82SiouxGuy
-
Posts
5,777 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
78
Posts posted by 82SiouxGuy
-
-
So Hak going to another Frozen four, Brewster going to the dance, Hardee going to the top of the BSC is all because of coaching while Jones and Muss struggled because of the nickname issue?
Each situation is completely different and only a fool would claim otherwise. Hakstol is the coach of a program that has been one of the top programs in the country for many years. They weren't looking for a conference that would take them, although they ended up leaving one of the top conferences to create another top conference. The nickname issue had little effect on hockey.
Women's basketball also has a long history of success at UND. It is a program that can depend on recruiting the region for most of their players. Brewster had a losing season his first year and a great season his second. You claim he is more successful because they made "the dance". The difference between the men and women making the dance last year was a single game. Both played in their league championship games. The women won and the men lost. The men were also short handed, playing with only 3 of their top 6 players. That isn't a reason to fire a coach.
Hardee is another case of being able to recruit most of his team from the region. That makes it easier to recruit. Hardee did a great job doing that. But 1st place in the conference is still only 1 place better than 2nd, which is what the men's basketball team finished last year. You don't get fired for finishing 2nd, especially when you work for a program that doesn't have a long history of success.
Obviously you have no clue that there are a lot of factors that figure into the success or failure of a team and a coach. It is very rare when everything comes down to a single factor. The nickname issue was a factor in recruiting, but it affected different sports to a different degree. Dale Lennon publicly said that he saw it affecting football recruits. We know that it was a minor factor at best for hockey. There are 300+ men's basketball programs at the DI level, so anything that can negatively affect recruiting will be a problem because talented players have a lot of choices. Why is it so hard for you to accept that fact?
-
1
-
-
Wait, so was Jones successfull because he finished in the top 3 of the Big Sky his first 2 years and made post season tournaments the last 4 years, or did his teams struggle because of the nickname issue?!
He had the players he had in part because of the nickname issue. As an example, last year's senior class had some good physical talent but also had its share of challenges (losing focus and not always playing a team game for instance). His teams had the success they did in part because of the quality of recruits, in part because of the coaching involved, in part because of the injuries, and because of several other factors that figured into the equation. It is very possible that he could have had even higher quality recruits without the nickname issue. He has been somewhat successful during the past several years, including the first 2 years of playing in the Big Sky. Getting even better recruits (or not having those recruits deal with major injuries) could have allowed for even more success. Coaches don't get fired when they finish in the top 3 during their first years of moving to a higher conference or when they miss the NCAA tournament by losing the championship game with 3 of their top 6 players missing the game because of injury.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_North_Dakota_athletics#Retirement_of_.22Fighting_Sioux.22
USD joined the SL in April 2009, you don't think UND would've joined with USD if the bolded part was allowed to happen without no stupid state law (which didn't happen until 2011).
It doesn't matter what would have or could have happened. The reality is that the nickname issue dragged on for several years. It is still going on. It affected UND's league membership, which affected recruiting. High school athletes aren't going to make their school decisions based on what should have happened, they make their decisions based on their impression of what is happening. UND didn't join the Summit. UND didn't find a home until after USD, and membership in the Big Sky was still somewhat a question mark until the name was dropped. Players made their school decisions based on their impressions on those facts, not on your stupid assertion that they should have had a place in the Summit at the same time as USD. That's how the nickname issue affected recruiting for Jones and for other coaches.
-
My point was if it wasn't for the nickname we would have been SL members not BSC members, so that nickname issue isn't really an excuse on Jones' mediocre teams. But Douple messed it up when he wanted the nickname issue a done deal before the 11-30-10 deadline and that is where it was a blessing because UND got a chance at full membership in the BSC.
"UND became a member of the SL before the BSC called them up for full membership. "
I meant USD in my second to last sentence.
UND and Jones still had to deal with the nickname issue in the real world. Because of the nickname issue, UND didn't have a conference home until the Big Sky, and that was at least somewhat in doubt because of the nickname. Recruiters from other schools still used that against UND while recruiting athletes. Not having a real DI conference home especially hurt in basketball where the better players had 300+ other schools to look at. And whether USD had a home in the Summit or not had absolutely nothing to do with UND dealing with a nickname issue. Your point is meaningless.
