Chewey
-
Posts
1,154 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Chewey
-
-
Sioux need to continue playing aggressively. Prevent defense usually winds up being just the opposite.
-
Didn't see a thread on this but the clock is ticking at NDSU regarding "culturally insensitive" references in their song, among other things. "NDSU's system for confidential reporting of bias issues." WTF?
-
They should have a big weekend in Kalamazoo. My brother and I will be in attendance with our Fighting Sioux sweaters. Surprising tie with CC last weekend. They'll be ready to exact some correction this weekend. Should be fun to watch.
-
1
-
-
C'mon Sioux! Goalie pull your head out!
-
1 hour ago, Siouxman said:
The Canadian meltdown is beginning.
http://www.tsn.ca/canada-beats-swiss-in-shootout-clinch-playoff-spot-at-wjc-1.415293
Let the alibis start in 3, 2, 1.......
-
1
-
-
I was frustrated with the "home" crowd at DU at the 3 previous UND series in Denver. It really has to make you feel bad as a player when the visiting crowd not only is louder, but outnumbers the home crowd. The biggest problem stems from no student section. DU students act like they don't even know they have a hockey team that is good. The student section is an entire end of the arena and tickets are really cheap for students, yet they only fill the first few rows up from the glass.
Inexcusable. It's a nice arena and a great place to watch a game and it's a program with an extremely rich history. I guess many of the DU folks would probably rather be out skiing. Good thing to see the Rodents go down in flames tonight though.
-
Welcome to the reality of "Fighting Hawks". It is what it is. I believe in truth and truth is conformity of mind to reality.
Fighting Hawks is here and real. So, in the spirit of truth and reality, we have to go with it.
And now we need a logo.
OK, I get that some folks are rolling out their personal designs. Have at it.
Here I'd like the conversation to focus on "What makes a great sports logo".
The Capt. Obvious answer is a great team and winning tradition. Undoubtedly. The next is "the old logo". Sure, but in today's world that's not an option. (See above: truth.)
So, moving beyond that, what else is there?
I have some ideas of mine and others stolen from websites.
I'd like to hear everyone's ideas on the concepts behind logos and not so much logo samples.
Will we get into trouble with the NCAA because of the feathers on the bird logo? They are sacred to NA's after all....
-
I'm sure a couple of the boys would have worn a few feathers in their hats.............Calling Mr. Brien
-
1
-
-
Nodaks would be the best and most "creative" option, given the circumstances. At least it's not a copycat nickname or a stupid weather phenomenon.
-
2
-
2
-
-
Your obsession for this is unreal, if this would have been on the ballot it would have won, and you know! You reek of fear everytime you try to play it down!
Yea, before you go all nuts, I know "few showed up" but that doesnt mean they arent out there. I didn't even hear about this till today. Keep trying! There's a reason they didn't want it on the ballot.
You're quite right. It would have won hands down, and they know it; that's why it wasn't one of the options. The reasons why the school absolutely, positively, without a doubt needs to have a nickname are tenuous at best. Regardless of what the nickname is, sales of merchandise will not be anywhere near what they were with the Fighting Sioux nickname. They wont be that much better, if any, than the sales of North Dakota only materials. To use their own logic against them (i.e. the people who want to stay "North Dakota" really want to be the "Fighting Sioux"), all of the marketing fluff and other justifications really can be translated, as I've said before, to this: "We want to have a nickname - any nickname, even a horses#!# one- just so that we're not the "Fighting Sioux" and so that people are hopefully less inclined to say 'Fighting Sioux' at games." The meme that "North Dakota" violated the terms of the surrender agreement was a complete lie and was exposed as such. They still have plan B which is the whole marketing angle - an area that is so nebulous and esoteric and which can be impacted by so many varied perspectives that can never be completely identified let alone understood. With the surrender agreement, all one had to do was read it, acknowledge it and wait for the inevitable admissions.
-
2
-
-
Anything other than "Sundogs".......
-
2
-
-
Goon got the statement from a NCAA spokesman and Pete Johnson with UND admin verified. There is no reason to waive anything in the agreement, because not having a nickname met the requirement, unlike what some folks had been pushing. The reason for this all along is because the NCAA has nothing in their bylaws requiring a member university to have a nickname. This is all moot now because it is not an option.
Precisely. The ones who are propagating falsehoods and who "just don't get it" are the ones who still are saying that the surrender agreement requires UND to adopt a new nickname. The committee indicated that this was not the case. I believe Kelley indicated this was not the case, too. In any event, it's been publicly stated that it's not the case. It might be a good idea to read something recent before regurgitating the same false pablum that was mentioned a year ago. Just a thought.
-
2
-
-
Is this guy on crack?
