NCAA press conference

[jimdahl]

It's about 20 meg and 40 minutes, you can listen yourself, but here's a summary.

This is not a transcript, its my summary, you may NOT reproduce it elsewhere, but may link to it. A good 80% of the questions were about UND -- they get progressively more combative.

Dr. Walter Harrison, President of University of Hartford, Chair of Executive Committee

Dr. Myles Brand, President of the NCAA

Dr. Bernard Frankling, NCAA

Harrison:

Primary purpose of the Native American mascot policy is to maintain NCAA championships as an environment that provides an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. The policy is grounded in the NCAA principles of sportsmanship and non-discrimination but also balances the principle of institutional control and responsibility. In this regard, the policy does not mandate that an institution discontinue the use of native american mascots, nicknames, or imagery on its campus, but instead preserves the sanctity of the NCAA championship site by precluding institutions that use such imagery from hosting championship events and requiring institutions to eliminate such references on uniforms and paraphernalia when participating in an NCAA championship. That is frequently misunderstood.

...

The executive committee sustained the staff decisions in three of the four cases, Illinois, North Dakota, and IUP were retained on the list. The executive committee determine that none of the thread provided sufficient evidence that the staff had misapplied the policy the executive committee established in 2005.

...

The executive committe continues to believe that its policy regarding the use of native american nicknames, mascots and imagery is the correct one. In fact, today the executive committee approved extending that policy to off campus sites that host championship events. The policy has resulted in additional institutions dropping such practices entirely and has clearly provided a national conversation on the associations values of respect and non-discrimination. In many cases the policy has resulted in new instances of conversation between institutions of higher education and the Native American community and its enhanced the level of sensitivity to Native American issues among the general public.

Four institutions have been removed from the list because they had namesake approval.

Q. You said North Dakota's argument was not persuasive, why not?

A. I'm not sure I can do justice to the entire argument, but the University had a number of arguments in its appeal. We considered them all carefully, considered the NCAA staff's response, and in the end thought the University had failed to make a case to have it removed from the list.

Q. Are there incidents the NCAA has recorded where it appears to be hostile and abusive?

A. Today's decision was to review whether the staff's original decision was the right one. We tried to confine ourselves to that. We believe the use of the Fighting Sioux and the mascots and imagery that represents are hostile and abusive and we don't believe the University has made a case to the contrary.

Q. Illinoi's appeal argued institutional autonomy. Are member schools not allowed to govern themselves under this rule?

A. That's why I read the policy at the beginning. The NCAA policy extends to its own championship events. The Universities can do what they want on their campuses, but the NCAA has the responsibility to ensure that championships have the right atmosphere for all students participating.

Q. Why is it right for the NCAA to get into sociological or political arguments?

A. (Myles Brand) The NCAA has the responsibility to ensure its own events are conducted with sportsmanship and respect for all. The action keeps with past actions and future actions to ensure games are respectful.

Q. What would it take for North Dakota to make a sustainable case.

A. Our decision is final. That's a moot question. They made a case, we considered it, and decided the staff made an appropriate decision.

Q. Regarding Illinois, the Chief doesn't appear in logo form or dance at NCAA tournament events. Why is Illinois not allowed to host tournaments?

A. This isn't a decision we made today. The policy was approved last August. ... About where the mascot appears, we'd rather not split hairs and therefore decided that the policy pertains in this case.

Q. I assume there has been no second guessing about if this was a good road for the NCAA to go down?

A. (Brand) Yes, it's consistent in that regard. The Boards that have discussed it have been consistent from the beginning. Each recommendation has been unanimously passed by the executive committee.

Q. Could you clairfy the expansion into off campus venues?

A. Some venues used by Universities, whether a public venue or nearby the campus, has some objectionable markings. Championships will only be held at venues that are respectful of all persons, including Native Americans.

Q. You said the policy has resulted in the start of a national conversation about respect and discrimination and started some new conversations between schools and tribes, do you have an opinion about where the future of that discussion ought to go?

A. We hope through continued consideration by all involved parties that all social interactions will take place with great respect for all parties involved.

Q. Could you expand on UND's appeal?

A. This appeal was really limited. What we reviewed was extensive materials, but only focused on whether these schools, had they made a case that would rebut the position that nicknames, mascots, and imagery create hostile and abusive environments. We concluded that they had failed to rebut that position. Very limited focus, lots of material to look at and things to consider, but we were only considering if North Dakota had rebutted the position that the nicknames, mascots and imagery created a hostile and abusive environment.

Q. What would be your advice to UND moving forward?

A. The institution must make its own decision about how its moving forward. The NCAA has made a definitive ruling about it intends to conduct its championships.

