CAS4127

DELUSIONAL ARE WE??!!!!

Doing so may be in violation of the bill, which states neither UND/SBoHE can take any action to discontinue the use of the logo/nickname in use as of Jan, 1, 2011. Didntt both teams play after that date? Now, think about this, if UND can't change their Uni's from what it used in PO's this year, then they can't play in the NCAA tourney, cuz the NCAA won't allow use of the sioux logo in NCAA tourneys. Something to think about!!

I agree, and don't think you are being too cynical. I think it is quite possible Kelley put that question in the letter knowing UND/Sioux supporters would gain access to it, and knowing that the question at least appears to suggest that retaining the nickname/mascot could effect whether UND remains a member of the NCAA and or is accepted to D1. I doubt strongly that the nickname issue will have any effect on UND's membership in the NCAA or move to D1, but, given my cynical side, I wonder if Kelley is attempting to suggest otherwise to UND/Sioux supporters in an attempt to gain their support for retiring the nickname. Perhaps the wording of the quesion is poor because that is exactly what he was doing, but wasn't sure how to state it, or stated it poorly just to draw attention to it. It's interesting, at least for me, to attempt to analyze what is being said without saying it, For example, in the NCAA email, the NCAA, in reference to the April 22nd meeting states that it is declining the "invitation to that meeting". Does that mean the NCAA would attend a different meeting, if invited, after the SBoHE/UND and the legilature come to an agreement on what effect the bill has on the settlement agreement or after the ND Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the bill (if it goes the litigation route)? Who knows. One scenario could be that the SBoHE/UND agrees with the bill and will not challenge it, and the nickname remains. Would the NCAA then attend a meeting to discuss the mascot issue? See what I mean???

Well, his letter should be a public record and therefore open to our review. Perhaps he will rephrase it, because the latter portion makes no sense as it stands. I just can't figure out what the hell he is asking. And, no, I am not being d**k and trying to rub anything in, I am serious. What is he trying to ask?

This quote from the NCAA email fairly and clearly seems to state their position: "The NCAA and the University of North Dakota have agreed to the parameters of the NCAA's Native American mascot policy and we remain ready to assist the institution in it's implementation." And, is Kelley questioning whether UND will be able to remain in the NCAA with this statement/question in his letter to Goetz: "UND will need clarification [from the NCAA] concerning the relationship the University will have with the NCAA regarding the impact of HB1263 on the 2007 settlement agreement". Not sure what he is getting at there.

It appears as though the NCAA figured out what many have said from day one about Carlson's actual agenda behind this bill--a power struggle between him/the legislature and the SBoHE. If I were a Sioux fan, I would not be happy with Carlson, and, whether a Sioux fan or not, would never vote for him again. He has used a very sensitive and controversial issue to promote his politcal ideals--that just effin BS, but typical of a true "politician".

He couldn't, but his source was spot-on as we now know. I would assume the meeting, if it is in Indy and actually happens, will not take place until after the legislative session is over, so there is plenty of time to get those who should or must be there lined up. It will be interesting to learn more about what the NCAA has planned for the meeting, and exactly why they were not to keen on an "open" meeting--that is, if we ever find out given you correct statement that the NCAA operates in large part behind closed doors until they have made a final decision on things like violations, sanctions, fines, etc.

Here's the link

I assume you meant you were "not" talking about me. And, yes, BV is where I found the information, so I came over here to see if you guys would know more, as you are more involved in the issue than I or BV (although there is a hell of a long thread on it over there as you know). That said, Darell, I know who the BV poster is that posted that tidbit, and, although I can't give you his name, he is someone who is significantly connected to those involved in the nickname meeting matter. I, myself, hope that it is merely a reschedule to Indianapolis rather than a cancelation. For UND and the State of ND, this issue just has to come to head.

I am not trying to piss anyone off or be troll. I have heard this. If I am wrong, I apologize. I just figured Sioux fans would know more on the subject then I. What I understand is that the NCAA may not be coming to ND for the meeting, perhaps to avoid open meeting law issues. So, maybe canceled isn't the correct term, perhaps postponed or rescheduled, and to be held in Indianapolis?

I have heard that the NCAA has canceled this meeting, or at least has told State reps that it will not be sending a delegation to ND. No, not effing around. Has anyone hear heard the same thing. Sorry if this is repost. Link me to the other if it is please.

Well, it looks as though you can each have your very own place to eat if you spread out!

This from starzy2: What exactly are you saying, that SDSM was so desperate it had to schedule UND??!!

Wouldn't that be the other way around then??!!

Some evening reading: My link

Barry Vickers--former property law, ethics instructor and a few other classes at UND Law School. What do I win?! Sorry for the thread drift--go back to the speculating again (and, no, not as in oil, but, as in, the balance of this thread).

Given that the Mankatos, Duluths, St. Clouds and Bemidgis are part of the Minnesota University system, has there been any talk by the "system" admins about following the U of M's position on scheduling/the nickname?

I guess I should have more specifically stated what I was getting at: Does the NCAA make any money from D1 Hockey, meaning NET; that is, revenues minus expenditures? We know it makes (Nets) money from FB and men's BB, but what about men's hockey?

Link--interesting read! Does anyone know whether the NCAA makes any money on hockey, in general, and or the tournament specifically?

The MN AD was just on KFAN the other day, and, when asked about scheduling UND in hockey after the BTHC is in play, he said he is not sure how that will work out. BTW, the question was prefaced with (paraphrasing), "while you won't play UND in football or basketball because of the name . . . . . . "

I would think that his position has more to do with just scheduling. The nickname opponents are not going to go away even if a new deal is worked out with the NCAA, and both of the surrounding, non-productive debate and negative connotations (whether accurate or not) will still be there. He likely thinks and feels his time, and others in the administration, is better spent on productive matters--but these are just my thoughts of course.

Have you and others ever considered that he may have been doing just that^?! As in he believes, whether correctly or incorrectly, that the best thing for UND and its athletic programs is to change the nickname and move on, especially given the "transitional" status of UND sports (-hockey) at this very time?

I could actually see this happening at MSUM. I would also predict the ensuing demise of FB and wrestling there. I think Fargo-Moorhead, or, in this case, Moorhead-Fargo, might actually support a D1 hockey program better then SCSU, UNO or MSU-Mankato.

Sans a few of them, I just like sports in general, especially college. As for NDSU & hockey, my position is that it would hurt the existing sports that are otherwise doing relatively well. Look what has happened at SCSU and UNO for examples, and which are more comparable to NDSU then Wisky. I also think NDSU hockey would "divide" the existing fanbase to some extent, the result of all of which would be negative for NDSU in general--not unlike the nickname issue at UND.