82SiouxGuy

LakesDave's opinion is supreme over all, just ask him.

It was a very little chance of winning from the start. Many people said that in 2005 when the NCAA policy was announced and again in 2007 when the settlement was announced. I don't know why anyone is surprised about this.

If you think the claim has a basis you should follow through and try to make a case out of it. I don't see much coming from that. The Alumni Foundation rented a plane from the Fargo Jet Center.

Spirit Lake's position has been respected. Unfortunately, the agreement required approval from both tribes. That didn't happen by the deadline. You should know that many contracts and legal agreements have deadlines that have to be followed. The deadline is past. That takes precedence over the position of Spirit Lake. And respecting the position does not have to mean honoring and following the position. Eunice Davidson was quoted in the Grand Forks Herald saying that the Standing Rock decision should be respected even if she disagreed with it. You said that the CUR took the high road, I'm just suggesting that you might want to follow. Is Spirit Lake's opinion the only one that is to be honored? What about every other Sioux tribe in the country? What about the other Native American tribes in the region? Spirit Lake is the only tribe that has given approval. If you have 2 diametrically opposed opinions, how do you honor both sides? You can't honor both. You can respect both sides. Then you have to decide which side to follow. In this case the decision on which side to follow was built into the settlement agreement.

No, it sounds like it was more of a name-calling thing. They wanted people to stop calling them the AC and UND kept doing it. But the cow-tipping thing might have been the last straw.

And UND was mean to NDSU back in 1958 and 1960 or something like that.

You mean that whole day they spent flying around the state? And again with the baseless Rob Port accusation.

That's kind of the way that government works. The side with the most votes wins. That is what is set up in their Constitution. You should listen to Eunice Davidson and respect their decision.

Sorry if we don't take your legal advice, you haven't exhibited a high standard of expertise. I will listen to attorneys that I know and trust. The CUR may have tried to take the high road. Rob Port and many others they have associated with have not. You have followed the same path. The University and the State Board have been attacked over and over, many times with baseless and petty accusations. Most of the people on this site are trying to protect the University they care about. The Alumni Association is doing the same.

The settlement agreement didn't ask for a vote. It asked for written approval from the tribe, and the tribe could decide on that approval any way that their constitution allowed. They don't have a way to vote on issues in their constitution. And the Tribal Council wouldn't allow it any way. The Tribal Council has passed resolutions against UND using the nickname many times since 1992. So a vote wasn't possible, and it wouldn't mean anything anyway in the settlement. Besides, no one could have forced the tribe to vote on any thing. They are a sovereign nation and control their own government. No one in the state could force them to do anything, much less force them to hold a vote on a sports nickname. Also, much of the reservation is in South Dakota, which would give North Dakota officials even less chance of control. In addition, the time to get approval had a deadline of November 30, 2010. We are now in 2012. The NCAA has said that they plan to live up to the terms of the settlement, which means that any approval now is meaningless to the NCAA. So any vote taken now will not affect the situation in any way. There isn't any way to get any kind of approval that would be accepted by the NCAA.

Modest is a relative term. A severe penalty would be the "death penalty" where sports are shut down for a period of time, in this case until the nickname is changed. If the death penalty is the severe end, then the NCAA sanctions would be rated moderate. But that doesn't mean the sanctions won't have a major affect on the athletic program. You really don't understand collegiate sports if you don't understand that the sanctions will chase off athletes, chase off coaches and cause the program to lose games, fans and money. The sanctions will limit that ability to compete and will drag the program down to a low level, unlike the efforts to succeed that the program has spent years trying to achieve. That includes the hockey program, which is why Hakstol finally realized it was time to change his position. The athletic program will become as relevant as Alcorn State. That is quite a plateau to aspire to. I'm sure you will be proud when that status is attained. The Alumni Association needs to be the ones to take the lead at this point because both the University and the State Board of Higher Education are severely limited in what they can do by law. But I'm sure you know that, you just want to take shots at people trying to protect the University. Or maybe you didn't realize that. The Alumni Association doesn't have the same restrictions, and they are normally tasked with working for the betterment of the University. Unfortunately that is the point we have reached. The Alumni Association has to work to protect the University by fighting to retire the nickname. What a waste of time and energy this has been by a group of misguided people, and the sad part is that they may still succeed.

On another thread he said he was going to become a fan of every team with a Native American nickname. Here's hoping that the Central Michigan Chippewa don't get mad at us for that.

Fetch might fit your diagnosis, but LakesDave is actually delusional. He shows it with almost every post on almost every topic. The nickname just brings out the worst of it.

That would be a great outcome, but his promise would probably be worth as much as Fetch's.

He did warn that the NCAA was going to crumble because of the lawsuit so he must have something big planned. I believe that he has said he's a graphic artist, so maybe he's going to draw a really ugly caricature of each of them and try to embarrass them into submission.

"So it is written, so it shall be done," sayeth the all knowing one.

Only by about 47 years.

I didn't tell you what to believe or even discuss religion. I told you to check out what was said in a book. You do realize that the Bible is a book, don't you? People of all different faiths, even atheists, have read the Bible. And a lot of them get something out of the book even if they aren't Christian. You have the most bizarre awareness of the world, LakesDave. You try to twist everything to fit in your alternate universe. Is it any wonder why no one ever agrees with your takes on anything? And sorry I used the same term to tell you that you were acting like a fool. I have stopped reading your complete posts since they don't make any sense to rational people and I didn't notice what you said. How about this, you are an embarrassment to people that support the University of North Dakota and to anyone that has ever supported the Fighting Sioux nickname. Every time you post you make yourself look worse. You might want to think about quitting where you are now.

Every lawyer I've talked to or saw quoted, other than Soderstrom and Chewey, said that the lawsuit was going to fail. And the private organization factor was a major reason. You know diddly squat about the law. Stop making a fool out of yourself. You've become the Lakes of this site.

UND is already dead to you. You worship at the altar of the Fighting Sioux. You might want to check on what the Bible says about worshiping false idols.

Does this mean that you're not going to support UND any longer? Of course I won't trust your answer, but it might be interesting to see how far you'll push this envelope.

You've already admitted that you're not a man of your word, so you can't be trusted at all.

I agree with you about Soderstrom. My point was that Dave doesn't have a clue about the entire process, and can't understand the whole private organization thing. At least Soderstrom has a grasp on how the system works. He doesn't seem like he's very good at being a lawyer and he either doesn't care or doesn't understand the true impact on UND. But he doesn't live in the same fantasy world as Dave.

I've wondered that myself, but Soderstrom appears to have at least a little understanding of how the legal system works. Dave, not so much.

You don't have to like it, but as you said, it is their right and UND has to deal with it. The best way to deal with it is to not give them that opportunity.