Help
Add Reply
UND turns to state for advice
Media Stories on the Sioux Name For reference / interest
Back to top
MultiQuote
#702
Posted 11 October 2005 - 07:47 AM
Clayton Hoyt, on Oct 11 2005, 07:12 AM, said:
Quote
"That is consistent with what the board has said all along, that the matter is settled, and if the campus wants any changes, then, that request must come to me and I would transmit that to the board," Potts said.
Quote
The third, the Spirit Lake Nation, about 90 miles from the UND campus, has refused to answer repeated requests by the NCAA to restate its position.
I would think that by not restating their position as in changing it formally to the negative, the first one stands. As stated previously, the NC$$ repeatedly asking the tribe to restate it's permission sounds an awful lot like coercion to change their position.
Quote
"I think they have much more significant issues to deal with."
So say we all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#703
Posted 11 October 2005 - 08:19 AM
From The Gateway (UNO):
NCAA decision on the Fighting Sioux could affect UNO, NCC
NCAA decision on the Fighting Sioux could affect UNO, NCC
Quote
"I think that UND has made every attempt to represent their logo and the Fighting Sioux with the highest amount of respect possible," said David Herbster, UNO's athletics director. "Obviously they [the Sioux tribe]are not in agreement or offended by that, and really that is who you end up listening to. It's different for us because you don't necessarily have the ability to ask the Mavericks if they are offended by us using them as their mascot."
Since the ban prohibits UND from hosting postseason events, it could cause headaches for the rest of the NCC. In most of the conference sports, the teams with the best records host playoff events. If North Dakota earns the right to host an event, it will have to be moved to a neutral site or awarded to a lower ranked team's venue. Currently the North Dakota football team has an undefeated NCC record and has traditionally finished high in swimming and other sports.
"That's going to be interesting," Herbster said. "What that means is that if they are the No. 1 seed they can't host an event, so it will go somewhere else. It hurts the athletes who have earned the right to host an event. How it will affect us might just mean we get to go somewhere warmer."
Since the ban prohibits UND from hosting postseason events, it could cause headaches for the rest of the NCC. In most of the conference sports, the teams with the best records host playoff events. If North Dakota earns the right to host an event, it will have to be moved to a neutral site or awarded to a lower ranked team's venue. Currently the North Dakota football team has an undefeated NCC record and has traditionally finished high in swimming and other sports.
"That's going to be interesting," Herbster said. "What that means is that if they are the No. 1 seed they can't host an event, so it will go somewhere else. It hurts the athletes who have earned the right to host an event. How it will affect us might just mean we get to go somewhere warmer."
#704
Posted 11 October 2005 - 09:12 AM
Sioux-cia, on Oct 11 2005, 07:47 AM, said:
I don't know that we would have anything to gain by going to the board. They have already made a rulling regarding the name and logo. According to this statement, the only reason for going back to the board would be to ask for changes?!
My interpretation of what Potts is saying is that if Kupchella wants the SBoHE to consider changing its current position, he needs to ask. The board isn't going to revisit the issue unless UND requests it.
When the Herald says that Kupchella "intends to seek direction from the system's governing board on future moves," that could mean a number of things. It could mean that he wants the board to reaffirm its previous position. He might want the board to consider changing its previous position. Or it might mean that he wants to the board's approval to take legal action against the NCAA.
The Herald story also says:
Quote
Kupchella said he believes the NCAA is guilty of a "breach of contract" regarding its own bylaws, which say that matters, such as nickname usage, should be left to the member schools and managed locally.
Also keep in mind what Kupchella said back on Aug. 12 when asked about covering the logos and Sioux references in Engelstad Arena:
Quote
"I can't even comprehend - even fathom - asking the Engelstad Arena to do that. Not because of any physical impossibility or difficulty, but because of the very idea. It would imply all kinds of things that we're not willing to have implied."
There's an important detail here that many are overlooking. The NCAA's ban on American Indian names and imagery being displayed on team uniforms went into effect immediately (Aug. 5). This means that if UND's football team makes the playoffs, it would be required to cover the small Sioux logo on the collars of its uniforms.
If Kupchella can't fathom covering up Sioux logos on a large scale because of what it would imply, couldn't he also be concerned about what it would imply to cover up Sioux logos on a small scale?
This post has been edited by PCM: 11 October 2005 - 09:16 AM
#705
Posted 11 October 2005 - 09:47 AM
From the DS:
From the Herald:
Some interesting questions:
- Can a private organization (that appears to be a monopoly) limit the free speech of a public institution?
