Nickname/Logo Affecting Conference Affiliation

[UND92,96]

Another Kevin Fee blog.

[Goon]

I'm concerned with the level of animosity toward Douple here. We all agree it would be extraordinarily difficult to gain admission to the Summit witout his recommendation to the conference presidents? Where is any base level of self evaluation (by that I mean evaluation of UND and fans) of what needs to be done to be granted a site visit by the Summit along with USD? UND CANNOT afford to be passed by on this.

I can't see them denying UND because a couple of people emailed the Summit league office and expressed their displeasure with them.

You're going to have fans that do this type of thing no matter where you go.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I can't see them denying UND because a couple of people emailed the Summit league office and expressed their displeasure with them.

You're going to have fans that do this type of thing no matter where you go.

(emphasis mine)

A) I agree with the statement. If a coach says "I need to quit because people are criticizing my strategy" then he's not the right man for the job. If this guy is upset by criticism, he needs to find a new job yesterday. He's CERTAINLY not ready to move on to bigger challenges in this line of work.

B) IMHO, those are two excellent word choices: people and fans. There's no proof that the emails in question have come from genuine fans of any single school.

[FargoBison]

There seems to be a good geographic fit. Its not as if there are differences in the sports that can't be overcome. Sorry, but the decision "not to choose UND" wasn't MADE by the commissioner of that league. He might have concurred with it, but the Presidents (or someone even higher) made that call.

I'd say the original work is done by the University Presidents and the conference commissioner does little more than announce a decision. I'd go 180 degrees away from your statement: that commissioner wouldn't be employed for long if he wasn't going along with the wishes of the various Presidents.

It was made by the commissioner, he even said so on the radio.

As for the commissioners, I believe the Big Sky comissioner once said that it was his job to show why NDSU is good fit for the Big Sky, and I bet Douple has similar feelings about potential new members. UND has an issue with the NCAA, it is perfectly fair for the Summit League to want that cleared up before the school could get admission.

This is nothing more than a conference commissioner thinking ahead and deciding that the nickname issue could cause some problems if UND ever enters the stage of getting a site visit and being voted on for membership.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

It was made by the commissioner, he even said so on the radio.

Well, good for him. If that's the case, he's got quite a job there.

When the Big Ten admitted Penn State, the presidents started the idea. Jim Delaney may have encouraged them to look at expansion, but there was QUITE a lot of information on academics exchanged long before anything got too public. The AD's and Delaney got involved after that, but if the presidents hadn't been able to agree that PSU was a good fit from the books side, it would have been dead in the water. At that time, there was some discussion that Rutgers and/or Texas weren't considered for academic reasons. How true that is will probably never be known, but what is a given is that the Big Ten commissioner is merely an employee of the schools, not vice versa. He may hire refs, negotiate TV deals and speak with other conference commissioners but he certainly can't say "we don't want Notre Dame in the Big Ten" without getting the okay of the people who sign his paycheck. It's a lot like a law partnership. The decision to admit someone as a new partner simply isn't made by the office manager.

Apparently one man can bind 10 schools to another in the Summit Conference without consulting the schools. After all, he said so right there on the radio!

This conference may be the only league that handles things that way. Good luck with that.

This is nothing more than a conference commissioner thinking ahead and deciding that the nickname issue could cause some problems if UND ever enters the stage of getting a site visit and being voted on for membership.

Yes, who could expect those highly paid, postgraduate degree-holding, semi-politicians we call "University Presidents" to actually

think ahead

? Thankfully we don't trust those dolts with this important duty. After all, they could get their own schools in real trouble this way. Nothing they do on a day-to-day basis could "cause some real problems" for their school. They just don't make those kind of decisions in any other aspect of running a multi-million dollar university. Glad we got

THAT

straightened out.

[mksioux]

I'm concerned with the level of animosity toward Douple here. We all agree it would be extraordinarily difficult to gain admission to the Summit witout his recommendation to the conference presidents? Where is any base level of self evaluation (by that I mean evaluation of UND and fans) of what needs to be done to be granted a site visit by the Summit along with USD? UND CANNOT afford to be passed by on this.

It just means we care. A passionate fan base should be a positive.