Q. Did you consider any of the petitions regarding North Dakota?

A. Yes. There were letters received from a variety of people with a variety of opinions. We carefully considered them as we considered all the material that was brought before us. In particular, we received three letters regarding UND in the last day or two. One from Fool Bear, one Kupchella, one His Horse is Thunder. All three involved whether the tribe had endorsed the use of the name and having reviewed them very carefully, we were persuaded by His Horse Is Thunder, particularly because he is chair of the tribe, that the council had passed a resolution which requests UND discontinue use of its nickname and logo. That was new evidence and was very helpful in reaching this conclusion.

Q. You've said these decisions are final. Say a University files a lawsuit, can you comment on that?

A. Of course there's always the opportunity for an institution to seek remedies in the courts. The NCAA feels very confident in its position and will defend it.

Q. You said there wasn't much discussion in the appeals. Was this appeals process flawed? Was it ad hoc?

A. What I thought I said was that we had a very extensive review of the material. I had to FedEx them to myself because I couldn't carry them on the airplane. I'm sure each member of the committee reviewed them carefully. We tried to limit ourselves to the question of if the schools rebutted that their use of imagery created hostile and abusive environments. It took at least an hour to reach these decisions.

Q. The DOJ report said everything was ok with the Chief. Did you consider that?

A. There was a lot of evidence on all sides of the issue, particularly with Illinois and North Dakota. There were a lot of things we considered supplementary, but we feel the staff made the correct decision.

Q. You didn't answer my question, what role did that document play?

A. We didn't find it compelling. I'm trying to say as carefully as I can, we considered it, we didn't find it a compelling reason to remove the school.

Q. Even though it was a report from the U.S. government?

A. A lot of people had opinions, we considered them all, but made our decision about our own championships.

Q. Aren't you handing down moral decisions?

A. The NCAA has the obligation and responsibility to ensure that its championships are conducted in a way that respect sportsmanship and respect the points of view and ethnicity of its players.

Q. You went over this, but we're having a hard time understanding what happens if UND doesn't drop the Sioux nickname?

A. They don't have to. We're asking only that our championships and venues in which they take place have respect for all and dignity for every person and to the extent that UND will participate in championships, we expect that of them.

Q. If they had different uniforms, they could still play in a championship?

A. Yes. Their appeals weren't based on anything like that? That's a hypothetical question. They don't show any interest in that.

Q. Is there a loophole where they can just wear a different uniform for that?

A. If they carry none of the nicknames, images, pictures, dancers, as long as none of that appears, its permitted. They have made no indication they want to move in that direction.

Q. Can they keep the Fighting Sioux nickname, but then change just during a championship?

A. Yes. But we have no evidence that they would pursue that line. It's hypothetical. Nor would we permit UND to host on its campus or other venues while they maintain these nicknames.

Q. The administration could approach you with that deal?

A. We expect UND to obey the rules, including this one.

Q. If the tribes were to give approval down the road, would the decision change?

A. There are a number of Federally recognized tribes in the area. It would involve a different set of facts. We can't respond to a different set of facts at this point.

Q. So if the tribes changed their mind down the road, that wouldn't change things?

A. That's hypothetical and the context in which that occurred would play a role.

Q. What action can Illinois take? Where do they stand now with away championship games?

A. Illinois has exhausted its appeals. If they are to participate in championships away from campus and they follow our rules, all the names and symbols are absent, they are permitted to participate.

Q. If the don't do that they can't participate?

A. Correct. Official members of the University Party -- students, cheerleaders, bands can't have those symbols. We have no rules about fans because of freedom of speech.

Q. There's been a lot said about recognizing institutional autonomy. Doesn't this policy attempt to change institutional behavior?

A. (Brand) It's important that an institution think through how they respect every person. We believe that conversation should take place on each campus. We expect over time institutions will reach appropriate decsions. We hope we've opened up a dialog, frankly, that reaches beyond higher education to other parts of our culture and society in the way we deal with native americans. We don't have the power to make those decisions for others, but we hope rational conversation and respectful treatment and moral considerations will come into play as people make their own decisions.

Q. But aren't you telling them what you think they should do?

A. I was very clear, we expect that as an outcome of that conversation respect for every human being will take place. I believe that people have moral positions on these issues and understand what it means to respect every person and with rational discourse people will reach the right decisions. Recall that my discipline is philosophy.

Q. You've dealt with leaders from a number of institutions on this now, perhaps you're able to draw some conclusions about leadership at Universities around the country. What characterizes the differences between leaders that have accepted the policy and changed the name, and schools like UND that have appealed, resisted, and criticized you publicly?

