SiouxMD Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I don't think you have you facts straight. UND doesn't come close to some of the top programs in basketball. Kansas seats around 18,000 and consistently sells out. Same with North Carolina. Maryland has a huge new arena that seats around the same I Believe. UND averages around 10,000 fans per game. That is not even close to the top 50 programs in basketball. UND hockey also does not come close to football I-A programs. In order to keep your I-A status, you must average 15,000 per game. I think this is doable in football, maybe not basketball. Hockey is not maxed out but it is damn close. The room for growth in the future will be seen in Football and Basketball, more so football. We need to start allocating our resources, in terms of more marketing dollars, to those sports. UND needs a marketing budget at least on par, if not more, than NDSU! Right now it isn't even close. According to the NCAA...UND would be in the Top 50 (if hockey were basketball). http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/att...ball_attend.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/att...ball_attend.pdf UND would be #28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatSiouxNation Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Apples to Oranges. They weren't just beginning a transition from DII to DI, we are. They are both established Big 10 schools, we're facing an unknown number of years of being a DI independant. They both have huge fan bases relative to UND's. If we were just looking for an AD that could be a great fund raiser, Blais would be one of my first choices. However, this transition is going to be very difficult and scrutinized by fans of not only UND but many other schools. I would just prefer that we look for someone that has a little more experience on the administrative side, book keeping and conference politics. Apples to oranges? The fact that we are facing an unknown future is why WE NEED Dean Blais. We need games for both football and basketball and what a way to schedule than to get games with schools we already have a relationship with do to hockey. Would it be nice to have an AD that could get us some games vs. Big Ten opponents. Who could get Ron Mason on the phone faster? Gene Taylor or Dean Blais?? We have a huge fan base. Not on the same scale as some Big 10 schools but just go on the road out East and to Denver when we play hockey games. Dean could fund raise just because he's Dean Blais. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatSiouxNation Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Apples to Oranges. They weren't just beginning a transition from DII to DI, we are. They are both established Big 10 schools, we're facing an unknown number of years of being a DI independant. They both have huge fan bases relative to UND's. If we were just looking for an AD that could be a great fund raiser, Blais would be one of my first choices. However, this transition is going to be very difficult and scrutinized by fans of not only UND but many other schools. I would just prefer that we look for someone that has a little more experience on the administrative side, book keeping and conference politics. Apples to oranges? The fact that we are facing an unknown future is why WE NEED Dean Blais. We need games for both football and basketball and what a way to schedule than to get games with schools we already have a relationship with do to hockey. Would it be nice to have an AD that could get us some games vs. Big Ten opponents. Who could get Ron Mason on the phone faster? Gene Taylor or Dean Blais?? We have a huge fan base. Not on the same scale as some Big 10 schools but just go on the road out East and to Denver when we play hockey games. Dean could fund raise just because he's Dean Blais. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 According to the NCAA...UND would be in the Top 50 (if hockey were basketball). http://www.ncaa.org/stats/m_basketball/att...ball_attend.pdf I stand corrected. Interesting find. But it would not be #28 as we do not average a sell out. We average around 10,500 which puts us somewhere around #40. I was wrong but please don't tell my wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I stand corrected. Interesting find. But it would not be #28 as we do not average a sell out. We average around 10,500 which puts us somewhere around #40. I was wrong but please don't tell my wife. I didn't throw "top 50" out there by whim. I had the 2004 numbers and gave myself some margin. UND has a little gold mine in Hockey. Yes, future growth should next be targetted at football as that has potential, then BB. But you have to keep your base business healthy and thriving along the way. And if it's about creating new fans, you know my thoughts on a springtime activity .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 UND hockey also does not come close to football I-A programs. In order to keep your I-A status, you must average 15,000 per game. I think this is doable in football, maybe not basketball. Today's DI reminder: The sub-classifications "FBS" and "FCS" (formerly DI-A and DI-AA) apply only, *only* to football. The "average attendance" rule only applies to maintaining FBS (DI-A) status and thus only applies to football attendance. You can average 404 fans per home game in MBB and remain DI (like Colgate did in 2004). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 Today's DI reminder: The sub-classifications "FBS" and "FCS" (formerly DI-A and DI-AA) apply only, *only* to football. The "average attendance" rule only applies to maintaining FBS (DI-A) status and thus only applies to football attendance. You can average 404 fans per home game in MBB and remain DI (like Colgate did in 2004). My comment was confusing. It was directed only to football except for the statement about basketball. Generally I don't think bball can make it to 15k average but you are right, it is not needed to keep your D-I status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Generally I don't think bball can make it to 15k average but you are right, it is not needed to keep your D-IA, aka FBS status. Fixed your statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 Fixed your statement. You are the greatest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Uh, ..... no. That's Ali, or Diggler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I stand corrected. Interesting find. But it would not be #28 as we do not average a sell out. We average around 10,500 which puts us somewhere around #40. I was wrong but please don't tell my wife. Using this years attendance they would be. This is what I tried to link to initially, but I suck at the Internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 Using this years attendance they would be. This is what I tried to link to initially, but I suck at the Internet. I have a hard time believing that we are averaging a sellout up to this point in the year. Also, I find it hard to believe that they list our capacity at 11,500 when it clearly is not the case. Also, this is paid attendance, not actual attendance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Also, this is paid attendance, not actual attendance. Paid is what pays the bills. As far has how other folks count attendance .