D-1 Survey Says...

[The Walrus]

Wyomingbison writes....Not Sure Winonia is a UND Peer?

They just won a Div2 Natl Championship in Mens Basketball..?

I am not sure why everyone downgrades the likes of the Northern Sun Conference and other ND Schools other than the Big two..UND and NDSU....

I believe alot of top Div1 schools play within their States and Regions when possible to complete scheduling, but never get critized.

UND can play within the state and still be successful, and still play a strong non-conference schedule with regional Div2 powers, like Pitt State, Grand Valley, and throw in some RMAC Schools to boot...

Why not be the BEST Div2 has to offer...Would that be so awful..?

[nd1sufan]

DenverBison05 posted this link on www.bisonville.com about NDSU's survey. You might find it interesing as the NDSU survey also was against the division change.

One major difference, NDSU had a president that wanted to make the move, UND's obviously does not want to make the move.

After listening to the Big Sky Commissioner on WDAY radio tonight, I think the Big Sky thing is still a couple of years away from happening, and he realizes that may be too late for the Dakota schools. It sounded like he realizes the Mid-Con or another conference may be knocking on NDSU's door before his presidents will make a decision.

[PCM]

One major difference, NDSU had a president that wanted to make the move, UND's obviously does not want to make the move.

UND's circumstances are different from NDSU's. How many times must that be said?

[SiouxMeNow]

The flip side of these results is if a group showed up with the money and a conference option opened up it's all out there on the table: The DI supporters could show they've met the criteria of the majority of folks.

You nailed it and Buning said as much afterwards. It allows UND to have the basic info in place and be able to react quickly if something becomes available...(read: Fullerton and the Big Sky) SDSU is still an anchor to NDSU as a partner...they might have been better served doing a review like this before they dove headfirst into DI.

[aff]

You nailed it and Buning said as much afterwards. It allows UND to have the basic info in place and be able to react quickly if something becomes available...(read: Fullerton and the Big Sky) SDSU is still an anchor to NDSU as a partner...they might have been better served doing a review like this before they dove headfirst into DI.

Yeah, if only the SU's had done an internal study instead of hiring Carr and associates. Nothing gives credibility like an internal study.

[aff]

So do you rent?

Starcity-

I can tell you very much want UND to go D-I, but making making a statement like that makes almost no sense to me. Are you honestly telling me that if you had a million dollars to bet on this one way or the other, you would say UND is going to be in the Big Sky this summer? I have no idea who you are, maybe you're privy to a wealth of inside knowledge that I don't know. Yeah, that would be great for a D-I UND, but to come to that conclusion you basically ignore blatant facts and choose to look at a huge list of circumstantial evidence that you concieve of. I'm not personally attacking you here, I just don't understand where you're coming from on this. Here's the reasons I think SDSU and NDSU will be in the Mid Con and UND will, without a D-I conference, will stay in D-II. Please enlighten me as to where my logic is flawed.

1. The midcon just lost Chicago State.

2. The mid con needs members.

3. SDSU is already an affiliate member in swimming, and both NDSU and SDSU are soon to be at least affiliate members in baseball and softball.

4. The mid con commisioner Douple was a large part of putting the Great West together and has worked with both SDSU and NDSU for that conference.

5. The mid con would find it advantagous to go to a two division setup because of its nearly rediculous geography.

6. To do this, SDSU, NDSU and IPFW could all be added, decreasing travel costs.

7. UND will not have or perhaps want, a spot in the mid con. They will be unable to get in the big sky themselves. They will stay D-II.

I don't know how you would argue with these points. The mid con is going to expand, why would they not expand to members where they already have affiliates for some sports? To me it looks like the SU's are basically shoe-in's for this expansion. Meanwhile, the Big Sky has rejected them twice already? And thats the conference you think their going to end up in? You can have all the conspiracy theories in the world, but the basic fact is that the mid con NEEDS members NOW, and the big sky doesn't right now. The SU's are a good fit for the mid con, looking at it from any direction. The big sky considers them too geographically isolated.

