rochsioux

We have a winner!

Most involved are playing the "who takes the blame" game. Some are playing it better than others. There are five players/groups involved here: 1. NC$$ This is the one player that has declared that the nickname should be gone and is proud of it. In some small way I can respect this much more than the position of the other players. This is the only player that doesn't care if they take the blame, in fact they are proud of it. 2. Kelley / Faison Has anyone ever heard of the slightest support for the nickname from either of them ? They want the nickname gone but haven't had the guts to say so. They want to leave it up to the State Board to retire the name and then claim they had no say. At best, a lack of comment either way implies poor leadership to me. 3. State Board Keeps placing artificial deadlines for tribal action then ignores the deadlines when nothing happens. 4. Charles Murphy When elected as tribal council chairman many assumed he had a favorable response to the nickname, ignoring past comments he made a number of years ago which left no doubt where he stood at the time. Could he have shifted position ? Yes. Could he have just left the impression during the tribal chairman campaign that he would take favorable action to help keep the nickname just to help his election chances ? Certainly possible. I don't know but there seems to be little action on his part. Hopefully there will be good news soon as that is the only way the nickname has a chance. 5. Tom Douple Claims the Summit League is not involved in this issue but then says the nickname issue must be resolved before the Summit will consider UND for membership. This, in spite of the fact that UND could not begin play until the 2011-2012 season and the issue will be resolved before the end of 2010 per the court settlement. All he would really need is a signed agreement with UND that the issue will indeed be resolved by then, maybe add a multi-million dollar penalty clause if it is not. IMO, there is an appearance of collusion with the NC$$, this just doesn't pass the smell test to me (maybe I just have a cold). If there are valid reasons why the Summit League will not consider UND right now, why won't he return reporters calls ? Why not give an interview and explain why it is important to the Summit to have this issue resolved prior to considering UND for membership ? Explain why it is important even though there is a court agreement that will have the issue resolved prior to any possible league play. Whether Douple likes it or not, he has interjected himself into this issue and he and the Summit League will take a share of the blame from nickname supporters which will carry into future Summit League play. I believe Charles Murphy is the smartest guy in this game. All he has to do is say the tribal council has other pressing matters and will get to the nickname issue on their own time schedule. He knows that Kelly/Faison/State Board are worried about getting into the Summit League and will very likely capitulate much sooner than the 11/30/2010 deadline. Therefore very few will blame the Standing Rock tribe when the nickname goes regardless of their position. Excellent strategy for the SR tribal council, much better than having the tribal chair (RHHT) in the news constantly saying they are against the name and will never approve. Let this play out till the 11/30 deadline. I seriously doubt that in puts UND in danger of missing out on membership to the Summit League. At most in delays UND an additional year prior to starting league play. Will that cost $$$ ? Probably, but so will terminating the nickname. By the end of November if there is no agreement with SR then the nickname will be gone, the Summit League will accept us for membership, and the State Board, Kelley, Faison, and the NC$$ will all be happy campers. The Spirit Lake supporters who filed the lawsuit against the State Board might want to look at sueing the NC$$ for the way they are treating their tribe vs. other tribes in this nickname fight. The NC$$ has stated they have to respect tribal wishes when it comes to keeping the nickname, however, no other school has been required to have multiple tribes approve, only UND. Have no idea if there is any legal ground for a lawsuit on this but who knows.

