UND to cut women's hockey

[UND1983]

16 minutes ago, UNDColorado said:

The sports experts over at Vogue have gotten in on the action: https://www.vogue.com/article/jocelyne-lamoureux-team-usa-title-ix

Do you hear the baseball players constantly bitching and complaining like this?  Or the Swimming and Diving teams-who won more in one year than the WH did in their entire existence?  

This attitude is why they don't have support from the masses, only their little myopic niche.  

[Siouxperfan7]

2 hours ago, UND1983 said:

Do you hear the baseball players constantly bitching and complaining like this?  Or the Swimming and Diving teams-who won more in one year than the WH did in their entire existence?  

This attitude is why they don't have support from the masses, only their little myopic niche.  

Not even any other former womens hockey players, including the ones that were on the team when the program was cut, have commented on this as much as the Lammy twins.   Besides the few days after it all went down, the only ones that consistently bitch about it are these two.  

I wonder how many hours the Lammy's got to train at the Ralph including ice time that the Ralph and UND did not charge them for.  For all that they have been provided by UND when they were at school and the last 8 years or so training for the Olympics and World Championships, you would think that they wouldn't make it a priority to bash UND every chance they can get.

[jdub27]

 

Quote

About a year ago, the college you had played for, the University of North Dakota, cut their women’s hockey program, for which you were serving as the strength coach. Why? The university is renowned for hockey—the men’s team has won eight national titles, yes, but the women’s team sent eight players to the Sochi Olympics, and at least that many to Pyeongchang. That’s more players sent to the Olympics from any single sport in the university’s history.

Yes. When you say University of North Dakota, it’s synonymous with Fighting Sioux hockey. It was a tough situation handled poorly at every turn by the university’s leadership. The way the players found out, the way the staff found out—the lack of ownership by the athletic department and the university in general was disappointing. And I understand that the university was in financial distress. I understand that it’s a business, and the NCAA is a business. But there was a way to make it work, and I don’t think any solutions were tried. Can you imagine the publicity of having a dozen or so Olympians talking up your school, and how that could affect girls, whether local or regional or national or international, who either play hockey and want to excel or just want to be inspired to learn and dream?

• I'm not positive, but I think those numbers are off. Even if there were 8 players in Sochi (the Herald only named 7), Schlossman only named 6 this year in this tweet.
• It's not Fighting Sioux hockey anymore
• You "understand" that the University was in financial distress? How kind of you to acknowledge that
• There was a way to make it work?? Oh really? Strange that claim is short on details. UND explained what was needed to make it work: a $60 million endowment.
• I don't recall any of this "talking up" in past Olympics, especially from the foreign players because, well, their games get minimal coverage in the US. I also don't recall UND seeing any noticeable bumps or exposure from the previous two Olympics at a cost of $8 million/4 year cycle.

Quote

I thought the whole point of Title IX laws were to prevent exactly this sort of thing from happening.

Well, Title IX is tricky: You don’t have to balance the expenditures sport versus sport, men’s hockey versus women’s hockey. Obviously the university found a way to maneuver numbers and dollars to make it look compliant, but I don’t think that decision was made in the spirit of Title IX and what Title IX was created for. When you have one of the most prevalent men’s college hockey programs in the country and a women’s team of this caliber and literally the best facilities in the world—not the biggest, but the best—you should be offering a women’s program as well, not figuring out a way to not have one.

• The University found a way to maneuver numbers to make it look compliant? Decisions weren't made in the "spirit" of Title IX? I don't think she actually understands how Title IX works and there isn't a "spirit" behind it, either you're compliant or you aren't. The OCR investigation proved that UND was in compliance. Period.
• Women's team of what caliber? Slightly above-average? 0 Conference Titles, 0 NCAA wins but once finished T-2 in league play. What exactly are you hanging your hat on here?

 

This pandering and flat out misinformation is why people have such strong feelings that appear to be negative. Enjoy your gold medal, it's an awesome accomplishment to be incredibly proud of. Quit trying to drag UND through the mud while doing it.

[fightingsioux4life]

1 hour ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

Not even any other former womens hockey players, including the ones that were on the team when the program was cut, have commented on this as much as the Lammy twins.   Besides the few days after it all went down, the only ones that consistently bitch about it are these two.  

I wonder how many hours the Lammy's got to train at the Ralph including ice time that the Ralph and UND did not charge them for.  For all that they have been provided by UND when they were at school and the last 8 years or so training for the Olympics and World Championships, you would think that they wouldn't make it a priority to bash UND every chance they can get.

They earned those World Championships. They earned those Olympic Medals. So please don't make it sound like those things were handed to them on a silver platter. Did the ice time at REA help them achieve those things? Absolutely. But the Lammy twins are fighting a much bigger battle than getting ice time. They are fighting for future generations of female hockey players, who may not have the same opportunities they have had if they don't speak out. And they have been very grateful for the support they have gotten from everybody in this area; so please do not imply that they are ungrateful and spoiled. Everyone who knows them and/or has worked with them will tell you otherwise.

