Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

obborg

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    348

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by obborg

  1. obborg
    True, the visuals are more important than the nickname.
  2. obborg
    Yeah, ND is the roughrider state in exactly the same way Coke is the Real Thing.
  3. obborg
    So UND was forced and it's that simple? Where there is compliance force is unnecessary.
  4. obborg
    The sentence in bold above sounds downright silly. Seems to me that one must have to try hard to believe it.
  5. obborg
    I wouldn't worry about ending up with Teddy as a logo. Rough Riders is not on the ballot. Roughriders is, Not saying the logo wouldn't end up a white guy though.
  6. obborg
    Imagine if that historical support would have been for Roughriders instead of Sundogs. If so, RR would now be receiving the same ass-end of criticism Sundogs gets here.
  7. obborg
    Bison will score more in the 4th quarter than UND scores in the entire game.
  8. obborg
    Good question.
  9. obborg
    I agree that it seems obvious, but evidently it's not, since most people simply consume the manure shoveled at them.
  10. obborg
    The message you are referring to was not from the NCAA. It was from UND insiders, eventually including Kelly himself. If we are even on the NCAA's radar for any reason, would somebody please display the proof? (A local media article quoting somebody quoting another unnamed person does not qualify as proof).
  11. obborg
    It's not the NCAA who is bluffing here.
  12. obborg
    I call.
  13. obborg
    "Eric, thanks for the email and the support for our university. The NCAA says there would not be a violation of the settlement agreement as far as they are concerned if UND didn't adopt a new nickname. However, the NCAA did say that if fans resumed using Sioux or Fighting Sioux, the NCAA believes other schools will complain and that, in turn, would very likely result in sanctions. The NCAA does seem to believe that UND has done its best to comply with the settlement agreement." Wow, there's a lot of conjecture crammed into that. Sounds like somebody's read of the situation rather than their knowledge of it.
  14. obborg
    In fact its not even my word. It has been used here by multiple posters in their description of Sundogs.
  15. obborg
    Please replace my word with a better one.
  16. obborg
    I understand. What you're making clear is that much of the ostensible hate for Sundogs is actually hate for its supporters. Modern politics at its finest.
  17. obborg
    When reading these threads I usually find myself wanting to defend Sundogs. Even though it's not my first choice, I get tired of hearing the exaggerated abuse it takes here. Wouldn't be so bad if just one of you actually could explain specifically what is so bad about it. Instead we are stuck with general terms like "lame" or "terrible." Overcompensated bashing like this doesn't discredit Sundogs. It makes it appear as a real threat.
  18. obborg
    You sure this is the last time?
  19. obborg
    But what exactly constitutes "using" it? I didn't see anything at your link about required sales.
  20. obborg
    My original point was about moving on. What we are arguing about here was a secondary point.
  21. obborg
    So am I to assume that it is illegal to own a trademark without generating income with it?
  22. obborg
    How?
  23. obborg
    The way you say that makes it sound like they are being forced against their will. Who do you think benefits from this stipulation? Which side do you think pushed it into the settlement?
  24. obborg
    So they have to produce merch so that they will get to use the trademark. After all, they have to own the trademark so that they get to produce merch, right? Kind of circular logic, isn't it?
  25. obborg
    They have to or they get to?
×
×
  • Create New...