CAS4127

OMG, are you effing kidding me???!!!! Wow do rank Portly Rob (aka Rob Port) then. That is all he is doing as well, yet many of you follow blindly all of his BS!!! I mean, check out his resume-->he holds himself out as a "professional contrarian"? Do you know what that means??!!! Do you really think he has UND in his bests interests, or is he promoting his best interests by being involved in a controversial issue that will get viewers to his idiotic, myopic blog page??!!! C'mon man!!!

Originally posted by star2: Um, arent those statements a bit contradictory??!!! Just askin!!!

Actually, I think it may even be beyond that to "ignoramous stage".

Star--you really need to get on some psychiatric medication for paranoia!! I mean, really?!!!!!!! Also, please arrange to be in padded room wearing a flack jacket and having no guns or sharp instruments around you when this all comes to pass. Oh, and post some links to your "facts" for credibility sake. It's Charlie Stock, btw!

Surpised the "WE R NORTH DAKOTA" tv adverstisements/promos haven't been mentioned. Already gettin peeps accustomed to "Sioux" being gone that early in the game??!! Those started almost a year ago, didn't they?

Read my response to Sic--that's what I am saying!! Past/existing regulations and policies can be looked at as "guidance". Why would Fullerton hide the ball that the NCAA contacted the BSC and said "be careful with UND invite"? WHY would he hide that if in fact UND is still and wanted/desired member and he knows the NCAA has said there could ge ramnifacations to the BSD if UND joins with the nickname. What would be the reason to hide that ball?!!!!!!!! More NCAA/BSC conspiracy? Doubt it, as BSC not that big of a player to the NCAA!!

@Sic: I think you are construing much too broadly that one statement in a paragragh that is nothing short of confusing in the manner it is worded. I have read it dozens of times and still do not understand what it means. To read it as simply as the BSC received guidance from the NCAA on this issue is not doing it justice. How do you know that the BSC didn't contact the NCAA for "guidance"? How do you know that the BSC did not just use past history and NCAA actions as guidance? The paragraph could also be read as to say that the BSC is concerned that UND may decide it does not want to remain a member of the NCAA because the NCAA's policies do not align with those of UND's/Nodak! READ THE ENTIRE PARAGRAPH, as typically paragraphs contian full thoughts/positions on an issue, not just one sentence within it. Think: BSC concerned UND/Nodak may bail from NCAA because of sacred nickname, and BSC does not want to deal with that and the resulting scheduling issues. I will stick with the conspiracy theory run amuck approach--maybe we will ultimately learn what happened!!

Others!!!!! Like those former UND presidents and high admins (Clifford/Strinden), legislators and Governors who took for granted that some Sioux Tribe/Band members or PC'ers would never rise up and say anything, and, when they did, the lack of response to the same--that's where it all started and could have been cut off at the pass.

Call in Jesse Ventura and let the conspiracy investigation begin. To say that the NCAA got to the BSC really makes no sense if you recall, and keep in mind, that the BSC letter basically stated the BSC did not care whether the NCAA and UND renegotiated and UND would be allowed continued use of the nickname. So, why would the NCAA "get to the BSC" under that scenario? What you are basically saying is that the NCAA if foretelling us that it is going to renegotiate but wants the BSC to step in and say, "big deal", we don't like the name so you are still not in. Not a plausible version of events my friends, not even close. The BSC did not say UND is in if NCAA capitulates--remember that before posting more conspiracy theories. Hell, the NCAA doesn't care all that much whether UND keeps the nickname--"go ahead, but just don't expect to host NCAA events or ewear" the jersey in out of town NCAA events. Each individual school and or conference can make their own policy, and the NCAA could care less. For example, do you think the NCAA cares whether UND and Minnesota play each other during the regular season? No, and it has said as much by the sanctions it is going to apply come August 15th. The NCAA is dictating what it will do, not what other schools/conferences decided to do. Kelley knows all of this, and that is why he wants some reassurance from the legilative branch now that the law will be repealed--He knows that the BSC is going to base its decision on its own policies, not those of the NCAA, so the meeting with NCAA doesn't matter relative to the BSC invite

Guess what, and this will be hard to believe until you see/understand the reason for the answer, there are many people who would like UND to keep the nickname/logo more so than even DaveK and star2!!! You know who they are--Bison fans who despise UND/Sioux!!!! Now, why do you think that is?? I ain't one of them, but they are out there.

