Benny Baker

And if that is the case, UND could do a better job of marketing and branding. University of Michigan doesn't seem to have an issue with selling merchandise, branding it's school name, or having one of the most recognizable school songs in the country, all of which have nothing to with wolverines. Go Blue?

This is the credited response. Most of you are neglecting to consider that the original settlement agreement said transition to a new nickname "on or before August 15, 2011". UND did not do that, and NCAA put UND on sanctions for the 2011-2012 season. Then UND dropped "Fighting Sioux" in June 2012, and the NCAA and UND "amended " the settlement agreement to remove UND from sanctions on September 24, 2012. END OF STORY.

You probably couldn't afford their retainer fee anyway.

Which means that UND fulfilled its obligation under the original agreement; hence, the NCAA removed UND from the list of school's that were in violation of NCAA policy and the NCAA has not enforced sanctions against UND since then.

He should also read the addendum. The addendum expressly amended the settlement agreement to confirm that UND was now in compliance with NCAA's policy because UND was no longer using the "Fighting Sioux" nickname. To the extent there is a conflict between the original settlement agreement and the addendum, the addendum expressly states that the addendum governs the parties' responsibilities. Also, the addendum does not discuss, reference, or imply UND's transition to a new nickname.

Read the facts in the original post, brother.

And again, the purpose of this thread was to establish if anyone had any credible evidence and sources or if people are just assuming that the NCAA had no reason to enforce sanctions. If the latter, that is fine. All I'm asking is whether that stance is based on a credible source or based upon the poster's opinion or assumptions.

Yes. The following article explains that UND went back on sanctions in August 2011 because of the the state law mandating the school's use of "Fighting Sioux". http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6391276 You may also recall that the NCAA enforced those sanctions when it prohibited UND from playing as the "Fighting Sioux" in the 2012 NCAA hockey regionals. That law was, of course, repealed in June 2012 by public vote. As such, the NCAA confirmed that UND was no longer subject to those sanctions via the addendum. Since that time, the NCAA has not enforced any sanctions against UND despite the fact that UND has been and is continuing to simply play as "North Dakota" for the past three years.

Exactly, like the part of the addendum addressing that UND was removed from sanctions because "UND has retired the 'Fighting Sioux' nickname and logo". "The [settlement] Agreement is amended as follows: . . . the University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the Policy." The addendum is part of the settlement agreement; the settlement agreement states that UND is in compliance with NCAA policy. Case solved.

The settlement agreement is subject to and governed by the addendum. The addendum says UND is compliant. Honest question, do you have evidence or a source to confirm that the NCAA has not given an answer to this question and that they have not given an answer because they are letting the process play out? I gather you may assume that is what the NCAA is doing, but I honestly want to know if anyone can confirm this or if its just based on assumption.

Yes. I don't mind Roughriders though.

So North Dakota can be a nickname; it's just redundant. Glad we finally agree.

Except that the committee confirmed "North Dakota" as a potential nickname candidate, and President Kelley indicated that he may allow "North Dakota" to go forward as an option for a nickname.

Reasonable minds are free to disagree, but I think that "North Dakota" is UND's nickname right now and may continue to be going forward. If people recall the public submission process, the committee excluded every suggestion of "no nickname" but allowed the suggestion of "North Dakota" to move forward. So again, even if the university is playing under the name "North Dakota", the NCAA can't say that UND does not have a nickname. But then again, like scpa0305 said, some people are simply pushing "the worst case scenario" in order to force a nickname other than "North Dakota".

Challenge accepted. And the mirror said, "the NCAA took UND off of sanctions and awarded regionals to UND at a time during which UND was legally prohibited from even having a nickname. You need not fear anything, the is no evidence to suggest that the lack of a nickname will cause any issue between UND and the NCAA despite some other people's speculative fear".

This is exactly the point! If the absence of a nickname violated any cognizable NCAA policy or the Settlement Agreement, why would the NCAA agree to lift sanctions against a school that was prohibited from having a nickname!!!!! There was no guarantee and still is no guarantee that UND will ever have a nickname. Yet, some people think it's the gospel truth that the NCAA is waiting in the lurches to pounce on UND. And that's fine if some of you people believe that, but just admit it's your opinion and you don't have proof to back it up.

Agree. NCAA put UND back on sanctions after North Dakota's 2011 state law mandated the school's use of the "Fighting Sioux" nickname. Thus, UND could not play as the "Fighting Sioux" in the NCAA tournament in Spring 2012. Then, in June 2012, the public voted to remove the law mandating the school's use of "Fighting Sioux", and the NCAA took UND back off of sanctions in the September 2012 addendum to the settlement agreement. Big picture though. NCAA decided to remove UND from sanctions at a time when UND had no nickname and was not transitioning to any new nickname. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6391276

I do apologize for that. I took a page out of the huffingtonpost's playbook, but I did lay an easter egg in the title thread to clue people in on it.

Wow, lots of speculation and conjecture in this post. Take a cue from 82SiouxGuy and own up to it.

Don't know if you're a hockey guy, but remember 2012 regionals when the University North Dakota Fighting Sioux were prohibited from playing as the Fighting Sioux? UND was put back on sanctions after the settlement agreement, but you seem to have missed that fact. Winner, winner! While I don't recall anyone admitting that in the past, I am glad you have brought clarity to the issue and informed the fine posters of siouxsports.com that the threats of future NCAA sanctions are simply opinions without proof. Goodbye, post.

Yes, in September 2012, NCAA lifted sanctions against UND [no nickname] during a time that UND was legally prohibited from transitioning to a new nickname. The NCAA awarded regionals to UND [no nickname] at a time that UND was legally prohibited from transitioning to a new nickname. These are the facts; I don't need any more concrete examples than that. And it's fine if you want to speculate about the possibility of the NCAA creating new policies or changing the rules as they go. But just admit that it's your opinion.

So the state's prohibition against transitioning to a new nickname until January 1, 2015 is "transitioning towards a new nickname" in your eyes. hmmmmm? I know you believe the NCAA does "whatever they want." The question is, however, what sources do you that show that the NCAA will do "whatever they want" to UND despite the NCAA not having done, well, anything to UND since Fighting Sioux was retired?

Fair observation. But I highly doubt the media would have ignored the "Sioux-per drunk" t-shirts even had UND been playing under a new nickname at the time. The media loves sensationalism, and the gf herald has exhibited a shockingly poor sense of journalistic integrity by sensationalizing social media outbursts at the expense of, well, journalism.

So again . . . you're simply speculating that the NCAA bogeyman will lay the hammer down on UND. Do you have any concrete evidence or facts to support your opinion that the NCAA will do this? Because it seems like the NCAA has taken quite the opposite stance since UND retired "Fighting Sioux" and went forward with no nickname; i.e., removing UND from sanctions and awarding regionals to UND.

You could have just said "I don't have any sources or facts to back up my opinions." Unlike you, however, I have pointed out that the NCAA has lifted sanctions against UND and awarded home playoff games to UND despite the school's absence of a nickname.