- Has the NCAA breeched its constitution (the contract of what it does for and with members) and overstepped its bounds in this case?
Quote
"The institution would have to decide whether or not they wanted to take the action into court to determine if the NCAA has overstepped its bounds and actually put upon us an improper or unconstitutional effect of First Amendment kinds of things," Harmeson said.
Quote
Kupchella said he believes the NCAA is guilty of a "breach of contract" regarding its own bylaws, which say that matters, such as nickname usage, should be left to the member schools and managed locally.
Some interesting questions:
- Can a private organization (that appears to be a monopoly) limit the free speech of a public institution?
- Has the NCAA breeched its constitution (the contract of what it does for and with members) and overstepped its bounds in this case?
#706
Posted 11 October 2005 - 11:00 AM
Quote
NCAA decision on the Fighting Sioux could affect UNO, NCC
Quote
I'm not sure how the two are represented any different between the two universities."
THIS is one of the biggest obstacle we have to get overcome. The general public, outside of North Dakota, are totally unaware of all the American Indian programs and services as well as a high percentage of "so-called" (GK's words not mine) American Indian students, we have as opposed to the number at of the exempted schools. This is information that will show that we are not an institution who is 'not paying their dues' to the American Indians in our and neighboring states.
#707
Posted 11 October 2005 - 11:44 AM
In the area of "breach of contract," it appears that there is much fertile legal ground (at least to my untrained eye). Here's a section out of the 2005-2006 NCAA Division II Manual which contains the organization's constitution, operating bylaws and administrative bylaws.
As David Herbster, UNO's athletics director, noted in a previously posted article, "What means is that if they (UND) are the No. 1 seed they can't host an event, so it will go somewhere else. It hurts the athletes who have earned the right to host an event."
In other words, Herbster recognizes what the NCAA apparently does not. The organization's own constitution says that one of its primary principles is to conduct postseason competition "fairly to all participants." The NCAA's constitution also says that it "shall promote opportunity for equity in competition." Yet the NCAA's policy on American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos purposely puts UND's student athletes at a competitive disadvantage in post-season play, unfairly depriving them of the home playoff games they've earned.
I'm sure some will say that the NCAA can fall back on the "golden rule" defense, which is: He who has the gold makes the rules. That's another way of saying that as a private association, the NCAA can make whatever rules it wants and, as a voluntary member, UND is free to leave if it doesn't like the rules. However, the NCAA's constitution is quite specific about the organization's responsiblities and its members' responsibilities. For example:
CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1
Name, Purposes and Fundamental Policy
1.3.2 Obligations of Member Institutions. [*]
Legislation governing the conduct of intercollegiate athletics programs of member institutions shall apply to basic athletics issues such as admissions, financial aid, eligibility and recruiting. Member institutions shall be obligated to apply and enforce this legislation, and the enforcement procedures of the Association shall be applied to an institution when it fails to fulfill this obligation.
Notice that this article doesn't mention any obligation for members to "apply and enforce" the NCAA's "Principle of Nondiscrimination" which the organization cites as its justification for enacting the policy on Indian-related names, mascots and imagery. As previously noted, when citing this principle, the NCAA conveniently leaves out the sentence that I've emphasized below.
In summary, the NCAA's constitution says that one of the primary reasons it exists is to ensure fair and equal competition among its members by requiring them to follow the organization's regulations on (but not limited to) admissions, financial aid, eligibility and recruiting. But in UND's case, the NCAA has enacted a rule that violates an article of its own constitution and treats UND and its athletes unfairly and unequally in postseason competition.
Quote
CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 2
Principles for Conduct of Intercollegiate Athletics
2.10 THE PRINCIPLE OF COMPETITIVE EQUITY [*]
The structure and programs of the Association and the activities of its members shall promote opportunity for equity in competition to assure that individual student-athletes and institutions will not be prevented unfairly from achieving the benefits inherent in participation in intercollegiate athletics.
Principles for Conduct of Intercollegiate Athletics
2.10 THE PRINCIPLE OF COMPETITIVE EQUITY [*]
The structure and programs of the Association and the activities of its members shall promote opportunity for equity in competition to assure that individual student-athletes and institutions will not be prevented unfairly from achieving the benefits inherent in participation in intercollegiate athletics.
Quote
2.15 THE PRINCIPLE GOVERNING POSTSEASON COMPETITION AND
CONTESTS SPONSORED BY NONCOLLEGIATE ORGANIZATIONS [*]
The conditions under which postseason competition occurs shall be controlled to assure that the benefits inherent in such competition flow fairly to all participants (emphasis added), to prevent unjustified intrusion on the time student-athletes devote to their academic programs, and to protect student-athletes from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises.
