Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

  

319 members have voted

  1. 1. What name should replace "Fighting Sioux" after it's retired?

    • Aviators or Pilots
      12
    • Cavalry
      18
    • Nodaks
      11
    • Nokotas
      21
    • Norse, Nordics, Fighting Norsemen
      46
    • Outlaws
      13
    • Plainsmen
      4
    • Rangers
      6
    • Rough Riders
      79
    • Other
      109


Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm one of the crazy few who wouldn't mind Flickertails. I don't necessarily like the name Flickertails, but since it was a former moniker of ours, it would kind of make the nickname thing come full circle. I hate the idea that we'd essentially be another name for Gopher, though.

Posted

I'm one of the crazy few who wouldn't mind Flickertails. I don't necessarily like the name Flickertails, but since it was a former moniker of ours, it would kind of make the nickname thing come full circle. I hate the idea that we'd essentially be another name for Gopher, though.

That is my reason for not liking Flickertails....I would rather be a Roughrider (remember I am a GFC alumn) than a Flickertail.

Posted

(WARNING: Self-serving post follows.)

I like my new signature, follow the link to learn what the word means. ;)

That word would work with the UND "flame" logo, but I'd also like to see a new burning stick logo (as a torch or a weapon) designed just for athletics.

And I like the notion of being "somebody with a strong or aggressive personality who encourages unrest".

And we'd forever get to say ... Fire. Brand. :devil:

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

I'd like a new nickname that intimidates the opponent and strikes fear into their hearts. Ladies and gentlemen I submit to you to University of North Dakota Congressmen.

How about the "Statesmen"? Still NOWHERE as cool as the Fighting Sioux.

Posted

I'd like a new nickname that intimidates the opponent and strikes fear into their hearts. Ladies and gentlemen I submit to you to University of North Dakota ...

IRS Auditors ... Motto: "We're here to help!"

That's scarier than Congressmen. ;)

Posted

(WARNING: Self-serving post follows.)

I like my new signature, follow the link to learn what the word means. ;)

That word would work with the UND "flame" logo, but I'd also like to see a new burning stick logo (as a torch or a weapon) designed just for athletics.

And I like the notion of being "somebody with a strong or aggressive personality who encourages unrest".

And we'd forever get to say ... Fire. Brand. :devil:

Torch 'em.

Posted

Torch 'em.

(WARNING: Self-serving post follows.)

I like my new signature, follow the link to learn what the word means. ;)

That word would work with the UND "flame" logo, but I'd also like to see a new burning stick logo (as a torch or a weapon) designed just for athletics.

And I like the notion of being "somebody with a strong or aggressive personality who encourages unrest".

And we'd forever get to say ... Fire. Brand. :devil:

The definition is cool and definitely unique but it just doesn't roll of the tip of your tongue. How about the Blaze or Blazers?

Posted

The definition is cool and definitely unique but it just doesn't roll of the tip of your tongue. How about the Blaze or Blazers?

Blaze or Blazers would be too easily negatively-connotated by some parties.

The official name could be Firebrand, but in practicality we'd be known as "The Torch".

Posted

I propose only current and actual graduates of UND get to vote on the new name.

I think you would miss some big "stakeholders", that are major contributors. For instance, did Wes Rydell graduate from UND? For all I know he did, but I'm sure there are others who are big time contributors to UND athletics that would be left out.

Posted

I think you would miss some big "stakeholders", that are major contributors. For instance, did Wes Rydell graduate from UND? For all I know he did, but I'm sure there are others who are big time contributors to UND athletics that would be left out.

dont forget the "small time" contributors(season ticket holders)!!!!
  • Upvote 1
Posted

I think you would miss some big "stakeholders", that are major contributors. For instance, did Wes Rydell graduate from UND? For all I know he did, but I'm sure there are others who are big time contributors to UND athletics that would be left out.

Because you give money your voice counts more?
Posted

I propose only current and actual graduates of UND get to vote on the new name.

I propose anyone who was against the "Fighting Sioux" nickname has no say because they already got what they wanted.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Because you give money your voice counts more?

I'm not saying it should count more, I'm just including them. You were excluding them.

I agree with Iluvdebbies, "small contributors" need to have a voice, as well.

Posted

I propose only current and actual graduates of UND get to vote on the new name.

With that statement you miss:

- current students who have not graduated

- stakeholders who may or may not have attended or graduated

- faculty (oh, wait, see the "Uncle Rico Rule" above :D )

- staff

I know folks who should vote, for example PCM, who's done a lot for UND Hockey with his USCHO writing, who wouldn't be able to vote under a "graduates only" mindset. That mindset = FAIL.

Posted

With that statement you miss:

- current students who have not graduated

- stakeholders who may or may not have attended or graduated

- faculty (oh, wait, see the "Uncle Rico Rule" above :D )

- staff

I know folks who should vote, for example PCM, who's done a lot for UND Hockey with his USCHO writing, who wouldn't be able to vote under a "graduates only" mindset. That mindset = FAIL.

The fact that he writes for Uscho/cesspool should warrant automatic exclusion. :D

Posted

With that statement you miss:

- current students who have not graduated

- stakeholders who may or may not have attended or graduated

- faculty (oh, wait, see the "Uncle Rico Rule" above :D )

- staff

I know folks who should vote, for example PCM, who's done a lot for UND Hockey with his USCHO writing, who wouldn't be able to vote under a "graduates only" mindset. That mindset = FAIL.

Reading problems? I said current students followed by graduates. My point is that it can not be put up as a public vote. Limits need to be outlined as to who will vote or all you will have is a big mess. From all of posters responces the difficulty of picking and chosing who votes becomes as I said too messy. Stakeholders is too broad of a term. Faculty is too broad is too broad of a term. Small stakeholders, such as season ticketholders, somewhat limited in scope though still too broad. To make it simple the only way is to only allow current students and actual graduates to choose. As for Uncle Rico's comment saying anti-logo people shoul not get a voice, and all those who agree with him, how much more sophmoric can you be? Some here scream how SR voices are not being heard and should get to vote while they wish to deny others their right to vote, hypocricy?
Posted

Reading problems? I said current students followed by graduates. My point is that it can not be put up as a public vote. Limits need to be outlined as to who will vote or all you will have is a big mess. From all of posters responces the difficulty of picking and chosing who votes becomes as I said too messy. Stakeholders is too broad of a term. Faculty is too broad is too broad of a term. Small stakeholders, such as season ticketholders, somewhat limited in scope though still too broad. To make it simple the only way is to only allow current students and actual graduates to choose. As for Uncle Rico's comment saying anti-logo people shoul not get a voice, and all those who agree with him, how much more sophmoric can you be? Some here scream how SR voices are not being heard and should get to vote while they wish to deny others their right to vote, hypocricy?

Someone here says that only current students or graduates of UND should vote, while denying the vote to season ticket holders, donators and casual fans. That also seems a bit hypocritical.

Posted

Someone here says that only current students or graduates of UND should vote, while denying the vote to season ticket holders, donators and casual fans. That also seems a bit hypocritical.

I am not proposing this to be malicious as Rico is, there is the difference. I am proposing trying to keep it orderly. As lakesioux said they pay taxes so they should get to vote also, there are people younger than 18 who pay property taxes that do not get to vote. I pay property taxes in two counties but only get to vote in one. Have it on a statewide ballot? Bad idea if there ever was one. Just think about it Jay. The only way to keep the process orderly is to only give ballots to current students and graduates. It is not like this is some big democratic issue for everyone to vote on.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...