Something just doesn't smell right. 1. I have never seen any statement from Kelly or Faison in support of the nickname. At best, a lack of comment either way implies poor leadership to me. 2. The Summit League Commissionor is Tom Douple. He is a member of the NCAA Leadership council. This council has regular meetings, one of the items they seem to review is the status of NC$$ litigation. Bernard Franklin is also an attendee at these meetings. Does that mean there is collusion between the NC$$ and the Summit to try and force UND to drop the nickname ? No, but it just adds another layer to a very confounding statement from the Summit League. 3. Right after the Spirit Lake tribe voted in favor of the nickname the State Board got more involved and started the deadlines for eliminating the nickname far in advance of the deadline that came out of the lawsuit with the NC$$. Not only did they move the deadline up but added the 30 year agreement provision, almost begging to have the nickname retired. A few comments from this article: http://wcco.com/local/fighting.sioux.nickname.2.1010383.html I personally believe that UND only sued the NC$$ to get a retraction on the hostile and abusive label. The president and athletic director want to get rid of the nickname but don't want be blamed for it. The feeling was with the lawsuit surrender agreement that they had no chance to get approval from the tribal councils and hence the blame would be placed on the tribes. What happen next took them all by surprise when the tribal members themselves took the initiative to win approval. Their ace-in-the-hole was Standing Rock but their tribal council was up for re-election in Sept and what if they elected a more nickname favorable council ? When they saw this happening they needed to develop a new plan to force the issue before approval could be obtained. So they threw out the red herring of conference membership. Have the Summit League issue a statement that they won't consider UND while the nickname dispute "festers". Never mind that the issue would be resolved per the court agreement prior to UND playing their first game as a member of the Summit. Their actions may have backfired on them with public opinion so they started extending the deadlines. The state board and UND are in a bind with the nickname and are looking for a way out without taking the blame. Who knows, Charles Murphy may also be playing a game with the state board to see who blinks first. I am not 100% convinced he is in favor of the name based on some of his past statements years ago. He may just be drawing this out waiting for the state board to step in and drop the nickname. I hope that is in favor of letting the membership decide regardless of his personal beliefs. Bottom line is that neither side wants to be blamed if/when the nickname is abandoned. When something doesn't pass the common sense test I tend to think that people are idiots or there is some backroom collusion going on. I have to believe that most of these people are pretty smart so that only leaves one conclusion. I think it is entirely possible that there is some level of collusion between UND and the Summit League, or even the Summit League and the NC$$. I am sure the NC$$ was not happy with the lawsuit that UND filed and would be very happy to see UND drop the nickname. Does anyone think the the NC$$ would never be vindictive towards a school that had the audacity to file a lawsuit ? Finally, I agree with Sam Dupris statement: "Why did you agree to the settlement in the first place? Was it because it was the easy way out, or was it because you never intended to stick to your convictions?" Dupris told the board before Thursday's vote. "Why this sudden and unexpected turn, to bail out, to abandon us, the Sioux? You leave us confused and forsaken."

Currently, I see only two possible conferences - Summit and Big Sky. Of these two the Summit is more likely. That doesn't mean it won't look different in a year or two. I believe we will be accepted to the Summit as soon as the nickname issue is settled, regardless if that is today, next month, six months from now or on 11/30/2010. At most it may delay league play for another year. If UND keeps the nickname by getting tribal approval most, if not all schools, will schedule us as the nickname will have the blessing of the NC$$. I don't see any real negative repercussions today if they keep the name with the NC$$ blessing. If something changes in the future then it would have to be addressed at that point. If the Summit League doesn't care about our nickname issue then why do they use that as the reason not to review the application ? Obviously, there is something behind this. I have yet to hear a good reason. The real answer to this question will reveal a great deal.

If the Summit League doesn't care about the Sioux nickname then why not review UND's application ? They know it will be resolved in the next 12 months one way or another. The answer is 1) they don't want UND anyway or 2) They don't have the ability to read the surrender agreement that UND made with the NC$$ or 3) there is some type of collusion between the league and the NC$$. By not accepting UND's application right now they are sticking their nose into the process. They will be directly responsible if UND drops the name in the next few months. By trying to avoid the "controversy" of the nickname they will in fact, be generating far more controversy directly involving the dropping of the nickname. Not sure I would really want to part of a league that is run by people with so little common sense. If they want to avoid any controversy then they should accept the application now and go through the review process. IMO, the Summit League has UND at the top of the list of schools they would like to add. Do they have to add them ? Of course not. IMO, it is not worth thowing away the nickname so the Summit League will accept our application. If the Summit League doesn't need us then what is the guarantee that UND will be accepted anyway ? If there is no guarantee then why drop the nickname just so they will be so kind as to review our application ? For those that are urging UND to panic and throw away the nickname today what will you do if Standing Rock approves, UND keeps the nickname, and they join the Summit League. Will you continue to proudly wear the Sioux logo to games when you were so desperate to throw it away ?

I don't understand the Summit League's insistance on the nickname being "resolved" prior to considering UND for membership as it will certainly be resolved prior to any league play. I don't think the Summit League or UND is considering the ramifications of getting rid the of nickname and logo without allowing the process to play itself out. The agreement with the NC$$ gives UND until 11/30/2010 to gain approval. If UND caves in prior to that date and uses "Summit League membership" as the reason it will only increase the resentment from a large portion of SIoux fans. The Summit League does nothing for the hockey or football programs and like it or not, these have by far the largest following of Sioux fans. I predict if this happens that it will only further harden a large group of Sioux fans that will never accept a new nickname/logo and will continue to wear their Sioux stuff. You do not make a monumental change like this by forcing it down peoples throats and expect them to accept it. You have to let the process play out and give Standing Rock as much time as needed up to the 11/30/2010 deadline. It will be difficult enough for people to accept a new nickname but damn near impossible if you don't let this play out. If the goal of the Summit League was to avoid controversy with regard to the nickname they are idiots. If they would accept UND with a stipulation that the nickname is resolved per the NCAA agreement by YE2010 they would be covered. By sticking their nose in this issue they will only increase the controversy which will carry over into the league. They are actually creating a problem where one wouldn't exist and they will share part of the blame and resentment if UND drops the Fighting Sioux.

