Opinions on Fighting Sioux

[dakota fairways]

Florida State is not sanctioned by the NCAA for its use of the "Seminole" nickname and imagery - On a flight today I picked a copy of Sky Magazine and in browsing through it found an advertisement for Florida State's College of Business and Management. The ad was a professor with maroon and yellow war paint striped on his face with the caption -" FSU - war paint for the business of business". What the hell is the definintion of "hostile and abusive" and how can any organization that does not censure this kind of publicity from one of its (acceptable nickname) members, penalize an institution that goes out of its way to avoid such uses of native imagery? Did the Turtle Mountain Tribal Council fully appreciate what they were approving when they passed their resolution supporting the NCAA policy on native nicknames and imagery - the "war paint" ad from Florida State will not even appear on the radar of the NCAA, yet is exactly the kind of stereotyping the NCAA, nickname opponents, and tribal councils such as Turtle Mountain claim to be most offensive. For the NCAA to ignore examples such as this, while promising to enforce all its sanctions against another institution in its membership is hypocrisy of Biblical proportion.

As much as it seems that we should point out that the big schools like Florida State got a pass on the hostile and abusive charge, I don't think it will do our cause any good to point out abuses by other schools like this one. Its not the UND alumni and students that are the problem - its the derogatory comments by others (like some of the Bison faithful on this and other boards like AGS) that have to be considered hostile to native americans. Any action that sanctions negative imagery toward native americans, be it by other schools who got a pass or schools that UND faces (or faced) on the field, should be challenged, not used as an excuse that we should get to have our nickname too..

[Chewey]

I'm no attorney either, but i don't understand why we have to have an expedited process for this...First, its the law and get used to it...Second, don't do a thing until we have passed the predetermined date for NCAA sanctions. Once we incur the sanctions, then we have the discussions...I don't understand the rush as none of this affects us for another year or so anyways and we'll have time to negotiate it then once we have almost 2 years under this legislation. Given the above, why are we in need of a final decision - I'll use a tactic of the nickname naysayers...Don't we have more important things to work on then trying to strike down a law approved by the people's representatives...

BobIwabuchiFan

Like it. +1

[PhillySioux]

I'm no attorney either, but i don't understand why we have to have an expedited process for this...First, its the law and get used to it...Second, don't do a thing until we have passed the predetermined date for NCAA sanctions. Once we incur the sanctions, then we have the discussions...I don't understand the rush as none of this affects us for another year or so anyways and we'll have time to negotiate it then once we have almost 2 years under this legislation. Given the above, why are we in need of a final decision - I'll use a tactic of the nickname naysayers...Don't we have more important things to work on then trying to strike down a law approved by the people's representatives...

BobIwabuchiFan

Seems to me that if one is a supporter of the nickname and of the process that led to passage of the bill, one would want all questions regarding constitutionality of the law answered quickly and clearly. One can be sure that the NCAA will do NOTHING to change their position if there is a cloud of uncertainty as to whether the nickname law will remain law of the land.

[jodcon]

Seems to me that if one is a supporter of the nickname and of the process that led to passage of the bill, one would want all questions regarding constitutionality of the law answered quickly and clearly. One can be sure that the NCAA will do NOTHING to change their position if there is a cloud of uncertainty as to whether the nickname law will remain law of the land.

Exactly, until the question of whether the law is unconstitutional or not is answered there cannot be any further course of action planned, regardless of whether you're a nickname supporter or opposer this is the first order of business. The AG is going to have to make this call soon, the SBHE will be asking for it, and then the next step can be mapped out.

I don't understand the thinking of dragging everything out to the last possible minute, what is really to gain by it? These things don't happen overnight, if this law ends up being deemed constitutional and the state decides to fight the NCAA in court, it's going to be well past the sanction date before it ever actually starts getting argued in court, do we really want this to drag out until 2013 or 14 or 15 when by taking the legal route we can only improve our situation from what it already will be? It's a win or stay-the-same situation at that point, there is no downside except the cost of the trial.

If the thinking is to not ever address whether or not the law is constitutional because it could lead to the nickname being retired immediately...well that is not going to happen. In order for this to end up well in the eyes of supporters it's going to be a necessary evil to have to sweat through this ruling, and hope it goes well. If it does, UND may well be the Fighting Sioux forever, whether with or without sanctions will be determined down the road.

[yababy8]

Just amend the state constitution to make the Fighting Sioux the UND nickname and end this madness!

Constitutional amendment reads in general the following;

'Only by a statewide popular vote can a state higher education university change its nickname.'

[Fetch]

I agree a Statewide Referendum is still a possibility & will happen to help prove to the ncaa that we have aproval

[BobIwabuchiFan]

Exactly, until the question of whether the law is unconstitutional or not is answered there cannot be any further course of action planned, regardless of whether you're a nickname supporter or opposer this is the first order of business. The AG is going to have to make this call soon, the SBHE will be asking for it, and then the next step can be mapped out.

I don't understand the thinking of dragging everything out to the last possible minute, what is really to gain by it? These things don't happen overnight, if this law ends up being deemed constitutional and the state decides to fight the NCAA in court, it's going to be well past the sanction date before it ever actually starts getting argued in court, do we really want this to drag out until 2013 or 14 or 15 when by taking the legal route we can only improve our situation from what it already will be? It's a win or stay-the-same situation at that point, there is no downside except the cost of the trial.