A. Every leader has been a person of good will. They have different contexts and sets of historical experiences, personal and otherwise, that they're dealing with. That's what happens when you have public conversations about these issues with moral undertones.

Q. Paraphrase again why UND was not able to sustain the appeal and why was His Horse is Thunder's appeal more persuasive.

A. That's not what I said. UND failed to rebut the position that the nicknames, mascots, and imagery created a hostile and abusive environment. We found that the staff had correctly ruled in that case. Referring to the letter, I was referencing it show that one of the letters we received helped us clarify a situation whether the tribe had endorsed the use of the name. His letter struck us to be very compelling that the tribe had passed a resolution asking the University to discontinue the use of the nickname. It's our intention to post that letter on our website so you can see exactly what he said.

Q. If any UND teams in the Spring make the post-season, will they have to immediately look for new uniforms?

A. Institutions have until 2007-08 to transition to new uniforms.

[Sioux-cia]

Sounds to me like Myles is threading deep water and barely keeping himself afloat.

[Goon]

Miles is a Baffoon, you can see he definately Hates UND or the fact that the School is pushing him hard. I hope we take this weasle to court and win this for good. Then we can shut him up and his pompus do good attitude. They have definately way over stepped his bounds.

[Uncle_Rico]

Wow, it looks like the reporters were giving the "The Three Stooges" a really hard time with their questions and the Stooges pretty much danced around every one of them. Somebody pitch a tent over this circus.

[Sioux-cia]

Wow, it looks like the reporters were giving the "The Three Stooges" a really hard time with their questions and the Stooges pretty much danced around every one of them. Somebody pitch a tent over this circus.

Wayne Stenejhm, ND State's Attorney, was quoted on the 9 o'clock news as saying the NC$$ is on shaking legal ground and he is going to speak with UND officials about taking legal action against the ba$tards. OK, ba$tards is my word but the rest is from Wayne.

[Smoggy]

Looking at that last answer, I find it appalling that UND has to "rebut" the "hostile and abusive." Shouldn't the NCAA have to prove that we are "hostile and abusive?"

[PCM]

The NCAA policy extends to its own championship events. The Universities can do what they want on their campuses, but the NCAA has the responsibility to ensure that championships have the right atmosphere for all students participating.

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Brand and Harrison constantly go back to this above point. And yet, I have not seen one shred of evidence provided by anyone from UND, the tribes or at the NCAA that the presence of the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo have ever caused a hostile and abusive atmosphere at an NCAA championship event.

I've read the entire minority report to the NCAA written by the name-change advocates. Nowhere in that report are any incidents of racism, hostility or abuse cited as being present at an NCAA event as a result of UND's participation. Has anyone ever claimed to have witnessed or been subjected to hostility and abuse at an NCAA event sponsored by the NCAA?

Because unless that is the case, the NCAA's policy is clearly not aimed at correcting or preventing any documented problem associated with NCAA events. It's aimed at forcing UND others to make changes based on events alleged to occur on the university campus and at athletic events over which the NCAA readily admits that it has no control or authority.

You'd think that if the NCAA was going to constantly claim that it is controling only what's within its realm to control, it could easily cite some evidence of the problem occurring at the events it runs. But it never has. The NCAA has made no attempt whatsoever to do this, and neither have any of the tribes or groups advocating that UND change its name.

How difficult would it have been to gather such evidence during the many NCAA playoff games in which UND's teams have participated the past couple of years? How is it that the NCAA claims that it is correcting a problem that supposedly occurs at its events, but cannot provide once shred of evidence that the problem even exists?

If the NCAA was truly being respectful of the institutional autonomy of its members, it wouldn't even consider evidence of "hostility and abuse" that occur outside of the events it controls. The only way the NCAA can get to where it wants to go is by considering evidence that occurs outside the events it controls and outside its scope of authority.

[dagies]

Q. But aren't you telling them what you think they should do?

A. I was very clear, we expect that as an outcome of that conversation respect for every human being will take place. I believe that people have moral positions on these issues and understand what it means to respect every person and with rational discourse people will reach the right decisions. Recall that my discipline is philosophy.

Wow. The arrogance of this statement is shocking.

[SiouxPride0303]

Wow. The arrogance of this statement is shocking.

Agreed. That statement and the one I am citing stood out most for me, the rest was just more spin from what we already know about their position :

Correct. Official members of the University Party -- students, cheerleaders, bands can't have those symbols. We have no rules about fans because of freedom of speech.

I thought that Freedom of Speech applied to all? Civics 101 anybody??

[jimdahl]

Wow. The arrogance of this statement is shocking.