[tony]

All, I can say (and I mean this sincerely) is, "Good luck." Even if you want to go DI and are disappointed by the survey results and the probable "no" coming from President Kupchella, this WILL turn out for the best for UND. Going DI isn't a short-term deal and, if UND goes DI, waiting a couple more years isn't going to hurt. OTOH, if UND never goes DI, that will mean that NDSU's gamble on DI turned into a scary cautionary tale.

Anyway, attitudes can change quickly. NDSU's survey wasn't really a ringing endorsement for going DI, but I bet if they redid the survey today, you'd get a whole different set of answers.

Right now there is a whole lot up in the air at UND. First, President Kupchella isn't going to be around much longer so if you started DI now, you'd have to change Presidents in the middle of the process. Second, there's the whole nickname battle yet to be resolved. Finally (and if I were an alumni of UND, this would be a big deal), I'd want to see UND's athletic budget stablize. Back in 2002, UND's athletic expenses were $5.8 million per year and NDSU was at $5.1 million. If that $10 million figure posted earlier is accurate, then UND has had to spend $4 million extra a year just to stay in D2. That number has to stablize or be explained away (maybe the numbers were arrived at in a different way?). Anyway, you sure can't go DI for a mere $1.5 million a year when expenses are escalating that rapidly.

Heck, I'm not even sure that a Big Sky invitation is enough to counteract all the uncertainty. Of course, UND would have to consider it, but if Star2city is right, the Big Sky might agree to waiting a year or two while all this other stuff shakes out. (Alert: dead horse about to beaten) While the Herald did nothing to inform UND's stakeholders on the ramifications of going DI and of staying DII, I'm confident that given a year, they could get that job done properly.

[dlsiouxfan]

Wyomingbison writes....Not Sure Winonia is a UND Peer?

They just won a Div2 Natl Championship in Mens Basketball..?

I am not sure why everyone downgrades the likes of the Northern Sun Conference and other ND Schools other than the Big two..UND and NDSU....

I believe alot of top Div1 schools play within their States and Regions when possible to complete scheduling, but never get critized.

UND can play within the state and still be successful, and still play a strong non-conference schedule with regional Div2 powers, like Pitt State, Grand Valley, and throw in some RMAC Schools to boot...

Why not be the BEST Div2 has to offer...Would that be so awful..?

If we remain Division 2 soon we won't be the best D2 has to offer we're losing every recruiting battle to the SU's right now and it will only get worse. How can we maintain our current level of success with less talent? Why should we settle on having an athletic program that can be likened to and considered a peer of those at Winona State University and the University of Mary when we can be peers with Minnesota and Wisconsin. Remaining division 2 will damage the university's reputation in the long run and if we wait too long it won't be easily repaired. I never thought this many UND fans would be in favor of becoming a second rate university and of becoming a peer school of UMC- Crookston. If we stay D2 we risk destroying every bit of tradition we've built at this school. Ask any of the UND football alumni who were part of the 12 year losing streak if going back to that is an option? That's the reality we're faced with, it's either move up or be left behind and it looks like were in favor of being left behind.

[Bigears]

when we can be peers with Minnesota and Wisconsin.

I hope you're referring to hockey only.

[Bison Dan]

All, I can say (and I mean this sincerely) is, "Good luck." Even if you want to go DI and are disappointed by the survey results and the probable "no" coming from President Kupchella, this WILL turn out for the best for UND. Going DI isn't a short-term deal and, if UND goes DI, waiting a couple more years isn't going to hurt. OTOH, if UND never goes DI, that will mean that NDSU's gamble on DI turned into a scary cautionary tale.

Anyway, attitudes can change quickly. NDSU's survey wasn't really a ringing endorsement for going DI, but I bet if they redid the survey today, you'd get a whole different set of answers.

Right now there is a whole lot up in the air at UND. First, President Kupchella isn't going to be around much longer so if you started DI now, you'd have to change Presidents in the middle of the process. Second, there's the whole nickname battle yet to be resolved. Finally (and if I were an alumni of UND, this would be a big deal), I'd want to see UND's athletic budget stablize. Back in 2002, UND's athletic expenses were $5.8 million per year and NDSU was at $5.1 million. If that $10 million figure posted earlier is accurate, then UND has had to spend $4 million extra a year just to stay in D2. That number has to stablize or be explained away (maybe the numbers were arrived at in a different way?). Anyway, you sure can't go DI for a mere $1.5 million a year when expenses are escalating that rapidly.

