82SiouxGuy
-
Posts
5,777 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
78
Everything posted by 82SiouxGuy
-
Next you're going to tell me they have dancing and the evil, demon rum.
-
Do you mean that people actually dealing with the situation and people that have a strong and direct connection to the situation might have a better idea about what is happening than anonymous posters on an internet forum? How can that be? I am shocked,... shocked I say.
-
As usual, you have made a bad assumption based on poor reading comprehension. I have repeatedly said that I don't like what the NCAA has done, and I don't agree with it. But the NCAA and the court systems don't really care what I think, any more than they care what you think. What I think isn't going to change the NCAA policy. What the people of North Dakota think isn't going to affect the NCAA policy. This isn't a popularity contest. I live in the real world where you have to deal with real consequences. I'm not sure what world you live in. UND has to deal with the consequences that the NCAA has in place. You don't have to deal with the NCAA consequences. UND should have the right to make the changes needed to avoid those consequences. That is what I support. That is why I keep explaining that the NCAA has the law on its side and we aren't able to change that fact. That is why I support retiring the nickname. I approach the issue from a pragmatic and business side, not some pie in the sky world where things don't happen because they are "wrong". I work to change things I can change, if I can't change them I learn to work around them. The most practical way to deal with the NCAA Native American policy is to change the name. UND needs to change the nickname.
-
Well, the NCAA created their Native American policy based on research that disagrees with you. Go argue with them. See if that works for you.
-
There is a difference between understanding what the NCAA can and can't do, and liking it. Most of us don't like what the NCAA is doing, but understand that they have the ability and legal rights to do those things. "Wrong" doesn't have a lot of standing in court. Legal does.
-
I mentioned on the last page that monopolies by themselves are not illegal. They normally have to interfere with commerce or be doing something illegal before the government even thinks about stepping in.
-
Federal courts have ruled that private organizations can be segregated. There are golf clubs that don't allow anyone of any color other than white. And clubs that only allow men. So the courts are not going to rule against the NCAA for a policy that is based on research that says the use of Native American sports nicknames and mascots is racist.
-
I am waiting. And every lawyer that I've talked to about the issue disagree with you. It is a voluntary, membership organization. They may not be equal, but the NAIA is a very large competitor. The NCAA isn't going to be found a monopoly.
-
You do realize that without a school there is not athletic department, and without an athletic department there is no sports nickname. But the state would still own it and would be able to lock it away for good. So the nickname goes away in that case too.
-
The courts have repeatedly said that the NCAA has a constitutional right to do everything that they have done. Unless you are a constitutional attorney that can point out a point of law that the courts have missed, you don't know what you are talking about. A big reason why it isn't unconstitutional is BECAUSE THE NCAA IS A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION. A private organization can do a lot of things that a governmental body can not do. Whether the NAIA is an equal alternative or not has nothing to do with whether the NCAA is a private organization, and has nothing to do with this issue. I believe that you and your friends are the ones that are blind to the facts. Notice I said facts, not supposition or rumor.
-
Dave would probably rather close the school than give up the nickname. He doesn't care about UND, only the Fighting Sioux.
-
That was short for SiouxSports.com.
-
They understand the situation that is facing UND. You don't. Do you have to continually insult everyone that disagrees with you?
-
I can't help it that you can't deal with reality. The "private organization" part is very important. The situation is different because of that fact than if it were a governmental organization. If you can't understand that, you have no chance of understanding the entire situation. And monopolies are not illegal. They are usually only found to be a problem if they interfere with commerce or if they are doing something illegal. The NCAA has been examined many times and haven't been found to be doing anything illegal. And it is hard to argue that they are interfering with commerce with the dollars that the NCAA brings to the member schools. The courts are going to recognize that the NCAA is a private organization and base any legal rulings on that fact, so it has to be considered in any discussion.
