New Nickname

[Oxbow6]

Looks like a Spartan being stabbed.

 

 

But it will still sell more t-shirts than just "ND".........................

[Cratter]

So if the no nickname crowd was forced to pick a nickname would Nodaks be the winner?

[southpaw]

Army's new logo. It looks like the helmet is being stabbed with the sword, in my opinion. And now I can't un-see it.

It's a logo that has been part of Army for, I believe, a couple centuries. It's embedded in a monument there

[breakin face]

So if the no nickname crowd was forced to pick a nickname would Nodaks be the winner?

 

No, Nodaks is brutal.  Nodaks represents everything that is wrong with this process, it is a nickname nobody else has that you can't market without creating a cartoon character (see NAU rebrand).  The same can be said for the vast majority of this list (Big Green, Force, Pride, Sundogs).  Roughriders is a name you can build a brand around, Calvary is a brand you can build a name around.  These are real things, not buzz words vetted out because they are unique.

[breakin face]

Unless we think we can vastly improve our current brand on both fronts (No Nickname/Interlocking logo), we should stay as is.  The current list does not have more than three names where this is even plausible.  It's concerning that over 1000 submitted no nickname and only 2 of 11 on this committee voted for that as an option.  If they whittle this down to a handful of names it appears 'No Nickname' will not be an option and we'll be left with options that will move our brand laterally at best and backwards at worst.

[dagies]

As luck would have it, the Wild Nokotas are off the list.  What list, you may ask?  My list.  As is also the fate of every other gawdawful nickname that has been spewed out the past 10 years.  Then, I see the latest top 62 or whatever and I have to wonder when the nightmare will end.  Using my advanced knowledge of Microsoft products, specifically Excel, I was able to determine that Nodaks has the most committee "yes" votes.  I know, some of you were able to scan the list visually and arrive at the same outcome, but I tend to leverage science and technology for such mundane tasks while I work more complex issues such as what was it in the end that tipped the scale in Hakstol's favor when I clearly have the edge in appeal to the female hockey mom market.  Clearly.

 

Back to Nodaks.  I really, really like it not so much.  It is an extremely average, obscure name.  What is a Nodak?  I did a quick search, again using science and technology at my disposal, and didn't really find anything useful.  To me, this is just about as vacant as no-nickname.  Is that the point?  And, how do we cheer for a NoDak?  "Go No's!"  "Go Dak's!"  "No. Dak!"  "No. Dak!"  

 

Next up is "Force"  'Sokay.  F = m x a.  Hockey has mass and acceleration.  Applicable.  I actually would prefer "Machine" better.  That's Minnesota Made's AAA program in Edina and I've always thought that name was cool for hockey.  But, honestly, all names are awful when compared to the Fighting Sioux.

 

NorthStars reminds me of Minnesota where I am forced to live due to the wickedness of my youth.

 

 

Pride?  Lame

Spirit?  Lame

Big Green?  Big Lame

Flames?  Way cool awesomeness, if you live in Calgary.

Roughriders?  High School.

Sundog?  Please, oh please, not this one.

 

and so it goes...  I just...  can't...  oh heck.  Just be North Dakota.

 

taz

man, I love reading your posts

[Teeder11]

No, Nodaks is brutal.  Nodaks represents everything that is wrong with this process, it is a nickname nobody else has that you can't market without creating a cartoon character (see NAU rebrand).  The same can be said for the vast majority of this list (Big Green, Force, Pride, Sundogs).  Roughriders is a name you can build a brand around, Calvary is a brand you can build a name around.  These are real things, not buzz words vetted out because they are unique.

 

I've never understood some folks' obsession with Jesus' crucifixion site as a potential nickname.  

[breakin face]

I've never understood some folks' obsession with Jesus' crucifixion site as a potential nickname.  

 

Haha, good catch!  Cavalry is a name you can build a brand around.

[Teeder11]

Haha, good catch!  Cavalry is a name you can build a brand around.

