The Clock is ticking on NCAA Pres Mark Emmert

[star2city]

Mark Emmert is the new NCAA president, and his view on the NCAA's earlier decision to become a social gerrymandering organization is not known. Currently, with the NCAA facing numerous cheating scandals that threaten the very fabric of the NCAA as an organization (and invite political intervention from Congress), is the NCAA willing to buck a state law?

Emmert may have found the NCAA ruling on nicknames distasteful or beyond the realm of the NCAA's responsibilities, in contrast with Myles Brand, who wholeheartedly was anti-Indian nickname.

With a change in top executive, there very well may be a change in vision. Just the mere fact that Emmert is going to Bismarck, rather than requiring the State officials go to Indianapolis, seems to indicate that there is an openness for understanding with the legislature's position.

A sampling of articles just in the past day:

Times-Picayune - Clock is ticking

I'm sure the last thing NCAA president Mark Emmert wanted to be talking about Thursday afternoon was the outbreak of scandal that has rocked intercollegiate sports.

Emmert knows the house needs some spring cleaning. I'm not sure how he's going to do it, but he absolutely has to because the organization's credibility - what little credibility it still has - is on the line.

In just the last week, we've learned Fiesta Bowl representatives have misappropriated funds and that the bowl might be stripped of its BCS bowl status; former Auburn players say they were paid to play; and a trainer allegedly shopped the services of former LSU cornerback Patrick Peterson.

Add that on top of the mess at Ohio State with Coach Jim Tressel, the ongoing investigation into former Auburn quarterback Cam Newton and his family, the fact that Oregon paid $25,000 to the trainer (Willie Lyles) who allegedly shopped Peterson, the recent firing of Tennessee basketball coach Bruce Pearl for lying to the NCAA, North Carolina football players being suspended last season for receiving improper benefits last offseason and probably 10 or 15 more cases that haven't been mentioned here, and you'd understand if Emmert has begun to wonder why he even wanted the job.

"The single biggest concern that I have among the threats to the collegiate model is simply the threat of integrity," Emmert said. "I've heard concerns expressed by people all around the country about the integrity of intercollegiate athletics right now, that people are seeing things that they don't like and that I don't like and that many people are concerned about."

CBS: Emmert on making NCAA clean again

Houston Chronicle: NCAA President admits prevention of cheating needs work

ESPN: NCAA President addresses integrity

Is the NCAA going to focus on cheating, or on social engineering?

The NCAA may be at it's most vulnerable time now politically. Can the NCAA afford to antagonize a whole state's congressional representation, when others are calling for congressional hearings?

[Unknown Siouxldier]

Mark Emmert is the new NCAA president, and his view on the NCAA's earlier decision to become a social gerrymandering organization is not known. Currently, with the NCAA facing numerous cheating scandals that threaten the very fabric of the NCAA as an organization (and invite political intervention from Congress), is the NCAA willing to buck a state law?

Emmert may have found the NCAA ruling on nicknames distasteful or beyond the realm of the NCAA's responsibilities, in contrast with Myles Brand, who wholeheartedly was anti-Indian nickname.

With a change in top executive, there very well may be a change in vision. Just the mere fact that Emmert is going to Bismarck, rather than requiring the State officials go to Indianapolis, seems to indicate that there is an openness for understanding with the legislature's position.

A sampling of articles just in the past day:

Times-Picayune - Clock is ticking

CBS: Emmert on making NCAA clean again

Houston Chronicle: NCAA President admits prevention of cheating needs work

ESPN: NCAA President addresses integrity

Is the NCAA going to focus on cheating, or on social engineering?

Salient post and nice research.

[ScottM]

Mark Emmert is the new NCAA president, and his view on the NCAA's earlier decision to become a social gerrymandering organization is not known. Currently, with the NCAA facing numerous cheating scandals that threaten the very fabric of the NCAA as an organization (and invite political intervention from Congress), is the NCAA willing to buck a state law?

