82SiouxGuy

At least those aren't going to be confused with a major university.

North Dakota as a "nickname" and the interlocking ND as the logo are bland, no matter who is leading the process. I'm going for the stars while realizing that it is very difficult to get there. But going for the stars may result in at least flying rather than just sitting like a lump on a log. And I have a lot more faith in the committee, people like Karl Goehring and Lowell Schweigert and Dave St. Peter and Carla Christofferson, than you seem to have.

Alabama and Oregon get huge amounts of publicity by competing in power conferences. Their logo doesn't have to stand out. UND doesn't have that luxury. UND needs a strong nickname and logo much more than the schools that you keep bringing up. Try finding a school at the same compete level as UND that benefits by having a letter for a logo. That would give your argument more strength. Otherwise UND's logo would be more on the same level as Alcorn State than Alabama.

I see no benefit in going bland in this situation. What are we telling the students, athletes and everyone else by striving for "good enough"? UND needs to go for great.

That looks like a logo for the state of North Dakota, not for a school. I don't see a lot of casual sports fans buying merchandise with that logo on it.

This is the problem with only having the interlockinig ND logo. Those top selling logos that you mention are well known and long established. The interlocking ND logo is well known and long established as the Notre Dame logo (even though UND used it first). It doesn't help sell merchandise for the University of North Dakota, unless they buy it by accident. UND merchandise really took off when the Brien logo was chosen. The geometric logo and earlier logos did OK, but sales jumped with the new logo. That is one of the reasons a new nickname and logo will be a benefit over just using North Dakota.

A good logo looks better on t-shirts and sweatshirts. It can also look better on other merchandise like clocks, posters, signs, golf bags, etc where the logo is large enough to be seen properly.

McKinnon is definitely part of their plans. But his back injury this year and his small size have convinced them that he wouldn't hold up to the pounding as a full time feature running back. They consider him more of a 3rd down and change of pace back, probably getting 8-12 carries per game rather than 20.

In other places committee members have said that the vote will be made by UND stakeholders rather than the general public. They just haven't figured out exactly how that is going to happen. It will probably be the stakeholder groups that were identified by the other committee, so UND staff would probably be added to your list.

They went to neutral sites so that teams wouldn't have a home advantage and to give all teams an equal footing. They struggle because it is hard to balance that neutral site idea with getting enough people attending the games. He wasn't complaining, he was just stating the facts. Technically, Fargo was a neutral site, but it wasn't a neutral crowd with approximately 90% in green. Anyone in the country paying attention to college hockey knew that was going to happen. He even said that if they wanted to avoid that situation they should have won more games to get a higher seed. And he said he thought the crowd and the atmosphere were great. I'm not sure where anyone sees a complaint in his quotes. There is a group in college hockey that are trying to bring the regionals back to home rinks. So far it has been the coaches that have led the charge to play them in neutral rinks because it is an advantage for 1 out of the 4 teams in the regional. None of the regionals are booked past next year until they review the situation again.

I think that the fact that there are 28 colleges around the country using Warriors, and one of the criteria they are using is being unique, is a bigger factor in not choosing Warriors.

I doubt that each committee member is going to sit and read each individual submission. Someone is going to sit and compile a list. They will eliminate all duplicates, and there will be a lot of duplicates. They may or may not count the number of duplicates to give the committee members an idea of popularity, that is up to the committee. They will also probably eliminate any submissions that aren't suitable, and maybe eliminate the ones that are trademarked to save the committee time. This isn't as difficult as some of you seem to want to make it.

The vote won't be open to the general public. It will be available to UND stakeholders like students, alumni, staff, season ticket holders, etc. They still aren't sure exactly how it is going to work, but they have said that it isn't going to be available to everyone.

Just wanted to give you the best chance to sell. Good luck, hope you can find new homes for the jerseys.

The only other school I found that uses Explorers is La Salle. Otherwise it fits most of the criteria being discussed. Definitely worth exploring.

For clarification, is your deadline Thursday, April 2nd or Sunday, April 5th? There isn't a Thursday, April 5th in 2015.

