Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

The University as a whole is in one of the strongest positions it has ever been in. That needs to continue to work its way into the athletic on-field performance.

Don't think you can say the former about any other research institution in the state.

UND has had a strong academic and research foundation for quite awhile. When do you think it will "work its way into the athletic on-field performance"? Is that something that will happen organically?

  • Upvote 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

UND has had a strong academic and research foundation for quite awhile. When do you think it will "work its way into the athletic on-field performance"? Is that something that will happen organically?

I don't have the answer. If I did, I probably by charging a hell of a lot of money as a consultant.
The University has been able to put more support into athletics the last few years after actually taking on an unsustainable and broken budget and actually making some hard decisions to get to the spot they are in.

Posted
4 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

I don't have the answer. If I did, I probably by charging a hell of a lot of money as a consultant.
The University has been able to put more support into athletics the last few years after actually taking on an unsustainable and broken budget and actually making some hard decisions to get to the spot they are in.

I did support dropping the number of sports we sponsor. The old number was not sustainable as a Division I institution.

Posted

If they move up and we can't even compete at a high level in the FCS, and even win road games, UND football is going to become fairly irrelevant within the state. 

  • Upvote 2
Posted
27 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

UND has had a strong academic and research foundation for quite awhile. When do you think it will "work its way into the athletic on-field performance"? Is that something that will happen organically?

You raise a good question. I don’t believe that money will “work its way into athletic onfield performance “ if it means a shift in that support. Personally, although we are behind the SU’s I believe there is enough financial support for our programs to be successful.
 

To me that means competing and frequently winning conference championships in WBB, MBB, VB, Tennis, Soccer and softball.  Conference individual championships in Track and CC and occasional,  if not frequent,  team championships in CC and track. 
Hockey has the necessary financial support and the goal should be league and national championships and qualifying for playoffs yearly. 
 

Back to FB. Our standard should be qualifying for playoffs yearly, frequent league championships, more than our share of national championships and position our program to move to FBS if an attractive opportunity arises. 

In my mind, if we are already covering “allowed expenses, Alston program awards, and whatever the athletes add through NIL, our biggest need is coaches salaries. That will likely need to come from new money/donations. 
 

For too long, too many of us are waiting for the “big donors” to take care of these shortcomings. It’s been easy to do in hockey thanks to one major donor along with our sport with our largest fan base, also supporting generously. With FB when our team has failed to meet our expectations, we respond with many people canceling season tickets, refusing to attend games, and some donors discontinuing donations. Our collective response should be the opposite. We should continue to support our teams and our players. We don’t have to be happy with the results but they need our support. How many of us couldn’t dig deep to commit an additional $1000-$2000 per year. (For some of you just cutting your booze budget 10% would more than cover).  
 

I’m ok with the “squad groupies” hammering me for this opinion,  but coaches salaries are one of the obvious areas we have been too slow to fix. If we want the next DeBoer, we need to be prepared to pay, not only the HC, but also  the assistants. Same goes for our other non-hockey sports. 
 

I have learned over the years so many critics (not just in sports) always have great ideas how to build, expand, improve things as long as it’s someone else’s money and the subsequent product for us to enjoy or benefit from,  doesn’t require much time, effort, or money from us.  But I’m just one of the pissants from the outside looking in who doesn’t want to sit on my ass waiting for someone else to get things done  


 


 

 

  • Upvote 3
Posted

As a Bison fan I feel this is the first report of the years that actually comes with some merit.  That being said, I think the best part about college sports are regional rivalries.  Some call that small minded, but it's just a fact....you beat a team you get to (hopefully with humor and respect lol) carry it into your co-workers face for a year, and it makes it more fun.  College sports for many reason$$$ is in some wild times.

  • Upvote 2
Posted
45 minutes ago, iramurphy said:

I have learned over the years so many critics (not just in sports) always have great ideas how to build, expand, improve things as long as it’s someone else’s money and the subsequent product for us to enjoy or benefit from,  doesn’t require much time, effort, or money from us.  But I’m just one of the pissants from the outside looking in who doesn’t want to sit on my ass waiting for someone else to get things done

Most of college athletics is funded by "someone else's money". If we aren't willing to up our fund raising (which involves "someone else's money"), we might as well adopt the Rutgers model and not care if our teams are any good or not. Either adapt or get left behind.

  • Upvote 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, Johnny Five said:

As a Bison fan I feel this is the first report of the years that actually comes with some merit.  That being said, I think the best part about college sports are regional rivalries.  Some call that small minded, but it's just a fact....you beat a team you get to (hopefully with humor and respect lol) carry it into your co-workers face for a year, and it makes it more fun.  College sports for many reason$$$ is in some wild times.

And to remain competitive for money to support those other sports, the Dakota schools should make sure anyone one of them wanting to do it on their own is truly on their own.  There is additional money to be had in the MWC and having to play outside of the Summit would mean NDSU has to spend it on sports other than football.  

  • Upvote 1
Posted
1 hour ago, homer said:

If the other Dakota schools allow them to move up for football only and still get the benefit of a fairly tight footprint Summit league for all other sports than those schools get what they deserve.  Why make it easy for them when it’s known they have budget issues that aren’t going away. 

LOL - that's the same !@#$ UND and RT said and did when we went DI.  How'd that work out?

Posted
6 minutes ago, Bison Dan said:

LOL - that's the same !@#$ UND and RT said and did when we went DI.  How'd that work out?

and it would be glorious to do it again.  See ya

Posted
2 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

Moving up from FCS to FBS is a lot more complicated and expensive than moving up from D-2 to FCS.

I disagree.  FCS to FBS is only a change for football (I fully realize there are ramifications in other sports such as the additional football scholarships that have to be offset). All other sports stay the same.  D2 to FCS was a seismic change across the whole athletic department.

Posted
2 minutes ago, andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! said:

I disagree.  FCS to FBS is only a change for football (I fully realize there are ramifications in other sports such as the additional football scholarships that have to be offset). All other sports stay the same.  D2 to FCS was a seismic change across the whole athletic department.

Have you seen how much bigger the budgets are for FBS schools vs. FCS schools? It's insane how big the gap is between FBS and everything else below it. Travel would also be much more expensive.

Posted
4 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

Who would fire him? 

Every school that doesn't have football that NDSU is in very good standing with. Schools that probably wouldn't want their premiere program to face a similar power play from Fenton that aren't in the Summit. SDSU might as well because NDSU might be its only FBS lifeline if it gets in the MWC. 

Posted
1 minute ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:

supposed he did say/do that.......where does ndac "park" their oly sports?

It wouldn't get to that point but it would likely be full MWC and perhaps it ends up costing the Summit SDSU as well to give NDSU a travel partner. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, FargoBison said:

It wouldn't get to that point but it would likely be full MWC and perhaps it ends up costing the Summit SDSU as well to give NDSU a travel partner. 

so ndac just gets a full invite bc fenton holds the line.......seems illogical...plus the mwc adds another mouth to feed bc fenton holds the line.......nope.

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...