Petitions

[The Sicatoka]

Of course you're going to dispute the credibility of that blog. It reported facts that refute the chicken little theory that you so desperately cling to for dear life.

I won't dispute one fact I got from that blog, namely, ...

If all (except the target) Big Sky presidents vote to oust a member, that member is ousted. Period. Next. Question.

Whom are the Big Sky presidents more beholden to: the NCAA or UND?

[ScottM]

You don't want to try that tactic with me. There was a fight. You were MIA.

Go back into the threads on this forum topic from 2002 on ... most of Sioux moniker fans we see now were missing then.

[The Sicatoka]

First of all, I have extreme doubts that every single Big Sky member school would vote unanimously to remove us from the conference over something as frivilous as what our nickname is.

Frivilous to whom? Apparently not the NCAA and they have severe influence over their members' behaviors.

But, just for the sake of discussion, if they actually felt that way it would tell me that they are not the kind of schools I want to associate with. If they're so high and mighty as to go along with the hateful concept that NA nicknames are bad, then to hell with them. I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage.

Look across the member schools of the NCAA.

They're all run by academic liberals beholden to the NCAA. All. Every. Last. One.

The only university I can think of that isn't is Hillsdale College.

With your statement "I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage" you are saying you do not want to associate with the NCAA; thus, you are saying UND should shut down athletics because there is no other option. None. (Don't say "NAIA". They don't play hockey.)

[darell1976]

First of all, I have extreme doubts that every single Big Sky member school would vote unanimously to remove us from the conference over something as frivilous as what our nickname is. But, just for the sake of discussion, if they actually felt that way it would tell me that they are not the kind of schools I want to associate with. If they're so high and mighty as to go along with the hateful concept that NA nicknames are bad, then to hell with them. I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage.

Seeing we are on the extreme outskirts of the BSC footprint.. we are not popular among western school's fans (Sac St, PSU, EW) when it comes to travel. I am sure this nickname thing would give them reason to expell UND.

[Fetch]

there is always that wonderful summit league you were so worried about before - it's not worth giving up the name for a bunch of bush leagues that are as petty as some of you fear

[petey23]

First of all, I have extreme doubts that every single Big Sky member school would vote unanimously to remove us from the conference over something as frivilous as what our nickname is. But, just for the sake of discussion, if they actually felt that way it would tell me that they are not the kind of schools I want to associate with. If they're so high and mighty as to go along with the hateful concept that NA nicknames are bad, then to hell with them. I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage.

Ummm....supporting PC garbage is a job requirement for being a College president....it's written right into the job description.....except at Hillsdale College.

[petey23]

Frivilous to whom? Apparently not the NCAA and they have severe influence over their members' behaviors.

Look across the member schools of the NCAA.

They're all run by academic liberals beholden to the NCAA. All. Every. Last. One.

The only university I can think of that isn't is Hillsdale College.

With your statement "I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage" you are saying you do not want to associate with the NCAA; thus, you are saying UND should shut down athletics because there is no other option. None. (Don't say "NAIA". They don't play hockey.)

Great minds...I responded before reading all the way through.....Imprimis subscriber?

[The Sicatoka]

there is always that wonderful summit league you were so worried about before - it's not worth giving up the name for a bunch of bush leagues that are as petty as some of you fear

If the Big Sky were to do the unspeakable, UND would become a pariah and no conference would touch them.

[The Sicatoka]

It's time for a revolution against the NCAA.

Yes it is, but it won't come from the inside. The best, only shot to take down the monster is Spirit Lake's.

And if you'd shut down UND Athletics over two words and a picture, are you really a fan of UND Athletics. Sorry DaveK, I have even Tim Hennessy on my side on this one. (If you heard Tim's Dec 31 post-game v. Harvard you'd know I'm right.)

[darell1976]

Yes it is, but it won't come from the inside. The best, only shot to take down the monster is Spirit Lake's.

And if you'd shut down UND Athletics over two words and a picture, are you really a fan of UND Athletics. Sorry DaveK, I have even Tim Hennessy on my side on this one. (If you heard Tim's Dec 31 post-game v. Harvard you'd know I'm right.)

Same with Jim Kleinsasser. Most everyone not associated with hockey look at UND as a whole not just a hockey team. This is the NCAA not the NHL. UND is football, basketball, volleyball etc. We are not UND the hockey only school.

[82SiouxGuy]

First of all, I have extreme doubts that every single Big Sky member school would vote unanimously to remove us from the conference over something as frivilous as what our nickname is. But, just for the sake of discussion, if they actually felt that way it would tell me that they are not the kind of schools I want to associate with. If they're so high and mighty as to go along with the hateful concept that NA nicknames are bad, then to hell with them. I want nothing to do with anybody who supports this PC garbage.

