iramurphy

There would be no reason to stop supporting UND athletics. The kids and coaches had nothing to do with this. There is no reason to rag on the attorney General or the other attorneys involved. I believe most legal minds felt we would win this lawsuit and the NCAA would be able to make sure they properly follow all of their own procedures and guidelines then return to court and make it stick. some times you need to be smart enough to cut your losses. The only thing I object to is that there is no reason to place any restrictions on the Ralph. Heck, its a piece of history and we should save it for generations yet to come. Choosing the name was done for the right reason and will be discontinued for the wrong reason. The logo and traditions of UND Fighting Sioux Athletics are something to be proud of and this decison doesn't change that. The Fighting Sioux have never been the name. The Fighting Sioux are not the Native American tribes. Other than recognizing their place in the history of the state of ND the Sioux American Indians have nothing to do with UND athletics. The Fighting Sioux are the University of North Dakota student body, alumni and supporters who have made Fighting Sioux Athletics what it is. The name and logo don't change that. If it does, then the activists and the NCAA will be able to claim a big victory. I would initiate plans to change the name or simply drop the name effective next school year. If one or more of the tribes wish the privilage and recognition that goes along with being associated with UND athletics then let them request the privilage and UND can decide if they are honorable enough to continue the name.. If they don't, I wouldn't approach them. They have chosen to no longer associate their history with UND and I would simply say too bad for you and ignore them. No protests, no harrassments, no special programs but make sure they are treated with the same fairness and respect as any other of our students or our states citizens. Some day they may regret the decision but who cares? It is their choice now. Their leaders seem to want to polarize their people and kids and so I would say good luck and you are welcome to go to school here, all you need is and ACT of 23(or whatever it is) and a GPA of 2.5 (or whatever it is). You will not be placed on committees or given places of honor that you don't earn with your own deeds, same as anyone else. They are not to be mistreated harrassed or in anyway treated differently. Many of them will say agreed and many of them will say wait a minute, that isn't what we want. My answer is that of today your leaders have decided you no longer wish to hold a place of honor and respect at UND based on your history. It was a great run, but good luck. We will get on with the next chapter of a storied and proud heritage at UND without you. I am a big supporter of the name and the great logo but I wouldn't be willing to prostitute the University and especially Fighting Sioux atheltics to a group of people who are not interested in continuing this relationship. It is a bit like the guy whose wife has been visiting all of the other guys in the neighborhood while he works the night shift and still thinks he can make it work. Go Sioux!

I wonder if he will wear his Feather Jacket?

UND has a good group of young kids and two very good recruiting years in a row. If Lennon stays and the $$$ support is there it could happen. We need to solve the AD issue and the new president needs to be proactive and recognize the value of using the athletic programs as a tool for the University. UND should be competitive from day one and even a top 20 team or better. #1 would be pretty tough and odds are against it. The AC beat the odds. I also think it will be tougher for both teams to stay on top because of the better competition.

You could argue whether or not this is the best AC team ever. Some of the guys from those teams in the 1980's might take exception. I might agree with them. This is a very good team however. A win over any big 10 team is big and this was a big win no matter how much the Gophers are down. (We still talk about the near win over the Gophers in 1974 and they weren't that good then either and it wasn't one of our best UND teams). The cupboard was left pretty bare by Mason, but a number of these kids did play last year when they had more wins and went to a bowl game so I don't think you can say none of those guys should be playing in the big 10. Weber will get better, Barber beongs, Hightower belongs just to name three. Some of their young kids will be OK. I would have liked to see us play the Gophers this year and if we could have won we would be thinking it was a pretty big deal too, because it would be. Best to let the AC and their fans enjoy this one. Anything else looks like sour grapes.

Not sure what you meant by the question. It may mean I have a role at a high school where kids are recruited by both guys and I think they both do a good job. Our HS coaches (who are very good and highly respected) speak highly of both of these guys. (My kids ACT score was over 30 so he was overqualified to go to the AC and he wasn't good enough in FB to play at either school). I did have the pleasure of telling Bohl he didn't belong on the sideline of our HS team during the game when he was recruiting and he was polite enough to leave without incident. Some of you guys remind me of the 5 yr olds who keep having to compare their manhood and think if they stretch the hell out of their monkey that makes them better than someone else. They are both good coaches and recruiters and to say otherwise would lead me to believe that person has no clue as to what they are talking aobut . The records of both coaches speak louder than my or your observations.

