Kennedy vs. Engelstad Foundation: GF herald feature

[BobIwabuchiFan]

1 minute ago, darell1976 said:

If people want to bring up attendance of hockey vs attendance vs football, don't look at 2000 or 1999. Where the average attendance at Memorial Stadium was more than the capacity of the REA. 

2000- 8658

1999- 8710

capacity at the REA was 6,067

So maybe the funds should have been dumped into football and not so much into hockey. 

If only you had a time machine Kip...

[darell1976]

Just now, BobIwabuchiFan said:

If only you had a time machine Kip...

The attendance comparison between the two are stupid because total capacity is always going to favor hockey. And even if the Alerus was at 100% capacity for 5 games, and playoffs, the total will ALWAYS be greater for hockey than football, so their point or Petey's fuzzy math doesn't make sense. 

[Blackheart]

Are we there  yet?  This thread is awesome!

[Benny Baker]

10 minutes ago, nodak651 said:

UND's football budget is multiple times higher than what it's total ticket sales are.  Just saying.

So football is funded through other means than ticket sales---just like women's hockey was, which had no ticket sales.

Since football is funded through other means than ticket sales, why all the hoopla about the Ralph getting the 52%?

Serious question, folks.  Please excuse my ignorance.

[petey23]

9 minutes ago, darell1976 said:

The attendance comparison between the two are stupid because total capacity is always going to favor hockey. And even if the Alerus was at 100% capacity for 5 games, and playoffs, the total will ALWAYS be greater for hockey than football, so their point or Petey's fuzzy math doesn't make sense. 

It makes total sense to those who can add.

If Team A has revenues of 100 and team B has revenues of 20 and Team A spends 80 and Team B spends 40, Team A is not stealing from Team B.

I support the football team 100% but they need to do a little lifting as well. I realize it is a bit of a catch 22 situation in that they need money to win and they need to win to bring in more money. If you look at the attendance for the first two games last year which followed the playoff season they were trending well until the season went off the rails.

What I don't like is ill informed people speculating that UND is diverting money from football to the hockey program.

[Blackheart]

6 minutes ago, petey23 said:

It makes total sense to those who can add.

If Team A has revenues of 100 and team B has revenues of 20 and Team A spends 80 and Team B spends 40, Team A is not stealing from Team B.

I support the football team 100% but they need to do a little lifting as well. I realize it is a bit of a catch 22 situation in that they need money to win and they need to win to bring in more money. If you look at the attendance for the first two games last year which followed the playoff season they were trending well until the season went off the rails.

What I don't like is ill informed people speculating that UND is diverting money from football to the hockey program.

Speculating?  You mean some of the stuff on this thread might not be accurate?

[UND-FB-FAN]

49 minutes ago, BobIwabuchiFan said:

So, is there a financial report from the UND AD that shows your supposed pilfering of the UND Football revenues to the Men's Hockey program?  Or is it more money going into the maintenance and updating of the facility which happens to house the Hockey Program?  

What other programs consistently perform within the Ralph Engelstad Arena? Maintenance and updating of the Ralph is indirect support of the UND hockey program; no other program is benefited. So, if 52% of UND football ticket revenue goes towards the Ralph, that is not benefiting UND football. It is, however, either directly or indirectly benefiting UND hockey. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

52 minutes ago, nodak651 said:

UND's football budget is multiple times higher than what it's total ticket sales are.  Just saying.

This is definitely correct. But any increase in revenue (or donations/support) will decrease net losses, which is undoubtedly beneficial for UND and the football program. 

[Oxbow6]

14 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

What other programs consistently perform within the Ralph Engelstad Arena? Maintenance and updating of the Ralph is indirect support of the UND hockey program; no other program is benefited. So, if 52% of UND football ticket revenue goes towards the Ralph, that is not benefiting UND football. It is, however, either directly or indirectly benefiting UND hockey. 

These comments are 100% inaccurate.

[UND-FB-FAN]

22 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:

These comments are 100% inaccurate.

The Ralph doesn't benefit UND hockey, huh? Wrong. 

[Oxbow6]

4 hours ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

The Ralph doesn't benefit UND hockey, huh? Wrong. 

You constantly twist comments and numbers to fit your narrative which is anti-hockey. The Ralph DOES benefit UND hockey but the 52% of UND tickets revenue DOES NOT go directly to the Ralph to which those falsely allocated dollars DO NOT directly or indirectly benefit hockey.

 

"52% of UND ticket revenue goes towards the Ralph"......that is patently false and any other comment you make linked to that BS drivel is also false.  Make sense???

[TNF]

19 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said:

The Ralph doesn't benefit UND hockey, huh? Wrong. 

http://www.keloland.com/news/article/sports/und-adding-two-video-boards-to-betty-engelstad-sioux-center

According to the article, “UND Athletics and Ralph Engelstad Arena are financing the $600,000 project.”  So perhaps the 52% does in fact benefit more than just UND hockey.  

 

[Benny Baker]

2 hours ago, darell1976 said:

How do put a product on the field that makes the Alerus 99% full? Can’t say hire coaches because football doesn’t have the money for a top notch coach.

So if football got 100% of ticket revenue, you’d be in favor of firing Bubba and replacing him with a top notch coach?  Got it. 

[UND1983]

2 hours ago, BobIwabuchiFan said:

So, is there a financial report from the UND AD that shows your supposed pilfering of the UND Football revenues to the Men's Hockey program?  Or is it more money going into the maintenance and updating of the facility which happens to house the Hockey Program?  

Why do you keep equating the money the REA gets to the Men's Hockey program?  Two completely different entities.  

Who is saying this is happening?

[darell1976]

17 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

So if football got 100% of ticket revenue, you’d be in favor of firing Bubba and replacing him with a top notch coach?  Got it. 

