The Writing is on the Wall

[Stromer]

The Bullets/Wizards analogy is the only one you've cited that can be compared with what will happen to UND. The other ones involved the team actually moving to a different city, region, and state. UND, on the other hand, is not going anywhere.

I understand your frustration. It will be awfully difficult for me to have the same affection toward UND's sports teams for a while, particularly if they replace one of the best college nicknames in the country with some new-age generic nickname. But to stop supporting UND athletics altogether is a little extreme IMO. It will probably take me a long time to buy anything with the new nickname on it, but I'm sure I'll continue to watch and follow the teams. But it's a personal choice and to each their own.

Good post. It will be hard for a while because you are dissapointed that they gave in and got rid of a part of the program. But in the end, you cheer for the University itself, not the nickname. That being said, I will never buy anything with the new name unless it truly reflects the state's history. It will be UND or North Dakota from there on out.

[Goon]

I think he was talkign about the Bison fans when he said that. And I also have no problem cheering on the Gophs in football. Rather have them win the Big 10 (never gonna happen) than Michigan or OSU. But I still hate them in hockey.

I think they can make a bowl game this season but I guess it doesn't hurt to dream about the Gophers winning the Big Ten and making the Rose Bowl.

I think I heard Brewster predict that they could do it...

[82SiouxGuy]

I totally disagree. A simple way to find out if this is "evolutionary": would the screaming maniacs on the other side say their goal is evolutionary? Or would they say "revolutionary"??

Perhaps your school has changed some logos in the past, but AFAIK the old logos are still available, correct? And has the nickname

EVER

changed? I'm guessing that a 1988 grad could still pull out a college sweatshirt, give it to the son/daughter headed off to college and everyone would know what it was and what it symbolized: no one would be "offended" that they weren't wearing the latest, most up-to-date logo. But the die-hards on the other side want to be "offended" by the Sioux logo and nickname. At least one person here has proposed throwing people out of the hockey arena if they wore a Sioux sweatshirt. A

evolutionary

attitude? Hardly.

The goal of the opposing side today is the complete eradication of the nickname and logo in any form; either current or evolutionary. That's far different than what may have happened during the last twenty years. Not the same thing at all. Not even close.

Yes the nickname has changed at the University of North Dakota. The original nickname was Flickertails. The name was changed more than 70 years ago, and at a time when they didn't have a lot of logo clothing so I doubt that anyone has a sweatshirt from that time. But there is an example of change in the past. And the logos from before the geometric logo are not officially available as a part of the University of North Dakota. I don't even know if the geometric logo is available anywhere. However, I do have a hockey jersey with that logo and wear it to games on a regular basis. I also have a jersey and other clothing with the current logo, the interlocking ND logo and probably the eternal flame UND logo.

The fact that people are going to be offended by the current logo even if a new name and logo are chosen is beside the point (and not even closely related to the topic I was discussing). They are offended now and will be then. And the fact that one person proposed banning people wearing a Sioux sweatshirt is an overreaction by a zealot. It would be almost impossible to regulate and probably isn't going to happen at an arena with those same logos still in place. And watch me as I wear my Fighting Sioux hockey jerseys to games for many years.

My reference to evolution was the fact that personnel, buildings, policies and other parts of the Athletic Department change over time. The department is not static. Evolution can be forced, it is an adaptation to outside influences. So changing the nickname, if it happens, will be a part of the evolution of the Athletic Department. That is true even if it is a revolutionary change.

[82SiouxGuy]

Memphis/Nashville... it's still Tennessee. For what it's worth, they only played one season in Memphis (not two as you implied) and were known as the Oilers for one season in Nashville prior to the name change. But I can give you even another example that you can't possibly dismiss. The Washington Bullets/Wizards. The Bullets are extinct, having been replaced by the Wizards. Had I been a Bullets fan I would've bailed on them the minute they changed the name to Wizards.