Emmert may have found the NCAA ruling on nicknames distasteful or beyond the realm of the NCAA's responsibilities, in contrast with Myles Brand, who wholeheartedly was anti-Indian nickname.

With a change in top executive, there very well may be a change in vision. Just the mere fact that Emmert is going to Bismarck, rather than requiring the State officials go to Indianapolis, seems to indicate that there is an openness for understanding with the legislature's position.

A sampling of articles just in the past day:

Times-Picayune - Clock is ticking

CBS: Emmert on making NCAA clean again

Houston Chronicle: NCAA President admits prevention of cheating needs work

ESPN: NCAA President addresses integrity

Is the NCAA going to focus on cheating, or on social engineering?

The NCAA may be at it's most vulnerable time now politically. Can the NCAA afford to antagonize a whole state's congressional representation, when others are calling for congressional hearings?

Check out HBO's recent spot on the NC$$ dealing with its concept of amatuerism.

HBO

The NC$$ could care less about Bismarck. If the NoDak congressional delegation in DC had its act together we might get a different result, witness what happened with Florida State and Utah right after the H&A list came out. People are wasting their time directly emails and calls to Bismarck. Call DC.

[darell1976]

Mark Emmert is the new NCAA president, and his view on the NCAA's earlier decision to become a social gerrymandering organization is not known. Currently, with the NCAA facing numerous cheating scandals that threaten the very fabric of the NCAA as an organization (and invite political intervention from Congress), is the NCAA willing to buck a state law?

Emmert may have found the NCAA ruling on nicknames distasteful or beyond the realm of the NCAA's responsibilities, in contrast with Myles Brand, who wholeheartedly was anti-Indian nickname.

With a change in top executive, there very well may be a change in vision. Just the mere fact that Emmert is going to Bismarck, rather than requiring the State officials go to Indianapolis, seems to indicate that there is an openness for understanding with the legislature's position.

A sampling of articles just in the past day:

Times-Picayune - Clock is ticking

CBS: Emmert on making NCAA clean again

Houston Chronicle: NCAA President admits prevention of cheating needs work

ESPN: NCAA President addresses integrity

Is the NCAA going to focus on cheating, or on social engineering?

The NCAA may be at it's most vulnerable time now politically. Can the NCAA afford to antagonize a whole state's congressional representation, when others are calling for congressional hearings?

That is why they need the Spirit Lake Tribe represented at the meeting.

[The Sicatoka]

The NCAA's biggest fears right now would be:

- to be declared "for profit"

- to face a real anti-trust action

- to be declared a "public actor"

Those would all come Federally, not from Bismarck.

[rockybison]

The NC$$ will be looking for a victory. UND had 6 years to sort this out and has done nothing.

[Knickball2]

And we'll take six more years to sort it out if need be, so go support your thieving football team.....

[star2city]

The NCAA's biggest fears right now would be:

- to be declared "for profit"

- to face a real anti-trust action

- to be declared a "public actor"

Those would all come Federally, not from Bismarck.

The legislation also includes the potential of an anti-trust suit. Even if there is only a 1% chance of the State of ND winning, that 1% is totally unacceptable risk to the NCAA.

[rockybison]

so you're saying there's a chance!!!!!!! yes

[rockybison]

The NC$$ doesnt need to go to court. They will just say goodbye. Then you can schedule home and homes against crookston, again

t

[SiouxFanatic]

The NC$$ doesnt need to go to court. They will just say goodbye. Then you can schedule home and homes against crookston, again

So this is what bison fans do on their free time. Your trolling and baiting unfortunately sucks yet you still get fed though.

[ringneck28]

Why wouldn't they invite the leader from the Spirit Lake tribe. I pulled this from todays Bismarck tribune.

Shaft said the meeting's purpose was "first, to determine the NCAA's position with respect to the newly signed legislation. Second, to explore any and all opportunities at resolving the matter."

Shaft said Dalrymple, Kelley, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, UND athletics director Brian Faison and William Goetz, chancellor of the state university system, have been invited, as have Carlson and Sen. Bob Stenehjem, R-Bismarck, the Senate's majority leader.

