zonadub
-
Posts
2,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by zonadub
-
-
I don't always agree with Rachel Blount, and she's never been a real fan of the Sioux moniker, but she seems to box the issue up pretty well.
http://www.startribu.../139773373.html
the statement she makes that really gave me pause:
...put the nickname issue on the ballot for the November election as a constitutional amendment.
That is not a joke. ...
this whole fight among ourselves is really being looked at as a joke by the rest of the country. I don't like reading statements like that, even from Twin Cities writers.
Benny... there are so few teams with native american nicknames, it will be difficult to come up with a list of schools who have announced that they will no longer play teams with native american nicknames, I just don't know how you can list the schools that won't play Alcorn State because of their nickname. Really, what other measure is there besides the list of schools (MN, WI, IA) that have officially announced they won't play UND?
-
I guess they could add another team, but I thought adding USD was due in part to stuff like this, like an insurance policy. If Illinois State leaves, it puts the conference back at 9 members, an ideal number.
That may be, but USD was added to the MVFC, and the MVC may be looking for an all-sports member to keep the status quo in the MVFC with the Summit schools. North Dakota would bring no Summit League ties into the MVC that a NDSU, SDSU, USD or another previous member of the Summit would.
Bottom line is that UND will still have to get off the NCAA sanction list to get in to any conference - BSC, WAC, MWCUSA, MVC, Summit - you name it.
-
1
-
-
Is there even a remote chance that this happens?
not if UND is still dealing with NCAA sanctions
-
After seeing reports listing the UND Sioux in South Dakota and hearing other parts of the country thinking it was the Sioux playing football when NDSU was playing, what would be the chances that recruits from other parts of the country could confuse NDSU and UND? Seems to me that recruiting could harm South Dakota as well as NDSU and UND as long as the sanctions are in place. Anyone else see this as a possibility?
Wouldn't you think that recruits are a lot more on top of what school is the Fighting Sioux than some headline writer in Connecticut?
-
1
-
-
Jones said that they are recruiting for next year, primarily bigs.
We have offered Quinton Hooker, a 6' guard from Park Center. Also have interest in Kebu Johnson, a 6'3", shooting guard from Blake, also in the Cities.
-
I think dome tickets go for around $20. bump it up to 25 for UND, and you make an extra 100,000. Then the next year you give up 400,000 in ticket sales to go to grand forks. Plus UND would't even be the biggest game of the year, that would normally be UNI or SDSU. should those games be premium as well?
Any home-home situation is basically a six figure handout from NDSU football to UND football. It's pretty clear why they aren't in favor of it. Both teams would probably make more money if NDSU just paid UND 250k to come to the fargodome every year.
I think what you are forgetting is that for every casual one-game-at-a-time Bison fan that couldn't afford the extra $$, there would be a Sioux fan lining up to pay that extra cash to the NDSU athletic dept. Wouldn't that be satisfying to the Bison faithful? Gouging the Sioux fans for an extra $10 or $20 a seat? How many out of town fans come to Fargo to watch the Robert Morris's and Wagner's? You certainly cannot infer that the UND-NDSU game could not sell out at a higher price. It must be that you fear that NDSU fans can't afford the ticket price and that there would actually be some Sioux fans at the Fargodome.
Disclaimer: I would prefer that UND-NDSU play every other or every third year and put the South Dakota schools and Northern Iowa into the mix. This is with the caveat that UND gets to join the Big Sky after all the other distractions are addressed.
-
Rock-Paper-Scissors.
Rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock.
-
What about "Phoenix" or "The Phoenix".
No, it's not indigineous to ND, but isn't there something about the mythology of the phoenix that is kind of appropriate to this situation?
Better than most
-
You are correct. As long as UND was D2 they did not get their share of Frozen Four revenues. We lost about $400,000 per year. the expense money UND received fro the NCAA didn't usually cover our costs.
The D2 issue vs D1 issue is irrelevant because we would still have the same sanctions regardless of which Division we are in. They are both NCAA. Would there still be an NCC? With SDSU, USD and the AC all gone maybe, probably not but we woudl give up the home playoff games which is a big deal for FB whether you are D1 or D2. D2 became so watered down and was losing scholarships. With 14,000 students and the history of UND athletics and academic excellence, we outgrew D2.
Dolphinswin: UND is a hockey school but not hockey only. Get the WBB or MBB or FB into the tournament and you will learn that UND will support any successful program and especially hockey, BB, or FB. Force the logo and name issue on UND and you will learn we are not a "hockey school" we are a University with a great hockey program with a great tradition. The great tradition of UND hockey does not need nor has it ever needed the name for its success and tradition. How many National titles have we won since the team moved into the Ralph??? How many did UND win when they played in the old quonset? How many did they win playing in the old Ralph that didn't have the name and logos everywhere? I want a successful hockey program a lot more than a name or logo that without NCAA approval hurts my hockey team. We will end up a bunch or rubes with a great logo and name and beautiful arena and no where to go.
doggone it, ira... there you go makin' sense again. thanks
-
It's kind of curious that if this issue was such a sore point for so many people in the past, that they are now willing to handicap UND athletics, why are the politicos like Conrad, Hoeven, et al. continually re-elected? And the AG Stenjhem has been in office since 2001 and has been re-elected a few times. Odd ... Is this issue on the agenda for the congressional elections?