The problem, 76, is that he is getting name recognition despite being an asshat, and I would say well over half of the ND voting population is completely uninformed-- see a name on ballot, recognize it, check. Anyway, still think we are gonna see repeal, retirement and BSC membership.

Here's what I see happening: From now until November special session, Big Al will be attempting to garner votes for repeal of the law, and there will be public statements to that effect. He'll say he tried, but now must do the right thing. NCAA and Big Al and Co. meet in July--no change of policy Discussion on repeal escalates, and it becomes almost a given that repeal will happen in November (sending message to BSC). BSC meets in October. Outcome: provided law is repealed, UND still in. Law is repealed in November (nickname retired as a result). Confirmation by BSC that UND is still in. Big Al paints himself as a true politician. One that put up a "fight", as they like to say in Nodak politics, but given the un-yielding NCAA, he fully studied the issue and decided not to risk UND athletics. Big Al runs for U.S. House.

But, Dave, UND does not have a "legal right" to be a member of the NCAA or the BSC. Anyway, looks like NCAA will at least meet with Big Al and Co.:Late July?

Dave, psssst, the law is not directed at nor does it govern either the NCAA or the BSC. It is directed at and is meant to govern the conduct of the SBoHE and UND. Also, within the same minute a lawsuit being filed, Kelley will recieve a fax or email from Fullerton saying "Good Bye!" Think about it, don't react emotionally!!

Vern, I think you know better. If the law becomes effective the 1st, you can't do anthing after that. Also, it has retroactivity language--just sayin!

Sounds like action taken to discontinue the use of the logo/nickname to me, Repeal is what is needed, and you're correct, the timing is not synchronized. If the BSC is looking for a way to bail on the invite becuase of travel given that USD didn't come along, this could be it.

It says "neither SBoHE nor UND" Well, I guess it's actually the other way around, but you get my point I assume.

This: Couldn't that be construed to mean the hockey team must wear the same jerseys next year at all times that it was using as of January 1, 2011? If so, this law arguably will elimate UND's ability to participate in the Final Five, etc, as the NCAA will not allow the Sioux logo to be worn during NCAA tournaments, but the bill says UND can't take any action to discontinue the use of the fighting Sioux logo. See what I mean? And I agree: "An effin Federal Anti-trust lawsuit"? Carlson is braindead IMO!!

GSioux: The bill--soon to be law--does not contain a penalty clause. In other words, there is no out-right penalty that could be handed down to UND. Might UND see some "legislative" penalties in two years when the legislature next meets if it violates the law? Also, remember that Shaft said the SBoHE is not going to challenge the law, thus, UND is the only one left standing to do so. I hope you now all see what this was about, as I said when the bill was being debated and voted upon. Al Carlson wanted to rein in the SBoHE, and this was one of his ways of doing that, even though the ND Constitution does not allow the legislative branch to control the SBoHE or UND. Also, Big Al wanted his name and face front and center in the news because he has bigger political aspirations. He has used UND for the good of his own plans, not for the good of UND. Now look at the position Big Al's "Sioux Bill" has put UND!!

Big Al to the resue again!! First he gets the bill passed and now he is going to persuade the NCAA to change it's position. It's almost like he is contemplating a run for statewide office!!!? When's he gonna meet with all the BSC presidents?!

Never saw those, 83--may not have joined BV by then. I would have responded in similar way, as I do sometimes now. So, ya, I understand what you are saying re: "Same thing-different board"!

My response was too the entire post, not just the WAC reference. Go back and read that post of DF's and really, really give it some critical thought. HINT: USD did not even follow/join UND in the BSC, now he has them and other Dakota schools going with UND to the WAC???!!!!! Un-effin believable if you just think about it even a little bit!!

I didn' t realize questioning an asinine post by a UND fan meant I had negative feelings toward UND--now I do. I question people on Bisonville and am not accused of having negative feelings toward NDSU. I question Al Carlson because, guess what, I do have negative feelings toward him for the S$*TFEST he and our legislators created.

Answered my own question:WAC expansion Don't see UND mentioned anywhere!

He would lose his job if he were doing that!