Siouxperfan7

AS long as the hockey program (coaches and players) continue to reject the Fighting Hawks name and logo, the fans will continue to do the same. Other coaches have gone all in on the logo and name and you can see the result of the fan reaction at games. It helps. Brad Berry is an employee of UND. If I were Kennedy, I would tell him that it is part of his job responsibility to act in the best interest of the University. And the thing that he needs to do that he currently isn't to support that is to get behind the new name and logo. I am not saying that Berry changing his twitter profile pic to a Fighting Hawks logo is going to make everyone accept it. But if he was as enthusiastic about it as Bubba, Jones, and other coaches, you can't deny the climate would be a lot different.

Danks really thought his land was worth way more. Alerus just waited him out. I bet he was asking double for that 10 years ago!!

Was there every renderings or drawings of the HPC Phase II ?

Best case scenario for those that don't like the current logo would be for UND to develop a secondary logo and that one would eventually turn into the primary logo used by the athletic programs. Of course, when that would happen is the question. Coming up with a secondary logo would be an admission by UND that the current logo is not as popular as they would have hoped, but if they did it right could go a long way in uniting this divided fanbase and we can't stop talking about logos!! Maybe UND is just playing with us and releasing a less a logo that is kind of plain and bland, and then 5 years after its release, come out with one of the other SME designs and people will compare it to the current logo and think the new secondary logo is just awesome!!

I predict Brady. I think (and maybe I am hopeful) Santiago will be used more in the passing game. I still don't know what the deal is with JJ. He needs to get more touches. If Santiago's role is tweaked a little bit, that may end up happening.

You can sell the naming rights and still have a logo of your school at midfield. Happens everywhere.

Looking a the Summit map now since they left with the addition of Oral Roberts coming back and UND joining, you would think that the travel looks a heck of a lot more attractive than playing a WAC schedule!

One thing that people that don't like the Fighting Hawks name and/or logo need to ask themselves is: What will all my bitching and complaining accomplish? I see it in the same way I see protesters sit on a highway and block traffic, or people who are upset their candidate didn't win an election so they #resist anything and everything associated with it. A lot of effort is wasted when people act this way. So you don't like the Fighting Hawks name. Well, there isn't really a lot you can do about that since I doubt UND is going to spend the time and money to start the process over. OK, so what's next. You don't like the logo. Alright, well currently we only have one Fighting Hawks logo. Does that mean it is going to be like this forever? Likely not as you can look around the country and see schools with multiple logos for their athletic teams. So what can you do? Complaining and resisting the current logo and publically bashing it every chance you get is not going to do any good. the logo is still going to be around. A better way to see change is maybe write letters to the people that can actually make change. Send an email to Kennedy, to Chaves. Start a petition for UND to think about adapting a new secondary logo. See what you can accomplish when you focus your efforts on something that actually has a chance to create change. Not saying that that is going to make a difference either. but is sure as heck better than sitting on the highway pouting about it.

Wondering how things are going with UMKC and playing in the WAC. We all know what that kind of travel can do to an athletic budget. They are right in the "129 Corridor" so to speak that the Summit is moving more towards. I wonder if their budget issues with travel will catch up with them and they would consider coming back.

The current turf at the Alerus was installed in 2013. Not sure what the lifespan of the turf is, so I am not sure if replacing it after 7 years is too soon or if it can last longer. The initial cost to install the Magic Carpet II System was 4 million dollars. they replaced it for free in 2013 for free. I am only guessing but I assume the entire system (turf, blowers underneath to lift up the turf in order to roll it up, storage containment , etc) cost 4 million. The cost to replace just the turf would be much less. So, if UND/Alerus is looking to replace the turf, it's not going to be the 4M initial cost it originally paid back in 2012 when it was first installed. Given the fact that UND has a new logo, new script, and are going to be in a new conference, I would anticipate new turf for the 2020 season when UND enters the MVFC. The Alerus has worked with UND (Gameday committee) has made may improvements in the past 2 years to making the Alerus the "Home of UND football." That being said, I think we can anticipate seeing the Fighting Hawks logo at midfield when it gets replaced.

Unfortunately the Alerus decided to put two massive Alerus logos alteadyvat midfield so it would look waybto crowded. It’s not like the Fargodome where you have two text lines on either side of the logo. You would have 3 Lois at midfield. Way to busy. I am fairly confident that when it gets replaced, you will see the logo at midfield. The Alerus has already shown they comitement to working with UND in their rebranding efforts. Something the Ralph refuses to do.

