Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum
Sign in to follow this  
lawkota

October 2017 Announcement

Recommended Posts

Just now, UND-FB-FAN said:

That occurred in spite of Faison, not because of him. So much untapped potential out there, you have no idea. 

Do tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SooToo said:

Exactly. Outgoing ADs don't remain on the job for 3 more months, then another six as a consultant if there's friction or a forced retirement.

Don't know the man, so can't comment on how personable he is or isn't but objectively he can claim an impressive list of accomplishments at UND, from successful transition to D1 to league affiliations and athletes' performance on the field and the classroom.  Would like to see more on the fund-raising front, but hard to understand sometimes the animosity toward Faison. Some on this board not happy with anyone at UND since Clifford retired some 30-odd years ago.

Totally agree.  I think he's done an excellent job and I'm sorry to see him go.  Our athletics dept. has made great strides during his tenure; I would add excellent coaching hires and the HPC to the accomplishments that you listed.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

We would’ve had phase 2 done by now if not for mussman and Faison.

If true and that's the prevailing logic Bubba isn't helping right now either.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

Faison didn’t build !@#$. That money was in place when Lennon was coach and a lot of people pulled out when Mussman was hired. 

I do not believe the  money was  in place. When the University was asking some of us for money,  they weren't even close.  When Sanford offered the $10,000,000 and Altru  then came up with their $10,000,000 the money was there for phase one. Not sure where you get the info about all of the people pulling out when Mussman was hired but I was told we had a long way to go to get the necessary funds. As it has turned out the $10,000,000 Sanford gave to the AC has turned out to have been only the first part of Sanford's support.  I believe phase 2 would have been started had we sold our soul to Sanford instead of Altru.

UND-FB-Fan is correct.  Faison was not the fundraiser.  The Champions club staff was and is.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone in a position like that has pluses and minuses. I think his pluses are pretty impressive, even though 100% of each one can't be directly attributed to him:

  • Transitioned to Division 1, which has had its ups and downs
  • Got UND into the Big Sky when the only other option available would have killed football
  • Spent a few years and finally negotiated UND into the Summit/MVFC, bringing down travel expenses and getting natural rivals back on the schedule permanently
  • Created the NCHC, which immediately became the premier hockey conference in the nation, when it was obvious the WCHA was going to be controlled by schools that were not "like-minded" as UND
  • Oversaw a large portion of the fundraising and completion of the HPC
  • Immediately replaced a coach who left for the NHL with no disturbance in the program that currently brings in the most money for UND
  • Instituted full cost of attendance for all scholarship athletes to ensure programs remained competitive
  • Cut loose the anchor that was women's hockey
  • Coaching hires have largely been great
  • Did all of this while dealing with the disaster known as the nickname issue
     

Again, there are definitely some negatives.

  • The biggest one I have is process of replacing the football coach; appears to have settled on the right guy, but the timeline was unacceptable. 
  • Some people say he isn't personable enough, I can't really speak to that as I haven't really had that experience.
  • Budget cuts probably could have been handled differently if women's hockey and corresponding cuts would have been done initially, preventing round 2, but tough to know depending on the information that was available at the time.
  • Maybe fundraising, maybe not? AD obviously plays a part in it, but is not their main job, there are people who's sole job is to do that. 

 

Neither list is all inclusive but a pretty decent rundown.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Oxbow6 said:

If true and that's the prevailing logic Bubba isn't helping right now either.

We’ll see what happens with a new AD. There’s no debating the work Bubba did to get fans at the games and improve tailgating. He’s got a mess on his hands now obviously but he’s had a net positive impact by far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

That occurred in spite of Faison, not because of him. So much untapped potential out there, you have no idea. 

We'll see.  Expect to hear about a new football stadium within the next few years then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

I do not believe the  money was  in place. When the University was asking some of us for money,  they weren't even close.  When Sanford offered the $10,000,000 and Altru  then came up with their $10,000,000 the money was there for phase one. Not sure where you get the info about all of the people pulling out when Mussman was hired but I was told we had a long way to go to get the necessary funds. As it has turned out the $10,000,000 Sanford gave to the AC has turned out to have been only the first part of Sanford's support.  I believe phase 2 would have been started had we sold our soul to Sanford instead of Altru.

UND-FB-Fan is correct.  Faison was not the fundraiser.  The Champions club staff was and is.

