jdub27

I know that the issue brought up in the Star Tribune is mainly related to money being spent on the different genders, however participation numbers are also mentioned as part of the issue. Just for fun: If you look at the unduplicated participation numbers (each student athlete counted once, regardless of how many sports they play), U of M's women's participation rate is at 46.5% (337 women vs. 388 men), ranking 149th. For comparison: UND is ranked 161st at 45.7% (205 women vs. 244 men) and NDSU is at 31.4% (129 women vs. 282 men) which ranks 340 out 347 schools in Division 1. Looking at the total participation (student athletes are counted once for each sport they participate in), NDSU does move up to 337 out of 347 at 35.0% (188 women vs. 349 men). U of M moves up to 102 out of 347 at 51.5% (501 women vs. 471 men). UND is ranked 163rd at 48.1% (268 women vs. 289 men). U of M does have a higher percentage of women enrollment (51.1%) than NDSU (43.3%) or UND (45.4%). Equal opportunities don't matter when you can produce "surveys" to show that women supposedly aren't interested in D-1 athletic opportunities.

Not everyone, but the overwhelming majority and it isn't even close. Read any set of Facebook comments or tweets related to the nickname issue, it is far and away the main reason why people are selecting "no nickname" and makes it very clear why "no nickname" is the current leader in the polls on the GF Herald/Forum websites and people's reasoning for it.

Just curious, how do you know that they aren't representing opinions they have heard? I've talked with one of the committee members and gave my input and I know I'm not the only one. Just because they aren't representing your specific opinion doesn't mean they haven't taken input into their comments or decisions. They are also privy to a lot more information than the general public sees through whatever snippets WDAZ or the GF Herald decides to show, including recommendations and information from the marketing firm (who I'm not a huge fan of myself, but that's a different point). KG's comment was a five second snippet of a how many hour meeting? It doesn't mean he didn't speak positively or negatively that or any other nickname, that was just what was presented by the media. In the end, I'm guessing pretty much every single member of the committee knew they were signing up for a thankless job in a no-win situation and accepted the role anyway because they wanted to do the best they could to help out a University they care very much for and about.

Who let a Minnesotan chair this committee??

Agree 100%. Lay it out for what it is, saying you are picking "North Dakota" is incorrect, that part is going to be there regardless of what happens going forward. Be clear and state that you supporting the selection of "no nickname". Unless of course you want the University of North Dakota North Dakota but we've already went over how redundant that is.

One other point is that what is acceptable today is not always acceptable in the future. The NCAA Executive Committee has the power to do as it pleases. It isn't a real stretch to see the same outside groups continue to put pressure on UND if no nickname is the option selected, particularly since there is absolutely no doubt that it leaves Fighting Sioux as the de facto nickname. Why even put yourself in that position? This process has been a circus, I don't want to see Act 2.

What you call BS logic is rationalization of why going with no nickname is not only a terrible idea itself but also sets up UND for potential for consequences, giving it two pretty heavy marks against it. Even if I didn't think there was potential ramifications for selecting no nickname (hypothetically, because I do), I still think it is just a flat out bad idea. At some point, a group of students/alumni/outside source will start the push to put a nickname in place and we end up in this exact same spot. My concern is that it ends up being the outside source because they continue to see an environment where the "Fighting Sioux" nickname is the de facto nickname because nothing has been put in place to fill the void. I'm not in favor of the majority of the nicknames left on the list. But I could look at 95%+ of the college nicknames across the country and if they were on the list, I'd think the same thing. The funny thing is, alumni of all of those schools support their nickname because they have become acclimated to it. The same thing will happen at UND regardless of what nickname is chosen. The teams and student-athletes will still play the same games, the same way. It will still be just as enjoyable to watch. But not picking a nickname continues to leave open what has become a festering wound because it leaves UND fair game for criticism from the outside groups that were part of creating this mess in the first place. I want to hear about positive things when I see UND in the news, not the same old nickname stuff that has been the overshadowing tone for a decade or so now.

And if they continue to make limited edition shirts or apparel, they are doing that. They released 50 at Scheels and 50 at the Sioux Shop, sold them and made money. Not sure how that is hard to prove? They will have to use all the previous marks in order to stay in compliance, not just the Brien logo. It was included for the reasons you stated, so that it didn't fall into the public domain and it remained under control. I'd love to print up some apparel with some of the logos from way back and sell them for a nice profit. Don't see that happening (legally) in the future. I guess other than some sort of hypocrisy (which is synonymous with the NCAA), I didn't see it as all that strange. The NCAA deemed allowing very limited runs of apparel to be better than it being freely available for public use.

