Riverman Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 If anyone thinks Gene Taylor or Joe Chapman are keeping UND from the Summit League you need to have your head examined. Insult anyone who has an opinion.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Wow. Alot of people need to settle down. 1) Douple never said that UND wouldn't get into the Summit. Douple never said that he would never bring UND up for consideration, site visits, or for discussion for future expantions. He simply said that he wants to see UND get the nickname issue resolved before anything movs ahead. And we all know that is going to happen sooner rather than later. 2) Taylor and Chapman don't owe anything to UND. They have no reason to schedule us as long as they are getting full schedules with reasonable DI competition. Their fans want to see them play new DI teams and big schools with name recognition just as much as we want to see our schedule filled out with new DI teams and big schools with name recognition. Once UND is a counter it would make sence for both schools to schedule each other in non-revenue sports for travel and budget reasons. However, there is nothing that says either school MUST schedule the other. 3) So far we have no reason to believe that any of the NDSU administration is trying to blackball UND from the Summit League. If anyone has any actual evidence that has happened, I would hope that the SBOHE would be the first to be shown this evidence. But until there is any evidence, all of this trash talk and accusations is pointless. It's early, but this is my post of the year thus far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Insult anyone who has an opinion.. To your credit, you admit that charge is opinion rather that fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 What SBoHE policy are some of you talking about? With one exception, the stated policy of the Board is to stay out of athletic decisions involving the state's colleges and universities. The exception, of course, is the nickname matter, but can anyone actually quote a legislator or SBoHE member commenting on a policy that state universities are supposed to play one another or go to bat for them in conference deliberations? Because I've got several quotes saying the opposite. Taylor's statement yesterday essentially took the Summit league's stance on the issue and said it was superior to the current SBOHE's policy regarding the Sioux nickname. The Summit league can have whatever policy they want regarding scheduling UND but since the SBOHE is Taylor's employer, NDSU is bound by the SBOHE's policy regarding the nickname. If Taylor wants to use the nickname as an excuse for not scheduling UND then he is being insubordinate and should be disciplined. If he had given another reason for not scheduling UND, he probably would have been fine at least in the short term. Despite what Taylor or Chapman may believe neither one of them has enough political capital to continue their stance against resuming the rivalry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Since when does it require any political capital for UND or NDSU to control their scheduling decisions? My company just laid off 1500 people nationwide. It affected about 20 people in ND and NW MN. They don't care right now if UND and NDSU play each other, or what the Summit league policy about the Sioux nickname is. Politicians rightfully have other concerns right now. We care a lot more about this than most people do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FargoBison Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 NDSU athletic director Gene Taylor said his school had nothing to do with The Summit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Since when does it require any political capital for UND or NDSU to control their scheduling decisions? There will be repercussions for standing in the way of the rivalry. They played out here at UND as Kupchella and Roger Thomas are no longer here. The same will be true at NDSU if Taylor and Chapman continue as they are. It doesn't matter how many kudos Chapman may have earned with the Governor, the legislature, or others in the state government if a growing portion of the ND population is upset with his decision making eventually the day will come when he'll have few friends in the state governement who he can turn to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammersmith Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Taylor's statement yesterday essentially took the Summit league's stance on the issue and said it was superior to the current SBOHE's policy regarding the Sioux nickname. The Summit league can have whatever policy they want regarding scheduling UND but since the SBOHE is Taylor's employer, NDSU is bound by the SBOHE's policy regarding the nickname. If Taylor wants to use the nickname as an excuse for not scheduling UND then he is being insubordinate and should be disciplined. If he had given another reason for not scheduling UND, he probably would have been fine at least in the short term. Despite what Taylor or Chapman may believe neither one of them has enough political capital to continue their stance against resuming the rivalry. But there's no current SBoHE policy on the nickname that applies to anyone except UND. All directives from the SBoHE have only applied to UND, the Sioux tribes, and the NCAA, and the last only in regards to the lawsuit. NDSU(or any other ND college or university) has no part in those directives. In fact, conference directives DO trump everything else unless SPECIFICALLY addressed by the SBoHE. Since Douple's scheduling suggestion was not known until yesterday, and there have been no new statements from the SBoHE, there's no way there could be any conflict yet. And since it's the stated policy of the Board to stay out of these matters, I doubt that will change. If you have some proof that I'm wrong, please post it, but I've got about a half dozen quotes saying or suggesting the Board won't get into the middle