New Nickname

[Benny Baker]

This had nothing to do with the "nickname", this agreement was for UND to possibly host a NCAA regional at the Ralph. Before they could do that they had to remove the Fighting Sioux imagery. This agreement was for the Italian marble floors to keep their Fighting Sioux logo's and the Fighting Sioux logo's at the end of each row of seats. Because of the cost to remove the logo's in the marble floor and the logo's at the end of reach row of seats was too much.

Read it again.  In particular, where it says UND is now compliant with NCAA policy and no longer on sanctions.  Also please remember that UND did not (and still does not) have a formal nickname when the NCAA said UND was compliant and removed its sanctions against UND.

 

Problem solved!

[Benny Baker]

Everyone quit saying "strawman argument".  stupid.  come up with something new.

fair enough.

[Benny Baker]

The dead body one seems more appropriate for this.

I see what you did there!

[Teeder11]

The dead body one seems more appropriate for this.

As in a horse? LOL!

[The Sicatoka]

... UND was in compliance at the time the addendum was signed.  

 

Compliance because they were "in transition" is the open question.

 

Again, if the transition stops, do we fall out of compliance? 

[cberkas]

Read it again.  In particular, where it says UND is now compliant with NCAA policy and no longer on sanctions.  Also please remember that UND did not (and still does not) have a formal nickname when the NCAA said UND was compliant and removed its sanctions against UND.

 

Problem solved!

 

The agreement you posted was not about the school changing it's athletic teams name's but for two facilities being in compliance to host NCAA tournament events.

[Siouxperfan7]

Benny /Baker, mksioux.  Put all the legal stuff aside for a second.  Why do you want UND to have no nickname?  You and the other "no nickname" people have yet to answer my question.  What is your reasoning?

[UND1983]

Benny /Baker, mksioux.  Put all the legal stuff aside for a second.  Why do you want UND to have no nickname?  You and the other "no nickname" people have yet to answer my question.  What is your reasoning?

 

 

See my post on previous page.  I laid it out nicely.

[siouxfan512]

Ok.  Let's say that UND can go without a nickname.  Is that really what you want?  And one question that all you "no nickname" people fail to answer is...why do you want UND to not have a nickname?  Is it because you loved the Fighting Sioux nickname so much that you feel no other name is worthy to replace it?  Is it because having no nickname will still allow "Fighting Sioux" to be the unofficial nickname of UND without having to pick a new one? Someone in the "no nickmame" crowd please tell the reason that you don't want the University of North Dakota to have any identity for its athletic teams.  I will hang up and listen!!

 

For me, there isn't something that will be good enough to replace the Fighting Sioux. I'm perfectly content with University of North Dakota, UND, or even NoDaks if we must. Just a personal preference. I'll always cheer for our teams, but it would always leave a bad tast in my mouth to watch our team on the ice with a big roughrider, Jets, Aviators, etc logo on the jersey.

 

Seems stupid to be so attached to a name and a logo, but I'm obviously not alone.

 

I still maintain that if UND chooses to not transition to a new nickname, they could state their nickname would be "UND". The agreement may require a new nickname, but there are no parameters to that nickname other than it cannot be deemed hostil and abusive. If they truly forced us to adopt something, they could be the NoDaks, which would really be no different.

 

As I have also stated for those who believe we must pick a new name, if Kelley and the nickname task force have already stated that no nickname is still on the table, it likely mean that it has already been cleared with the NCAA, or they wouldn't state it. Pure speculation, but I think as long as UND has officially dropped the nickname, the NCAA is happy. They can state publicly that they did everything in their power to eliminate "hostility" from the school and the NCAA; they would also likely state that if fans continue to wear apparel and use the Sioux name there is nothing they can do to change the narrow mindedness of those fans. Again, pure speculation but I think that would be their approach. These people are corrupt and money hungry, but they are not all that stupid.

[Benny Baker]

Benny /Baker, mksioux.  Put all the legal stuff aside for a second.  Why do you want UND to have no nickname?  You and the other "no nickname" people have yet to answer my question.  What is your reason?

Well, I guess before I could ever answer your question, you would need to show me where I said that I don't want UND to have a new nickname.  I have only been saying that, in my opinion, the absence of a new nickname does not violate the settlement agreement.  That is all.

[Benny Baker]

The agreement you posted was not about the school changing it's athletic teams name's but for two facilities being in compliance to host NCAA tournament events.