I agree with mksioux, this is an example that is similar to the UND problem. The difference between you and me is that I am a fan of the University of North Dakota athletic teams. The Fighting Sioux nickname and logo are great, probably the best in all of sports. But I am a fan of the players, coaches and teams, not a nickname. If the nickname goes away the players, coaches and teams will continue on. The program will go on. The UND hockey team will still beat up on the Minnesota Gophers hockey team. The football team will chase down the Coyotes of the University of South Dakota. I will keep my season tickets for football and hockey and attend basketball or volleyball games when I have a chance. The only difference would be that we might call them something different.

[Stromer]

Yes I was talking about Bison fans who hate Sioux football but like Sioux hockey. That just doesn't seem right to me. For the record, liking Gophers football while hating Gophers hockey doesn't seem right to me either... but maybe that's just me. I doubt I'm the only person who feels that way, but maybe I am. Again, each to their own.

I can see where you are coming from. The way I look at it is that I don't have a pony in that horse race so I might as well pick one to cheer for. The Gophers are only a rival in hockey so it is easy to cheer for them in other sports. NDSU is a rival in everything but hockey so I could see that being harder to do. But if you love hockey you probably will go for state pride instead of cheering for Minn.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

The fact that people are going to be offended by the current logo even if a new name and logo are chosen is beside the point (and not even closely related to the topic I was discussing). They are offended now and will be then. And the fact that one person proposed banning people wearing a Sioux sweatshirt is an overreaction by a zealot. It would be almost impossible to regulate and probably isn't going to happen at an arena with those same logos still in place. And watch me as I wear my Fighting Sioux hockey jerseys to games for many years.

My reference to evolution was the fact that personnel, buildings, policies and other parts of the Athletic Department change over time. The department is not static. Evolution can be forced, it is an adaptation to outside influences. So changing the nickname, if it happens, will be a part of the evolution of the Athletic Department. That is true even if it is a revolutionary change.

Wow. Just plain wow

I

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

...Evolution can be forced,...

Huh, wha... er.... how's that again? Evolution can be FORCED??

I'll admit that I haven't read "Origin of Species" in a little while. But as I recall, Darwin gave two choices:

-Evolve

-Die

You cannot force evolution. Its no more a matter of choice than it is a matter of force. Darwin didn't have a chapter devoted to the idea that "we found that the Duck-Billed Platypus was going to become extinct unless it developed wings and started to fly: therefore we got an order from the ship's captain, read it to the species and gave them until the next day to comply."

I see that your knowledge of language and science is on a different plane than mine. I'm going to step back now and stop responding until such time as I develop a new understanding.

[ringneck28]

Yep!! Just because you live in the community/state doesn't mean you have the same love and desire for the best for the U.

Wait a second, hold your horses. I am as big of a Sioux sports fan as anyone. Born and Raised in North Dakota. I am that guy who while I am fishing or out hunting has the game on. I am that guy who as I am driving down the road and the hockey game is on is searching the radio for the game. How can you say that I don't have the same interest in the Sioux nickname as an alumni would have.

I am the guy who wears all my gear with pride and follows the Sioux into Minneapolis to go to the game, been to the DEC to support the team and the National Hockey Center to see the comeback with less than a minute left in the game. I am the guy who lived in Minneapolis for 7 years and wore my green on the day the Sioux played the gophers in the final five at the St Paul Civic. I am the guy who drives from Bismarck to see the game at the Ralph. No I didn't go to your U, but don't say I don't have the best at heart.

How can you limit this to just alumni.

I am who you want on your side, don't exclude me just because I didn't go to your U.

[Sioux-cia]

Wait a second, hold your horses. I am as big of a Sioux sports fan as anyone. Born and Raised in North Dakota. I am that guy who while I am fishing or out hunting has the game on. I am that guy who as I am driving down the road and the hockey game is on is searching the radio for the game. How can you say that I don't have the same interest in the Sioux nickname as an alumni would have.

I am the guy who wears all my gear with pride and follows the Sioux into Minneapolis to go to the game, been to the DEC to support the team and the National Hockey Center to see the comeback with less than a minute left in the game. I am the guy who lived in Minneapolis for 7 years and wore my green on the day the Sioux played the gophers in the final five at the St Paul Civic. I am the guy who drives from Bismarck to see the game at the Ralph. No I didn't go to your U, but don't say I don't have the best at heart.

