mksioux

The "Dartmouth incident" will come and go. I think the larger issue of importance is the possible growth of schools who will refuse to schedule teams with Indian nicknames for non-conference games. Think of how easy these policies can be introduced and passed as sort of a "feel good" measure that has almost no real impact. To be honest, I'm surprised Dartmouth and other elitist Ivy schools didn't already have the policy. If there is substantial growth of schools enacting these policies, it will make it very difficult for UND to schedule non-conference games.

Doesn't everyone with cable in Grand Forks and Fargo get the FSSN? If you don't have cable, just go to any restaurant in town and they'll probably have it on.

It's simple. The NCAA would say there is no namesake Seminole tribe within the state of North Dakota to give its blessing. Therefore, UND would stay on "the list".

Fair enough. I'm sure WDAZ had good intentions. But from an outsider's perspective, you have to admit this looks pretty "small time". It's kind of embarassing.

The "Thanksgiving and family are more important than a football game" excuse given by some on this board is hogwash. WDAZ submitted a bid to air the game and would have aired the game had the NCAA replied sooner. Therefore, that argument is irrelevant. Let's not confuse the issues. The relevant issues are : 1) why it took so long for the NCAA to grant permission (did WDAZ submit the proposal later than usual or was not diligent in following-up, or was the NCAA at fault?), and 2) given when WDAZ got the notice (which isn't clear from the release) whether there was enough time to put together a road broadcast. On those issues, I have no idea.

To inject a little negativity into this group therapy session - I will say that this year UND may not even get a chance at a Frozen 4 run if they finish T4th or 5th like the past two years. The WCHA probably will not get five teams into the tournament this year. I'm not saying the season is over - far from it - I'm saying that just because they are on pace with where they were at the last two years at this point in the season does not mean everything is A-OK. This year is different and they will have to finish better than they did the previous two years to get another Frozen 4 chance.

This is VERY disappointing. I finally got over the fact that I won't be able to watch the game in person on my holiday trip back to Grand Forks, and now I find out I won't even be able to watch on TV? What the he!l is going on up there?

If that were to happen, I'd like to see UND go without a nickname at least for a while. The worst thing would be to do some knee-jerk reaction student vote on a list of generic and meaningless names. If a consensus nickname develops over time, then I'd be fine with officially adopting one at that point.

I thought UND had a great season. I'm not complaining about it at all. I'm just saying comparing what UND did to what NDSU did - particuarly against Minnesota - NDSU's season was more impressive. Maybe "head and shoulders" was a bit of hyperbole.

Good points. Hopefully UND will be able to make up ground in short order.

That's just the way it's always been since I've been around. Before the Alerus Center, Memorial Stadium did not have lights (I believe it had lights from the 1920's to the 1960s when they were removed), so only day games were possible. That tradition has been carried over to the Alerus Center.

Any word on whether the game is being televised?

Even though I didn't make the comment, I'll concede UND going DIA is not much more than a pipe dream at this point. But from what I hear, some of your brethren are saying the same thing about NDSU, which is not a whole lot less rediculous. And I'll concede that UND is not leading. That's unfortunate, but I'd rather be following than giving up and becoming an NSIC-type school like Walrus would have us do. I know you'd probably like all of us to share his defeatist attitude so we'd stay and languish in DII and never again be competitive with the Bison, but fortunately Walrus is in a tiny minority of Sioux fans.

Considering last year had about the same attendance for the first-round game against UMD, I'd say the injuction had nothing to do with it.

As late as 2004, we were competing with -- and getting the better of -- NDSU. Did Fargo's population superiority hold us back then? Now two years later, "we are what we are" and we need just accept the fact that NDSU has soared past us and left us in the dust? A national title is only as prestigious as the division in which it is won. We could move to NAIA and win a national title nearly every year, yet nobody would consider that an upgrade of the program. The bottom line is that UND will be nationally competitive in DI-AA football immediately. For the other sports, the goal will be "league title" and not "national title". In basketball, a league title and a trip to the dance would create more buzz on campus, in the community, and amongst the alumni than a DII national championship ever could.

This is the rub. I just fundamentally disagree with you here. UND has been holding itself back for twenty five years because we have this "we're too small to compete" attitude that makes me sick. I needed to move away from Grand Forks and this attitude just to realize the potential the university has. Does UND and Grand Forks have serious challenges ahead? You bet, but being complacent and falling behind as the rest of the world passes you by is NOT the way to meet those challenges. I say this with all due respect to your past support, but UND doesn't need your defeatist attitude.

True. I think UND's goaltending and defense will improve considerably as the year goes on. However, I'm much more concerned about whether UND has the guns to make the offense improve a great deal.