If you want nothing to do with them there is a simple solution. Don't have anything to do with the University of North Dakota or college athletics. You are free to do that all by yourself. But leave the athletes, coaches and fans of UND out of your little world. The program and the people involved with the program want to keep it going.

[Chewey]

Fighting Sioux nickname referral within 1,000 names of goal

Shouldn't that tell you something? The people who are close to the issue, fought the good fight and have acknowledged that it is over.

All's fine and well if you're in to bowing to totalitarism. The fight is not over, however. The "good fight" is ongoing. You've just allowed yourself to be cowed and bridled. So, you fought the good fight and what did that entail, pray tell? You probably contributed to the law suit, wrote letters to the NCAA, the Alumni/Alumnae Association, Shaft, Backes, Kupcake, Goetz, the AG, SBoHE, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, etc as I did and as many others did. When these people either did not respond to you or betrayed your confidence by not working the terms of the surrender agreement in good faith or just told you "we've done all we can and we'll have to just live with it" you accepted it.

What you fail to grasp is that what the NCAA has done and, in a broader and probably more relevant and significant context, what Goetz, Shaft, SBoHE, Backes, Faison, Kelley, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, have failed to do is completely unacceptable. What has transpired is wrong. The failure of these parties to conduct themselves in good faith was wrong. The failure or unwillingness to fight and redress a wrong because of a threat from the wrongdoer is wrong. You may have fought some of the good fight earlier but you have not acknowledged anything except your own acquiescence. You and others may chortle that the petitioners are harming UND. That is a disortion. The nickname and logo did absoutely nothing harmful for over 80 years. The ones harming UND are the ones that have assaulted it and the state of ND from the beginning. You're not at the Stockholm Syndrome level yet, at least. You're not saying anything different than others who have been in the same situation in years past. You're psychology is evidently to warn against fighting a dictatorial entity for fear that said dictatorial entity will inflict even more damage/hardship. For an example of the mentality you're acquiescing to, see the assassination attempt (ultimately succeeding) of Reihnard Heydrich by a few Czech heros and the resulting liquidation of Lidice. Not on the same scale, obviously, but certainly related and certainly exhibits an elemental or developmental state of such ultimate lunacy.

[82SiouxGuy]

Of course you're going to dispute the credibility of that blog. It reported facts that refute the chicken little theory that you so desperately cling to for dear life.

I disproved most of that blog a few days ago. You might want to try reading it. The highlights are that UND is not a full member of the Big Sky at this time no matter what the blog claims. The Big Sky bylaws state that a member has to be a full Division I member of the NCAA. UND is considered a Division II member transitioning to Division I. That will not change until July 1, 2012 at the earliest. I posted links to prove both of those facts.

An example that you might understand. We are going to elect a President in November. That person does not become President the day of the election, or even on the day the votes are counted. They are inaugurated in January. There are procedures that have to be followed before they can actually become President. When you join a conference you don't become a full member on the day it is announced or the day you sign the paperwork. Things need to be done. In this case, UND has to first become a true member of Division I. Also, UND has not completed paying the entry fee. That will be paid this summer after UND is qualified to become a member. I'm pretty sure that was spelled out in the contracts.

Back to the blog. People state that UND can't or won't be kicked out of the Big Sky. There is a mechanism in the bylaws to remove a school from the conference, so UND can be removed even when they are a full member. You are making an assumption when you say they won't be kicked out because no one can know that at this point. It is a dangerous assumption for someone to make considering the bad public relations that are associated with this issue right now. And if you assume they won't, but you're wrong and they do, would be a bad result for UND. That is not a good bet for a responsible person.

The myth that the Big Sky is a failing or floundering conference, and that they need UND more than UND needs them is outright laughable. The Big Sky is a very stable conference. They haven't lost anyone in the past decade. The last school they lost was Cal Northridge in 2001 when they dropped football. Boise State and Idaho left almost 16 years ago. Northern Colorado was a quality replacement for Northridge. And the Big Sky has 1 other full member and 2 football only members joining this summer without UND. So the Big Sky has plenty of members. Besides, with UND they have a strange number of members so it would actually be easier for scheduling to not have UND. (The travel distance and travel cost to UND is another reason to not have UND in the conference, but I won't persue that any further right now.)

People also bring up attendance at sporting events, and how UND would rank among the top schools in the conference in attendance. I'm not sure how that applies to this argument at all. I may be wrong, but I believe that the home school keeps the ticket revenue from a sporting event in conference play. When UND is at home they get the ticket money, and if they are traveling they don't. I suppose it's possible that there could be some kind of revenue sharing. But they don't just throw all of the ticket revenue into a big pot and split it evenly. So Eastern Washington isn't going to profit if UND sells out all of its games. Eastern Washington profits when they sell out their own games. That is why Montana and Montana State are important to the league, they attract fans to their away games. It isn't because Montana puts 25,000 people in the stands for a home football game. Tournaments are a different story. Revenues are split for a league tournament. But UND would only host a limited number those events. The conference isn't going to keep them just to sell a few more tickets to those events. And at this point UND isn't a big enough factor to attract large attendance at away games. UND fans would help, but would that be enough to overcome the increased travel expenses of having to bring teams to Grand Forks?

