House Bill Passes Senate 28-15

[PhillySioux]

Will it still be hard to recruit when athletes come in for a visit and one drives thru Wahpeton, looking at a state highway sign for information and gets pulled over by a North Dakota trooper in the state called Dakota along the Bois De Sioux River.. Wonder if the town, highway patrol, or the state asked any Indians if they could use their name or image on their cars, signs, towns, rivers, schools etc It should be all or nothing. If the Sioux name goes away, then lets do away with all names related to any Indians state wide. Lets just do away with any image or names related to Indians and soon they will all be forgotten, history.

Your points about the hypocrisy of various groups are well taken. They have nothing to do with the NCAA and what it may or may not decide.

[Knickball2]

While the football team is formally known as the Fighting Sioux, I haven't recently seen any logo or nickname

imagery in the Alerus, or on the Alerus, so the NCAA will simply be refusing to allow a playoff game there because

the school maintains a native american nickname/logo. Also, no imagery in the Betty, just lots of ND. I remain

confident that there will be additional negotiation with the NCAA, if not, then the anti-trust suit will need to be brought.

Again, the intellectual property rights will need to be asserted, see the arguments of Gordie Caldis per the full page

ads he had, and tried to present to the SBoHE. There appears to be federal precedent, I've not seen anyone refute

his claims in a legal manner, only Grant Shaft and company choosing to ignore them.

[Predator]

This board sometimes gets pretty entertaining. Having spent the weekend in GF for Sioux Hockey I was surprised at how many people there were very concerned about what this legislation does to UND. First of all, those of you who continue to call people names because others raise issues you may not have thought about, remind me of middle school student council. (Don't let anyone disagree and if they raise questions or issues shout them down). Telling DlSioux not to let the door hit him in the butt is pretty immature. I don't agree with his decision but I believe he understands the importance of the other sports and of the University as an entity What is good for hockey is good for FB, BB, VB, soccer etc. What is good for FB, BB, VB etc. is good for hockey. What is good for athletics is good for UND. The Englestad arena is good for all sports and don't forget that Ralph stated his gift was there to allow the continued success of UND hockey but also for UND athletics. The Betty Englestad Arena is another example of the vision of the Englstad family and the importance of the entire athletic dept to hockey. Some on this board don't seem to understand that.

Whatever we do on this, we need to continue to work to get the Standing Rock band to vote in support of the name and then much of the problem is solved. To sit back now and think this legislation is good for UND, for hockey or for UND athletics or even think it changes anything with the NCAA is a mistake. No one knows what the NCAA will do. They won't kick us out, but I don't think they will change their previous directive. That directive would preclude us from hosting FB playoff games. What some of you neglect to mention or discusss is that would also mean our other sports can't host regional playoffs in other sports either. That could affect track, baseball, WBB, soccer, swimming, Women's hockey etc. Men's BB is not likely to host. UND has proven a good host for events in the past including Men's hockey, WBB and FB. The NCAA has recognixed that in the past. Those of you who say it would only mean we can't host FB are wrong. You are correct in that no one will be able to wear the logo or name on the uniforms for playoffs. I agree that is not an issue because THE NAME AND LOGO HAVE NEVER ONCE WON US A GAME NOR AN EVENT. EVER!!!

1. DISioux's hissy fit and temper tantrum about not getting his way was pretty immature. I thought my response was just funny.

2. Could not agree more about this.

[dmksioux]

While the football team is formally known as the Fighting Sioux, I haven't recently seen any logo or nickname

imagery in the Alerus, or on the Alerus, so the NCAA will simply be refusing to allow a playoff game there because

the school maintains a native american nickname/logo. Also, no imagery in the Betty, just lots of ND. I remain

confident that there will be additional negotiation with the NCAA, if not, then the anti-trust suit will need to be brought.

Again, the intellectual property rights will need to be asserted, see the arguments of Gordie Caldis per the full page

ads he had, and tried to present to the SBoHE. There appears to be federal precedent, I've not seen anyone refute

his claims in a legal manner, only Grant Shaft and company choosing to ignore them.

Last I checked, it still says Sioux in the endzones...

[PhillySioux]

While the football team is formally known as the Fighting Sioux, I haven't recently seen any logo or nickname

imagery in the Alerus, or on the Alerus, so the NCAA will simply be refusing to allow a playoff game there because

the school maintains a native american nickname/logo. Also, no imagery in the Betty, just lots of ND. I remain

confident that there will be additional negotiation with the NCAA, if not, then the anti-trust suit will need to be brought.

