Women's Hockey

[fightingsiouxfan57]

I don't think it's a matter of airing dirty laundry, but it's more of trying to bring awareness to the problems that are at hand. The reason why I'm so upset about this is that Bunning and others are making false problems, and saying everything can be solved by reaching maximum scholarship, but none of that is the problem at all.

Well this season is over. Hopefully with 7-8 new freshmen coming on board for 06/07 the atmosphere and team chemistry improve.

[dakotadan]

Congratulations to Bucky on the title this year. It is good to see it leave Minnesota but stay in the WCHA. Hopefully UND is the next WCHA team to win it's first Championship.

[dlsiouxfan]

Anybody else catch the Dakota Student yesterday. Front page of the sports section there is a story where three current un-named women's hockey players badmouth Rivard and one even suggest that she needs to be fired. It really sheds light on what a mess that program really is. It probably was the second most embarassing thing for UND aside from the whole School of Communication fiasco in the paper yesterday. It's time to cut our losses we need to seriously consider cleaning house in that program. Get rid of coaches, players, assistants, everybody or scrap the whole idea and just drop the program.

[spfreak]

I don't think that we should scrap the program. Just start over with a new coach.

[HockeyMom]

I'm speechless........

[Cratter]

I don't have a clue as to what's going on with the women's hockey team, but I do know that the problems aren't going to be solved by airing dirty laundry on an Internet message board.

Any medium to get people talking to help evoke change for the better is a good thing whether that be a message board or newspaper:

Direct from the people closest to the situation, the players:

The program has gotten worse over the past four years.

The practices don't prepare us and we don't prepare against some opponents.

We have no plays, and strategies that we learned in third grade aren't practiced.

There's no consistency when it comes to practices or punishments.

It's nothing against her personally, but she's really not good at her job, and in the real world, if you are bad at your job, you get fired.

Cara Wooster and Sarah Connelly quit the team and won't be back. Does that speak volumes?

The players want a coaching change.

Players raise concern about women's program

[PCM]

The players want a coaching change.

Obviously.

[lawkota]

Three hockey players, who wished to remain anonymous out of respect for the coach and because of the sensitivity of the situation, talked to the Dakota Student about their discontent with the program.

That is funny. "We have so much respect for Coach Rivard that we choose to remain anonymous when we trash her abilities in the student newspaper".

I don't like this however, I don't know the situation. Maybe this was necessary.

[stafford_rules]

Well this season is over. Hopefully with 7-8 new freshmen coming on board for 06/07 the atmosphere and team chemistry improve.

14 freshmen actually. just fyi. i think the problem is the coaching. thats just me though.

[tnt]

It would be nice to know if UND is moving to Division 1 in all sports? If they are, then something needs to be done with the women's hockey program -- either make it more viable and better able to support itself, or jettison it and fill the title 9 requirements with a less money intensive sport. I would love to see it succeed, but the drain it has become on the budget needs to be addressed.

[HockeyMom]

It would be nice to know if UND is moving to Division 1 in all sports? If they are, then something needs to be done with the women's hockey program -- either make it more viable and better able to support itself, or jettison it and fill the title 9 requirements with a less money intensive sport. I would love to see it succeed, but the drain it has become on the budget needs to be addressed.

So we just dump the team? Attendance figures sucked this year, and the team was 8th in the nation in attendance........with a mere 443 fans a game (almost a 50% drop from the averages in 04-05 and 03-04) I am going to go out on a limb here and assume that nearly every women's hockey team is a budget drain. Minnesota lead the nation with 1300 a game this year, is that enough fans to make a team viable? I very highly doubt it, so women's hockey should be dropped from all programs? I would like to know how much Wisconsin's team lost this year......I doubt that after they hoisted a National Championship that anyone is complaining how much it cost the University.

Think what you will about Title 9, but without it where would women's sports be? And yeah, it does suck that men's teams have been dropped in order to even out the playing field, but that wasn't what was intended when Title 9 was passed......it's an unfortunate consequence, case in point- the UND wrestling team. The problem is that no women's sports have a roster as big as a football team, and it's tough to make up those numbers.