I certainly hope the guy wouldn't make such an important decision as conference membership based on a few pissy emails from fans. But then again, nicknames seem to be high on his priority list, so you never know.

* and no, I never sent an email to Douple nor would I recommend it.

[FargoBison]

Well, good for him. If that's the case, he's got quite a job there.

When the Big Ten admitted Penn State, the presidents started the idea. Jim Delaney may have encouraged them to look at expansion, but there was QUITE a lot of information on academics exchanged long before anything got too public. The AD's and Delaney got involved after that, but if the presidents hadn't been able to agree that PSU was a good fit from the books side, it would have been dead in the water. At that time, there was some discussion that Rutgers and/or Texas weren't considered for academic reasons. How true that is will probably never be known, but what is a given is that the Big Ten commissioner is merely an employee of the schools, not vice versa. He may hire refs, negotiate TV deals and speak with other conference commissioners but he certainly can't say "we don't want Notre Dame in the Big Ten" without getting the okay of the people who sign his paycheck.

Apparently one man can bind 10 schools to another in the Summit Conference without consulting the schools. After all, he said so right there on the radio!

This conference may be the only league that handles things that way. Good luck with that.

The Presidents have all the power, I won't argue with that. But I think Douple might just be taking a proactive approach. The League missed out on SIU-Edwardsville and it seems like Douple is making sure that doesn't happen again. The Summit is not like the Big Ten, membership isn't stable, so a commissioner like Delany doesn't exactly have to plan for massive membership shifts.

There is no doubt in my mind if a president had felt strongly about wanting to add UND he would have taken a different approach. In fact I think he should have taken a different approach from the get go, calling UND instead of talking in the press would have been a good start.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

In fact I think he should have taken a different approach from the get go, calling UND instead of talking in the press would have been a good start.

I can't disagree with that idea. IMHO he's on quite a power trip here: but that's really the problem of the league members.

Good geographic fit, facilities up to par, scope of programs offered comparable, no skeletons in the closet: IMHO that should be about the end of it for the conference office. Run numbers on whether this expands the pie or cuts out another piece of the same-sized pie and then sit back and tally the vote. Those presidents (and certainly the one who resides in your state as well as the one from South Dakota) should be well aware of the entire nickname and logo issue and where North Dakota stands with the NCAA. If not, let them ask questions at their level rather than having someone at a much lower level make a policy decision like that.

And IMHO, that should hold even more if what is in the back of your mind is "missing out" on an opportunity a la SIU-Edwardsville. Don't want to miss out again? Start with an open mind. Let someone else be accused of causing a missed opportunity.

[Hammersmith]

I can't disagree with that idea. IMHO he's on quite a power trip here: but that's really the problem of the league members.

Good geographic fit, facilities up to par, scope of programs offered comparable, no skeletons in the closet: IMHO that should be about the end of it for the conference office. Run numbers on whether this expands the pie or cuts out another piece of the same-sized pie and then sit back and tally the vote. Those presidents (and certainly the one who resides in your state as well as the one from South Dakota) should be well aware of the entire nickname and logo issue and where North Dakota stands with the NCAA. If not, let them ask questions at their level rather than having someone at a much lower level make a policy decision like that.

You seem to be under the impression that "site visit=invitation". Douple is using the site visit to inform the presidents about USD, who he thinks might be a fit. It will be totally up to the presidents to decide if he's right. Remember, almost none of the Summit presidents know anything about about USD; its facilities, its programs, its academics. Sure NDSU & SDSU know about them, and maybe SUU a little bit, but the other seven presidents know very little. How do you expect those presidents to make informed decisions on a school they know nothing about. Should seven different presidents conduct seven different investigations, or should the league conduct one and report the findings to the others?

It's Douple's job to put together a list of possible expansion/replacement candidates for membership and gather the info needed for the presidents to make their decision. It's also his job to eliminate any candidates he views as unacceptable for whatever reason. The presidents can overrule him, of course, but that will or will not happen in the future(probably at the March meeting). There doesn't appear to be any pressing need to expand, so it's not like Douple is pushing USD down the throats of the Summit presidents. The Big Ten/Penn State situation is completely different. In that case, all the presidents were dealing with a well known school and very little new research was required. A conference like the Summit must look at little known schools that are new to Division I or are otherwise obscure.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

You seem to be under the impression that "site visit=invitation".