I would wonder how you came to this conslusion. Lennon is undefeated against Bohl. Doesn't mean anything other than he won the only game they coached against each other. He can flat out coach. So can Bohl. If you are still confused ask coaches who have no alligiance to the two schools. They will tell you both of these guys are excellent coaches and recruiters. I have personally witnessed both men recruiting and Lennon is every bit as good as Bohl as a recruiter. He is outstanding. His recruiting classes this year and last year are outstanding despite the planned D1 move. Maybe your personal experience is different. Feel free to explain. Too many people get confused by how the teams do in a particular game. These guys records speak for themselves and there is no reason to try claim one guy is better than another. They are both outstanding coaches. It is as simple as that.

Bohl has earned, and might have a shot at, the Nebraska job. He would leave in a minute if given the opportunity. He is not in Fargo for the long haul and has earned, and will receive, a chance to coach elsewhere. It isn't a question of if he will leave, but when. This year will be his best opportunity baring an upset loss to someone on the schedule and that is not be likely. The AC win over the Gophers is big no matter how bad the Gophers are this year. They should have won last year. If UND were healthy, I think they would also do well. This may be the last chance to beat them because Brewster is already having a lot of success with his recruiting and the Mn. HS coaches want to see him do well. One of the downsides to the win is Mn and other Big 10 schools may start looking closer at talent in NDak and that would hurt both schools. UND will do well in D1AA because just like the AC because they are committed to the transition. The disadvantage is the AC will be playoff eligible and this season's success will go a long way and they wil market it very well. . UND still has the academic advantage and Lennon and his staff do a great job. Bohl will leave soon if not this year. That is to their disadvantage.

I think the players are given the opportunity to make the plays and if they don't make them, you can't blame the coach. We are young, smaller on the D-line, hurt and lack depth this year. We can't afford to miss tackles and we need guys to step up and make plays but when they do that they sometimes will get burned. UND should have won the game. We missed three open receivers for TD passes and didn't make the fourth and short. We left too many points on the field. The defense played OK considering how many people we had hurt. we gave up a TD when the DB jumped the route and we gave up two big runs. They certainly didn't dominate us despite their big and experienced O-line and mobile athletic QB.

Contrary to what some believe, Martinson had no decision making authority and made no decisions about things within the athletic department. He served in an advisory capacity and his role was to assist with the D1 transistion which would require him to communicate with many people in the Athletic Dept. including coaches as well as Alumni office staff and administrative personel. A lot of what he did was garner financial support and committments to make the D1 move based on what those at UND told him it would require and to try and coordinate communication between the involved parties. If you have followed the D1 move in your own school, you should realize the D1 move is not just about athletics but involves academics, research, marketing, and support from students and faculty etc. I would hope that is all a part of what Martinson advised the president on. I am not sure why people assumed he had any decision making authority.

I am going to assume that you didn't read what was written. He wasn't working for any one in the athletic department. He obviously communicated with a lot of coaches, employees, athletes and alumni. His role was well outlined, and he did a lot to position UND to make the move to D1 with the necessary resources. There is no reason to belabor the point. I attended meetings with both of those guys present. The relationship was a cooperative one in the beginning and frankly there is no reason to air a lot of dirty laundry. I am not privy to all of the interactions within the athletic department. The issue was handled and you may certainly criticize how that was done but don't criticize the wrong people for the wrong reasons when you don't know what you are talking about. I may be wrong, but I doubt you will be brought up to speed on any of the details of this issue and can't figure out why you would really care. Better get stoked up for the Gopher AC game instead. I have a bet on the AC.

I'll take that bet and bet my house and pension. You have no idea what has gone on nor how things have been handled. Martinson wasn't "put in" Bunings Dept. He was working for and advising Kupchella. Don't get all of your info from the media or the blogs.

