Gothmog

C'mon, the point is not valid and you know it. Back to my original point, for many reasons, the case against UND's nickname simply does not apply to IU's nickname - even if a few farmers from North Dakota (I assume) were to claim to be offended.

In my opinion, it is wrong for any institution to use the name and image of a group of people if the members of that group have made it clear that they don't want them used in that manner. Regardless of the outcome of this legal case, the NCAA is at least trying to do the right thing, and I applaud them for it. In the end this case is about morality and nothing else. In our free society it can be very difficult to force one group of people to stop mistreating another group. People will cling to the letter of the law even when they know that, in doing so, they are perpetuating an injustice. In those cases shame is quite often the best approach to take. SHAME ON YOU UND, you're wrong and you know it!

His point was so lame it wasn't worth a comment.

Are you playing some sort of PETA thing now? Wow, that's a slippery slope argument taken to absurd lengths.

Gee, I doubt if any of your uncles and cousins would be too keen on following your direction. Given what you just wrote about them, I suspect that you're probably not their favorite person.

You seem to be saying that no Sioux people object to the nickname. Surely you don't believe that. If there is, as you seem to be suggesting, little oppostion to the nickname among the Sioux people, why have such an overwhelming majority of Native American and civil rights organizations expressed opposition to the name? Sorry, I'm not buying it. The Sioux people, as a group, want the name changed.

I don't necessarily disagree. For instance, if the Irish people were to begin to express opposition to the "Fighting Irish" nickname, I would absolutely support the NCAA requiring Notre Dame to change it. That nickname is every bit as offensive as "Fighting Sioux", and the "put up your dukes" leprechaun is clearly far more offensive than any image UND is currently using. The point is that, other than those who use it as a means of opposing the NCAA policy on Native American nicknames, I have never heard an actual Irish person, or any Irish group, object to the name. In fact, those that I have known seem quite proud of the name. I have heard, and seen, many Sioux people object to UND's name. I don't know what the future holds. But we all know what the past held for the Sioux nation. Given that tragic history, is it too much to ask that UND make this small change just because a clearly oppressed group asks them to? Why do you need any more reason than that?

Well, personally I don't care what exemptions the NCAA may, or may not, have given to other schools. This issue is ultimately not about UND vs. the NCAA. It is about UND doing what is good and right and honorable. If any group of people asks a public institution to stop using their name and image in a manner that they deem to be offensive, that institution has a moral and ethical responsibility to respect that group's wishes - PERIOD! That's why this lawsuit is so terribly wrong and wasteful. No matter who wins, the issues will not go away. The tribes I listed, along with nearly every other Native American and civil rights group in the country, will still oppose the nickname. Eventually, UND must and WILL change the name, it's just a matter of how much time, money, and goodwill its leadership is willing to throw away.

No, in that case the tribe that expressed support was the namesake tribe - the Seminoles. All the tribes I listed are "Sioux" tribes.

C'mon, you know better than that! Are you suggesting that one Sioux tribe's qualified support trumps every other tribe's expressed oppostion!?!?! What about Standing Rock, Wahpeton-Sisseton, Rosebud, Pine Ridge, Yankton, Crow Creek, Cheyenne River and Oglala? A "continuing, open dialog" is simply not possible until UND admits the legitmacy of the Sioux people's request.

Well that's a stretch. In any case, that could be said of ANY nickname that has ever been, or might ever be, connected to a group of people. The thing about UND's nickname is that there is a real group of people who have, in fact, been expressing opposition to its use for at least 30 years, and that group's connection to that nickname is not in doubt. GET IT?

Good, I'm glad you agree. I suspect we would probably disagree as to exactly why the argument is "silly". I would contend that it is silly because there's really no analogy to be drawn between IU's use of the nickname "Hoosiers" and UND's use of "Sioux". Why do you think the argument is "silly"?

C'mon, this is a silly argument and you all know it. The term "Hoosiers", as currently used, simply does not apply to an racially or ethnically identifiable group of people - it is usually is taken to mean something like "a person from Indiana." In any case, to my knowledge, no group has ever requested that Indiana University stop using the name.

Geez, you gotta be kidding. My point is obviously correct - I'm sure you know that. BTW - Here's a scientific poll that yields considerably different results: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/magazine/...ates/minnesota/

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. The "someone" I'm referring to is the person who designed the poll. You might have noticed that there are 3 choices involving the State of Wisconsin totalling over 70% of votes cast. The problem with this sort of a question is that we have no idea whether the folks that voted for the Packers, for instance, would prefer UW Football, UW Hockey or UND Hockey. I suspect that if you removed the Packers, for instance, that UW Hockey would easily outpoll UND Hockey. And, of course, we have no idea who actually voted and how many times a single person may have voted.

That "someone" could have been a rabid hockey fan, or even a rabid UND hockey fan, for all you know. That's precisely why unscientific polls are meaningless.

You do understand that the pool you sited is not a scientific survey and its results are statistically meaningless.

What a great post. I had some friends go to the game wearing Sioux gear and they said the same. The Bison fans made it hard for them to cheer for the guys in green and gold, but they still did. I am thinking if the Sioux were playing the Gophers in the dome, Bison fans probably would have been cheering for UMN-TC, but who knows.

You think, maybe, that's a bit of a stretch?

Listless? They're just getting their butts kicked. Things could turn around in the second half, but, so far, this is total physical domination by the Bison!

Do you really think there's any chance NDSU would allow that.

So, let me get this straight, you HATE the Bison because they beat the Sioux (badly I might add) 12 times in a row? Aren't you, basically, hating someone for doing their job?

You know, I've probably been out of line on this issue, and, if so, I apologize. It just drives me crazy to see Star2City pawn his speculation off as fact. Personally, I would have no problem with UND being in the Big Sky and NDSU in the MidCon/GWFC or Gateway - that may be what's best for everyone. It's the notion that, if that were to happen, it would somehow constitute a failure for NDSU that bothers me. One school's success does not constitute a failure for the other.

I'm reminded of a small child saying something like, "I'm rubber, you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." Your post is, again, a collection of irrelevant nonsense. But, hey, whatever makes you feel good. That's what this whole thread has been about anyway.

"UND will succeed where NDSU has failed." There it is!!!! That's the answer to my question. You want this to be true so badly that you feel compelled to repeat it over and over again, hoping that somehow that will make it come true. Maybe UND will end up in the BSC, maybe they wont. Regardless, NDSU has already succeeded. Nothing UND can do will change that. Your wish cannot come true.