Incorrect. I know nothing about which schools have had a visit. For all I know he's visited Hawaii and Harvard in the last two days.

OTOH, I do know what public comments this person has made. They've been well-documented here.

Remember, almost none of the Summit presidents know anything about about USD; its facilities, its programs, its academics...should the league conduct one (investigation)...

While I don't know anything about the people employed by the Summit Conference, I'll go out on a limb and say nobody there is qualified to intelligently report on the academic abilities of a school. That's so far over a conference staff's level of expertise it isn't funny.

It's also his job to eliminate any candidates he views as unacceptable for whatever reason.

In no way, shape or form could I possibly disagree more. If so charged he may present a recommendation one way or another along with his fact-finding report. The up-or-down vote should be left to the members, not to an employee of the members. Eliminating a candidate on a whim is a one-man blackball vote. Totally unacceptable; out of the question on its face.

The Big Ten/Penn State situation is completely different. In that case, all the presidents were dealing with a well known school and very little new research was required.

Knowing what I know about the situation, I disagree with the statement that "very little new research was required"; but I also realize that nothing will be proven either way by two people posting on a message board 15 years after the fact.

[Hammersmith]

Listen whiney - despite your revisionist history the facts are that UND didn't play 'SU because even had they won (while at a significant scholarship disadvantage), they would have had their playoff chances reduced. They did it to protect UND, not to punish 'SU. Even at that, 'SU had the opportunity to play UND in GF, but 'SU deemed that to be insufferably beneath their over-inflated dignity. Also, had 'SU really wished to avoid being "surprised" by UND's stance, they could have inquired before making the jump and so been able to have alternative plans accordingly. They just assumed that UND would fall all over themselves for an opportunity to play 'SU. Perhaps some poor planning on the part of 'SU? Perish the thought!

Talk about revisionist history. The real situation was that Taylor approached Thomas with a 2 year + 2 year contract. Over the phone, the two of them agreed in principle to a two year contract with the first game in Fargo(it was our turn in the rotation) and the second in GF. The contract had an auto-renew clause in it for a second pair of games(Fargo/GF) if neither AD objected. This clause was inserted to allow the UND AD to easily cancel the extension if he felt the scholarship differential was proving insurmountable. Taylor sent the final contract to Thomas to sign. Instead of signing it, he sat on it for months, never telling Taylor that he had changed his mind. Taylor continued to schedule the upcoming season, thinking the date for the UND game was set. Taylor only found out that the game wasn't going to happen when a reporter asked him how he felt about the contract falling through. He wasn't particularly happy. All of this was reported by both the Herald and the Forum.

As for the "it will hurt our playoff chances", that is both true and false. For one year, the DII playoff selection criteria had a loophole that would have "penalized" UND for playing NDSU. The loophole existed because there were so few DI-AA independents at the time, and they were all bad. Accordingly, they were all lumped together as having low value in the playoff selection points system. When UNC, UCD, NDSU & SDSU all moved up, they initially fell into that same category. It took the rulebook a year to catch up and add the Great West to the list of "good" I-AA conferences; the kind with the high point values. Once that happened, the argument that playing NDSU would hurt UND's playoff chances went out the window. There is even a very good chance that Thomas knew the rule change was coming when he refused to sign the contract described in the first paragraph. He still continued to use the invalid argument until he left for the NCC commissioner's job, however. Funny that.

[Herd]

I can't disagree with that idea. IMHO he's on quite a power trip here: but that's really the problem of the league members.

Good geographic fit, facilities up to par, scope of programs offered comparable, no skeletons in the closet: IMHO that should be about the end of it for the conference office. Run numbers on whether this expands the pie or cuts out another piece of the same-sized pie and then sit back and tally the vote. Those presidents (and certainly the one who resides in your state as well as the one from South Dakota) should be well aware of the entire nickname and logo issue and where North Dakota stands with the NCAA. If not, let them ask questions at their level rather than having someone at a much lower level make a policy decision like that.

And IMHO, that should hold even more if what is in the back of your mind is "missing out" on an opportunity a la SIU-Edwardsville. Don't want to miss out again? Start with an open mind. Let someone else be accused of causing a missed opportunity.