I supported eliminating WIH because of the staggering amount of red ink it took to keep it going. But I also support the Lammy twins for promoting and advocating for access to hockey for girls and women. That is what will make women's hockey more competitive, popular and yes, affordable, in the long-run.

[Gully73]

How long has football been a sport at UND? What year(s) did they make money? How much have they lost in those year(s) they didn’t make $$?  How long do we support a team that loses that much $$?    Now, I am not proposing we cut football. Heavens no. . I love football. But to continue using “financial abyss” and “staggering red ink” and not call it across the board is getting old. 

[UNDBIZ]

1 minute ago, Gully73 said:

How long has football been a sport at UND? What year(s) did they make money? How much have they lost in those year(s) they didn’t make $$?  How long do we support a team that loses that much $$?    Now, I am not proposing we cut football. Heavens no. . I love football. But to continue using “financial abyss” and “staggering red ink” and not call it across the board is getting old. 

Look at per student athlete cost. Football is in line with every other sport at UND. Women's hockey was 3-4 times the average. 

[fightingsioux4life]

1 minute ago, Gully73 said:

How long has football been a sport at UND? What year(s) did they make money? How much have they lost in those year(s) they didn’t make $$?  How long do we support a team that loses that much $$?    Now, I am not proposing we cut football. Heavens no. . I love football. But to continue using “financial abyss” and “staggering red ink” and not call it across the board is getting old. 

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

[UND1983]

6 minutes ago, Gully73 said:

How long has football been a sport at UND? What year(s) did they make money? How much have they lost in those year(s) they didn’t make $$?  How long do we support a team that loses that much $$?    Now, I am not proposing we cut football. Heavens no. . I love football. But to continue using “financial abyss” and “staggering red ink” and not call it across the board is getting old. 

To all women's hockey supporters out there - I have seen the "but what about football" argument thrown around lately alot.  That is a losing battle my friends.  Just no.  

[UND1983]

6 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

They both lost millions, no doubt about it.  

But, ask the Champions Club what would happen if we dropped football.  Their donations are not included in that financial report.  

[Hockeygirl97]

5 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

Totally agree!!  They had some bad luck w/ their conference holding the three or four best teams in the country all the time.  Could they still have been better?  Sure.  But being in that conference sure didn't help.  It's tough to get to the NCAAs when you're dealing w/ that every year.  It was especially bad timing seeing how well some of last year's players are playing for other teams this year (Wisconsin's goalie).  Anyway, maybe someday someone will figure out a way.  If I win the Powerball, they're back!! 

[ChrisUND1]

Instead of whining and blaming UND, the twins should have used this new worldwide platform to lobby for a donor or group of donors to come up with the 60 million required to endow UND womens hockey.  

[fightingsioux4life]

11 minutes ago, ChrisUND1 said:

Instead of whining and blaming UND, the twins should have used this new worldwide platform to lobby for a donor or group of donors to come up with the 60 million required to endow UND womens hockey.  

But then they would be skewered on this forum for "spending other people's money".

They can't win.

[MafiaMan]

On 3/6/2018 at 11:23 AM, Cratter said:

It's fun to watch the two guys who get checks in the mail from Forum Communications go at it on Twitter:

Liberal Brad Schlossman vs Conservative Rob Port.

And this...IS CROSSFIRE!  

[UND1983]

1 minute ago, fightingsioux4life said:

But then they would be skewered on this forum for "spending other people's money".

They can't win.

No, not really.  They would be trying to come up with a plan instead of playing the victim every time they speak.  If they can raise the money why would anybody care where it came from?

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

36 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

Absolutely, 100% agree

[UND1983]

39 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

Speaking for myself, I go as they go.  If they continue to act the way they are acting (meaning WH players and coaches), I am inturn going to continue to not feel bad them at all and basically be against them.  If they grow up and quit playing the victim card, I would be interested in hearing what they have to say. 

The Lammy's claim there were options.  Now would be a good time to tell everyone about those options.

[fightingsioux4life]

3 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Speaking for myself, I go as they go.  If they continue to act the way they are acting (meaning WH players and coaches), I am inturn going to continue to not feel bad them at all and basically be against them.  If they grow up and quit playing the victim card, I would be interested in hearing what they have to say. 

The Lammy's claim there were options.  Now would be a good time to tell everyone about those options.

I hope your Team Canada jersey came in time for the Winter Games. Too bad they lost to the Spoiled Entitled Whiners. (extreme sarcasm)

[UND1983]

2 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

I hope your Team Canada jersey came in time for the Winter Games. Too bad they lost to the Spoiled Entitled Whiners. (extreme sarcasm)

Why are you relating Team USA to UND Women's hockey?  Two completely unrelated entities that have nothing to do with each other.  

