DamStrait

The announcement would not be demeaning or confrontational, just factual. If Myles and his band of foaming-at-the-mouth pc stormtroopers don't want to have it known that they are responsible, then they should have thought that through before embarking upon their "catalyst for social change" campaign. That most definitely would have been my preference.

I'm not advocating marketing "nothing" I'm advocating marketing the University of North Dakota. Those insisting that UND needs a new moniker should "Fighting Sioux" be retired can be more accurately described as advocating "nothing" as they are doing so without knowledge of what that new moniker will be. It's like saying that one really needs to be married, but to whom one is married is of secondary if not trivial importance. A lot of the problem I have with a new moniker is that it will be largely the same people (SBoHE, Kelly, Faison, Alumni Association) responsible for screwing the pooch on the effort to retain "Fighting Sioux" making the selection. If "just the University of North Dakota" were to be one of the options for a popular poll for selecting a new moniker - with the various other names that have been bandied about comprising the rest of the possible selections - it is not at all unreasonable to expect that the "no moniker" option would garner the most votes.

Ask Marquette how their new moniker affected their merchandise marketing. That's what happens when you force the issue. You self-proclaimed marketing geniuses need to quit trying to convince those of us that think going without a moniker is wrong-headed and come up with a new moniker that fits - and I got news for you - all the ones mentioned up to now do not fit. I'd also suggest you get out of smack dab in the middle of that box you're in. UND can't market like Michigan? Think small - be small. Going without a new moniker could set UND apart and exploit the difference to its marketing advantage. I'd have every home game start with a PA announcement similiar to the one currently employed explaining "Fighting Sioux", only it would explain why UND has no moniker. Lets' just say the NCAA, and "Catalyst for Social Change" Myles Brand would be prominently featured. And as for the interlocking "ND", each and every time UND plays before a national audience, I'd make sure the AD's publicity department unambiguously informs the broadcasters that UND had it first - turn a negative into a positive. Sure it would take some effort, but anything worth doing does. Let's not shrink from the challenge, but show a little "can do" North Dakota spirit. I suspect I am thought of as being intransigent, but I can assure that I have given considerable thought to a new moniker, something unique, but fitting. I've thought of Corps of Discovery (Lewis & Clark), Badlanders, Plainsmen (doesn't work well with the women's teams), Prairie or Western Rattlers (which would be somewhat ironic, given the load of bull propigated by pc morons equating Sioux to snake), Roughnecks (oil industry), Bankers (Bank of North Dakota, the only state owned bank in the US), Frontier Scouts, Territorials (Dakota Territory), Ligniters, Northerners (UND is the northernmost state flagship university in the continental US), Eighty Niners (ND was admitted to the Union in 1889), Minutemen (missles), Miners, Equalizers (ND was the only legislature to pass the ERA), Trappers...none seem to fit.

I admit I'm not the marketing genius you apparently are, but I am not contending that Sicatoka's avatar would be the only new logo, but merely an example of one (of several) that could be successful without a moniker. If the current moniker is retired, it's likely merchandise sales will take a dip, regardless whether there is a new moniker or no moniker. I can easily envision a ill-fitting, forced, and too soon new moniker resulting in much worse merchandise sales than if no moniker is adopted. And no one seems interested in commenting on my Michigan example - again, if they can do it with in effect no moniker presence on their merchandise, why can't UND? This is being made harder than it has to be - try it with no moniker and see how it goes - if it catches on, great - if a new moniker naturally evolves, great - if hell freezes over and it becomes evident that a lame-ass contest to find a new moniker among a list of lame-ass options is needed, then gr... - TO HELL WITH THAT. The point is, going with no moniker does not preclude the possibility of choosing a new one at a later date - in other words, stupidity delayed is at least preferable to immediate stupidity.

I'm assuming by "moniker/logo" you mean "moniker and logo", but I would suggest that it should mean "moniker or logo". I think your avatar is a very good example of a new and very marketable logo that is independent of a moniker. What fraction of University of Michigan merchandise makes reference to "Wolverines"? Whatever it is, it is a very small one and if "Wolverines" was to be banned from all their merchandise, I have to believe it would have almost no, if any, effect on their sales. And Michigan is what - certainly in the top ten of all the NCAA for merchandising - probably in the top three. In addition, as someone else mentioned previously, having no moinker would set us apart from virtually all other programs - a difference that could be exploited to UND's (marketing) advantage.

Agreed.

Again, perfectly expressed.

First two games of the WCHA tournament.