I think that you are quite presumptuous in assuming that Douple is a 1-man band. Who's requirements is the Summit League required to follow? Humm . . . would it be the NCAA?

I am quite confident that Douple is in touch with the NCAA on this issue, but that would be the last thing that he could actually say and his contact with the NCAA is deep under cover. Just think of the Liability and Lawsuits if the NCAA directly mandated that a conference not add UND . . . ouch!

Is he being influenced and in the know about the NCAA's feelings on the issue? You bet he is.

[Hammersmith]

While I don't know anything about the people employed by the Summit Conference, I'll go out on a limb and say nobody there is qualified to intelligently report on the academic abilities of a school. That's so far over a conference staff's level of expertise it isn't funny.

In no way, shape or form could I possibly disagree more. If so charged he may present a recommendation one way or another along with his fact-finding report. The up-or-down vote should be left to the members, not to an employee of the members. Eliminating a candidate on a whim is a one-man blackball vote. Totally unacceptable; out of the question on its face.

Knowing what I know about the situation, I disagree with the statement that "very little new research was required"; but I also realize that nothing will be proven either way by two people posting on a message board 15 years after the fact.

1st paragraph: Who the hell do you think makes up a site visit team? It's comprised of the commissioner, one or two university presidents, and other staff, typically including the provost of one of the conference's universities as an academic adviser. In the case of NDSU, the visit team consisted of Douple, Richard Roberts(president of Oral Roberts), Homer Erekson(UMKC school of business), Mike Moore(IUPUI athletic director), Kathy Orban(WIU senior women's administrator) plus two Mid-Con officials(including current GWC commissioner, Ed Grom).

2nd paragraph: It is totally within the duties of the commissioner to protect his conference from choices he feels could hurt it. It's also clearly within the powers of the President's Council to overrule him if they feel it's necessary. If Douple feels that seriously considering UND is a waste of time and effort until the nickname issue is completely resolved, then that's legitimately part of his job. It's not like there's a imminent deadline approaching. If the President's Council disagrees, they can easily override his decision during the regular meeting in March and instruct him to schedule a site visit.

Another element you're probably not aware of is the current initiative within the Summit League called the Summit Plan. It is a multi-year plan to improve the level of competition and the profile of the League from within. As part of this plan, Douple has been given a few more duties and powers to act on behalf of the League than a commissioner would normally have in a totally stable conference. The Summit Plan was developed by the commissioner and the president's council and was approved by a vote of the presidents. In other words, the presidents have explicitly given Douple permission to do these sorts of things. He doesn't have final say, but he's allowed to be more proactive than most commissioners normally are.

3rd paragraph: Are you trying to tell me that the other Big Ten presidents knew very little about the details at Penn State? Come on. From being fellow members of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, the Association of American Universities, and that most of the Big Ten are considered to be "Public Ivies" along with Penn State, it's obvious that the Big Ten presidents were well acquainted with Penn State long before they started thinking about adding them to the conference. Do you really think the same can be said about Centenary College of Louisiana, Oakland University of Michigan, Western Illinois University, or Indiana University Purdue University - Indianapolis when it comes to schools like USD or UND? Probably the most that can be said is that they know those universities exist and that's about it. If you asked the president of Centenary what the enrollment of USD is, do you think he would know, or even come close? If you asked the president of Oakland whether UND had a law school, would he be sure? How about the hundreds of other questions that need to be asked? It's Douple's job to be the icebreaker and find likely choices for membership, because there's a world of difference between Penn State and any schools the Summit might be looking at(yes, including NDSU).

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

1st paragraph: Who the hell do you think makes up a site visit team? It's comprised of the commissioner, one or two university presidents, and other staff, typically including the provost of one of the conference's universities as an academic adviser.

Wow, that's sad. Try reading first. How many of those people are EMPLOYED BY THE CONFERENCE?

The people employed by the

schools

are the people who should evaluate academic fit.

Have any of those people (the academics) felt the need to issue a statement yet? On academics or ANYTHING OTHER SUBJECT?

Your conference commissioner certainly did.

