- Popular Post
PCM
-
Posts
13,098 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by PCM
-
-
According to this article in the USA Today ( http://www.usatoday....-approved_x.htm ) The NCAA granted namesake exemption without formal approval from the Oklahoma Seminole tribe. Based on everything that I have seen, the Oklahoma Seminole tribe has never approved the use of the name.
I think you are correct that the Oklahoma Seminole never approved FSU's use of the Seminoles nickname, but the tribal council did vote down a resolution to condemn FSU's use of the nickname by an 18-2 margin. That was widely interpreted as the tribe giving its approval. David Narcomey had long been an outspoken critic of Florida State's use of the Seminole nickname. This USA Today story shows how the NCAA started to back off its policy and began to create the "namesake exemption" after the Oklahoma Seminoles rejected Narcomey's position.
Here's another story from that time period about what happened.
FSU's chances of success have drastically improved in the past two days with the clarification that the Oklahoma tribe does not oppose the "Seminoles" name or imagery used by the university. Several members of the NCAA executive committee that handed down the decision last week have said they believed the Oklahoma tribe -- unlike the Seminole Tribe of Florida -- condemned FSU."Now I've learned that one member of the [Oklahoma] Tribal Council spoke loudly and vociferously but really wasn't representative of the entire council. For me, that's a very significant factor in this decision relative to Florida State," said executive committee member Arthur Kirk, the president of Saint Leo University, near Dade City.
He stressed that he spoke only for himself and not the entire committee or NCAA. "If the Seminole tribes in Florida and Oklahoma do not find it offensive or objectionable," he said, "then that's significant."
Here's yet another story detailing how the NCAA thought that Narcomey spoke on behalf of the Oklahoma Seminole tribe when he really didn't.
-
Why didn't anybody question Wayne Stenjeum on this? He agreed to this....why?
The question is: Why do so many believe that Wayne Stenehjem operated in a vacuum when it came to hammering out the details of the settlement with the NCAA? He represented the State of North Dakota. He consulted with other attorneys inside and outside of state government. Do you honestly believe that the governor and the State Board of Higher Education had no input into the terms of the settlement agreement? Stenehjem represented them. He could not decide all by himself to settle the lawsuit. He could only agree to what his client -- the State of North Dakota -- agreed to.
On the day the settlement was announced, Stenehjem said the NCAA's attorneys told him that even if they lost the lawsuit, the organization would simply change its rules to make what its executive committee did legal under the NCAA's bylaws. And that's exactly what the NCAA did. So even if Stenehjem had pressed on and won the lawsuit, it wouldn't have changed the NCAA's policy against the use of American Indian nicknames, mascots and imagery. We would be at the exact same spot we're at today.
Stenehjem also said he was confident that based on his experience of working with the tribes, he could negotiate a deal with them that would enable UND to retain the nickname. On this point, he was wrong. Both tribes -- Spirit Lake and Standing Rock -- indicated within days of the settlement that they had no intention of negotiating on the issue. How do you negotiate with empty chairs? Stenehjem miscalculated on the willingness of both tribes to negotiate, but it's not his fault that they chose not to.
-
2
-
-
We can make distinctions all we went and frame the issue is different ways. But, Florida State only needed approval of the nearest Seminole tribe. Central Michigan only needed the approval of one Chippewa tribe, the closest to the school, despite the presence of three other Chippewa tribes in Michigan. UND is also received approval from the tribe closest to the school, but it is the only institution that the NCAA had required approval from multiple tribes.
I was merely setting the record straight. The Oklahoma Seminoles were not against Florida State's use of the Seminole nickname.
-
No doubt about it,jodcon, the NCAA tweaked it as they went along. I believe the NCAA decided to add the stipulation of having tribe approval after Florida State people emphasized the Florida Seminole Nation was behind them, even though Oklahoma Seminole people were against it.
The NCAA originally intended to force its policy on Florida State, even though it knew the school had the approval of the Seminole tribe in Florida. The NCAA merely assumed that the Oklahoma Seminole tribe was against Florida State's use of the Seminole name. But the tribal council of the Oklahoma Seminoles quickly passed a resolution nearly unanimously giving Florida State permission to use the nickname. It was only after that happened that the NCAA created the namesake approval exemption.
-
[¶17] Under N.D. Const. art. VIII, § 5, all North Dakota land grant universities and universities supported by a public tax shall remain under the absolute and exclusive control of the State. The Board is the constitutionally established entity for the control and administration of state educational institutions, including UND.
Hasn't the North Dakota Supreme Court already answered the question? Is there any reason to believe that the court will give a different answer the second time around?
-
The fact that he writes for Uscho/cesspool should warrant automatic exclusion.
Except that I don't.
-
-
I don't believe PCM has made it to the '80s yet with Zubas. Last time I saw him he was fighting with Virg over a bag of popcorn up in the pressbox. He was decked out in his favorite Bee Gees Saturday Night plad leisure suit.