UND can't use my trade names, add North Dakota to nickname ballot, ex-mayor of Bismarck says
Just another point of reference as to how utterly stupid the whole process has been. From the date the name was retired to now, one could not have purposefully and intentionally programmed a bigger clusterf$@&. So many PhD's. So many advisers. So many paid consultants. So much money. So many focus groups. This is what everyone got for it.
-
1
-
-
Nodaks is the only one that even comes close to being unique. They all suck badly, however. Nodaks, at least, would be sort of going the route of the MIAC with Johnnies, Tommies, etc.
-
3
-
-
The voice of dissidence appears. Everyone should get used to this sort of thing, and worse, because it's not going away for a very, very long time I think. The whole process has been an epic clusterf@#$ from day one. You will likely see the Sioux Were Silenced and like minded people protesting at different events. It will be the other side of the coin from the PC knobs. This mess will be Kelley's sordid legacy.
-
My guess is if both teams win tomorrow, which is likely, NDSU opens as a 14+ point favorite vs UND.
Agreed. I think UND gets its arse handed to it badly, however. Everyone my age will recollect with horror the days of the 80's. This coaching staff should promptly call Roger Thomas and ask him what he put in the water in 1993 to beat the Bison - finally - and be truly competitive with them. Now that we'll have an actual nickname, the recruiting scales of justice should finally be in sync again.........
-
Must be something in the water. I have zero tolerance for drunk drivers. Hopefully, he gets to a good AA group.
-
The sooner Kelley exits ND, the better.
-
Kelley, in his infinite stupidity, has just guaranteed that this controversy will linger on for a very long time.
-
1
-
-
The weather sucked but it was good to be there nonetheless.
-
The postings on this blog if nothing else prove how devisive this issue has been. 82Siouxguy posts his opinion and cites facts and is accused of belittling people. In a debate like this you shouldn't feel belittled as people try and express their views. We have derailed this debate back to whether or not UND had proper permission to use the name and whether or not the majority of the people on the reservations support the use of the name. It no longer matters.
I believe those who wish to either keep the name or remain nameless believe that is best for UND and are loyal UND fans just like those who want to select a name. We derail the whole issue by trying to insult those with opposing opinions. If someone's post makes you mad then counter it with some semblance of intelligent discussion and counter their facts with facts.
Nobody really knows what people on the reservations want or don't want or what they wanted back in the 1930's. I believe most supported the use of the name then and do now but none of us knows for sure. Really it no Longer matters. As I said before the fact is that the people on the reservations and the tribal councils had years and ample opportunities to turn this issue in the favor of keeping the name which I and I believe the vast majority of Sioux fans and Natives supported. The fact is that unless the NCAA completely reverses their stance on Native names and imagery, that ship has sailed and UND athletics is on shore and we can wave goodbye .
The whole naming issue has been a fiasco. The people on the committee are doing what they think is right for the University and includes people who wanted to keep the name wanting to adopt a new name because they think we need a name and need to move on. No reason to insult them. I don't know how they can come up with a way to vote on this issue because there is no way to define your voting constituency.
To me the only question that remains is what is best for UND and UND athletics. From what I have read, having a name allows us a brand and identification that allows us marketing opportunities that remaining North Dakota doesn't. Remaining just North Dakota leaves this debate open and decisive for the foreseeable future and doesn't resolve anything, it postpones what even many who wish to remain just North Dakota is inevitable. I and others understand the emotional and historical ties associated with the Fighting Sioux name and the wish and inclination that we will never give up. Beyond that, what is the value to UND in remaking just North Dakota? Forget what the name was, and the heavy handed way the NCAA dealt with the issue here and elsewhere. The name for athletic teams allows an identity that eventually gets back to the University and the teams and just like the Gophers, Cornhuskers, Cobbers, Jackrabbits, etc. we will adjust and be fine. If we get a cool logo, we will adjust faster. More importantly than the name is that our fan base at this level has resorted to name calling and threatening to pull donations or stop supporting UND. That issue is more important that what name we eventually choose. Convince me we can do the same thing without a name. Leave out all of the debate about what the tribes wanted or who is to blame. The issue is simply name or no name. The University and our athletic teams remain the constant. Attach any of these names or many of those dropped and we will be fine. The time to adjust will be shorter with a name than without in my opinion.