CONTESTS SPONSORED BY NONCOLLEGIATE ORGANIZATIONS [*]
The conditions under which postseason competition occurs shall be controlled to assure that the benefits inherent in such competition flow fairly to all participants (emphasis added), to prevent unjustified intrusion on the time student-athletes devote to their academic programs, and to protect student-athletes from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises.
As David Herbster, UNO's athletics director, noted in a previously posted article, "What means is that if they (UND) are the No. 1 seed they can't host an event, so it will go somewhere else. It hurts the athletes who have earned the right to host an event."
In other words, Herbster recognizes what the NCAA apparently does not. The organization's own constitution says that one of its primary principles is to conduct postseason competition "fairly to all participants." The NCAA's constitution also says that it "shall promote opportunity for equity in competition." Yet the NCAA's policy on American Indian mascots, nicknames and logos purposely puts UND's student athletes at a competitive disadvantage in post-season play, unfairly depriving them of the home playoff games they've earned.
I'm sure some will say that the NCAA can fall back on the "golden rule" defense, which is: He who has the gold makes the rules. That's another way of saying that as a private association, the NCAA can make whatever rules it wants and, as a voluntary member, UND is free to leave if it doesn't like the rules. However, the NCAA's constitution is quite specific about the organization's responsiblities and its members' responsibilities. For example:
Quote
CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1
Name, Purposes and Fundamental Policy
1.3.2 Obligations of Member Institutions. [*]
Legislation governing the conduct of intercollegiate athletics programs of member institutions shall apply to basic athletics issues such as admissions, financial aid, eligibility and recruiting. Member institutions shall be obligated to apply and enforce this legislation, and the enforcement procedures of the Association shall be applied to an institution when it fails to fulfill this obligation.
Notice that this article doesn't mention any obligation for members to "apply and enforce" the NCAA's "Principle of Nondiscrimination" which the organization cites as its justification for enacting the policy on Indian-related names, mascots and imagery. As previously noted, when citing this principle, the NCAA conveniently leaves out the sentence that I've emphasized below.
Quote
2.6 THE PRINCIPLE OF NONDISCRIMINATION [*]
The Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. It is the policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its governance policies, educational programs, activities and employment policies, including on the basis of age, color, disability, gender, national origin, race, religion, creed or sexual orientation. It is the responsibility of each member institution to determine independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/00)
The Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. It is the policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its governance policies, educational programs, activities and employment policies, including on the basis of age, color, disability, gender, national origin, race, religion, creed or sexual orientation. It is the responsibility of each member institution to determine independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/00)
In summary, the NCAA's constitution says that one of the primary reasons it exists is to ensure fair and equal competition among its members by requiring them to follow the organization's regulations on (but not limited to) admissions, financial aid, eligibility and recruiting. But in UND's case, the NCAA has enacted a rule that violates an article of its own constitution and treats UND and its athletes unfairly and unequally in postseason competition.
#708
Posted 11 October 2005 - 01:16 PM
PCM, on Oct 11 2005, 11:44 AM, said:
Quote
CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1
Name, Purposes and Fundamental Policy
1.3.2 Obligations of Member Institutions. [*]
Legislation governing the conduct of intercollegiate athletics programs of member institutions shall apply to basic athletics issues such as admissions, financial aid, eligibility and recruiting. Member institutions shall be obligated to apply and enforce this legislation, and the enforcement procedures of the Association shall be applied to an institution when it fails to fulfill this obligation.
Quote
2.6 THE PRINCIPLE OF NONDISCRIMINATION [*]
The Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. It is the policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its governance policies, educational programs, activities and employment policies, including on the basis of age, color, disability, gender, national origin, race, religion, creed or sexual orientation. It is the responsibility of each member institution to determine independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/00)
The Association shall promote an atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person. It is the policy of the Association to refrain from discrimination with respect to its governance policies, educational programs, activities and employment policies, including on the basis of age, color, disability, gender, national origin, race, religion, creed or sexual orientation. It is the responsibility of each member institution to determine independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/00)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Wow.
The NCAA says its governance shall apply to basic athletics issues only. Not how members conduct themselves in other ways.
The NCAA will not set up policies that discriminate, or encourage members to discriminate, yet each member institution is to set up their own policies regarding discrimination.
Yet the NCAA has come forth with a policy that arbitrarily judges which member institutions are being "hostile and abusive", and penalizes them for this.