Heck, I'm not even sure that a Big Sky invitation is enough to counteract all the uncertainty. Of course, UND would have to consider it, but if Star2city is right, the Big Sky might agree to waiting a year or two while all this other stuff shakes out. (Alert: dead horse about to beaten) While the Herald did nothing to inform UND's stakeholders on the ramifications of going DI and of staying DII, I'm confident that given a year, they could get that job done properly.

If SDSU and NDSU go to the Mid Con then the DI question at UND is dead. The BSC has to act fast, which I hope they do but I wouldn't bet on it. No DI conference is going to pick up 1 school located in ND with no travel partner. Then again both conferences might sit back and wait and see what shakes out. It's going to be an interesting 2 months.

[The Sicatoka]

Even if you want to go DI and are disappointed by the survey results and the probable "no" coming from President Kupchella, this WILL turn out for the best for UND. Going DI isn't a short-term deal and, if UND goes DI, waiting a couple more years isn't going to hurt. OTOH, if UND never goes DI, that will mean that NDSU's gamble on DI turned into a scary cautionary tale.

I'll agree. Right now there's too much outside of the realm of either UND's or NDSU's control and it's rather scary for both.

The BSC has to act fast, which I hope they do but I wouldn't bet on it.

The recent activity in the Mid-Con (Chicago State departure) may be the spur that someone like Fullerton could use to say to the leaders, "Act now or get stuck with second choices, or worse, no autobid later."

[The Sicatoka]

President Kupchella isn't going to be around much longer ...

I keep coming across this theme in various postings from our non-UND contingent on the board. I'm not sure why however.

[LennonIsTheMan]

OK, as nicely as I possibly can, I am applying one collective "b***h"-slap across the face of everyone here on this thread:

"Data from 400 season ticketholders, 400 students, 545 employees and 336 faculty members was used for the survey.

The survey did not specifically address alumni."

How much stock can we actually take in this survey. Anyone who took the survey knows that the questions were heavily skewed and biased in its questioning. I think Phildo or Chuck may have actually handwritten the survey themselves. And how dare they use the word "stockholders" without addressing the biggest donors for the program - THE ALUMNI. This is simply a propoganda tool for Chuck to use with the media if he decides to not go D1. I don't like where this is heading. We need to start a replacement search for Chuck and Phildo as soon as possible. That means getting them out of their current positions first.

The survey was/is complete BS.......IMO

GO D1!!!!!!!!!!!

[WYOBISONMAN]

That is a legit concern about the alumni being left out. I can tell you that the increase in donations to NDSU is largely coming from the alumni that are excited about the move. I do think that this survey will lead Kuppy to say no, but there are a lot of alumni out there that will be unhappy and push for a new President....

Of all the UND alumni I know, not a one wants to stay D2.....anectodatal as that is, it may show that D1 has some traction with the UND alums.

[bincitysioux]

I am also shocked at these results. I wonder if the only season ticket holders that were surveyed were hockey ticket owners. I have season tix for football, and was never contacted. I'd think that the vast majority of football, and quite alot of basketball ticket holders would be overwhelmingly in favor of going DI. I sure am. I love watching the hockey team play Minnesota, Maine, New Hampshire, etc. I want to see the Basketball and football teams do the same!

[LennonIsTheMan]

Exactly my point fellas. I would like to see percentages of season ticket holders that were surveyed, and which sports they came from. 500 season ticket holders were sampled. From which sports? How many season ticket holders are there from all sports, and each sport individually? In my opinion, this survey was manufactured to get these results precisely. I do not believe that these results truly measure what EVERYONE involved believes in regards to making a move. Complete waste of time, especially when you don't include the biggest financial backers in regards to making a move - the alums.

[MplsBison]

Exactly the point I was trying to hint at.

I'm telling you now: they only contacted hockey ticket holders. And it was done on purpose.

That's my speculation.

[rabidrabbit]

OK, as nicely as I possibly can, I am applying one collective "b***h"-slap across the face of everyone here on this thread:

"Data from 400 season ticketholders, 400 students, 545 employees and 336 faculty members was used for the survey.