We have multiple 3-8 seasons sure fire him, but with what money would we get a better coach? 

[tnt]

2 hours ago, darell1976 said:

The attendance comparison between the two are stupid because total capacity is always going to favor hockey. And even if the Alerus was at 100% capacity for 5 games, and playoffs, the total will ALWAYS be greater for hockey than football, so their point or Petey's fuzzy math doesn't make sense. 

So we're giving out all this scholarship money for our fans only being able to see 5 home games?  Hardly seems worthwhile if you look at it like that.  Hockey plays 4-5 times more games so the money should be distributed that way. 

[UND08]

Would it be too much to ask to see an accounting of how football's 52% revenue share is spent by REA?  If all sports have to submit the majority of their ticket revenue to REA, shouldn't they have some expectation of a benefit from that entity?  That should be easy to prove for basketball and volleyball, who play in an REA entity, but it seems awfully murky to me on the benefit that the football program gets.  Budgetary pressures hit these programs pretty hard, but I'm not so sure that they hit the Ralph...which isn't really an ideal situation in my eyes.

Regardless, when the athletic department financial results come out each year, under this agreement you have to factor in the 52% hit in revenue on the football program's P&L.  Does it make the difference between showing in the red and the black (no)...but it probably makes the net loss look a lot worse.

[BobIwabuchiFan]

30 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Why do you keep equating the money the REA gets to the Men's Hockey program?  Two completely different entities.  

Who is saying this is happening?

See UND-FB-FAN responses to date...

[UNDBIZ]

https://www.grandforksherald.com/news/education/4463670-kennedy-receives-positive-evaluation-ndus-chancellor

Quote

UND President Mark Kennedy received positive remarks on his yearly evaluation from North Dakota University System chancellor Mark Hagerott, according to a copy of the document obtained by the Herald.

 

[Benny Baker]

1 hour ago, UND08 said:

Would it be too much to ask to see an accounting of how football's 52% revenue share is spent by REA?  If all sports have to submit the majority of their ticket revenue to REA, shouldn't they have some expectation of a benefit from that entity?  That should be easy to prove for basketball and volleyball, who play in an REA entity, but it seems awfully murky to me on the benefit that the football program gets.  Budgetary pressures hit these programs pretty hard, but I'm not so sure that they hit the Ralph...which isn't really an ideal situation in my eyes.

Regardless, when the athletic department financial results come out each year, under this agreement you have to factor in the 52% hit in revenue on the football program's P&L.  Does it make the difference between showing in the red and the black (no)...but it probably makes the net loss look a lot worse.

This assumes all sports are funded through their respective ticket revenues. I have not read anything that would support that assumption, however.

So why are some so concerned about 52% of football ticket revenue, when other sources of money fund football?

[UND08]

50 minutes ago, Benny Baker said:

This assumes all sports are funded through their respective ticket revenues. I have not read anything that would support that assumption, however.

So why are some so concerned about 52% of football ticket revenue, when other sources of money fund football?

Because when news comes out and the women's hockey folks whine about UND football's deficit, they aren't taking into account that a portion of their revenue is taken from their P&L without any corresponding benefit, which is why I think it would be nice to see a breakdown of the services that REA provides to UND football.  I never said that football is self-sustaining (it's not), but it is a sport with both current revenue and potential for greater.  This whole arrangement is just a shell game that seems unnecessary to me.  But that's where we are in this era that pits individual sports against each other I guess... 

[MrEdway]

1 hour ago, Benny Baker said:

This assumes all sports are funded through their respective ticket revenues. I have not read anything that would support that assumption, however.

So why are some so concerned about 52% of football ticket revenue, when other sources of money fund football?

What happens to the money brought in by concerts and other non UND events?

[Siouxperfan7]

10 minutes ago, MrEdway said:

What happens to the money brought in by concerts and other non UND events?

Goes straight into the Engelstad money bin!! 

[WiSioux]

On 6/22/2018 at 10:04 AM, Siouxperfan7 said:

100% off all revenue from UND sports should be used to fund all UND sports.  Obviously it won't be distributed evenly as some programs cost more than others.  But can we all agree that UND needs to fund all programs at a level where that they can succeed at the Division 1 level?

Without the athletic budget of a Big Ten school that is literally impossible, a pipe dream. You have to prioritize your funding of sports because everyone can't have everything they want. You MUST take care of your money making sport or all of your other sports will have less available money in the future. UND's football coach is never going to have a salary on par with D1 FBS schools, we can't afford to pay a football coach (for a program in the red) millions of dollars, we just can't.

[Benny Baker]

25 minutes ago, UND08 said:

Because when news comes out and the women's hockey folks whine about UND football's deficit, they aren't taking into account that a portion of their revenue is taken from their P&L without any corresponding benefit, which is why I think it would be nice to see a breakdown of the services that REA provides to UND football.  I never said that football is self-sustaining (it's not), but it is a sport with both current revenue and potential for greater.  This whole arrangement is just a shell game that seems unnecessary to me.  But that's where we are in this era that pits individual sports against each other I guess... 

Shell game is exactly right. UND needs to pay for the usage, services, and employees at the Ralph. Ticket revenue is simply the means through which UND pays for that. Take ticket revenue out of the equation, and UND needs to find some other source of money to pay for the usage, services, and employees at the Ralph. 

I understand you agree the funding for UND football is not tied exclusively to the football teams’ ticket revenue.  The athletic department is going to allocate money to the football team regardless  of the team’s ticket revenue. 

Others on here clearly don’t understand how any of this works. They actually portray it as the Ralph taking away money that the athletic department allocates to the football team. 

Changing the 52/48 breakdown or removing football ticket revenue from the usage agreement would do absolutely nothing to ensure more funding to the football program.