ESPNInsider Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 So what's the deal with the athletic department? Why is so much money being lost when we are getting the biggest crowds in UND history? IMO the REA has way to much say in everything that goes on. I know it is hard to hear this and say this but it has been bad for every sport but hockey. The AD job at UND is not an enviable position as you have little-to-no say in what goes on, as you are bound by the REA. There needs to be a major overhaul at that place within personell and figure out what the hell is going on. Why are we losing money? What needs to change? UND is a first-class institution with great athletics. We are the envy of most DII schools and no doubt some DIs. Some things, though, need to be changed so that the ath. dept. isn't losing money like this each year! I'm no expert, but when you are losing that kind of money I know something is wrong! Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 Nice rant, but can you help the rest of us out with some factual information to back up the posit you start with? Thanks. PS - You've heard they're looking to hire a new AD, right? Quote
ESPNInsider Posted April 13, 2005 Author Posted April 13, 2005 The UND athletic dept. lost over $400,000 for the 2003-2004 academic fiscal year. I don't have the numbers for attendance although, I'm sure it could be looked up, but I'm quite certain these past few years have been much larger attendance-wise then in the past! Looking at the REA thing, look how much money is brought in with suite revenue, merchandise, etc. Sorry, hope that helps. I am well aware of the fact that UND is looking for an AD right now and my guess is this is the reason why a Purpur or other big-time candidates did not apply. We have the finest facilities in DII bar-none, some of the best teams, great alumni support, yet the position just doesn't seem to be highly sought after. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 There are 18 sports at UND. How many make money? Maybe three? I can easily see how money could be an issue in that environment. What do the books say for this year? Where's this coming from today? Something had to have triggered this. Tell us what. Purpur applied and then pulled back. Why? I was told Stanford showed him the money to keep him. Quote
ESPNInsider Posted April 13, 2005 Author Posted April 13, 2005 WOW! BITE ME IN THE A$$! I've felt this way for awhile, just wondering if anyone has any info. SICATOKA=Kupchella?? Does anyone know the relationship between the REA and the Ath. dept.? What funds are supposed to go where? Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 Me Kupchella? Uh, no. However, I'd like the facts and the actuals before I crucify people. That way I'm sure I got the right ones. The link I have isn't good any more, but I copied the Dakota Student article where it said, in reference to the transfer of REA to .... ... Arena Holdings Charitable, LLC, an umbrella for three corporations that will own and manage the arena. The new organization is designed to run the arena, with profits donated to the university, while ensuring that the arena would not become a liability for UND were profits to disappear. .... Quote
ESPNInsider Posted April 13, 2005 Author Posted April 13, 2005 Thanks for the info, it would be interesting to see the numbers on the REA and what they turned over to UND. I just found out that they are actually beginning to do an overhaul at the REA via a telephone call from another SS.com viewer. I'm not here to crucify anyone, just find out what is going on. Quote
star2city Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 So what's the deal with the athletic department? Why is so much money being lost when we are getting the biggest crowds in UND history? IMO the REA has way to much say in everything that goes on. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 (cash flow, balance sheets, and special items) You forgot "tuition waivers", which both parties give. Quote
ESPNInsider Posted April 13, 2005 Author Posted April 13, 2005 My source was everything I've heard in the past few months/years. That letter is right on with what I've heard though from many different parties. Do you guys honestly disagree with my statement about the long arm of the REA? One instance: Look at the basketball team being forced to play in the REA when they don't want to! Quote
The Sicatoka Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 One instance:Â Look at the basketball team being forced to play in the REA when they don't want to! They are scheduling all home games next year for The Betty is what I heard second-hand yesterday. That's forced? Quote
bisonguy Posted April 13, 2005 Posted April 13, 2005 Anyone want to take any bets that the letter writer is any one other than our very own "Bisonguy". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm all in . As much as I would like to be able to take credit for the letter, it wasn't me. Quote
star2city Posted April 14, 2005 Posted April 14, 2005 I'm all in . As much as I would like to be able to take credit for the letter, it wasn't me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My apologies, Bisonguy. Ethically, it certainly wasn't proper even if partially made in jest. But maybe you will agree that some of your posts have made those very same points more than once. Quote
bisonguy Posted April 14, 2005 Posted April 14, 2005 star2city, Apology accepted, although I didn't necessarily think one was needed. I think both of the proposed "audits" are petty and stupid. The info the legislators supposedly want could be fairly easily obtained, as both subjects of the "audits" have audits performed or report the needed information already. Had I penned a letter to The Forum, it would have been a near verbatim letter as the one that was in The Forum. 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.