Again, the intellectual property rights will need to be asserted, see the arguments of Gordie Caldis per the full page

ads he had, and tried to present to the SBoHE. There appears to be federal precedent, I've not seen anyone refute

his claims in a legal manner, only Grant Shaft and company choosing to ignore them.

The nickname legislation does not require any suit of any kind.

[iramurphy]

1. DISioux's hissy fit and temper tantrum about not getting his way was pretty immature. I thought my response was just funny.

2. Could not agree more about this.

You are right but, I can understand the frustration with bringing an opposing view. As I have said (apparently as nauseum) we must consider what all of this does to UND. He obviously supports UND but I don't think UND hockey created the problem. There is no reason to stop supporting UND hockey just like there would be no reason to stop supporting UND athletics if the name had to be dropped. Doesn't help anything. So much of this is out of our control. If it comes down to keeping the name or hurting UND and/or UND athletics then we need to move on. If there is a way to keep the name then we have very little time and I am, not so sure very many options. The one sure option is to get standing Rock to vote. Our Native American friends need to get that done within the rules of their tribal Government. If they are getting bullied by the tribal council there must be some recourse, but I am not familiar with their laws so I woudln't know what it is. My frustration is that even with the NCAA's inerference and threats of sanctions they have had ample time. Spirit Lake got it done, why not Standing Rock??

[Cratter]

Or is it more amazing that UND fans think they would be allowed to watch Sioux home football games?

People should be happy UND didn't drop football with the move to D1 like UNO just did. Wait a second did i just solve this "problem." I think UND should drop Sioux football! Boom Problem Solved. It would save the athletic department millions. More money for hockey hockey hockey.

The logo means more than the athletes? Is that what some people think? UND will still have the same number of athletes. The football program will have the same number of scholarships. The players will still get to play football and they will know they won't have home playoff games. It sounds like the fans might care more about winning than the student athletes themselves.

[Cratter]

And if they are denied a game (in the doomsday scenario) then what would be the proper course of action?

Watch the game on tv.

[coach daddy]

Again, I don't think the atheletes are worth more than the right to vote or free speech...go ahead and ask the Standing Rock tribe and the supporters at Spirit Lake...I know we all should feel bad for these kids who are receiving full ride scholarships to earn a degree playing a sport we would all still like to play...again, lets get some perspective...at least Gene Roebuck understands it...why can't you guys who are supposed Fighting Sioux fans?

How do you dare question the loyalty of those of us who only want whats best for the athletes? Seriously, go back and read messages from my past. No one is or has been a bigger fan of UND I've been the biggest supporter of Coach Roebuck for as long as I can remember. He's been a friend for almost 25 years. The fact that I put the athletes ahead of the logo and nickname only proves my support of the school. The difference between me and you is that I support those who put their hearts on the field, court, and ice. You seem to be more worried about a fictitious character on the front of the jersey.

[dakota fairways]

... It sounds like the fans might care more about winning than the student athletes themselves.

You can't be serious!

[iramurphy]

Or is it more amazing that UND fans think they would be allowed to watch Sioux home football games?

People should be happy UND didn't drop football with the move to D1 like UNO just did. Wait a second did i just solve this "problem." I think UND should drop Sioux football! Boom Problem Solved. It would save the athletic department millions. More money for hockey hockey hockey.

The logo means more than the athletes? Is that what some people think? UND will still have the same number of athletes. The football program will have the same number of scholarships. The players will stick get to play football and they will know they won't have home playoff games. It sounds like the fans might care more about winning than the student athletes themselves.

The fans have never cared more about winning than the athletes, they just think they do and they talk more.

Not sure I quite follow the transition in the comment but neither UND athletics nor UND could afford to lose FB. If you don't like FB no big deal just enjoy hockey. UND athletic teams have been the Fighting Sioux before we had hockey and except for a number of hockey fans who are NDSU supporters for other sports or a handfull of "hockey only" folks most UND fans are fans of all UND sports. Certainly our hockey fans are passionate but that is no excuse to be small minded when it comes to the needs of the University. Josh Morton commented recently that the Fighting Sioux Club support from former FB players and FB supporters is tremendous. I didn't play hockey but I have had season tickets for about 35 years with the exception of my military service overseas. I married a hockey cheerleader and I donated to UND hockey in the pre $100,000,000 donation days when they needed every penny. Prior to leaving for the military I was one of the team physicians who took care of UND athletics including hockey when Jim Leigh couldn't be there. I would daresay there aren't many more loyal hockey fans. My ties to UND hockey are stronger than yelling F--- the Gophers and getting drunk on a few beers for hockey games.

