The Sicatoka

Mr. Jeanotte forgets: - the judge that signed off on the NCAA/State of ND agreement: UND graduate - the judge that denied the recent Spirit Lake appeal: UND graduate Given that history, Mr. Jeanotte should be pleased that 4/5 of the court is UND graduates. Maybe it is time to kick the soapbox out from under this grandstanding know-nothing.

1:40 seconds too late.

Isn't it time to split Gregoire and VV up?

Poor officiating.

The French Connection!

We have half a million. Do I hear one, *one* million dollars? Building collapse will cost NDSU $1 million

UND will only help the northern tier Summit schools (NDSU, SDSU, soon USD) via both lower travel costs, (bus travel instead of flights to a non-conference game) and better gates (as the potential for visiting fans increases when the opponent is in reasonable driving distance). But no one is saying the Summit should allow UND in before the NCAA agreement kicks in in Nov 2010. There, there's the case. Happy?

Seems the Summit's position isn't that well known ... Maybe Tu-Uyen Tran of the GF Herald should give Douple a call and as ... oh ... wait ... never mind.

Yup. I too believe everyone wants to just let the clock run out and start pointing fingers at everyone else. So if the results of that is what you expect, or are planning for, why not just say it and act to head off what you can of it by acting now. Stand up and do, or take the weak way out.

Ah, but it does affect them. Perception is reality, and it truly is becoming in this case. Douple has created a more than legitimate perception as an dodger of questions from the media. That's the Summit commissioner. That's perception of how the Summit operates that he's creating. Even a simple, "We've stated our position to the media already. Please reference that." is better than not returning calls to Tu-Uyen Tran of the GF Herald.

What does "settled" or (I believe his precise word was) "resolved" mean? To whose satisfaction? The NCAA's? Or the Summit's? And if the Summit's, what does "settled" or "resolved" mean to them? Douple's said some words. Do we have definition as to what they mean or if they have any true gravitas with the Summit presidents? Where's the formal, documented, statement of position ... from anyone. I'll agree with the person who said they respected the NCAA for at least stepping up and putting their position out there on paper: This and this by that date or this triggers in. Hey, at least we know where the NCAA is at. It's on paper. It's not an unanswered media inquiry.

That's all Florida State, Central Michigan, and Utah had to do.

And what exactly is that? Tu-Uyen Tran of the GF Herald blogged that he contacted Summit League school presidents about the issue and they all said to talk to the league commissioner. So Tran tried to contract Douple. And Douple didn't return the Herald's calls. So much for Douple stepping up and defining "the Summit's clear position". Do we surely know that getting Standing Rock's approval would satisfy Douple and/or the majority of Summit members? I've never heard Douple or anyone else say that. What is their "clear position"? The only thing I know for certain is that if the SBoHE changes the name before November, there is zero chance of getting SR's approval. So if the SBoHE intends to shut that particular door before it has to, it owes us an explanation as to why it's happening.

Normally the presidents of the individual conference member schools have the vote.

"That's stereotyping. And stereotyping is wrong." {sip off scotch} {long draw off cigar} [/Ron White]

That's going to happen come Nov 2010. (There is no way UND will allow itself to go back onto the NCAA sanction list.) So what's the Summit's issue?

My main concern: There has been almost no effort by UND or the SBoHE to convey any message to alums, Sioux boosters, students and the public at large. Sure, Faison has made statements from time to time about the importance of UND getting into the Summit, but nobody from UND has ever said something like: "Therefore, it is the official position of the University of North Dakota that the Fighting Sioux nickname be retired as soon as possible to assist with the transition to Division I." Furthermore, neither Faison nor Kelley has ever bothered to explain what they know about the Summit's position in relation to the nickname issue. They have to know something. What has Douple told them? Is there a deadline? When? Why that date? Why not November 2010? What do they understand it to mean when Douple says the nickname issue must be "resolved"? Do all Summit members feel that way or is it just Douple talking out of his tail-feathers? It'd be nice to know some information and context. Surely, behind the scenes, Kelley and Faison are conveying much (if not all) of this type of information to Goetz and the SBoHE. And I don't believe that Kelley and Faison would sit around waiting for the board to decide what it wants to do. For the first time, it became clear yesterday that they are pushing the board in a particular direction. It's about time that they publicly do something, anything. But there are still many unanswered questions that people have a right to know. State the case; make the case.

No. They need to quit playing games and lead from the front. They'll probably find out that the vast majority of fans just want this resolved and want someone to step up and finish it. Additional Note: There's a vocal group that doesn't like how Alerus Center is run. They didn't show up for a recent open meeting to discuss the issues and problems and come up with ideas to make it better. But they love to make noise anonymously on the internet about the Alerus Center. I honestly believe the most vocal supporter of the Sioux name won't show up either, but will continue to anonymously make noise.

I agree. And that seems to be the SBoHE's new direction. But the only guy I've seen get out recently is Hanson's predecessor.

No one has ever stated the costs of changing the moniker. And don't tell me some cost evaluations and estimates haven't been completed. I'm (as an alumnus and taxpayer) getting that bill if it comes. How much? In my opinion, Spirit Lake should be sueing not the SBoHE, but the NCAA. The NCAA is not treating them equally as only one of five Chippewa tribes in Michigan (the closest) had to approve Central Michigan, and only one Florida Seminole tribe (there is only one) had to approve Florida State. So why don't they as one approving, and the closest at that, tribe count in North Dakota? Does the NCAA not believe Spirit Lake to be as worthy as the one Michigan Chippewa tribe or the Florida Seminole Nation? Spirit Lake should flex that "tribal sovereignty" muscle. What right does the NCAA have to tell a sovereign nation that it can't allow a university to use its tribal name? And what right does one sovereign Sioux nation to have to tell another what it can or can't do? And how in the world does a State of ND/NCAA agreement bind a soverign nation, that wasn't a party to the settlement, from making its own decisions?

For both Kelley and Faison: Step up to the podeum in 300 Twamley in front of media from around the state and lay out specifically, knowing it's going onto the local evening news, the issues and concerns and his position. Costs, benefits; pros, cons; and how they arrived at their position based on those.

I tend to look at KRACH because I believe that's a better model than the arbitrary weightings in an RPI. I wish the NCAA would dump the RPI and use KRACH in the PWR. (That almost sounded dirty. )

So, if that's the case, ... Faison and Kelley need to step up, man up, and state the case. The silence from them is deafening and has gone on long enough.

I see headcounts. I see dollars. But aren't US heads (resident tuition) lower cost than Foreign (non-resident tuition)? I'd like to see the breakdown of dollars going resident/non-resident, or what's ND getting for local v. outside talent.