These people resigned long before the AD was let go. It helps if we are going to criticize someone we get the facts straight first. Before we make any assumptions based on preconceived notions consider a couple of things. Dan Martinson went to UND just like many of us. With his degree from UND, he worked in the insurance business. He was a person who had the vision and leadership to eventually create a very successful insurance company. He eventually sold this to SAFECO (if my informantion is correct) and during the course of his successful career in the insurance business and "retirement" he has given very generously of both his time and financial resources to UND. That has come without strings attached. He felt strongly UND was the "flagship" university of the state of North Dakota and we needed to continue to excel both academically and athletically so we wouldn't lose our competitive advantage in the upper midwest. He has served on a committee studying and discussing the move to D1 for the last 10yrs or so and met with President Kupchellla on a number of occasions to lobby on behalf of the move. When Dr. Kupchella asked him to help with the transition, he stepped up with more of his resources, but most importantly his time. He moved to Grand Forks and has lived in Grand Forks for about a year and does this as a volunteer. Rather than some of the cheap shots tossed at him occasionaly on this thread he deserves our thanks. He has a home on the west coast and a ranch out west (where I believe he also does some voluteer work and provides resources to help needy kids). If anyone thinks this issue was a "good old boy" issue or that there were no problems in the Athletic Dept. you a grossly misinformed. You can't have the number of people in the department (who are highly thought of) resign at the same time. Most of the coaches were unhappy and many supportive alumni were unhappy and we should be smart enough to know that there were serious problems. Lastly, when those who were your biggest supporters and most responsible for you getting the job in the first place decide you need to go( OKeefe and Harmeson), then I don't think anyone would be under the mistaken impression Dan Martinson got Buning fired. When people who have exceled all of their lives in careers like Maritinson did, that rely so much on working with people and communicating, see there is a problem, we should be thankful he asked those with the authority to look into the situation. That is what he should have done and that is what he seems to have done.

That clears up my questions I had about the Gopher-AC FB game (which was the thread topic at one time).

It was a good catch. He bobbled it but then gained control, both feet were in, butt was in, poor call. It also looked like Grover's TD was a good catch in the other end zone.

PCM has a good points but if you think it is just Wisconsin and Minnesota you are wrong. They won't look foolish to any fan base but some of ours and after a few years of lost revenue and opportunites, I wonder who would look foolish. According to some of the coaches it is an issue right now. Games against these schools are the ones that can bring in the 6 figure guarantees and are part of the budgeting for the move to D1. It won't be smart to "win the battle and lose the war" and miss opportunites to recruit kids or generate income because we can't get over the Fighting Sioux issue. It will be difficult enough to make the move to D1 without having problems we can avoid. Our opponents are on the field of play, basket ball and volleyball courts or ice arenas not in a court of law, nor at a tribal council meeting. I am not saying we should not see the lawsuit through. We should win the thing and try and come away with a reasonable settlement that allows UND to solve the issue on our own time in order to minimize the cost. If we can be awarded any damages so much the better. There is no sense in making our point, however valid, and then having higher travel costs to play further away or missing opportunites to have a better schedule because of this issue. It isn't a win or lose proposition it is a lose-lose deal. What do we accomplish if we keep the name and play Crookston or U of Mary instead of the Gophers or Wisconsin in FB, BB, VB or soccer? We will probably paly them anyway in some sports. An attorney who is very close to the situation Feels UND has a good chance of winning this suit because the NCAA didn't follow its own rules, but feels the NCAA will be able to make sanctions and restrictions stick once they follow their own guidelines . The pink locker room is irrelevant to us. I have been in it and it is unique. It isn't offensive and I wear pink sometimes and thus far don't seem to be a homosexual but I roomed with one once. He would have gotten a kick out of the pink locker room.

I agree. The Fighting Sioux and their history shoud always be part of the UND athletic teams. The cost is becoming too much.

