Siouxphan27

I hear ya. it's understandable if that is the ncaa's stance, at this time. as we continue down the PC road of insanity, the ncaa may feel pressure in the future from other constantly offended groups. Midgets is now controversial. Even if it's not the ncaa that has a problem with a certain "human" name, if other groups of wake up offended-type folks do, time and resources will be wasted.

Interesting take. So in this instance the ncaa's policies are permanently set in stone? After all the hullabaloo about the ncaa and what punishment they may drum up for going without a nickname, it just seems like a bad idea to go with any name with a human element. One person complains that Nodakers is derogatory, or one person claims Roughriders were racist gun toting white cowboys from the desert southwest, and all of a sudden we have a new headache on our hands. go sUNDawgs!! a daschUND would be a solid mascot.

My question is why in the world does anyone want to risk going down this road again with a name like Roughriders? It's puzzling to see some people stressing moving on from Fighting Sioux, while at the same time championing the cause for another "human-based" name, for lack of a better term. Nodaks should be off the table as well given the hypersensitive path this nickname quest is on. Hawks, Sun, or Stars. Yay.

I would love to see UND take the NCAA to court for trying to force unfair sanctions on a university based on words uttered by a third party. The reality is it would never come to that. This silly, weak response from the NCAA is proof they know they have no leg to stand on. It's a green light for no nickname.

Looks like we finally have the answer to the riddle of how many ndsu graduates it takes to run a fantasy football team.

Next thing you know he'll be saying they should have their own schools

Aren't We Sued Enough?

How about we all yell Voldemort?

Is it white sand? If so, I'm fine with it. Didn't mean to offend by saying tinfoil hat. I happen to think they're quite stylish if worn for the right cause. All we have is rampant speculation regarding what the NCAA may or may not do. Kelley needs to finally ask the NCAA, or if he's asked, share with the public what he has already found out from the NCAA so we can stop the insanity. With the 5 lackluster choices coupled with the following no nickname has right now, he needs to lead for once on this issue, immediately. I'm a no nicknamer until we hear otherwise from the NCAA. And if they say no, I'll moooove on to support one of the lame names.

sorry Sic. just assume sarcasm with me. it's a curse.

So in other words, scenario 3 = scenario 1. They do not have a policy against it. I know that's not enough for the tinfoil hat crowd, but the reality is, it would be acceptable.

I was being facetious as you realize. Kelley announced that very morning that no nickname would still be given consideration, so that would also take the air out of any rally don't you think? To continue with facetious questions/answers..... How have the rallies for the other 5 options been? Poorly attended? Well attended? Wait what?! there haven't been any rallies? Wow given what we've learned here today, there must not be any support for those names.

I'll take a stab. No nickname forever folks are employed, while fighting Sioux forevers are not?

Two scenarios have been quite obvious to everyone for awhile now. 1. Kelley has asked and received permission, or 2. Kelley has gone to bed each night praying the no nickname supporters will go away, and has avoided asking the NCAA until he absolutely has to. If scenario 2 is true, he's probably asking the NCAA right now. OR, he's trying to find a way to justify having north stars and Sundogs as our only 2 options.

We weren't at the rally, because we do not agree with the fighting Sioux forever part of their stance.....maybe that's why it was poorly attended?

The reality we should be concerned with is today's reality/situation. You're comparing apples and oranges.

We're on two different wavelengths here- my post a couple posts back was referring to people saying opposing coaches will use it in the future as a recruiting strike against UND. I did not say, and was not referring to, the issue the NCAA may or may not have with going nickname less. My point, and I'll state it again, permission for going with no nickname will have been decided with the NCAA before UND goes ahead and officially chooses no nickname, (I have at least that much faith in the UND administration). Thus, rendering all the scare tactics mentioned here regarding opposing schools and recruiting, moot. Or as some mimes would say, mute.

They're not the ones using it as a scare tactic. People on here are the ones using it as a reason to be afraid of going with no nickname.

My pont was that question will be answered by then. We will not go forward with an option that creates instant sanctions. Which makes the entire discussion about opposing coaches another fear mongering scare tactic.

How would not having a nickname be used against UND by other teams' coaches? Would they sit in a recruit's living room and say you know, UND doesn't have a nickname, so, Neener Neener Neener? Or am I missing something here?

I would pass your litmus test. Since we're all speculating here anyway, my thoughts are that the number of people content with going forward without a nickname, (permanently, even if Fighting Sioux magically became an option again,) is much larger than you might think. The number of people content with no nickname continued to grow after each committee meeting, as one by one, good choices that either meant something personally to North Dakotans, and also pretty much all animal choices for that matter, were eliminated, and we were left with 5 steaming piles of poo. I would venture to say that at this point, the fighting Sioux forever folks are a small minority of the people desiring to have no nickname. I for one am not interested in attending rallies put on by the fighting Sioux forever people. As others have mentioned on here, they undermine the legitimacy of the idea of going nickname-less when they show up in Sioux apparel and shout Sioux cheers. Coupled with Kelley's wishy washy statement made about possibly including North Dakota as an option again, maybe this helps explain why their rally was poorly attended.

I think I speak for everyone on this board when I say we don't really care what the end result of this process is, as long as the unaffiliated folks in Colorado and Arizona are happy, that's all that matters. *

Haha. Well, at least she doesn't like roughriders the best! :-)

I have always liked your arrow idea. You've provided a great example of what can be done to enhance the ND logo if we move forward without a nickname.

My goal was a little levity- I shouldn't have quoted you directly- sorry about that. I just couldn't resist everyone's '1 out of, 2 out of, 3 out of' talk.