fightingsioux4life

I suppose some of you think the NCAA Sanctions List itself is nothing more than a "scare tactic" and that it wouldn't hurt us at all if we went back to the old name and logo and voluntarily went back on the naughty list? Then please explain why all but one school (Alcorn St.) did what they had to do to get off that list? And Alcorn St. should have an asterisk since they are bad in almost every sport anyway and sanctions don't affect them all that much. Because being on the naughty list has real and tangible consequences that make it harder to recruit and retain top notch athletes. But if you simply choose to not believe that, go right on ahead.

I have no problem arguing points with people. But I think questioning people's loyalty to the institution or the teams based on this or other issues is just crossing a line that should not be crossed. And I for one won't stand for it.

I am thinking his arm is nice and fresh from not playing for the first 80 games.

If you mean the group that will support UND no matter what, yes.

To quote George H.W. Bush: "Not gonna happen. Wouldn't be prudent."

You realize that going with "North Dakota" virtually ensures that this whole circus will be repeated in a couple of years?

The many are the people that will support UND no matter how this whole thing shakes out. The few are the people that will disown UND and their association with it if they don't get "North Dakota".

Whoa, you really wounded me there (not).

Good point. I just want what is best for UND.

A run-off? I like it.

Okay, that is fair enough. I am just angry about that letter in the Heraldo this morning that disowned UND over this. That was a bridge too far for me.

"Green and White" is my least favorite substitute.

This is the guy that set me off this morning. But apparently to some people on here, I am the bad guy and this gentleman is some sort of tragic hero. If I have to wear the black hat on this, so be it.

Really Mr. Moral High Ground? And the rest of us did? Let me clue you into something that has apparently gone straight over your head or bounced off of it without penetrating your thick skull: All of us in the Fighting Sioux family fought the good fight on this. We fought for years (almost 10) to preserve and protect this iconic name and logo. But the cards were stacked against us from the start and it just didn't work out. We didn't quit, we lost. In life, you will win and lose battles. There is no shame in losing, just in not trying or quitting prematurely. We didn't quit too soon, we lost. I can sleep at night knowing that. And I do.

When people disregard the health and vitality of an institution I love, yes, I will get angry. And a new name won't be a "lie". Where do you get that logic?

Classic Ignorance.

I am keeping the username as a tribute to a name and logo that I loved very much and always will love. If you don't understand that, then you are the one with the problem.

If it's all about trademarking, then Fighting Hawks needs to be eliminated too. I call B.S., this is about the PC police getting rid of Roughriders. Not to mention the supporters of Sun Dogs.

Actually, that is how the Fighting Sioux Forever crowd is acting.

Yeah, I like Star Trek...and Star Wars. That doesn't mean the quote doesn't have some truth to it.

They haven't. Yet. They probably are watching this whole sorry exercise from a distance to see what happens. You won't hear from them unless we go along with "North Dakota". By then it will be too late to avoid their wrath.

Pretty sure I am not the only one that is calling the "Fighting Sioux Forever" crowd "temper tantrum throwers". Geaux basically called them "toddlers" in the initial posting on this thread. And I agree with him. As Mr. Spock (the late Leonard Nimoy) used to put it: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one."

I am talking about the NCAA determining in their infinite wisdom (sarcasm) that "North Dakota" is really a clandestine version of "Fighting Sioux". Then it's back on the naughty list with Alcorn State and with that, all the problems that it will cause our coaches and student-athletes.

What would you call people that want to stay "North Dakota" forever, despite the possible consequences to the entire institution? Is there a better term for those people that wrote into the Heraldo today threatening to not support UND anymore? If you have a better term, then tell me. I suppose selfish would fit the bill.

You just proved me right, as always. You want what you want and that is all that matters in your little world. Oh, and nice insult. Name calling means you are losing the argument.