Thoroughly Modern Virg was in the leisure suit. I'm still rockin' the Nehru jacket.
-
There seems to be some confusion caused by the title of the thread. I'll be covering men's hockey for FightingSioux.com, the website of UND Athletics. This doesn't mean I've decided to resume posting regularly here. It was never a case of me being either here or at USCHO.
-
Gosh, I didn't even know I was gone! It's so wonderful to feel the love here that it makes me think of my favorite Whitney Houston song.
But I do believe that UND SID Jayson Hajdu put the Foss-Miller tag team writing combo in proper context when he compared it to this famous event.
-
1
-
-
Don't assume anything. You know the rest of the expression, I'm sure.
So when you continue to say this...
I never said there was any evidence of Kojich doing anything wrong. I just think in a situation where you have a SWA with such a "connection" to Twamley, perhaps it could be construed as potentially blurring the lines of who's "really" in charge? I know I'm not the only one who thinks that....what, exactly, should I assume? I know this is a favorite subject/theory of yours, so why don't you elaborate? What does it have to do with Lennon leaving? What does it have to do with who should be hired as AD?
As for my identity, it's none of your business.I never said it was. But if we knew who you were, it might help us understand the context of your comments.
I do not, and never have worked at UND. Neither has my wife or any member of my family. That's all you need to know.That wasn't my point, but it's nice to know because it means that I know a whole hell of a lot more about the subject of spouses working at UND than you do.
So you're saying that the SWA who used to be a dI volleyball coach shouldn't have any responsibility for hiring an inexperienced volleyball coach at UND who is clearly not doing a good job? Whatever.Should she have input on the decision? Certainly. Is it completely her decision? I wouldn't assume that. Nor would I presume to understand all the factors that went into hiring the current volleyball coach. But who knows? Maybe it was mandate from University Relations.
-
So instead of criticizing others: what do you propose to do to fix the problem?
Here's a novel concept: Call the people at UND whose job it is to fix the presumed or perceived problem and find out if it actually exists. If they're unaware of the problem, tell them what you know about it. If they're aware of the problem, ask what they're doing to fix it. If you can be of assistance in helping the person whose job it is to fix the problem, offer your assistance. If you can't help but you know people who can, offer to contact them.
By pursuring this action rather than exchanging gossip and bitching on an Internet message board, you might discover that:
A. There really is no problem.
B. There is a problem, but it's not nearly as serious as you'd been led to believe.
C. There is a problem and those responsible for fixing it are working on a solution.
D. The person responsible for a particular area is unaware of the problem and thanks you for bringing it to his/her attention.
E. You can be part of the solution.
This is not to say that following such a course will always result in a speedy solution that's 100 percent to everyone's satisfaction, but it at least improves the chances of something constructive being accomplished in a manner that's not damaging or embarrassing to the university.
-
I think it is fair to look at the potential problems. After all Ralston is and has been, I believe, in charge of internal affairs. It is no secret that many of the coaches aren't or haven't been happy and there is low moral with the staff (Lennon departure isn't going to help this). I'm not saying that she is the problem but for anyone to say that there isn't a problem has to be blind. People are and have been jumping ship at a very quick rate.
Thanks for so effectively proving my point.
-
I don't blame Ralston for Lennon's departure, but I believe the two examples I gave of her glaring mistakes are 100% accurate.
Your post appeared to be timed and worded to suggest that Ralston had something to do with Lennon's departure. Perhaps you should criticize Ralston on the job she was hired to do rather than her ability to coach volleyball or hire basketball coaches, which isn't her job.
EDIT: BTW, I also don't think it's a good idea to have one spouse working in a high-ranking athletic department capacity, and the other in Twamley. It at least creates the potential for problems.Then have fun purging UND of all such situations because there are some potentially more problematic than the one you cite.
And I'll add: There you go again. How about posting some evidence of the problems caused by Ralston and her spouse before making such broad accusations? Better yet, put your real name on your accusations and opinions so we can all have a better understanding of your prespective on these issues.
-
I'd go along with that. It was very bad acting on JPL's part. Judging by the amount of time it took a trainer to get out there to check on him, they thought the same thing!
Apparently JPL has learned some things from JP.
-
Rumor has it that the PA guy, Darrin Looker, is serving a two-game supspension for his Holy Cross joke during the Gopher series.
-
I think some legitimate questions can be asked about Ralston's ability to work well with people and make good decisions. Her supposed expertise is volleyball, and how has that hire worked out so far? I believe she was also responsible for a very poor finalist for the men's basketball job (the fired Eastern Illinois assistant who was coaching in high school when he applied for the UND job).
My opinion on this continued foolish behavior.
-
I just wish UND would throw away the bad apple .... that being Philip Alan Harmeson.
That wouldn't work. You'd just have to find another convenient scapegoat the next time something didn't go right.
-
Why do you think he was resting??
He certainly wasn't playing any games for the Sioux
-
News conference is on. Steve Brekke said UND will start with an internal search. A coach could be named as early as next Friday.
