Denver's Peg Bradley-Doppes on the Big Five

University of Denver Vice Chancellor for Athletics and Recreation Peg Bradley-Doppes had this to say about the big five conference rules. Obliviously, DU is a small school in the Summit League, but is considered a big school in division I hockey and lacrosse.

Marc Tracy, New York Times -- The new model would codify the college sports world as one “much more, perhaps, of haves and have-nots,” said Peg Bradley-Doppes, the vice chancellor for athletics at the University of Denver, which is not in a Big 5 conference. “It may make the competitive experience more challenging.”

Both supporters and detractors of the new model see the vote as pivotal, even as outside developments threaten to force more drastic reform.

“This is a game-changer,” Ms. Bradley-Doppes, of the University of Denver, said.

And I think you can see a theme starting to emerge here. If the Big Five doesn't get their way, these big schools are going to leave the NCAA. This is why N.C.A.A. President Mark Emmert is behind this move. The NCAA doesn't want to lose the big money that the big five conference schools generate.

If the board rejects the model, it could prompt a more severe break. Big 5 commissioners have suggested that in that event, they would consider much more drastic measures: departing from the N.C.A.A. and taking their teams — and the billions in revenue they produce — to a so-called Division IV.

N.C.A.A. President Mark Emmert, the former president of Washington and chancellor of Louisiana State — both Big 5 universities — has appeared to support autonomy. In 2011, he pushed for a proposal to allow Division I colleges to offer athletes additional $2,000 stipends. (The board passed the proposal, but the membership overrode it.)

The No. 1 reason the NCAA voted to give greater autonomy to the Big Five conferences today: http://t.co/AfwEVE5pi4 pic.twitter.com/66l8m2jwHP
— Jim Pagels (@jimpagels) August 7, 2014

Related articles

• N.C.A.A.'s Rich Poised to Get Richer, With More Athlete Benefits
• N.C.A.A. May Let Its Top Conferences Play by Their Own Rules
• Four-year college athletic scholarships could be wave of future
• For Wealthy NCAA Programs, Autonomy Is Not a Panacea

New York Times, N.C.A.A. Players’ Winning Streak, Off the Field

This article is a must read, the last paragraph should make things a little more clear for you. The big school in division I athletics are going to be making their own rules. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on college hockey.

Marc Tracy, New York Times -- The N.C.A.A., the Big 5 conferences and a few other universities have seemingly begun to retreat.

In April, weeks after the star point guard Shabazz Napier of Connecticut complained during the Final Four that there were “nights that I go to bed and I’m starving,” the N.C.A.A. changed its rules to allow universities to provide unlimited meals to competing students. (The N.C.A.A. said the change had been in the works for some time.)

The N.C.A.A.’s president, Mark Emmert, testified this month before a Senate committee investigating student-athletes’ well-being. While defending the current model generally, Emmert acknowledged several concerns expressed by the senators. He said he supported guaranteed four-year scholarships.

Last week, the N.C.A.A. released a revised governance proposal that, if approved by its board of directors in August, would make it easier for the Big 5 conferences — the A.C.C., the Big Ten, the Big 12, the Pac-12 and the Southeastern Conference — to make their own rules.

NCAA: Are we on the Verge of Having Five Power Conferences?

#149125547 / gettyimages.com

Although this blog focuses on mostly hockey, I do wade into other areas, from time-to-time. This is a subject that I have been following with great interest. It's also going to be interesting to see how this plays out in the future. I don't think this is necessarily a good thing. Much like realignment in division I college hockey, this is about the rich schools getting richer, and leaving the rest of division I schools in the dust.

Tom Fornelli, College Football Writer --NCAA president Mark Emmert believes that the the NCAA and the five power conferences are "not that far apart" in what they want to get accomplished as far as a new governance structure for the NCAA.

SEC commissioner Mike Slive recently rekindled the talk about the five power conferences (the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC and Pac-12) and Notre Dame essentially breaking off from the rest of Division I to form their own Division 4, but Emmert remains confident that won't be necessary. He said as much following a meeting with more than 100 athletic directors Wednesday at the National Association of College Directors of Athletics convention.

