dmksioux

I have no idea what the percentage of Universities that have policies regarding scheduling games against schools with Native Americans is. However, there definitely is precedent (or proof) as Minnesota and Wisconsin and I believe even Iowa have stated that they will mirror the policy of the NCAA. In other words, if UND goes back on the list, those schools would not schedule us. As I, ScottM, and some others have alluded to in the past, there has to be a reason Faison and Kelley are encouraging the retirement of the Sioux name. I highly doubt they are just pushing a personal agenda...feel free to provide the proof of that. I'm sure that Kelly and Faison have had discussions with other Athletic Departments/Schools in regards to potential fallout regarding the name. To think otherwise is foolish. I'm hoping we get to keep the name but only if Standing Rock steps up and says it's ok. I don't see anyway this turns out positive for UND without their blessing. Standing Rock needs to step up very soon...

Continuing to keep it close...hopefully they can hang around long enough to make a run at the end of the game...

Thanks, I missed the first five minutes of the game and have missed him if he's played since then. Sioux need to start playing defense...lots of open looks for AFA right now. Perhaps it's fatigue from the amount of games at elevation. They also are settling for the three point shot too much. Again, perhaps a bit of fatigue.

Nice to see that Webb is back on the court. Is there a reason that Brekke isn't playing tonight?

On the website it says all games are on Fox College Sports broadband with a link to watch online. The Championship appears to be the only game televised. Here is the webcast link... http://www.b2livetv.com/partner_members.asp?id=379

Last I checked, it still says Sioux in the endzones...

Fullerton has gone on record as having discussions with another potential school. I don't know that Omaha would pick the Big Sky over the Summit League for the same reasons USD chose the Summit...money. It's going to be interesting to see how NDSU feels about having Omaha in the league...at least from their fan's perspectives.

It appears as though the interest in UNO by the Summit League is ramping up a bit. http://omaha.com/article/20110309/NEWS01/703099866#division-i-conference-eyes-mavs

You kind of had to figure that some venue in GF would take advantage of this opportunity. I'm guessing the Empire will have 2 sold out shows for this event.

Already been posted and talked about in another Sioux sports forum...

I would like to believe this is how it would play out but I have my doubts. In the eyes of the NCAA, this is already resolved (read the settlement). North Dakota can pass the nickname into law and the NCAA would be fine with it...they will just tell us to live with the sanctions and abide by the settlement. The only way I see the NCAA looking at this case is if there is some type of development at Standing Rock. Yes the SBoHE deadline has passed, but if somehow the Standing Rock Tribe were to make a move before June 1st when we officially stop using the name, then the NCAA might be willing to listen. Keep in mind I am not a lawyer nor do I pretend to be one...

I'm not arguing that it doesn't happen at most any athletic event. I'm not saying I'm offended by it. There is a difference when it comes to "F the Gophers" chants and a derogatory chant towards the Sioux name. The Sioux name represents real people who can be offended. Again, I don't agree with it, but it's unfortunatley a fact of life that some people find it offensive. Personally I would tell those people who are offended to get a life and worry about more important issues. Unfortunately the minority who are offended make noise about it and go to the media and blow it all out of proportion. The fans don't make scheduling decisions, it's the administrators that do. It's my opinion that administrators would rather not deal with these issues if they don't have to as evidenced by some schools adopting policies against it. It's also my opinion, that more schools will be added to that list if "racist" or "insensitive" issues arise because their athletic department chooses to play UND. Am I happy about it, no...just trying to view it from other people/schools perspective...

As will UND, regardless of whether we keep the nickname or not. Your are also correct that we can only control what is ours to control...same as the opponent. They are the ones who can and have (at least some of them) decided to not play UND because of a myriad of reasons. They are controlling what they can control. Texas Tech can say we won't schedule UND anymore because of the fiasco with the football program. I have been to Madison on three different occassions and have heard the chant each time. I also wore my Sioux jersey and had no issues with Bucky fans saying anything derogatory about it. It's just students being creative and having fun. I don't see any thing wrong with the chant. How their administration views it is up for debate. Will the chant continue in the future, who knows but there is a pretty decent chance that there will be more "insensitive issues" such as TT, Dartmouth, St. Cloud, Wisco, etc. that will pop up every now and then. Some administrations may take the chance it won't and will schedule us, others will pass on us and schedule someone else.

For starters, UND was only on the "black balled list" for a short time, so we haven't seen how scheduling may be affected. But we do know that some schools have policies stating they won't play schools on that list. Those incidents have been isolated thus far, but will it stay that way? Wisconsin fans chant "Racist Mascot" whenever the Sioux go to Madison. Do there administrators want to deal with those issues if they don't have to? Conference games, WCHA games/tournaments do not matter when it comes to being on the "black balled list." Sioux/UND fans will continue to attend those games, set records, provide a good gate etc. The games against "name" opponents/non-conference games/NCAA playoff games are what may/will be affected.