UND is going to change the name. With the move to D1 we are having some big problems with scheduling and that includes U of Mn., and U of Wisconcisn. Both of them are in our prime recruiting areas and those kids who will come to UND to play, that might be D1 recruited walk-ons, are more likely to come to a place where periodically they will be able to go up against the so-called big dogs. They want to play rather than sit on the bench at a big school, but they also want the satisfaction of knowing what it is like to play at the highest level. The name isn't worth hurting recruiting or scheduling over. There are a number of people intersted in the Presidents position at UND who want the issue solved before they come on board. They think they will have better things to do than deal with the activists or NCAA. The NCAA has admitted off the record they screwed up with the name issue but mainly with not following their own procedures and how it was handled. They can lose the lawsuit, come back and if they follow their own guidelines, they can make it stick next time. The name isn't worth losing good candidates for president or hurting relationships with coorporations and governments who may have grant dollars. Lastly, if the Native American leaders, whomever they may be, keep focusing on the name and blaming their problems on the name issue, instead of leading their people, then indirectly it will hurt their kids and it is no longer worth the hassle. The leadership on many of the reservations is so inadequate that if getting rid of the name helps only a handful of kids then lets change and get on with life. The only way I would even consider keeping the name would be if the tribes (without prompting) came back to UND and requested the name be kept. ( I am pretty sure that won't happen). I would also require they put their money where their mouths have been and start cooperative programs for their youth to make sure the kids are healthy and safe and properly educated. I have worked with schools and programs for those kids and the kids themselves will tell you the biggest problems they have are their own parents and tribal leaders. They want to allowed to be kids. They could care less what the excuses are but they don't want to have the violence, drug use and umemployment used as excuses for dysfunctional families. They could care less about most of the cultural things until they get older. That is the sma ewith almost all kids. They just want to fit in and be kids and enjoy the same things other kids do. Unless the Fighting Sioux name can help those kids it is time to change. I have always thought it could and should be used to help reservation kids, be you can't fight the ignorance and racial bias we often face in dealing with the leadership at the reservations in order to accomplish what could have been done. It was done with respect and honor by UND, with the approval of the vast majority of Native Americans in the state and the logo is outstanding but it is going to have to change and it isn't worth fighting over anymore. I also believe the wheels of change are already rolling and the change will come within the next year or two.

What NDSU did at the D2 level and performing at the top of D2 for a number of years positioned them better for success at the D1AA level. Their reputation and traditions did indeed help with the success they have now. What makes the difference isn't that the schools competed successfully at D2 but how they went about achieving that success that makes the difference. UND will do well at the D1AA level because they are already positioned for success by how they are doing things in most programs right now. THe tradition and success of UND and the reputation of the University will be a big reason for UND's success. It isn't so much they were one of the top powers in D2 but how they became that power. The Fargo-Moorhead community got on board and have supported the move with $$$ and an upgrade in facilities. Add that to the schools athletic history and tradition and we could have predicted success. UND Alumni have gotten on board with additional $$$ and facilities have been upgraded and UND will also be successful for the same reasons.

None of this issue has anything to do with NDSU past or present. We need to take care of our own problems. It won't hurt FB recruiting nor athletics but it looks bad and the way it has played out leaves UND open to legitimate criticsim. Leave NDSU out of it. It reminds me of the parent whose kid gets in trouble and rather than dealing with their own problem child they are asking "what about the other kids?".

You must not have seen either the Gophers play nor the Sioux play. I do think UND could beat the Gophers but it would be close. I think the AC will beat the Gophers by at least three TD's and have made that bet. There are a lot of die hard Gopher fans who wouldn't bet against either NDSU or UND against the Gophers. They have been that bad this year. UND isn't as good defensively up front as NDSU this year and I think the Gophers would be able to run on us but will have trouble running against NDSU. They will have to pass to beat NDSU and I am not sure they have been consistent enough to do so. I don't think the Gophers would be able to stop us either running or passing. Why would that be a stretch? We have played them before when they were down and almost beat them and we weren't as good offensively in comparison as we are now. That was a long time ago but it was D2 against D1 before the D1AA stuff. Last year NDSU should have won and the Gophers are worse this year.

Its a college FB game, I would hope the Governor has better things to do. It will be an extra incentive to meet them every year in the playoffs as long as UND is D1AA.