This was addressed in 2013. Dacotah Legacy Collection: Print off 100 limited edition shirts to keep the trademarks and sell for a huge profit. The NCAA is fine with it because its 100 items and is the only way the trademarks can stay active. And with the pace they've been doing it, it appears it will be extremely limited. Not sure how fans shouting "Fighting Sioux" or wearing old clothing helps UND in regards to this. Neither of those is considered commercial use which is needed to keep the trademarks. I personally own one of those shirts and will buy any other releases if I'm able. Why? Because I'm proud of the history and the University. That doesn't mean I don't want it to move on from a situation that continues to be a net negative for the University.

Now that we've agreed upon and established that, let's address the part of the settlement agreement that says "transition to a new nickname and logo" and explain how going with North Dakota and continuing to use the existing interlocking ND exclusively as the only logo doesn't seem to fit. Maybe the NCAA doesn't care right away but sure gives them a pretty easy out to revisit it and we do this whole circus again. Nothing like poking a bear who is already tired of your antics.

I fully agree that there is something that seems off about it. I guess if it makes the final 3 or 4 or whatever number is voted on, I will stand corrected. Until then, I feel comfortable, though slightly confused, by what I've been told.

I don't think they have doled out any punishments yet (and all the more reason to not cross the NCAA, they may be looking for a distraction fairly soon....).

As to the first part, I'm not saying UND what UND does or doesn't know, but I have a general idea of what some people related to the process know. Which leads to a whole different set of questions but that's for a different time. As for the second part, Sicatoka explains comments that have been floating around better than I can:

UND has not picked a new nickname as they agreed to. Not picking a new nickname is willfully fostering an environment that keeps Fighting Sioux as the de facto nickname. The last few years have proven it not to mention they many people who have openly stated it. UND nor the NCAA will not stop people from wearing or cheering whatever they want, but until UND has picked a new nickname, they have not fully done their part to move on and are very much culpable for it.

The couple of years has shown that most will continue to use the Fighting Sioux nickname because there is nothing to fill the void. Leaving the void open will do nothing but continue that. Picking something new gives people guidance on where to go. Of course there will be people that will continue to use it, regardless of what is chosen but those people will slowly dwindle, as has happened at every other school and college that has went through the same process. That doesn't mean that people forget about it, but it means that people understand what is best for the University. I would very much argue that the NCAA feels the school has moved on. They had representatives in Fargo at the regionals and heard the Sioux chants. And as tSic would say, Marco Hunt being on the ice in Boston wasn't a coincidence/mistake it was a message...

I guess they are much worse than inspiring names such as Hawkeyes, Spartans, Gophers, Cornhuskers, Wildcats, Badgers, Ducks, Aggies, Falcons, Broncos, Bulldogs, Rams, Cowboys, etc, etc, etc. All of those are on the same level as the majority of the finalist list. The difference is, they are in place and people have acclimated to them. The same thing will happen at UND. There wasn't going to be some magical nickname that everyone looked at and said "Yep, that's it" so I'm not sure why people are surprised that there is unrest with the finalists. It's a nickname. The sports teams will continue to strive to make the University of North Dakota proud regardless of whatever new nickname and logo happens to be chosen and rational, level-headed people will still support them the same.

Hey, you made my point for me and answered why "North Dakota" has a bigger drawback than any other name on the list! Thanks! Not to mention, choosing nothing means UND is in fact not choosing a new nickname, which (while up for much debate) seems to be in direct violation of the signed settlement agreement that requires UND to choose a new nickname. University of North Dakota isn't new it has been around since 1883.

University of North Dakota North Dakota seems a little redundant, no?

There is a lot more to it than revenue from merchandise and the marketing aspect but to deny that it is without merit is to be purposefully ignorant. The bigger issue, is that it leaves Fighting Sioux as the de facto nickname. WDAZ interviewed people on the news last night about the remaining names. One of the responses they showed was a student saying “I like North Dakota because we're indefinitely the Sioux". At least she was honest enough to admit why many support having no nickname. That is what is going to hold the University back more than anything.

I'd say he crossed the line from caring and to making an ass out of himself. Won't argue that he plays with some emotion, but that was an embarrassment. Guessing he'll get a few game suspension, more so because he started pushing on one of the umpires. Hope he just gets a fine, losing his bat is exactly what the Twins don't need right now.

Twins continue to come back to Earth and Hunter shows some quality maturity and "leadership" tonight.

Congrats to Tyler Follis, first UND draft pick since 2000.

Just so you know what you actually cited:

That's funny. I'm sure going forward with no nickname, more or less giving the blessing to continue to use Fighting Sioux as the de facto nickname, won't continue to cause issues for the University. If they don't fill the void with something, fans will continue to use the most convenient thing available to do so. The last few years, when UND has had no nickname, is empirical evidence of that. Sure, there will be people that continue to live in the past, but the majority will move on when given the opportunity to do so. There are already many examples of this. And no, moving on does not mean forgetting or disregarding the past, it means UND moving forward, trying to remove itself from a situation that is a net negative for the University.

You know what would be really, really fun? To go with North Dakota and then end up doing this whole process over again in a few years.