siouxweet Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 why keep softball? It's men's counterpart is gone , they have a $600 k budget and spend the first two months flying all over the country to play. 3 Quote
jdub27 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Cratter said: We obviously know that's not true. Football Mens and women's hockey Mens and women's basketball Volleyball All safe. We also knew this wasn't going to come up again. Your list might be right but it's incorrect to state that everything on there is 100% safe. The situation is different this time with a much larger and specific number that has to be addressed. They've already shown that the change in circumstances has changed some lines of thinking. Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 11 hours ago, siouxweet said: why keep softball? It's men's counterpart is gone , they have a $600 k budget and spend the first two months flying all over the country to play. Agree with this 100%. Plus when they finally do play a home game they seem to get postponed due to weather. Also they generate zero dollars in ticket revenue. Same this with with M and W Golf. Quote
jdub27 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, Big Green said: Agree with this 100%. Plus when they finally do play a home game they seem to get postponed due to weather. Also they generate zero dollars in ticket revenue. Same this with with M and W Golf. Softball generates $3,000 less revenue the WIH and but costs $800,000 less while offering almost the same amount of student athlete opportunities. Men's golf is more or less not the athletic departments responsibility plus the cost of the golf programs is minimal compared to the other. The only program that costs less is Men's Tennis. 2 Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Either we are a hockey town or just a Sioux Men's hockey town. They need a new coach. Do that and start winning the fan's will come. Women's hockey is a good alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the men's game. The whole student "athlete opportunities" does nothing for me. If no one is willing to watch them play than big deal. Women'shockey generates more fan interest then Tennis, Golf, Softball, Soccer and Swimming and Diving. Look there before cutiing Women's Hockey. Quote
Popular Post Siouxperfan7 Posted February 21, 2017 Popular Post Posted February 21, 2017 UND has 2 options here on what they are going to decide. They can either make this decision on what sports to cut based on feelings, or based on numbers and facts. Kennedy and other UND officials need to not be worried about hurting peoples feelings and "public outcry" when cutting a sport if it is going to save millions in the long run. 10 Quote
Popular Post jdub27 Posted February 21, 2017 Popular Post Posted February 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, Big Green said: Either we are a hockey town or just a Sioux Men's hockey town. They need a new coach. Do that and start winning the fan's will come. Women's hockey is a good alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the men's game. The whole student "athlete opportunities" does nothing for me. If no one is willing to watch them play than big deal. Women'shockey generates more fan interest then Tennis, Golf, Softball, Soccer and Swimming and Diving. Look there before cutiing Women's Hockey. People didn't show up when they had two of the best women's hockey players in the world. Sure, its a good alternative, but not at a real cost of around $2 million per year on UND's dime. I guess those people could always watch high school hockey, which is pretty close to the same skill level. Unfortunately Title IX cares about athlete opportunities. There is just as much if not more participation at the youth levels in those other sports, meaning they fit in better with the community (which is part of Title IX). Its really splitting hairs to say that it generates more fan interest. Cutting 1/4 of the athletic department to save 1 sport that basically quit charging for tickets because they were losing money on workers taking tickets doesn't scream fan interest. 7 Quote
UNDBIZ Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 13 minutes ago, Big Green said: Either we are a hockey town or just a Sioux Men's hockey town. They need a new coach. Do that and start winning the fan's will come. Women's hockey is a good alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the men's game. The whole student "athlete opportunities" does nothing for me. If no one is willing to watch them play than big deal. Women'shockey generates more fan interest then Tennis, Golf, Softball, Soccer and Swimming and Diving. Look there before cutiing Women's Hockey. It's been proven several times that GF is just a UND men's hockey town. Look at the attendance for the U-18 tournament last spring. Look at attendance for the state high school tournament. Men's club hockey is an even better alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the varsity men's games. Student athlete opportunities matter for Title IX and for enrollment, which affects revenue all across campus. Women's swimming and diving generates more revenue than women's hockey. 2 Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Just now, UNDBIZ said: It's been proven several times that GF is just a UND men's hockey town. Look at the attendance for the U-18 tournament last spring. Look at attendance for the state high school tournament. Men's club hockey is an even better alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the varsity men's games. Student athlete opportunities matter for Title IX and for enrollment, which affects revenue all across campus. Women's swimming and diving generates more revenue than women's hockey. Do they even charge to watch Swimming and Diving. Quote