Since the feds have the only real power to bring the NC$$ to heel, you have to wonder about the true motivations of Carlson, Hennen, Soderstrom, etc.
and yet, some on this forum continually point out that Standing Rock has elected tribal council members that do not vote 'for' the nickname. sorry to point this out, but the nickname is not the most pressing issue for any elected official, whether federal, state or tribal. as such, UND is just going to have to live with the consequences.
unfortunately, ira, sica, scott and others are probably correct that even with Standing Rock tribal approval, at this point it is too late. so, the only recourse left is Spirit Lake's pending suit. and that will be a long, expensive process that may result in nothing changing either.
-
how about the WASPs?
-
It’ll be ironic in those Big Sky matchups against Northern Arizona knowing that one of the Lumberjacks’ logos is of a human person.
and the Portland Vikings
-
dakota,
I believe the article I’m thinking of is entitled “Sioux Unhappy: Challenging the NCAA’s Ban on Native American Imagery, 42 Tulsa L. Rev. 171 (2006-2007)” by Kelly P. O’Neill. I can’t find a link to the full article unfortunately. I’ll try again and see if I can find anything.
There is also a William and Mary Law Review article entitled “Playing Cowboys and Indians” that is pretty interesting. I believe this also discusses the inconsistent application of the NCAA policy and the fact that the policy violated the NCAA’s own constitution, which provides that “it is the responsibility of each member institution to determine independently its own policy regarding nondiscrimination.”
Piece by piece, these articles highlight a lot of interesting points. For example, before the policy was even put in place, the NCAA exempted the UNC-Pembroke Braves, which boasts an Indian head logo similar to North Dakota’s, because of its historical ties to the Native American community and that 20% of its students were Native American.
Some universities received approval to continue using a Native American based moniker because they amended their logo to remove Native American references. Bradley Braves, William and Mary Tribe, etc.
Illinois, which has no native American tribe that the university could even seek approval, was allowed to keep the name because “Illini” is closely associated with the state’s name. Their mascot was retired, however.
No school has been required to gain approval of more than one local tribe---obviously UND is the exception. Florida State only needed approval of the local Florida Seminole tribe despite the fact that most Seminoles both live in Oklahoma and are opposed to the Florida state nickname. I’m guessing a lot of it stems from the animosity of being kicked out of Florida altogether.
Here are some other links:
http://www.law.uconn...d%20Mascots.pdf
http://www.willamett...008%20-%202.pdf
http://www.columbialawreview.org/assets/pdfs/107/8/Mezey.pdf
http://www.law.umary...ings_Harper.pdf
To be honest, there is a lot more out on the internet than I thought. If interested, just runs some google searches that quote law review; ncaa; hostile and abusive; fighting Sioux. Or any other combinations that you might find relevant.
Thank you, Benny. I have skimmed the 4 articles you linked, but not being an attorney, its going to take me a while to actually try to digest what they say. An early reaction to them is that basically, there is nothing that has not been discussed in these threads already. Seminoles, Chippewa & Utes got tribal approval, Illini got a pass by dropping the Chief & saying its about the state not a tribe, and almost everyone else changed their nicknames.
Illinois lost the chance to host an NCAA tennis tournament before the waiver was given to them. The NCAA did not keep them out of the tournament, but they could not host it.
but, as I said earlier, I'm a layperson when it comes to the law, so I don't know what I missed.
googling "Sioux Unhappy: Challenging the NCAA’s Ban on Native American Imagery, 42 Tulsa L. Rev. 171 (2006-2007)” by Kelly P. O’Neill" brings up a lexis nexis link, but only gives the intro paragraph to the non-subscriber. Maybe one of the attorneys on this forum would be able the check it. You sound like you have a law background, Benny. Do you have access to lexis nexis?
Thank you again, Benny.
-
They can't. Even SCOTUS had made it very clear that the NCAA must apply its policies in a consistent manner and NOT in an arbitrary or capricious manner. There's even published literature, a law review article, which discusses how arbitrary and unfair the NCAA's settlement with UND was relative to other institutions.
if you have a link, I would really like to read that. thank you!
-
1
-
-
I just wish they were in the same conference...oh well.
yeah, if NDSU would express some interest in rounding out the Big Sky & being a travel partner for UND, I think the Big Sky would listen. eventually, SDSU and USD could follow. but this has been discussed on other threads before...
-
State Board asks for statement from ND Supreme Court declaring nickname law unconstitutional
The State Board of Higher Education today asked Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem to seek a declaratory statement from the North Dakota Supreme Court declaring the Fighting Sioux nickname law adopted in April 2011 to be unconstitutional.
