cberkas Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 Just now, UND-1 said: What did Goon say to the Red Wings that pissed off the Mafia? Huh? Redwing77 will write things on Goon's blog from time to time. If you don't notice who wrote it you'd think it was Goon, MafiaMan happened to correct me and then I noticed the mistake on thinking Goon wrote it. Quote
petey23 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 1 hour ago, MafiaMan said: Lemme guess...another former North Dakotan who grew up in Grand Forks, Fargo, or Bismarck, who feels that anything west of New Salem Sue may as well be gifted to Montana. Not all of us dumb country folk who grew up in the SW corner of the state were or would be thrilled with the idea of going to college more than 100+ miles away from home. The idea of closing entire universities and colleges so we can fund a floundering athletics program for roughly 30 athletes at the flagship school is so preposterous, it doesn't even merit discussion. I feel targeted here. Grew up for the most part in Bismarck(with stops in Hillsboro, Valley City, Litchville, and Linton) Went to school in Grand Forks. Live in Fargo. Am I supposed to be triggered? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Uj32C20JCA Quote
UNDvince97-01 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, cberkas said: Redwing77 will write things on Goon's blog from time to time. If you don't notice who wrote it you'd think it was Goon, MafiaMan happened to correct me and then I noticed the mistake on thinking Goon wrote it. Got it. My mistake, my bad. My apologies. Quote
cberkas Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, UNDvince97-01 said: Got it. My mistake, my bad. My apologies. I made the mistake too. Most of the stuff is by Goon so you over look who wrote it and just assume it was Goon. He been quiet on the issue for the most part. Quote
UNDBIZ Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 The elimination of WIH and any other sport at UND was unfortunate, but necessary. In a completely separate statewide higher ed conversation, Dakota College at Bottineau should be closed immediately. Mayville, Valley City, and Lake Region need to start coming up with reasons to justify their existence. 2 Quote
JohnboyND7 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 9 hours ago, The Sicatoka said: Johnboy > Mafia Johnboy > siouxsports.com (see bracket) Quote
ksixpack Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 53 minutes ago, petey23 said: The worst decision The U.S. Women's team made was scheduling games against and getting beat by mediocre Minnesota boys High School teams. ...in a game that checking was not allowed... Quote
Blackheart Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 57 minutes ago, cberkas said: Redwing77 will write things on Goon's blog from time to time. If you don't notice who wrote it you'd think it was Goon, MafiaMan happened to correct me and then I noticed the mistake on thinking Goon wrote it. You should have known right away that Goon didn't write the article...no typos. 3 Quote
NoDak Fan Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 Outside the Grand Forks bubble, does anyone else in the state even care about this issue of women's hockey being cut? Once the Lamoureux's "15 minutes" is up, who is going to continue to fight for the program's survival? And who will bring the checkbook? Quote
CMSioux Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 43 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said: The elimination of WIH and any other sport at UND was unfortunate, but necessary. In a completely separate statewide higher ed conversation, Dakota College at Bottineau should be closed immediately. Mayville, Valley City, and Lake Region need to start coming up with reasons to justify their existence. Easy to close something that is not in our backyard - Mayville has set attendance records in recent years. We may have a lot of small colleges in our state, and perhaps too many but what they provide is access to higher education. I saw a plan once to coordinate them so they become feeder programs for the larger Universities and thus help reduce the drop out rate a win/win, but politics always comes into play. While this conversation needs to be had - it has nothing to do with dropping a niche program that loses millions of dollars and has very little impact on the quality of an education at UND> 3 Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 Rob Port :The Truth Is Not Very Many People Like Women’s Hockey http://www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/truth-not-many-people-like-womens-hockey/ Quote
Popular Post ringneck28 Posted April 4, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 4, 2017 33 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said: Rob Port :The Truth Is Not Very Many People Like Women’s Hockey http://www.sayanythingblog.com/entry/truth-not-many-people-like-womens-hockey/ This is a great article. Rob reports the truth that Brad refuses to. 5 Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 17 minutes ago, ringneck28 said: This is a great article. Rob reports the truth that Brad refuses to. They will cut mens hockey at UND before Schloss admits that womens hockey wasn't propular at UND. 3 Quote
Kermit's Luck Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Does the women’s team live a little large for the revenue it brings in? Absolutely. Do we need to prioritize Olympians (some foreign) over local players and budgets? No. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! 4 2 Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 5 minutes ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Does the women’s team live a little large for the revenue it brings in? Absolutely. Do we need to prioritize Olympians (some foreign) over local players and budgets? No. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! While I do think the decision to cut WH was the right one, I agree with you on the current tone and atmosphere of this discussion forum. It is one thing to disagree with the Lamoreaux twins about this, it is quite another to make this personal by being mean, nasty and vindictive about differing viewpoints. The message is basically to "sit down and shut up". Well, I don't think the Lamoreaux twins owe us anything. If they want to petition Kennedy to reinstate WH, they have the right to do so. 2 Quote
Popular Post UND-1 Posted April 4, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 4, 2017 12 minutes ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Does the women’s team live a little large for the revenue it brings in? Absolutely. Do we need to prioritize Olympians (some foreign) over local players and budgets? No. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! I have seen that angle a lot on Twitter. People that have daughters are outraged that UND cut the WH program. I get your point, I do, but they don't need to keep a 2.13 million dollar program because of the .00001% chance your daughter ends up playing hockey through the age of 18 AND is good enough to make UND's team. My son loves baseball and will now never play at UND, either. Doesn't mean they should keep the program or reinstate it and at this point he has a very, very minor shot at playing college baseball. I am waiting for the WH supporters/players/staff to present a plan that shows what could be done to save the program. They have said they are going to do that but I am sure it will take time, that is a bunch of money. Having 100s of people tweet hashtags about UND reinstating the hockey program is cool and everything. But, it means nothing to a public institution. FYI, the program lost 1.9 million dollars, not 1.3. 10 Quote