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I have a hard time believing that we are averaging a sellout up to this point in the year. I believe it. Saturday, October 13, 2007 Michigan State (MSU) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11738 (Sellout) Friday, November 2, 2007 Colorado College (CC) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11824 (Sellout) Saturday, November 3, 2007 Colorado College (CC) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11803 (Sellout) Friday, November 23, 2007 Minnesota Duluth (MND) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11791 Saturday, November 24, 2007 Minnesota Duluth (MND) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11674 Friday, December 7, 2007 Minnesota (MIN) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11834 (Sellout) Saturday, December 8, 2007 Minnesota (MIN) at North Dakota (NDK) Attendance: 11857 (Sellout) That's an average of 11,789 per game to date. Also, I find it hard to believe that they list our capacity at 11,500 when it clearly is not the case. I'm not sure where the 11,500 number came from. The Ralph says its seating capacity is 11,700. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 I believe it. That's an average of 11,789 per game to date. I'm not sure where the 11,500 number came from. The Ralph says its seating capacity is 11,700. I am getting my a$$ kicked today. I guess it's true what they say about siouxsports.com. GO BIG OR GO HOME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMD Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I am getting my a$$ kicked today. I guess it's true what they say about siouxsports.com. GO BIG OR GO HOME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I am getting my a$$ kicked today. I guess it's true what they say about siouxsports.com. GO BIG OR GO HOME. Hey, you were right about the seating capacity of the Ralph being above 11,500. The day's not a total loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 UND committee makes change Not having three years of athletic administrative experience won't automatically disqualify somebody from being a candidate for the job of UND athletic director, a search committee decided Thursday. At a meeting on the UND campus, the athletic director search committee decided to take athletic administrative experience and move it from a required to a preferred qualification. Committee chair Greg Weisenstein decided to revisit the college athletic administrative experience qualification after receiving several “e-mails and calls.” After discussion Thursday, a straw vote ended up 6-6, so Weisenstein broke the tie and moved it to the preferred category. And, instead of a minimum of three years of experience, the qualification states that applicants with “significant” successful college athletic administrative experience will be preferred. Looks like there is a/some candidate(s) in mind that didn't meet the original criteria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 UND committee makes change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 A cynic would be obliged to point out this "tailoring" of the application requirements helps Dean Blais, but doesn't seem to have harmed Rob Bollinger's chances either now does it. Bollinger was an AAD at UND but was fundraising/FSC, not administrative/operations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so.cal.sioux Posted December 14, 2007 Author Share Posted December 14, 2007 A cynic would be obliged to point out this "tailoring" of the application requirements helps Dean Blais, but doesn't seem to have harmed Rob Bollinger's chances either now does it. Bollinger was an AAD at UND but was fundraising/FSC, not administrative/operations. Very good point. Big difference between Rob and Dean though is Rob has athletic administration experience and plenty of fund raising experience. Dean has none, at least not in college athletics anyway. In my mind Rob would be a much better candidate than Dean if it came down to those two. I am still rooting for Purpur. I wonder if he will apply? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikejm Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 With all due respect to both Blais and Bollinger, this latest tinkering with the process just stinks of more good ole boy crap. When will this university emerge from the back woods? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxjoy Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 With all due respect to both Blais and Bollinger, this latest tinkering with the process just stinks of more good ole boy crap. When will this university emerge from the back woods? Okay. I am just curious, but where does all this "good ole boy" belief come from? I may not have been around UND long enough (13 years if you count both being an undergrad student and an employee), or maybe I am naive, but from what I can see, a lot of high profile positions have been filled recently by outsiders: President Kupchella VP and Provost Weisenstein Dean Potvin Dean Watson Dean LeBel Athletic Director Buning Those are just off the top of my head, there could be more I don't understand it at all, and I am not trying to be rude, or troll or flame or anything...I just am wondering where this comes from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted December 14, 2007 Share Posted December 14, 2007 I have never understood why because someone has done a lot for UND and had outstanding success at UND that if they were ever rewarded by being appointed to a new position that it is the "good old boy system". UND is a an excellent University. Look at the CEO's and senior executives at businesses and corporations all across the country. Look at the number of successful attorneys, doctors, nurses, pilots, engineers, educators as well as coaches across the country with UND ties. Being an Athletic Director first and foremost requires the personality and passion for UND athletics that will sustain that person through the next years as we deal with the stresses of the D1 move, the change of the Fighting Sioux name, a new president and the new facilities. Whomever takes the job needs to be a leader with vision and they will need to be a fund raiser. They need to oversee the busget but if we are looking for a numbers guy before someone who can "work the crowd" and generate support it would be a huge mistake. Who cares where the candidate comes from. There are CEO's out there with no athletic admin experience who would be a great AD. Purpur, Blais and Bollinger are all qualified candidates. If one of them is the best choice that's who it should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.