That is probably plenty for now. Dave, your blog had some facts in it, but they didn't use all of the facts. Therefore they came to some wrong conclusions. There is a real possibility that UND could lose its place in the Big Sky. No one but the Presidents of the conference schools knows what the chances are of that happening. But it is a real threat. And that is on top of the sanctions that the NCAA has in place that will also hurt UND Athletics.

[Fetch]

anyone read all of that ?

[Hawkster]

Seeing we are on the extreme outskirts of the BSC footprint.. we are not popular among western school's fans (Sac St, PSU, EW) when it comes to travel. I am sure this nickname thing would give them reason to expell UND.

I was one of the first here to favor changing the name, but got flamed so bad I just kept quiet after that. Time for me to speak up again. There is no doubt that you are dead right about what the western members will do to us if it comes down to a vote since we aren't full fledged members yet, they don't need a unanomous vote.

[82SiouxGuy]

All's fine and well if you're in to bowing to totalitarism. The fight is not over, however. The "good fight" is ongoing. You've just allowed yourself to be cowed and bridled. So, you fought the good fight and what did that entail, pray tell? You probably contributed to the law suit, wrote letters to the NCAA, the Alumni/Alumnae Association, Shaft, Backes, Kupcake, Goetz, the AG, SBoHE, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, etc as I did and as many others did. When these people either did not respond to you or betrayed your confidence by not working the terms of the surrender agreement in good faith or just told you "we've done all we can and we'll have to just live with it" you accepted it.

What you fail to grasp is that what the NCAA has done and, in a broader and probably more relevant and significant context, what Goetz, Shaft, SBoHE, Backes, Faison, Kelley, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, have failed to do is completely unacceptable. What has transpired is wrong. The failure of these parties to conduct themselves in good faith was wrong. The failure or unwillingness to fight and redress a wrong because of a threat from the wrongdoer is wrong. You may have fought some of the good fight earlier but you have not acknowledged anything except your own acquiescence. You and others may chortle that the petitioners are harming UND. That is a disortion. The nickname and logo did absoutely nothing harmful for over 80 years. The ones harming UND are the ones that have assaulted it and the state of ND from the beginning. You're not at the Stockholm Syndrome level yet, at least. You're not saying anything different than others who have been in the same situation in years past. You're psychology is evidently to warn against fighting a dictatorial entity for fear that said dictatorial entity will inflict even more damage/hardship. For an example of the mentality you're acquiescing to, see the assassination attempt (ultimately succeeding) of Reihnard Heydrich by a few Czech heros and the resulting liquidation of Lidice. Not on the same scale, obviously, but certainly related and certainly exhibits an elemental or developmental state of such ultimate lunacy.

Right and wrong can make for a great argument. And most of us will agree that the NCAA is wrong, probably on many levels. But is that what will win in a court of law? I'm pretty sure that the court case will be decided mainly on what is legal. Has the NCAA done anything that can be proven illegal? You believe that they have broken anti-trust laws. Previous courts have said they have not. We will see what the court feels at this time. Have you got anything else? Any place where the law was broken? Did they break the law by making the Native American policy? Proving a lack of good faith is going to be very difficult. The NCAA has a settlement agreement that was put in place in a court, that is going to be difficult to prove illegal. Other than the anti-trust aspect, where has the NCAA done something illegal or what have they done that can be addressed by the law?

Your assertion that the name and logo did no harm for 80 years is not accurate. There have been issues because of the name and logo for more than 40 years. They have caused problems for students. The University used cartoon figures like Sammy Sioux, which showed a lack of respect. There are several examples in the past with parade floats and signs. Most of the issues were blown way out of proportion, but they existed. UND has made major strides over the years and has done a much better job with the name and logo in more recent years. But it is not accurate to say that they did no harm during the past 80 years.

Responsible people stop fighting when the chances of doing harm are much greater than the chances of winning. They pick their battles and determine the level of loss they are willing to absorb depending on the importance of the issue. Fighting to the death is not a responsible decision, especially for an issue that is not worthy of causing death. A college sports nickname is not as important as the institution, or the athletic program. Therefore, when it is apparent that the chances of winning the battle are very small and the chances of doing damage to the athletic program are pretty certain, then you stop fighting and take control of what you can control.

[Fetch]

[82SiouxGuy]

anyone read all of that ?

Sorry if that was too much for you. I will shorten it to something you might understand.

