MafiaMan

I'm not referring to the regional. That contract was set in stone long before the long arm of the NCAA tried to re-do it. Obviously their attorneys concurred. I'm talking about if UND were to change the nickname from Fighting Sioux. What would make more sense, tearing down the REA and building a new Sioux logo-less arena or removing the Sioux logos from the existing arena? That should be obvious. It would be foolish to think that the name-change crowd would be happy with a new nickname, yet allow REA to keep ties to the past by not removing the existing logos everywhere from the campus, from t-shirts to gym floors to the hockey arena.

One thing I do not like about the pro-nickname argument is the mention of how much it would cost to remove the logos from REA. Big deal. I'm sure it cost a lot of money to enforce integration in the south in the 1960's, too, but no one felt that it was too much money. The pro-name change forces should be eating that cost argument right up. Besides, if there is money for all the marble and granite in the place, I'm sure they could find some cash to remove some logos. It's a bad argument for keeping the logo.

Pretty good article, PCM. You know one positive that might wind up coming out of the decision to put the screws to UND is that maybe some people will finally see the light and think that this is political correctness run amok. What's interesting is the obvious "huh?" when you look at two schools with similar issues and the NCAA reaches completely opposite conclusions: UND + large population of American Indian students + Fighting Sioux nickname = hostile and abusive UNC-Pembroke + large population of American Indian Students + Braves nickname = exemption

Thank you for recognizing that. Funny that Conrad wouldn't criticize the NCAA or the pro-name change forces, but instead direct his first shot at a Republican governor.

US Senator Mel Martinez, R Democrats...Bueller...Bueller...anyone?

I must admit, I am stunned they are actually taking a position on this issue.

June 23, 1998: arena ground-breaking for Xcel Energy Center in St Paul. September 1999: arena enclosed. September 2000: arena completed. October 2000: opening night for Minnesota Wild. October 5, 2001: Opening night for UND in the new REA. Do the math.

There's some real logic being displayed on this thread, so naturally, GK has disappeared and moved on.

You're forgetting, mikejm, that not all Sioux people have been "educated" on this issue, so people like GK do in fact speak for all of them. The only Indians who would support the nickname fall into one of several categories: #1) They're not really Sioux so their voice doesn't count. #2) They're not Sioux enough in terms of blood so their voice doesn't count. #3) They're hang around the fort Indians so their voice doesn't count. #4) They've never left the reservation and haven't experienced racism so their voice doesn't count. #5) They have their own opinion and support the Sioux nickname so their voice doesn't count.

Oh here we go with the conspiracy theory. I bet George W. Bush himself is behind this!

You know what's funny, GK, is how you resent having to defend your culture everytime something bad happens, yet you have no problem throwing out the actions of a few and lumping their whole "culture" (if you will) as being entirely responsible. I was a fraternity member at UND from 1990-1992 and am apalled at the actions of a certain few. However, your absolute hatred and loating for all things that are Greek on campus and anyone wearing fraternity letters is disturbing. This doesn't diminish what happened to you in any way, shape or form. However, would you hate all people from Manitoba if the perpetrators of this incident were wearing Winnipeg Blue Bombers sweatshirts? Of course not! If I observed a drunk Indian in a bar on a Saturday night, I do NOT make the leap to the conclusion that all Indians must be alcoholics. If I see one white southern man burning a cross, I do not assume that all southern men are rednecks. If I see a man dressed in a suit making sexually suggestive comments to his attractive administrative assitant, I do not conclude that all business men in suits are evil. Similarly, I'd ask that the actions of a few idiots wearing Greek letters should not represent Greek life across the entire campus.

The first sentence I agree with. The second sentence shouldn't be allowed to happen, regardless of the nickname decision. It's hardly worthy of the keep-the-name cause to play playground bully. "Give me your lunch Billy and no one gets hurt." "Don't change the nickname or else we'll go after Indians." That's just plain wrong. Violence against American Indians on campus AFTER a nickname change would only prove the other side's point.

How about the obvious conflict of interest there? Is it in St Paul's best interest that drawing 10,000+ for a regional tournament (probably 14,000+ if not closer to 17,000+ with the Goophers in town) be held in St Paul? Of course it is!

I love this part in particular... "It doesn't matter if a logo and nickname are offensive to one tribal member or 1 million. The fact is they're offensive and they're wrong." Applying that same standard, it doesn't matter if a painting of a guy peeing on a crucifix is offensive to one person or 1 million. The fact is it's offensive and it's wrong. Now, propose those two scenarios to the ACLU and see which one they'll completely ignore because they don't agree with it and which one they'll rally around the cause to promote as freedom of expression. The FACT is it's offensive and wrong? Who decided that for me?

Assuming we're still allowed to celebrate Thanksgiving, Sioux-cia. Rumor has it that GK is lobbying the state legislature to ban the holiday in North Dakota.