Did you read it, though?  And I quote: "THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA WILL BE REMOVED FROM ANY LIST OF INSTITUTIONS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE POLICY".  UND did not have a nickname on September 24, 2012, and the NCAA put this matter to rest by removing UND from sanctions anyway.  So, you are correct in the sense that the agreement does not require a name change, but rather the retirement of the "Fighting Sioux" nickname.

[jdub27]

Did you read it, though?  And I quote: "THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA WILL BE REMOVED FROM ANY LIST OF INSTITUTIONS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE POLICY".  UND did not have a nickname on September 24, 2012, and the NCAA put this matter to rest by removing UND from sanctions anyway.  So, you are correct in the sense that the agreement does not require a name change, but rather the retirement of the "Fighting Sioux" nickname.

 

Pretty sure UND had already or was on the way to being removed from the sanctions list.  UND quit using the nickname on 12/31/11, almost a full year before the addendum. The state voted in June of 2012 to officially retire the nickname.  The addendum did not remove them, it clarified some things regarding imagery in the REA and the Betty. 

 

You also quit your quote halfway through a sentence that finished with "if it has not already been removed from such list, provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement."

[Siouxperfan7]

Let me sum up why people don't want UND to choose a nickname.  People have come to realize, finally, that UND will never again be the Fighting Sioux.  Whether voices weren't heard or not, UND is not going to fight that losing battle again.  So for people who are passionate about the name and don't want UND to be known by anything else, by supporting "no nickname" as an option, it allows people to not have to cheer for a new name and still unofficially refer to UND teams as the Fighting Sioux.  With the absense of a name, many will just revert back to the old name.  Now we can have a debate on whether the NCAA required UND to adopt a new name to prevent this from happening.  But you can not deny that the "no nickname" crowds main reason for UND not to adopt a new name is so they can refer to UND as the Fighting Sioux.  They just don't want to admit it.  They can say things like "no nickname is unique" and "just North Dakota would be just fine" but we can see through your reasoning.  Now I am one that wanted UND to remain the Fighting Sioux and supported the Universities fight against the NCAA when the fight was still winneable.  It is clearly not anymore.  It is time to move on and select a new name that we can rally around.  "North Dakota" simply does ot do that.  Now if I am way off and you just want UND to just be known as North Dakota and it is not for the reason I stated, I guess that's fine.  But tell me how often you yell the words "Go UND" or "Go North Dakota" at a UND sporting event.  Once you do it 1 or 2 times, you will realize a new name is needed.

[siouxfan512]

Let me sum up why people don't want UND to choose a nickname.  People have come to realize, finally, that UND will never again be the Fighting Sioux.  Whether voices weren't heard or not, UND is not going to fight that losing battle again.  So for people who are passionate about the name and don't want UND to be known by anything else, by supporting "no nickname" as an option, it allows people to not have to cheer for a new name and still unofficially refer to UND teams as the Fighting Sioux.  With the absense of a name, many will just revert back to the old name.  Now we can have a debate on whether the NCAA required UND to adopt a new name to prevent this from happening.  But you can not deny that the "no nickname" crowds main reason for UND not to adopt a new name is so they can refer to UND as the Fighting Sioux.  They just don't want to admit it.  They can say things like "no nickname is unique" and "just North Dakota would be just fine" but we can see through your reasoning.  Now I am one that wanted UND to remain the Fighting Sioux and supported the Universities fight against the NCAA when the fight was still winneable.  It is clearly not anymore.  It is time to move on and select a new name that we can rally around.  "North Dakota" simply does ot do that.  Now if I am way off and you just want UND to just be known as North Dakota and it is not for the reason I stated, I guess that's fine.  But tell me how often you yell the words "Go UND" or "Go North Dakota" at a UND sporting event.  Once you do it 1 or 2 times, you will realize a new name is needed.

 

This may be true for you, but not everyone. I'll tell you this, people will do what they want regardless of what happens. Even if they do adopt a new name, I'll still call them the Sioux. More out of habit than anything else. Personally, I just don't see anything they can replace it with that will be as cool as what they had. I agree that saying "no nickname is unique" is dumb, but "staying just UND is fine", whats wrong with that. Seriously, I would be perfectly ok with that and would completely rally around the team.

 

I don't think everyone who wan't no nickname, is purely to keep the "Unofficial Fighting Sioux". Sure that is the goal of many, but even so, who cares what their intent is. Adopting a new nickname will change what some people refer to the team as, but not all. Keeping no nickname would do the same.

 

Doesn't really matter at this point anyway. Unfortunately we will just have to see how the process plays out. If no nickname is on the ballot, that will be my vote. Otherwise, I'll pick the best I see. My greater concern is whom all is allowed to vote on this, which I believe has been brought up before.