UNDBIZ Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Just now, Big Green said: Do they even charge to watch Swimming and Diving. Nope, and they still make more money than WIH. Quote
AJS Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Kennedy coming out and giving the number ($1.3 million) and saying everything is on the table, I actually think for once that UND will make the logical, completely obvious decision and cut Women's hockey. I don't know how it's even debatable when you lay everything on the table. Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Just now, UNDBIZ said: Nope, and they still make more money than WIH. don't beleive that. Quote
Oxbow6 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 30 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said: UND has 2 options here on what they are going to decide. They can either make this decision on what sports to cut based on feelings, or based on numbers and facts. Kennedy and other UND officials need to not be worried about hurting peoples feelings and "public outcry" when cutting a sport if it is going to save millions in the long run. Makes sense to me but I have learned thru the years "making sense" and government supported/run entities rarely go together in the same sentence. 3 Quote
jdub27 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, Big Green said: don't beleive that. What isn't there to believe? The NCAA report shows that Women's Ice Hockey generated revenues of $29,239 and Women's S&D generated $36,194. There is more to revenues than just ticket sales. #NotMyNumbers 2 Quote
AJS Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 30 minutes ago, Big Green said: Either we are a hockey town or just a Sioux Men's hockey town. They need a new coach. Do that and start winning the fan's will come. Women's hockey is a good alternative to people that can't afford tickets to the men's game. The whole student "athlete opportunities" does nothing for me. If no one is willing to watch them play than big deal. Women'shockey generates more fan interest then Tennis, Golf, Softball, Soccer and Swimming and Diving. Look there before cutiing Women's Hockey. I really, really hope you're trolling. Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Just now, jdub27 said: What isn't there to believe? The NCAA report shows that Women's Ice Hockey generated revenues of $29,239 and Women's S&D generated $36,194. There is more to revenues than just ticket sales. I get that. I would like to see what makes up that $36,194. I'm not against cutting Women's Hockey. The subject has been beat to death on here, Just wish the support between the Men's and Women's program wasn't so great. Quote
Big Green Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 8 minutes ago, AJS said: I really, really hope you're trolling. Nope. Everything is the truth. Quote
jdub27 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 10 minutes ago, Big Green said: I get that. I would like to see what makes up that $36,194. Majority of it is money they raised from putting on camps. The balance is listed as miscellaneous funds. They also have to cover the expenses of the camps, which is listed in their expenses. Quote
WiSioux Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Let's just cut all sports that don't have spectators in attendance. So we're left with men's hockey, men's and women's basketball, women's volleyball, and football. Done. 2 Quote
UNDBIZ Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 1 minute ago, WiSioux said: Let's just cut all sports that don't have spectators in attendance. So we're left with men's hockey, men's and women's basketball, women's volleyball, and football. Done. Well that would be great, but obviously the NCAA and Title IX wouldn't allow it. The key is to minimize financial losses in the sports not named in your post. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 5 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said: Well that would be great, but obviously the NCAA and Title IX wouldn't allow it. I corrected your statement. Title IX is about equitable opportunities, not how many. The NCAA is the one that mandates n sports to play in Division X. 1 Quote
UNDBIZ Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 5 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: I corrected your statement. Title IX is about equitable opportunities, not how many. The NCAA is the one that mandates n sports to play in Division X. And Title IX would not allow UND to sponsor men's hockey, basketball and football with just women's basketball and volleyball, as that would not be equitable. Quote
UND-1 Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 16 minutes ago, WiSioux said: Let's just cut all sports that don't have spectators in attendance. So we're left with men's hockey, men's and women's basketball, women's volleyball, and football. Done. UND needs 16 sports if they ever want to go FBS in football. So your idea won't work. But, in the mean time they can try and reduce losses/stabilize budget by eliminating sports that cost the most and bring in the least amount of revenue/attention. Quote
Cratter Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 They're going to keep women's hockey despite the numbers because it's one of the most watched women's sports on campus. 1 Quote
UNDColorado Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, Cratter said: They're going to keep women's hockey despite the numbers because it's one of the most watched women's sports on campus. Do they get more average attendance than volleyball and W basketball? 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.