Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Cutting Sports: Round 2


SWSiouxMN

Recommended Posts

Just now, UND1983 said:

Those 500-1000 fans/game certainly make it worth two million dollars a year.  Strong argument.

I would bet more fan's attend womens hockey than Soccer, Tennis, Softball, Swimming/Diving and Golf Combined.

More national exposure for Women's Hockey and a chance for National Championship.  Much more room to grow. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the core problem is the NCAA. 

So what if Wazzamatta U wants to play DI mens lacrosse and nothing else. So. What.

Obviously Wazzamatta would have to do things inside their university to meet Title IX, but why should any school have to play 14 or 16 sports to just play 1 or 2 that might make fiscal sense. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cratter said:

I don't think Kennedy is going to make any decision. 

He said Faison cut a million plus from the athletic budget...and then he'll say "Sounds good. I'll be by your side when you tell everyone."

First round Kennedy made sure to publicly state committee had major role and now second round he throws it on Faison.  We have rarely heard BF'S name until now regarding budget decisions.  Kennedy should go into politics.:)  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cratter said:

If you're great at reading between the lines like I am, thats basically what the Herald article stated.

Oh....

You haven't been great at reading between the lines/speculating/stating facts in the past, so I'm just trying to understand your take and angle on this one.

If you think Kennedy (publicly or privately) will have no say in this round of cuts, you are sadly mistaken.

Remember when Kennedy wasn't cutting any more sports because you said that he already stated he wasn't going to?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

 

If you think Kennedy (publicly or privately) will have no say in this round of cuts, you are sadly mistaken.

Remember when Kennedy wasn't cutting any more sports because you said that he already stated he wasn't going to?

 

I didn't say Kennedy wouldn't have any say. "Sounds good" is the presidents confirmation of the recommendations.

Not sure about your last comment. I was probably just pointing out hypocrisy of said statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 4:14 PM, Cratter said:

Womens Hockey won't be cut at UND thanks to its sugar daddy in Mens Hockey.

While they are politically correct enough not to take a public position on this, the folks running the Ralph would prefer that women's hockey disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said:

They're "non-profit" so making money is against the rules.

Uh, ... depends on what type of non-profit they are. 

A non-profit can make money as long as it defines where its "excess revenues" must go. In REA's case, it's UND Athletics. Heck, Sanford Health is a non-profit. You know because they file an IRS Form 990. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

R U sure? Sounds like employees I wouldn't want working for my company. 

Maybe they see the potential for having a months worth of weekends freed up to get an event or two that makes money.  I don't know how many weekend women's hockey isn't at home the same time men's is but I estimated 4.  One big concert during one of those weekends would do more for the Ralph and the city than an entire season of women's hockey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, homer said:

Maybe they see the potential for having a months worth of weekends freed up to get an event or two that makes money.  I don't know how many weekend women's hockey isn't at home the same time men's is but I estimated 4.  One big concert during one of those weekends would do more for the Ralph and the city than an entire season of women's hockey

Seems like it's difficult to get in good a good show?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, UND Fan said:

While they are politically correct enough not to take a public position on this, the folks running the Ralph would prefer that women's hockey disappeared.

Because it is so costly?  They could make $ on other events? Assuming that extra money would go to UND athletics?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, hky said:

Because it is so costly?  They could make $ on other events? Assuming that extra money would go to UND athletics?

The cost of running a women's game isn't dramatically different than a guy's so it is definitely a money loser. As pointed out earlier, the other major factor is that women's games take up so much of the calendar that could be used for other events. 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...