Seems like they should invite Spirit Lake to this too.

[coach daddy]

The NC$$ doesnt need to go to court. They will just say goodbye. Then you can schedule home and homes against crookston, again

This from a guy whose team played Morgan St. last fall and this year they play Lafayette and St. Francis!!! I must have missed the playoff games they were in last year.

[star2city]

Why wouldn't they invite the leader from the Spirit Lake tribe. I pulled this from todays Bismarck tribune.

Shaft said the meeting's purpose was "first, to determine the NCAA's position with respect to the newly signed legislation. Second, to explore any and all opportunities at resolving the matter."

Shaft said Dalrymple, Kelley, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, UND athletics director Brian Faison and William Goetz, chancellor of the state university system, have been invited, as have Carlson and Sen. Bob Stenehjem, R-Bismarck, the Senate's majority leader.

Seems like they should invite Spirit Lake to this too.

If they invite Spirit Lake, Standing Rock will probably insist on being there too.

More and more, the idea that Emmert is coming to Bismarck indicates that the NCAA has a major concern about the legislature's actions and potential lawsuit. In the previous lawsuit, which wasn't anti-trust, Myles Brand just laughed at ND from his Indianapolis office. An NCAA President would never ever journey to Bismarck unless the NCAA had a major legal and political concern.

I wouldn't be surprised if the NCAA extended the lawsuit settlement for 10 or 15 years, just to save face (and hope Standing Rock approves during that time.) The anti-trust lawsuit has to be avoided at practically any cost, as the consequences of losing are just too great, even if the risk of losing is small.

The NCAA has accomplished much of it's original goal: wiping out Indian nicknames at NCAA schools. Only a few remain out of the 20 or so original names (Flor St, CMU, Utah, Ms College) remain with feathers removed from others (Bradley Braves).

[dakota fairways]

If they invite Spirit Lake, Standing Rock will probably insist on being there too.

And they should be invited. Don't be afraid of them, include them, especially those whose voice was not heard by the tribal council, like Archie Fool Bear.

More and more, the idea that Emmert is coming to Bismarck indicates that the NCAA has a major concern about the legislature's actions and potential lawsuit. In the previous lawsuit, which wasn't anti-trust, Myles Brand just laughed at ND from his Indianapolis office. An NCAA President would never ever journey to Bismarck unless the NCAA had a major legal and political concern.

I wouldn't be surprised if the NCAA extended the lawsuit settlement for 10 or 15 years, just to save face (and hope Standing Rock approves during that time.) The anti-trust lawsuit has to be avoided at practically any cost, as the consequences of losing are just too great, even if the risk of losing is small.

Yes, the NCAA is showing that they want to reach a conclusion on this matter by being accomodative to the legislators' needs. Their actions are very encouraging. The discouraging actions are those being taken by UND's administration and the SBoHE.

The NCAA has accomplished much of it's original goal: wiping out Indian nicknames at NCAA schools. Only a few remain out of the 20 or so original names (Flor St, CMU, Utah, Ms College) remain with feathers removed from others (Bradley Braves).

This is why the voices of the tribal members should be heard. Their support should be heard. Why should the NCAA hear only from the white people? Invite Eunice Davidson, Myra Pearson, Archie Fool Bear, Charles Murphy. Ask Mr Murphy why the voice of the tribal members has been suppressed. Let the NCAA hear the depth of the support the name has among the Sioux. Mr Shaft is afraid to let the voice of the tribal members be heard out of fear that the SBoHE's discriminatory position will be exposed.

I have visited with a member of Standing Rock at length about this nickname issue, and she can not understand what the NCAA is doing meddling with the nickname in the first place. She was thoroughly convinced that if the tribal members (especially those who live on the ND side of the reservation), and not the South Dakota controlled tribal council, voted on the nickname, it would pass overwhelmingly.

[bisonh8er]

I actually totally disagree with inviting standing rock. They already have said many times they don't want any part of the name situation so now when its in the tribal councils interest to come I say don't let them. They made their bed let them sleep in in. I would invite Spirit Lake though because they have been actively involved since the beginning.