The survey did not specifically address alumni."

How much stock can we actually take in this survey. Anyone who took the survey knows that the questions were heavily skewed and biased in its questioning. I think Phildo or Chuck may have actually handwritten the survey themselves. And how dare they use the word "stockholders" without addressing the biggest donors for the program - THE ALUMNI. This is simply a propoganda tool for Chuck to use with the media if he decides to not go D1. I don't like where this is heading. We need to start a replacement search for Chuck and Phildo as soon as possible. That means getting them out of their current positions first.

The survey was/is complete BS.......IMO

GO D1!!!!!!!!!!!

This is almost a cut and paste of the SDSU or NDSU surveys prior to going D-1. Ask students, teachers, employees, and season ticketholders, they are more than likely say "Stay in our comfort zone, and only stretch if know results". Any surprise there? NOT!!!

IF it's Kupchella's intent to stay D-2. This gives his position weight. However, UND appears poised to join U of Mary, Minot St. as equals. NDSU is, and SDSU down in South Dakota, are becoming the destination school in their respective states. Not just in athletics either, but in #'s of students choosing _DSU over the other college choices in the state.

I hope Kupchella notices the trends, and has enough history/knowledge of who are UND's peers. And who do they expect to be evaluated with. I have never envisioned SW Minn St., U of Mary, Northern (SD), Winona to be our peers. Montana, Creighton, Northern Iowa, Bradley, Cal Poly yes. And academically, should be in vs Big 10/Big 12 for grants, research. Unfortunately, sports define how an university is perceived, so which way to go?

[UND Fan]

Exactly my point fellas. I would like to see percentages of season ticket holders that were surveyed, and which sports they came from. 500 season ticket holders were sampled. From which sports? How many season ticket holders are there from all sports, and each sport individually? In my opinion, this survey was manufactured to get these results precisely. I do not believe that these results truly measure what EVERYONE involved believes in regards to making a move. Complete waste of time, especially when you don't include the biggest financial backers in regards to making a move - the alums.

I hope you and others who support the move have communicated your thoughts to Kupchella! I don't recommend you complain about the validity of the survey - just endorse the move and state that you feel alumni would step up to assist with the financing of the move (and any other factors that you feel are pertinent)!

His e-mail address is: ckupchella@mail.UND.nodak.edu

[PCM]

This is almost a cut and paste of the SDSU or NDSU surveys prior to going D-1. Ask students, teachers, employees, and season ticketholders, they are more than likely say "Stay in our comfort zone, and only stretch if know results". Any surprise there? NOT!!!

Which is why I don't understand why some people are going off the deep end about the survey.

As for the rest of your post, goading UND into turning DI didn't work last time and I don't expect that it will work this time, either.

[WYOBISONMAN]

Exactly the point I was trying to hint at.

I'm telling you now: they only contacted hockey ticket holders. And it was done on purpose.

That's my speculation.

If Kuppy wanted to maintain a credible process he could not have done that. I would be surprised if they only surveyed the hockey folks. There is too much at stake to have done something like that which would have blatently skewed the process and made the credibility so suspect.......

[PCM]

If Kuppy wanted to maintain a credible process he could not have done that. I would be surprised if they only surveyed the hockey folks. There is too much at stake to have done something like that which would have blatently skewed the process and made the credibility so suspect.......

Nobody at UND would have done that because it would have been stupid beyond reason.

[The Sicatoka]

Reading the two different Herald articles today here are some take-aways that caught my eye:

Fifty-two percent of students surveyed said moving to Division I would increase the school's academic image, but only 28 percent of faculty and 42 percent of employees said they believed it would help the academic image.

The NDSU market survey didn't ask that question, but it asked two similar:

"Survey respondents were asked if they believe that moving to Division I could increase the perceived value of an NDSU degree."

Students 26%, Faculty/staff 23%

" ... respondents strongly agree or agree that Division I would havea positive impact on the (general) image of NDSU"

Students 64%, Faculty/staff 51%

Forty percent of season ticketholders said they would increase personal support for athletics if UND teams played Division I opponents and bigger schools rather than smaller schools.