I am in no way defending that completely moronic post, but how do you know the mods changed the post (and not the poster)? I think most feel that Jim is more tolerant than a lot of other board organizers, but I suspect he just hasn't yet had that particular post come to his attention. If it were up to me, I would choose differently than Jim does on occasion, but it's his site. Most of us Sioux fans have things other than the 'SU softball team on our minds right now. By the way, tony is hardly a paragon of virtue. You may prefer his board to Jim's, but certainly no one is forcing you to visit Jim's.

Not "they" - "he".

Why try to engage in discussion someone that is on record as stating that the principle reason he wants the name changed is to "stick it to whitey"? He isn't worth it.

I hope the basketball teams appreciate the sacrifice, because the Summit sponsors neither hockey nor football (which just happen to be the two most popular sports at UND). I wish nothing but the most ill towards all the members of the BoHE, Tom Douple (and especially his puppetmasters), and Miles Brand. If any were in my presence I don't know that I could resist the temptation to spit in each of their despicable faces. Make no mistake - the decision has been made to knuckle under to a minority of a minority that is willing to wage an unholy war caring for nothing but acheiving their desired ends. They will go to any means to accomplish them. If you love justice and fairness, you have no recourse but to hate this decision. It is disgustly weak and cowardly - anyone with an shred of integrity would feel nothing but shame.

I agree that Mr. Bettman leaves much to be desired as a commissioner, but I don't fault him for fighting a relocation to Hamilton, Ontario. Three NHL teams as close as together as Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo would be nuts IMHO.

Since you are apparently in a position to guarantee Summit membership, why don't you just go ahead and make it no longer conditional. I mean, you do acknowledge that that would be the right thing to do since only a minority of a minority wish to have the name changed, right?

You know, one has to wonder - doesn't it seem that since the Spirit Lake vote yet again reaffirmed all previous scientific polling regarding NA opinions on NA sports teams' nicknames that MlpsBison should put his considerable talents to use badgering ad nausem Erich Longie,Tom Douple, Myles Brand and Joel Maturi instead of filling this forum with his repetitive drone? They are the ones that are holding indefensible positions on the subject. Makes you wonder about his true motives, doesn't it?

Dude, you do realize that tin foil hat is not really doing anything, right? Seriously, paranoid much?

First - let me say I want to take advantage of the good doctor iramurphy, M.D. (psychiatry) being "in" and pledge that I will follow his prescription and indeed get out more. If ever there was someone that felt threatened by posts on this website it would be me. I live in fear of my computer (I am cringing as I write this). Second - I seriously doubt that the 'SU fans positng on here regarding this topic are Sioux hockey fans. I also doubt that any of the 'SU fans that are Sioux hockey fans are against the current moniker, so I'm not sure what reasonable point it is you thought MplsBison was making. Third - I didn't know MplsBison had so m(any) fans of his posts on this website! Fourth - My comment about rather hearing what Sioux hockey fans had to say vs. what 'SU fans had to say on any subject was not meant seriously. You see, in addition to being emotionally impaired (see item one above) I am also sadly "smiley icon usage" impaired. Not to worry, I will be seeking additional professional help immediately.

And another thing, Skippy, regarding this issue I'd much rather listen to Sioux hockey fans than 'SU fans. There seem to be an awful lot of 'SU fans here today offering advice. I find it hard to believe that they really have the best interests of UND at heart. I think it more likely that they are shitting themselves at the prospect that the Fighting Sioux moniker may yet live on. On second thought, let me correct myself - there isn't any issue on which I'd rather hear the opinion of 'SU fans over Sioux hockey fans.

There is nothing morally wrong with the Fighting Sioux nickname.

Bolding above is mine. Jim, I'm really curious to hear a good reason for opposing the nickname - that's one of the biggest beefs I have with the anti-nicknamers - none of their arguments hold water. It all seems to boil down to "because I say so".

That is an incredibly weak argument - the people that might care about the nickname issue have been shown time and again to be a ridiculously small minority and are very unlikely to be sports fans. He quite simply has no dog in this fight and ought to stay the hell out of it.

Hammersmith, I respect you for your many insightful and informative posts, but this is just hogwash, and I have to say, unworthy of you. There might be any number of reasons that might generate bad pub for the league (such as league players' trouble with the law). At least this one could be easily dealt with by the league offices by issuing a statement like the following: "UND's nickname is strictly their affair - the league does not involve itself in such matters." Unfortunately, this would require some humility to recognize one should stay out of the business of others. I do not believe humility is a virtue in Mr. Douple's possession.

Then by all means, keep him away from the Osh.

Zach Jones played in 168 games during his career at UND and was rock solid defensively.

Gentlemen, thank you for deciding to come to play for my alma mater. I wish you luck in all your future endeavors. I think it's safe to say we'll all continue to root for you wherever you end up and whatever you decide to do.