So how do we get people involved in the program?

I'm gonna use women's soccer as an example, the '99 Women's World Cup Championship that filled the Rose Bowl to capacity and over 90,000 fans- the largest crowd ever to witness a women's sporting event- that team played to crowds of 200 people or less for MANY years before that (and those 200 people were mostly family) How did they do it? It was a grass roots effort. They started at the bottom, got girls interested in soccer and then focused on getting those girls into the seats and their parents interested in and involved in the game. It wasn't fast, it evolved over time. But they started at the bottom. Yeah, I know it's soccer , but the same effort should be used to get girls and their parents involved in hockey.

Of course, winning wouldn't hurt either.

I watched the NCAA Women's Bowling Championship yesterday on ESPN- okay, it was to make fun of it, but SERIOUSLY who the hell would want to add a women's sport (if you can call it that) like BOWLING?!

Uff da!

[tnt]

I'm saying there are other women's sports that should be looked at that aren't as money intensive. People all liked the idea of women's hockey, including myself, but let's be honest, if you bought a house and couldn't pay the mortgage, something would have to give in your personal budget. Why should it be different for UND? Where do you think they are going to make up for the shortfall -- the fans. You are right in that steps need to be taken to try get the fan support, but I would contend that it isn't a matter of people not liking women's hockey, it is a matter of oversaturation -- too many sports, too little time and only so many household dollars to go around. I go to women's hockey here and there, but not on a consistent basis because of money and time, what with high school hockey, men's and women's basketball etc. I think it would be smart in the short term to handle women's hockey like women's basketball used to be. They should play right before the men's game, then at least you would get some people watching the 3rd period and generate some interest. Obviously not many are going to sit through 5 hours of hockey, but after interest is generated maybe you could get more people to watch them in a different time setting.

[HockeyMom]

I'm saying there are other women's sports that should be looked at that aren't as money intensive. People all liked the idea of women's hockey, including myself, but let's be honest, if you bought a house and couldn't pay the mortgage, something would have to give in your personal budget. Why should it be different for UND? Where do you think they are going to make up for the shortfall -- the fans. You are right in that steps need to be taken to try get the fan support, but I would contend that it isn't a matter of people not liking women's hockey, it is a matter of oversaturation -- too many sports, too little time and only so many household dollars to go around. I go to women's hockey here and there, but not on a consistent basis because of money and time, what with high school hockey, men's and women's basketball etc. I think it would be smart in the short term to handle women's hockey like women's basketball used to be. They should play right before the men's game, then at least you would get some people watching the 3rd period and generate some interest. Obviously not many are going to sit through 5 hours of hockey, but after interest is generated maybe you could get more people to watch them in a different time setting.

It's a tough call, and I know one six-year-old who's dream of playing college hockey at UND would be crushed if they dumped the program.

I don't think that UND has given the women's program enough time to just turn around and drop it.

Many of life's failures are experienced by people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up- Thomas Edison

[tnt]

I know I would come a little bit early to a men's hockey game to catch at least the 2nd or 3rd period of the women's game, and I know others would as well. Can you imagine how much better the atmosphere would be for the women if they had even a 1/4 full arena to support them. The dollars lost on admission to the women's game would be made up for in part by more concession dollars. If I'm going to be at an arena for 3-1/2 hours I'm much more likely to buy an extra pop or hot dog. Just a thought!

[legend334]

UND was in compliance withh Title 9 before adding womens hockey....could propably find the papaers to state UND was in compliance too....

[HockeyMom]

UND was in compliance withh Title 9 before adding womens hockey....

Good point.