Popular Post southpaw Posted April 4, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here... It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. Way to start off with a classy first sentence. That will get some people to change their opinions Here's the issue that I have with cutting even more of the education part of the school in order for the 12 international women to play hockey at UND : At some point people need to realize UND is here to educate people and not just provide sporting opportunities. The administration and education side of things has had to cut the same amount as the athletic side of things. There has already been senior-level "reorganization" and there's still a huge budget deficit in the athletic department. 15 1 Quote
MafiaMan Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 27 minutes ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! It sure didn't take long for you to add to the piling on and name calling, did it? I hate to break the news to you, but college hockey still IS available to young women. It's just not available at the University of North Dakota. 1 1 Quote
petey23 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 What about Gymnastics? ND has as many high schools that sponsor Gymnastics as Girl's Hockey. Should UND or NDSU have to offer Gymnastics so that our girls have something to stride for? 1 Quote
cberkas Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 12 minutes ago, petey23 said: What about Gymnastics? ND has as many high schools that sponsor Gymnastics as Girl's Hockey. Should UND or NDSU have to offer Gymnastics so that our girls have something to stride for? Gymnastics might turn a profit. 2 Quote
ringneck28 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 1 hour ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Does the women’s team live a little large for the revenue it brings in? Absolutely. Do we need to prioritize Olympians (some foreign) over local players and budgets? No. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! Per Rule 7 of @MafiaMan handbook, there will be no circle jerks unless there is a Friday win by the Men's Hockey team and they must include a mimosa. This must happen on the Saturday morning following the Friday win. Article 3 of this rule is that this event can't happen at the Hoggsbreath, per his trying to get a clarification of this rule and the waitress forth giving a slap of the his face. (Poor Mafiaman just wanted a clarification and left with a pack of ice on his face) So with this being said, guess we will have to wait until sometime in Oct. to get the Mimosa and talk further of this subject. 1 Quote
UNDBIZ Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 44 minutes ago, UND-1 said: I am waiting for the WH supporters/players/staff to present a plan that shows what could be done to save the program. They have said they are going to do that but I am sure it will take time, that is a bunch of money. Well he already addressed that. Just cut the unnamed, likely already laid off or demoted, boogeymen administrators. Quote
Popular Post siouxkid12 Posted April 4, 2017 Popular Post Posted April 4, 2017 53 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said: While I do think the decision to cut WH was the right one, I agree with you on the current tone and atmosphere of this discussion forum. It is one thing to disagree with the Lamoreaux twins about this, it is quite another to make this personal by being mean, nasty and vindictive about differing viewpoints. The message is basically to "sit down and shut up". Well, I don't think the Lamoreaux twins owe us anything. If they want to petition Kennedy to reinstate WH, they have the right to do so. The problem I have with the two Lamoreaux sisters are that they were not the ones who started the program and they sure as heck didnt care about it when it came time to declare a school. What about Margaret- Ann Hinkley, Marissa Hangsleben, Meghan Mutrie, Anne Girtz, Aynsley Allen, Meaghan Nelson, Meghan Hopps, Amber Hasbargen, and the rest of the players from the 02-03 team? Everyone likes to think that the Lamoreaux sisters started something here at UND when in reality, they didnt. These girls chose to come to UND from the get go, not go somewhere else and then come to UND when things were looking better. The Lamoreaux sisters have always had their own agenda and it shows! 9 1 Quote
tnt Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 1 hour ago, Kermit's Luck said: I hate to interrupt the circle jerk in here, but the point you guys are missing is that some people think it’s important that college hockey be available to girls->women. I agree with them. I may not have ten years ago when I was saltier and a little more conservative, but now that I have a slightly different worldview and a baby girl I absolutely think women’s hockey at UND shouldn’t go down without a fight. I’m sick of career administrators making the “tough decisions” while making a buttload of dough and then retiring to Colorado or wherever and not giving two sh*ts about the tough decisions they made. It’s easy to point to the dollars and cents and say that hockey needed to get the axe – but the opinion of the people wanting to save the program is that a $1.3M deficit can be made up a number of ways, and eliminating a program at what we like to consider the premier hockey school in the country isn’t how they would have done it. Does the women’s team live a little large for the revenue it brings in? Absolutely. Do we need to prioritize Olympians (some foreign) over local players and budgets? No. Could we cut the WH budget by 30% and make some deeper administrative cuts to make up the difference? I think so. Doesn’t take too much senior-level “reorganization” to free up a decent chunk of change to allow UND to provide an opportunity for girls to grow up dreaming of putting on the green and white. This website has gotten hard to read for someone with different opinions. There is rarely true discussion; it’s all piling on, name calling, and mildly-to-moderately flawed logic getting passed around between the same 10 usernames. I think the nickname situation just has all UND fans itchin’ for a scrap, regardless of topic! Go Sioux! So you're saying 10 years ago you would have felt the same as most of us. Nice that you can admit you're a hypocrite and are only looking out for number one. Guess that is what the University is doing as well. Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted April 4, 2017 Posted April 4, 2017 1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said: While I do think the decision to cut WH was the right one, I agree with you on the current tone and atmosphere of this discussion forum. It is one thing to disagree with the Lamoreaux twins about this, it is quite another to make this personal by being mean, nasty and vindictive about differing viewpoints. The message is basically to "sit down and shut up". Well, I don't think the Lamoreaux twins owe us anything. If they want to petition Kennedy to reinstate WH, they have the right to do so. The Lammy twins are big girls. I think they can take some criticism. I doubt they read this message board, so you can be rest assured that their feelings are't being hurt. 2 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.