Much of the support for the lawsuit and push to keep the name has come from UND FB supporters and those of us who support UND not just one team. Your comments which I hope were tongue in cheek are the type of comments that will cause strife with in the UND family and are not in the best interest of UND hockey or UND athletics. UND hockey and UND athletics can do without those who are small minded more than we can do without FB or any of our other sports.

[Predator]

OK. We know coach Hakstol's stance on the nickname. I would assume the hockey players all agree that the name is more important than hosting playoff games as it really doesn't affect them. My question, where do the rest of UND athletics stand on this? Have we heard from muss? Or his players? How about BB? The fact of the matter is this is all just speculation at this point and no one knows what or if anything will change between UND/state of ND and the NC$$. It would be interesting to hear the other coaches and players opinion on the "no home playoff" thing.

[Chewey]

Chewey, if you really are an attorney, check with some others and see if anyone thinks you could force U of Minnesota, U of Wisconsin, or anyone else to schedule us if they don't wish to. If that is the case, then we should sue them now to get BB, FB, VB games etc. I appreciate some of your insite, but were you sober when you said that?? By the way I would love to see you take on the SBoHE attorney. He seems to be a lot smarter and even though he is a UND supporter and name supporter his opinions are sound and they are based on his legal rather than his personal opinions. A lot of folks on this board won't like that but there are many of us who would like to keep the name and logo if it doesn't hurt UND or UND athletics.

The name calling (takes a lot of courage when they aren't here to respond) against Faison or Kelly or the SBoHE does nothing to help UND or UND hockey. Doesn't matter anymore what happened in the past. They have no choice but to follow the direction of the SBoHE until told to do otherwise. If you don't understand that then i don't think I can convince you. Most of us at work answer to someone and unless you own your business you do what you are told or either quit or get fired. Kelly and Faison are no different.

I believe that the present course by UND officials is the best way, (short of the Standing Rock band voting to approve the name), to get the NCAA to change the agreement. If Kelly and Faison can show that UND has been complying with the NCAA directive and agreement and are now handcuffed by the state legislature, then they have a case for the NCAA to reconsider. They might consider that if UND did everything they were asked to do then were forced by legislative action to keep the name. The sanctions would only hurt the athletes and teams who have nothing to do with the legislation, I think they would at least have to consider an appeal. In the meantime, we need to keep this from being UND hockey vs UND. If it gets that way UND and UND hockey will lose and I believe would take a long time to recover.

I don't drink so, no, I wasn't drunk. Actually, it's pretty simple. U of M and U of W are state run bodies and those state run bodies have publicly stated that they would refuse to schedule UND because of its nickname and logo. This is discrimination by a public body based on speech.. Historically, they've played us. If that changes, why? Would the reason be economics? Of course not because Sioux/Gopher hockey games and even FB games in the TC would earn a ton of money for both schools because there are so many Sioux fans in MN like myself. Would the reason be uncertainty about competitive parity? Of course not. Would the reason be low television ratings? Of course not. Would the concern be cost of travel? Of course not. Would the concern be some sort of team generated malevolence that would serve to cause injury to players? Of course not. Bottom line is that there is a course of dealing and an historic association there that has never been problematic except for, you guessed it, the nickname "policy" and the simple lockstep adherence to the NC$$'s asinine "policy." There's a lawsuit there somewhere. And, if it were brought against UofM or UofW or whomever the NC$$ could be joined anew because there would be a brand new claim asserted. Free speech rights are sacrosanct. Who in God's name would have thought that corporations, of all things, would be endowed with free speech rights to donate whatever they want to compaigns? Well, it happened and they do. If you want to view the position with incredulity now, fine. It certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility.

I am sure Pat Seaworth is a nice enough fellow. He was always pretty professional and courteous when I spoke with him. But, in my opinion, there is no doubt that he is anti-nickname. At the very least, he succums to the various doomsday prophecies most of which have no factual support whatsoever. At the very best, he is among the insipid "I would love to save the nickname but" crowd who would blithely abnegate 80 + years of tradition so as to wrap everything up with utmost cynical expediency. Such widespread milklivered pusillanimity among those who were supposed to have advocated for the university/nickname/logo/students/alumni/state in all of this is one of the reasons why this process is at its present juncture. PM me and I will send you Pat's diatribe. Most of it is doomsday regurgitation that falls squarely outside the parameters of the surrender agreement. At the time of the surrender agreement, did Pat and others not know of the terms FSU, CMU and Utah had obtained? At best, the legal team who negotiated the settlement agreement obviously did not do the most thorough job and UND was sold out short, accordingly. At worst, the whole process was designed simply as a 3 year buffer period during which all UND fans and alumni would just get used to the idea that the nickname and logo would be retired and would simply accept it once November 30, 2010 rolled around. With people so willing to sell out 80 + years of tradition involved in the process, the terms of the surrender agreement really are not surprising. They are unacceptable.