-
Speaking of USD someone mentioned UND's struggles on transition and nickname, if it wasn't for the nickname UND would've entered the SL along side USD even before the BSC was calling for UND and USD to be members. UND became a member of the SL before the BSC called them up for full membership. So cross off nickname as an excuse on Jones' mediocre teams.
Sorry, but I must have missed the press conference where UND was admitted to the Summit. I do seem to remember press reports of the Summit waiting to talk to UND until the nickname issue was settled. And I remember other press reports saying that the Big Sky had concerns about UND's membership because of nickname issues. But I don't have any memory of UND joining the Summit at the same time as USD.
-
Tenders take cash tips and put in pockets nothing wrongn with that
Goaltenders get tips??? I didn't know they had pockets, either.
-
When were all of the improvements supposed to take place. I thought that was part of the agreement, the big upgrades that were supposed to take place.
Negotiations took longer than planned. They have an architect and design firm in place. I think Mortenson is in charge of construction. The last plan I heard was to get construction started some time this spring and be finished in the fall of 2016.
-
So last weekend, CC had much improved by keeping it close and skating with the boyz at the Ralph and there was talk about being scared to play CC in the first round of the NCHC playoffs. This weekend St. Clown beats CC 7-1 and 6-1 in Colorado Springs. Do we play down to the competition or did CC fold up their tent this weekend? Just wondering.
Two weeks ago CC beat Omaha 4-3 on Friday and lost 4-1 on Saturday. Three weeks ago they were off, but the week before that CC lost in overtime 5-4 to Providence on Saturday and lost 5-3 on Sunday. Omaha is currently 4th in Pairwise and Providence 11th. It sounds like CC had a bad weekend after playing several pretty good teams in a row.
-
UND would not be encouraging anything. Not replacing the nickname is not encouraging use of the former nickname. The people have options with "North Dakota" - "Flickertails, "Fighting Sioux", "North Dakota". According to your premise, the fans already have options. Who's to say people aren't going to say "Go North Dakota" at these same venues? By your premise, the NCAA an,d by extension, Kelley, Peter Johnson and the rest of them want to have a new nickname so that the wearing of "Fighting Sioux" attire, the saying of "Go Sioux", the saying of "Home of the Sioux" at the end of the national anthem and all other like references are eliminated. No matter how you dress it up with marketing and failure to abide by the surrender agreement hyperbole, this is tantamount to language and thought policing. And, what you just indicated here controverts assertions made to the contrary. "We don't want you saying 'Fighting Sioux'" is not an appropriate basis to select a new nickname. This is why I do not and will not support the choosing of a new nickname. In venues the NCAA does have control over, "North Dakota", at least for now, does not constitute negative and offensive NA imagery. The venues they would control would be public venues so they'd look pretty foolish in directly saying that they don't want people saying this or that. The surrender agreement does not contemplate not having a nickname. This is appropriate because that's an entirely different matter which would require a new policy.
Actually, not choosing a new nickname IS a way to encourage people to continue using the old one. People will use the old name until they have something new to use. The settlement agreement says that UND will transition to a new nickname. It doesn't allow UND to go without a nickname. Using a new nickname to encourage people to use that name is completely different from not allowing people to use the old nickname. Giving people the choice of something new to use is in no way the same as policing or preventing the use of the old. People would still be allowed to yell Sioux or wear Sioux clothing. No one uses North Dakota as a nickname, and no one uses Flickertails as a nickname since that hasn't been the school nickname since 1930. Everyone gets it, you won't let go of the Fighting Sioux nickname. That isn't going to prevent a lot of us from believing it is time to move on, time to choose a new name. And in my conversations with people, more and more are ready to move on.
-
1
-
-
I doubt the NCAA would make a big fuss about not having a nickname. As long as UND has no Fighting Sioux reference, they will be fine
The NCAA wants to eliminate as many references to Native American nicknames as possible in areas they control. If they believe that UND is encouraging the fans continued use of the Fighting Sioux name by not replacing the name, they could decide to force the issue. If UND doesn't choose a new name then most people will continue to use the old one because they don't have a lot of options. North Dakota is not a sports nickname, and no one is using it as such. If UND does choose a new nickname they are giving the fans an option, an option that some portion of the public will use. Not having a nickname is not living up to the legal requirements of the settlement agreement.
-
Yes it is.
I'm pretty sure that most people not associated with UND and the nickname issue would disagree with you. No nickname is a lack of a nickname. To have a new nickname you would actually have to have a nickname.
