gfhockey Posted November 4 Posted November 4 10 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Full buyout + hire process > $1M, easily. And that isn’t in our budget Quote
The Sicatoka Posted November 4 Posted November 4 3 minutes ago, gfhockey said: He could take the high road And walk away from $750k buyout? You might be able to, but we mere mortals ... 1 1 Quote
UND1983 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 3 minutes ago, gfhockey said: He could take the high road We will soon find out what the is more important - his dream program or the paycheck. Quote
UND1983 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 1 minute ago, The Sicatoka said: And walk away from $750k buyout? You might be able to, but we mere mortals ... That's a lot of jingle Quote
Popular Post UND08 Posted November 4 Popular Post Posted November 4 2 hours ago, iramurphy said: Reality is that when fans want to fire someone before the contract is up, they usually need to provide significant funds. The contract buyout is only a part of the overall cost with a coaching change. The hiring process can be expensive. I will bet you that $500,000 to $1,000,000 isn’t in the budget to do this. The "fans" wanted this to happen when the buyout effectively would have been $0. Chaves made sure that wasn't the case. If I've learned one thing about running an athletic dept. from all of this it's that if you aren't willing to EXTEND, then you have to be willing to END! The timeline of events surrounding UND football in the first 3 months of 2024 may damn the program for the rest of time...given what's going on in the landscape around us. We needed to be all hands-on deck...instead we've been "asleep at the wheel" (apparently literally). That's as much of a Chaves problem as it is a Schweigert problem in my book... 5 Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 #21 in this weeks poll. Can't believe we are still ranked. FCS Football Rankings - Stats Perform FCS Top 25 | NCAA.com Quote
LH Golfer Posted November 4 Posted November 4 23 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said: #21 in this weeks poll. Can't believe we are still ranked. FCS Football Rankings - Stats Perform FCS Top 25 | NCAA.com Give it a week 1 Quote
UND Football Fan Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Maybe we are still ranked so Montana could hang on to a quality loss. 2 Quote
SIOUXFAN97 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 not a huge fan of kleiman but look at his TE production this year at kstate our te's have one catch for 11 yds in two weeks...... just don't get how anyone would wanna play that postion at und for the last 11 years..... need 7 on 3rd down.....have a te run upfield 8 yds and then "post up".....ball is there as you turn around ...first down. 2 Quote
The Sicatoka Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Per InForum.com: ... South Dakota State spends $8.8 million a year on football. North Dakota State is next at $6.41 million and the rest of the league goes as follows in millions: North Dakota $6.02, Missouri State $5.24, Southern Illinois $5.21, Illinois State $4.8, Youngstown State $4.71, South Dakota $4.45, Murray State $4.03 and Northern Iowa $3.8. Note: SDSU's number includes debt service on stadium improvements. 1 Quote
Kab Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Watched bubbas press conference same old same old i thought he looked real nervous and scared of what might be asked but never was Quote
Wilbur Posted November 4 Posted November 4 9 minutes ago, Kab said: Watched bubbas press conference same old same old i thought he looked real nervous and scared of what might be asked but never was He was awake the whole time? I kid I kid...... Quote
FSSD Posted November 4 Posted November 4 39 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: Per InForum.com: ... South Dakota State spends $8.8 million a year on football. North Dakota State is next at $6.41 million and the rest of the league goes as follows in millions: North Dakota $6.02, Missouri State $5.24, Southern Illinois $5.21, Illinois State $4.8, Youngstown State $4.71, South Dakota $4.45, Murray State $4.03 and Northern Iowa $3.8. Note: SDSU's number includes debt service on stadium improvements. I would assume that both SDSU and USD would carry the debt service number consistently. The primary difference between South Dakota and North Dakota is that USD/SDSU can finance debt for athletic facilities. Here are the numbers: USD: Academic spending $198,846,155.00 Athletic spending $23,147,916.00 Football spending $4,446,693.00 Annual Debt Service $3,257,329.00 Total Debt Service $24,669,071.00 SDSU Academic spending $254,653,012.00 Athletic spending $27,778,456.00 Football spending $8,799,956.00 Annual Debt Service $2,588,918.00 Total Debt Service $27,230,000.00 Quote
Hawkster Posted November 4 Posted November 4 2 hours ago, gfhockey said: He could take the high road I had assumed you'd pay the buyout. Wouldn't even need the rest of the GOBC. Ha ha. Quote
Oxbow6 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 I'm setting the O/U attendance at 9300 for Saturday......but there will be markedly less butts in seats. Quote
UND1983 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 26 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said: I'm setting the O/U attendance at 9300 for Saturday......but there will markedly less butts in seats. Deer opener combined with the last two weeks - yup. Quote
UND-FB-FAN Posted November 4 Posted November 4 6 hours ago, The Sicatoka said: If date is 1/1/25 it's Following 24 mos: 265 + 275 25-36 mos after date (75% of owed): 213.75 or just over $750k. I love UND football. I’d happily contribute 1 to 2 percent of that. Can we find 99 more alumni/fans that love UND football that much? I’d think so, or at least hope so. 2 Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted November 5 Posted November 5 29 minutes ago, UND-FB-FAN said: I love UND football. I’d happily contribute 1 to 2 percent of that. Can we find 99 more alumni/fans that love UND football that much? I’d think so, or at least hope so. But according to some of the geniuses here, only donations of $100,000+ are worth discussing (sarcasm). Quote
iramurphy Posted November 5 Posted November 5 5 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said: But according to some of the geniuses here, only donations of $100,000+ are worth discussing (sarcasm). Where did you see that? Quote
HoopsFan03 Posted November 5 Posted November 5 18 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said: But according to some of the geniuses here, only donations of $100,000+ are worth discussing (sarcasm). According to some on here an email has the same impact that a $100,000+ donation has…….. 1 Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted November 5 Posted November 5 20 minutes ago, iramurphy said: Where did you see that? I'm being facetious. 1 Quote
Sioux95 Posted November 5 Posted November 5 On 11/3/2024 at 6:19 PM, geaux_sioux said: People get worried about guys hitting the portal. Just think of it like a forest fire. The ground is more fertile afterward and allows for better growth to follow. We struggle to recruit enough talent the way it is. You think we'll do better when we have twice as many spots to fill? Quote
sioux24/7 Posted November 5 Posted November 5 8 minutes ago, Sioux95 said: We struggle to recruit enough talent the way it is. You think we'll do better when we have twice as many spots to fill? Would you rather minimize portal departures and be same old same old or get absolutely gutted but a new guy comes in and builds it his way? Maybe it doesn’t work, but I’m taking the latter all day. Worth the risk, imo. 3 Quote
UND1983 Posted November 5 Posted November 5 These 7-5 guys aren’t doing it for me. Maybe take a chance and find a different type of player. Could be better could be worse, but we all know what we got now 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.