of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverman Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 What SBoHE policy are some of you talking about? With one exception, the stated policy of the Board is to stay out of athletic decisions involving the state's colleges and universities. The exception, of course, is the nickname matter, but can anyone actually quote a legislator or SBoHE member commenting on a policy that state universities are supposed to play one another or go to bat for them in conference deliberations? Because I've got several quotes saying the opposite. To be clear you are stating it is not in the best interest for the State of North Dakota to help another state entity ? Just a simple yes or no. Please post anything you know from the AG of ND or quotes saying the opposite. I for one would be most interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackJD Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 To be clear you are stating it is not in the best interest for the State of North Dakota to help another state entity ? Just a simple yes or no. Please post anything you know from the AG of ND or quotes saying the opposite. I for one would be most interested. I don't think that's what he said (and your "question" cannot be answered 'yes' or 'no') but am I reading your post correctly: are you suggesting UND needs NDSU's help? I don't think I've ever read that before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 The thread title says it all...kind of like Bill Clinton's "it's the economy stupid"....IT'S THE NICKNAME STUPID!. Hey, I love the tradition that is Fighting Sioux athletics and bleed as much green as anyone here, but we are where we are, and the situation is what is. It's time to move forward, and I think most rational thinking people have resigned themselves to this fact by now. Let's turn the page, Douple might be doing us a favor with this. When UND gets a site visit from one or more conferences, they will be hooked...like many of us were. My bigger concern turns now to the internal debate, which I hope doesn't turn into an internal civil war. I'm not talking about when that football player threw Bobyck through a window at that Dyke Avenue party in the late 80's, but something very much along those lines. It was part of Kupchella's dilemma. Kelley and Faison are going to earn their money on this one, that's for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 But there's no current SBoHE policy on the nickname that applies to anyone except UND. All directives from the SBoHE have only applied to UND, the Sioux tribes, and the NCAA, and the last only in regards to the lawsuit. NDSU(or any other ND college or university) has no part in those directives. In fact, conference directives DO trump everything else unless SPECIFICALLY addressed by the SBoHE. Since Douple's scheduling suggestion was not known until yesterday, and there have been no new statements from the SBoHE, there's no way there could be any conflict yet. And since it's the stated policy of the Board to stay out of these matters, I doubt that will change. If you have some proof that I'm wrong, please post it, but I've got about a half dozen quotes saying or suggesting the Board won't get into the middle of this. The SBOHE's policy regarding this is that the Sioux nickname issue will be resolved according to the timeline they set forth. The Summit League has a policy the UND must resolve this sooner or be penalized through scheduling with it's members. Taylor as an employee of the SBOHE can't adobt the Summit League policy that UND has to resolve this sooner without being in conflict with the SBOHE's policy. In simpler terms, if UND and NDSU were branches of the same company (which they essentially are within the SBOHE structure) and they both had seperate dealings with the same third party. If a dispute arose between one of the branches and that third party (in this case UND), would it be appropriate for the management of the other branch to side with the third party? Especially in a manner that reinforces that third party's position. The Summit League is essentially trying to manipulate the SBOHE's timeline regarding the Sioux nickname and Taylor has sided with the Summit League's position. He is in no position to do this and has undercut his employer's ability to effectively manage the Sioux nickname decision according to their timeline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 To be clear you are stating it is not in the best interest for the State of North Dakota to help another state entity ? Just a simple yes or no. Please post anything you know from the AG of ND or quotes saying the opposite. I for one would be most interested. There wasn't anything in that post that even addressed what is in the best interest of the state of ND. That aside, I can say that it is absolutely not in the best interest of the state of ND to have anyone but the athletic directors of UND and NDSU, with approval of their hiring managers, the respective college presidents, setting the schedules and corresponding opponents for their schools' athletic teams. Faison should be making decisions based on what is in the best interest of UND. Worrying about what is in the best interest of the state of ND is a job for the governor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammersmith Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 To be clear you are stating it is not in the best interest for the State of North Dakota to help another state entity ? Just a simple yes or no. Please post anything you know from the AG of ND or quotes saying the opposite. I for one would be most interested. Who decides "what's in the best interest for the State of North Dakota"? How many projects and programs occur every year that are good for one city, county or institution, but are arguably bad for the state as a whole? In this case, the SBoHE would probably look at it as who is hurt worse: 1. A state university who doesn't get a desired game but has many other scheduling choices, or 2. A state university who may run afoul of their conference leadership and