Nice logic. We will never be Fargo so let's let our once proud football program deteriorate so it's on par with NSIC schools. In the 1970s while UND had been playing football for 80 years and was regularly playing Montana, Montana State, Northern Iowa, and NDSU, the current best program in DII (Grand Valley) didn't even have a football program. 10 years ago the NSIC schools had just moved from NAIA to NCAA DII and were completely irrelevant. Now we're playing them in regular season and playoff games. In another 10 years, and another round of scholarship cuts, there likely would be no discernable difference between UND and those schools. Difference of opinion is what makes the world go around, but for the life of me, I just can't see how anyone can still be opposed to going DI.

The rules of college hockey have not ceased to exist for this Sioux team. You simply can't lose five excellent players early and expect to be a great team the next season. It just doesn't work that way. Particularly with a very ordinary freshmen class.

The way I see it, USD is being forced to move up by UND leaving and the collapse of the NCC. They really have no choice. Staying DII with a crumbling NCC and merging into the NSIC is simply not an option for USD. Regardless of what the consultant said, it seems to me that you can't assume USD has conference affiliation nearly locked up based solely on their decision to move up. To a lesser extent, I feel the same about UND. How long was staying in DII really an option for UND? It may have simply gotten to the point that moving up even without a conference lined-up was a better option than languishing in a deteriorating DII.

The only way I see the NCAA backing off on this is if the Standing Rock Tribe comes out unequivocally in favor of the nickname. That, along with the Spirit Lake resolution, would probably be enough for the NCAA to remove UND from the list. However, even if that were to happen, UND may not want to settle the case because it would leave the fate of the nickname up to the whim of changing tribal governments. The question would be whether UND would continue to have standing to challenge the policy in court if it is removed from the list. Without having thought about that issue much, I think the answer is yes, because the exemption would be merely temporary in nature and the terms of the exemption would be beyond the control of UND. So the policy would still have a negative impact on UND even if it were removed from the list. With the current facts, I don't see a settlement happening. I suppose it's always possible, but it takes two parties that want to settle the case before a settlement becomes a possibility. I've seen nothing from the NCAA that would indicate they are the slightest bit interested in settling.

My theory is that Winona State just simply does not excite the casual UND fan. Personally, it reminds me how DII is the new NAIA and makes me sad that UND is even a part of it (and glad to be moving up). Winona State in a playoff game would have been laughable ten years ago -- were they even in the NCAA ten years ago? Another reason could be that the playoff field is just too big. I mean, UND will still have to play three more games after Winona just to make it to the national championship game. I think that makes the game seem like less of an event. Having said that, if I lived in Grand Forks (or anywhere close), I'd definitely go to the game.

Sorry Sioux-cia. Immediately after UND won on Saturday, I may have gotten your hopes up in the UND-USD game thread. After the game was over, and confident that we'd get the preliminary injunction, I was excited because I thought I'd get to watch a Sioux football playoff game and two Sioux-CC hockey games all in the same trip back home for Thanksgiving. Unfortunately, the NCAA dopped UND from #2 to #3 (most likely in retribution for the lawsuit/injunction) and UND plays this coming weekend, and if they win, they will now be on the road (in Omaha) the Saturday after Thanksgiving. Sorry about that. But we'll still have the hockey games. And hopefully the football game will be televised from Omaha and the Grand Forkians can all get together in sports bars and watch the game together.

I'm not going to dwell on this much more, but my point was that if the college presidents are so concerned about the NCAA exercising unlimited power and micromanaging institutions (as you claim they are), then this policy enacted by the Executive Committee does affect them because it will embolden a precedent that the Executive Committee has the authority to enact social legislation without a membership vote. Despite this, I've heard no outcry by unaffected institutions. That, in part, is what's leading me to the conclusion that the college presidents care more about the substance of the policies (ideology) than any precedent these policies may establish that diminishes their institutional autonomy. Or, at a minimum, they simply don't care what policies the Executive Committee enacts as long as it doesn't affect their institution. Either way, I don't think they care a great deal about institutional autonomy. Remember, this is the second "social justice" policy enacted unilaterally by the Executive Committee. The first was the post-season ban on the entire state of South Carolina because the state government flies the Confederate flag at the state capitol. They started with a VERY easy target that nobody questioned, and then moved on to Indian nicknames, which was a little more controversial, but still not controversial enough to get the unaffected members riled up. This is the trend the Executive Committee will continue until they feel they have enough power to tackel the controversial "social justice" issues. And that is why I believe the Executive Committee did not simply take this issue to the members for a vote (not because they didn't feel they could get the requisite votes). They have a long-term plan that will ultimately afford their committee A LOT of power. They can't acquire that power by simply taking all of their ideas to the membership for a vote.