PCM

Works for me.

This "new" column is nearly a week old. It's already been posted here.

That's the Bo this sudo-reporter came to know and love. I once asked him what the Murray-Parise-Bochenski line should be called and he replied, "How about the Brandon Bochenski line?"

So your solution is to allow the the bigots and anti-Semites who use these cheers to continue to be bigoted and anti-Semitic while those who use the unofficial "Jews" nickname in a positive manner are censored? Does this make sense to you? Do you work for the NCAA?

Illinois hasn't filed an appeal. University officials have suggested that they probably will, but they haven't yet. The NCAA said it expected all appeals to be filed and decided before the policy goes into effect Feb. 1, 2006. I doubt that even the NCAA would be dumb enough to try the "Sorry, too late" strategy you've suggested.

Another good find, Sioux-cia. But I think the sentence before the one you quoted is extremely important, too. And there's also this:

Some more details on the latest mascot move by the NCAA are provided in this AP story. Apparently the NCAA was only giving the BCS what it wanted. I wish Illinois would hurry up and file an appeal to demonstrate the worthlessness this latest action.

From the Sept. 17 Centre Daily Times: Chippewas face much bigger, tougher opponent than Nittany Lions

Here's what I don't get. The NCAA says that it's policy on American Indian nicknames, mascots and logos is based on the value of diversity. So how does assisting in the coverup the historical role of the Sioux on the plains demonstrate that the NCAA values diversity? Is it somehow better to name UND's athletic teams after something that recognizes only the role of the current majority race in the state's history, such as the Pioneers? I would think that because UND has the largest enrollment of American Indians in the region and has a multitude of educational programs and services to support them, the NCAA would treat the university of a model of diversity. But apparently that pales in comparison to having a non-controversial moniker and logo. Or maybe I just need a new dictionary.

Now that's just mean.

Nice story about Matt Jones in the Arizona Republic. Rookie Jones vies to make roster

The guy picking his nose?

Just reminder: Posting the full text of copyrighted articles is also forbidden on this board.

The UND Alumni Association Web site shows Joe Proctor as being a member of the UND Letterwinners Assocation and a member of the National Alumni Football Committee. He lettered in football from 1968 to 1970. The committee's missision is:

There's a letter to the editor in today's Grand Forks Herald from a UND alumnus in Des Moines, Iowa, named Joe Proctor. He takes Kupchella to task for failing to lead UND into the ranks of DI.

Brandon certainly has shrunk since leaving UND. He was listed at 6-2, 195 his last season here.

Good find, Sioux-cia. I also thought this comment in the NCAA news release was interesting: In other words, the role played by the Dakota Student in UND's selection of the Sioux nickname isn't anything unusual.

You've completely misinterpreted this story, which was previously discussed in this thread. I'm not going to retype what I've already said in this post.

From the Desert Morning News (Utah): A handful do object to the U.'s nickname The reference to Kupchella is confusing. The "political correctness run amok" part is straight out of his open letter to the NCAA. So did Esplin receive an e-mail from Kupchella or did someone copy him on UND's open letter to the NCAA along with other comments about UND's situation? Who said UND was in danger of losing a large donation if the name changed? Kupchella or someone relying on the numerous rumors being circulated? I wish some of these newspapers would be more precise in their reporting.

Unless you're me. Then you can speak for everyone except CoteauRinkRat.

NDSU is also close to reservations. But in 2004, UND had three and a half times more American Indian students than NDSU. Native Americans make up a higher percentage of South Dakota's population than North Dakota's, but UND has more American Indian students than USD and SDSU combined. Obviously, the reason UND has so many American Indian students is because it puts time, effort and money into recruiting those students and creating educational opportunities for them. That's as it should be. Other schools in the region should be doing the same thing, but they're not. Wouldn't it be better if those schools were as good as or better than UND at creating programs and edcuational opportunities for American Indians? Shouldn't what a university accomplishes in Native American education and the results it achieves be more important than what it calls its athletic teams? I am not criticizing other races for being involved in the protests. I am questioning why, after 30 years of debate, an issue that's been compared to slavery and women's suffrage doesn't attract more visible support from the people who are most impacted by it. At a university with more than 400 American Indian students, having fewer than 100 people show up for protest marches suggests that there aren't as many victims of injustice as is alleged. I'd also like to know how many death threats are made to people who might particpate in protests? Are these threats being reported to law enforcement? Why haven't we heard more about them? Has anyone ever been killed or physically harmed for protesting the Sioux nickname? If so, why haven't we heard about it? I'm aware of those studies. However, I'd like to know why the victims of this psychological harm don't take a more active role in protesting it? Why do American Indian students come to UND in ever-increasing numbers if they know that doing so will cause them pychological harm? I've read numerous times that Bennett Brien is Chippewa. Is that not the case? Isn't he married to a Sioux woman? In any event, the idea that only members of the Lakota/Nakota/Dakota tribes are permitted to create artistic representations of themselves seems bigoted to me. Following this line of reasoning, many of the world's great works of arts wouldn't exist because the artist wasn't wasn't of the same race, ethnicity or national origin as the subject. I fail to see what difference it makes as to who started these programs or who pays for them. The fact is, they are at UND and not somewhere else. Why do you think that is? Why don't other universities (some much larger than UND) do as much for American Indians as this university? Are those universities better than UND simply because they have non-controversial logos or mascots? Is that really what's most important to you? All universities do whatever they can to attract federally funded programs. Most people I know think it's a good idea for universities to pursue such programs. Would UND be a better place for American Indians if it had no federally funded Indian-related programs?

Another team mocks my ancestors.

This isn't directly related to the "hostile and abusive" mascot issue, but it's yet another example of Myles Brand and the NCAA thinking that they're doing something good and ending up looking greedy instead. Sportsview: NCAA losing some good will By Jim Litke, Associated Press Sports Columnist