The vote was 7-1, with board member Claus Lembke dissenting. Early in the two-hour teleconference meeting, Stenehjem told the board that, in his opinion, “if this matter were to be brought to the Supreme Court justices, I have no doubt they would rule the law (requiring UND to keep the nickname) is in violation of the Constitution.”
Stenehjem told the board that they will need to ask the Supreme Court to exercise original jurisdiction to take up the case, and they would need to seek an expedited hearing schedule so the matter could come before the court in time for action before the deadline for printing the June primary election ballot.
-
Maybe, just maybe Faison knew the South Dakota Board of Regents was not going to approve the exit fee for the Coyotes to get out of the Summit. If that was the case, was Faison jumping the gun or being proactive? If the Big Sky presidents knew that USD was not going to be joining the league along with UND, would they have pulled the offer? Maybe Faison accepted the offer early for a good reason.
The MVFC has never been receptive to UND, and I really wonder where the idea came from that there is a gentleman's agreement not to leave a team without a conference. I also wonder where the idea is coming from that UND can just go to the Summit. If I remember correctly, Douple & Faison had a bit of a contentious media exchange last year and there may be a bridge to rebuild before the Summit would consider UND. Plus, the Summit has already come out publicly with the position that the nickname issue must be resolved first.
-
They probably won't believe our new "reality" until the women's hockey team actually plays its "home" playoff games in Fargo ... or more likely if the men's team has to hit the road too if they end up with a home berth. And even then, they'll still probably keep clinging to the moniker and waiting for some vain "salvation" from SL, or Bismarck.
that is assuming, if the Sioux do not win the conference tourney, that they will get an at-large bid.
the NCAA can select whomever they decide.
will the nickname cause them to pass over the Sioux in favor of another school if it is a close call?
-
1
-
-
When was THAT? 1994-1996? A bad 3-year stretch of hockey?
it may have been quite a few years ago, but when I was a student (in the 70's) & Rube Bjorkman was the hockey coach, the football team was bigger than hockey. I think basketball was also bigger in the 60's. I know, a long time ago for some of you, but history has a way of repeating itself.
-
From the front page of the cnn.com website, check out this heavily voted upon poll:
Should colleges be allowed to use Native American sports mascots?
Yes
85%
63365
No
15%
11143
Total votes: 74508
This is not a scientific poll
too bad that is not a poll of the people who have the deciding vote in Indianapolis
-
OK, what if the Fighting Sioux football team doesn't win the conference to get a tournament autobid and is ranked, say, #19 or #20 in a 20 team playoff scenario? If the NCAA has any 'justifiable' reason to pick another team over UND for the playoffs, what does the nickname mean then? Same thing for other playoff possibilities... men's hockey (they seem to be teetering on that precipice right now), women's hockey, volleyball, women's basketball, even possibly men's basketball, others as well... you do not have to win the conference to get an at-large invite to the tournaments, but will a school on the H & A list get the benefit of the doubt? We do not have the answer to that one until it happens, but I have a strong uninformed opinion.
If the Fighting Sioux are passed over for a playoff berth because of the nickname, it is doing harm to the school, the athletic teams and to the conference. The Big Sky presidents & Fullerton will definitely take notice of something like that happening. Let's say that UND finishes just ahead of Eastern Washington in the conference football standings, but the Screaming Eagles would have been ranked #20 had they not played and lost to UND in a conference game, which (hypothetically) pushed their rank to #22, and then out of the playoffs. Where, if UND had been relegated to the Great West Conference (or now, independence since the GWFC is gone), E Washington would not have played the Sioux and beat someone like McNeese State instead and thus been ranked high enough to get an at-large bid. What would the conversations be like at the conference meetings if the Sioux were excluded from the playoffs for the nickname then? Would UND be kicked out of the Big Sky for something like keeping another Big Sky team from getting an at-large invitation? I still believe the Montana's and Northern Colorado would back UND, but in a case like this, all bets are off.
Sorry, seems like I'm rambling with a bunch of random thoughts here, but hope you get my idea. Its not just home field if UND wins the conference, its the risk of giving the NCAA a reason to pick someone else for at-large bids, too.
-
What is AGS?
anygivensaturday.com a very good FCS fan forum. another good one is championshipsubdivision.com
-
So, here is a question that I have not seen come up in this thread, yet...
What if... the repeal initiative goes to a vote. The state votes it down, because we are afraid of what it means to UND with the NCAA and especially the Big Sky. BUT, there is a two-thirds approval in BOTH of the reservation precincts, such as Sioux and Benson Counties? Would the people who are supposedly supporting the rights of native americans in Indianapolis listen to the native vote or the statewide (mostly white) vote, since they are doing this FOR the native americans?
Would someone who has a better grasp of the legal side of what is going on here have any ideas?
-
Competing in BSC isn't any different than GWC, its a weak conference and we'll end up goin to the dance in 1st year of eligibility, not to worry. Thats one nice thing about BSC totally not basketball conference and we con dominate and could end up being known as a basketball college in the future because of this.
What planet have you been hanging out on?
UND's New Hockey Conference
in Men's Hockey
Posted
Huh?
What? 
Did I miss something here? 