gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 So if then senate approves, then what? Give us non-politcal people a heads up on the this process Ok, the House passed this bill today. Now it goes to the Senate. If the Senate approves, then this will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 People should realize that people voting "No" for this bill are not against the nickname. They are against the decades of lawsuits that will continue to hurt the student-athletes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 So what is the timeline for the Senate? When will they likely be debating and voting on this? As stipulated by law, the legislature is allowed 80 session days. They are on day 35 (I believe). So at the very latest the Senate could vote on it is mid-April(ish) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I understand the arguments of no home playoff games for our teams without NCAA approval. But, the goal in this battle is to gain approval for the use of the nickname AND meet the NCAA's approval. The 2nd will be a challenge, but not undoable. This whole process will still take some time, but can be, and will be accomplished if we keep fighting, like our current nickname says we do. We are FIGHTING Sioux. Fight for what you believe in. If you fail, at least you tried. You have to remember, teams like our football team are a bit far off from achieiving home field for their respective sport. By the time the dust settles, the whole nickname situation should be relatively clear. If we have to play a year or two without possibility of home field for playoffs while we settle the case with the NCAA, so be it. It is worth the fight. I think even the athletes would agree. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 GREAT NEWS! Lets hope the senate has the same amount of backbone as the house! One of the 28 no votes is a rep from my district. Congrats on never getting my vote ever again.... Did they ever get your vote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 (edited) Ok, the House passed this bill today. Now it goes to the Senate. If the Senate approves, then this will “require” Stenehjem to file a federal anti-trust claim against the NCAA WHEN they sanction us for using the nickname and logo because you better believe they will. That is a problem because the initial NCAA anti-trust lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice. That means once something is decided, you cannot re-file (or appeal) the case. Because Stenehjem is the AG, he would be the person to represent the State (the legislature) in a lawsuit. But because Stenehjem already defended UND in the initial lawsuit, he has a conflict of interest that will prohibit him from representing the State in this matter and must recuse himself. He will then have to find a different attorney to represent the State when the SBHE sues the legislature over the constitutionality of the issue and it will be a gong-show. Long story short, there will be no case between the State and the NCAA. It will be between the SBHE and the legislature and it will be ugly. We will then be blacklisted (again) and prohibited from hosting ANY postseason games in any sport. The harsh reality is that the SBHE has “absolute and exclusive” control over all the universities in the state. They are bound by the initial NCAA lawsuit. The only way they could have ignored those stipulations was to get tribal approval by November 30, 2010 (that date has come and gone). Ultimately, the athletes are the ones being hurt the most. They won’t be able to host playoff games, they will have a difficult time scheduling games with schools that don’t like the fact that we completely ignored the NCAA and SBHE’s ruling. By passing this bill, the legislature is hamstringing the entire athletic department. Gov. Dalrymple may not like that you ignored his required signature. I should amend that a bit. He doesn't need to sign it actually if in session, he just needs to not veto it. Edited February 21, 2011 by PhillySioux Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Gov. Dalrymple may not like that you ignored his required signature. Good point. I apologize to Mr. Dalrymple... But what I think most people are forgetting is that we already sued the NCAA and they dismissed the case. That means we cannot sue them again for the same thing. There are specific rules that prohibit this. So the sooner people understand this legal principle, the sooner we can move forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksixpack Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Ultimately, the athletes are the ones being hurt the most. They won Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firewall Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I liken today's vote to this movie clip: Go Fighting Sioux! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksixpack Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Ultimately, the athletes are the ones being hurt the most. They won Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Ok, the House passed this bill today. Now it goes to the Senate. If the Senate approves, then this will 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What playoff games are you speaking of? Men's hockey--no they are all off campus now....men's and womens basketball -- never in a million years UND would ever host as any so called sports fan would realize...Football - possibly...all other sports...who cares. So it boils down to let the name go or we may not get a playoff football game every few years (if we are lucky)...to me that is a no brainer--keep the name! As far as scheduling goes...hockey-no effect WCHA occupies all but 8 or so non conference games and there isn't a team in the country that wouldn't want to play us, especially the way our fans travel for