"The reality is, they're not that far apart on the various ends of that and I'm pretty confident the whole thing is going to work out and probably be successful," Emmert told USA Today.

The NCAA is trying to focus on an autonomous structure for the power five conferences that would give them voting independence on specific issues. What specific issues those will be are still being worked out, as well as what the voting threshold will be among the conferences. The NCAA steering committee submitted a proposal last month that called for a two-thirds super majority in order for an autonomous vote to pass, plus a simple majority from four of the five power conferences. Both Slive and Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany would like to lower the threshold to 60 percent and three of the five conferences.

NCAA: Sweeping changes could be coming to NCAA

This article is worth a look. I wonder if Division I College Hockey will start giving their players a stipend as well? And if they did... That brings up another question. Then, wouldn't that negate the Major Junior argument, because now college athletes could be possibly be getting paid a stipend like their CHL counterparts? I am just throwing it out there.

Michael Marot, The Associated Press – In October 2011, the NCAA approved a measure allowing conferences to award athletes up to $2,000 more per year. Most of the big conferences quickly adopted.

Since then, NCAA President Mark Emmert has supported bringing back the stipend, though no formal proposal has been made. Emmert is scheduled to give his annual state of the association speech Thursday evening.

Last summer, commissioners of each of the so-called power conferences used their media days to lobby for changes to the way the NCAA does business. Hatch, the president at Wake Forest, an Atlantic Coast Conference school, and others heard the concerns and insist the debate is not just about giving money to players. They want schools to provide additional resources that will help student-athletes with everything from academics to health.

It's a tricky proposition. For decades, all Division I schools have played by the same set of rules.

Now, Hatch and others are hoping lower-resource schools, which often don't compete for the same recruits as the bigger schools anyway, are willing to stay in a division even if there are separate financial structures.

Some believe it could lead to a split. Hatch disagrees.

More Trouble at the NCAA

Maybe we should get rid of the NCAA and Mark Emmert? To me the NCAA seems like a bunch of pushy bullys. There has to be a better to have oversight over college athletics.

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - NCAA President Mark Emmert has spent 2 1/2 years trying to push through historic reforms and get tougher on cheaters.

It's only created more problems.

Today, Emmert presides over an organization that is struggling to maintain credibility with the public, is tied up in multiple court cases and is tainted by an embarrassing internal scandal. He has been criticized for his governing style and personality. There have been questions surrounding the work he did in previous jobs and whether he overstepped his authority in punishing Penn State for the Jerry Sandusky scandal. He drew fire for pinning blame for the debacle in the Miami investigation on enforcement officials and some question whether he should lead the NCAA through its next major overhaul - fixing the governance structure.

Critics contend there is only way to only one way to restore the NCAA's tattered image: Find a new president.

''He should have been gone yesterday, as far as I'm concerned,'' said Gerald Gurney, a former senior associate athletic director for academics at Oklahoma and a former compliance director at Maryland. ''He's absolutely unable to get anything through the NCAA system. Every time one of his proposals is voted down, that's like a vote of no confidence. If he can't get his ideas across to membership, he ought to leave.''

Emmert has ignored the growing calls for his resignation and he doesn't sound like a man planning to leave any time soon. [Read the rest of the article right here]

Will Jim Delany take aim at NCAA?

I found this article on my twitter feed, I find this article to be interesting, but in a way, I think  it kind of translates to other sports besides football, I think. There's a mind set out there, and frankly some of the schools in the WCHA didn't want to play against the smaller schools in the WCHA, that mind set was out there. It's really about the have's and the schools that have more. I believe.

Take 1: Brian Bennett Delany has probably been more supportive of NCAA president Mark Emmert than some of his other peers, but he has to feel many of the same frustrations as his commissioner colleagues. Like Slive, Delany is a big proponent of paying athletes an additional stipend on top of their scholarships to cover the full cost of attendance, and they are upset the NCAA has yet to approve that measure after both stumped for it more than two years ago. Bowlsby said Monday that commissioners of the five power conferences met six weeks ago and were unanimous in wanting major changes to the NCAA structure. It sounds like the major conferences are growing tired of a system where Ohio State and Nebraska have to share the same rules as Louisiana-Lafayette and Texas-San Antonio.