[stafford_rules]

So we just dump the team? Attendance figures sucked this year, and the team was 8th in the nation in attendance........with a mere 443 fans a game (almost a 50% drop from the averages in 04-05 and 03-04) I am going to go out on a limb here and assume that nearly every women's hockey team is a budget drain. Minnesota lead the nation with 1300 a game this year, is that enough fans to make a team viable? I very highly doubt it, so women's hockey should be dropped from all programs? I would like to know how much Wisconsin's team lost this year......I doubt that after they hoisted a National Championship that anyone is complaining how much it cost the University.

Think what you will about Title 9, but without it where would women's sports be? And yeah, it does suck that men's teams have been dropped in order to even out the playing field, but that wasn't what was intended when Title 9 was passed......it's an unfortunate consequence, case in point- the UND wrestling team. The problem is that no women's sports have a roster as big as a football team, and it's tough to make up those numbers.

So how do we get people involved in the program?

I'm gonna use women's soccer as an example, the '99 Women's World Cup Championship that filled the Rose Bowl to capacity and over 90,000 fans- the largest crowd ever to witness a women's sporting event- that team played to crowds of 200 people or less for MANY years before that (and those 200 people were mostly family) How did they do it? It was a grass roots effort. They started at the bottom, got girls interested in soccer and then focused on getting those girls into the seats and their parents interested in and involved in the game. It wasn't fast, it evolved over time. But they started at the bottom. Yeah, I know it's soccer , but the same effort should be used to get girls and their parents involved in hockey.

Of course, winning wouldn't hurt either.

I watched the NCAA Women's Bowling Championship yesterday on ESPN- okay, it was to make fun of it, but SERIOUSLY who the hell would want to add a women's sport (if you can call it that) like BOWLING?!

Uff da!

LET US CHECK!!! it would make things a lot more interesting to watch. everyone thinks that girls arent tough enough to check. F### THEM. big hits at a womens hockey game will do a big amount od good for the programs across the country. I'm probably being a big baby here, but i just dont understand why we can't check!

[HockeyMom]

LET US CHECK!!! it would make things a lot more interesting to watch. everyone thinks that girls arent tough enough to check. F### THEM. big hits at a womens hockey game will do a big amount od good for the programs across the country. I'm probably being a big baby here, but i just dont understand why we can't check!

The no checking rule is all the way up to the International level, and I agree it's a horse-poop rule.

[stafford_rules]

The no checking rule is all the way up to the International level, and I agree it's a horse-poop rule.

so no matter how high you can go, you cant check for your whole life? BULL$HIT. oh........ what "association" came up with that dumb rule? NCAA?

[UND Fan]

I fully agree that the women's program is a major drain on the Athletic Department's budget but the program will not be dropped. With our facility, all of our primary competition fielding women's teams, the prestige of our men's program, etc. - it will not be dropped!

It will be interesting how the sport progresses in the years to come. Many of us remember when the crowds were very small for women's basketball (at all levels). It now makes money at many universities around the country and it certainly is well-followed at UND. Who knows, that may happen in hockey as well!

Regarding UND's program, it appears to be a legitimate question whether we have the right coach to lead us to success. I am not knowledgeable enough to know. What I read is a little disconcerting!

Again, the program will not go away!!!

[HockeyMom]

so no matter how high you can go, you cant check for your whole life? BULL$HIT. oh........ what "association" came up with that dumb rule? NCAA?

Girls are fragile, don't you know?

[stafford_rules]

Girls are fragile, don't you know?

oh grrr!!!!! no theyre not. they're just babies. i can take a check! geez!

[onlooker]

I think the fact that the girls are dropping like flies should be saying something. Bunning obviously won't listen, or is choosing not too. So here it is for him loud and clear: the seniors on the team WERE NOT complaining about ice time number one. Number two the girls have been trying to fire their coach for the past 2 years, and no one has done anything about it except make remarks such as "they're complaining" or "it's the ones who aren't getting ice time" or "once there is the full 18 scholarships the problems will be solved". My question is how are you going to get to 18 scholarships when there won't be a team to give them to? For once it'd be nice for the administrators to LISTEN to what the girls are telling them, last time I checked a 2-23-2 record in the WCHA isn't just "bitching and complaining". Someone should email this forum to Bunning, so he can get in tune with what's going on in the athletic community.

