PhillySioux Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 The issue is that Kelley and Faison have lost the credibility to speak or convince people - if that day comes. Evidence indicates that Kelley spent his time allowing or convincing one or more Summit League Presidents to come out with a anti-Sioux resolution, prior to membership. If true, that's deception on the highest order by a UND leader. The media totally bought into the lie, and it still is perpetuated. At least what Faison spoke at the hearing was on public record, and not some backroom dealing as Kelley has quite possibly done. Kelley and Faison have lost the ability to communicate with a huge majority of UND alumni and fans, largely because they have not given the slightest indication that they have a passion for the nickname. That's a failure of leadership. Passion for the nickname? So what? Do you think the NCAA would've settled for a one tribe approval if Faison and Kelly were more passionate? You may feel better if they vocalized your views, but it would change nothing with our athletic regulator. Quote
star2city Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Passion for the nickname? So what? Do you think the NCAA would've settled for a one tribe approval if Faison and Kelly were more passionate? You may feel better if they vocalized your views, but it would change nothing with our athletic regulator. You missed the point entirely. Leadership is about leading people in a direction they don't want to go. Kelley and Faison don't have that ability. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Evidence indicates that Kelley spent his time allowing or convincing one or more Summit League Presidents to come out with a anti-Sioux resolution, prior to membership. There's a player in the Summit drama who has since left the stage, ... but his lasting impacts continue to be felt, be they with the Summit or as basis for legislative actions in Bismarck. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 The issue is that Kelley and Faison have lost the credibility to speak or convince people - if that day comes. If that day comes, any president or AD (no matter the person) will need someone to come in on the white horse wearing the white hat (with saddlebags full of fat stacks of cash). Quote
ksixpack Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Folks: Reality check time. If the day comes where UND Athletics faces sanctions for the word "Sioux" and a piece of Ben Brien's art, they have to go. You fight to prevent that day from setting in, but that's reality. For all of you out there buying the sky is falling dooms day scenarios spewed by Faison, etc remember this... ...If the Sioux logo is retired it is gone forever... ...if Minnesota will not schedule us tomorrow, it will not be forever...in fact it could probably be solved very soon with a few phone calls and an education on what UND does for the Native Community...It could be solved with Standing Rock finally getting a vote that will make us compliant with the settlement...It could be solved by our Senators getting involved with the NCAA... I, for one, am willing to fight and see this through. Now is not the time to give up. Let's see how this plays out before throwing in the towel on 80 years of tradition! Giving up now is cowardly. Ask yourself this...what would the real Fighting Sioux do? I would have to believe they would stay and fight to the bitter end... Quote
mikejm Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Leadership is about leading people in a direction they don't want to go. You are kidding, right? Is that really how you define leadership? Quote
star2city Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 You are kidding, right? Is that really how you define leadership? "The only test of leadership is that somebody follows." Seriously, you think LSSU, NMU, and Ferris St are first-rate schools. Quote
CAS4127 Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Given that the Mankatos, Duluths, St. Clouds and Bemidgis are part of the Minnesota University system, has there been any talk by the "system" admins about following the U of M's position on scheduling/the nickname? Quote
lomackman Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 The issue is that Kelley and Faison have lost the credibility to speak or convince people - if that day comes. Evidence indicates that Kelley spent his time allowing or convincing one or more Summit League Presidents to come out with a anti-Sioux resolution, prior to membership. If true, that's deception on the highest order by a UND leader. The media totally bought into the lie, and it still is perpetuated. At least what Faison spoke at the hearing was on public record, and not some backroom dealing as Kelley has quite possibly done. Kelley and Faison have lost the ability to communicate with a huge majority of UND alumni and fans, largely because they have not given the slightest indication that they have a passion for the nickname. That's a failure of leadership. As I am always asked here, can you document this? If not then you have made it up. Quote
star2city Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 As I am always asked here, can you document this? If not then you have made it up. So Kolpack can report the same story in the newspaper, but if I state it here, I have made it up? Ridiculous. Douple stated he lied to the media and public about the nickname keeping UND out of the Summit, and he stated Kelley knew it. That is out there, and you can't sweep it under a rug. Quote