The threat of the power leagues breaking off and forming their own kingdom gives them leverage, although those conference don't really want to be in the business of putting on their own soccer and lacrosse tournaments. Still, this is clearly an organized assault on the NCAA by the most powerful leaders in college football, and I'd expect Delany to weigh in with his own concerns. He probably won't be as pointed in his comments as Bowlsby -- Delany tends to speak in carefully considered, lawyerly tones -- but as one of the sport's most influential figures, whatever Delany says on Wednesday will carry a lot of weight.

There's a lot of money to be made in college sports, it's very a big business and some schools no matter what aren't going to be able to even the playing field, financially. We also see this in college hockey as well. Lastly, I also believe the NCAA is a poorly run organization that isn't even-handed in the way they deal with member schools. I could see the big schools breaking away from the NCAA and forming their own governing body.

NCAA Investigates Its Investigators

Wow! So now it appears that the NCAA is in need of a internal affairs division. There are days that I wished the NCAA was disbanded or at least weakened. The NCAA is not a law enforcement agency, its an athletic association.

Inside Higher ED --- NCAA does not have subpoena power and thus lacks the authority to compel testimony under oath, Emmert said, meaning the Miami investigation turned up evidence that shouldn’t have been accessible. Further, whoever hired Shapiro’s lawyer apparently did not have clearance to do so, because Emmert said the decision did not go through the NCAA’s general counsel as procedure requires.

Reminding everyone of his own demands of athletic programs to show integrity, Emmert expressed his disgust with the conduct of his own staff, two of whom are no longer employed there.

“I’ve certainly never seen anything like this, and I don’t want to see it again,” Emmert said, adding that the conduct was “deeply disturbing” and he felt “deeply disappointed and frustrated and even angry.”

These new developments could be good news for Miami, however, which was widely expected to face harsh punishment from the NCAA. Emmert said that whatever evidence was obtained through the lawyer (a “small portion” of all the evidence that’s been gathered, he said) will be thrown out, and the investigation of Miami will not be extended or redone. The investigation of the enforcement division, to be conducted by an external law firm, will apply to “the current issue” of the Miami case as well as the enforcement’s overall policies and practices The NCAA will not deliver Miami’s notice of allegations -- the document that contains its formal charges -- until after the law firm has completed its work, which Emmert hopes happens in one to two weeks.

 I also don't want the Federal Government getting involved in running the NCAA 's regulatory process, like the  writer below suggests. Seriously, do we want federal law enforcement agents being pulled out of the field to investigate NCAA violations and allegations? Investigations are a law enforcement function. Moreover, the federal government screws up everything it runs and touches, and that's not what we need. I also don't think that the average fans wants the Feds screwing up the NCAA as well. Whats next? Wire taps on boosters and fans? 

Let the federal government take over the NCAA’s regulatory process, writes John Infante, NCAA expert for the athletic recruiting website Athnet and author of the Bylaw Blog: “There is really only one organization that can enforce the NCAA’s rules substantially better than the NCAA. There is also only one organization that can force institutions to go along with an expanded enforcement program. Luckily, it is the same organization: the federal government.”

What do you think?

Penn State failures draw unprecedented NCAA sanctions

The NCAA throws the book at Penn State...

Official Statement

By perpetuating a "football first" culture that ultimately enabled serial child sexual abuse to occur, The Pennsylvania State University leadership failed to value and uphold institutional integrity, resulting in a breach of the NCAA constitution and rules. The NCAA Division I Board of Directors and NCAA Executive Committee directed Association President Mark Emmert to examine the circumstances and determine appropriate action in consultation with these presidential bodies.

"As we evaluated the situation, the victims affected by Jerry Sandusky and the efforts by many to conceal his crimes informed our actions," said Emmert. "At our core, we are educators. Penn State leadership lost sight of that."

According to the NCAA conclusions and sanctions, the Freeh Report "presents an unprecedented failure of institutional integrity leading to a culture in which a football program was held in higher esteem than the values of the institution, the values of the NCAA, the values of higher education, and most disturbingly the values of human decency."

As a result, the NCAA imposed a $60 million sanction on the university, which is equivalent to the average gross annual revenue of the football program. These funds must be paid into an endowment for external programs preventing child sexual abuse or assisting victims and may not be used to fund such programs at the university.