The nickname and logo do not hurt UND or UND athletics. Rather, it's the whimsical and capricious and completely unjustifiable animus that the NC$$ holds against UND that would serve to hurt UND and UND athletics. The few members of the SR Tribal Council who are cynically preventing a vote who are hurting UND and UND athletics. It's the taxpayer funded, self-aggrandizing professors and administrators at UND who are hurting UND and UND athletics. Indeed, they see the reality that 98% of Native Americans on both reservations have no problem with the nickname and logo yet they, in entirely Captain Ahab fashion, continue to fixate on the nickname and logo, impute some brainwashed "racism" element to it and try to protray their own views as being more important than the rank and file majority simply because they're "educated" (charitably described, given present context). Every Milquetoast imbued with false rationalizing and equivocating that acceding to such purile, low-core aggressive antics "will really help UND and UND athletics" actually hurts UND and UND athletics.

The psychology on the other side is so 5th grade. All the nickname supporters have every asked for is a vote on SR and a continuance and validation of everything that has been factually proven to date. Namely, that the school uses the nickname and logo with the utmost respect, the vast majority of SL and SR natives support the nickname and logo, that the majority of alumni and ND citizenry likes the nickname and logo, that the nickname and logo have NEVER been a detriment to UND or UND athletics in the past, that there have been absolutely no incidents where the nickname and logo have caused anyone any harm except those emotional glass jaws who have concocted stories otherwise. UND has done nothing wrong. The nickname and logo have done nothing wrong. The majority at SR who wish to have their voices heard have done nothing wrong. The majority of alumni, students and ND citizenry who have actually had a backbone have done nothing wrong. The wrongdoers are the NC$$, the majority of the SR Tribal Council, the "truly intellectual heavyweights" on the faculty and administration of UND, and people like Pat Seaworth who strive to pacify and enable every petulant outburst disgorged by that crowd.

Kelly and Faison and the SBoHE have bosses - the legislature and the people of ND whom the legislature represents. If they're smart, they'll realize that they have de facto bosses in the UND alumni. Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that SR really would approve but they are being cynically prevented from expressing their opinions? Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that UND has done what other similarly situated universities have done? Why not put energy into opposing a bully? Why not put energy into laying forth the truth that neither the logo nor the nickname has caused UND any injury at all historically? Why waste your energies being a wobbler? The only reason there's any controversy about all of this is that the people who oppose the nickname and logo aren't used to being opposed. Now that they're being strongly opposed they don't like that very much and don't know what to do about it except equivocate, cry "racism" and try to obfuscate the obvious. Thankfully those tactics, though vigorously employed, have met with significant resistance. Like someone else on here said, this is exactly where the issue needs to be and I am thankful that so many have exhibited the strength necessary to enable the majority to be heard.

[Cratter]

Your comments which I hope were tongue in cheek are the type of comments that will cause strife with in the UND family and are not in the best interest of UND hockey or UND athletics. UND hockey and UND athletics can do without those who are small minded more than we can do without FB or any of our other sports.

Yeah tongue in cheek. I support the football team just as much as the hockey team.

[iramurphy]

I don't drink so, no, I wasn't drunk. Actually, it's pretty simple. U of M and U of W are state run bodies and those state run bodies have publicly stated that they would refuse to schedule UND because of its nickname and logo. This is discrimination by a public body based on speech.. Historically, they've played us. If that changes, why? Would the reason be economics? Of course not because Sioux/Gopher hockey games and even FB games in the TC would earn a ton of money for both schools because there are so many Sioux fans in MN like myself. Would the reason be uncertainty about competitive parity? Of course not. Would the reason be low television ratings? Of course not. Would the concern be cost of travel? Of course not. Would the concern be some sort of team generated malevolence that would serve to cause injury to players? Of course not. Bottom line is that there is a course of dealing and an historic association there that has never been problematic except for, you guessed it, the nickname "policy" and the simple lockstep adherence to the NC$$'s asinine "policy." There's a lawsuit there somewhere. And, if it were brought against UofM or UofW or whomever the NC$$ could be joined anew because there would be a brand new claim asserted. Free speech rights are sacrosanct. Who in God's name would have thought that corporations, of all things, would be endowed with free speech rights to donate whatever they want to compaigns? Well, it happened and they do. If you want to view the position with incredulity now, fine. It certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility.