These games are extremely important this w/e. IMO, they will determine whether we are fighting for a top 2 finish or fighting for home ice. Right now I think the Sioux are a bit overrated while the Badgers are somewhat underrated. Need every Sioux player to bring there "A" game both nights.

List of games on FCS for UND, Denver, Minn, Wis http://msn.foxsports.com/id/3121084

The schedule shows it on Fox Sports Atlantic both nights: http://msn.foxsports.com/id/1523305 Note the times listed are eastern so the games are on live. Fridays game also looks to be on the NHL network.

Let's see how consistent Iowa is in scheduling teams with native american nicknames: Womens volleyball: 09/05/09 vs. Central Michigan Green Bay, WI Women's tennis: 10/16/09 Seminole Invite Fall Classic Tallahassee, FL 10/17/09 Seminole Invite Fall Classic Tallahassee, FL 10/18/09 Seminole Invite Fall Classic Tallahassee, FL From this I must conclude that their policy is that they won't schedule teams with NA nicknames at home but it is OK to play them on the road. Or maybe it's OK in some sports and not others. Or that it is OK once the NCAA waiver is in place. Or that their hypocrites.

I keep seeing this NCAA deadline of Feb, 2010 for approval. This is not true. The deadline is November 30, 2010 http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?key=/ncaa/NCA...+Dakota+Lawsuit We do not have to have a new nickname in place prior to that. If we don't and the sanctions kick in on Dec 1,2010 so what ? Other than hockey we still aren't eligible for playoffs so missing a home playoff game is not a factor. We can then change the name and all sanctions would be removed long before we are playoff eligible.

WOW! What a pathetic game played by UND. After watching this I would say Sioux Falls is equal to an average d2 team. The Sioux, on the other hand might want to go back to scheduling Crookston if they play like this...only half kidding. There is either a serious lack of talent on defense or the coaches suck or both...not sure right now. Absolutely no pass rush as it has been in pretty much every game. Without a decent pass rush you cannot have a good defense. Brutal game by Landry, the int's were horrible decisions and throws. Bamba can't catch the ball unless it is a perfect throw. Curious how much work he puts in to develop this part of his game. He has potential but has a long way to go. Play calling was terrible also. Fair catches on 3 kickoffs when no one is within 10 yards, but we try to field a punt in the 1Q when a defender is 6 inches away. WTF? Nothing positive in this game except we are one game closer to ending the season. Sorry if this is too negative, but right now I can't think of anything good to say. Up till now they have been lucky in some of the wins that the other team played poorly with turnovers (Stony Brook) or the coach was an idiot and goes for a 4th and 1 at their own 17. Bottom line the defense is not very good, certain not fcs level, not even close to good enough for a good d2 team. The offense is lacking a good running game, the QB is eratic and the coaching is suspect.

As important as Murphy winning is to keep some hope alive for the name, it is just as important what the makeup of the tribal council is after this election. 11 of 17 seats were up for election, I believe. If a majority of the council is against the name then it may not matter who is the chairman. I believe I read somewhere that the state board would only consider extending the deadline if one of the tribes requested it. Got about 7 hours to get that request in. Logic says to give the new tribal chair and council a little time to see what can be done. I would hope the state board would extend the deadline at least a few weeks right now to give the new chairmain and council enoough time to consider their options. If the state board refuses to extend the deadline and terminates the Fighting Sioux name on Thursday, then the full blame for this will reside with them and UND. If UND was fighting to keep the name they would be asking the board to extend the deadline. All I have heard from them is that "it is out of our hands"...they haven't seemed willing to fight to keep the name ever since the surrender agreement with the NC$$. They don't seem to have the backbone to stand up on either side of this issue. They need to show some guts and take a stand either way but please take a stand ! Personally, if the name goes, I will place most of the blame on UND due to the way they have handled this. In the past few months we have seen Spirit Lake vote overwhelming in favor of the name, their tribal council has passed a resolution granting UND permission to use the name, and now new elections at Standing Rock may have opened a window to get a vote from their members. If, after all this, the state board still decides to eliminate the name right away then it will show, beyond any doubt, where they and UND really stand on this issue. It would be a complete slap in the face to the people of Spirit Lake and Standing Rock who have been working in good faith to try to keep the name.