The sanctions also include a four-year football postseason ban and a vacation of all wins from 1998 through 2011. The career record of former head football coach Joe Paterno will reflect these vacated records. Penn State must also reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a four-year period. In addition, the NCAA reserves the right to impose additional sanctions on involved individuals at the conclusion of any criminal proceedings.

The NCAA recognizes that student-athletes are not responsible for these events and worked to minimize the impact of its sanctions on current and incoming football student-athletes. Any entering or returning student-athlete will be allowed to immediately transfer and compete at another school. Further, any football student-athletes who remain at the university may retain their scholarships, regardless of whether they compete on the team.

To further integrate the athletics department into the university, Penn State will be required to enter into an "Athletics Integrity Agreement" with the NCAA. It also must adopt all Freeh Report recommendations and appoint an independent, NCAA-selected Athletics Integrity Monitor, who will oversee compliance with the agreement.

Effective immediately, the university faces five years of probation. Specifically, the university is subject to more severe penalties if it does not adhere to these requirements or violates NCAA rules in any sport during this time period.

"There has been much speculation on whether or not the NCAA has the authority to impose any type of penalty related to Penn State," said Ed Ray, Executive Committee chair and Oregon State president. "This egregious behavior not only goes against our rules and constitution, but also against our values."

Because Penn State accepted the Freeh Report factual findings, which the university itself commissioned, the NCAA determined traditional investigative proceedings would be redundant and unnecessary.

"We cannot look to NCAA history to determine how to handle circumstances so disturbing, shocking and disappointing," said Emmert. "As the individuals charged with governing college sports, we have a responsibility to act. These events should serve as a call to every single school and athletics department to take an honest look at its campus environment and eradicate the 'sports are king' mindset that can so dramatically cloud the judgment of educators."

Penn State fully cooperated with the NCAA on this examination of the issues and took decisive action in removing individuals in leadership who were culpable.

"The actions already taken by the new Penn State Board of Trustees chair Karen Peetz and Penn State President Rodney Erickson have demonstrated a strong desire and determination to take the steps necessary for Penn State to right these severe wrongs," said Emmert.

Judgement day for Penn State

What I have read today - the sanctions that Penn State University is going to experience - is going to be more punitive than if the Penn State University football program had suffered the death penalty.

I am not sure how that is possible? According to all of the reports, "Unprecedented," said one NCAA source. "This is just unprecedented."

So just what is it that we will see tomorrow in the way of punishment that is so unprecedented? It will be something we have never seen before.

If there is no death penalty for Penn State University - what penalty would be unprecedented that we have never seen anything like it before? There are some that aren't happy about the NCAA deciding to punish Penn State without even so much as a hearing and it appears that Mark Emmert was the lone arbiter on this mater as well. Some are going to ask as well - what actual NCAA violation was violated?

(ESPN.com) --- NCAA president Mark Emmert has decided to punish Penn State with severe penalties likely to include a significant loss of scholarships and loss of multiple bowls, a source close to the decision told ESPN's Joe Schad on Sunday morning.

But Penn State will not receive the so-called "death penalty" that would have suspended the program for at least one year, the source said.

The penalties, however, are considered to be so harsh that the death penalty may have been preferable, the source said.

The NCAA will announce "corrective and punitive measures" for Penn State on Monday morning, it said in a statement Sunday. Emmert will reveal the sanctions at 9 a.m. ET in Indianapolis at the organization's headquarters along with Ed Ray, the chairman of the NCAA's executive committee, and Oregon State's president, the news release said.

It is expected the NCAA Division I Board of Directors and/or the NCAA Executive Committee has granted Emmert the authority to punish through nontraditional methods, the source told Schad.

This begs the question - what stops the NCAA to just punishing schools without so much of a hearing? Who is the arbiter? Who decides the punishment? Where is the due process? I have no problem with the NCAA giving something in the way of punishment to Penn State - however - do they not have the benefit of at least being heard?

According to Rival.com Penn State is going to have 10-plus [scholarships stripped] for four years or five years - plus a multi year bowl ban.

