ScottM

Seriously. The first FF I ever attended was in St. Paul in 2002. UND wasn't in it, but it was a great time anyway ... even when Minnesota won it all. For this one, I've reserved a room at the Hotel Teatro. Not sure if I'll make it, as I may be in the UK for business around that time.

It's really never too early to start planning, especially hotel rooms. As an aside, there are a number of hotels that are closer to the Pepsi Center that are not included in the FF promo, but their prices may be higher. Denver FF Oh, and if we don't make it, it's all your fault!

A plain reading of the Settlement implicates measures to be imposed on REA but is not signed by anybody on REA's behalf. (See my earlier comments about non-litigants, such as the tribes, covered by this thing.) If REA is controlled by an entity not directly addressed in the agreement, such as a non-profit corp or foundation, it's possible REA could refuse to abide by its terms w/o penalty.

As well, I've always tended to view it a sign of respect for the warriors from Red Cloud and Crazy Horse's era, not the whining bedwetters running things today.

Not necessarily. It's been awhile since I've thought about it, but I recall the REA was put into a separate entity to keep it away from the campus politics of changing the name. I'm not sure if the Foundation directly controls it, or a separate entity operates it for benefit of the foundation. Conceivably, REA could tell the NC$$, the tribes and UND to "pound sand" if the settlement agreeement did not properly address this structure.

Moreover, since you are dealing with ostensibly "sovereign" nations, you are dealing with entities that can you to "pound sand" at any time, with little or no recourse for UND. I also agree that I do not like the idea of UND being subject to the whims of often-capricious "governments", whether it's the NC$$ or some tribe. I don't have a copy of the settlement here, but does anybody know if the entity that controls REA has signed this thing?

I agree. I also see no reason for UND to expand any of these programs either, lest they be contrived as "meddling" by some unhappy soul.

Damn, that's terrible. I met Marty a few times when he was on campus. A really good guy. Best wishes to his family.

I doubt Boosh would have had the same "interaction" if Blais was still behind the bench. Blais didn't take !@$! from idiots, or refs.

This pragmatist would not have made UND's keeping the name/logo subject to the approval of hostile non-litigants. If UND wanted to retire the name/logo on its own, for whatever reason(s) it should have done so and dispensed with that line of bullsh!t about tribal "approval", which was then subject to summary withdrawal. Moreover, if the Board and/or AG, had paid attention they would have known this was a non-starter anyway, so why waste everybody's time and more money by pandering to these assclowns?

Just cynical, jet lagged me. I'll send you some sand from Bermuda this week.

What did North Dakota "get", really? It got out of litigation, that it probably would have won, always a "brilliant" tactic. (I must have missed that day at law school.) It got bent over a barrel for a bunch of disinterested and/or hostile constituents, in and out of the state. It got itself pushed around by an entity that abused its own rules and processes. It took what is arguably protected speech and turned it into a joke that can be trotted out at someone else's offense in the future. I love the way you're shilling this settlement. Did Wayne promise to make you his media aide if he runs for the Big Chair?

And what exactly was this "point"? Sue the NC$$ with all of the hellfire and brimstone a law firm can mount, and then slink away to seek permission from non-litigants that will never be given, or if it is given it can be yanked for any reason? Tell your supporters and donors that UND/the State have a great case and we're going to pursue it for a reasonable time until we decide to cave in? Of course, "points" and "principles" play well in academia and government when you're using OPM. I think anybody who donated to the litigation fund is due an f'ing refund if this is the result that money bought.

No. What's "naive" is to presume that even if the AG and "the powers that be" were all replaced in the next election the settlement might be changed or invalidated. Basically, the train has left the station and there's nothing that can be done without breaching the agreement. Have another drink of the Kool-Aid, since the tribes will never agree to the use of the name/logo regardless of how deeply you pine for it.

Changes in "public policy" are usually done in a more transparent environment, not under the guise of a "settlement". If the State and/or Board wish to change policy, perhaps they should stop mirroring the NC$$ and allow ND residents their duly given input. While we're at it, I think the powers that be should change UND's official colors to Pink and Yellow, since they're more fitting.

Anybody who, even under the influence of any combination of narcotics and booze, thought the SR band would suddenly support the name/logo or that Spirit Lake would actually step up to offer support really needs a kick in the teeth. This is an awful settlement. Basically UND and the state allowed the tribes to veto the name/logo under the guise of a three year grace period. The f'ing tribes weren't even part of the litigation. How in the hell could anybody effectively allow a non-litigant decide the terms of the settlement? If the tribes wanted to be a party to this, why not let them spend their own money? If anybody in our legal dept pulled this crap, they'd be fired and probably have an ethics claim filed against them. The NC$$ gets off with some mild platitudes, the tribes get UND to get rid of the name and UND gets away from being called "hostile or abusive" while effectively abandoning its integrity as laid out in missives to the NC$$ and the court. Yay. That's some fine lawyering, there, Wayne.

No, "majority rule" has long since been replaced with "He who whines loudest wins". :lol:

I tend to agree. I see no reason for UND to put itself into another "debate" about a name/logo, and trying to appease every freakin' interest group under the Sun from the NC$$ to some tribes to PETA to some other college that may have the same name. There's no requirement for a team name, and I see no reason to search for a replacement.

I was thinking the North Dakota Surrender Monkeys myself.

I don't agree with cutting the NA programs, but I see no reason to increase their funding or outreach after this ass-raping. If UND seeks to "differentiate" itself, I'd rather they spend more money on programs in the business school, science, technology, etc., that have a broader appeal, and broader societal benefits.

I was out of the country, and this what I return to: A complete and utter capitulation that makes the French defense in 1940 look brave. If this is the "best" the AG could do, then his lawyering skills have not improved since his days in private practice. UND gained nothing, except a period of time to try and gain the support and assent of a bunch of ungrateful and/or apathetic maggots. I tend to agree with those who favor getting rid of the name sooner than later, and avoid having UND being extorted, bullied and cajoled by the NC$$ or the tribes any longer. I also do not favor adopting another name/logo, nor do I favor any more pandering to the tribes, or expanding any more outreach programs. Put the money to better use. As we used to say in the army: They can "f*#k off and die". And you can quote me to your heart's content.

Not surprising. Rather than appealing the decision, or using other methods within the judicial process, the Fraud once again shows its "yellow journalism" credentials. And since the "reporter" is Amy Dalrymple, I can't say I'm surprised.

I hope the Forum would appeal this soon. If not them, then perhaps one of the media trade organizations. I see no reason for a blanket order, regardless of how close the sides are/were to settling. UND and the NC$$, to a lesser degree, are public entities. From my perspective, I think the NC$$ has the most to lose if/when the seal is lifted. I also think the NC$$'s feeble attempt to interject UND's relationships with the various tribes speaks volumes about its confidence in its own positions.

I'd be happy taking 2-3 pts this weekend. Houghton has a reputation for being a tough place to play, and MTU seems to be getting better than years past. Polls, rankings, etc. mean nothing when the puck drops, especially in this conference.