2nd paragraph: It is totally within the duties of the commissioner to protect his conference from choices he feels could hurt it. It's also clearly within the powers of the President's Council to overrule him if they feel it's necessary. If Douple feels that seriously considering UND is a waste of time and effort until the nickname issue is completely resolved, then that's legitimately part of his job. It's not like there's a imminent deadline approaching. If the President's Council disagrees, they can easily override his decision during the regular meeting in March and instruct him to schedule a site visit.

If you seriously think that its within his duties to publicly discuss who should and shouldn't be in his conference before he issues that report to his employers, and before such a vote is taken; more power to you old buddy.

Another element you're probably not aware of is the current initiative within the Summit League called the Summit Plan. It is a multi-year plan to improve the level of competition and the profile of the League from within. As part of this plan, Douple has been given a few more duties and powers to act on behalf of the League than a commissioner would normally have in a totally stable conference. The Summit Plan was developed by the commissioner and the president's council and was approved by a vote of the presidents. In other words, the presidents have explicitly given Douple permission to do these sorts of things. He doesn't have final say, but he's allowed to be more proactive than most commissioners normally are.

Again: if you seriously think that its within his duties to publicly discuss who should and shouldn't be in his conference before he issues that report to hisemployers, and before such a vote is taken; more power to you old buddy.

3rd paragraph: Are you trying to tell me that the other Big Ten presidents knew very little about the details at Penn State? Come on. From being fellow members of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, the Association of American Universities, and that most of the Big Ten are considered to be "Public Ivies" along with Penn State, it's obvious that the Big Ten presidents were well acquainted with Penn State long before they started thinking about adding them to the conference. Do you really think the same can be said about Centenary College of Louisiana, Oakland University of Michigan, Western Illinois University, or Indiana University Purdue University - Indianapolis when it comes to schools like USD or UND? Probably the most that can be said is that they know those universities exist and that's about it. If you asked the president of Centenary what the enrollment of USD is, do you think he would know, or even come close? If you asked the president of Oakland whether UND had a law school, would he be sure? How about the hundreds of other questions that need to be asked? It's Douple's job to be the icebreaker and find likely choices for membership, because there's a world of difference between Penn State and any schools the Summit might be looking at(yes, including NDSU).

Again, try reading. What you think is little and what I think is little are obviously two VASTLY different things.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I think that you are quite presumptuous in assuming that Douple is a 1-man band. Who's requirements is the Summit League required to follow? Humm . . . would it be the NCAA?

Any league can follow any requirements they like. Issuing public statements says "hey, look at me: I'm smarter than everyone else" to me. Therefore, I think he's on a power trip.

Yeah, he's the only one who knows what the NCAA requirements are. Thank God for this guy being the commissioner . Otherwise those schools would screw up for sure.

I am quite confident that Douple is in touch with the NCAA on this issue, but that would be the last thing that he could actually say and his contact with the NCAA is deep under cover.

Gotcha. Wow, wish I'd known this before. I wouldn't have wasted so much time talking about someone with NCAA contacts

DEEP UNDER COVER

.

Okay, I'm out of here. Gotta go get me another layer of tin foil for my hat. Have fun!

[tjbison]

Listen whiney - despite your revisionist history the facts are that UND didn't play 'SU because even had they won (while at a significant scholarship disadvantage), they would have had their playoff chances reduced. They did it to protect UND, not to punish 'SU. Even at that, 'SU had the opportunity to play UND in GF, but 'SU deemed that to be insufferably beneath their over-inflated dignity. Also, had 'SU really wished to avoid being "surprised" by UND's stance, they could have inquired before making the jump and so been able to have alternative plans accordingly. They just assumed that UND would fall all over themselves for an opportunity to play 'SU. Perhaps some poor planning on the part of 'SU? Perish the thought!

I think this is happening right now! Fiason would probably do or take ANY deal Taylor would throw at him for a game in any sport!!

[The Sicatoka]

I think that you are quite presumptuous in assuming that Douple is a 1-man band. Who's requirements is the Summit League required to follow? Humm . . . would it be the NCAA?

I am quite confident that Douple is in touch with the NCAA on this issue, but that would be the last thing that he could actually say and his contact with the NCAA is deep under cover. Just think of the Liability and Lawsuits if the NCAA directly mandated that a conference not add UND . . . ouch!