NCAA source: "Unprecedented" penalties against Penn State

Sounds like "judgement" day is coming for Penn State University tomorrow. It sounds like the sanctions are going to be unprecedented. It will be interesting to see what the sanctions are and how much teeth they actually have to them.

(CBS News) CBS News has learned that the NCAA will announce what a high-ranking association source called "unprecedented" penalties against both the Penn State University football team and the school.

"I've never seen anything like it," the source told correspondent Armen Keteyian.

NCAA President Mark Emmert will make the announcement Monday morning at 9 a.m. at the organization's headquarters in Indianapolis.

The penalties come in the wake of the independent report by former FBI Director Louis Freeh that chronicled repeated efforts by four top Penn State officials, including former football coach Joe Paterno, to conceal allegations of serial child sex abuse by Jerry Sandusky over a 14-year period.

The NCAA had been awaiting the school's response to four key questions pertaining to the sex abuse scandal, including issues involving institutional control and ethics.

UPDATE: Also, the Joe Paterno statue that was erected in front of Beaver Stadium to honor Paterno, has been taken down today by Penn State University. Here is what former FSU football coach Bobby Bowden had to say about the statue.

NCAA boss Mark Emmert is open to PSU death penalty

While I do think that PSU football could receive the death penalty – color my cynical – I just don’t see it happening. In the end the almighty dollar will prevail. Mark my words… A death penalty would affect the bottom line of more than one school – the NCAA would be hard pressed to cause suffering on the other B1G schools.

NEW YORK (AP) --- The president of the NCAA says he isn't ruling out the possibility of shutting down the Penn State football program in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal.

In a PBS interview Monday night, NCAA President Mark Emmert said he doesn't want to "take anything off the table" if the NCAA determines penalties against Penn State are warranted. Emmert said he's "never seen anything as egregious as this in terms of just overall conduct and behavior inside a university."

He added, "What the appropriate penalties are, if there are determinations of violations, we'll have to decide." The last time the NCAA shut down a football program with the so-called "death penalty" was in the 1980s, when SMU was forced to drop the sport because of extra benefits violations.

After the NCAA suspended the SMU program for a year, the school decided not to play in 1988, either, as it tried to regroup.

While I would personally have no problem with the NCAA throwing the book at Penn State University, however, I don't think it's going to happen. Not in this case. All you have to do is look to the SMU scandal of the 1980's to realize that there might never be another NCAA death penalty handed out again – the death penalty buried the SMU football program into a twenty year period of mediocrity that they are finally recovering from now.

In 2002, John Lombardi, then president of the University of Florida and now president of the Louisiana State University System, expressed the sentiment of many college officials when he said:

“ SMU taught the committee that the death penalty is too much like the nuclear bomb. It's like what happened after we dropped the (atom) bomb in World War II. The results were so catastrophic that now we'll do anything to avoid dropping another one.”

That’s not to say that the acts that happened on PSU’s campus aren’t egregious, because they are disgusting – there is also no way to sugar coat this mess. I am just not hopeful that the NCAA will do it in this instance. We will be watching to see how this shakes out.

Now we find out from an L.A. Times article that the Sandusky might have been abusing young boys as early as the 1970’s. Wow!

Joe Paterno’s family continued its fight Monday to save the reputation of one of college football’s most honored coaches, insisting that it will conduct its own investigation into the Penn State University child sex-abuse scandal tied to Jerry Sandusky. Meanwhile, reports that Sandusky may have abused some victims as early as the 1970s raised new questions about the already complicated legal liability issues in the scandal.

Citing "sources close to the Jerry Sandusky case," the Patriot-News reported that three men have told police that they were abused in the 1970s or 1980s by Sandusky, who was convicted in June on 45 criminal charges of sexually abusing boys. He is in jail awaiting sentencing...

So the sports world is watching – what the NCAA does next is anyone’s bet…

NCAA to wait for 'appropriate time' for action on Penn State

I don't think that Penn State is out of the woods yet and I do believe that there has to be some kind of NCAA punishment or sanctions for Penn State University football team. What happened on their campus is disgusting and heinous crime and might have been covered up.

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) – The NCAA says that it will decide on whether to take action at the "appropriate time" in connection with its inquiry into Penn State and the child sexual abuse scandal that led to the ouster of Hall of Fame coach Joe Paterno.

