jdub27

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.

Your lack of knowledge on the subject is shining through if you think that North Stars is one of only two reasonable options. Picking the state motto of a neighboring state seems real logical...

Yes, those of us that have an actual vested interest in the University will support it regardless. Your opinion is coming from "marketing expert" who thinks a nickname that leads to UNDERMINES is a good idea. Not to mention that a ermine is a weasel that is basically only good for its fur.

Yep.

Good point. And I'm sure there are people who did alter their donations because of Kelley though there are also people who are big fans of him and his wife.

Just to play devil's advocate, how you do you explain the $330 million or so raised from the Spirit campaign?

I'm not sure what part there is confusion about. Every step of the process has been publicly explained as far as I can tell. The only thing that I'm currently unsure of is the exact details on how the final vote will be held, but I'm guessing they are still working through that and it will be explained, just like everything else has, before it is done.

What questions? He'll be here for the fall semester, guessing any questions people have, they can have answered in that time frame.

Quickly? This thing couldn't drag out any longer if they tried (though I'm by no means tempting them to get it a whirl). What exactly is it that you want him to stick around and deal with? Once the new nickname is in place, there isn't a whole lot more that he will be able to do. He (nor the new president) will not change any minds that refused to be changed. Cowardly would be to leave in the middle of the process, which he very easily could have done and with how big of a joke it has become, most people wouldn't have blamed him.

So he should stick around for another decade? Or what time frame do you judge "appropriate". By the time he retires, UND will have retired to the Fighting Sioux nickname and have a new one in place. Seems like the "mess" will have been cleaned up. Not sure what more you want. Him sticking around or leaving isn't going to affect the speed at which each individual person accepts reality.

The new president will get to start with a clean slate and a new nickname in place. Seems like perfect timing to me.

In 2011, the average age of a University President was apparently 61, meaning he's still older than the average college president by a fair amount since he's almost 70. Personally, I'm surprised he didn't retire a few years ago. At least he is seeing the nickname process through, quitting in the middle of it would be cowardly. Him retiring isn't some new revelation, nor is an unhappy faculty when they don't get everything they want. From most of what I see and hear, there is a lot more dissatisfaction with DiLorenzo than Kelley. I'm by no means a supporter of Kelley's, neutral at best on him actually, but it is time for new blood in the president's office and most people would agree. But you want him to stick around longer because "nickname".

The guy is 70 years old, he isn't running anywhere.

No real surprise given his age. Did some good things and some not so good things. Will be interesting to see the list of applicants to take over for him. Stepping into the disaster known as higher education in the state of North Dakota is a different beast. You have to be kidding right? The nickname mess pre-dates Kelley by quite a long time. Part of his job when he was hired was to clean it up and he has, though it might take some people a decade or so to actually see that. I wouldn't be surprised if him staying on until January instead of retiring before the school year wasn't partially to make sure the new nickname is properly implemented.

Last I saw, Montana was a 14-15 point underdog at home against NDSU for the FCS kickoff game. You should be able to get more than 20 points.

Does it come with a press pass?

I don't think we really disagree, it just seems to be a very strange excuse/argument that gets used quite a bit and I've never understood it. I think its a mixed bag of what actually happened but it seems like the only thing a good amount of NDSU fans will admit that changed was the scholarship cuts. Whenever its trotted out, its unintentionally putting down what NDSU did in the 80's. If you're going to say that the sole reason NDSU came back to the pack was because scholarships were cut, then you're alternatively saying that the sole reason they were winning is because they had more scholarships. It wasn't the only thing that changed but the scholarship reduction argument is almost always the only reason that gets used when someone says NDSU won't stay on top forever. Note that most of this isn't directed at you, we agree quite a bit on this, just a fairly accurate generalization on what typically shows up here.

I'm well aware of what happened but you did lay it out for others very nicely. That being said, pretty sure you just furthered my point (possibly intentionally). NDSU fans using the cut in scholarships as an excuse for their decline is basically just a roundabout way of admitting that they were only winning because they were outspending other schools and couldn't have the same success on a "level" playing field. I'll also note that they are doing more than fine at the FCS level on a "level" playing field.

Never understood this excuse. Are you saying that NDSU couldn't have success at the D-2 level once everyone was playing with the same scholarships and were only able to win previously because they spent more money on football than other NCC schools? Not like the playing field was exactly leveled, or had NDSU stopped allocating dining center funds to the football program at that time?