 

 

I'm glad you took it in the right spirit!   

[jdub27]

Unless we think we can vastly improve our current brand on both fronts (No Nickname/Interlocking logo), we should stay as is.  The current list does not have more than three names where this is even plausible.  It's concerning that over 1000 submitted no nickname and only 2 of 11 on this committee voted for that as an option.  If they whittle this down to a handful of names it appears 'No Nickname' will not be an option and we'll be left with options that will move our brand laterally at best and backwards at worst.

 

I get your point, but did you honestly think there were going to be dozens, let alone hundreds, of nicknames even a small majority of people would find tolerable?  Look at the list of current college nicknames, most of them would be considered "terrible" by most measures but they have huge support from alumni in fans because people have had plenty of time to get used to them. 

[Oxbow6]

I get your point, but did you honestly think there were going to be dozens, let alone hundreds, of nicknames even a small majority of people would find tolerable? 

 

 

But we are talking about our process...the process to get UND a new nickname and more importantly get it right.  Pretty sure no one cares about a "list of current college nicknames" when in the end that won't have any bearing on how those associated with UND feel about what is ultimately decided...for UND.  There are 64 names left..........give me 4 you consider tolerable that would be an improvement on just being "North Dakota" with the branding of the "ND".

[Old Time Hockey]

I get your point, but did you honestly think there were going to be dozens, let alone hundreds, of nicknames even a small majority of people would find tolerable? Look at the list of current college nicknames, most of them would be considered "terrible" by most measures but they have huge support from alumni in fans because people have had plenty of time to get used to them.

People get used to having herpes too! But in the end it still sucks and life was way better than having herpes in the first place!

[The Sicatoka]

I've never understood some folks' obsession with Jesus' crucifixion site as a potential nickname.  

 

Go Philistines! 

[Oxbow6]

People get used to having herpes too! But in the end it still sucks and life was way better than having herpes in the first place!

 

 

Two things in life one can never get rid of...........luggage and herpes. 

[The Sicatoka]

People get used to having herpes too! But in the end it still sucks and life was way better than having herpes in the first place!

 

How do ... nope, not going to ask. 

[breakin face]

I get your point, but did you honestly think there were going to be dozens, let alone hundreds, of nicknames even a small majority of people would find tolerable?  Look at the list of current college nicknames, most of them would be considered "terrible" by most measures but they have huge support from alumni in fans because people have had plenty of time to get used to them. 

 

Rallying/Unifying the fan base and finding something tolerable are two entirely different things.  If this process produces four garbage results the alumni base is going to feel left out of the process.  More harm can be done by forcing a square into a circle than leaving the status quo as is for now.  

 

Ultimately in the no-nickname era we have gone to an NCAA Women's Basketball Tournament, appeared in a few frozen fours, saw our football program begin to turn around.  Academically enrollment continues to climb, and three of the major colleges on campus are either relocating into new facilities or are being updated.  

 

It's not like the sky has fallen going by North Dakota.  Why risk alienating your alumni base for the sake of adding a tolerable name?

[BIGSIOUX]

Rallying/Unifying the fan base and finding something tolerable are two entirely different things.  If this process produces four garbage results the alumni base is going to feel left out of the process.  More harm can be done by forcing a square into a circle than leaving the status quo as is for now.  

 

Ultimately in the no-nickname era we have gone to an NCAA Women's Basketball Tournament, appeared in a few frozen fours, saw our football program begin to turn around.  Academically enrollment continues to climb, and three of the major colleges on campus are either relocating into new facilities or are being updated.  

 

It's not like the sky has fallen going by North Dakota.  Why risk alienating your alumni base for the sake of adding a tolerable name?

Do you honestly think supporting alumni will be alienated and stop support because of a "tolerable name"?  I think all of this verbal diarrhea is a waste of time.  A new nickname is coming, and it wont be just 'North Dakota'. 