The NCAA says Penn State will have to formally respond to questions from President Mark Emmert about the conduct of its athletics department in connection with the Jerry Sandusky sexual abuse scandal.

Findings from Penn State's internal investigation into the case of ex-defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky are due to be released at 9 a.m. ET Thursday. The NCAA says it has already been collecting information from the probe led by former FBI director Louis Freeh.

The NCAA says Penn State will have to formally respond to questions from NCAA President Mark Emmert, even after Freeh unveils his findings.

The governing body says it won't interfere with other ongoing inquiries and will determine if additional action is necessary. It offered no specific timeline.

If investigations reveal that Penn State did in fact cover up these heinous crimes then,  PSU needs to have the book thrown at them by the NCAA - but I would say lets let the investigations play out before the long arm of the NCAA wields its punishment. I don't like the fact that the University knew about this back in 2001 and this didn't get exposed. If in fact there was a coverup then PSU should feel the pain of NCAA Sanctions.

A few good articles on the NCAA

National Collegiate Athletic Association (Philippines) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Someone posted these articles on Sioux Sports in the nickname section and they are worth a read if you haven’t seen them. There seems to be an emerging re-occurring theme of an Anti-NCAA sentiment by fans and journalists.

Dennis Dodd, CBSSports.com --- "Do we really want the NCAA to be the moral police?" one college administrator said last week.
-----------[ Snip ]-----------
Some thought NCAA president Mark Emmert overstepped his authority when he warned Penn State it might be investigated for lack of institutional control in the Jerry Sandusky case.

Former NCAA president Myles Brand started the fight to eliminate offensive team nicknames. While some schools acquiesced quietly, the battle over University of North Dakota's "Fighting Sioux" nickname rages. All of it still doesn't explain why Notre Dame's "Fighting Irish" nickname isn't offensive and stereotypical.

"The NCAA drifts into social policy every now and again," said a source who has had business dealings with the NCAA. The source did not want to be identified. "Is that organization, by design, supposed to lead our moral fabric, be engaged in social policy?"

Here is another one that asks the question The NCAA: Is Membership Worth It? That's a good question... Do we really need the NCAA to monitor college athletics anymore? Some would say no. In some cases they have over stepped their bounds.

Frank Deford NPR --- Trust me: It's only 10 days since Kentucky took the title, but the NCAA is safely again where it likes to be, flying under the ethical radar, tucked away on the sports pages and in the warm embrace of ESPN.

So far as the college media and fans are concerned, we're already back to the only issue of real consequence: how to more properly conduct the football championship so that the big-conference schools can make more money, even as the poor players continue to make none.

But before we all put the NCAA out of our mind again, here is my question: Why do so many honorable colleges continue to let their good names be associated with such an un-American conglomerate? Oh, I can understand why the big-time colleges, like Kentucky — or like Alabama, the football champion — need a cartel. It's the same reason Saudi Arabia and Venezuela belong to OPEC.

But why, in particular, do Division III colleges feel a need to align themselves with such a big-foot organization? At the very least, the NCAA is just so unbalanced. Do schools like Williams and Johns Hopkins and Oberlin and Cal Tech really need NCAA oversight just for their students to leave the classrooms and play games?

Related articles

• They aren't listening - Fighting Sioux nickname (ndgoon.blogspot.com)
• Letter from the NCAA to UND (ndgoon.blogspot.com)

Really Jack...

Image via WikipediaWow! Jack Campbell doesn't like the new NCAA rule that allows colleges and universities to pay a $2,000.00-per-year stipend to their athletes. That money is a drop in the barrel, it's chicken feed. I am not sure why Campbell would be opposed to it?

Jim Parker, Yahoo Sports --- Long an opponent to paying athletes, the most notable change will see the NCAA allow conferences the option to pay athletes a $2,000-per-year stipend to cover incidental costs of college. That’s over an above the money paid out for scholarships, which can cover tuition, fees and books as well as room and board.

“I’m a little disappointed the NCAA felt they had to do that,” Spitfires goaltender Jack Campbell said. “You go to school because you want an education.”