[Gully73]

I think if some people were honest, (and would explain why some people who don’t care about WIH seem so invested in their demise), it wasn’t about how much WIH lost so much as it was what (enter their team) didn’t have. This wasn’t about saving money but reallocating it to other programs. Let’s hope this year isn’t an indication of what they do with the extra $$. . 

[UND-1]

1 minute ago, Gully73 said:

I think if some people were honest, (and would explain why some people who don’t care about WIH seem so invested in their demise), it wasn’t about how much WIH lost so much as it was what (enter their team) didn’t have. This wasn’t about saving money but reallocating it to other programs. Let’s hope this year isn’t an indication of what they do with the extra $$. . 

That money isn't going to kick in for two years, roughly.  Plus, budgets were smaller for the other teams this year as they all took a trim in the cuts, as well.  Little known fact.

I think what you said has some truth to it.  For them to have the third largest sport budget on campus and having done nothing to earn that status (other than play the same sport as the Men, who sure as hell earned it) made many resentful.  They were probably the least respected program of all from what I gathered.  Obviously not scientific, TIFWIW.  

 

 

[jdub27]

1 hour ago, Gully73 said:

How long has football been a sport at UND? What year(s) did they make money? How much have they lost in those year(s) they didn’t make $$?  How long do we support a team that loses that much $$?    Now, I am not proposing we cut football. Heavens no. . I love football. But to continue using “financial abyss” and “staggering red ink” and not call it across the board is getting old. 

As already stated, football doesn't get the required donations for season tickets including in their Revenue. The 2017 numbers will also show a sizable increase in ticket revenue. The post below shows the net cost/participant. It should be pointed out that facilities expense in these numbers were a pure guesstimate and the $2.2 million in REA/Betty expenses are broken out as follows: MBB - 11%, WBB - 11%, MIH - 48%, WIH - 18%, Soccer - 1% and VB - 11%. I'd venture to guess the WIH cost is lower than it really should be.

 

On 4/4/2017 at 5:01 PM, jdub27 said:

Here's the breakdown of Net Cost/Athlete using 2016 numbers (most recent available):
BB – $19,868
MBB – $66,703
WBB – $68,491
FB – $22,432
MG – $20,934
WG – $14,462
MIH – $6,051
WIH – $76,799
Soccer – $19,484
SB – $23,098
MS&D – $12,126
WS&D – $16,833
MT – $14,392
WT – $17,656
MTF – $11,723
WTF – $16,182
VB – $59,501

 

[UNDBIZ]

12 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

As already stated, football doesn't get the required donations for season tickets including in their Revenue. The 2017 numbers will also show a sizable increase in ticket revenue. The post below shows the net cost/participant. It should be pointed out that facilities expense in these numbers were a pure guesstimate and the $2.2 million in REA/Betty expenses are broken out as follows: MBB - 11%, WBB - 11%, MIH - 48%, WIH - 18%, Soccer - 1% and VB - 11%. I'd venture to guess the WIH cost is lower than it really should be.

Unless we were in line to have to spend a LOT of money on the hyslop, cutting S&D seems a bit ridiculous. If we assume those student athletes left UND, UND is going to lose about $8,000 per lost student in state money. Gotta assume the average athlete GPA is down without them too. 

I struggle to believe the Betty is responsible for 1/3 the cost of the REA/Betty too. 

[SWSiouxMN]

1 hour ago, Hockeygirl97 said:

Totally agree!!  They had some bad luck w/ their conference holding the three or four best teams in the country all the time.  Could they still have been better?  Sure.  But being in that conference sure didn't help.  It's tough to get to the NCAAs when you're dealing w/ that every year.  It was especially bad timing seeing how well some of last year's players are playing for other teams this year (Wisconsin's goalie).  Anyway, maybe someday someone will figure out a way.  If I win the Powerball, they're back!! 

The bigger issue wasn't so much Minnesota and Wisco (they had surpassed Duluth by that time), they never could avoid stubbing their toe in non-conference or dropping one to Mankato or St. Cloud.  If they had found a way to avoid that, they would have had more NCAA appearances.  

They had a goalie that could have led them to a title, its a shame she only got one crack at it her freshman year when they last made the NCAAs

 

[petey23]

1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Women's Hockey was losing an incredible amount of money. Way more than FB, WBB, MBB or MIH. If the deficit would have been much smaller, we wouldn't have abolished it. But it just wasn't sustainable, which was a tough deal for everyone involved. I will say that some people on this forum have enjoyed the demise of UND Women's Hockey just a little too much. Call it necessary, call it a good move, but don't celebrate it. It is nothing to celebrate.

Correct.

Catch 22. If they were funded at an amount similar to the D2 teams with women's hockey they are still around....but if we did that, then Title 9 puts the squeeze on UND.

[petey23]

1 hour ago, ChrisUND1 said:

Instead of whining and blaming UND, the twins should have used this new worldwide platform to lobby for a donor or group of donors to come up with the 60 million required to endow UND womens hockey.  

They were The Ellen show. Should have pulled her aside.