jdub27

Let me make sure I have this straight - You are now supporting people that were your enemies because other people that were also your enemies changed their mind and now want the same thing as you (though for a different reason)? You have now changed your opinion on those that haven't changed theirs?

Really? -UND had the same oppurtunity that FSU had at that time, getting approval from one of the tribes. That seems like an option. -UND sued, then settled with the NCAA with the ability to keep the nickname. A longshot, but still an option. The state law wasn't really an option but it gave many the closure they needed to see the writing on the wall.

Isn't moving to retire it today taking ownership? 8 years ago there were still options available. Today there is not. I assume from you comments, your view has never changed on anything. Must be easy living up in your ivory tower.

You keep basing your "No" vote (I guess opinion, not vote since you live in the cities right?) and other comments on the information that isn't correct. The fact is, a lot of people on this board care that much about UND to continually correct you and others that are misinformed and to make sure others don't think what you are saying is actually factual.

Really?? Pretty sure they have a signed settlement agreement that begs to differ. You are right, why listen to those who's jobs will be affected due to the harm the sanctions will put on their programs. What are they thinking looking out for the livelihood of their careers, the program and the University? And what was in Grand Forks first, the Fighting Sioux nickname or the University of North Dakota? That should explain to you what is more important.

Come on, you're better than that. Your questions and concerns have been clearly answered and spelled out to you and then you go and throw this out there. Do you think these coaches just had an extra day or two on the calendar and thought it would be fun to take a little scenic drive around the state? Look at the list of people who are coming out against keeping the nickname and the positions they hold. Seems like a lot of people that have a lot more information on the entire situation than you. And Dave Hakstol himself has said it will be detrimental to the hockey program. I'm sure he would like to hear your input on how he is incorrect on that and you have all the answers. In fact, maybe you can show up at one of the press conferences and expose him in front of everyone.

And the rest of us are afraid of what is going to happen if we don't. The facts have been laid out there, the sanction are real. Keeping the name and logo is and will continue to be harmful to the University of North Dakota.

Obviously someone who's word should be taken at face value:

Great attitude to have. Way to show the student-athletes you appreciate the entertainment they provide you. You truly do only care about the jersey they wear. The fact that you are so blind to the fact that you are that selfish and only care about what you want further emphasizes everyone's point.

But yet you are willing to sacrifice the student-athletes and athletic department of a University because of your opinion of a nickname and logo. How is that not you putting your importance over others? You've stated before that to you, your opinion is the only one that matters.

Where have I seen that before...?

Received my Alumni Review in the mail today. Nice, big Vote Yes on Measure 4 add was attached as a cover over the original cover. The inside of the additional cover spelled out the reasons for the need for Measure 4 to pass. I applaud the Alumni Associations effort to educate alumni. The article inside goes into even greater detail with quotes from some influential people including O'Keefe, Hakstol, Lennon and other coaches. Link to Alumni Review

The most recent comments were for a home and home, nothing more, nothing less. Faison has said he wants it to be more than that, but the offer that was talked about was only a home and home. GT is getting the only contract that he said would be acceptable. Why is he talking about University Presidents needing to be involved now that he is getting offered what he wants?

If Gene Taylor didn't want the game why did he say he would only agree to a home and home? And at this point, I do agree with you that either team doesn't absolutely need the game. But, it is a game that would excite both fan bases far beyond what any other regular season game would. And it continues to get tougher and more expensive to get OOC games with no return. If you are going to have to make it a home and home, why not do one where the fan bases can easily travel to?

If Gene Taylor means what he says, it should. He asked for a home and home. That is the contract Faison has said he will send or already has sent to him. The question becomes why is GT already making comments about the University presidents probably needing to be involved. Pretty sure that isn't normal for negotiations. Is he already looking for an out now that Faison gave him what he wants? Not saying he is, but I'd be interested in hearing his explanation on it.

Hmmmm.... Never mind, nothing to see here...

It looks like he is interested in aviation. Pretty good reason to come to UND I guess.

Bill Clinton defense, interesting choice. That depends Dave, what is your definition of "every"? You lost the argument long ago. Unfortunately you just keep moving the goal posts and which leads to you being proven wrong again and again.

While I agree with 82Sioux that you are the one who should have to back up your statement, I provided you with a link to the top colleges before but I know you are going to use not having it as an excuse, here it US News list. Nothing in the top 100, but I guess I don't know how high of a rank you still consider finest in the nation...

Playing D-III means UND is still under sanctions. Playing NAIA means dropping hockey. Looks like a no win situation to me. Dave said that some of the finest colleges had no sports. That is false unless he can magically come up with an answer, but being how he has completely avoided and then changed the question, things aren't looking in his favor.

sigh...

Close but not quite. We are all Fighting Sioux fans. There are other here who have made it very clear that thay are no fan of the University of North Dakota. Anyone openly admitting that they don't think there will be or care if there will be harm from sanctions on the student-athletes, athletic department and the University as a whole are not fans of the University of North Dakota. And it has been made clear before which one can survive without the other and it isn't the nickname and logo that goes on the jersey, those have both been changed before. The University of North Dakota is the constant in the equation.

Wrong. Your point was that they could make a statement by doing it AND there are already schools that do this, meaning that is has been shown in the past to be successful. What part of does not imply that you are saying there are schools that are already doing this? You are right that you have not offered to give any examples. But you were asked for some by myself and other because no one can seem to find any of these mythical colleges that are some of the finest in the country without athletics. You are the one deflecting and you are the one who continues to make statements/post other's statements that have lies and misconceptions in them as fact while they are continually proven false to you.

The letter writer says this: and then goes on to criticize them for doing exactly that.

So you base you decisions on what a bunch other people think, not just DaveK and his buddies. Glad they teach you to think for yourself down south.