I am sure Pat Seaworth is a nice enough fellow. He was always pretty professional and courteous when I spoke with him. But, in my opinion, there is no doubt that he is anti-nickname. At the very least, he succums to the various doomsday prophecies most of which have no factual support whatsoever. At the very best, he is among the insipid "I would love to save the nickname but" crowd who would blithely abnegate 80 + years of tradition so as to wrap everything up with utmost cynical expediency. Such widespread milklivered pusillanimity among those who were supposed to have advocated for the university/nickname/logo/students/alumni/state in all of this is one of the reasons why this process is at its present juncture. PM me and I will send you Pat's diatribe. Most of it is doomsday regurgitation that falls squarely outside the parameters of the surrender agreement. At the time of the surrender agreement, did Pat and others not know of the terms FSU, CMU and Utah had obtained? At best, the legal team who negotiated the settlement agreement obviously did not do the most thorough job and UND was sold out short, accordingly. At worst, the whole process was designed simply as a 3 year buffer period during which all UND fans and alumni would just get used to the idea that the nickname and logo would be retired and would simply accept it once November 30, 2010 rolled around. With people so willing to sell out 80 + years of tradition involved in the process, the terms of the surrender agreement really are not surprising. They are unacceptable.

The nickname and logo do not hurt UND or UND athletics. Rather, it's the whimsical and capricious and completely unjustifiable animus that the NC$$ holds against UND that would serve to hurt UND and UND athletics. The few members of the SR Tribal Council who are cynically preventing a vote who are hurting UND and UND athletics. It's the taxpayer funded, self-aggrandizing professors and administrators at UND who are hurting UND and UND athletics. Indeed, they see the reality that 98% of Native Americans on both reservations have no problem with the nickname and logo yet they, in entirely Captain Ahab fashion, continue to fixate on the nickname and logo, impute some brainwashed "racism" element to it and try to protray their own views as being more important than the rank and file majority simply because they're "educated" (charitably described, given present context). Every Milquetoast imbued with false rationalizing and equivocating that acceding to such purile, low-core aggressive antics "will really help UND and UND athletics" actually hurts UND and UND athletics.

The psychology on the other side is so 5th grade. All the nickname supporters have every asked for is a vote on SR and a continuance and validation of everything that has been factually proven to date. Namely, that the school uses the nickname and logo with the utmost respect, the vast majority of SL and SR natives support the nickname and logo, that the majority of alumni and ND citizenry likes the nickname and logo, that the nickname and logo have NEVER been a detriment to UND or UND athletics in the past, that there have been absolutely no incidents where the nickname and logo have caused anyone any harm except those emotional glass jaws who have concocted stories otherwise. UND has done nothing wrong. The nickname and logo have done nothing wrong. The majority at SR who wish to have their voices heard have done nothing wrong. The majority of alumni, students and ND citizenry who have actually had a backbone have done nothing wrong. The wrongdoers are the NC$$, the majority of the SR Tribal Council, the "truly intellectual heavyweights" on the faculty and administration of UND, and people like Pat Seaworth who strive to pacify and enable every petulant outburst disgorged by that crowd.

Kelly and Faison and the SBoHE have bosses - the legislature and the people of ND whom the legislature represents. If they're smart, they'll realize that they have de facto bosses in the UND alumni. Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that SR really would approve but they are being cynically prevented from expressing their opinions? Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that UND has done what other similarly situated universities have done? Why not put energy into opposing a bully? Why not put energy into laying forth the truth that neither the logo nor the nickname has caused UND any injury at all historically? Why waste your energies being a wobbler? The only reason there's any controversy about all of this is that the people who oppose the nickname and logo aren't used to being opposed. Now that they're being strongly opposed they don't like that very much and don't know what to do about it except equivocate, cry "racism" and try to obfuscate the obvious. Thankfully those tactics, though vigorously employed, have met with significant resistance. Like someone else on here said, this is exactly where the issue needs to be and I am thankful that so many have exhibited the strength necessary to enable the majority to be heard.

Points well said.

I will PC you about the Seaworth character. I do not believe he was part of the legal team who arranged the settlement with the NCAA, the Attorney General was. He had to interpret the settlementt and report to the board. He also works for the SBoHE and is smart enough to remember that. The Paulsen board had members who wanted to fire him for not covering for Chapman when he lied to the board and to the media concerning Potts. All he did then was produce the records of the meetings and the minutes which showed Chapman had a little trouble being truthful and it supported what Potts had said. I know him pretty well and he is far from the PC crowd but don't forget he is an attorney!