ScottM Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Now is not the time to give up. Let's see how this plays out before throwing in the towel on 80 years of tradition! Giving up now is cowardly. Ask yourself this...what would the real Fighting Sioux do? I would have to believe they would stay and fight to the bitter end... If history is any guide, since the "real Fighting Sioux" ran away from the Ojibwe/Chippewa tribes in northern Minnesota and moved on to the plains, and later allowed themselves to be corralled onto reservations by the US Govt, your "fight to the bitter end" reference is a bit misguided. Quote
bisonh8er Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 I just hope the NCAA will be willing to at least hear UND out. Best case scenario is that the NCAA is pressured enough to agree that unless Standing Rock lets their citizens be heard then one tribes approval will suffice. I just think that there is to much that is tainted for the NCAA to ignore. Bring the facts to them. Show them the money that goes into indian studies. Show them the Spirit Lake letters begging to keep the name. Show them the petition with the signatures on it from Standing Rock that the tribal council refused to acknowledge. Show them how Standing Rocks tribal council refused to even talk to UND. UND needs to show that a few in power have crippled UND's ability to fulfill the agreement that was set. And finally, confront the NCAA with the fact that they are making money off of something they are against. Similar things happened in the NFL this year with James Harrison's photo of his illegal hit he was fined for. The NFL was selling the photo making money and they were confronted and folded. If the NFL can fold the NCAA can fold. Quote
BobIwabuchiFan Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Not going to happen. McLeod has already said that any interlocking schedules would involve all WCHA teams, not just the "top tier" like UND, Denver, etc. So we may see them ever other year or so. Moreover, without a conference affiliation, the B10 schools' current dictates regarding schools on the NC$$'s list for "hostile and abusive" names would probably still preclude playing Minnesota and Wisco. And in my mind, a hockey "rivalry" with Denver or UNO isn't even close to what the rivalry with the Golfers and Badgers means. Oh the humanity of it all..... Quote
iramurphy Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 For all of you out there buying the sky is falling dooms day scenarios spewed by Faison, etc remember this... ...If the Sioux logo is retired it is gone forever... ...if Minnesota will not schedule us tomorrow, it will not be forever...in fact it could probably be solved very soon with a few phone calls and an education on what UND does for the Native Community...It could be solved with Standing Rock finally getting a vote that will make us compliant with the settlement...It could be solved by our Senators getting involved with the NCAA... I, for one, am willing to fight and see this through. Now is not the time to give up. Let's see how this plays out before throwing in the towel on 80 years of tradition! Giving up now is cowardly. Ask yourself this...what would the real Fighting Sioux do? I would have to believe they would stay and fight to the bitter end... The "real fight ing Sioux" are alive and well and they are doing whatever it is they are doing. We aren't really Sioux Indians you know. Who are you going to fight with? Most people here want to fight with Faison and Kelly or the SBoHE or for that matter anyone else on this board who might question what the best strategy and plan is at this time. We criticize the Gophers and Badgers but are going to rely on their goodwill to schedule us in the future?? That isn't any smarter than trusting the State Legislators who hate UND to have done something good for us with this legislation in the first place. Who are you going to meet with to educate them on what UND does for Native Americans? Don't you think the opponents won't do the same and contradict everything you might say? Don't you think the people at the U of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa are not already aware of what UND offers? They were aware years ago when I worked for UND. Who are you going to make those few phone calls to? The Wizard of Oz? I don't think even the Wizard of Oz is going to get Standing Rock to vote or give us support on this but I agree with you that is the best solution. At White Earth, when the people don't like what the council does or doesn't do, they throw them out. They could do the same at Standing Rock. I believe if they voted it would be similar to the vote at Spirit Lake but I don't think the "real fighting Sioux" think it is all that important or they would have gotten this done. The people at the NCAA are the same ones who have been inconsistent with enforcement of their policies for years. They aren't going to change on our behalf unless forced to. We can win in court and I am not convinced that is likely unless Native Americans bring suit based on being discriminated against. I don't know though because I am not an attorney. We can get Standing Rock to support the name. We are wasting time whining about Kelly, Faison or the SBoHE. We need to lobby Standing Rock, the NCAA or successfully litigate. Anyone have any other ideas I would like to hear them. Failing that .then we either change the name or leave it and live with the results and sanctions. There is clearly no agreement on which of those options is best. 1 1 Quote