How can you limit this to just alumni.

I am who you want on your side, don't exclude me just because I didn't go to your U.

I love you!! I just don't believe that the name change decision should be open to every one. There are waaaay too many people who believe they should have a say in what the new name and logo should be; including the Sioux council leaders who are demanding we change. Not everyone wants what's best for us. IMHO, the most rationale way to do it would be to limit the voters to alumni, current students, and staff.

If need be, I'll give you half of my vote.

[darell1976]

I love you!! I just don't believe that the name change decision should be open to every one. There are waaaay too many people who believe they should have a say in what the new name and logo should be; including the Sioux council leaders who are demanding we change. Not everyone wants what's best for us. IMHO, the most rationale way to do it would be to limit the voters to alumni, current students, and staff.

If need be, I'll give you half of my vote.

I agree with you its stupid to open the voting up to everyone. At GFC the nickname change was just open to the students (with facuilty approval) one criteria they used for suggestions was look at the school (building, students, classes, song, motto, etc.) and choose your name that best fits the school, so after the list was cut down it was between Pride (pack of Lions) and Knights (which is in the school song) so it was Knights overwhemingly. A lot of people including myself still loved Redskins but we learned to tolerate Knights and as you can see 14 years later the name is as strong as ever. So I think students, alumni, and those directly involved with UND (NOT ANY SIOUX TRIBES!!!!) should be involved in the nickname process. And it will take awhile but the name will grow.

[Sioux-cia]

Huh, wha... er.... how's that again? Evolution can be FORCED??

I'll admit that I haven't read "Origin of Species" in a little while. But as I recall, Darwin gave two choices:

-Evolve

-Die

You cannot force evolution. Its no more a matter of choice than it is a matter of force. Darwin didn't have a chapter devoted to the idea that "we found that the Duck-Billed Platypus was going to become extinct unless it developed wings and started to fly: therefore we got an order from the ship's captain, read it to the species and gave them until the next day to comply."

I see that your knowledge of language and science is on a different plane than mine. I'm going to step back now and stop responding until such time as I develop a new understanding.

We are forcing evolution everyday with scientific research, global warming, encroachment into habitats formally only inhabited by certain wild and plant life This is forced evolution which is a direct result of 'civilization', technological advancement, etc. Things we are doing today to our environment are a testiment to Darwin's theory of evolve or die.

There is plenty of evidence to prove the actuality of forced evolution but I'm too lazy to look it up for you.

[Goon]

So I think students, alumni, and those directly involved with UND (NOT ANY SIOUX TRIBES!!!!) should be involved in the nickname process. And it will take awhile but the name will grow.

Yes, and why not just be the Unversity of North Dakota until we have decided on a name that STUDENTS and ALUMNI, and those connected with the school can agree on...

[Sioux-cia]

Yes, and why not just be the Unversity of North Dakota until we have decided on a name that STUDENTS and ALUMNI, and those connected with the school can agree on...

I agree with Goon!

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

We are forcing evolution everyday with scientific research, global warming, encroachment into habitats formally only inhabited by certain wild and plant life This is forced evolution which is a direct result of 'civilization', technological advancement, etc. Things we are doing today to our environment are a testiment to Darwin's theory of evolve or die.

There is plenty of evidence to prove the actuality of forced evolution but I'm too lazy to look it up for you.

You and I have a very different understanding of "forced" evolution.

Evolution will occur, or extinction will occur. But both will happen at their own pace, in response to the natural environment. And those facts remain immutable no matter

WHAT

causes nature to change: be it man, a volcano, a meteor, sunspots, whatever.

Some people would call civilization part of evolution. Perhaps others would say that "pollution caused by man forces evolution". Both may be describing the same phenomena, but IMHO nothing can force evolution. (Personally, I think Darwin and I are in agreement on this.