jeopardize their standing in the conference by scheduling an opponent they were told/asked not to. Sorry, the SBoHE would almost certainly side with the second situation; not that the Board would even bother with something like this. Now, if NDSU actively blocked UND from getting into the Summit, that would be a whole 'nother kettle of kittens(PETA thread). If that were to happen, the Board would come down on Chapman/Taylor like a ton of bricks. But that's not what we were talking about. We were talking about scheduling, not membership. And the situation I just mentioned would never come to pass. As the new kids on the block, NDSU & SDSU do not have much say in matters of expansion. If the majority of the Summit schools are against UND joining, then NDSU will vote for them(like it would ever come to an actual vote in that case) and the other Summit presidents would understand that NDSU was voting against the rest purely for political reasons. If the Summit presidents overwhelmingly want UND in, what the hell do you think NDSU is going to do? Vote no? Please. The only situation where there could possibly be a problem is if NDSU's vote was the deciding factor, but that will never happen because to force a vote in that situation could tear the conference apart. Generally, the conference presidents will only call for a vote in a membership situation if they know it will be unanimously for the newcomer or nearly so. As for NDSU lobbying against UND during the discussion: Are you nuts? NDSU(whoever is president at the time) will stay the f--- out of it unless asked direct questions by the others, and then "vote" the way the wind is blowing. Anything else would be politically suicidal in either direction. If NDSU lobbies against UND, someone would leak it and there would be hell to pay. If NDSU strongly lobbies FOR UND, it will only piss off the other presidents and marginalize NDSU's position on the council. The best thing for everyone is for NDSU to stay neutral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herd Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Taylor is not obligated to schedule UND, but it's part of his job as an employee of the state to adhere to NDBOHE policy. Whether he likes it or not the State of ND and the ND taxpayers (which includes a hell of a lot of UND grads) pay his salary. Tom Douple may be a hell of a pal to Gene but he doesn't sign Gene's checks so it really doesn't matter what the hell the Summit League's policy regarding playing UND is since that sure as hell better not be NDSU's. If Taylor and Chapman want to continue to take this stance then they will have to pay with their jobs because they're no longer serving the state of ND anymore. Let me see now . . . NDSU administrators as employees of the state have an obligation to schedule UND? But UND administrators had no such obligation? Is that what you are trying to tell me? And what stance are you referring to? NDSU doesn't have a stance. The only stance by anyone was made in a 2003 press conference up north. You are off your rocker man! I've ready some crazy stuff, but that takes it. NDSU has said that will resume competition when the time is right, there is no stance or obligation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Let me see now . . . NDSU administrators as employees of the state have an obligation to schedule UND? But UND administrators had no such obligation? Is that what you are trying to tell me? And what stance are you referring to? NDSU doesn't have a stance. The only stance by anyone was made in a 2003 press conference up north. You are off your rocker man! I've ready some crazy stuff, but that takes it. NDSU has said that will resume competition when the time is right, there is no stance or obligation. Is there video of this press conference that took place. I know that it did, I just would like to sift through the message board cold war and draw my own conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Let me see now . . . NDSU administrators as employees of the state have an obligation to schedule UND? But UND administrators had no such obligation? Is that what you are trying to tell me? And what stance are you referring to? NDSU doesn't have a stance. The only stance by anyone was made in a 2003 press conference up north. You are off your rocker man! I've ready some crazy stuff, but that takes it. NDSU has said that will resume competition when the time is right, there is no stance or obligation. Did you even read my next post? You're right NDSU doesn't have an obligation to schedule UND. But Taylor can't say it's because of the Sioux nickname. That goes against the SBOHE's policy regarding the nickname. He could have picked a million other reasons including retribution for UND not scheduling NDSU during the transition and it probably would have been better than what he said yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammersmith Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 The SBOHE's policy regarding this is that the Sioux nickname issue will be resolved according to the timeline they set forth. The Summit League has a policy the UND must resolve this sooner or be penalized through scheduling with it's members. Taylor as an employee of the SBOHE can't adobt the Summit League policy that UND has to resolve this sooner without being in conflict with the SBOHE's policy. But you're confusing a limited policy directive with a global one. The SBoHE decision in the lawsuit applies to UND, and UND only. It doesn't apply to the university system as a whole. The settlement and its timeline is between UND and the NCAA; none of the other universities are third parties to it. Again, the overall policy of the SBoHE is that the local decision-makers(ADs & presidents) are in charge unless specifically overruled. The Board has never expanded the particulars of the settlement beyond UND, so the Summit's laws and directives are paramount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=100474 NDSU athletic director Gene Taylor said his school had nothing to do with The