[Siouxphan27]

Benny /Baker, mksioux. Put all the legal stuff aside for a second. Why do you want UND to have no nickname? You and the other "no nickname" people have yet to answer my question. What is your reasoning?

I must be on your "ignore" list. Lol. I'll try and state my reasonings yet again later tonight.

[Benny Baker]

You also quit your quote halfway through a sentence that finished with "if it has not already been removed from such list, provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement."

And do you know why . . . ?  Because this was already discussed at length this morning.  Consider the controlling language "remains in compliance".  "Remains" and "in compliance" unequivocally means that the University of North Dakota [no nickname] was compliant with NCAA policy in September 2012.

 

Perhaps you, but certainly some others, should considering dropping the "NCAA won't sanction UND because they're in a 'transition phase'" myth.  First, UND was legally prohibited from transitioning to a new nickname from August 2012 until 2015.  There absolutely was not a transition phase in place when the NCAA dropped its sanctions against the nicknameless University of North Dakota in 2012 when it further said that UND was complying with NCAA policy.  There was, and still is, no guarantee that UND will ever adopt a new nickname. Second, the settlement agreement required a transition, if any, to be completed by August 15, 2011.  It did not discuss any transition that could occur after that date.  It does not contemplate an indefinite grace period during which the NCAA would refrain from placing UND back on sanctions.

 

Instead, even though the transition did not occur by the August 15, 2011 deadline,  the September 2012 addendum still recognized that the University of North Dakota [no nickname] was, indeed, "in compliance" with the NCAA's policies.  There is no truth to this transition/grace period rumor.  None.  Some people need to stop misinforming others of this message board myth that no new nickname = NCAA sanctions.

 

Put it to rest.

[mksioux]

As in "continue to be as specified", sure. 

 

"Remains" in the status of " ... in transition to a new ... ".

 

The minute there's no "transition" (and no "new"), is UND in violation of the original settlement and the addendum? 

Sic, you're grasping at straws. There's nothing about "transition" in the addendum, or a requirement that UND continue with a transition or about completing a transition to a new nickname.  It doesn't reference a requirement for a new nickname, or make reinstatement dependent upon a new nickname or a transition to a new nickname.  All of this at a time when, according to you, UND was in violation of the agreement for failing to "complete" transition to a new nickname by the deadline.  

 

If the NCAA was cutting UND a break and reinstated UND despite the fact that UND was in violation of the original settlement agreement, there would definitely be something about that in the addendum.  There would have been a reference to the fact that UND had not completed transition, as was required in the original settlement agreement, but the the NCAA was reinstating UND anyway, subject to a continuing transition to a new nickname.  There probably would have been a new deadline set forth for completing the transition as well.  Yet, none of this is in the addendum.  The addendum references only the retirement of the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo as the basis for removing UND from the list.  The addendum stated UND was in compliance with the agreement as of that date and removed UND from the list.  You and JDub are searching way too hard for meaning in the addendum that isn't there.

[engelbunny]

Having no nickname is not necessarily just some sort of sneaky way to retain the name through the back door.  There is much more to it.

It is hard to explain the attachment to the Fighting Sioux name with out sounding over-dramatic; but to many “diehards”, the name “Fighting Sioux" was not just a marketing tag.  It was a recognition of, and tribute to, the original inhabitants of the Dakota territory.  The name stood for honor, courage, pride, and heritage.  The name was territorial, it was unique.  There was a deep tradition involved.  Having all of that just ripped away was painful, and still is.  

People fought hard to keep it, not because it was cool, but because to be told it was “hostile” or “abusive” was an offensive premise.  It is hard to just get over it and move on.   In addition, this debate is not something in the abstract; there are real people involved.  They are actual “Sioux”.  Many of them, possibly the majority, feel an affection for the name and believe they were belittled and disenfranchised by the entire process.  They feel that they gave the name to the University in a sacred trust and there is an obligation attached to that; creating an everlasting bond between the University and the Sioux people.  (Other tribal members feel differently, there is no denying that.)  

The name “Fighting Sioux” will not be coming back to the University of North Dakota, that is a given.  However, the adoption of a new name and logo might be the final insult to the very people that the University had purported to honor in the first place - saying it really was “just a name”, "a cool logo", a "money maker", and nothing more.  Not having a new name is way to signify respect for the "Fighting Sioux", and a solemn recognition of what was taken.