I hope you sense the sarcasm. Hence the winkey emoji!

Should have just gone with this logo. Even the diehard #Siouxforever fans would be for this!!

4 logos used at center ice at the Ralph.

Edit: Four

The interlocking logo was at center ice at the old Ralph. But when a new logo was created, in a crazy scheme to "shove it down our throats" the powers that be decided to put it at center ice as well as thousands of other places throughout the arena.

Yeah, spending money to put the schools athletic logo on the buildings their athletic teams play in is something you rarely see schools spend money on. Give me a break.

When the current turf was installed in 2013, UND did not have a nickname. The logo was set to be replaced within 4 years, so the Alerus likely knoew that any logo at midfield would be outdated before it was time to replace the turf. You can't blame the Alerus for not wanting a logo that would be outdated in just 4 years at midfield. Given the amount changes done to the building in regards to displaying the new Fighting Hawks logo, I can guarantee the Fighting Hawks logo will be at midfield when it is time to replace it.

Not sure about the teams spring practice, but the new facilities plans looking pretty good at KU http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/university-of-kansas/article174926821.html https://kuathletics.com/news/2018/4/18/construction-begins-on-ku-indoor-football-facility.aspx?path=football and Indiana as well!! http://www.idsnews.com/article/2018/03/specconstruction

Or at least 52% of the cost!

No one said that. And no one has ever claimed they want that. There is a balance of remembering the old name and logo and embracing the new. Nobody is suggesting that all the fighting Sioux logos go away. Kind of impossible at the Ralph. Just a willingness to show the Fighting Hawks at the venues where the teams play. It's not erasing the past. And it's not "shoving it down your throats". We were all Fighting Sioux fans and nobody wants to erase that from our history. Moving forward is something that we all must do as well.

- 100% of football ticket revenue - higher percentage of all other ticket revenue to UND - Support UND in its rebranding effort (starting with the request to put the Fighting Hawks logo at mid court at the Betty.) Not asking for the world here. Just a few minor tweaks to a contract that has remained unchanged for 17 years. A request that I think is fair and supports the notion that the REA and Engelstad Foundation are to benefit the interests of the University and not the other way around.

https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/home/2018/4/17/unlv-len-jessup-engelstad-family-foundation Article about the Engelstad Foundation pulling out of their UNLV donation. KEM with an ironic quote: “Even with philanthropy," McGarry continued, "it’s a transaction, and both parties have to fulfill their end, and they did not." Also some other great points in the article regarding the donor/University relationship. The main takeaway here should be abundantly clear by now. As universities become increasingly reliant on philanthropy, donors are wielding greater influence. Sometimes, this influence will clearly be for the greater good. Other times, this influence will lead to decisions that may be perceived as unfair, if not self-defeating and arbitrary. This fact opens up a Pandora's Box of questions, which include: Should a handful of donors have such a disproportionate amount of influence over a state school system? (It's less than ideal.) Would we be having this discussion if the Engelstad Family Foundation was rescinding, say, a $500,000 donation? (It's highly unlikely.) And, perhaps most importantly, is this any way to fund a university? (Fair enough, but what's the alternative?)

At every University in the country there is one sport that is the "cash cow" for the athletic department and financially supports the other programs. Nothing new. Is it wrong for the basketball program at NDSU to benefit off of the money the football program brings in every year? Some sports are more profitable than others. The fact that the hockey program brings in more money doesn't entitle them to be the only program that benefits. UND is lucky to have program that is as profitable as the hockey program. But that doesn't mean others have to suffer because they are not as profitable.

To sum up, UND signed a contract with REA and the Engelstad Foundation 17 years ago. This contract is to be reviewed every year. Previous Presidents have just signed it with no issue and business goes on as usual. There is a reason that the deal was setup to be negotiated and agreed upon every year. To adjust to changes that are inevitable to happen. Since 2001, UND has moved all sports to Division 1, gone through a complete re branding of it's athletic program with the adoption of a new name and logo, and has had budget cuts that has forced programs to be completely cut. So so say things aren't the same as they were in 2001 is an understatement. Kennedy recognizes this and simply suggests that the deal be re negotiated so that the intent of the "gift" can serve its initial purpose and that is to benefit the University of North Dakota. Asking that UND received more in ticket revenue (especially football), helping UND with their re branding campaign by displaying the new logo more, and inquiring on where all the extra revenue goes(that is supposed to go to the University) are not outlandish things to bring up.