The issue with Kelly is complicated and I am not of the opinion there is nothing he could have done to help the cause, but I do believe the best tactic for UND, Kelly and Faison are to follow the instructions of the SBoHE and until they are told otherwise I believe they proceed as directed. I believe that will postion UND to at least have some sort of credibility if they appeal on the basis they did everything agreed upon in the settlement but had no choice once the legislation was passed.

The name and logo have never been the problem. There are always those in life, and that includes UND, who need someone to blame for whatever is wrong in their lives. Roger Thomas said a number of the anti-name folks were decent people who cared more about winning one for the Natives than they did about the name and logo. The NCAA taking on the issue that they should have stayed out of, was the biggest problem. If you or others want to file suit on behalf of the Spirit Lake band or have another legal solution I am all for it. If you have something that makes sense many of us will donate to the cause. I don't believe anyone has taken away the American Indians right to free speech but they need to excercise those rights to affect change on their reservations and with their tribal councils. Spirit Lake got it done. If the support is overwhelming as we are told then why hasn't the vote on Standing Rock been accomplished.

We may not agree of the impact of the sanctions but I believe it is naive to think there would be no negative impact on UND hockey in the long run and I believe there would be negative impact on our other athletic teams in the near future and it woudln't just be home play offs for FB..

[BobIwabuchiFan]

How do you dare question the loyalty of those of us who only want whats best for the athletes? Seriously, go back and read messages from my past. No one is or has been a bigger fan of UND I've been the biggest supporter of Coach Roebuck for as long as I can remember. He's been a friend for almost 25 years. The fact that I put the athletes ahead of the logo and nickname only proves my support of the school. The difference between me and you is that I support those who put their hearts on the field, court, and ice. You seem to be more worried about a fictitious character on the front of the jersey.

Maybe I am getting this whole forum exchange thing wrong then..we are not suppose to question and make counterpoints? I notice that you didn't say fighting sioux, only UND...is that something that was a subconcious slip or an intentional display of your real feelings on the nickname? I only stated that putting the atheletes above the right to vote or have your voice heard is backwards in my mind - remember that the whole thing is supposed to be about hostile and abusive behaviors and causing NA to have stunted social development because people cheer on a visual representation of these same people from about 100 years ago, but if you want to construe it that I only want the logo so I can wear cool hockey jerseys around town, then continue to live in the world you envision.

BobIwabuchiFan

[BobIwabuchiFan]

Points well said.

I will PC you about the Seaworth character. I do not believe he was part of the legal team who arranged the settlement with the NCAA, the Attorney General was. He had to interpret the settlementt and report to the board. He also works for the SBoHE and is smart enough to remember that. The Paulsen board had members who wanted to fire him for not covering for Chapman when he lied to the board and to the media concerning Potts. All he did then was produce the records of the meetings and the minutes which showed Chapman had a little trouble being truthful and it supported what Potts had said. I know him pretty well and he is far from the PC crowd but don't forget he is an attorney!

The issue with Kelly is complicated and I am not of the opinion there is nothing he could have done to help the cause, but I do believe the best tactic for UND, Kelly and Faison are to follow the instructions of the SBoHE and until they are told otherwise I believe they proceed as directed. I believe that will postion UND to at least have some sort of credibility if they appeal on the basis they did everything agreed upon in the settlement but had no choice once the legislation was passed.

The name and logo have never been the problem. There are always those in life, and that includes UND, who need someone to blame for whatever is wrong in their lives. Roger Thomas said a number of the anti-name folks were decent people who cared more about winning one for the Natives than they did about the name and logo. The NCAA taking on the issue that they should have stayed out of, was the biggest problem. If you or others want to file suit on behalf of the Spirit Lake band or have another legal solution I am all for it. If you have something that makes sense many of us will donate to the cause. I don't believe anyone has taken away the American Indians right to free speech but they need to excercise those rights to affect change on their reservations and with their tribal councils. Spirit Lake got it done. If the support is overwhelming as we are told then why hasn't the vote on Standing Rock been accomplished.

We may not agree of the impact of the sanctions but I believe it is naive to think there would be no negative impact on UND hockey in the long run and I believe there would be negative impact on our other athletic teams in the near future and it woudln't just be home play offs for FB..