I can now understand why Pres. Kupchella felt that his best chance of winning an appeal through the NCAA is with the Council of Presidents. All presidents of member institutions should be VERY wary of the NCAA acting out of the boundaries of its own constitution.
#709
Posted 11 October 2005 - 01:25 PM
Is the Council of Presidents the next step in the appeal process after the Executive Commitee.
#710
Posted 11 October 2005 - 01:50 PM
Diggler, on Oct 11 2005, 01:25 PM, said:
Is the Council of Presidents the next step in the appeal process after the Executive Commitee.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yep
#711
Posted 11 October 2005 - 02:07 PM
Clayton Hoyt, on Oct 11 2005, 07:12 AM, said:
Here's the revised edition:
http://www.grandfork...ks/12874883.htm
#712
Posted 11 October 2005 - 02:13 PM
This is a bit different from what was originally reported in Herald's story.
Quote
Editor's note: The following story was re-edited to make it clear that UND is not asking the state Board of Higher Education to decide whether the school should keep its Fighting Sioux nickname. The school may ask the board for endorsement for a potential lawsuit over the issue if the appeals process does not result in a favorable ruling for the university.
UND President Charles Kupchella has informed the head of the state university system that he may seek legal advice from the system's governing board if appeals fail and the school decides to take its argument with the NCAA over the "Fighting Sioux" nickname and logo to court.
UND President Charles Kupchella has informed the head of the state university system that he may seek legal advice from the system's governing board if appeals fail and the school decides to take its argument with the NCAA over the "Fighting Sioux" nickname and logo to court.
#713
Posted 11 October 2005 - 04:50 PM
Phil Harmeson was on KNOX with Mike McNamara this morning and said the same thing. He said Kupchella was very upset with the original story in today's Herald because it was misleading. They even discussed asking for a retraction. They made a point of saying that UND will go through the appeal process and keep the Board informed, but planned to pursue legal action if the appeals failed.
#714
Posted 11 October 2005 - 05:30 PM
From the Associated Press:
UND doing preliminary legal work in nickname dispute
UND doing preliminary legal work in nickname dispute
Quote
UND President Charles Kupchella said school officials will discuss a possible lawsuit against the NCAA with the state Board of Higher Education at the board's November meeting.
Quote
"I would hope there's some way to find common ground to get this issue behind us," Potts said. "It's very distracting, to UND particularly, and to some extent, our state."
Quote
The school has no plans to ask the board if UND should change the nickname, Kupchella said.
#715
Posted 11 October 2005 - 08:55 PM
This editorial is more than a month old from The FORUM, but it needs to be posted just to show how much support UND officials are getting from the Bison media. Not only is their statement misleading (the "hostile and abusive" language must be removed prior to any consideration of a name change), but shows, IMO, the sly and disingenuos nature in which they attack UND athletics and undermine its leadership.
http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm...section=Opinion
http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm...section=Opinion
Quote
LEAFY SPURGE: To University of North Dakota officials who seem to have changed the way they view tribal endorsement or rejection of UND’s “Fighting Sioux” logo and nickname. Not long ago the school was making the argument that at least one Sioux tribal council supported the name, which lent credence to the university’s determination to keep the name. But when leaders of that same tribe reversed course and came out against the logo, a UND spokeman said the school was not “hanging its hat on any existing or in-play resolutions of any tribe.” Now the school says the contentious issue is a matter of a relationship with American Indians as individuals. Whether one wants to keep the Fighting Sioux name or scrap it, UND’s malleable position regarding American Indian support is not credible.
#716
Posted 12 October 2005 - 07:09 AM
Why would the Bison media support UND?
Why does everyone here seem to think the Forum SHOULD be supportive of UND? They have NEVER been supportive of UND as far as I can tell. Why should they?
This name fiasco gives the Forum a way to be edgy, spur on this filth and lies and boost readership because people seem to like to read about and watch dirt throwing contests (Uh...reality TV anyone?). I doubt they'd be this callous if it were NDSU's name being attacked.
I hope no one posts another Fargo Forum news clipping here. We know their position already. There's nothing they can print that will change their stance.
Why does everyone here seem to think the Forum SHOULD be supportive of UND? They have NEVER been supportive of UND as far as I can tell. Why should they?
This name fiasco gives the Forum a way to be edgy, spur on this filth and lies and boost readership because people seem to like to read about and watch dirt throwing contests (Uh...reality TV anyone?). I doubt they'd be this callous if it were NDSU's name being attacked.
I hope no one posts another Fargo Forum news clipping here. We know their position already. There's nothing they can print that will change their stance.