-
A lot of people that haven't paid much attention to the issue, which probably means a majority of the state, will have a chance to hear the truth. Most people only know the very basics, not all of the factors involved. Whether they take advantage of the opportunity will be the question.
-
Most of us supported the fight up until it became obvious that Standing Rock wasn't going to change their position by the deadline. The fight was lost at that point because the NCAA had the law on its side. The Spirit Lake lawsuit may be dismissed this week. If it continues it will take multiple years and still has only a small chance of winning. The damage that can be done to the University of North Dakota isn't worth the small chance of Spirit Lake winning their lawsuit.
-
Your comprehension skills are very weak, as are your off-hand insults. Most of us really like the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. It would be our first choice to keep. However, we understand that keeping the nickname and logo in place will damage the University of North Dakota because of the NCAA sanctions. The University of North Dakota is more important to us than the nickname. Therefore we are ready to retire the name and allow the school to move on. The nickname and logo have served the University well over the years. They can be retired with honors. You and the other nickname-at-all-cost types don't care about the University. You care about what you want, rather than what is best for the school and the athletic department. You seem to believe that the nickname is magic. It isn't. You believe that continuing to fight will somehow result in the NCAA changing their policy. It won't. You think that UND keeping the name will somehow hurt the NCAA. It won't. This isn't some great crusade. This is a sports nickname that currently is causing UND problems because of the sanctions.
- 185 replies
-
- 10
-
-
The NCAA may be wrong, but they have the controls. I am right about what UND needs to do.
-
And what does that matter under the current circumstances? UND didn't get the needed approvals by the required deadlines. There are no do-overs. It doesn't matter what happens with Florida State.
-
Try telling the athletes and coaches that the damages can be handled. You will hear a different answer from them. And since when has life ever been fair? Do you live in some kind of fantasy world? UND has to deal with its own situation and not worry about what is happening with anyone else.
-
The NCAA is a private organization. They can set their own rules. They don't want Native American nicknames or imagery associated with their events, and they have the ability to put pressure on schools to get rid of them. How difficult is that to understand? If they wanted they could pass a policy against schools using the color green for school colors. That's why you change it, to remove the pressure being put on the school. The choices are simple. Keep the name and suffer the penalties, keep the name and leave the NCAA, or change the name. There is no option where you get to keep the name and not suffer damages of some kind. The sanctions the NCAA have in place will slowly eat away at the athletic department, unless the Big Sky decides to get rid of UND which would result in much quicker damage. Leaving the NCAA and going to the NAIA would set UND athletics back decades. Retiring the nickname is the lesser of the 3 evils. A lot of other schools have changed their nickname and have thrived. UND can also. That's why you change the nickname.
-
It's a sports nickname. Get some perspective.
-
I believe that the movie writers also ghost write speeches for Minnesota legislators.
-
The courts aren't going to care if the plaintiffs are Sioux or not. They are Native American and claiming civil rights violations that are associated with the school using a Native American sports nickname. The question will be whether civil rights violations actually happened, not which tribe they belong to. And no, a ruling in favor of these claims wouldn't set a precedence that would end the use of nicknames based on people. The ruling would be related to civil rights violations, so other cases would also have to prove civil rights violations.
-
I would tend to believe that actual civil rights violations against Native American students on campus of a school, and that those violations might be associated with a Native American sports nickname, would have more standing than perceived damages suffered by a namesake tribe located 90 miles away. The students don't need to be Sioux if they have suffered civil rights violations that can be associated with a Native American nickname. Most white people couldn't tell the difference between someone of Sioux descent versus someone of Chippewa descent. The issue will be whether there were actually civil rights violations, not whether the students are Sioux or not. I don't believe that the student lawsuit has much chance of success because we haven't seen much evidence of civil rights violations. If they do have actual evidence it could be a different story. And their case could very well take precedence over all other issues associated with the nickname if they can prove civil rights violations, even a North Dakota Constitutional Amendment. The US government and the court systems take civil rights very seriously. But again, they will have to prove those violations occurred to be successful.