)

[darell1976]

Yes, and why not just be the Unversity of North Dakota until we have decided on a name that STUDENTS and ALUMNI, and those connected with the school can agree on...

We can't be just the University of North Dakota because Dakota is an Indian word then UND would be back on the list again.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Yes, and why not just be the Unversity of North Dakota until we have decided on a name that STUDENTS and ALUMNI, and those connected with the school can agree on...

Nobody asked me, but I would view this matter in the following way: an advisory committee should be formed using the same criteria that drives the way your Board of Trustees is composed: probably with an overweighting on alums, but open to all. Testimony/suggestions are open to all people no matter who/where: and final voting/decisions back to alums, fans, students of a certain age.

And I would definitely make sure that "no nickname at all" is an available option.

We can't be just the University of North Dakota because Dakota is an Indian word then UND would be back on the list again.

To repeat: I'd DEFINITELY make sure that "no nickname at all" is an available option.

[darell1976]

Nobody asked me, but I would view this matter in the following way: an advisory committee should be formed using the same criteria that drives the way your Board of Trustees is composed: probably with an overweighting on alums, but open to all. Testimony/suggestions are open to all people no matter who/where: and final voting/decisions back to alums, fans, students of a certain age.

And I would definitely make sure that "no nickname at all" is an available option.

To repeat: I'd DEFINITELY make sure that "no nickname at all" is an available option.

Lets just put it up on the November ballot, right ahead of the question who do you want for president, since there would be more interest on this than the presidency.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Lets just put it up on the November ballot, right ahead of the question who do you want for president, since there would be more interest on this than the presidency.

This is far more important than the choice between those two imbeciles-we can't just leave it to the realm of hanging chads, butterfly ballots and all the rest.

[Sioux-cia]

(Personally, I think Darwin and I are in agreement on this. )

1838 Darwin would agree with you but I believe that 2008 Darwin would agree with me.

Just one example: Scientists are daily forcing evolution of virus, bacteria, cancer cells, etc. in their quest for the cure of whatever disease process they are researching.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

1838 Darwin would agree with you but I believe that 2008 Darwin would agree with me.

I don't know who he would agree with, but either way 2008 Darwin would be one really old guy.

Just one example: Scientists are daily forcing evolution of virus, bacteria, cancer cells, etc. in their quest for the cure of whatever disease process they are researching.

So you would call medical research "forced evolution"? Can I infer that you would also say that something like the cross-breeding or creation of hybrids in plants and crops is "forced evolution"?

Personally, I wouldn't call them that. I'd call them "medical research" and "cross breeding".

I think that Chuck would find that you were stretching his theories way, way way out of line in comparison to his intentions. Splicing genes, etc. in the name of cancer research: are you saying that otherwise the original organisms would die? Because AFAIK that's what Darwin said. IIRC, he said that living things evolve because they have to. Artificial labratory conditions do not constitute "nature", where Darwin's theories originated (and to which they apply).

And to bring things back to the topic at hand (and the purpose of this bulletin board), how would you call a new nickname and logo "forced" evolution; or even

evolutionary

in any way? One misguided person laughably thought that comparing the nickname to items with a limited lifespan would somehow prove that a change was merely evolutionary. Things like medical research are done for good. Same thing with plant/crop research. I can find no good in the intentions of the radical screamers. They have no particular result in mind, other than the destruction of one nickname and logo; and their desires are ENTIRELY based on emotions. Darwin dealt in pure science.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I know this isn't the topic for this post-but its the most active lately, so I'll post here to keep things moving.

I was wondering if anyone saw the Michigan State/Notre Dame football game last Saturday?

If so, you would have seen Sparty the Spartan, a paper-mache caricature of a Spartan warrior, running around on the sidelines, mugging for the camera, playing with kids in the crowd and hexing the opponent on key plays. And doing all of this while "wearing" a sombero and serape; in "honor" of Hispanic Heritage month.

So where do we draw the line? What's an "honor" and what's a "mockery"?? One caricature of a real-life group of people donning some stereotypical garments of another group of real-life people??

