the Lamoureaux girls in my opinion.

UND stopped ticketing for womens hockey games.  However, I'm not sure what they do for volleyball.

[planet2county]

What are the numbers for football?  Have they made money or lost money?  Have contributions covered the cost of moving up?  What is the realistic top end financially for football based on other programs?

To give you an idea on volleyball, Minnesota played in Wisconsin to a sold out crowd of about 5,400.  Top end at Nebraska is 10,0000.

[Big Green]

7 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

Attendance numbers may indeed be similar.  But what are the expense and budget numbers for UND Womens Hockey?  Whats the ROI?  Whats the potential of the program?  It peaked with the Lamoureaux girls in my opinion.

UND stopped ticketing for womens hockey games.  However, I'm not sure what they do for volleyball.

ROI is Its one of 3 Teams sports we have a chance at the National Championship.  Very similar to where we were at with Women's BB in the 80's with fan interest and quality of play.

 

 

[UNDBIZ]

13 minutes ago, planet2county said:

What is the realistic top end financially for football based on other programs?

National championships, select games on espn, and profits near the level of men's hockey. 

[UND08]

Just now, UNDBIZ said:

National championships, select games on espn, and profits near the level of men's hockey.

I agree Biz...I think based on some of the financial data available that things probably did look ugly for UND football for awhile.  However...we are on pace to end the year up 2,500 people per game attendance wise.  That's an additional $250k in revenue right there.  Plus the higher interest levels are going to lead to more advertising and sponsorships.  Football was definitely underperforming financially in prior years...but it has the potential to more than hold it's own (while being a big draw for the University).

[planet2county]

So are you basing financials on NDSU and Montana?  Where are they at now?  I am strictly talking financials?  What is it going cost to get there?  Are commitments from boosters in place?

 

 

[UNDBIZ]

One doesn't need to look far to see how huge fcs football can be for a university. 

[UNDBIZ]

3 minutes ago, planet2county said:

So are you basing financials on NDSU and Montana?  Where are they at now?  I am strictly talking financials?  What is it going cost to get there?  Are commitments from boosters in place?

You asked about potential. Obviously the money isn't there right at this point.

[UND08]

Just now, planet2county said:

So are you basing financials on NDSU and Montana?  Where are they at now?  I am strictly talking financials?  What is it going cost to get there?  Are commitments from boosters in place?

 

 

More commitments from boosters for Football than any sport outside of Men's Hockey.

[Goon]

18 hours ago, siouxnami said:

I think this is insulting to these athletes and condescending to the University of North Dakota. I fully support these women.

To each his/her own. I would question how many of the anti women's hockey fans have actually been to a game or two. Personally, I think UND women's hockey is a good brand of hockey and it's also exciting. One of the top games I ever saw was the pre-Olympic game between USA and Canada.

That being said, I am a football and hockey fan and for the most part, I get bored watching baseball and basketball games. It's what you like. Would I go to a basketball game? Sure, I would. I would also never diss an athlete from any sport. 

[UNDBIZ]

1 minute ago, Goon said:

To each his/her own. I would question how many of the anti women's hockey fans have actually been to a game or two. Personally, I think UND women's hockey is a good brand of hockey and it's also exciting. One of the top games I ever saw was the pre-Olympic game between USA and Canada. 

2 periods. I left after the free tuition drawing during the second intermission. The chance at free tuition wasn't worth sitting through 2 periods of another game. 

[planet2county]

There is also more cost, so it is relative.  It is also one thing to project and another to have money in hand.   Also, I would be disappointed if football didn't have a large number of boosters based on the number of participants and the number of years it has been played.  I am also smart enough to know football isn't going be chopped anytime soon.  

I enjoy UND football.  But I doubt when sports were introduced at UND in the early years, they were projecting national championships.  

I also see what is going around at all levels of college sports, sometimes egos, presumed status are drivers in athletic decisions and financials are an afterthought.

