fightingsioux4life

Ah, the infamous "Climax-Fisher Rule". Well, screw that. I am voting Roughriders and I do think it will carry the day if not after the first vote, then definitely after the run-off. IMO, Sundogs and Nodaks are the bottom two choices. I can live with anything else on there.

The headline in the Heraldo today could just as well have said: "UND considering move back down to Division II to protect Men's Hockey." Because if we do what I think we are going to do, we might as well start the de-transition process right now.

http://und.edu/features/2015/08/nickname-process.cfm So they basically went with my idea of requiring a majority vote and having a run-off if nothing gets a majority. Nice! I will be voting Roughriders.

I have had it up to you-know-where with this whole "If the Big Sky doesn't do it, we shouldn't do it either" garbage. That almost sounds like what the NSIC used to do with football scholarships when they had that cap that was set way below the NCAA maximum. It was all about "inter-conference competitiveness". So that is what we moved up for? So we could set lower standards and then pat ourselves on the back for being "competitive within our conference" and that's it? I suppose if the Big Sky sets a cap for football scholarships of, let's just say, 50, you will be on board with that? Sorry, I am not cool with that. Mark my words, NDSU is not backing down on this. And I disagree 100% with the idea that "We can't afford this for anything but hockey." That is pure B.S. Like I have said before, if we can raise $300 million for an endowment, we can raise the money for this. And if that involves cutting some lower-tier sports, then so be it. Get rid of baseball and softball. Get rid of swimming and diving (both men's and women's). That will probably help us focus on the rest of our programs more. Once again, in closing, I am sick and tired of NDSU being on the cutting edge of FCS athletics while we wallow in the mud and pretend that everything is just fine the way it is. Because it is not fine. And it won't get to be fine until we get a new President that understands how important athletics is to a university's overall mission. Faison is just doing what he is told; Kelley is the one that is apathetic to this because he is leaving next year anyway.

Kelley will not pick Sundogs. He will want to avoid any major uproar from the fans and the community. He'll pick Roughriders because that will be acceptable to a lot of people, even the Fighting Sioux Hardliners.

I was responding to your comment that not having a nickname wouldn't be a problem at all. If we pick a new name, the NCAA won't bother us; they basically would have gotten everything they wanted back on August 5th, 2005. But if we don't pick a new name, then they will have all the opening they need to slap us down again.

You are committing a lie of omission. IF WE PICK A NEW NAME, then Fighting Sioux won't be looked at as an "unofficial" name. That is all we need to do to put this to bed. PICK A NEW NAME. But you and others on here are more interested in sticking a finger in the eye of the NCAA and the others that forced this change. Four words for the "UND/North Dakota" camp: Don't poke the bear.

If you want to trust the NCAA, go right on ahead. I for one will not put anything past them.

Eh yourself.

You are misrepresenting the issue here (as usual). The NCAA said, not in so many words, that if we chose a new name and logo, it wouldn't matter what people did at games. But if we continue as "UND/North Dakota" and people start complaining again (which they probably will; B.R.I.D.G.E.S. immediately comes to mind), then they will investigate us for possible sanctions. Learn to read between the lines, it really helps when you are trying to figure out what organizations like the NCAA really mean.

Look junior, don't EVER question my loyalty to this institution. I went to school there, I work there and I have been following ALL our programs for years. I also am a Coaches Club member and season ticket holder for men's hockey and football. I also make it to an occasional basketball game here and there (both men and women). My credentials are solid as a rock. So please don't make this personal, there is no need to. Also, you misrepresented what the NCAA said about this. Basically, they told us that if we choose a new nickname and logo, it wouldn't matter what people wore to games or what they said at games. BUT....and this is what you guys like to ignore.....if we go without a nickname and logo and other schools complain about our fans continuing to use the old name and logo at athletic events, then sanctions might be back on the table because the NCAA might believe that the Fighting Sioux name and logo have become the "unofficial name and logo" of UND, thus still creating a "hostile and abusive" (their views, not mine) environment for coaches, student-athletes and fans. That is enough of a threat for me to want us to choose a new name and logo and put all this behind us. And, if sanctions occur, I will be pointing the finger at YOU and your ilk. End Rant.

First of all, I will not be "moving along" anytime soon. Second of all, this is the same song and dance we heard when the policy was announced on August 5th, 2005: People were pooh-poohing the potential negative consequences of the nickname policy if it was not overturned and we kept the name and logo as so many men's hockey rubes wanted (because, after all, we can't host regionals anymore anyway, so just accept the sanctions). The NCAA remembers who we are and they probably will never like us. So why give them an opening to attack us again? We need to cover our a$$es so our coaches and athletes can focus on winning and not stuff like this.

All it takes is for one person or school to complain to the NCAA about some fans wearing Fighting Sioux gear (which I will continue doing) to bring back the scrutiny and potentially bring back the sanctions. And there are still enough people at hockey games (home, away and at postseason tournaments) that wear the name and logo and voice their support for them to make this a potential pitfall in the future. Sorry, thanks for playing, please play again.

That is a trend across high school and college athletics, not just at GFC. It's more cultural and social than anything else. I suppose you expect UND to start losing in men's hockey because of the name change? I think not.

I still think it's a legitimate comparison, regardless of level and/or size of the schools involved.

This was the same B.S. argument brought up when Grand Forks Central was talking about using Knights as a replacement for Redskins. "But Climax-Fisher doesn't want us to use it so we just can't." Well, I didn't care about what Climax-Fisher was thinking back then and I still don't all these years later. And I have the same attitude with regard to Roughriders and GFRR.

Again, I don't care how many FCS schools decide not to fully fund FCOA. I care if UND does it or not. And if we want to put together top-notch mid-major programs, we will need to do this. IMO, there is no choice in the matter.

If this is the case, we must ensure that we end up in the haves category.

This is my basic argument in a nutshell.

Damn GOBC!

I was waiting for this red herring to be brought up. FYI, I am a Champions Club member (Coaches Club) and a season ticket holder to men's hockey and football. So please don't go there with the "you aren't practicing what you preach" garbage. FCOA will require a whole new fundraising effort from people that are not giving at all right now. I am willing to fork over more to help make it happen, but this is a whole new category of expenditure and needs to be treated that way.

Oh, I agree with you, trimming some sports will have to be part of the equation. I am more than willing to do that. I just don't want us to keep all sports and then make across-the-board budget cuts to all the non-hockey sports (you know hockey won't feel the blade at all). I would rather have fewer, but successful programs than more, but mediocre to average programs.

UND made a half-arsed effort at addressing the issue, while NDSU is tackling the issue head-on and making no bones about the fact that they want to be the best they can be at whatever sports they sponsor. As for UND "re-adjusting their strategy", I guess I am not going to assume that until I see concrete steps towards achieving that objective.

When Faison is quoted in the Heraldo that UND is planning on funding all 18 men's hockey scholarships and an equal number of women's scholarships and then hints at possible "cuts" in the future, that doesn't sound good to me. What I meant was that I don't care if most of the other FCS schools decide not to do this, I still want UND to do it so that we become a leader and trend setter in mid-major collegiate athletics instead of being in wanna-be, catch-up mode all the time. And like it or not, what happens with NDSU has an impact on UND and vice-versa. We either accept that and rise to the challenge or we sink into permanent mediocrity. I know which path I want to take.