Who judges whether that's an insult or an honor?

[fightingsioux4life]

This was painful to read. We get a $110M gift from the Engelstad's with more in trust and now we're posting, 'let's sue them'. I understand where you're coming from, it's just hard to agree to it after all their philantrophy has done for us.

No offense because you are a true supporter of the Fighting Sioux name and logo and the University of North Dakota, but your post is a microcosm of what is wrong with the current relationship between REA and UND. When Ralph Engelstad decided to build this arena, I think he envisoned an arena that would serve the interests of his alma mater and help make the athletic department stronger and more competitive.

And what have we seen during the past seven years? Students treated like third class citizens (behind suiteholders and season ticketholders, in that order), clashes between former head coach Dean Blais and REA management, tighter athletic department budgets and chronic deficits despite the pre-construction promise of REA becoming a "cash cow" for the athletic department and the continued watering-down of the game-time atmosphere to almost Mariucci proportions. I don't think this is what Ralph had in mind when he traveled all around the United States to get ideas for this marvelous facility. And I am tired of our fans glossing these issues over like they don't matter.

You are right, REA is a $110 million gift of which all of us are grateful for. But a gift by definition is supposed to be just that, a gift. It should benefit the recipient, not just the people who manage it. It should serve the interests of the recipient, not just the interests of the people who are managing it. And those are qualities that are lacking in the REA-UND relationship as it stands today.

The REA-UND relationship should be a symbiotic one; REA makes money (and subsequent profits) off of the talents and efforts of UND athletes and coaches via our season ticket purchases and concession sales and UND gets a fabulous recruiting tool for it's Men's and Women's Hockey programs (I am excluding The Betty for the purposes of this discussion) and a big chunk of the proceeds. But this seven year relationship has seemed to be tilted in favor of REA over UND by a considerable margin. In short, instead of REA serving UND, UND has been serving REA. And that is just not right. As a season ticket holder, Fighting Sioux Club member and longtime booster of all things Fighting Sioux, I often feel like my opinions and concerns don't matter to REA management. And a lot of fans (not just students) have expressed similar concerns on this forum and in other media outlets.

My suggestion to file suit against REA was purely hypothetical, we don't know what will happen over the next couple of years. And I would hope that such a harsh action will not be necessary. But like I said earlier, this case would be a good acid test to determine if REA management really is interested in serving the interests of UND athletics and the campus in general or only their own interests, which has generally been the case for the past seven years. In short, philantrophy does not erase the need for responsibility and accountability.

My 2 cents (again).

[darell1976]

I know this isn't the topic for this post-but its the most active lately, so I'll post here to keep things moving.

I was wondering if anyone saw the Michigan State/Notre Dame football game last Saturday?

If so, you would have seen Sparty the Spartan, a paper-mache caricature of a Spartan warrior, running around on the sidelines, mugging for the camera, playing with kids in the crowd and hexing the opponent on key plays. And doing all of this while "wearing" a sombero and serape; in "honor" of Hispanic Heritage month.

So where do we draw the line? What's an "honor" and what's a "mockery"?? One caricature of a real-life group of people donning some stereotypical garments of another group of real-life people??

Who judges whether that's an insult or an honor?

The fact its Mich St and Notre Dame ($$$$$$) is the factor that the NCAA looks the other way at this, now if its UND/USD then the NCAA would have been all over this.

[nodakvindy]

No offense because you are a true supporter of the Fighting Sioux name and logo and the University of North Dakota, but your post is a microcosm of what is wrong with the current relationship between REA and UND. When Ralph Engelstad decided to build this arena, I think he envisoned an arena that would serve the interests of his alma mater and help make the athletic department stronger and more competitive.

And what have we seen during the past seven years? Students treated like third class citizens (behind suiteholders and season ticketholders, in that order), clashes between former head coach Dean Blais and REA management, tighter athletic department budgets and chronic deficits despite the pre-construction promise of REA becoming a "cash cow" for the athletic department and the continued watering-down of the game-time atmosphere to almost Mariucci proportions. I don't think this is what Ralph had in mind when he traveled all around the United States to get ideas for this marvelous facility. And I am tired of our fans glossing these issues over like they don't matter.