hockey. Football--again Big Sky occupies all games but maybe 3 nonconference games...pretty sure we can fill that with the 200 teams out there to play. Basketball, again Big Sky occupies all but maybe 10 nonconference games and with 330 D1 teams and numerous local D2 I wouldn't think that would be an issue. Other sports are the same...Big Sky Schedule occupies the far majority of the schedule leaving a few nonconference games. GFHomer your argument is just not valid. If there is no effect in hockey, why then were we required to remove the logo from the rink at the Ralph when we hosted the 2006 West Regional Tournament? And would it really be fair to strip the football team of the ability to host a playoff game? Do you think the football team is inferior to the hockey team? Also, do you think the 2001 football team would have won the national championship if they couldn't have hosted 2/3 home games? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 What playoff games are you speaking of? Men's hockey--no they are all off campus now....men's and womens basketball -- never in a million years UND would ever host as any so called sports fan would realize...Football - possibly...all other sports...who cares. So it boils down to let the name go or we may not get a playoff football game every few years (if we are lucky)...to me that is a no brainer--keep the name! As far as scheduling goes...hockey-no effect WCHA occupies all but 8 or so non conference games and there isn't a team in the country that wouldn't want to play us, especially the way our fans travel for hockey. Football--again Big Sky occupies all games but maybe 3 nonconference games...pretty sure we can fill that with the 200 teams out there to play. Basketball, again Big Sky occupies all but maybe 10 nonconference games and with 330 D1 teams and numerous local D2 I wouldn't think that would be an issue. Other sports are the same...Big Sky Schedule occupies the far majority of the schedule leaving a few nonconference games. GFHomer your argument is just not valid. The FCS playoff field has been expanded to 20 teams. Its probable that we would have hosting opportunities in Football. Recruiting against UND in Football gets quite a bit easier if the NCAA restrictions do take effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hambone Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I know I'm in the minority, but the passage of this bill does not really excite me per se. I've prepared myself for life without the Fighting Sioux name, and I think that this could really hurt our athletic teams (with the exception of hockey). Don't get me wrong, I love the Fighting Sioux, but I love the University of North Dakota more. But the overall affect on the athletic department could be huge, and not in a good way. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Whistler Posted February 21, 2011 Author Share Posted February 21, 2011 Its not a matter of being able to outbid someone. Its the fact that the NCAA will not allow us to host a home playoff game if we continue using the nickname and logo. That is why this is so damaging to the athletes. Add in the fact that we will start to see schools who won't want to schedule us because of this entire nickname-circus and its punishing the entire Athletic Department Maybe we can worry about this if we ever get to the point where we could actually host a playoff game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfhomer Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I know I'm in the minority, but the passage of this bill does not really excite me per se. I've prepared myself for life without the Fighting Sioux name, and I think that this could really hurt our athletic teams (with the exception of hockey). Don't get me wrong, I love the Fighting Sioux, but I love the University of North Dakota more. But the overall affect on the athletic department could be huge, and not in a good way. Couldn't agree with you more. Well said. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 As much as I'm deeply concerned about the consequences of this bill on the football program, I admit I smiled when I read the results of this vote. I'm really torn on this. Man, I really wish the legislature had done this two years ago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 We have a football team that is playoff eligible in 2012. Any playoff game that does not include a top 4 seed goes to the homesite of the highest bidder. All things equal, we wouldn't be outbid very often. We can't pony up money for a FCS non conference game...I'm not holding my breath that UND will be able to "successfully bid' for a home playoff game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predator Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Question. Why are we putting so much effort into this bill? From the sounds of it, it's only going to lead to more lawsuits, more $$ spent, and a pi$$ed of NCAA. Why not put this effort into getting a blessing from the other tribe that we need it from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND Fan Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I sent the following e-mail to all House members last Thursday. Surprisingly, I received responses from many of them. They all agreed that it would be a waste of time to pass this bill unless there was some sort of assurance that we would not be punished by the NCAA (either open punishment or their quietly telling other universities not to play us). "I am a strong proponent of retaining the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. I firmly believe that it honors the Sioux name and its people. I ask that you take the time to fully analyze House Bill 1263 and the ramifications of its passage. If you feel that passage will truly result in the retention of the name in a manner that the NCAA will accept, I strongly urge a "yes" vote. However, if it appears that this would simply "prolong the agony" with the end-result being the same as it is today, let's move on! Thank you for your consideration." I have even gotten a couple of e-mails from House members since the vote. I also have a real concern that this will backfire on us but it would be outstanding if we could retain the name! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I sent the following e-mail to all House members last Thursday. Surprisingly, I received responses from many of them. They all agreed that it would be a waste of time to pass this bill unless there was some sort of assurance that we would not be punished by the NCAA (either open punishment or their quietly telling othe runiversities not to play us). "I am a strong proponent of retaining the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. I firmly believe that it honors the Sioux name and its people. I ask that you take the time to fully analyze House Bill 1263 and the ramifications of its passage. If you feel that passage will truly result in the retention of the name in a manner that the NCAA will accept, I strongly urge a "yes" vote. However, if it appears that this would simply "prolong the agony" with the end-result being the same as it is today, let's move on! Thank you for your consideration." Sincerely, I have even gotten a couple of e-mails from House members since the vote. I also have a real concern that this will backfire on us but it would be outstanding if we could retain the name! Did any of those that responded state that their opinion on what the law would mean in terms of NCAA sanctions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND Fan Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Did any of those that responded state that their opinion on what the law would mean in terms of NCAA sanctions? They did not; however, most of them alluded to the fact that not getting a blessing from the NCAA would simply prolong the agony. I don't know how they could be assured of that this law would influence the NCAA - in the proper fashion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksixpack Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 If there is no effect in hockey, why then were we required to remove the logo from the rink at the Ralph when we hosted the 2006 West Regional Tournament? And would it really be fair to strip the football team of the ability to host a playoff game? Do you think the football team is inferior to the hockey team? Also, do you think the 2001 football team would have won the national championship if they couldn't have hosted 2/3 home games? So we removed the center ice logo in 2006...did that effect anyone that attended??? ...I don't get that. What I do get is the fact that the NCAA is not allowing any hockey regionals to be played on a college campus anymore so we would never even have the ability to bid on one, hense it is a non-issue for hockey. I am a football fan and I have attended every playoff football game at home and some on the road...do I think they are inferior to the hockey team...well if you go by the revenue they generate, the attendence, or the level of competition (D1 vs D1AA) or the success (7 D1 national champions vs 1 D2) then I guess yes they are... I don't think we should look at the past but rather the future and hosting future football playoff games is clearly the only issue left to debate and to me keeping the name is more important than hosting future playoff games especially when future playoff football games are neither guarenteed or expected on a yearly basis. In addition, you are speculating that the NCAA will not allow us to host football playoffs aren't you? As of today the NCAA has not said we can't host at the Alerus? WIll they?...maybe, but that is not an absolute given...so my basis is even stronger... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackburn87 Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 I am elated at this most recent development and refuse to buy into the doomsday scenarios. I currently live in Kentucky. There are no reservations here. The Native American population is non-existent. The real tragedy is that a whole race of indigenous people are gone from here and are unlikely to ever return in significant numbers. But then, there's North Dakota. There is an uneasy history between Native and Non-Native Americans. We often view each other with a degree of distrust that lingers over 100 years from the last war, But from this, we have found some common ground. The name, the Fighting Sioux, may not have started out with such noble underpinnings, but it ended up that way. This name keeps the Lakota people as the standard bearer for UND. How many groups of people can say that? I don't see the Fighting Swedes or Norse, etc... but I do see the people who have helped shape our state to what it is today. The Sioux name creates a positive image and and I am humbled for the privilege of being affiliiated with the Fighting Sioux. The Native Americans of Spirit Lake have sued, fought, testified, voted, and begged the NCAA to let the name remain. Many of Standing Rock members are only asking that the 1969 pipe ceremony be recognized for the gift it is or that they be given the chance for a referendum. Enough already, I say, to the NCAA, SBofHE, UND admin and the other powers that be that stopped listening too soon. The people, ALL the people, have spoken time and time again. I'm glad, even if it's late, that the State Legislature is at least trying to do something about it. Fighting Sioux, forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Maybe we can worry about this if we ever get to the point where we could actually host a playoff game. That would be 2012. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.