Nobody has applied for the job yet. If it's opened to external candidates, that could also happen at the end of next week.
Now Brekke says that somebody has sent him an application through his Blackberry.
-
How does it make any sense at all to "rest" Lamoureux after he's just come off three weeks of rest?
-
Just to remind people, it's supposed to be against SiouxSports.com policy to copy and paste comments from other boards on to this board.
-
Does the ND winter kill this (at least on the outdoor turf)?
My understanding is that bacteria generally don't surivive well above and below certain temperatures or in dry conditions. I would think that regularly cleaning the turf with an anti-bacterial agent would be the best way to prevent infections.
-
BTW, its staph infection.
Whew! I read this thinking that our entire staff might be infected.
SBoHE votes to move ahead with nickname retirement
in UND Nickname
Posted
This is getting ridiculous. People have the ability to change their minds based on changing circumstances, and they seldom change positions en masse or simultaneously. As we’ve seen, some refuse to ever change their minds, even when their position threatens to undermine the well-being of the very institution which supports the athletic programs they allegedly care about deeply.
For me, there were two events that signaled that the battle to retain the nickname was probably a lost cause. The first came after the settlement with the NCAA when representatives from Spirit Lake and Standing Rock said they were unwilling to negotiate on the issue. You can only have negotiations if both sides are willing to talk.
The second was when I realized that many strong UND athletics boosters were willing to jettison the nickname if it meant a smoother transition to Division I and improving the university’s ability to get into a conference. There was no longer a united front and the issue was beginning to divide UND fans, alums and supporters. The cracks in the wall were rapidly turning into fissures.
You can sit there in all your success soaking in rays and gloating about your how nickname prediction came true, but the fact is that there were some strong nickname backers on these very forums who predicted that the issue would come down to UND either playing by the NCAA’s rules or getting out of the organization. As it turned out, they were right. You didn’t have to be an anti-nickname zealot, Nostradamus or own a crystal ball to understand that the NCAA was in a very strong position and might ultimately triumph.
That being said, I also talked to some pretty smart people with law degrees who thought North Dakota might have a strong case against the NCAA on a number of legal fronts. That gave me hope that the state might prevail in court, but the case never made it through the courts. Therefore, we never found out whether legal action might have ultimately allowed UND to retain the nickname.
The day the settlement was announced Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said the NCAA’s lawyers told him that even if they lost the case because the organization didn’t follow its own rules, they would simply change their rules. He allowed for the possibility that the attorneys were bluffing (he didn’t think they were). But in the end, his assessment of the situation proved correct. The NCAA simply changed its rules to make valid the manner in which the Executive Committee implemented that anti-nickname policy.
During the three year period in which UND had to gain approval from Spirit Lake and Standing Rock, voters at Spirit Lake and the tribal council granted the university perpetual use of the nickname. Suddenly, nickname supporters were half way to a goal that once appeared totally unreachable. There were predictions from Standing Rock that if the tribal council there allowed people to vote, the outcome would be similar. I don’t think it’s difficult to understand why these developments provided encouragement to those who wanted to keep the nickname.
Shortly after the State Board of Higher Education voted to drop the nickname, the Big Sky Conference announced that it was granting UND membership. Although the conference had never publicly made an issue of UND’s nickname, it wasn’t difficult to understand that there was linkage between the two occurrences. Since then, the conference has let it be known that the nickname is an issue. That helped persuade many more that jeopardizing membership in the Big Sky was not a good exchange for maintaining the nickname.
By the time Al Carlson got involved with legislation mandating that UND continue to use the Fighting Sioux nickname, those of us who’d been closely following the issue not only knew it was a bad idea because the NCAA had absolutely no reason to change its stance, but also saw it for what it really was: a cynical political ploy designed to enlist nickname supporters in an effort to get rid of the State Board of Higher Education.
So, let’s see: In exchange for keeping the nickname, UND would likely be kicked out of the Big Sky Conference, be under NCAA sanctions, become a pariah with the world of college athletics and see its efforts to become a successful Division I school blown out of the water. But wait! There’s more under Al’s Grand Plan, North Dakota’s university system would once again become a political football for the legislature to kick around every two years. You can’t beat a deal like that!
As with many controversial issues, it took longer for some to see the light than it did for others. When it really counted, those who mattered most came on board and did what was best for the long-term interests and future of UND, recognizing that the welfare of the university was more important than the nickname, no matter how much it meant to them personally.
However, for some reason, you seem to believe that lemmings headed over the cliff and ostriches with their heads buried in the sand are worthy of praise because of their willingness to self-immolate for blind loyalty and for their absolute refusal to deal with reality. I’m guessing that you’re also a great admirer of General George Armstrong Custer, who divided his force and led his troops to slaughter, despite warnings from his scouts about the imminent danger ahead. But, hey, it was all good because Custer stuck to his convictions to the bitter end, right?