[breakin face]

Do you honestly think supporting alumni will be alienated and stop support because of a "tolerable name"?  I think all of this verbal diarrhea is a waste of time.  A new nickname is coming, and it wont be just 'North Dakota'. 

 

There are a lot of eyeballs on this story from a lot of angles.  Your question speaks to my point, if the alumni aren't going to stop contributing and the university will stay on the growth trend it already is on despite not having a nickname why add a nickname for the sake of adding a nickname?  

 

The university had revenues of 500 million or so last year, to put the amount of effort into changing the name for $300,000 of incremental revenue (less than 1% of total revenues) and run the risk of rubbing even one big donor the wrong way makes no sense.  

 

From a public relations standpoint, Kelley could schedule a press conference and have a huge win and potentially energize more donors by saying.  We heard you loud and clear, over thousands of our constituents want us to remain North Dakota, we are the flagship university in this state, "We are North Dakota".  

[Oxbow6]

There are a lot of eyeballs on this story from a lot of angles.  Your question speaks to my point, if the alumni aren't going to stop contributing and the university will stay on the growth trend it already is on despite not having a nickname why add a nickname for the sake of adding a nickname?  

 

The university had revenues of 500 million or so last year, to put the amount of effort into changing the name for $300,000 of incremental revenue (less than 1% of total revenues) and run the risk of rubbing even one big donor the wrong way makes no sense.  

 

From a public relations standpoint, Kelley could schedule a press conference and have a huge win and potentially energize more donors by saying.  We heard you loud and clear, over thousands of our constituents want us to remain North Dakota, we are the flagship university in this state, "We are North Dakota".  

 

 

Well said but to your last point......that would require a pair. 

 

"Ain't never gonna happen" says the English professor at NDSU..........

[scpa0305]

Pride is starting to grow on me.  However I still think I'm in the no new nickname grouping.

[ericpnelson]

Nokota or some variation has grown on me. Go Nokes.

 

I was looking for a father's day gift, and I went on the pride of dakota site. I found this cool photography website, https://squareup.com/market/patgerlach. The bottom part of that page has wild horses, and they are pretty darn cool looking. Go Nokes!

[ringneck28]

Anyone else see Dave St Peter's tweet about 15 minutes ago.  Said, Go Twins, Go Green??  Is this a leading consideration or is he talking non UND name?

[jdub27]

From a public relations standpoint, Kelley could schedule a press conference and have a huge win and potentially energize more donors by saying.  We heard you loud and clear, over thousands of our constituents want us to remain North Dakota, we are the flagship university in this state, "We are North Dakota".  

 

And how exactly does having a nickname change any of the bolded?  Somehow preventing the Athletic Department from having another arrow in their quiver for marketing and brand identification/awareness is a good idea?  And to your comment about thousands

 

There is zero chance that picking no nickname will energize more donors.  If people weren't donating when UND had the Fighting Sioux logo/nickname, having no nickname isn't going to magically inspire them to start donating money. 

 

And from a public relations standpoint, it would be a disaster.  A press conference that is a big middle finger to the NCAA?  I'm sure they won't mind, at least until they need a distraction from some sort of scandal at a P5 school.

[The Sicatoka]

And from a public relations standpoint, it would be a disaster.  A press conference that is a big middle finger to the NCAA?  I'm sure they won't mind, at least until they need a distraction from some sort of scandal at a P5 school.

 

The NCAA? They have a great sense of humor. 

 

Now read my signature and understand how the NCAA works. 

[breakin face]

Found a glimpse into the future of the great branding opportunities we'll be looking at in 2035 by changing our name now:

 

http://www.gomarquette.com/

 

http://gostanford.com/

 

Marquette even went as far as to type the new nickname in the upper right hand corner of their website, that's brand recognition!  Also those super important domain names, it looks like Marquette and Stanford found it made more sense to market the names of their universities since they are inherently unique, not their generic force fed nicknames.