There are already a lot of nicknames that are more violent than Hunters. PETA and Humane Society wackjobs (as you call them) don't seem to have a lot of traction in North Dakota. So I don't think Hunters is going to be eliminated for those reasons. It may be eliminated because not enough people like it, or they like something else better.

UND owns the land that the REA is built on. The building was built on that property to supply a home for UND hockey. It was a donation to UND and UND athletics (not to Fighting Sioux Incorporated). Basketball and volleyball were added later, still on UND property. UND hockey, as you said, is the primary tenant. Everything that REA does is meant to support UND hockey and UND athletics. There is a contract in place for UND to take over the building in the future (the state wanted to make sure the building could support itself and not become a burden on the state budget before accepting the title). So you are also correct that there is not time available for another hockey program. It is very simple, but a select few just aren't able to grasp the concept.

The vagueness is part of what gives it a chance to be accepted. Does everyone define Bears (Black, Brown, Grizzly, Polar) or Eagles (Golden, Bald, Screaming) or Engineers (Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Chemical, Petroleum) or Hawks (Blue, Crimson, Scarlet, Mountain, River), etc? Most people don't just hunt one species. I'm not sure if it would make my short list or not, but it should be submitted and let people take a look at it. And maybe someone can find a synonym that sounds even better. How about Huntsmen (and maybe Lady Huntsmen) or Deerstalkers?

Hunters fits a lot of the criteria that has been discussed, and seems to be unique. Not only does it cover a lot of people that currently live in the state, it represents a lot of the original Native American population and the original white explorers that came through the region.

UND lost the faceoff battle to Quinnipiac 39-33, won the game 4-1. UND won the faceoff battle with St Cloud State 38-28, won the game 4-1. Does that prove your point? There are a lot of different factors that could decide a game. That includes a fluke goal, several of which were scored this weekend in UND games and in other games.

Some games yes, some games no. Overall UND is ahead according to UND Sports. FACEOFFS (W-L) 1358-1210 1210-1358 Faceoff W-L Pct. .529 .471

There is also a lot of difference between playing in a conference tournament after a disappointing season and being one of the last 4 teams playing for a national title. The most casual of fans will show up to see a potential national title win.

Maybe the fact that Texas has been at the same DI level for many years, including the entire 17 years that Barnes was the coach might make the situation different. And the fact that the performance of the program at Texas has declined the last several years might also factor in. Barnes took the Longhorns to the Sweet Sixteen 5 times during his first 10 years, including 3 trips to the Elite Eight and once to the Final Four. They haven't made it to the Sweet Sixteen since 2008. 2008 was also the last year they won a regular season conference title. That might be a little different than a program that has only been a full Division 1 program for 3 years. Not to mention the fact that the Texas athletic department in one of the richest in college athletics. Not exactly comparing apples to apples situations.

I don't think there ever was a Flickertails logo. If there was I don't remember seeing it. The NCAA wouldn't care whether UND picked Flickertails for a new nickname or not. There is no desire by any significant number of people to pick Flickertails because it is too similar to the Gophers next door and it doesn't give the impression of strength or power or uniqueness or any other positive image. It's a dirty rodent. The NCAA won't care if UND continues to use the interlocking ND logo or not. That logo has been used by UND for many years, mainly as a secondary logo to a Native American logo of some kind. It can continue to be a secondary logo. It probably isn't going anywhere. The settlement agreement says that UND had to quit using the Native American nickname and logo, and that if a new nickname and logo are not chosen to replace the Native American nickname and logo then the NCAA will be allowed to put UND back on the "naughty" list and suffer sanctions. North Dakota is not a sports nickname. It is the name of the state. If you think it is a suitable nickname, then you believe the team can be called the University of North Dakota North Dakota, that is how a sports nickname is written. In addition, the school has been known as North Dakota since it has been in existence since that can be a shortened form of University of North Dakota. It isn't new. It will always be called North Dakota. The settlement agreement says new nickname. North Dakota and the interlocking ND are not new.