Summit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammersmith Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Is there video of this press conference that took place. I know that it did, I just would like to sift through the message board cold war and draw my own conclusions. I'm pretty sure it used to be on the official fightingsioux.com website, but I don't think it survived the move to the new host last year. I didn't find it with a quick search, but I'll dig a little more before calling it a night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlsiouxfan Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 But you're confusing a limited policy directive with a global one. The SBoHE decision in the lawsuit applies to UND, and UND only. It doesn't apply to the university system as a whole. The settlement and its timeline is between UND and the NCAA; none of the other universities are third parties to it. Again, the overall policy of the SBoHE is that the local decision-makers(ADs & presidents) are in charge unless specifically overruled. The Board has never expanded the particulars of the settlement beyond UND, so the Summit's laws and directives are paramount. When the SBOHE's initially came out with it's policy establishing the timeline for resolution of the Sioux nickname issue could Taylor have come out against it and set forth his own timeline accelerating the SBOHE's timeline in order for scheduling between the two universities to resume? He'd have been writing his own pink slip. Does the fact that the Summit League is now essentially doing exactly that give Taylor sufficient cover to suddenly adopt this policy? Let's not forget that the Summit League's policy regarding scheduling UND is a loose directive while the SBOHE's timeline was hard and fast policy until recent events. If there is a dispute between the SBOHE and the Summit League (which this essentially is) then Taylor doesn't get to pick and choose sides in the dispute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Is there video of this press conference that took place. I know that it did, I just would like to sift through the message board cold war and draw my own conclusions. It wasn't a press conference to ANNOUNCE UND wouldn't play the Bison because they went DI - it was the one and ONLY UND press conference that announced next falls football schedule - which included some good teams just unfortunately not the Bison. Of course the PRO-UND media asked about ndsu's absence on the schedule and that's what it turned into...but not what it was intended to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 OHH! The plot thickens...maybe Douple isn't being a pc dick but actually elbowing UND WINK/WINK "make a decision" because things are moving pretty fast on the national level... SDSU (former Forum writer) blog... Not a bad idea IMO - UND needs to move on this now! The nickname is going away anyway, like it or not, it IS going away...better to embrace the future now because we have a LOT more at stake than just a stupid name! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FargoBison Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 While I really don't have a horse in this race, I do think that "conference decisions" are usually made at conference meetings-with either AD's or University Presidents making those decisions via a vote. Those meetings have minutes, records of votes, etc. and USUALLY conferences are so proud of themselves they practically wet their pants trying to get out press releases and publicity. IOW, this "decision" should have been public knowledge long ago. I think its a reasonable request to ask either this AD or the conference president for the details of this decision: such as when it was made, how the vote went, who voted for, who voted against and any number of other details. Sorry, but I think this school and/or conference is setting itself up as holier-than-thou in comparison to a lot of OTHER schools and conferences who have no problem playing a school that has made a decision about a school matter; especially while UND is already jumping thru a lot of artificial hoops set up by busybodies with little common sense. IMHO it's silly to think that this little conference has taken it upon itself to act as the conscience of the NCAA. Finally: well yes, you DID have something to do with your conference decisions (assuming that said conference decision actually exists). You either voted for it or against it. Are you trying to make us believe that you're a part of a conference that just shoves decisions down your throat without consulting their members? The conference commissioner selects schools, gathers information, and than presents why he thinks each school would be a good fit for the league. So no, NDSU didn't have anything to do with UND not getting selected, Douple even said not choosing UND was entirely his decision based on their current nickname situation. I think it needs to be understood that when a school is looked at for expansion the league puts a lot of time and effort into looking at each potential new member. I think there will be something like 177 meetings when USD gets their visit, Douple may like UND but he isn't going to waste his or anybody else's time on a school with a major issue hanging over its head. There is no league mandate to not schedule UND, the commissioner may suggest that they shouldn't be scheduled, but as you say it would take a league vote to institute a policy on not playing schools with nickname issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 OHH! The plot thickens...maybe Douple isn't being a pc dick but actually elbowing UND WINK/WINK "make a decision" because things are moving pretty fast on the national level... SDSU (former Forum writer) blog... Not a bad idea IMO - UND needs to move on this now! The nickname is going away anyway, like it or not, it IS going away...better to embrace the future now because we have a LOT more at stake than just a stupid name! Yep. What I said, you said, and he said: Isn 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.