ScottM

IMHO, one of the things that might bend ND towards the west is the fact they could try to effectively dominiate it by virtue of their name recognition. Not so much with certain teams around Beantown ....

Well, of course not. Do you know how difficult it is to skate with cow shiat on your skates? Not to mention it's tough to use a hockey stick when your banjo keeps gettin' in the way, and you have a plug of chew stuck in your mouth guard. And then there's the men...

For all of the whining from the Minnesota faithful, the fact of the matter is that college hockey does not have a lot of teams. So, the people who actually are responsible for these things and need to make the numbers work, namely ADs, presidents, etc., most of whom probably don't whine on message boards, will have no choice but to work out interconference schedules. IMHO, regardless of conference affiliations, people will pay to watch traditional rivals play. And as Sacred Heart can attest, almost any program has the potential to get into and possibly win the NC$$ tourney. Moreover, I don't think smaller programs like Bemidji or Tech should be thrown to the dogs and UND, et al. should make good faith efforts to schedule them regularly since it benefits all concerned about this sport.

Get real. It wasn't the "political establishment" that will kill the Sioux name, it's the NC$$. As long UND wishes to be a member of that organization, it will have to play by those rules.

Even though settlement discussions are "off the record" and may not be introduced into evidence in most cases, I suspect they probably went like this. UND: We want the same deal Florida State, Utah, etc. got, namely one tribe's approval. NC$$: No. UND: Why not? NC$$: You're a D2 school, and they're not. UND: So? We're planning to go D1. NC$$: Not with that name, you're not! UND: Why? NC$$: Because we said so, and we can make the rules, and change them, to suit our agenda. UND: That sucks, dude! NC$$: Tough shiat. If you want to go D1 without any flak from us, you need two tribes' approval. Anything less won't do. UND: Oh,. okay. But you won't interfere in our dealings with the tribes, right? NC$$: Of course not. (*whispers under breath* Member conferences are another story) /smiles/

None. Much like the "open meeting laws", the Carlson legislation only has force inside the borders of North Dakota. The NC$$ knows this, their lawyers know this and most rational people know this. The NC$$ is only being nice, and I suspect it's only a courtesy to UND and the Board not a real opening to revisit the settlement or let UND off the hook.

If his idiotic comments are any indication, Carlson's presence will probably do nothing but aggravate the NC$$ brass and make the meeting a short one. Maybe they can leave him outside to watch the van.

I was going to call it "The Magical Mystery Tour", but I got a "cease and desist" from some legal types ...

Perhaps the NC$$ will at least offer them a chair as they politely nod, tap a copy of the settlement on the table and discreetly check their watches.

Precisely.

So working for the best interests of the entire university as opposed to a name/logo is "stabbing us in the back"? Really. Yeah, Al tossed UND one helluva life saver with half-assed, self-serving legislation that put UND's ability to be a legitimate D1 school well in doubt. Perhaps you can email your local bartender/councilman and demand the name be 'saved".

Who's going to call them? The MIA delegation representing the state in DC? On another thread, some useful idiots are emailing the same useful idiots in Bismarck who got UND into this quandry. I'm surprised their next "tactic" isn't to stage a hunger strike on I-29 over the 4th of July weekend ...

Laws don't necessarily need a penalty provision or private right of action to make them "laws". If Clueless Al's legislation said that if UND athletes did not wear the Sioux name/logo they could not travel or be given scholarships, then you have a penalty. Criminal laws generally lay out the violations, and the potential penalties. Civil laws can run the gamut from specifying the official state mouse to allocating tax monies without specifying any particular consequences for a failure to "obey" them.

Emphasis added. Don't ever underestimate the caprice of myopic academics ... or the stupidity of politicians.

A decent NY Times piece about the flooding around Minot that also touches on the character of North Dakota in the face of adversity. NY Times

"render UND irrelevant as a NCAA Division I member." Thanks, Al. You f'ing jackbag.

But hey, there's always the WAC or NAIA ...

The "settlement" basically foreclosed the state and/or UND from pursuing any legal action in the future on the name/logo issue. Unless the NC$$ was in breach of the settlement agreement, like any contract, there's really nothing a court would do, besides sanction UND, dismiss the action and probably have the state pay the NC$$'s attorneys' fees for bringing a frivolous action. For example, if as part of the sanctions, the NC$$ mandated that UND revert to "Flickertails" or wear Green and Pink uniforms, then there would probably be a reason to re-visit the settlement and sue the NC$$ for violating its terms. Frankly, the only people in a twist over the settlement are Clueless Al and a few others who continually grasp at straws in some vain hope a miracle will occur. IMHO, the Sioux name/logo was doomed when UND indicated it wanted to go to D1, and I would not be surprised if that "price" was part of the settlement negotiations in some way. However, since settlement negotiations are confidential we'll never know for sure, but it may help explain AG Stenjhem's "MIA" status.

As long as the Sioux name/logo exist in the face of the terms of that settlement, I can see the NC$$ doing whatever it can to stymie UND's move to D1. (Their club, their rules, etc.) Transparency is not a hallmark of the NC$$, and it probably doesn't take much more than an "off line" conversation, or subtle hint to rattle these academics and get them to toe the NC$$ line.

I agree. This whole, long process of fighting the NC$$ over the Sioux name/logo sort of reminds me of watching a good friend or relative die a lingering death and accepting that fact, only to have somebody pull out "Dr. Al's Miracle Snake-Oil Cure" and claim it can stop the inevitable, and grow hair. I'm not at all happy at losing the name/logo, but I figured that was going to happen when the decision was made to move to D1 and the settlement was trotted out.

Kelley is an NCAA fifth-columnist, spy, traitor to UND and eats live puppies!!!!!

I've spent the past couple of years loading up on Sioux gear. I don't expect to buy anything with a replacement name/logo. Unless it's this ... And NoDak's "esteemed" Attorney General is doing nobody any favors by ducking issues related to the legislation that his office should either handle, or farm out to competent counsel.

Of course the NC$$ got to the BSC. And they can do the same to any other conference UND might consider. It's the NC$$'s ballgame, and they can make or change the rules as they see fit. I said it before, and it bears repeating: Losing the Sioux name/logo was the price for a relatively painless transition to D1.

And yet so many still think Clueless Al is right up there with Jesus and PBR.