-
My reaction to the strict literalist crowd is "So what." If no name constitutes a breach of the settlement agreement -- and I do mean IF, as it is not entirely clear -- then the NCAA's remedy is a legal action for breach of contract. But what nobody has been able to articulate is what the NCAA's damages are, or whether there is any sufficient economic justification for the NCAA to pursue the case. I tend to think that once UND got off the naughty list, the NCAA's leverage all but disappeared. Forcing UND to pick a name is a hugely extraordinary step that I don't see a court taking. Should nominal damages be awarded to the NCAA, I will be the first to pony up a dollar.
Actually, according to the settlement agreement, if UND does not transition to a new nickname the NCAA can put the school back on the "naughty list". UND would not be able to host NCAA playoffs and any other sanctions would be back in place. The NCAA could treat UND as if they were still officially using the nickname. UND would have to try to go to court to have the sanctions lifted. The NCAA isn't going to court for breach of contract, their first course of action would be to penalize the University.
-
The NCAA has a policy against NA nicknames and imagery. UND's former nickname and logo ran afoul of that policy. Not having a nickname does not run afoul of a policy prohibiting the employment of hostile and abusive nicknames. With no nickname, there is no such policy applicable to UND and there are no prohibitions being violated.
Not having a nickname runs afoul of the settlement agreement, where UND and the State of North Dakota agreed to transition to a new nickname. No nickname is not the same as a new nickname.
-
Um. Nope. Paragraph 2.d. Absence of Namesake Approval -- .....UND...will transition to a new nickname and logo which do not violate the Policy or render UND subject to the Policy. In the event UND announces a transition to a new nickname and logo which do not violate the Policy , the transition will be completed on or before August 15, 2011......If UND does not adopt a new nickname and logo, or if the transition to a new nickname and logo is not completed prior to August 15, 2011, then UND will be returned to the list of institutions subject to the Policy.
Is there anything anywhere in the NCAA by-laws, etc. requiring that a school have a nickname and logo? No. Is there anything anywhere saying that not having a nickname or logo violates anything, including the Policy? No. The whole thing is about satisfying the policy or not offending the policy. What's the effing policy again? Anyone? Anyone? Yes. Policy = Don't have "hostile and abusive" NA nicknames and imagery. That's it. UND is no longer known as "the Fighting Sioux". There it is - policy complied with.
Has either the NCAA Constitution or the NCAA by-laws been amended requiring schools to have nicknames? Has the NCAA Executive Committee come up with any such requirement? Now, the opponents of the "keep North Dakota" option can engage in linguistic and syntax divination or eisegete that paragraph with anything that's self-serving to their position. The meaning is quite clear and one certainly does not need to resort to diagramming sentences to see it. The parties are limited to the four corners of the document and the surrender agreement indicates that quite clearly. Paragraph 6, page 9, "UND and the NCAA agree that this Agreement constitutes all the agreements between them, and they have no other written or oral agreements or understandings." Parol evidence rule notwithstanding, the NCAA would have no basis, as per the agreement itself, to indicate that "we really meant this".
In paragraph 3 of page 9, UND can challenge any changes to the Policy. The NCAA would have to come up with a new policy in order to have a new category of offense regarding not having a nickname. The second to last introductory paragraph on page 2 indicates that the parties "desire to settle and extinguish all claims, rights of action, causes of action, and demands between themselves that they have or could have". Not having a nickname or logo does not violate either the Policy or the surrender agreement. End of story, scare tactics notwithstanding. Is not having a nickname mentioned in "the Policy"? No. Therefore, no litigation will come out of the surrender agreement because it deals only with the Policy. Not having a nickname does not violate the policy explicitly or even inferentially because there is absolutely no verbiage or language anywhere dealing with that topic.
The agreement signed by officials from North Dakota states that the school would transition to a new nickname. No nickname = doesn't live up to agreement. That seems like a pretty simple equation. And North Dakota is not a sports nickname. It is the name of the state and shorthand for the name of the school, just like North Carolina is short hand for the University of North Carolina and Texas is short hand for the University of Texas along with many others.
-
The MIAC has it solve with Johnnies Tommies Oles Gusties Auggies etc. Go by the Nodaks or Daks if North Dakota is too offensive. Why does anyone need to say "Here come your North Dakota (insert something -anything - other that Fighting Sioux)? Just so that it doesn't sound stupid ("Here come your North Dakota North Dakota)? How about "Here comes North Dakota" "Here we come - North Dakota " "Here’s your North Dakota scoring". Pretty simple to rearrange how one would say "the call". Having a stupid nickname just so that some thing's there and just so that one can say "Here come your North Dakota (whatever) is a poor basis to rush to a nickname and saying the inane and insipid replacement nickname would sound more stupid than just North Dakota.