BobIwabuchiFan Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Thank God the legislature didn't listen to the noisy negativists on this board or we would already be the Fighting Lady Bugs from North Dakota...I'll wait to hear the retort from ScottM, CoachDaddy, IraMurphy, PhillySioux, and Lomackman - I'm sure it will be filled with all of the appropriate fence sitting, hand wringing assessments as usual to justify why they all love the name, but just can't risk it for not getting to play the gofers/badgers or sacrificing a home game for our tennis/BB/Baseball/Football teams or the Native Americans who have been fooled by the white majority to vote in favor of the nickname ... BobIwabuchiFan 1 Quote
ScottM Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Thank God the legislature didn't listen to the noisy negativists on this board or we would already be the Fighting Lady Bugs from North Dakota...I'll wait to hear the retort from ScottM, CoachDaddy, IraMurphy, PhillySioux, and Lomackman - I'm sure it will be filled with all of the appropriate fence sitting, hand wringing assessments as usual to justify why they all love the name, but just can't risk it for not getting to play the gofers/badgers or sacrificing a home game for our tennis/BB/Baseball/Football teams or the Native Americans who have been fooled by the white majority to vote in favor of the nickname ... BobIwabuchiFan So, are in you more in love with UND, or the name/logo? And if you pull your head out, and look deeper into this part of the forum, I never supported the NC$$'s actions, or the settlement. However, being a pragmatist, I don't delude myself into thinking there's a chance in hell the NC$$ will not hesitate to put UND back on its "H&A List" in a New York Minute, unlike certain others around here. 1 Quote
PhillySioux Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 Thank God the legislature didn't listen to the noisy negativists on this board or we would already be the Fighting Lady Bugs from North Dakota...I'll wait to hear the retort from ScottM, CoachDaddy, IraMurphy, PhillySioux, and Lomackman - I'm sure it will be filled with all of the appropriate fence sitting, hand wringing assessments as usual to justify why they all love the name, but just can't risk it for not getting to play the gofers/badgers or sacrificing a home game for our tennis/BB/Baseball/Football teams or the Native Americans who have been fooled by the white majority to vote in favor of the nickname ... BobIwabuchiFan You keep a list of people that don't share your views exactly? I'm glad this isn't a high school. Otherwise, you would be pulled from class and we'd all have to use mesh backpacks for the rest of the year. Quote
GeauxSioux Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 You keep a list of people that don't share your views exactly? I'm glad this isn't a high school. Otherwise, you would be pulled from class and we'd all have to use mesh backpacks for the rest of the year. 1 Quote
The Sicatoka Posted March 25, 2011 Posted March 25, 2011 So, are in you more in love with UND, or the name/logo? And if you pull your head out, and look deeper into this part of the forum, I never supported the NC$$'s actions, or the settlement. However, being a pragmatist, I don't delude myself into thinking there's a chance in hell the NC$$ will not hesitate to put UND back on its "H&A List" in a New York Minute, unlike certain others around here. I guarantee you August 15 is circled on a calendar in Indianapolis, Indiana. Quote
BobIwabuchiFan Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 You keep a list of people that don't share your views exactly? I'm glad this isn't a high school. Otherwise, you would be pulled from class and we'd all have to use mesh backpacks for the rest of the year. Honestly, I didn't need to keep a list because its easy to see who always plays the devil's advocate or accentuates the negatives of this recent positive turn for the Nickname in this forum...maybe you should try to reread you responses to count how many are clearly in favor of our current path and how many are against. If I was a betting man, I think you might be surprised... BobIwabuchiFan Quote
BobIwabuchiFan Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 So, are in you more in love with UND, or the name/logo? And if you pull your head out, and look deeper into this part of the forum, I never supported the NC$$'s actions, or the settlement. However, being a pragmatist, I don't delude myself into thinking there's a chance in hell the NC$$ will not hesitate to put UND back on its "H&A List" in a New York Minute, unlike certain others around here. I have no illusion that the first move by the NCAA will be to move us back onto the H&A list...To the contrary, we need this to happen so we can start negotiations as soon as possible with the NCAA to find a resolution since the environment has changed since the agreement. I am sure you will tell me that the NCAA has all the leverage and all the power which they may do, but I have realized that everything is negotiatable and I am still holding to this opportunity to have calm minds discuss and find a path forward. I do not know of your lawyer skills personally, but I would think it safe to assume that you have advised many clients and probably have influenced many other parties to move forward when they thought there was no option to move the opposing party off a position to only find out, after the lawyers have met, that there was room for compromise and a settlement on a path forward. Maybe it is optimistic, but remember that only one month ago we were all resigned to the supposed fact that the name and its history were goners - low and behold, its still alive and we are in a better position since the beginning of this travesty. So who knows, but I'm not willing to give in... BobIwabuchiFan 1 Quote