I understand and appreciate what you're saying. However, ramming something through is only going to accentuate the divisiveness. I want to be "North Dakota" in perpetuity but many of the "North Dakota" crowd simply don't think it's a net positive for UND to move forward with a with either an unimaginative or appropriated nickname no matter how cool any logo is. With how emotionally charged this whole process has been and with how unacceptable all of the nickname replacement are moving forward with one of them would not be moving forward at all. This fallout is not the fault of the "North Dakota" crowd or of most people who genuinely support UND. It's not wrong for people to react the way they're reacting. This is the fault of the PC anti-nickname crowd, the NCAA and Kelley and his administration (for how they've handled it and for the propaganda they've been throwing out there). As I said before, I'm sure Kelley is a nice enough man and, no doubt, he has had a very tough job with all of this. I don't think either he or Peter Johnson or the whole Administration have been at all forthright and genuine about it though. This has been quite apparent and the latest example is the GF Herald screed concerning what the NCAA may or may not do to regulate speech. The duplicity and the failure to engage people in a straightforward manner is a primary reason why we're seeing accentuated divisiveness. Kelley should just put "North Dakota" on the ballot or just say that all of the replacements are terrible and that we're staying North Dakota for 5 more years or 3 more years or whatever.
-
- Popular Post
How can you guys be shocked by that response?
You want to protect the school but people with other views want to harm UND! You constantly tell us ND namers aren't as smart as you, group us as Sioux only people! I can't believe the harsh comments didn't start sooner. On top of that we have to read your same shyt over and over every other page. Every other page you guys give your condescending speeches to someone different! Why don't you give it a rest? If we want to refresh on your doom and gloom all we have to do is flip back a page and read 12 paragraphs of it!
It's fear and frustration that motivate all of it. I have more respect for many of the anti-nickname crowd who have spines, passion and a collective will to effect "change", than I do for some of the disassembling, propagandizing, expedient-minded, move on at all costs types (even with a boring, unimaginative, rip-off nickname) on this board. The purpose of the committee was to get input from the various stakeholders and choose a new nickname based upon the input gathered from those stakeholders. A great many of those stakeholders have said that they want to remain "North Dakota" so let's include it and see how a vote of all of the stakeholders shakes out. Why don't some want to see that? They don't want it because they fear that their claim that only a small, vocal group wants it will be proved incorrect . They don't want it because they fear that "North Dakota" will receive a majority. These fears are well-founded.
If "North Dakota" is not an option, even though many people want it, the process will be revealed as more of a sham and a "fix". What business stops producing something because a sizeable # of people want it? What politician, other than one who has something to fear or hide, avoids an issue that is important to a lot of people? What reporter, other than one trying assist a sleazy politician, squelches an idea or a story that may be important to a lot of people? Does doing any of these things cause an idea or issue to go away? Wouldn't an issue, idea or concern only persist and gain strength? Does anyone think that the issue will not continue to fester among young students/people who generally think and do the opposite of what they're told they should think and do? Does anyone think that the alumni, Native Americans and many others who support "North Dakota" are just going to go away? Not including "North Dakota" will only cause the whole process to live on. It will become a perennial fertile field for people to sow the seeds conspiracy-minded paranoia and harvest the yield of ever-deepening, visceral animus.
How did attempts to deny and squelch legitimate points of view work out with the Vietnam War, the 1968 Democratic National Convention (the squelching or "moderating" of the anti-war sentiment lead to Richard Nixon's election), Watergate (Richard Nixon's antics only led to deepening inquiries), Ford's pardoning of Nixon (only gave more grist for Watergate controversy) 1976 Republican National Convention (squelching or moderating of conservative points of view resulted in the election of Jimmy Carter who would have likely otherwise lost irrespective of Ford's pardon and his "Communism isn't a threat" nonsense), Iran-Contra, Hillary Clinton's email scandal, etc.?
Aren't Kelley and like-minded academics all about having open "conversations"? The only way a position loses momentum is to fully allow people to voluntarily consider its merits or lack thereof. Anything less constitutes an amputation of reason and legitimacy.
-
5
-
Very much looking forward to this after a 6 hour drive:
Commenting on an earlier post, I never would have thought that I'd agree with Tom Denis on anything pertaining to the nickname issue but he's dead on about the effects of not allowing "North Dakota" as one of the options and trying to squelch free speech. Do what the committee and the process was, in part, charged to do: Gauge public sentiment from the various "stakeholders".
-
1
-
-
I wouldn't be so sure. Look what the Democratic senators have done to the Redskins. I think it's a matter of time before the approved teams are under fire, too.
One reason I will never vote for a Democrat again in my life -- ever. Somehow, I voted for Al Franken and Tim Walz in 2008 and we're all experiencing the fallout inflicted by these clowns now.
Branding Survey
in Community
Posted
Wasn't control over "branding" the reason why the "North Dakota" and "Fighting Sioux" language was scrapped? Wasn't "branding" to be solved by the new U.S. Post Office logo and insipid nickname? Seems to me that UND would have helped its "branding" by just staying "North Dakota". Weren't we all worried that, without a nickname, others would be defining who we were and "branding" us as they saw fit? Doesn't the fact that no one even at the school knows "who we are" eviscerate all of arguments and contradict all of the odious, rudimentary paste that spewed from the mouths of the anti-North Dakota crowd previously?