The Division I Question? New Answer?

[star2city]

From RT

[The Sicatoka]

This is when we should mix in the past comments from UND AD Roger Thomas and UND Faculty Athletic Representative Dr. Phil Harmeson as found in [url="http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=68051

[GCWaters]

Maybe I'm just tired, but I couldn't find anything in the interview about RT talking with the Big Sky...can you tell me where it is?

[IowaBison]

i think it's in his head

i'm sure the BSC would be happy to hear from you guys

[UND92,96]

i think it's in his head

[GCWaters]

Thanks!

[The Sicatoka]

UND92,96 covered most of it.

Let me just add that the BSC recently put out word that it would accept "letters of interest" from interested schools. All that takes is letterhead and a stamp.

[IowaBison]

you guys are using McFeely as a reference?

you are nuts

[IowaBison]

UND92,96 covered most of it.

Let me just add that the BSC recently put out word that it would accept "letters of interest" from interested schools. All that takes is letterhead and a stamp.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

so what you're saying is that RT is the Real Slim Shady?

[UND92,96]

you guys are using McFeely as a reference?

you are nuts 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A reference? No. Just that the theory is not necessarily limited to a few people on this board. Why do you seem so threatened by the fact that perhaps it's possible to seek and obtain a conference affiliation BEFORE moving to dI, just as Carr recommended? Between Harmeson's quotes in McFeely's column and RT's comments in the Dakota Student article, you don't have to read too far between the lines to see what may be going on behind the scenes.

[bisonguy]

If UND is showing interest to the Big Sky (and/or DI, in general), I see a few "issues"-

1) NDSU and SDSU were told last year that the Big Sky was "not looking to expand into the Dakotas at this time". What has changed since last year to make the Big Sky think a little differently? NDSU and SDSU are no longer in their "exploratory year" and are in the first year of the DI reclassification process. The Big Sky was previously burned by a school that promised it was moving to DI, but backed down at the last minute. The commitment to DI has to be made before they will take any school seriously (as evidenced by the 'newfound' interest in the Dakota schools)

2) Tick-tock, tick-tock, the clock is running. With the 18 month notification required by the NCC, UND is already three years behind the reclassification process of SDSU and NDSU. Would the Big Sky be willing to wait that long if they're looking to announce expansion plans in April 2005? Would any Big Sky presidents be willing to waste their time considering a school that won't be available to make the jump for a few years, and might not even be serious?

3) Those 'other' sports- track and cross country. Doug Fullerton has repeatedly stated that track and cross country are extremely important to the Big Sky schools, as that's the sport they are most competitive at on the DI level. I know that NDSU and SDSU have very strong track and cross country programs, how about UND?(seriously, not a rhetorical question)

[The Sicatoka]

Conference before move? Tough? Yes. Impossible? No.

The political aspects? Campus-wise, if you've dealt, or are dealing, with other issues important to the faculty you're ahead of the game. (Recent salary actions for faculty and staff outpaced regional schools. There's a great start.) Community-wise even RT admitted he's hearing both sides of the issue. State board-wise this is a local control issue, right?

As far as UND being able to quietly work on, then unveil, something major: One day they called a press conference; soon after they had $100 million hockey facility. That's pretty good at being quiet behind the scenes yet working on something big.

I'm pretty sure Dr. Harmeson and Mr. Thomas are working on a strategic plan for what is best for the University of North Dakota. What they determine is best for the institution, well, that's why they have the jobs.

[The Sicatoka]

bisonguy:

About 1: Who knows the motivations for the BSC's past or present statements. Maybe the right schools weren't showing interest and that's why they weren't looking east before now. Which schools are showing interest now? We know the public statements of a few. Others? Only Fullerton knows if there are.

About 2: Buy-out clause.

About 3: T&CC? I bet a new indoor training facility with a 300 meter track would help UND's teams. I've read that somewhere. Where was that?

Then again, maybe the BSC isn't the right place for UND. Maybe UND should look at conferences that have schools with three major revenue producing areas: basketball, football, and hockey. With all the recent and potential shake-ups in conference alignments who knows what may be out there in the not-so-distant future.

[bisonguy]

About 3: T&CC? I bet a new indoor training facility with a 300 meter track would help UND's teams. I've read that somewhere. Where was that?

Facilities=Success?

How did NDSU have the most dominant NCC track programs with what has been called a not-so-great BSA?

[jimdahl]

Then again, maybe the BSC isn't the right place for UND. Maybe UND should look at conferences that have schools with three major revenue producing areas: basketball, football, and hockey. With all the recent and potential shake-ups in conference alignments who knows what may be out there in the not-so-distant future.

There were certainly hints of that in RT's interview quoted above. He went out of his way to point out that our conference now more than ever contains schools whose athletics resemble UND's. The biggest difference between our athletic department and those schools that left the NCC is that hockey is our #1 sport (both in fans and revenue); as RT said, UND is in a little bit different spot since our #1 sport is already DI.

Clearly any talk of UND approaching Big Sky right now is pure speculation (save for a privileged few); however, I think there is still a big story hiding here, and that is definite confirmation from RT that they're studying DI. That's something we all kind of knew, but had never really seen in print before; good to know they're considering their options.

