dmksioux Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 This is breaking nationally: http://www.sfgate.co...L&type=politics Not to pick on you "Haduke", but I get a kick out of people who think this is such a big story nationally. It's not. All these newspapers are doing is reprinting the "AP" story. Imagine if this was Florida State or Illinois? ESPN would be having reporters at the school and giving updates on Sports Center. I have yet to see this mentioned on sports center and in looking at the ESPN website, you have to dig pretty hard to find the AP story on it. As much as I would like to see this story gain traction in the media and put some pressure on the NCAA, it's just not happening... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I am sure the people over on Bilgerantville are having a great time with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hambone Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Fullerton is apparently going to be on at about 3:30. Won't be able to listen - hopefully someone can give those of us that aren't available to listen a recap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I'm sure he's busy clearing his schedule to be on McFoolyMcFeely's show tomorrow. According to a poster on bville, it sounds as though Fullerton is going to be on McFeely's radio program today. I can't find any info but his show runs from 2:00-5:00 pm on 790. Today on the Mike McFeely Show, 2-5 p.m. on KFGO and kfgo.com: Big Sky Conference commissioner Doug Fullerton responds to the Fighting Sioux nickname petition. ... Hey, Minnesota: Rick Santorum? Really? Rick Santorum? ... U.S. House candidate Pam Gulleson kicks off a "Building the Future" tour on our show. ... USDA Rural Development director Jasper Schneider tells us about the ND 2.0 initiative. ... YOUR phone calls. ... 237-5948; 800-880-5346 At least he's predictable.Listen for the snarky anti-UND comments and you'll have the right time in the show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I do like Famous Daves don't worry we will invite ewe Ira I'll buy ribs and beer but you pay for the psychiatrist and leave the friggin lamb in the truck with Dave K. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I'll buy ribs and beer but you pay for the psychiatrist and leave the friggin lamb in the truck with Dave K. Thanks for making me laugh during a boring teleconference ... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Here is a bit of a teaser, if you will, of what Mr. Fullerton will most likely be saying on the McFeely's show later today. http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/228888/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Here is a bit of a teaser, if you will, of what Mr. Fullerton will most likely be saying on the McFeely's show later today. http://www.grandfork...icle/id/228888/ Obviously, Fullerton has been misled by those of us who actually care about the university. However, I do like his even-handed take on this mess. But Grant Shaft, president of the State Board of Higher Education, said the board likely will ask the state Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of the revived nickname law. It's about damn time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Here is a bit of a teaser, if you will, of what Mr. Fullerton will most likely be saying on the McFeely's show later today. http://www.grandfork...icle/id/228888/ Fullerton said there would be advantages to the Big Sky dropping to 12 members, an even number that would make scheduling easier — especially if the dropped member was 600 miles away. “You tell me who needs who more?” he asked. This is inarguable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Here is a bit of a teaser, if you will, of what Mr. Fullerton will most likely be saying on the McFeely's show later today. http://www.grandfork...icle/id/228888/ I give Fullerton credit for laying their cards on the table, at least we know what the BSC thinking is on the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feff Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I hope Fullerton's comments can knock some of the BS out of these petitioners. I argued with one on Saturday of the Wisconsin series and he was actually trying to spout off some of the crap that Fullerton flat denied in his comments. It is dirty tactics to try and force their hands and ultimately it hurts the school which I call my alma mater and which I still currently attend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Btw...where are all these nickname at all cost supporters now? I would like to hear there thoughts about Fullerton's lates comments...then again, I probably don't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Btw...where are all these nickname at all cost supporters now? I would like to hear there thoughts about Fullerton's lates comments...then again, I probably don't... They'll just quote some stupid crap from their "Bible" (sayanythingblog.com) that "proves" that Fullerton is a liar and is bluffing and that Kelley put him up to it. When the facts aren't on your side, that's all that's left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risky Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 The nickname backers basically say the Big Sky has no intentiions of dropping UND and it is all a bluff. That accusation could have serious repercusions. If UND by law ends up having to keep the nickname and will have the NCAA sanctions put forward , the Big Sky probably will feel forced to kick UND out to show everyone indeed that they were telling us the truth. As a result the petition backers will force the hand of the Big Sky whether they were bluffing or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Btw...where are all these nickname at all cost supporters now? I would like to hear there thoughts about Fullerton's lates comments...then again, I probably don't... No, but we may be treated to Fetch's "family pictures" instead of a lucid response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSiouxFan Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Can they kick UND out? Has anybody seen or have solid information about the membership agreement UND has with the Big Sky? Is it in their by laws to be able to dismiss a member school for something like this? I honestly don't know, surely it would have been discussed when membership was extended to UND. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Btw...where are all these nickname at all cost supporters now? I would like to hear there thoughts about Fullerton's lates comments...then again, I probably don't... The earlier quote from Carlson pretty well sums up what these people's thoughts are. A man has realized his mistake, still won't answer calls from a resident in his district about the issue and comes out and basically tells UND it is ok to break a law he put into place. He started this mess but is now trying to distance himself from it. After Fullerton's comments from today get out, hopefully most of the folks who signed a petition go through the same thought process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Can they kick UND out? Has anybody seen or have solid information about the membership agreement UND has with the Big Sky? Is it in their by laws to be able to dismiss a member school for something like this? I honestly don't know, surely it would have been discussed when membership was extended to UND. I think Fullerton pretty much answered your question in the article. He has no reason to lie about this. Basically, yes they can with a unanimous vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I think Fullerton pretty much answered your question in the article. He has no reason to lie about this. Basically, yes they can with a unanimous vote. I don't even know if it would have to be a unanimous vote of the presidents being UND is probationary, I think he was talking about removing an existing member when he mentioned the unanimous vote. Either way, we would be at risk, that is clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Fullerton's comments on the situation. http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/228888/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSiouxFan Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Interesting quote by Fullerton: “Our concern, as before, is not that they are the Fighting Sioux,” Fullerton said, “but rather whether they can be an effective Division I program and a benefit to our conference.” I'm not in favor of what the petitioners did, If I was I would have signed the petition as I had numerous opportunities too. I'm just not sure how a UND losing the opportunity to host one maybe two football games would sway them to want to kick us out? How would that impact our ability to be an effective D1 program. If they were going to kick us out it would be because they would rather have 12 teams instead of 13. IMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I don't even know if it would have to be a unanimous vote of the presidents being UND is probationary, I think he was talking about removing an existing member when he mentioned the unanimous vote. Either way, we would be at risk, that is clear. You are correct, The bylaws outline the policy for removing a full member, and that is a unanimous vote of the Presidents other than the affected school. The bylaws do not mention removing a probationary member. UND is not a full member yet, and I haven't been able to find out if they would have to follow the same procedure or if they have a different procedure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Interesting quote by Fullerton: “Our concern, as before, is not that they are the Fighting Sioux,” Fullerton said, “but rather whether they can be an effective Division I program and a benefit to our conference.” I'm not in favor of what the petitioners did, If I was I would have signed the petition as I had numerous opportunities too. I'm just not sure how a UND losing the opportunity to host one maybe two football games would sway them to want to kick us out? How would that impact our ability to be an effective D1 program. If they were going to kick us out it would be because they would rather have 12 teams instead of 13. IMHO Because when a team is successful it looks good for the conference. Hosting playoff games is an easier way to win a championship, and the Big Sky, like every other conference, is proud of how many championships they win. Also, if it affects recruiting it will affect the ability to be an effective D1 program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Interesting quote by Fullerton: “Our concern, as before, is not that they are the Fighting Sioux,” Fullerton said, “but rather whether they can be an effective Division I program and a benefit to our conference.” I'm not in favor of what the petitioners did, If I was I would have signed the petition as I had numerous opportunities too. I'm just not sure how a UND losing the opportunity to host one maybe two football games would sway them to want to kick us out? How would that impact our ability to be an effective D1 program. If they were going to kick us out it would be because they would rather have 12 teams instead of 13. IMHO They'll do as the NC$$ "suggests" ,,, such as "Why bring in a new member with an albatross of moniker that could potentially affect the conference as a whole?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperman8 Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 And if FBS schools refuse to play you it limits your ability to be an effective D1 program. Minnesota and others have already taken that stance if it isn't a league or playoff game. Not sure where the petition backers get the idea that they will back down from that but it has been stated here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.