To clarify -- this is the answer I mangled the most, so don't judge it too harshly without listening to it, but I do think I captured the essence of it. What he said was actually about twice as long, but was rather rambling. "Recall that my discipline is philosophy" was actually a joke about how he had gone off on a ramble about how he thinks he's not forcing people to change, he's forcing them to have a dialog from which good people will come to the right decisions themselves....

[PCM]

"Recall that my discipline is philosophy" was actually a joke about how he had gone off on a ramble about how he thinks he's not forcing people to change, he's forcing them to have a dialog from which good people will come to the right decisions themselves....

In other words, if your opinion doesn't agree with Brand's, you're not a good person.

[Sioux-cia]

To clarify -- this is the answer I mangled the most, so don't judge it too harshly without listening to it, but I do think I captured the essence of it. What he said was actually about twice as long, but was rather rambling. "Recall that my discipline is philosophy" was actually a joke about how he had gone off on a ramble about how he thinks he's not forcing people to change, he's forcing them to have a dialog from which good people will come to the right decisions themselves....

In this case, I'm sure the only right decision is the NC$$'s decision. Humph...

[redwing77]

In other words, if your opinion doesn't agree with Brand's, you're not a good person.

In other words, it's the same political climate we find ourselves in today.

If you don't agree with the conservatives you must be a communist liberal bastard. If you dont' agree with the liberals you must be incredibly delusional and a crook.

Welcome to petty politics.

[DamStrait]

This ruling cannot be allowed to stand. It must be fought with all the resources that can be brought to bear. Myles Brand is a smarmy, condenscending, pompous, mealy-mouthed jackass of a bully. How do you fight a bully? You pop him in his fat elitist mouth with all your might and sent him home crying to his mommy. Dr. Kupchella needs to fight this on ALL fronts. He and his counterpart at the U of I need to push back HARD inside the NCAA. They need to start a movement to have Brand and his cronies thrown out on their ears for overstepping their bounds and for gross abuse of power. That arrogant SOB desparately needs his own "teachable moment".

Now is not the time to back down and just 'take it' as aff and cratter have suggested. This is what Brand is hoping we do. We pushed, now they've pushed back, hoping we've lost our nerve. Now is the time to hit back RUTHLESSLY. Now is the time to declare "We have not yet begun to fight"!

Myles Brand's epitaph: "Only a jackass this big could make Bobby Knight a sympathetic figure."

[Sioux-cia]

This ruling cannot be allowed to stand. It must be fought with all the resources that can be brought to bear. Myles Brand is a smarmy, condenscending, pompous, mealy-mouthed jackass of a bully. How do you fight a bully? You pop him in his fat elitist mouth with all your might and sent him home crying to his mommy. Dr. Kupchella needs to fight this on ALL fronts. He and his counterpart at the U of I need to push back HARD inside the NCAA. They need to start a movement to have Brand and his cronies thrown out on their ears for overstepping their bounds and for gross abuse of power. That arrogant SOB desparately needs his own "teachable moment".

Now is not the time to back down and just 'take it' as aff and cratter have suggested. This is what Brand is hoping we do. We pushed, now they've pushed back, hoping we've lost our nerve. Now is the time to hit back RUTHLESSLY. Now is the time to delcalre "We have not yet begun to fight"!

Myles Brand's epitaph: "Only a jackass this big could make Bobby Knight a sympathetic figure."

DAMN STRAIGHT!!!!

[PCM]

In other words, it's the same political climate we find ourselves in today.

If you don't agree with the conservatives you must be a communist liberal bastard. If you dont' agree with the liberals you must be incredibly delusional and a crook.

Welcome to petty politics.

The difference is that people who post on this board don't have the power to force their opinions on others by threatening them with punitive action. Myles Brand has that power and he's using it for that purpose.

[redwing77]

The difference is that people who post on this board don't have the power to force their opinions on others by threatening them with punitive action. Myles Brand has that power and he's using it for that purpose.

And hence the saying "Power corrupts" applies. Myles and Walter (who the hell cares if I misspelled his name) are drunk on their power. They need to do the opposite of Emeril Legase and "take it down a notch"

[Goon]

This ruling cannot be allowed to stand. It must be fought with all the resources that can be brought to bear. Myles Brand is a smarmy, condenscending, pompous, mealy-mouthed jackass of a bully. How do you fight a bully? You pop him in his fat elitist mouth with all your might and sent him home crying to his mommy. Dr. Kupchella needs to fight this on ALL fronts. He and his counterpart at the U of I need to push back HARD inside the NCAA. They need to start a movement to have Brand and his cronies thrown out on their ears for overstepping their bounds and for gross abuse of power. That arrogant SOB desparately needs his own "teachable moment".

