Teeder11

I for one don't mind WYOBISONMAN chiming in. He has proven over time that he brings valuable discussion points without flaming the majority of the board. There's an art to that, especially, when you come in fully acknowledging up front that you are a fan of the opposition. And in the spirit of full disclosure, my problem with Carlson is also personal, because he's effn' things up to the degree that it could have irreparable damages on UND and its athletic department, both of which I love.

Amen and +1

Well put.

Where does it say that UND cannot plan for the future? This is what the NDUS told UND to do on Aug. 15, and this is exactly what UND said it would do on Aug. 15 in a public statement that was published in the media and on here. Why is it such a news flash all of a sudden today? I will say again: it is not against the law to plan ahead. It just make prudent sense to do so, instead of starting out flatfooted two months from now.

Accused UND of doing something wrong. You asked.

I hope you're right. And I hope it is positive for UND. But if his past track record is any indication, he better invest in a new crystal ball.

I never said that they did write their own laws. I was implying that they never broke anyone else's. They may be planning what they will do if the Legislator repeals the nickname law, but that is a far cry from breaking a law. So Al is upset because UND leaders, instructed by their bosses, are being prudent and planning their next steps? How dare those commie pointy-headed socialistic University leaders be so forward thinking? The audacity of it all!

Who's not following state law in this instance?

Actually, you are right. UND should not be moving forward with "actual actions" to retire the Fighting Sioux name. And, lo and behold, that's exactly what it's not doing. (I hope that makes sense) You are also correct in that UND should be moving ahead with developing plans on the course of action to be followed if the law is repealed. Oh, again, that is exactly what UND appears to be doing. Ah hell, let's just let UND President Kelley's own words speak for themselves: "Following a meeting last Friday between North Dakota officials and the leadership of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the State Board of Higher Education held a teleconference meeting today and instructed me to resume the process of planning the retirement of the nickname and logo consistent with prior Board action. The State Board of higher education extended the deadline to complete that process through December 2011. I will resume the planning process, mindful of the state law which, as of Aug. 1, directs the University of North Dakota to continue to use our nickname and logo. Gov. Jack Dalrymple has indicated that he will urge the North Dakota Legislature to readdress that law in the special session of the North Dakota Legislature planned for November." So, it appears that the only thing that UND is doing/has done is put out a statement saying that it will restart the PLANNING PROCESS for retirement of the name, being mindful of the existence of the state law, which is exactly what you are condoning as well, unless I am misunderstanding you. As far as what Al is objecting to can probably only be explained by Al.

Oh heavens me, GeauxSioux! You must be one of those "scared little sorority girls." How dare you inject a little pragmatism into this thread?

That's my thinking too. NDUS is allowing UND to get the ball rolling on this "if" the repeal does in fact get approved in November. If the overwhelming sentiment in the legislature is that the law stay intact ( the death knell for UND athletics IMHO), the transition can be easily halted again. But to insist that UND wait until they make up their mind and start a potential transition flatfooted is ridiculous. Unless... you're an NDSU guy who has no actual concern for what happens to UND athletics in the first place, and whose new found appreciation for the voice of American Indians to be heard is as genuine as his concern for Fighting Sioux athletics. Rep. Carlson's been using a popular wedge issue (UND nickname) to score political points against NDUS. That's his target plain and simple. And if UND athletics becomes collateral damage in that pursuit, so be it! That's not right! I'm tired of my alma mater's athletic program being used as a tool or a pawn in his political game with NDUS. I think it's far more important for UND to show the Big Sky Conference that it is serious about addressing the conference's concerns than it is to pussyfoot around with Legislators (Carlson, Schatz, et. al.) so we can placate their egos, their self-inflated importance and their political aspirations.

Oh, yeah, I was going to tell you that I really enjoyed your assessment of the incoming players. Great insight! I learned a lot.

Judging by their character, I would say, no.

They will develop under Idalski's rigorous college regimen, a much higher-quality practice competition and elite game competition. If they are coming in "good" then I am sure they will leave "great." In the past 25 years, I have seen my share of men's recruits who've come in quite shaky and left as solid pro prospects.

I don't see that as a showstopper IMHO. Outside of North Dakota, the only people who have heard of Red River High School are alumni of the high school, former North Dakotans and a handful of Minnesota hockey teams who've played them. It would be a bigger problem for me if a well known school, institution, organization has the same nickname that is eventually chosen -- something more on a national level. But all that said, I don't think that the powers that be will allow the new nickname to be a human depiction of any kind, American Indian or otherwise. I hope I am wrong because I do like "Rough Riders."

Lots of very good ones! Uff da!

That is a principled stance. It sounds a lot like what was being said 15 years ago in Grand Forks in regard to the Central High School Redskins knickame. It wasn't very long, once they finally settled on the new nickname, that Knights apparrell dominated. Today it is rare to see anyone wearing Redskins apparrel in Grand Forks. You might find it on occassion, but it is rare.

You aptly summed up the feelings of many of us on this board who have cheered our hearts out for the Sioux since our earliest memories but who also love this University and ALL it stands for so much that we are willing to let something that is so dear go so that the greater whole might survive and flourish.

Um..... that would be you.

Dr. Kelley does not deserve that. The NCAA, which started this whole mess, does.

USC seems to do OK with Trojans.

Yeah, Like the Miami Hurricanes! What a riot! Sun dogs is pretty lame, though, IMHO. It smacks of some contrived minor league hockey team novelty gimmick!

Totally agree. Nothing would prove opponents' claims that, we care nothing about American Indians and only want "our" nickname, more than eliminating our fine American Indian programs at UND over this issue. These programs are the envy of the nation and are present at UND for far greater reasons than the fact that our nickname and logo has been the Fighting Sioux for the past 80 years.

That was the crux of my debate with Leigh..... he did not like those nicknames on the reservations, either, but in those cases they were chosen by the people they represent, so I think it settled with him a little easier. I always said that that kind of inconsistency is what makes it hard for non-natives to understand the whole controversy and offer any support. It's kinda like where the "N" word can only be used by a particular set of people. I don't think it's right, but it's become generally accepted, for better or worse. Mostly worse.

I too would love to see the American Indian population of the state, and for that matter, the nation come into par with the rest of society on those issues. I am not so delusional to believe that a nickname and logo change will precipitate those changes. From my conversations with Leigh, he doesn't either. His opposition to the monikers always revolved around his belief that it was wrong to objectify a race/culture of people, and in his, words, reduce those actual people (who are still alive to see it) to a nickname that could be ridiculed and mocked by opposing fans. I argued with him about this logic and the fact that the name actually honors the Great Sioux People, but he was entrenched in his belief. More power to him. However, never did he say to me that the elimination of the name would solve all American Indian problems instantly or even with time. I may have missed it, and I know other opponents have made this ludicrous claim, but I don't think it was Leigh. I would not be offended if you prove me wrong. I would welcome the enlightenment so I could call up Leigh and have one of our great debates. Anyway, again, I too hope that one day the plights of the American Indian can be more inline with the rest of Americans, if not eliminated totally.