The basic format is the name of the school, and then the nickname. If you want to claim that UND is using North Dakota as a nickname, that becomes the University of North Dakota North Dakota. Otherwise UND isn't using a nickname, which means it hasn't fulfilled the settlement agreement. Pretty simple really.
Not sure how some people think that UND is rushing to find a nickname when it has been 2+ years without a nickname already. And it will be 6 months to 2 years before they use a new nickname even if they start now. That isn't rushing anything. That's just wasting time.
-
We have made it work for a couple yrs now & YES we will always be Sioux so get over it - no new name will ever change that
That's a real high bar to strive for. "We've made it work so far, so we can make it work in the future." Everyone complains when they think the athletes aren't striving for excellence but some people are willing to settle for "making it work" for a nickname.
-
I swear some of you think "new name" means renaming the University of North Dakota.
It is and will always be the University of North Dakota, and folks will refer to the institution as UND or North Dakota in addition to the formal name (University of North Dakota).
However, the Athletics branch of UND (<-- see what I did there) has always run under an additional moniker or alias: UND Flickertails, North Dakota Nodaks, UND "that" word.
Calling the Athletics branch of the University of North Dakota North Dakota is asininely redundant at best, in violation of a settlement agreement at worst.
As said before here many times by many people, "no nickname" is a thinly veiled ruse to try to keep saying the old name.
Just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it? I can hear the announcer now, "Here come your University of North Dakota Nooorrrth Daaakoooooottttaaaaa!"
Works great for cheers, too. "Here we go, North Dakota, here we go! {clap} {clap}" I'm sure that the cheerleaders can make that sound great.
-
Hey what "nickname" does our country use when we compete in international competitions?
The United States does the same thing as every other country does in international competition, they don't use a nickname. All are known only by their country name. In college and pro sports everyone does use a nickname. North Dakota is not a sports nickname. UND should follow the pattern and find a new nickname rather than going without.
-
1
-
-
They should have just approved Knutson's plan north of Bismarck for a 14,000 seat arena.
I'm sure it's too late for that now. I wonder if they're going to have to put up a parking ramp eventually.
-
Parking was terrible when I lived there, looks like the parking will be worse after their done with the exhibition center.
I've wondered about that. I went to a trade show there last spring. They were using the new space even though it wasn't finished. Parking was a real challenge. They are talking about putting a hotel west of the Civic also, which would further cut down on potential parking.
-
Are you talking about the renovation that happened in the mid 90's, where they extended the south side?
The Bismarck Civic Center has been putting an addition on the convention space over the past year plus.
-
bang--Agree, that does seem very odd. Kind of hard to coach and be 100% into a game when you're Tweeting I would think?
A couple of posts later someone said that players who aren't dressed handle the Twitter account during the game. The coach isn't Tweeting and coaching at the same time.
-
1
-
-
So if Nevermann is a walkon and Momoh was offered partial(half) scholarship by UND, and Wyoming offered them both a full ride it is quite interesting. Bohl must be scrambling.
Wyoming can only offer full rides. All FBS scholarships are full rides. They have 85 scholarships to give and I believe that they can have up to 20 walk ons on the roster. FCS splits a lot of their scholarships.
-
Do Preferred Walk Ons really have an "offer" or isn't it the same as anyone who wants to walk on - "work hard and you could earn yourself into a scholarship".
I believe that Preferred Walk On status guarantees a spot on the roster for the first year and allows them to start camp with the team. I believe that regular walk ons have to go through the tryout process after school starts.
Coach Jones?
in Men's Basketball
Posted
How many DI men's basketball players come from North Dakota, South Dakota and rural Minnesota? How many DI women's basketball players come from those same areas? I don't know the numbers, but I am 100% sure that there are more on the women's side than on the men's side, probably a lot more. That fact alone shows a major difference between men and women's college basketball. It isn't all about the coaching, player talent is a major factor. And as people keep claiming on the football forum, it is easier to recruit and keep good players locally than it is to bring them in from a distance. The women's team has an advantage because they have more local players that can contribute to the success of the team.