Good point. Other than the Nickel and resuming the rivalry, there is no reason for them to play us right now. We didn't play them when they needed us because it would have hurt our playoff chances and I wouldn't expect them to do us any favors. I think they will resume the rivalry when it is in their best interest. They are very good this year. I think they will beat the Gophers by at least 3 TD's if not more. (I think UND would beat the Gophers this year as well). It would be a fun game to play them this year because of our speed on offense but I am not sure we could stop them either. They are a lot better than Central or Western Washington. Bohl is a better coach then the last couple of guys. Lennon would make sure we were competitive but we won't ever know because it isn't going to happen and comparing scores doesn't mean much either.

A couple of points which I think are valid. Kupchella is a former faculty guy and an academician. He did a number of things very well at UND. I think his biggest mistake was not understanding the importance of intercollegiate athletics at a University and especially in a smaller University like UND. Athletics is an important tool which should be used to improve campus life for the students as entertainment and a rallying point for building loyalties to your school. It should also be used as a marketing tool to increase the visibility of your University. We do not market our athletic teams, programs nor the successes of our student athletes a well as we should. We should also tie in our music programs and fine arts programs to build an entertainment package for the University and the community and region. The new AD and president would do well to see to it that the Marching band is well funded and well supported. It can greatly improve the atmosphere of the games and events at UND and for the community. Those kids need some sort of financial aid to recognize all of the hard work required to have a first class D1 band. The band we have does a great job but we need to increase the numbers and we need the type of band kids want to attend UND to be part of. President Kupcella, though very intelligent and honorable, missed those opportunites. I don't know why anyone's evaluation should be part of public record. In Mn. we are required to provide the public and media with a summary of similar evaluations but do not have to provide the details of someone's personal file. I believe much of that is protected by the privacy act but I am not an attorney. Bunings rating from the survey evaluation was dismal. He does, however, make some very good points in his rebuttal. The Athletic Department must have a strategic plan and mission statement and both should be referred to frequently. They should have the approval of the president so in cases like this you should easily know if you are adherring to the strategic plan and leading your department within the parameters set up by that plan and your own mission statement. You must also have and adhere to your budget. If so, it would be difficult to fire you. It is clear Buning had a number of problems. He had coaches upset with him and he had staff quitting for whatever reason. Things weren't getting done as evidenced by the gameday issues for FB referred to in a different post. To blame his demise on the "good old boys" would be a cop-out. I have been associated with UND athletics in some form or another for 37 years. I am not sure who the "good old boys" are but in most situations it is not us and it is the reason that things occur to others when we don't agree or understand. To some it is why Gino or Roger Thomas were hired and to others it is why they moved on. UND, over the years, has done a pretty good job of isolating employees from the whims of alumni and the booster groups. When you have employees, volunteers, alumni, coaches and eventually your supervisors lose faith in you then maybe you haven't sone as well as you should have. This seems to be the case and not the "good old boys". What should have occured was Kupchella should have called Buning in and let him know if he was disatisfied and was going to make a change and then negotiated an end to the relationship. It should have occured before the school year started. I know he looks to Harmeson as his right hand man, and relies and his recommendations but in the end the President needs to handle the dismissal of an AD. I also do not know what Harmeson knows nor the details of the Leave of Absence. In Mn. you cannot dilvulge reasons for the laeve of absence in many cases and with Harmeson being an attorney, I suspect he knows that. I am still puzzled at the release of the survey info but I assume it wasn't protected under the privacy act. Kupchella and Harmeson need to negotiate whatever buyout they need to do and bring this to closure ASAP. That could be what they are trying to do and are using the LOA to get this done but it seems it may have been prudent to have negotiated something this summer and made a quick and clean end to the issue. Lastly, I agree with our AC friends this has nothing to do with them or their own personel issues over the years.

You are correct. NDSU and George Ellis have nothing to do with this.

The Alumnus was not an employee. He volunteered to assist the D1 move and his role was to advise Persident Kupchella and to raise money for the move which I understand he has done very well with. Buning did not answer to this individual. If I didn't like his actions or interactions I would have told him we need to make an appointment with the president to clarify everyone's roles so there would be no miscommunication. You are correct in that if Buning was to be fired it should have been done earlier.