Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
UND92

UND to cut women's hockey

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, dlsiouxfan said:

 

That's sort of how life works.  Most things worth accomplishing are difficult to accomplish.  It's difficult to win a championship in these sports because tens of millions of people are invested in and care a great deal about them.  That's just not the case with women's hockey.  It's easier for UND to win a championship and produce Olympians for the exact same reason why 290 people show up for playoff games.  There just are not that many people who care about it.

Spot on.

1+

(I'm out of positive votes - HA)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-women/article/2017-01-16/womens-hockey-no-1-wisconsin-shatters-ncaa-attendance-record

Quote

The Wisconsin women's hockey team delivered for fans at Fill the Bowl on Saturday, defeating St. Cloud State 2-0 in front of a record-setting crowd of 15,359 at the Kohl Center.

That's support.

http://www.undsports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=209879521&DB_OEM_ID=13500

Quote

North Dakota’s “Pack the Ralph” promotion proved to be a success, as 4,818 fans were on hand to watch UND hand the Gophers their second loss of the year. The crowd was the second-largest in program history, falling short of the attendance record of 5,835 set last season against Minnesota.

Tickets $1.00 and less than half of the REA was packed. That is not support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Old Time Hockey said:

Besides Men's hockey and football, which is a long shot, woman's hockey is the only sport we had a chance to win a national championship.

Maybe, yet in 15 years we never came close despite playing when there's only like 30 other teams we're competing against.  Amazing we never came close so why the optimism you express here?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FargoBison said:

Does every women's hockey program just lose tons of money? Or is it only the schools that try to compete? 

 

Holy crap!!! I am sure Minnesota will look at this if they need to save money somewhere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Smoggy said:

It's nice to say we produce Olympians, but can anyone name 2 or more other than the twins without looking it up?  Were any of the others American?  I somewhat follow the team and go to games and I seriously don't know.

Spot on/good point.  I echo that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Old Time Hockey said:

Maybe we should cut women's basketball next!  To balance it out get rid of the men's program as well.  We will never win a national championship in BB.  Get to the dance once a decade.  Maybe win one or two NCAA tourney games starting in the same time frame.  Sounds like a great level for us.  But we can hang a Slummit League banner once in awhile.  Oh I forget, we will get that great exposure of getting our butts kicked in front of 1.4 million people.

We left one 1 bid conference for another so I hope those games against IUPUI mean something to the fans. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should have never had womens hockey in the first place. That sport will be nothing until they let the ladies check, then the sport may progress. Til then it's unwatchable.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FargoBison said:

Does every women's hockey program just lose tons of money? Or is it only the schools that try to compete? 

 

Justin Emerson when defending his I want to say Masters thesis at Arizona State (it was on ASU getting a hockey team). He said only 3 schools make money, they are all out East and not big schools.

1 hour ago, darell1976 said:

Holy crap!!! I am sure Minnesota will look at this if they need to save money somewhere. 

GPL put out the numbers when they went to the B1G and Minnesota lost $1 million in revenue, looks like it went back up.

Its hard to cut a sport that had a arena specifically built for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else find it weird how quiet the REA is about this?  Maybe I missed it but haven't heard anything on their end.

So much for the "Women's hockey was wanted by Ralph and isn't going anywhere" argument.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vegas_Sioux said:

We left one 1 bid conference for another so I hope those games against IUPUI mean something to the fans. 

I promise there will be more than 800 people at the game 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Old Time Hockey said:

Maybe we should cut women's basketball next!  To balance it out get rid of the men's program as well.  We will never win a national championship in BB.  Get to the dance once a decade.  Maybe win one or two NCAA tourney games starting in the same time frame.  Sounds like a great level for us.  But we can hang a Slummit League banner once in awhile.  Oh I forget, we will get that great exposure of getting our butts kicked in front of 1.4 million people.

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Old Time Hockey said:

Besides Men's hockey and football, which is a long shot, woman's hockey is the only sport we had a chance to win a national championship.

If winning a national championship is the ONLY reason collegiate sports exists these days, maybe it is time to shut the system down completely.  

Seen a first-round women's March Madness game lately?  It's nothing to see UConn or Stanford beat their opponent by 50+.  The women's field could easily be cut to 32, if not 16, no problem.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, runaroundsioux said:

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — A North Dakota rainy-day fund that held more than $572 million in January is on the verge of being emptied due to lower-than-expected tax collections from depressed oil and farm commodity prices.

"There are no 'ifs,'" North Dakota Treasurer Kelly Schmidt said Friday. "We will drain it."

North Dakota, the nation's second-ranked oil producer, also has been stockpiling oil revenues in its Legacy Fund that was approved by voters in 2010 to set aside 30 percent of oil and gas tax collections. The Legislature is barred from spending any of the fund's assets until June 2017. After that, a two-thirds vote of the North Dakota House and Senate is needed to spend any of the fund's principal, of which no more than 15 percent can be withdrawn every two years.

Schmidt said the Legacy Fund will hold $3.8 billion with the June transfer of $28.3 million.

 

 

 

I don't think not funding college athletics constitutes a rainy day.

I agree...and if the ONLY cuts coming to our state were college sports, your point is well taken, but all educational institutions will have some cuts as well as counties and frankly all departments. I'm not saying government doesn't get bloated and does not need cuts, but it just seems odd to be in this situation in ND with that much money in reserves and...

Oil is already coming back and when it does we will be flush again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy how a few hockey crusaders on Twitter are wondering why the state of ND didn't tap into the Rainy Day fund to save WH.  

You cannot make this stuff up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, KoolGuy2K said:

Now they have a petition going to save women's hockey. Good luck with that. :blink:

How many more people will sign it than their total attendance for the entire year?

Looks like the line is set at 15,353.5

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KoolGuy2K said:

Now they have a petition going to save women's hockey. Good luck with that. :blink:

There's a GoFundMe as well not sure if that's what you're talking about. They've raised $90 of a goal of $1.3 million. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

How many more people will sign it than their total attendance for the entire year?

Should be mandatory that your signature requires a $2500 minimum "donation" to help fund the program. I'll set the over/under at 8 signatures with that criteria.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sioux24/7 said:

There's a GoFundMe as well not sure if that's what you're talking about. They've raised $90 of a goal of $1.3 million. 

It's a start! :silly:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sioux24/7 said:

There's a GoFundMe as well not sure if that's what you're talking about. They've raised $90 of a goal of $1.3 million. 

Their total net cost in 2016 exceeded $2 million. They have to raise that per year.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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...