If the University does decide to choose a new name and logo, then so be it.  However, if there was a true intention to honor the Sioux (as many people with a strong affinity for the name still believe), then as part of the process, why not hold an event with Spirit Lake tribal leaders wherein as a gesture of humility, respect, and honor, the new name is adopted with their blessing; and the “Fighting Sioux” name and logo is ceremoniously retired - with the trademarks and logos given over to them with gracious thanks for having allowed the University to use the name in the past.  

Maybe the name could then finally be retired with some actual dignity rather than the University having to trot it out every so often on some meaningless “throwback” item in an attempt to preserve a trademark and copyright it has disassociated itself with.

[jdub27]

And do you know why . . . ?  Because this was already discussed at length this morning.  Consider the controlling language "remains in compliance".  "Remains" and "in compliance" unequivocally means that the University of North Dakota [no nickname] was compliant with NCAA policy in September 2012.

 

Perhaps you, but certainly some others, should considering dropping the "NCAA won't sanction UND because they're in a 'transition phase'" myth.  First, UND was legally prohibited from transitioning to a new nickname from August 2012 until 2015.  There absolutely was not a transition phase in place when the NCAA dropped its sanctions against the nicknameless University of North Dakota in 2012 when it further said that UND was complying with NCAA policy.  There was, and still is, no guarantee that UND will ever adopt a new nickname. Second, the settlement agreement required a transition, if any, to be completed by August 15, 2011.  It did not discuss any transition that could occur after that date.  It does not contemplate an indefinite grace period during which the NCAA would refrain from placing UND back on sanctions.

 

Instead, even though the transition did not occur by the August 15, 2011 deadline,  the September 2012 addendum still recognized that the University of North Dakota [no nickname] was, indeed, "in compliance" with the NCAA's policies.  There is no truth to this transition/grace period rumor.  None.  Some people need to stop misinforming others of this message board myth that no new nickname = NCAA sanctions.

 

Put it to rest.

 

You have a pretty broad and liberal interpretation of how an addendum that was done specifically to clarify the imagery allowable at the REA and BESC modifies other terms of the original settlement agreement even though they aren't mentioned or specifically laid out.  Like I said, I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.

 

If the NCAA truly just wanted to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname and didn't care after that, why wouldn't they have used to that language instead of specifically saying UND needed to transition to a new nickname?

[mksioux]

Pretty sure UND had already or was on the way to being removed from the sanctions list.  UND quit using the nickname on 12/31/11, almost a full year before the addendum. The state voted in June of 2012 to officially retire the nickname.  The addendum did not remove them, it clarified some things regarding imagery in the REA and the Betty. 

 

You also quit your quote halfway through a sentence that finished with "if it has not already been removed from such list, provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement."

Para. 3 of the addendum states that UND "will be removed" from the list upon signing the agreement.

 

But, really, it doesn't matter whether the addendum officially removed UND from the list, or whether it was just an acknowledgement that UND removed itself from the list when it retired the nickname.  The point is that in September 2012, when the addendum was signed, UND did not have a new nickname and had not "completed" a transition to a "new nickname" but was reinstated anyway. 

[Siouxperfan7]

Para. 3 of the addendum states that UND "will be removed" from the list upon signing the agreement.

 

But, really, it doesn't matter whether the addendum officially removed UND from the list, or whether it was just an acknowledgement that UND removed itself from the list when it retired the nickname.  The point is that in September 2012, when the addendum was signed, UND did not have a new nickname and had not "completed" a transition to a "new nickname" but was reinstated anyway. 

 

"provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement."

 

Funny how you and others keep forgetting that part.  The terms of the settlement stated that UND had to adopt a new nickname.  Any the addendum that was signed states that UND must ramin in compliance with that.  It really is that simple.  Not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

[The Sicatoka]

There's nothing about "transition" in the addendum, ... 

 

Correct. It says UND must remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement and the Addendum to stay off the naughty list. (Key: settlement agreement, and that's where those words are coming from)

 

What I'm saying is the Settlement Agreement says " ... in transition to a new ... " and that is the current state since that Addendum. Sure, the timelines are screwed up by in-state Legislative actions. But does the NCAA want to fight that, or hammer on UND even more for things out of their control*, or did they give UND time and space to ride that out, complete this "transition" phase (as drawn out as it may be), and move to "new". 

 

 

*UND did as much as it could under ND law up to Jan 1, 2015. Notice all the Kleinsasser and Goehring committees got commenced and broadcast starting about that time to give a clear signal regarding "transition" is still underway since the law expired. 

