Oxbow6

So what will be the fallout if the public votes goes for RR by a large margin (it seems to be the overwhelming choice of the 5 left) but that pick in turn is rejected by Kelley AFTER this whole debacle with the no nickname situation?

And at the end of the day your last paragraph says it all and is what most people will remember from this process and this committee.

Agree with almost all of your post but this process has been anything but "pretty well-organized". It has lacked a big picture vision, leadership, and an understanding of public opinion...just to state a couple things. For one to describe this process as a sham is being overly kind IMO.

Been waiting for a press release from the GOBC on where this process is at and their thoughts.......

So we'll be down to four shortly then..................

I think this is a very fair assessment. I was always of the opinion that at the end of this process there was zero chance UND wasn't going to have a new nickname and was going to stay just "North Dakota"...and for the record I could have easily lived with being just "North Dakota" although it wasn't my top preference.

My take on the Final 5: Roughriders: My favorite left. IMO makes the most sense based on criteria laid out by the committee Sundogs: The PC crowd's let's light up the White House in rainbow colors option NoDaks: Possibly the "no nickname" crowd's choice now that a nickname will be chosen Fighting Hawks: The ram it down your throat this is how we do it consultant's choice North Stars: If we as UND can't pick our own state's nickname let's steal our neighbors If you look at these maybe the committee did do their job by trying to appease as many people as they could that might have some say in the final vote.

Please look at the criteria again set forth by the committee in how to approach selecting a new nickname.....then look at the 5 options that are left based on the committee's process.....then stop asking yourself "What the ______ has just happened?" because there is no turning back.

If anyone thinks Kelley won't make the benign safe blah pick on his way out...try again. Fighting Hawks is "trending" as you Twitter guys would say......but MM has no clue what that means.

So in your opinion the committee(s) have done how good of a job to date using the 1-10 scale.....1 being worthless.

So 5 names left.......and Kelley has the hammer in hand. Anyone else just soil themselves? And I'd rather get a hot lava enema than have Sundogs, Nodaks or F-n Hawks selected.

No.....just my uneducated guess. 3 gets too complicated and might not result is a 50%+ majority vote for the "winner".

My betting line is that the final 2 will be Fighting Hawks and Sundogs. I don't think the committee will go with a final 3 with either Riders or Stars as one of those would win the popular vote.

As I stated a few pages back..........my info, which is probably as good or as bad as oneone else's, has this shaking out so that Fighting Hawks will be the new nickname....or at a minimum in the final 2.

This process has become tiresome.........is it too late for me to start a "FIRE KELLEY" thread?

With what is left I could deal with North Stars! I hope your info is right and mine is not.

Fix........that's a stretch. Guidance from Twamley Hall.........zero doubt. Consultants were brought in to only to give this committee what consultants do and what Kelley wants......a simple generic non-descript, non offensive name that will be palatable by the masses. My sense from hearing from some that know way more than me on this process is that Fighting Hawks is the leader heading down the stretch with Sundogs being the "let's pray we don't get stuck with that" option as to make Fighting Hawks much more acceptable. It kind of like do you want hot fudge or whip cream with sprinkles on your smoldering pile of ____!

I think we can all agree as alumni, fans and supporters of UND this whole process has been nothing short of embarrassing and pathetic. What I have witnessed by this committee as this process has moved along has been nothing short of ridiculous........no leadership, no sense of urgency, and no understanding of public perception.......and I could go on. Please just get this over with.

So..................after a conversation with someone kind if in the know this morning the betting line on "Fighting Hawks" just went to even money. Maybe the consultants did earn their keep.

Now we agree........a sad, sad day for my alma mater is forthcoming. Fighting Hawks is exactly what the consulting firm was brought into do........under the direction and guidance of our pathetic outgoing President. Sundogs would be worse......but happiness and gayness would abound on campus for years to come!

Could have said it any better. I'm disgusted by the process...disgusted by the Kelley driven PC chest thumping...disgusted by the gutless majority of committee members. Another meeting and just North Dakota is eliminated? I'm scheduled to meet at 715 am with a UND Foundation member again informing me I'm always welcome to give (more) financially..... conversation might not be about what this person thinks it's going to be about!

Kelley decides to un-retire? "Big Cocks" makes a move up the leaderboard? scpa0305 crashes the meeting, reveals he is actually a GFC grad and gets tossed from the meeting because he won't stop yelling "Go Ridas"! ............am I close on any of these?

This can not even be disputed. Ask any nurse, PA or Dr that works in any ER and they will tell you this is fact. Then ask them what % of ER visits are truly "emergencies" and the # will be astounding. People who get healthcare on the government's dime, state or federal, or those with a nominal co-pay will use the ER as the primary care outlet vs establishing a relationship with a PCP.

Like most things one's political views shape one's opinion on the ACA. Having served on both state and national committee's in the process of it's development IMO the guts of the ACA were never exposed to the general public. I also work with it daily. Is there some good to the ACA...yes. Is there some bad...yes. The ACA is working for those people it was intended for when created.....outside of those people you will get mixed reviews and from my experience those reviews are mostly negative. Big picture long term is the bad will dwarf the good and it is a system that when it reaches its maximum roll out will not be sustainable in any way shape or form. This is just my opinion...but one not based on a Google search or blogs or tea leaves or worst yet complete ignorance and a total misunderstanding of the ACA itself. And this just in......no shootings in the F-M area this morning.

Sad to see Dunne play like he did today.