I like that description of Myles Brand. Very nice.

[rochsioux]

This ruling cannot be allowed to stand. It must be fought with all the resources that can be brought to bear. Myles Brand is a smarmy, condenscending, pompous, mealy-mouthed jackass of a bully. How do you fight a bully? You pop him in his fat elitist mouth with all your might and sent him home crying to his mommy. Dr. Kupchella needs to fight this on ALL fronts. He and his counterpart at the U of I need to push back HARD inside the NCAA. They need to start a movement to have Brand and his cronies thrown out on their ears for overstepping their bounds and for gross abuse of power. That arrogant SOB desparately needs his own "teachable moment".

Now is not the time to back down and just 'take it' as aff and cratter have suggested. This is what Brand is hoping we do. We pushed, now they've pushed back, hoping we've lost our nerve. Now is the time to hit back RUTHLESSLY. Now is the time to declare "We have not yet begun to fight"!

Myles Brand's epitaph: "Only a jackass this big could make Bobby Knight a sympathetic figure."

Agree 100%.

[Cratter]

Any way to impeach the President, Myles Brand?

Without a court case, I'm thinking maybe a new president will have completely different views than Myles, and reverse this decision?

[DamStrait]

If his worship the emperor Brand is willing to allow we peons freedom of expression at NCAA events, we should take full advantage of it. I'd like to think fans of other schools are almost monolithically in our corner in this fight for our school's identity against the NCAA. I would love to see our boys in the FF again next year (needless to say). Should they make it I'd love to see Sioux fans, the alumni association, the Fighting Sioux Club, and whoever else could help, organize a free giveaway to all attending at least the first FF game the boys play in. Something like the black tee shirts that had "I'm not hostile or abusive" on them. If nearly the whole damn arena could be filled with fans so clad, it should make a very powerful statement, one powerful enough to penetrate even the thick skulls of the NCAA 'leadership'.

It would require a ton of logistical support and money, because I believe merely having them available for sale would not be enough. In order to have a chance of filling the arena, they would have to be free. Perhaps a campaign to have Sioux fans buy their tees and at the same time buy others to be distributed at the FF could be part of the solution. They should be made as inexpensively as possible, as they only need to last a few hours (they do, however, NEED to be colorfast!). Non-conventional resources such as this site and USCHO need to be used to get the word out. Tons of decisions would have to be made, such as, should they be tees or something else? If tees, how many of each size should be on hand? How will they be distributed and who will be responsible for the distribution? What exactly should the giveaways have printed on them (maybe "I'm not hostile or abusive - Free UND from NCAA tyranny" or "Remove Emperor Brand from his throne")? Many other questions that require answers will make themselves evident once the project receives serious consideration.

Even if the NCAA ignores it, it should be impossible for the media to avoid covering it. It would be hard for even the media to make Sioux fans and UND look bad in this story.

[HockeyMom]

DamStraight,

That is a great idea. I think that the I'm not hostile or abusive t's that were being sold by two UND students were sold for cost, which was 5 or 6 dollars each. Could they be bought for less than that?

[star2city]

Became a fan of Jeremy Bloom, draftee of the Philadelphia Eages, after this quote:

Jeremy Bloom is bringing his game-breaking skills to Philadelphia. He's leaving his skis in Colorado.

In the fall of 2004, the NCAA ruled he accepted endorsements to keep his equally successful career as a skier on track, so Bloom couldn't be eligible for the football team.

"They don't give answers to anybody because there is no oversight," Bloom said of the NCAA. "They make decisions within their organization and don't have to be held accountable as to why. They're a very hypocritical organization. They made decisions case by case instead of on precedent."

[dagies]

To clarify -- this is the answer I mangled the most, so don't judge it too harshly without listening to it, but I do think I captured the essence of it. What he said was actually about twice as long, but was rather rambling. "Recall that my discipline is philosophy" was actually a joke about how he had gone off on a ramble about how he thinks he's not forcing people to change, he's forcing them to have a dialog from which good people will come to the right decisions themselves....

Thanks, Jim. I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet.

[dagies]

Any way to impeach the President, Myles Brand?

Without a court case, I'm thinking maybe a new president will have completely different views than Myles, and reverse this decision?

I really had hoped the DII Council of Presidents might stand up to these shenanigans. They have allowed themselves to be vulnerable to whatever arbitrary and capriciuos decision the Executive Council deems proper, regardless of whether it is within the by-laws of their organization to do this.

It's astounding to me that bright people who run these educational institutions cannot see that far ahead.