this ain't HIGH SCHOOL or D2/D3 . Parents of a FBS player will be willing to travel for 8-10 times FFS.... ridiculous argument!
NDSU will 100% dominate any recruit in ND/SD/Minn that isn't going to Wisc/Iowa/Iowa St/Minnesota.
Printable View
this ain't HIGH SCHOOL or D2/D3 . Parents of a FBS player will be willing to travel for 8-10 times FFS.... ridiculous argument!
NDSU will 100% dominate any recruit in ND/SD/Minn that isn't going to Wisc/Iowa/Iowa St/Minnesota.
This is probably more a Hammersmith question, but it's not just 22. It's 22 plus the Title IX equity impacts. Is NDSU ready to manage that? Which women's sports would benefit?Quote:
Originally Posted by HerdBot
To my eye, NDSU is at 16 sponsored sports, minimum for FBS. No issues there; but is there room to add women's scholarships to balance?
Side note: Strangely, when UND cut sports, they didn't go to 14 (FCS minimum), they too stopped at 17 (and put men's golf on death watch, so effectively 16).
I mean, those schools lose kids to bigger P5's but yes, I suspect NDSU would have an easier time getting their leftovers.Quote:
Originally Posted by El_Chapo
Summit sponsors Tennis and Swimming/Diving for which we currently don’t field teams. Hat tip to Hammersmith who iirc posted to this effect recently on one of the zillion threads related to this subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
Adding teams? That sounds expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by bisonaudit
It'd be easier if there were open slots to fund scholarships in existing women's sports (while not going over NCAA limits obviously).
I think NDSU has been fully funded* in women's sports for a decade or more. No room to grow there. Only way to add more women's scholarships at NDSU is to add more sports. Tennis is cheap. S&D is fairly cheap now that West Fargo built a big swimming facility. I think it would have everything a DI program needs except for platform diving. Major issue now is that it's already shared by three high school programs(WF, Sheyenne, Horace). Those two sports are likely preferred because they have ready-made homes(Summit). The other choices of rugby, wrestling, lacrosse, etc. all have the problems of extremely few other programs around us. And equestrian is f--ing expensive to run. It would be our own version of UND women's hockey.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
*there have been years where some women's sports like basketball didn't use all the scholarships(coughdumbcough), but the money was always there
That would be easy. Our endowment funds for athletic scholarships would cover the difference. It's grown to the point where Teammakers is funding capital projects.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka
But having more scholarships would off set some laughable idea that mom and dad want to drive to vermillion every 2 years
I think you'd pause on sport selection in case you're not in the Summit (align to a new home's offering).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammersmith
But, equestrian, hockey, as a start-up or continuing expense (without a gate to support it) ... pass. Run away. (Learn from other's mistakes. :paperbag: )
I think that people are not factoring in is there are some big money alumni that will step up to the plate.
If UND were to "someday" go FBS, would you be willing to bring back womens hockey to keep in compliance? Asking for a friend from UND.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Sicatoka