I would have preferred aligning with  the Sanford monster personally but understand why they went with Altru.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears there are those who see any success as Faison’s and those who see we had the potential for much more and most of what we did under his watch was in spite of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jdub27 said:

Anyone in a position like that has pluses and minuses. I think his pluses are pretty impressive, even though 100% of each one can't be directly attributed to him:

  • Transitioned to Division 1, which has had its ups and downs
  • Got UND into the Big Sky when the only other option available would have killed football
  • Spent a few years and finally negotiated UND into the Summit/MVFC, bringing down travel expenses and getting natural rivals back on the schedule permanently
  • Created the NCHC, which immediately became the premier hockey conference in the nation, when it was obvious the WCHA was going to be controlled by schools that were not "like-minded" as UND
  • Oversaw a large portion of the fundraising and completion of the HPC
  • Immediately replaced a coach who left for the NHL with no disturbance in the program that currently brings in the most money for UND
  • Instituted full cost of attendance for all scholarship athletes to ensure programs remained competitive
  • Cut loose the anchor that was women's hockey
  • Coaching hires have largely been great
  • Did all of this while dealing with the disaster known as the nickname issue
     

Again, there are definitely some negatives.

  • The biggest one I have is process of replacing the football coach; appears to have settled on the right guy, but the timeline was unacceptable. 
  • Some people say he isn't personable enough, I can't really speak to that as I haven't really had that experience.
  • Budget cuts probably could have been handled differently if women's hockey and corresponding cuts would have been done initially, preventing round 2, but tough to know depending on the information that was available at the time.
  • Maybe fundraising, maybe not? AD obviously plays a part in it, but is not their main job, there are people who's sole job is to do that. 

 

Neither list is all inclusive but a pretty decent rundown.

how much of the loss of the the Sioux nickname is on him.  Personally I think a good chunk of the blame can be placed on him. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Big Green said:

how much of the loss of the the Sioux nickname is on him.  Personally I think a good chunk of the blame can be placed on him. 

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Big Green said:

how much of the loss of the the Sioux nickname is on him.  Personally I think a good chunk of the blame can be placed on him. 

That was on it's way out for a long time.  Bottom line is that it is better to be past that than to be rehashing it all the time.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

how much of the loss of the the Sioux nickname is on him.  Personally I think a good chunk of the blame can be placed on him. 

Can’t agree with you here. Once the sensitive white people got their paws on it the game was over. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

how much of the loss of the the Sioux nickname is on him.  Personally I think a good chunk of the blame can be placed on him. 

hot-takes-hot-takes-everywhere.jpg

 

I mean, he started his job in May, 2008. The NCAA settlement agreement was signed October, 2007 and it was over long before that. I think you are completely underestimating the whole issue if you think he could have done in his short time he was here before the nickname was done. This was an issue that people had decades to get resolved and didn't. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, geaux_sioux said:

Can’t agree with you here. Once the sensitive white people got their paws on it the game was over. 

 

Just now, tnt said:

That was on it's way out for a long time.  Bottom line is that it is better to be past that than to be rehashing it all the time.  

 

Just now, UNDBIZ said:

Why?

Don't want to Rehash, but I've always thought Kelly and him were equally to blame.  I think they could have worked with the Standing Rock tribe a little more to get approval.  A lot of other school were able to get approval (granted from only the closest tribe which is BS).  As we have seen no doesn't mean no and just means not now.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heard about the retirement yesterday, age being the main factor here. Leaving under a lot of challenges taken care of or put to sleep.

Also in the talk, Faison was not in favor of us with the B1Ghockey after Notre Dame joined, maybe because he was so instrumental in the developing the NCHC. What would of happened then if there were talks and Kennedy was part of the equation? Now, if no other teams in the B1G want to start hockey, this could be energised by the MNs and Wisconsins, and then the B1G contacts UND? Kennedy might like it, without having Faison along side of him saying no way?

MN craves the rivalry games with UND, & vise versa. The 2 games in MN last year were a home run for MN. The 2 games this weekend will be the same for UND. $100 $200 tickets, who would of taught that a couple years ago? Biggest games in Cawledge Hawkey!

See U @ D Ralph Fri & Sat vs goofs.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Big Green said:

Don't want to Rehash, but I've always thought Kelly and him were equally to blame.  I think they could have worked with the Standing Rock tribe a little more to get approval.  A lot of other school were able to get approval (granted from only the closest tribe which is BS).  As we have seen no doesn't mean no and just means not now.

 

We should have a poll. See how many we can blame on losing the Sioux nickname and what percentage each played.

Don't forget the entire state legislature was blamed at one point. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

We should have a poll. See how many we can blame on losing the Sioux nickname and what percentage each played.

Don't forget the entire state legislature was blamed at one point. 

Or, we could accept defeat, no blame needed, and support the Fighting Hawks! This game is over for most.

Now, this weekend at The Ralph vs the goofs, some will show their support for the Sioux name/logos. Maybe the most support shown during any games this season. I still say the Sioux supporters and the Fighting Hawks supporters get to see their team bring out the brooms right after game two!

  • Upvote 1

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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...