[Smoggy]

The problem with your argument can be summed up in one word: Faculty. In the minds of most faculty, THEY are the university--not the president, not the vp's, not the deans...the idea that the administration is there to determine what's best for the institution is a paternalistic (sp?) notion that most faculty reject. You can agree with this or not, you can argue that it shouldn't be this way, but it generally is. Yes, the administration is there to guide the institution, but it takes faculty buy-in to make that guidance work. Building a new facility isn't the same thing. Going up a division isn't the sort of thing that an administration can spring on the faculty as a "surprise! Guess what we did last summer!" kind of move--not if they want the move to work. I'm not saying the UND administration won't try such a move, just that, if they're as good as you say they are, they'll know better....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's been my experience that the faculty that would be complaining hate sports to begin with. So why would it matter if UND surprised the faculty by going DI? It shouldn't change research money. It won't force them to be better professors. Why would they care?

[Smoggy]

It's not a matter of folks complaining or not complaining, its a matter of them being involved...universities are founded on that principle--they're not dictatorships or monarchies and most administrators understand that. Again, I'm not saying that the UND administration would try this--just the opposite, that they won't, and that faculty input and involvment will be a part of the process...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe I've missed something along the way. I know NDSU fans have talked about going DI helping academics, but I just don't see it. The only link I see between academics and athletics is that the athletes need good grades to play. Why would faculty of academics matter in a move that only involves athletics?

[The Sicatoka]

Faculty?

Kupchella has been insistent and persistent that the faculty has come first. That's why he's been more focused on other (not athletics) aspects of campus, one big one being faculty salaries. UND faculty salaries, the biggest issue to the faculty, have increased by 25% since 2000. (4.8%, 7.1%, 6.2%, and 5%, from 2000-2003)

Kupchella's is working on elevating UND from the academic side first. He's pushed through his higher admissions standard for automatic acceptance. (That's another faculty issue.) That, academics first, is a different approach from other regional universities: Some of those schools claim elevating athletics will elevate the university. In the case of admission standards, those are something that college presidents look at very closely when choosing new schools to associate with (i.e. conference members).

The Kupchella Administration has looked to the academic (faculty) issues first. Then, as can be easily inferred by recent statements by his immediate staff, will the other aspects of the university (athletics) be dealt with.

However, the athletics side of UND hasn't been "treading water" through this time when the UND Administration has had an academics focus: Betty Engelstad Sioux Center, DI womens hockey, moving into The Alerus Center and Ralph Engelstad Arena, planning a new indoor training facility.

Kupchella's made some points with the faculty. Let's see how he decides to use them.

[The Sicatoka]

Facilities=Success?

How did NDSU have the most dominant NCC track programs with what has been called a not-so-great BSA?

I said help.

NDSU has focused on track. UND has focused on hockey. Want to compare "big time" successes in focus areas over the last 25 years?

[UND92,96]

Facilities=Success?

How did NDSU have the most dominant NCC track programs with what has been called a not-so-great BSA?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At least for track, the BSA is adequate. When I ran track in high school, and I believe it's still the case, we had three meets per year there, including the EDC and the unofficial state indoor. We didn't run at all at Hyslop after my junior year, and it has been many, many years since a college meet has been held there. In short, Hyslop is a terribly inadequate indoor track.

I think that NDSU's track success compared to UND is a combination of UND having essentially no indoor track compared to an adequate one at NDSU, and NDSU likely spending a lot more money on their programs compared to UND. Until UND has an indoor track, it's probably pointless to consider offering the maximum number of scholarships, at least on the men's side.

[tony]

Hey Sicatoka, I'm not going to come here and list all the reasons going DI won't work for UND. I hope other NDSU folks extend the same courtesy. You could return the favor by not smirking about NDSU who, unlike other universities in the region, has had a minimum ACT score of 21 for years (see how annoying that is?)

Enough of that. If UND is studying DI, when are they going to going to go public?

And Jim, when is the DI-AA forum coming back ?

[The Sicatoka]

tony:

You assumed whom I had in mind. It could any one of numerous schools in the region who have attempted to raise the profile of their school by advancing athletics over academics.

But since you mentioned NDSU, from their own webpage it says, "An ACT composite score of 21 or higher or SAT score of 970 or higher is recommended." (emphasis added) That's not a minimum.

As far "public", UND has a history of not engaging in public discusssions of issues until they have a very good handle on the variables.

[tony]

OK, The Sicatoka, I'll bite. Which schools were you talking about when you said that other schools in the area are trying to elevate their university through athletics alone? That's a pretty damning statement to make. Enlighten me, Talks Like A Snake Crawls.

When do you think UND will go public with its plans or do you think the first time we'll hear about it is after the deed is done?

And, again, if UND does go DI, I'd sure like to see the DI-AA board - it would provide hyster... I mean historical perspective on the issue

[DamStrait]

And Jim, when is the DI-AA forum coming back ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

tony, if you want a D-IAA forum, create it on your own on bisonville.com, and quit polluting this board with your presence.

[dakotadan]

Is the UND administration supposed to put up a billboard in the middle of campus everytime they are considering something? no. Just because RT has slightly hinted (and I stress slightly) that they could possibly be considering it doesn't mean they need to let every person on siousports.com (or bisonville) know about it. The athletic department could possibly be considering it, but until they make some definate steps towards the move we don't need to know every closed door conversation. It's not like UND is just going to announce one day "oh yeah, we are going DI next week." As far as faculty, they will know just like everyone else when the time is right IF something is being considered.

GO SIOUX

(GO DI that is!!)