PhillySioux Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 Honestly, I didn't need to keep a list because its easy to see who always plays the devil's advocate or accentuates the negatives of this recent positive turn for the Nickname in this forum...maybe you should try to reread you responses to count how many are clearly in favor of our current path and how many are against. If I was a betting man, I think you might be surprised... BobIwabuchiFan All joking aside, no I wouldnt be surprised. I doubt I have posted clearly in favor of the current path. However, I have never said it cant work. But, I'm pretty cynical. I'm cynical about the NCAA and their targeting of UND in light of FSU and Utah. I'm cynical about the policy/lawsuit/settlement process and why 3 extremely popular politicians (Hoeven, Conrad, Dorgan) did nothing. I'm cynical about legislators with an agenda. I'm cynical about dysfunctional tribal leadership. I'm cynical about email campaigns. I'm cynical about someone dumping manure on a SBOHE member's lawn. The whole thing sucks. In my view, for any number of reasons this ship has sailed. As I've posted before, I have no reason to believe the NCAA or Standing Rock will bend. So, I worry about damage done to UND as this process goes along. You should be too. That doesnt make me a doomsdayer or a chicken little. It makes me a realist. You wont believe me, but I do hope you get to say I told you so. 1 Quote
BobIwabuchiFan Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 All joking aside, no I wouldnt be surprised. I doubt I have posted clearly in favor of the current path. However, I have never said it cant work. But, I'm pretty cynical. I'm cynical about the NCAA and their targeting of UND in light of FSU and Utah. I'm cynical about the policy/lawsuit/settlement process and why 3 extremely popular politicians (Hoeven, Conrad, Dorgan) did nothing. I'm cynical about legislators with an agenda. I'm cynical about dysfunctional tribal leadership. I'm cynical about email campaigns. I'm cynical about someone dumping manure on a SBOHE member's lawn. The whole thing sucks. In my view, for any number of reasons this ship has sailed. As I've posted before, I have no reason to believe the NCAA or Standing Rock will bend. So, I worry about damage done to UND as this process goes along. You should be too. That doesnt make me a doomsdayer or a chicken little. It makes me a realist. You wont believe me, but I do hope you get to say I told you so. I believe you because you are still a Sioux fan regardless of the outcome of this ridiculous social experiment...that goes for all of the folks on here with the few exceptions being the trolls.... Quote
SooToo Posted March 26, 2011 Posted March 26, 2011 So Kolpack can report the same story in the newspaper, but if I state it here, I have made it up? Ridiculous. Douple stated he lied to the media and public about the nickname keeping UND out of the Summit, and he stated Kelley knew it. That is out there, and you can't sweep it under a rug. My link That's an amazing interpretation of the available information. I posted a link to the original story for anyone who's still interested. No where in it will you find a direct quote from Douple indicating anything close to what you are claiming. You will get verbiage from Kolpack stating that Kelley asked Douple to "publicly come out against accepting the Fighting Sioux as members until the controversial nickname and log issue was resolved." But you won't find a single quote to directly backing it up. My perception is that Kolpack is asserting that Kelley asked Douple to go public with the league's concerns about the nickname -- as first verbalized by AC athletic director Gene Taylor and Douple many months prior -- so the SBoHE and alumni wouild be aware of it. But who the hell can say for sure? The truth is Kolpack's original story was a mess -- poorly worded, difficult to follow and backed up by VERY few direct quotes from Douple. Yet you continue to present as fact your interpretation of this story based on the writer's murky interpretation of comments from a rejected suitor who's hardly quoted at all. In another post here you claim "evidence indicates that Kelly spent his time allowing or convincing one or more Summit League presidents to come out with a anti-Sioux resolution prior to membership" How is it even possible that Kelly "allowed" Summit presidents to formulate a resolution of any type? I've never heard your claim anywhere and I'd challenge you to provide any proof of your allegation. It's unfortunate we have to continually revisit some of these old issues. It's unfortunate you continue to present as fact your attacks that appear to be largely distortions or out-and-out fabrications. I enjoy your posts on Division 1 developments, etc., but I think these kinds of statements really add nothing useful to the discussion. Quote
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.