NCAA president Mark Emmert said the move isn’t meant as a pay-for-play, but rather a recognition that athletes train year round and because of that cannot get a part-time job to cover some costs.

“Two thousand (dollars) will buy a nice laptop, but it doesn’t matter,” the 19-year-old Campbell said.

NCAA won't budge

Image via Wikipedia
This just in from the associated press... I think most of us could have predicted this result.

NDIANAPOLIS - State legislators and University of North Dakota officials are preparing to change the school's Fighting Sioux nickname following a meeting at NCAA headquarters.

After spending more than an hour with NCAA President Mark Emmert on Friday in Indianapolis, Gov. Jack Dalrymple said the NCAA would not change the settlement agreement that goes into effect Monday. If the school doesn't change its nickname, or get permission to use the name Fighting Sioux from a second tribe, it will be banned from hosting postseason tournaments and using the nickname or logo at NCAA tournaments.

Dalrymple says he will introduce a bill Nov. 7 transferring authority of the nickname and logo back to the school. Earlier this year, the state legislature passed a law requiring the school to use its current nickname and logo.

Again, I am one of the biggest fans of the Fighting Sioux nickname but I seen no way that the Fighting Sioux nickname can survive, there is no way unless you want to watch UND play the University of Sioux Falls on a regular basis. The University of North Dakota cannot jeopardize their membership in the Big Sky Conference. Without a conference, UND’s athletic department outside of hockey would suffer and die.

Related articles

• NCAA, North Dakota leaders discuss nickname (espn.go.com)
• Native American Students File Suit to Prevent Use of Fighting Sioux (indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com)
• Fighting Sioux nickname meeting with NCAA rescheduled for Aug. 12 (mvn.com)
• A New Suit Over the North Dakota Fighting Sioux (blogs.wsj.com)

Governor to lead UND nickname delegation to NCAA July 25

Well everyone in their brother is going to this meeting with the NCAA in Indianapolis, Indiana except representatives from the two North Dakota tribes (Standing Rock and Spirit Lake). This slight doesn’t make any sense to me what-so-ever.

So if you going to the NCAA main office in Indianapolis, Indiana to make the case for the University of North Dakota to retain the Fighting Sioux nickname because you don’t think it’s hostile and abusive, wouldn’t you include a few of the people of Native American decent (just to name a few, Archie D. Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson) that broke their backs trying to get their respective tribes to vote on the Fighting Sioux nickname?

Chuck Haga, Grand Forks Herald --- Gov. Jack Dalrymple will lead a North Dakota delegation July 25 to Indianapolis to meet with leaders of the NCAA, hoping to persuade the athletics association to alter its stance regarding UND and the Fighting Sioux nickname.

“Everybody is in,” said Grant Shaft, who as president of the State Board of Higher Education will join Dalrymple, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, House Majority Leader Al Carlson, R-Fargo, and others at the long-anticipated face-to-face meeting.

The group also will include Senate Majority Leader Bob Stenehjem, R-Bismarck, UND President Robert Kelley and Athletic Director Brian Faison, North Dakota University System Chancellor William Goetz and Jody Hodgson, general manager of the Ralph Engelstad Arena.

“The governor will be the leader of the contingent,” Shaft said, “and he and Carlson will be the primary players at the table. The rest of us will be a supporting cast, there if we’re needed to answer questions.”

Kelley’s staff had worked with the NCAA in recent weeks to get possible dates for the meeting, which from the association’s side likely will involve President Mark Emmert and Vice President Bernard Franklin.

They told Kelley they’d be available for a sit-down session July 22 or 25. Shaft took those dates to Dalrymple and the others, and the 25th, a Monday, fit their calendars better.

State leaders had tried to arrange a meeting in Bismarck shortly after the legislative session ended, but the NCAA leaders balked, citing the apparent conflict between the Legislature and the State Board, which had directed UND to drop the name and logo.

The Spirit Lake Tribe in Devils Lake approved the use of the Fighting Sioux nickname, the Standing Rock Tribal Council failed to let their members vote on the issues, probably fearing that the vote at Standing Rock would have shaken out the same way. Something doesn’t smell right here… Anyone want to bet on whether the anti-nickname crowd will have their representatives present at this meeting as well?