Is he being influenced and in the know about the NCAA's feelings on the issue? You bet he is.

Uh, but part of the UND/NCAA settlement is that the NCAA step away from this for three years (thus giving time and space to allow UND and the tribes to try to reach an agreement)?

Under your scenario the NCAA would be in violation of that out of court settlement (by causing secondary influence on the tribes via Summit/Douple).

Whups.

[Hammersmith]

I had a longer, much angrier post toward ChiefIS written that was very condescending in tone, but I deleted the lion's share because it served no other purpose than to vent my spleen. After I finished it, I realized the reason we were disagreeing was because we were coming from two opposite directions. I continue to feel that the Summit presidents are supporting Douple up to and until they say otherwise. He seems to believe that Douple's decisions are only acceptable if the Summit presidents come out and support them publicly; until then, they are suspect. To that end, I leave you with the remnants of my original draft:

There are different, legitimate ways of running a conference. Could it just be that the Summit presidents are actually HAPPY with the way Douple is handling the situation? Could it be that they DIRECTED him to not present candidates that had controversial issues attached? Could it be that they trust him and are allowing him to do his job as he sees fit? The Summit presidents hired him and they can fire him if they so choose. They know it. He knows it. Just let the damn drama play out. If you're right, we'll find out in March. If I'm right, we'll also find out in March.

With that, I'm done with this topic. It was fun last night, but debating a third party over the matter just feels like I'm banging my head against a wall. I've said on multiple forums that I believe the timing of the USD site visit is solely due to the Summit basketball tourney in Sioux Falls. I've also posted that I believe that Douple is being proactive in gathering information, but that the league has no immediate plans to expand. Site visits are a lot of work, and the Summit was forced to do three back-to-back-to-back in 2006. This time, I think they want to spread them out. Someone had to go first, and the tourney made it USD. I've also posted that I think the 2011 & 2012 Summit tourneys will be in Fargo, so a team will be here in January 2011. Gee, that will be just after the settlement deadline expires and a bit more than a year before UND becomes playoff eligible. Wow, what a coincidence. Like I said, I could be proven completely wrong in March, but my scenario is just as likely as anything else. Blowing a blood vessel over Douple's decision doesn't do anyone any good until we learn what the Summit's expansion plans actually are. Again, March.

[Matt]

Here's a reason to speed up the timeline on the nickname issue.

[GeauxSioux]

[url=http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=101115&section=News]OUR OPINION: It

[DamStrait]

Talk about revisionist history. The real situation was that Taylor approached Thomas with a 2 year + 2 year contract. Over the phone, the two of them agreed in principle to a two year contract with the first game in Fargo(it was our turn in the rotation) and the second in GF. The contract had an auto-renew clause in it for a second pair of games(Fargo/GF) if neither AD objected. This clause was inserted to allow the UND AD to easily cancel the extension if he felt the scholarship differential was proving insurmountable. Taylor sent the final contract to Thomas to sign. Instead of signing it, he sat on it for months, never telling Taylor that he had changed his mind. Taylor continued to schedule the upcoming season, thinking the date for the UND game was set. Taylor only found out that the game wasn't going to happen when a reporter asked him how he felt about the contract falling through. He wasn't particularly happy. All of this was reported by both the Herald and the Forum.

As for the "it will hurt our playoff chances", that is both true and false. For one year, the DII playoff selection criteria had a loophole that would have "penalized" UND for playing NDSU. The loophole existed because there were so few DI-AA independents at the time, and they were all bad. Accordingly, they were all lumped together as having low value in the playoff selection points system. When UNC, UCD, NDSU & SDSU all moved up, they initially fell into that same category. It took the rulebook a year to catch up and add the Great West to the list of "good" I-AA conferences; the kind with the high point values. Once that happened, the argument that playing NDSU would hurt UND's playoff chances went out the window. There is even a very good chance that Thomas knew the rule change was coming when he refused to sign the contract described in the first paragraph. He still continued to use the invalid argument until he left for the NCC commissioner's job, however. Funny that.

Sorry Geno, didn't mean to strike a nerve.