You are right, REA is a $110 million gift of which all of us are grateful for. But a gift by definition is supposed to be just that, a gift. It should benefit the recipient, not just the people who manage it. It should serve the interests of the recipient, not just the interests of the people who are managing it. And those are qualities that are lacking in the REA-UND relationship as it stands today.

The REA-UND relationship should be a symbiotic one; REA makes money (and subsequent profits) off of the talents and efforts of UND athletes and coaches via our season ticket purchases and concession sales and UND gets a fabulous recruiting tool for it's Men's and Women's Hockey programs (I am excluding The Betty for the purposes of this discussion) and a big chunk of the proceeds. But this seven year relationship has seemed to be tilted in favor of REA over UND by a considerable margin. In short, instead of REA serving UND, UND has been serving REA. And that is just not right. As a season ticket holder, Fighting Sioux Club member and longtime booster of all things Fighting Sioux, I often feel like my opinions and concerns don't matter to REA management. And a lot of fans (not just students) have expressed similar concerns on this forum and in other media outlets.

My suggestion to file suit against REA was purely hypothetical, we don't know what will happen over the next couple of years. And I would hope that such a harsh action will not be necessary. But like I said earlier, this case would be a good acid test to determine if REA management really is interested in serving the interests of UND athletics and the campus in general or only their own interests, which has generally been the case for the past seven years. In short, philantrophy does not erase the need for responsibility and accountability.

My 2 cents (again).

Amen. Someone else who gets it.

[darell1976]

No offense because you are a true supporter of the Fighting Sioux name and logo and the University of North Dakota, but your post is a microcosm of what is wrong with the current relationship between REA and UND. When Ralph Engelstad decided to build this arena, I think he envisoned an arena that would serve the interests of his alma mater and help make the athletic department stronger and more competitive.

And what have we seen during the past seven years? Students treated like third class citizens (behind suiteholders and season ticketholders, in that order), clashes between former head coach Dean Blais and REA management, tighter athletic department budgets and chronic deficits despite the pre-construction promise of REA becoming a "cash cow" for the athletic department and the continued watering-down of the game-time atmosphere to almost Mariucci proportions. I don't think this is what Ralph had in mind when he traveled all around the United States to get ideas for this marvelous facility. And I am tired of our fans glossing these issues over like they don't matter.

You are right, REA is a $110 million gift of which all of us are grateful for. But a gift by definition is supposed to be just that, a gift. It should benefit the recipient, not just the people who manage it. It should serve the interests of the recipient, not just the interests of the people who are managing it. And those are qualities that are lacking in the REA-UND relationship as it stands today.

The REA-UND relationship should be a symbiotic one; REA makes money (and subsequent profits) off of the talents and efforts of UND athletes and coaches via our season ticket purchases and concession sales and UND gets a fabulous recruiting tool for it's Men's and Women's Hockey programs (I am excluding The Betty for the purposes of this discussion) and a big chunk of the proceeds. But this seven year relationship has seemed to be tilted in favor of REA over UND by a considerable margin. In short, instead of REA serving UND, UND has been serving REA. And that is just not right. As a season ticket holder, Fighting Sioux Club member and longtime booster of all things Fighting Sioux, I often feel like my opinions and concerns don't matter to REA management. And a lot of fans (not just students) have expressed similar concerns on this forum and in other media outlets.

My suggestion to file suit against REA was purely hypothetical, we don't know what will happen over the next couple of years. And I would hope that such a harsh action will not be necessary. But like I said earlier, this case would be a good acid test to determine if REA management really is interested in serving the interests of UND athletics and the campus in general or only their own interests, which has generally been the case for the past seven years. In short, philantrophy does not erase the need for responsibility and accountability.

My 2 cents (again).

should we destroy the arena and build a smaller one without logos around the stadium kinda like the Alerus doesn't display any UND logos except the banners, and the words Fighting Sioux in the end zones.