Before everyone commits suicide when the gophers and the badgers go to a 6 team super league of hockey, I would hope we could all understand what this 6 team league is going to have to have to survive and build a schedule. If for one minute you think the gophers and badgers are not going to schedule games with us, then you are smoking something that is illegal in about 48 of our 50 states. I like the odds of the WCHA, especially if we bring in a Notre Dame and Miami Ohio to keep the league at its current size and continue to have top notch hockey games played as well...again, its not going to be the end of the world and I think the Big Ten is probably going to be looking for others to join as well, maybe even the 7, possibly soon to be 8, time national champions....

[rochsioux]

I don't drink so, no, I wasn't drunk. Actually, it's pretty simple. U of M and U of W are state run bodies and those state run bodies have publicly stated that they would refuse to schedule UND because of its nickname and logo. This is discrimination by a public body based on speech.. Historically, they've played us. If that changes, why? Would the reason be economics? Of course not because Sioux/Gopher hockey games and even FB games in the TC would earn a ton of money for both schools because there are so many Sioux fans in MN like myself. Would the reason be uncertainty about competitive parity? Of course not. Would the reason be low television ratings? Of course not. Would the concern be cost of travel? Of course not. Would the concern be some sort of team generated malevolence that would serve to cause injury to players? Of course not. Bottom line is that there is a course of dealing and an historic association there that has never been problematic except for, you guessed it, the nickname "policy" and the simple lockstep adherence to the NC$$'s asinine "policy." There's a lawsuit there somewhere. And, if it were brought against UofM or UofW or whomever the NC$$ could be joined anew because there would be a brand new claim asserted. Free speech rights are sacrosanct. Who in God's name would have thought that corporations, of all things, would be endowed with free speech rights to donate whatever they want to compaigns? Well, it happened and they do. If you want to view the position with incredulity now, fine. It certainly is not beyond the realm of possibility.

I am sure Pat Seaworth is a nice enough fellow. He was always pretty professional and courteous when I spoke with him. But, in my opinion, there is no doubt that he is anti-nickname. At the very least, he succums to the various doomsday prophecies most of which have no factual support whatsoever. At the very best, he is among the insipid "I would love to save the nickname but" crowd who would blithely abnegate 80 + years of tradition so as to wrap everything up with utmost cynical expediency. Such widespread milklivered pusillanimity among those who were supposed to have advocated for the university/nickname/logo/students/alumni/state in all of this is one of the reasons why this process is at its present juncture. PM me and I will send you Pat's diatribe. Most of it is doomsday regurgitation that falls squarely outside the parameters of the surrender agreement. At the time of the surrender agreement, did Pat and others not know of the terms FSU, CMU and Utah had obtained? At best, the legal team who negotiated the settlement agreement obviously did not do the most thorough job and UND was sold out short, accordingly. At worst, the whole process was designed simply as a 3 year buffer period during which all UND fans and alumni would just get used to the idea that the nickname and logo would be retired and would simply accept it once November 30, 2010 rolled around. With people so willing to sell out 80 + years of tradition involved in the process, the terms of the surrender agreement really are not surprising. They are unacceptable.

The nickname and logo do not hurt UND or UND athletics. Rather, it's the whimsical and capricious and completely unjustifiable animus that the NC$$ holds against UND that would serve to hurt UND and UND athletics. The few members of the SR Tribal Council who are cynically preventing a vote who are hurting UND and UND athletics. It's the taxpayer funded, self-aggrandizing professors and administrators at UND who are hurting UND and UND athletics. Indeed, they see the reality that 98% of Native Americans on both reservations have no problem with the nickname and logo yet they, in entirely Captain Ahab fashion, continue to fixate on the nickname and logo, impute some brainwashed "racism" element to it and try to protray their own views as being more important than the rank and file majority simply because they're "educated" (charitably described, given present context). Every Milquetoast imbued with false rationalizing and equivocating that acceding to such purile, low-core aggressive antics "will really help UND and UND athletics" actually hurts UND and UND athletics.

The psychology on the other side is so 5th grade. All the nickname supporters have every asked for is a vote on SR and a continuance and validation of everything that has been factually proven to date. Namely, that the school uses the nickname and logo with the utmost respect, the vast majority of SL and SR natives support the nickname and logo, that the majority of alumni and ND citizenry likes the nickname and logo, that the nickname and logo have NEVER been a detriment to UND or UND athletics in the past, that there have been absolutely no incidents where the nickname and logo have caused anyone any harm except those emotional glass jaws who have concocted stories otherwise. UND has done nothing wrong. The nickname and logo have done nothing wrong. The majority at SR who wish to have their voices heard have done nothing wrong. The majority of alumni, students and ND citizenry who have actually had a backbone have done nothing wrong. The wrongdoers are the NC$$, the majority of the SR Tribal Council, the "truly intellectual heavyweights" on the faculty and administration of UND, and people like Pat Seaworth who strive to pacify and enable every petulant outburst disgorged by that crowd.