[siouxfaninseattle]

I wouldn't count on Emmert being more likely to see the nickname in a positive light. His last job was at UW, and there's a lot of liberlism there.

Invite Standing Rock? I completely disagree. The leaders have been as anti-nickname as anyone, and have not allowed the members of the tribe to have their say. Why should they be allowed to participate now that the legislature has put the nickname into law? The question has moved from what to do with the nickname to what should we do to make sure we can keep the nickname.

[Sioux-cia]

I disagree and agree with those who don't want reps from SR at the meeting. This meeting is, or should be, about keeping the name and logo. Members of the SR dictatorship council should not be invited. Members who support the name who have not been allowed to vote on the issue should be invited to the table.

[dagies]

The problem with inviting anyone from Standing Rock is that they have an official stance, to this point, against the nickname. Bring Standing Rock supporters who cannot speak officially for the Tribe, only looks like you are cherry picking.

All of the other representatives there are officials of parties involved from North Dakota's side of the table. I don't think you can just bring someone unofficial in an expect that to carry any weight. In fact, I think it might hurt the perception of your position.

On the other hand, Spirit Lake officially approved use of the nickname, having their representatives there in an official capacity holds weight.

[bisonh8er]

I don't know whether to be excited about the meeting or scared. I'm excited because the NCAA president is coming and he knows he doesn't have the weight that our legislation does. Couple that with the fact that he has his hands full as it is with everything else going wrong in the eyes of the nation with the NCAA. I just don't think he has the will to fight another battle and he might fold. However, it worries me that Grant Shaft, Kelly, and those likes are at the meeting simply for their seemingly anti Sioux stance. Some of me does think that won't matter because Carlson is going to be present and I think he would have a $h!t fit if they aren't fully committed to keeping the name. Hopefully all goes well and hopefully Shaft pulls his head out and offers a seat at the table for a rep from Spirit Lake. Just do what it takes to keep the name and keep us of the sanctions list! Make your school, fans, and state proud and be considered saviors, or lose it and lose any backing you currently have from the public. Whether they like it or not there is a good chance their jobs depends on keeping the name. That is my opinion but when push comes to shove losing the name would piss a lot of people off and those people won't soon forget the names of the people that didn't get the job done.

[Sioux-cia]

The problem with inviting anyone from Standing Rock is that they have an official stance, to this point, against the nickname. Bring Standing Rock supporters who cannot speak officially for the Tribe, only looks like you are cherry picking.

All of the other representatives there are officials of parties involved from North Dakota's side of the table. I don't think you can just bring someone unofficial in an expect that to carry any weight. In fact, I think it might hurt the perception of your position.

On the other hand, Spirit Lake officially approved use of the nickname, having their representatives there in an official capacity holds weight.

I hear what your saying but I still think it's important to have a pro-name and logo representative from SR. It's important to let the NC$$ know that there are many on SR that are pro-name and logo but the council (of six? eight?) won't allow a vote even though more than a thousand tribal members petitioned to be allowed to vote on the issue.

[MoSiouxFan]

If they invite Spirit Lake, Standing Rock will probably insist on being there too.

More and more, the idea that Emmert is coming to Bismarck indicates that the NCAA has a major concern about the legislature's actions and potential lawsuit. In the previous lawsuit, which wasn't anti-trust, Myles Brand just laughed at ND from his Indianapolis office. An NCAA President would never ever journey to Bismarck unless the NCAA had a major legal and political concern.

I wouldn't be surprised if the NCAA extended the lawsuit settlement for 10 or 15 years, just to save face (and hope Standing Rock approves during that time.) The anti-trust lawsuit has to be avoided at practically any cost, as the consequences of losing are just too great, even if the risk of losing is small.

The NCAA has accomplished much of it's original goal: wiping out Indian nicknames at NCAA schools. Only a few remain out of the 20 or so original names (Flor St, CMU, Utah, Ms College) remain with feathers removed from others (Bradley Braves).