It may be a small amount of schools right now, or they may be some schools we don't know about that are refusing to play us because of the name. When I see the stories that came about with Dartmouth and Texas Tech, I can't help but think that as time goes by, the list of schools who won't play us will continue to grow. I could be way off base on this but I have a difficult time weighing out the pro's and con's. I love the Sioux name as most do on this board, but I would also like to see UND's athletic department be successful at the DI level. Personally, getting thrashed by schools like Idaho in both football and basketball is not ok with me. I feel we have the resources and committment to put out a product as good if not better than those types of schools but that is a different argument. If UND ends up on the NCAA's bad list, I don't see anything good happening to our athletic department. If there is a way we can keep the name and avoid that list, I'm all for it.

Good post and lots of interesting points to consider...

Not being disrespectful, but I disagree with most everything you stated here. First off, there already are schools not choosing to play us because we were on the NCAA list. See Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. You could also give Dartmouth a call to see if they would be interested in scheduling us again...my guess is probably not. You can state that the NCAA is not held in high regards by many schools but there voting shows where they stand on this issue. If you remember back when the NCAA initiated this Hostile and Abusive rule, it was formed in a committee and passed by the committe into their by-laws. During the UND's court battle, the NCAA put the rule to a vote of all member institutions, and it passed overwhelmingly. If you were to say that sports fans of other Universities don't hold the NCAA in high regard then you would be correct. As far as having Kelly sit down and visit with AD's/Presidents who are skeptical about playing us, that is not realistic. If a President/AD from another school is presented with these two options: 1. Schedule a school with no controversy or 2. Try to work with UND, sit down with their President, visit with Tribal Elders, talk to their media about what language is or isn't permissable when covering the event, visit with students to make sure they don't do anything stupid such as offensive chants, offensive shirts, offensive posters (all of which could be portrayed negatively in the media), etc...the list can get quite long. Which option do you think they will do? My guess is the President/AD will choose the first option, and if they still are considering playing UND, they will just call the President of Dartmouth or the President of Texas Tech and ask them if it's worth the potential negative press to play UND. There was a fight to be fought in the nickname battle, and that fight could have been won had it taken place 2, 5, 10+ years ago. Unfortunately, I don't see UND winning this battle now except for one scenario. That scenario involves the Standing Rock tribe coming out fairly quickly and supporting the name. Even then, I feel some schools still won't schedule UND.

While all of this may be true to a degree, do you think it's any different than most of the other University Presidents? I would like to keep the name, but I'm not sure if the positives outweigh the negatives at this point. Since Kelley is a University President, perhaps he has a pulse on what other University Presidents feel in regards to the Sioux name. For example, perhaps he has spoken with the President of Texas Tech to see how he feels about scheduling the Sioux in anymore athletic competitions. Perhaps the TT President told him it's not worth the negative PR his school received with the TT Raider/Native American caricature poster to schedule us anymore. I'm not pretending to have any inside knowledge on any of this, but I'm guessing Mr. Kelley has more information to work with then the general public. Do I like that we may lose the nickname...absolutely not. But the negative ramifications of keeping it definitely needs to be considered. The questions is, for me I guess, is who is looking out for the best interest of the University (long term)...the ND State Legislature or Mr. Kelley. I'm not sure I can answer that question.

I find this a bit amusing. First some legislatures want to ban alcohol from sporting events because of possible exposure to minors and the message it would send. Now they have passed a bill allowing minors into bars that serve food. http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/192779

Apparantly something else. On WDAZ sports tonight, Pat Sweeney quoted a statement by Coach Mussman. According to coach, his release had nothing to do with academics or legal reasons. Coach also said he believes in second chances and this is beyond that. I can't find the statement anywhere otherwise I would post a link. Edit: Ok...guess I just had to look at the WDAZ website. Here is a link to the story with Mussmans comments. http://www.wdaz.com/event/article/id/6167/

Thanks for the info. I'm hoping we can redshirt as many of the incoming class as possible. I also hope we can get as many game day reps as possible for the redshirt frosh and sophs this year. Better to take a few lumps this next season so we can be ready for the Sky in 2012.

This stinks. We do have an awful lot of young rb's. I guess it's a bit of a blessing in disguise that we have one more year of play in the GWFC. Hopefully we are able to use this season as a stepping stone and get alot of reps in for all of the younger guys at all positions. How many Seniors does UND have back on both sides of the ball?

Any speculation, other than Idaho, as to which schools these could be? I know there are a few MAC schools that struggle with the attendance issue. Any other FBS schools out west that are struggling in that regard?

I have a feeling your inbox may get pretty full.