A 2-23-2 record could, certainly sound to me like a very common result of poor internal leadership - meaning from the players. It's tough for a team to win while they're dedicating their energies to "getting their coach fired for the past two years" instead of getting on the same page and working hard help make things work. Theere'll be plenty of kids to take those 18 scolarships - the kind who shut up and work vs. the kind who get to be big shots at new programs and that's why they go there. Now, a coach can do something about internal leadreship - mostly develop it, but it's hard to change it from negative to positive without kicking it off the team which looks like it's been done in some instances. And, it's not that the coach didn't recruit these players inthe first place, but beggars also can't be choosers when you're starting a new program either. If a kid comes drunk to practice or can't run a 5K do you think they should be on a DI college team? If some players are telling recruits not to come to UND then, who's fault is that? If you don't like it, leave, but otherwise you're just shooting holes in your own boat? Does that sound like a good kid to you? Regardless of talent, it seems to me that if I were Rivard I'd be thinking, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out" with some of the players who have quit or been asked to leave. If you pend all your tim pointing fingers at problems instead of looking for solutions you ARE the problem. Again, Rivard recruited these kids and maybe she waited to long to cut them. Maybe she didn't have the support to cut them unless they did something huge like showing up to practice drunk. But you've got three coaches who see these kids two hours a day and 20+ players who are together all the time. It only takes one or two negative ringleaders to drag a team down and keep it down. The coach needs to do something and it looks like maybe she's trying to kick it into gear, but these players need to take some accountability, grow up, and recognize that college athletics are a privilege, not a right. They don't need to like their coach and it's not the coach's job to be liked. But either they do what the coach asks them to do and shut up about it or leave. Period. Let some kid who would be happy to run in the snow (or probably wouldnt' have to because she showed up in shape) just to have the chance to stand on ice for the anthem. Sounds to me like Rivard is trying to clean house and there are two ways to do that: cut kids or make the environment unhospitable to those who are part of the problem so that they quit. Sometimes "a fish stinks from the head". There are two heads on the team - the coaches and the team leadership. Again, coaches can help with that team leadership by teaching them to lead positively, but not if those charismatic kids are not willing to be helped. If that's the case then, time to clean house.

[onlooker]

LET US CHECK!!! it would make things a lot more interesting to watch. everyone thinks that girls arent tough enough to check. F### THEM. big hits at a womens hockey game will do a big amount od good for the programs across the country. I'm probably being a big baby here, but i just dont understand why we can't check!

You can't check b/c when women's hockey wa heading the olympic way years ago they decided to drop it to differentiate it from the men's game. If you're about watcing hockey for the big hits, why watch smaller, slower girls do it when you could watch big, fast guys do it? Noting against girls, they're just not genetically a big, strong or fast. It's not like women's boxing has really taken off.

Checking is fun for players and they like it, but you'd be surprised how many converts have come over from the men's side to see a more finesse, classic style of hockey.

[redwing77]

I respectfully disagree onlooker.

If the defense can check you, then the defense has something to do other than be pylons or hope that they are in the right position for whatever play the oncoming offensive rush has in mind. Defensive players cannot play the puck, they'll get burned 99% of the time (the 1% goes to the offensive player screwing up).

I think checking can be a good thing. Just because players in men's hockey check doesn't make it a dirty or dangerous sport. Hockey can be dirty and dangerous without checking just the same. I think it makes it more of a contest of skill to allow physical play. The winning team then has earned the victory instead of just being able to skate through the obstacles in a really crowded version of moving Plinko on the ice with a goaltender blocking the $5000 slot.

Checking in some form should be allowed. 2 minute minor for bodychecking is the lamest penalty I've ever seen at a game, men's or women's. Oh yeah, the Olympic Committee doesn't need to differentiate men's from women's hockey any more than the obvious: THERE'S WOMEN UNDER DEM HELMENTS! Sheesh, how much different can one get from men?