Kelly and Faison and the SBoHE have bosses - the legislature and the people of ND whom the legislature represents. If they're smart, they'll realize that they have de facto bosses in the UND alumni. Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that SR really would approve but they are being cynically prevented from expressing their opinions? Why not put energy into showing the NC$$ that UND has done what other similarly situated universities have done? Why not put energy into opposing a bully? Why not put energy into laying forth the truth that neither the logo nor the nickname has caused UND any injury at all historically? Why waste your energies being a wobbler? The only reason there's any controversy about all of this is that the people who oppose the nickname and logo aren't used to being opposed. Now that they're being strongly opposed they don't like that very much and don't know what to do about it except equivocate, cry "racism" and try to obfuscate the obvious. Thankfully those tactics, though vigorously employed, have met with significant resistance. Like someone else on here said, this is exactly where the issue needs to be and I am thankful that so many have exhibited the strength necessary to enable the majority to be heard.

+1

[Knickball2]

Well said Chewey

[coach daddy]

Maybe I am getting this whole forum exchange thing wrong then..we are not suppose to question and make counterpoints? I notice that you didn't say fighting sioux, only UND...is that something that was a subconcious slip or an intentional display of your real feelings on the nickname? I only stated that putting the atheletes above the right to vote or have your voice heard is backwards in my mind - remember that the whole thing is supposed to be about hostile and abusive behaviors and causing NA to have stunted social development because people cheer on a visual representation of these same people from about 100 years ago, but if you want to construe it that I only want the logo so I can wear cool hockey jerseys around town, then continue to live in the world you envision.

BobIwabuchiFan

I used the term UND because, regardless of the nickname or logo we end up with, I'll support them. Can you say the same?

I don't pretend to know whether something is racist in nature when I, a white male, have never been a minority. If Native Americans tell us the name and logo misrepresent their culture, who are you, or who am I, to tell them they are wrong? I believe UND has done everything in their power to show respect to the name and the tribes. If Standing Rock and Spirit Lake tell us to keep it, we should keep it, and continue to honor it. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. It's time to move on in my opinion; which, I know, makes me a disloyal fan and also wrong, at least to you.

[Knickball2]

Read the editorial in last thursdays GF Herald by Steve Fool Bear and you'll get a grasp of the problems at Standing Rock and it's

tribal government, as to how two or three people in the right governmental positions can stifle the tribe as a whole. That is the

one aspect of the entire argument that "white" North Dakota just refuses to understand. Instead of three years to win the approval, it

might actually take four, perhaps five, but that doesn't mean that the majority at Standing Rock isn't trying to mirror the folks at Spirit Lake.

[Chewey]

I used the term UND because, regardless of the nickname or logo we end up with, I'll support them. Can you say the same?

I don't pretend to know whether something is racist in nature when I, a white male, have never been a minority. If Native Americans tell us the name and logo misrepresent their culture, who are you, or who am I, to tell them they are wrong? I believe UND has done everything in their power to show respect to the name and the tribes. If Standing Rock and Spirit Lake tell us to keep it, we should keep it, and continue to honor it. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. It's time to move on in my opinion; which, I know, makes me a disloyal fan and also wrong, at least to you.

That's the point though. A majority at SL have said that the name and logo do not offend them and are not racist. SR would say the same thing, if they were allowed to do so. What is racist is the denial of a vote. What is racist is white professors and administrators saying that the name and logo are racist irrespective of what the majority of native say or want. What is racist is a minority of native americans, many of whom are Chippewa, at UND who want to make that decision for everyone else. I'm sure you're not a disloyal fan but you are, evidently, buying the sophistry hook, line and sinker. What's racist is racist. I just love the "logic" employed by gays where they say that they can use the "f" word because it takes the sting out of the word and takes power out of the word. I have no desire to employ that word and I think using it is a nasty thing to do. However, according to their logic the "sting" of the word is lessened by the number of times it is employed. WTH?!?!?! Under that logic, the more times it is used by anyone and everyone, not just gays, the more the sting of the word should be taken away, right. Why is it not racist for CMU and Utah and FSU to use native imagery when they've obgtained tribal approval (one tribe) but the imagery is for UND because UND has not obtained the approval of 2 tribes? If something is racist, it's racist and no one should employ it. If something is racist, it should be taken out of town names and off of road signs and even native americans themselves shouldn't use the term, right? Anything else is equivocation that lessens the intellectual integrity of the argument, right?