I think the pro-nicknamers are finally holding some of the cards, but I am really concerned that, due to the mixture of pro-nicknamers and neutral or anti-nicknamers in the North Dakota delegation, that the North Dakota delegation won't push the case for keeping the nickname aggressively enough. This may be our last shot, so it needs to be a good one. I think they really need to go on the offensive.

[petey23]

Invite the people or a spokesperson from the group that put the petition together to explain what is actually going on at standing rock and also maybe a tribal historian who can explain the significance of and the binding agreement they made with UND leaders with the "pipe" ceremony .

[jodcon]

I don't know whether to be excited about the meeting or scared. I'm excited because the NCAA president is coming and he knows he doesn't have the weight that our legislation does. Couple that with the fact that he has his hands full as it is with everything else going wrong in the eyes of the nation with the NCAA. I just don't think he has the will to fight another battle and he might fold. However, it worries me that Grant Shaft, Kelly, and those likes are at the meeting simply for their seemingly anti Sioux stance. Some of me does think that won't matter because Carlson is going to be present and I think he would have a $h!t fit if they aren't fully committed to keeping the name. Hopefully all goes well and hopefully Shaft pulls his head out and offers a seat at the table for a rep from Spirit Lake. Just do what it takes to keep the name and keep us of the sanctions list! Make your school, fans, and state proud and be considered saviors, or lose it and lose any backing you currently have from the public. Whether they like it or not there is a good chance their jobs depends on keeping the name. That is my opinion but when push comes to shove losing the name would piss a lot of people off and those people won't soon forget the names of the people that didn't get the job done.

I don't think there's any reason to be scared about this meeting, to me this is a second chance I didn't see coming until the legislation was passed. After this meeting either the nickname will go away once and for all, which we all expected, or something better will happen, which we had pretty much lost hope of. Short of being stuck back on the H&A list if both parties do opt to test the legal waters again, which would surprise me, I don't see much of a downside for the supporters...the horse wasn't totally dead but it was on life support.

One thing I have to correct though is the NCAA does carry more weight than any other dog in this fight, regardless of the stance of the state/SBHE, the university, Spirit Lake, or the fans, the NCAA has the final trump card in the hole and can say, "Nah, this is what we want or else..." and that will probably be it. And up until now it seemed like that was the only way it was going to play out.

BUT...all of a sudden the new NCAA president decides to come to ND and have a roundtable discussion about the issue. And what I can't get my mind wrapped around is why? Is he coming to lay down the law and give a "You guys already agreed to this and if you try to backslide and take us to court we're going to do this and this and this and this and make your life hell until you settle again" speech? Does he truly have a desire to try to appease the masses and try to salvage the nickname? Is he testing the waters with the SBHE and whatever legislators they round up to gauge if they have the stones to throw down once more? Or if they really want to save it at all or are just trying to save face for their re-election chances? I wish I knew what was going around and around in Emmert's mind, because until we know that the rest of this is just one big grey area.

One thing is sure, if representatives from the two Tribes are not asked to attend the best we can hope for is that this meeting is a feeling out process... the NCAA doesn't need the Tribes in attendance to make a bunch of non-compliance threats and that would be the only other reason they would be coming without having the Tribes in attendance.

[bisonh8er]

The thing is though the NCAA still has to abide by the law that why I say they don't have the weight legislation does. The state could use the argument that by not allowing the name the NCAA is a private entity. If that would happen the NCAA would have to fold like a house of cards because they would have to be taxed like any other private entity and the NCAA will do anything to avoid that. That is the NCAA ultimate nightmare. I just think that if they NCAA wasn't willing to actually have dialogue then the president wouldn't becoming. I think one of his gremlins would be doing that dirty work. I think the NCAA will just say alright enough is enough we have enough to deal with invloving the Fiesta Bowl, concerns about paying players, and concerns about these colleges apparently paying athletes. The nickname is just another thing they don't need and in comparison to the other events I just don't think they really care all that much. Hopefully they say we got the closest tribes approval, like Florida State and thats that. (best case scenario)