Blog is wrong. Petitions baaaaaad.

[Fetch]

thanks you could be right time will tell

[The Sicatoka]

The NCAA is frivilous for taking a stance against NA based nicknames, and yes if push comes to shove I'd rather shut down athletics altogether than play along with their hateful anti-NA agenda. It's time for a revolution against the NCAA. They're corrupt with power and it is long overdue for their power to be overthrown. I want to either put them in their place or else no longer associate with them if putting them in their place eventually proves to not be possible. I have never been known to go along with the "if you can't beat 'em join 'em" mentality. Grow a pair and stick to your guns, why don't you?

Yeah, I would like to keep our athletic programs... but at what cost? Not worth selling our souls over it.

Dave, let's go with a crazy hypothetical, just for you:

Let's assume you're a long-time member in good standing of the Democratic Party (not a stretch). Let's say the Dems got the crazy notion that nobody named Dave or David could be a member of their private (they aren't an arm of government) organization from now on. The party voted on it at convention and it passed: No more people named Dave or David.

You really don't like the notion. Actually, I think the notion is really wrong along with you. But it's their party. So you have two choices: Change your name or leave the party.

What you're advocating is keeping your name and then immolating yourself to boot!

Sorry, but I can't advocate immolating UND Athletics.

[GeauxSioux]

All's fine and well if you're in to bowing to totalitarism. The fight is not over, however. The "good fight" is ongoing. You've just allowed yourself to be cowed and bridled. So, you fought the good fight and what did that entail, pray tell? You probably contributed to the law suit, wrote letters to the NCAA, the Alumni/Alumnae Association, Shaft, Backes, Kupcake, Goetz, the AG, SBoHE, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, etc as I did and as many others did. When these people either did not respond to you or betrayed your confidence by not working the terms of the surrender agreement in good faith or just told you "we've done all we can and we'll have to just live with it" you accepted it.

What you fail to grasp is that what the NCAA has done and, in a broader and probably more relevant and significant context, what Goetz, Shaft, SBoHE, Backes, Faison, Kelley, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, have failed to do is completely unacceptable. What has transpired is wrong. The failure of these parties to conduct themselves in good faith was wrong. The failure or unwillingness to fight and redress a wrong because of a threat from the wrongdoer is wrong. You may have fought some of the good fight earlier but you have not acknowledged anything except your own acquiescence. You and others may chortle that the petitioners are harming UND. That is a disortion. The nickname and logo did absoutely nothing harmful for over 80 years. The ones harming UND are the ones that have assaulted it and the state of ND from the beginning. You're not at the Stockholm Syndrome level yet, at least. You're not saying anything different than others who have been in the same situation in years past. You're psychology is evidently to warn against fighting a dictatorial entity for fear that said dictatorial entity will inflict even more damage/hardship. For an example of the mentality you're acquiescing to, see the assassination attempt (ultimately succeeding) of Reihnard Heydrich by a few Czech heros and the resulting liquidation of Lidice. Not on the same scale, obviously, but certainly related and certainly exhibits an elemental or developmental state of such ultimate lunacy.

You are obviously quite passionate about keeping the name, but as I have said before it would be a pyrric victory. Sure you may win after years of fighting to keep the name, but at what cost?

[ScottM]

What you fail to grasp is that what the NCAA has done and, in a broader and probably more relevant and significant context, what Goetz, Shaft, SBoHE, Backes, Faison, Kelley, Conrad, Dorgan, Pomeroy, have failed to do is completely unacceptable. What has transpired is wrong. The failure of these parties to conduct themselves in good faith was wrong. The failure or unwillingness to fight and redress a wrong because of a threat from the wrongdoer is wrong. You may have fought some of the good fight earlier but you have not acknowledged anything except your own acquiescence.

"Right or wrong", UND athletics is handicapped if it is forced to readopt the Sioux moniker. And no about academic histrionics, petitions or state legislation will change that.

If the petititoners are serious about this, why are they not making this an election issue for the Members of Congress who are up for re-election this fall? Surely they can't be so stupid as to presume that some state law with no force outside of North Dakota's borders will convince the NC$$ to reconsider their position. Therefore, I can only presume this lack of courage on their part supports the premise they are really seeking to harm UND athletics.

[Chewey]

Cliffs Notes for blog posts? I think 82may be on to something there. Gandhi Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, George Washington and Jesus would disagree with you.

[The Sicatoka]

I think this has been covered before...

Do you like the Sioux because they're UND or do you like UND because they're the Sioux? .

I like UND because I like North Dakota, my alma mater.

[GeauxSioux]

If you change the name... sure you may win the right to keep your athletic programs and be in good standing with the NCAA, but at what cost? That would be the true pyrric victory in my opinion.

That is why you and I will never agree on this point.