If the thinking is to not ever address whether or not the law is constitutional because it could lead to the nickname being retired immediately...well that is not going to happen. In order for this to end up well in the eyes of supporters it's going to be a necessary evil to have to sweat through this ruling, and hope it goes well. If it does, UND may well be the Fighting Sioux forever, whether with or without sanctions will be determined down the road.

Its moot anyways...the SBOHE already told the school to discontinue the process of retiring the nickname and they also allowed UND to begin planning for the marketing of the logo for next year as well...Again, after the NCAA sanction date is when we go to bat on the negotiations...It basically tells the NCAA that we won't challenge the consititionality of the law and we have full intention of complying. Hence, we are not in a position to comply with the agreement because we would be violating state law to do so...then begins the discussions in earnest about how to move on past this point in a favorable outcome for both parties or a compromise both can live with...I believe litigating the constitutionality of the law prior to the NCAA sanction deadline only benefits the NCAA and not UND or ND....

BobIwabuchiFan

[PhillySioux]

Its moot anyways...the SBOHE already told the school to discontinue the process of retiring the nickname and they also allowed UND to begin planning for the marketing of the logo for next year as well...Again, after the NCAA sanction date is when we go to bat on the negotiations...It basically tells the NCAA that we won't challenge the consititionality of the law and we have full intention of complying. Hence, we are not in a position to comply with the agreement because we would be violating state law to do so...then begins the discussions in earnest about how to move on past this point in a favorable outcome for both parties or a compromise both can live with...I believe litigating the constitutionality of the law prior to the NCAA sanction deadline only benefits the NCAA and not UND or ND....

BobIwabuchiFan

Asking the AG for an opinion is not litigation. However, It will give a strong clue to all those involved as to where this will likely go.

There couldn't be litigation prior to law taking effect as no one would have standing to challenge until then.

For the life of me, I cannot see the NCAA negotiating before clear evidence presents itself that this will be settled law. I wouldn't.

As far as the current position of the SBoHE and UND regarding the imminent nickname law, its the only prudent postion to take.

[mikejm]

I agree a Statewide Referendum is still a possibility & will happen to help prove to the ncaa that we have aproval

I really don't think the NCAA cares what the people of North Dakota have to say about the subject.

[Fetch]

It's still a ace in the hole - I hope the sbohe keeps their noses out of it - they can play politics later after the name is retained - I bet the AG is smart enough to wish the same.... politically

[yababy8]

I really don't think the NCAA cares what the people of North Dakota have to say about the subject.

I'm talking about an amendment to the North Dakota constitution.

The NCAA would be exposing themselves to intense condemnation, paramount to fascism, if they chose to discriminate against UND on the level of Constitutional law.

[jodcon]

It's still a ace in the hole - I hope the sbohe keeps their noses out of it - they can play politics later after the name is retained - I bet the AG is smart enough to wish the same.... politically

One thing I would bet the farm on...Stenehjem never saw this coming where he might be put into the position of determining the nickname fate, I wouldn't wish that on anybody.

[ScottM]

I'm talking about an amendment to the North Dakota constitution.

The NCAA would be exposing themselves to intense condemnation, paramount to fascism, if they chose to discriminate against UND on the level of Constitutional law.

Which will effectively mean "jack squat" to the NC$$. A constitutional amendment by any state only has the force of law within its borders. They understand that concept, and seem perfectly comfortable to watch the legislature, the Board, etc. spin their collective wheels.

[mikejm]

S.D. Guard, tribe mark new 'Lakota' helicopter

Hmmmm. Charles Murphy can get behind "Lakota" as honoring many.

[puck]

S.D. Guard, tribe mark new 'Lakota' helicopter

Hmmmm. Charles Murphy can get behind "Lakota" as honoring many.

Yeah -- A native american named helicopter will "help to promote unity", "strengthen relations with tribes", and "will honor many", but a native american named university is "hostile and abusive".

[dakota fairways]

S.D. Guard, tribe mark new 'Lakota' helicopter

Hmmmm. Charles Murphy can get behind "Lakota" as honoring many.

can someone send this to the NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis?

[HowBoutThemBison?]

I'm talking about an amendment to the North Dakota constitution.

The NCAA would be exposing themselves to intense condemnation, paramount to fascism, if they chose to discriminate against UND on the level of Constitutional law.

You think they care? How intense of condemnation? Some people in North Dakota and Minnesota send them some e-mails? Are 'Bama, USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Duke, or Carolina fans going to care that UND has been forced to change nickname or whatever even though a State law(which is yet to be determined if it is Constitutional yet) says that UND must keep their name?

[Sioux_FF]

can someone send this to the NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis?

I think it's becoming clearer that the Sioux nickname matter is less about the NCAA - they have already spoken- than it is about conference affiliation and scheduling of games that we really need to be scheduling. I think the timetable for settling the entire issue was just moved up.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/206310/group/homepage/

[homer]

I think it's becoming clearer that the Sioux nickname matter is less about the NCAA - they have already spoken- than it is about conference affiliation and scheduling of games that we really need to be scheduling. I think the timetable for settling the entire issue was just moved up.

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/206310/group/homepage/

Agreed. I hope all the state reps who turned this into law had a plan B for when something like this happened. I know they were warned this was a real possibility.