[dakotadan]

[url=http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=101115&section=News]OUR OPINION: It

[dakotadan]

Talk about revisionist history. The real situation was that Taylor approached Thomas with a 2 year + 2 year contract. Over the phone, the two of them agreed in principle to a two year contract with the first game in Fargo(it was our turn in the rotation) and the second in GF. The contract had an auto-renew clause in it for a second pair of games(Fargo/GF) if neither AD objected. This clause was inserted to allow the UND AD to easily cancel the extension if he felt the scholarship differential was proving insurmountable. Taylor sent the final contract to Thomas to sign. Instead of signing it, he sat on it for months, never telling Taylor that he had changed his mind. Taylor continued to schedule the upcoming season, thinking the date for the UND game was set. Taylor only found out that the game wasn't going to happen when a reporter asked him how he felt about the contract falling through. He wasn't particularly happy. All of this was reported by both the Herald and the Forum.

As for the "it will hurt our playoff chances", that is both true and false. For one year, the DII playoff selection criteria had a loophole that would have "penalized" UND for playing NDSU. The loophole existed because there were so few DI-AA independents at the time, and they were all bad. Accordingly, they were all lumped together as having low value in the playoff selection points system. When UNC, UCD, NDSU & SDSU all moved up, they initially fell into that same category. It took the rulebook a year to catch up and add the Great West to the list of "good" I-AA conferences; the kind with the high point values. Once that happened, the argument that playing NDSU would hurt UND's playoff chances went out the window. There is even a very good chance that Thomas knew the rule change was coming when he refused to sign the contract described in the first paragraph. He still continued to use the invalid argument until he left for the NCC commissioner's job, however. Funny that.

I usually respect your posts hammer, but I think you just broke 3 windows in your own glass house. Every time I see a bison fan post about RT sitting on this 4 year contract, the time frame seems to get longer and longer. And now all of the sudden RT knew what FUTURE NCAA playoff policy was going to be? Bison fans always razz Roger for calling a press conference to announce that UND would not play NDSU anymore in football but never ask Forum Communications why they were doing daily interview requests with RT and asking him the exact same questions about the rivalry everyday. If you want to be pissed at Roger for calling the press conference, you should be just as pissed at your cheerleader rag in Fargo for pressing the issue.

[star2city]

I've said on multiple forums that I believe the timing of the USD site visit is solely due to the Summit basketball tourney in Sioux Falls. I've also posted that I believe that Douple is being proactive in gathering information, but that the league has no immediate plans to expand. Site visits are a lot of work, and the Summit was forced to do three back-to-back-to-back in 2006. This time, I think they want to spread them out. Someone had to go first, and the tourney made it USD. I've also posted that I think the 2011 & 2012 Summit tourneys will be in Fargo, so a team will be here in January 2011. Gee, that will be just after the settlement deadline expires and a bit more than a year before UND becomes playoff eligible. Wow, what a coincidence. Like I said, I could be proven completely wrong in March, but my scenario is just as likely as anything else. Blowing a blood vessel over Douple's decision doesn't do anyone any good until we learn what the Summit's expansion plans actually are. Again, March.

If Douple is just being proactive in gathering information, he would discretely visit USD with a crew of people. With the Summit issuing a press release to announce a visit publicly proclaims a high level of seriousness. Now, if UDS is rejected, USD's Division I aspirations would take a very serious blow because of the press releases already issued: no way hasn't this been thought out and agreed to by Douple, Summit Presidents, and USD well before the press releases. If this was an informal trip with no press releases, then your hopes for a UXD-free Summit might have some legitimacy.

Once the Summit Presidents convene at the Sioux Falls tournament, USD is voted in, and USD gets an invitation. At this point, that's practically written in stone. The only question is the year USD gets in: 2010-2011 or 2011-2012.

For UND, next week the Board will announce the nickname is being dropped, some time thereafter, before summer, UND gets a site visit.

[Hansel]

For UND, next week the Board will announce the nickname is being dropped, some time thereafter, before summer, UND gets a site visit.

Changing your tune a bit? I thought Gene Taylor was going to wield his massive influence to prevent UND from joining the Summit League. Do you think Taylor will also initiate new Summit League policy (through his crony Douple) which would prevent NDSU from playing UND even though they are in the same conference