[mksioux]

"provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement."

 

Funny how you and others keep forgetting that part.  The terms of the settlement stated that UND had to adopt a new nickname.  Any the addendum that was signed states that UND must ramin in compliance with that.  It really is that simple.  Not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

I'm not forgetting it.  I'm not shying away from it.  

 

I'm not going to explain this again because we're way past the point of beating a dead horse.  On the other hand, this myth needs to stop. 

 

So I'll ask you a question instead.  Was UND in compliance with the Settlement Agreement on September 24, 2012 when the NCAA signed the addendum?  

[mksioux]

Correct. It says UND must remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement and the Addendum to stay off the naughty list. (Key: settlement agreement, and that's where those words are coming from)

 

What I'm saying is the Settlement Agreement says " ... in transition to a new ... " and that is the current state since that Addendum. Sure, the timelines are screwed up by in-state Legislative actions. But does the NCAA want to fight that, or hammer on UND even more for things out of their control*, or did they give UND time and space to ride that out, complete this "transition" phase (as drawn out as it may be), and move to "new". 

 

 

*UND did as much as it could under ND law up to Jan 1, 2015. Notice all the Kleinsasser and Goehring committees got commenced and broadcast starting about that time to give a clear signal regarding "transition" is still underway. 

Was UND in compliance with the Settlement Agreement on September 24, 2012?

[82SiouxGuy]

Having no nickname is not necessarily just some sort of sneaky way to retain the name through the back door.  There is much more to it.

It is hard to explain the attachment to the Fighting Sioux name with out sounding over-dramatic; but to many “diehards”, the name “Fighting Sioux" was not just a marketing tag.  It was a recognition of, and tribute to, the original inhabitants of the Dakota territory.  The name stood for honor, courage, pride, and heritage.  The name was territorial, it was unique.  There was a deep tradition involved.  Having all of that just ripped away was painful, and still is.  

People fought hard to keep it, not because it was cool, but because to be told it was “hostile” or “abusive” was an offensive premise.  It is hard to just get over it and move on.   In addition, this debate is not something in the abstract; there are real people involved.  They are actual “Sioux”.  Many of them, possibly the majority, feel an affection for the name and believe they were belittled and disenfranchised by the entire process.  They feel that they gave the name to the University in a sacred trust and there is an obligation attached to that; creating an everlasting bond between the University and the Sioux people.  (Other tribal members feel differently, there is no denying that.)  

The name “Fighting Sioux” will not be coming back to the University of North Dakota, that is a given.  However, the adoption of a new name and logo might be the final insult to the very people that the University had purported to honor in the first place - saying it really was “just a name”, "a cool logo", a "money maker", and nothing more.  Not having a new name is way to signify respect for the "Fighting Sioux", and a solemn recognition of what was taken.

If the University does decide to choose a new name and logo, then so be it.  However, if there was a true intention to honor the Sioux (as many people with a strong affinity for the name still believe), then as part of the process, why not hold an event with Spirit Lake tribal leaders wherein as a gesture of humility, respect, and honor, the new name is adopted with their blessing; and the “Fighting Sioux” name and logo is ceremoniously retired - with the trademarks and logos given over to them with gracious thanks for having allowed the University to use the name in the past.  

Maybe the name could then finally be retired with some actual dignity rather than the University having to trot it out every so often on some meaningless “throwback” item in an attempt to preserve a trademark and copyright it has disassociated itself with.

A few problems with your reasoning.  A lot of the people that claim to be "honoring" the Sioux tribe by using the name actually know very little about the actual tribes and the history of the people.  It is very difficult to honor someone when you don't know anything about the people that you are honoring.  And I would be willing to bet that most people that claim they are trying to "honor the tribe" would fail a test on the history and customs of the actual Dakota, Lakota and Nakota tribes.  In addition, some of that same group that claim to be "honoring" the Sioux people will start throwing insults at any actual Sioux people that disagree with them.  You don't have to agree with them, but you can't honor a people and insult them at the same time.

 

Turning the logo and name over to the tribe wouldn't retire them.  It would give free reign for the tribe, and anyone else they would allow, to produce merchandise and keep the name alive.  In fact, it would be a great money making proposition for the tribe.  In other words, instead of the name going away it would continue to live on as a competition for any new nickname and logo, thereby making it very difficult for the new name and logo to be used successfully.  That is just another backdoor way to continue using the Fighting Sioux name and logo.  That is why UND has to keep control of the nickname and logo, to limit the potential for others keeping them active as competition for the new.