Now WDAZ has it 1173-685 with 8/8 reporting. Not sure what happened with the votes, maybe they had an error when reporting 7/8.

Now 2007-1122 with 7/8 reporting.

Looks like some games may be on Fox Sports. The Manitoba game is listed as being on Fox Sports Atlantic along with the Friday game with Merimack. The Sat game with Merimack is on Fox Sports Central. Looks like this w/e football with USD is also on Fox Sports Atlantic at 4pm.

I just can't buy that there is any urgency in resolving the name so we can get in the Summit. The Summit league already knows that the nickname issue would be resolved prior to UND starting league play if they were admitted. Therefore, the name should be a none issue. If the Summit wants UND and UND wants the Summit, then it will happen regardless of whether the nickname is resolved on 10/1 or 11/1 or 12/1 or June, 2010. It is just another attempt to force the nickname to be abandoned before it can gain approval by the tribes. It appears that UND and the state board are fearful of that happening, otherwise they would let this play out. I think it was extremely important that Spirit Lake got the resolution for approval from the tribal council prior to 10/1. Without that there is no chance the state board would extend the deadline. Now UND and the state board have put themselves in a box...they want the name gone but didn't count on the tribal membership getting this far. What to do now ? If they don't extend the 10/1 deadline and give Standing Rock a chance to vote on this there will be a huge outcry not only from the fans but also from the tribal membership that has been working very hard to gain this approval. It would be worse than if they had just dropped the name a few years ago. If they extend the deadline and SR can put this to a vote it is very likely they will approve. If the SR tribal council then approves like SL what choice does UND and the state board have ? They would have to keep the nickname.

This has been my feeling all along: http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?sho...mp;#entry395398 When UND took the NC$$ to court the only real reason was to get them to retract the hostile and abusive label. The rest was just a sham, they had no intention of really trying to keep the nickname. What UND and the state board didn't count on was that the tribal membership would take the lead in trying to save the name. Pretty much a reversal of what most would have thought when the lawsuit was filed against the NC$$. Most would have said that UND and the state board would be fighting to keep the name...when in reality UND and the state board are doing everything they can to eliminate the name without having to take the blame. UND is insulating themselves by saying it is not their decision, while the state board is a group of unelected individuals, unlikely too many will place the blame on elected officials. If they really want to keep the nickname they would let this play out with Standing Rock. Wait till the elections and see what the makeup of the tribal council is and see what can be done. The road blocks that the state board and UND keeps putting up just validates my feelings on this. This does not have to be resolved by 10/1 so we can get into the Summit. I firmly beleive the Summit League wants UND and is just throwing the nickname issue out to help UND move the timetable up so the nickname can go before both tribes can agree. They also don't need a 30 year agreement. I understand they don't want to be held hostage on this issue every time the tribal council changes. What they need to do is get an agreement from SR which along with the recent resolution from Spirit Lake would satisfy the conditions of the NC$$ surrender agreement and should also satisfy the great Summit League. Then UND has to work with both tribal councils to put in place something of tangible benefit to the tribes (some will see this as a bribe, I don't have a problem with this) that is tied into UND keeping the name and logo. That way future tribal councils will know exactly what it will cost the tribe if they revoke their support...the councils may be very wary of approaching this issue in the future if they know that 1) the membership is in favor and 2) they will lose something tangible ($$$, scholarships, etc). Imagine if SR would come out with a resolution tomorrow supporting the nickname but said nothing about a 30 year agreement. We would then have both tribes agreeing to the nickname and yet the state board, based on what they have said, would still retire the name. I think that tells you all you need to know on the where the state board and UND really stand on this issue and how commited they are to retaining the Fighting Sioux legacy.

Huh ? Please explain. Last year UNO averaged around 6200 fans/game at home. Not bad but they could have had significantly more, the Quest Center capacity is 16,680. Why would the WCHA want to move the premier event to Omaha ? The XCEL capacity is 18,064. The Final Five is close to a sellout every year there. Why would they risk moving it to a smaller venue that has not shown they would be able to support it ? It is also a further drive for fans of almost every team. Additionally, UNO has not shown they can be a top club, so what is the likelyhood they would even make the final 5(6) ? If they don't make it do you really believe they could sell out the arena ? That's what would need to happen for the WCHA to even consider it. What are the advantages to the league in holding it in Omaha. I don't see any, only a loss of revenue.