That aligns with what TeamMakers said in NDSU's survey (using their $500 or $250 annually numbers).

Even more, 61 percent of season ticketholders said they would pay higher ticket prices to see UND play Division I teams such as Montana, Montana State, Northern Iowa and NDSU rather than smaller schools such as Minot State, Mary (N.D.) College, Jamestown (N.D.) College and Mayville (N.D.) State.

That aligns with what TeamMakers said they'd do as well in the cases of MBB and WBB. Their response was even stronger for football (obviously).

NDSU athletic director Gene Taylor said his school didn't do a similar survey before it made its move.

"We didn't ever do a survey of who was in favor and who wasn't," Taylor said.

Why not? Isn't that key data? Oh well, spilled milk.

"There was a group strongly in favor of it, a group opposed and a group on the fence," he (Taylor) said.

The fence group at UND seems to want to know "conference" (and "cost"). Given what has been observed at the SUs so far that seems fair to want to know.

UND's current athletic budget is at 84 percent of the Division I average.

The number tossed around yesterday was "$10 million". If that's 84% that means the average DI budget is $11.9 million. Considering Ohio State's is nearly eight times that there must be some really tiny budgets out there at some places.

Academics: The task force contrasted UND to 18 similar Division II schools and 14 similar Division I schools.

Boyd said he felt UND more closely resembled the similar Division I schools.

That's a gimme.

[The Sicatoka]

I'm telling you now: they only contacted hockey ticket holders. And it was done on purpose.

That'd be a gimme on being able to "poo-poo" the data away. I don't see that happening.

However, having the study would answer that definitely.

[star2city]

2. The mid con needs members.

The MidCon needs fully DI eligible members. Neither NDSU or SDSU are until the fall of 2008.

They may take one ineligible member before fall of 2008, but two is a big stretch.

3. SDSU is already an affiliate member in swimming, and both NDSU and SDSU are soon to be at least affiliate members in baseball and softball.

Of course they would take SDSU's swimming programs - even if you were in the Big Sky, it doesn't have that sport. Ditto for baseball. There's no risk for the MidCon in adding SDSU/NDSU as affiliates in those sports.

4. The mid con commisioner Douple was a large part of putting the Great West together and has worked with both SDSU and NDSU for that conference.

He very well could be a help. The best thing he can do for his former school is get the SU's into the Midcon so the Big Sky is forced to take Southern Utah. Southern Utah is your biggest advocate - it's in their best interests to get the SU's in the MidCon. UMKC is likely another advocate. ORU, Cent, IUPUI, and Oakland would have to be convinced its in their interests. ORU/Cent/IUPUI/Oakland > Sac St/Portland St/NAU

5. The mid con would find it advantagous to go to a two division setup because of its nearly rediculous geography.

6. To do this, SDSU, NDSU and IPFW could all be added, decreasing travel costs.

Let's see: 8 + 3 = 11 - that doesn't work. You need one more team to go to 12 (UND?). So they go to 10 and add NDSU/SDSU but have to wait till 2008/9. Possible, but the travel becomes

Oakland/IUPUI, Valp/W ILL, NDSU/SDSU, UMKC/ORU, Cent/SUU

7. UND will not have or perhaps want, a spot in the mid con. They will be unable to get in the big sky themselves. They will stay D-II.

You are forgetting a number of other DII schools that are looking at DI. A combination of IPFW and any of the following (SIU-Edwardsville - backed by WIll, Oklahoma City U - backed by ORU, N Kentucky - backed by IUPUI) would help the MidCon's geography more than by adding NDSU/SDSU. Incidentally, all of these DII schools are undergoing or have had a DI study.

You can have all the conspiracy theories in the world, but the basic fact is that the mid con NEEDS members NOW, and the big sky doesn't right now. The SU's are a good fit for the mid con, looking at it from any direction. The big sky considers them too geographically isolated.

The SU's are only a "fit" for the MidCon because, geographically, it has no identity.

Do I think the SU's could be headed to the MidCOn? Definitely. Is it a slam dunk? Absolutely not.

Dont get your hopes up to high, aff, you might get disappointed, again.