#717
Posted 12 October 2005 - 08:03 AM
From today's Grand Forks Herald:
CLARIFICATION: About Tuesday's nickname story
IN THE MAIL : Kupchella: Herald story inaccurate
NCAA: Kupchella: Nickname change not on agenda
UND president says he's talking to state board about legal options, not nickname review
CLARIFICATION: About Tuesday's nickname story
Quote
Kupchella said the story incorrectly implied that UND was asking the state Board of Higher Education to consider whether UND should keep its Fighting Sioux nickname.
Quote
Kupchella also said the story incorrectly implied that UND is reluctant to explore the possibility of a lawsuit because of fear the university might lose.
IN THE MAIL : Kupchella: Herald story inaccurate
Quote
The implication in the story that the State Board of Higher Education is being, or has been, asked to revisit the entire nickname issue is simply false.
Quote
We believe the NCAA is wrong to have involved itself in the issue in the way it has. I hope that UND can resolve this issue without litigation so that we won't have to go to the expense and the time that a lawsuit will require.
Quote
In our next level of appeal to the NCAA, we are going to invite the NCAA to come here for a visit. We had expected a visit from the NCAA before it ruled on our initial appeal. We hope they will now visit our campus and state to see that we treat our logo and nickname with utmost respect.
UND president says he's talking to state board about legal options, not nickname review
Quote
UND President Charles Kupchella said Tuesday his school would touch base with the North Dakota State Board of Higher Education before it pursues legal action against the NCAA, if appeals to an NCAA ruling that puts restrictions on the school's Fighting Sioux nickname and logo fail.
However, he stressed that the board wouldn't be asked whether UND should keep or discard the controversial monikers. Rather, the school simply would request the board's support for any legal steps it could eventually take against the NCAA.
However, he stressed that the board wouldn't be asked whether UND should keep or discard the controversial monikers. Rather, the school simply would request the board's support for any legal steps it could eventually take against the NCAA.
Quote
While UND works on its appeal, Kupchella said, on a parrallel track, school officials continue to try to meet and discuss concerns with American Indian tribes in the state.
#718
Posted 12 October 2005 - 08:50 AM
From The Daily Pennsylvanian:
Is Penn's Quaker offensive?
The NCAA's effort to rid college sports of the Sioux, the Savages and the Indians, raises another question...
Is Penn's Quaker offensive?
The NCAA's effort to rid college sports of the Sioux, the Savages and the Indians, raises another question...
Quote
The American Friends Service Committee, a Philadelphia-based Quaker social justice organization which has offices around the world, has not found any reason to complain.
"We haven't had any objection to the use of the Quaker," said Janis Shields, the AFSC's director of media and public relations. "Kind of like Quaker oatmeal."
"We haven't had any objection to the use of the Quaker," said Janis Shields, the AFSC's director of media and public relations. "Kind of like Quaker oatmeal."
#719
Posted 13 October 2005 - 09:53 AM
From Northeastern News (the student newspaper of Northeastern University):
Commentary: Put offensive mascots in the penalty box
I have to laugh at the University of Iowa. It's an NCAA "model insititution" because of its policy of not playing teams with American Indian monikers, but it still gets hammered by the PC crowd because of its pink visitor locker room.
Don't forget what else is going on at Northeastern. You just can't make this stuff up.
Commentary: Put offensive mascots in the penalty box
Quote
This weekend, our men's hockey team finds itself in the center of the debate as they travel to the University of North Dakota to face the Fighting Sioux. The team has been in the headlines lately and not for their goal scoring. UND is in a fight with the NCAA over the use of their nickname.
Quote
Just a few hundred miles from UND is Iowa City, home of the University of Iowa Hawkeyes. While not in trouble over their name (what is a hawkeye?), Iowa has received its share of negative publicity regarding a decades-long tradition many feel has run its course. For years, Iowa painted the visiting team's locker room and shower pink, a tradition started by former football coach Hayden Fry who felt it had a "calming and passive" effect on people.
Quote
The universities of Iowa and North Dakota however, are supporting sexist, racist, and divisive stereotypes. It goes beyond school spirit when I cheer for our Huskies at UND this weekend: Go Dogs, conquer unfair stereotypes!
I have to laugh at the University of Iowa. It's an NCAA "model insititution" because of its policy of not playing teams with American Indian monikers, but it still gets hammered by the PC crowd because of its pink visitor locker room.
Don't forget what else is going on at Northeastern. You just can't make this stuff up.
#720
Posted 13 October 2005 - 09:55 AM
It's a good thing that Northeastern doesn't live in a glass house.
