Benny Baker

For those who obviously haven't read some of the posts, I'll reiterate that I find it had to believe that enough schools will actually complain to the NCAA that UND's lack of a nickname perpetuates hostile and abusive stereotypes about Native American when there are literally other universities out there, like Florida State, that do perpetuate stereotypes about Native Americans. This has nothing to do with Florida State being exempt from sanctions. It has to do with what university's would actually complain about a lack of a nickname that allegedly encourages racial insensitivity while ignoring and not complaining about other schools. Recall, for sanctions to be in place, "other schools" must first complain to the NCAA according the Peter Johnson.

herald/forum is not even a legitimate media source anymore. they literally cite to Facebook and Twitter comments. sensationalism at its worst.

surprise, surprise. not a whole lot new with this article.

I don't know, it's kind of hard to believe much of anything you have to say considering how badly your opinion of the settlement agreement turned out. But again, you're purposefully avoiding my point: what University is really going to complain about the absence of a nickname out of concern for hostile and abusive treatment to ethnic minorities when there are schools, like Florida State, with a white-man playing "indian face" and a whole stadium performing native american chants in unison?

And I can see that some of us have been lead to believe that the word "sioux" at the end of a national anthem will necessarily, unequivocally, and automatically result in sanctions if a Sundog crest is not promptly placed on the sweaters of the men's hockey team.

I've personally grown accustomed to it over the past three years. I do personally think its unique and inclusive of our state's residents and alumni. I've enjoyed sports commentators who simply refer to UND as "North Dakota" or the like as opposed to a potential nickname, like Fighting Hawks, that an average viewer may not associate with our state or university. I personally like UND/North Dakota better than the other five options, and I personally believe that a majority of "stakeholders" agree with me. I might be wrong, but let's put it to a vote and see.

Spirit Lake? I'll edit this and also note that Central Michigan Chippewas may have more common opponents to UND than Florida State since that apparently needs to be a factor in your analysis. Like UND, Central Michigan only received the blessing of one of five Chippewa tribes in the state of Michigan. UND did better and received the blessing of one of two. But my point is really this: what University is really going to complain about the absence of a nickname out of concern for hostile and abusive treatment to ethnic minorities when there are schools, like Florida State, with a white-man playing "indian face" and a whole stadium performing native american chants in unison?

Which raises the identity of those alleged "other schools that might--might--complain" about UND's absence of a nickname. I'd love to see the academic who rings up the NCAA and complains about UND's lack of a nickname a week before his school accepts a huge payout for going down to get slaughtered in Tallahasee by the Florida State Seminole football team

I'm fine with Roughriders, but I've always stated that my preference would be to stay North Dakota/UND. I've never hid that. However, there's about a half dozen overly pessimistic fanatics on this message board who tirelessly read into things too much and make false assumption that the North Dakota/UND crowd is motivated by some deceitful desire to have UND adopt Fighting Sioux again and destroy the university. My preference for staying North Dakota/UND has absolutely nothing to do with the Fighting Sioux. That was my point earlier. As for my interest in Roughriders, my fear is that with four other names going to the public vote (whatever that vote entails), that UND will be stuck with a completely generic or extremely underwhelming nickname like Fighting Hawks or Sundogs.

It's about more than purchasing clothes.

perpetuity then.

What if some fans, alumni, stakeholders, etc. have come accustomed to North Dakota/UND over the past three years and think North Dakota/UND is a unique, suitable option moving forward? I personally like it much better than Sundogs and its inevitable logo of a husky with a linear rainbow shooting out of its ass. But that's just me; I'm personally content with North Dakota/UND for the time being.

Ermines?

I think it's also important to point out that NCAA sanctions aren't necessarily designed to directly limit free speech. Take the South Carolina sanction for example. The NCAA has acknowledged the state is free to fly its flag, but if they do, South Carolina member institutions cannot host NCAA tournament events.

The problem is that the NCAA is not a state actor or, ultimately, the government. The first amendment and free speech laws are not necessarily going to apply to NCAA rules and procedures.

Waiting for the next quarterly meeting for the NCAA Board of Governors to convene, recommend, vote upon, and ultimately pass a new policy and set of sanctions is easier than enforcing an already existing, written agreement? Or you could just admit you're wrong.

Hey, whatever helps you cope with reality.

Yup, like I said, the sanctions everyone is talking about do not even exist.

Hey, whatever helps you cope with reality.

Oh, boy. Here we go again. Ask jdub or 82SiouxGuy about how wrong they were on that one. . . . Or, just read the first half of this thread.

Are you kidding me? That link has absolutely nothing to do with UND competing as UND, but absolutely everything to do with UND competing as "Fighting Sioux"! Like I just said, UND will face sanctions for competing as the Fighting Sioux. No one has ever disputed that! How conveniently you forget the addendum that lifted sanctions against UND, and the herald article that just confirmed that playing as UND does not violate the settlement agreement. By the way, feel free to admit that your 100% wrong on that one. Your unabashed, albeit completely incorrect opinion, is etched in stone on the first several pages of this thread. Simply put, there are no current sanctions in place against UND for competing as UND . . . otherwise, UND would have been on sanctions for the past three years! The NCAA would have to adopt new sanctions against UND for competing as UND. I've never said the NCAA can't do that. What I have said, however, is that I'm not going to live in fear of potential future sanctions that do not even exist but ultimately depend on (1) "fans resumed using Sioux"; and (2) that "other schools might--might--complain."

Can you please cite to those sanctions then? Of course sanctions are in existence if UND plays as the "Fighting Sioux", which everyone agrees they are not. So, the NCAA would have to adopt a new policy and commission new sanctions in the event (1) "fans resumed using Sioux"; and (2) "other schools might--might--complain." I am not aware of any NCAA policy or applicable sanctions that currently apply to a university that competes simply as the name of its institution. Put another way, there is no current policy in existence that would result in sanctions against UND for competing as UND. If you think I am wrong, will you please provide a link to that policy and/or sanctions for everyone on this message board to see? Thank you.

That's the problem. These sanctions don't exist. As the gf herald reported, for what it's worth: "(H)e was told—just as a friendly word—that if fans resumed using Sioux or Fighting Sioux, the NCAA believes it is possible that other schools might—might—complain and that, in turn, could result in sanctions," UND spokesman Peter Johnson said in the email. So yes, (1) "if fans resumed using Sioux" (whatever that means); and (2) "it is possible that other schools might--might--complain"; then (3) it "could result in sanctions."

presupposing that those fanbases had not continued to use their former nicknames and/or that other schools obviously did not complain, of course. Moreover, the NCAA's position via-a-vis other member institutions is not a great barometer of the NCAA's position with respect to any other school. If it was, I'd say throw "Fighting Sioux" back on the ballot because the Seminoles, Aztecs, Utes, and Fighting Irish are free to use ethnic or race-related nicknames. At the end of the day, however, I'm not going to live in fear of potential sanctions that aren't currently in existence.