Where did you see Feb 23-24 for CC ? The schedule shows them on Feb 26-27 - http://www.fightingsioux.com/SportSelect.d...p;Q_SEASON=2009

The fact that REA would keep the Sioux logos or not has no effect on UND. The only possible impact is that REA could not host an NCAA regional. Given the fact that the NCAA wants to move away from campus hosting and the fact that we have only hosted one regional ever, I highly doubt we will ever see another regional at REA anyway. Spirit Lake voted overwhelmingly for the nickname/logo. From all indications there is an effort ongoing to put this to a vote on Standing Rock in July or Sept. Also, the Standing Rock council is up for election in Sept where it might be possible there would be new leaders that would be more open to an agreement on keeping the name. However, they wouldn't take office until Oct.1 which is too late because the SBOE set an Oct 1 deadline. The SBOE might as well have dropped the name immediately for all the good an Oct 1 date will do. Again I ask, why are we rushing this ? We have abother year and a lot can change in that time. A year ago, who would have thought we would have had a vote from Spirit Lake ? I can only come up with two reasons for rushing this decision: 1. The UND admin wants to get the name changed. They see some progress being made on the reservations and they want to put a stop to it. They are tired of dealing with the nickname/logo controversy and would like to end it once and for all. 2. We are worried about getting into the Summit conference. This makes little sense to me and I agree with what DamStrait has previously said. The league knows this will be resolved long before UND will become an active member, therefore there has to be something else there...it would be nice to ask Douple a few questions under oath about an NCAA involvement in this...something just doesn't smell right. I wouldn't mind also asking a few questions of Faison/Kelly under oath and explore what kind of discussions they have had with Douple...it wouldn't surprise me if they were somehow working with Douple to help put pressure on getting rid of the nickname. Otherwise, there is just no reason for Douple to care about this issue in considering UNDs membership in the Summit...at most he could ask UND to provide a letter certifying that the issue will be resolved prior to UND becoming an active member. Bottom line, if the league wants UND then the nickname issue is not going to stop us from getting in.

Don't see how that will matter. Even if new members are elected that are in favor of the nickname they don't take office until Oct 1 which is the deadline for getting a 30 year agreement.

UND appears to be in panic mode to get the nickname resolved, all for the hope of getting into the great Summit league, The Summit League? Ya, let's throw 80 years of tradition down the drain so we "hopefully" can gain entrance to a bottom-feeder D1 conference. We don't get a second chance to keep the name, why are we giving up just when a few things started to fall in place to keep the name. Makes absolutely no sense to me. How bout this. We drop the nickname for all sports that are just dying to join the Summit. Hockey can keep the name forever, we will just not host any playoffs, probably wouldn't get any anyway. Football can wait and decide later. They're not eligible for post-season for four more years so there is no hurry. Any way we can do this given the surrender agreement with the NC$$ ? We can start a new trend of having multiple nicknames based on the sport. Gotta be some great marketing ideas there. I know if I had paid for REA I would not go along with the agreement. Not one logo would be removed from the arena, in fact I would probably start adding more. The only way I would go along with it is if the tribal members voted against the use of the nickname. That is a decision that I could respect. I would not give in to a pathetic group like the NC$$ or a group of professional complainers that will always find something or someone to blame for their problems when maybe they need to be looking in a mirror.

I have always believed the settlement was a sham. http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=323587 http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=350388 http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=350419 They are now holding out the Summit as the reason to act quickly. Look, the Summit already knows that the nickname issue will be resolved based on the surrender agreement with the NC$$. If they really want UND then UND will be in the Summit regardless of rushing or waiting till 2010. It wouldn't suprise me if there was a plan between the Summit and UND to use the issue of conference membership to get the nickname retired. The urgency now is that one tribe voted and overwhelmingly supported the Sioux nickname. The other tribe is working on getting a vote and the results would in all likelyhood be the same. My take has always been that UND admins want to get rid of the name. They are just looking for some cover on the issue so they don't take the blame. The first was to blame the tribes (by way of the surrender agreement requiring both tribes to approve). Now that there is a slight chance that this could occur (thru referendums and new elections this fall) they are in a panic and have decided that we have to get into the Summit and if we don't act quickly we may never get in. Great leadership on this from UND. As I have said before, give it the entire three years. If, at the end of three years, we still don't have an agreement then begin retiring the name. We don't need to have the name retired prior to that. At worse we will be banned from hosting or using the nickname in the post-season for the next year while the nickname is retired. There would not be one sport affected by this since we are still going thru the D1 transition.

FWIW, DU / CC have played 271 times UND / MN have played 273 times according to MN records and 266 times according to UND records.