 

[UND08]

2 minutes ago, planet2county said:

There is also more cost, so it is relative.  It is also one thing to project and another to have money in hand.   Also, I would be disappointed if football didn't have a large number of boosters based on the number of participants and the number of years it has been played.  I am also smart enough to know football isn't going be chopped anytime soon.

I enjoy UND football.  But I doubt when sports were introduced at UND in the early years, they were projecting national championships.

I also see what is going around at all levels of college sports, sometimes egos, presumed status are drivers in athletic decisions and financials are an afterthought.

 

Simply put...do I think football has the ability to break even or turn a small profit?  Yes I do...

Do I think women's hockey has that same ability?  No I do not...

I don't love the fact that these decisions need to have a "bottom line" focus...but that's the world we live in unfortunately.  That said...because of Title IX it's not going anywhere...so I hope they can continue to grow interest to the point where it can generate some revenue...

[planet2county]

I appreciate that.  Participation in sports is trending lower in areas along with attendance at high school and college by younger adults.  

I just think the idea of redistributing savings to other programs, isn't going to be a magical solution.  

If Idaho had real financial commitment to their football program they would continue to be FBS.  It easy to point fingers at adminstration.

Somehow, I do not think OSU football boosters always needs the right administration to make things happen.

[82SiouxGuy]

Quote

What’s more, there’s actually a kind of hierarchy among the top-tier football programs.  According to Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, authors of The System: The Glory and Scandal of Big-Time College Football (2013), figures from the 2010-11 academic year show that only 22 of the 120 top-tier football programs broke even or made a profit.  That means that while these big-time teams generate millions of dollars of revenue, the cost of running such programs usually exceeds that revenue.  To put that more starkly, even within the so-called top tier, 82% of college football teams actually take away money from the university’s budget, rather than generate net revenue. 

Quote

(If that’s the picture among the top-tier teams, the picture outside NCAA Division 1 schools is not just muddy—it’s outright bleak.  It’s quite rare for teams outside the FBS to be profitable, and they are virtually never consistently profitable.)

http://www.ethosreview.org/intellectual-spaces/is-college-football-profitable/

College football is only profitable in a select few cases, probably 10% or less of Division I programs. NDSU may be making money right now (I don't know if anyone has actually seen their books or not to know for sure), but even that program is not going to make money on a regular basis. The only 2 athletic programs on campus at UND that actually have a chance to make a decent profit on a regular basis are men's hockey and basketball. Basketball would have to become a regular or semi-regular participant in March Madness to really make money.

 

[nodakvindy]

4 hours ago, UNDBIZ said:

National championships, select games on espn, and profits near the level of men's hockey. 

What?  I'll grant you the first two are possible but football will never be in the black let alone make the money hockey does.  Start with a huge and expensive coaching staff, triple the number of scholarships on the cost side and a quarter of the number of games on the revenue side.

For those that are so hung up on looking at dollars and cents football has lost more than anything, including women's hockey.  But neither is going any place. Women's hockey just needs a Gene Roebuck to breathe new life into the program and expand interest. Idalski doesn't seem to have been a great ambassador for the program in the community. 

[talksalot83]

On 10/14/2016 at 3:48 PM, UNDvince97-01 said:

 

UND stopped ticketing for womens hockey games.  

This is wrong. I went to Saturday's game (paid and received a ticket) and they're still require tickets. I asked and they said that they, absolutely, are ticketing this year.

[UND-1]

16 minutes ago, talksalot83 said:

This is wrong. I went to Saturday's game (paid and received a ticket) and they're still require tickets. I asked and they said that they, absolutely, are ticketing this year.

That is good to know and glad they are. 

[planet2county]

Some 2015-2016 Men's Hockey Avg. Attendance

Alaska-Anchorage  1763, Mercyhurst 1283, Canisius 1092, Holy Cross 1060, Niagara 892, Robert Morris 851