UNDBIZ Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Help me understand why the Board's constitutional authority will be the primary issue. A state cannot legislate away it's contractual obligations. Am I missing something? I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the contract was to get rid of the name or go under sanctions. The law attempts to force UND to go under sanctions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedi Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 http://www.grandfork...icle/id/228879/ This kind of BS makes me glad I left ND. Except for morons like Al Carlson, no one in state government has the balls to take a stand on any issue of significance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 This kind of BS makes me glad I left ND. Except for morons like Al Carlson, no one in state government has the balls to take a stand on any issue of significance. Al Carlson did not take a stand for any moral reasons, it was for political capital and to take down the SBoHE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the contract was to get rid of the name or go under sanctions. The law attempts to force UND to go under sanctions. Right, a state cannot pass a law or constitutional amendment for that matter that prohibits it from adhering to the terms of a legally binding contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Right, a state cannot pass a law or constitutional amendment for that matter that prohibits it from adhering to the terms of a legally binding contract. But the contract doesn't say UND has to remove the name, it says UND must remove the name OR be placed under sanctions. The law removes the "or" and makes UND's choice for it. The legislature making a choice for UND goes against the constitution, which gives the power to the SBHE. This is why the SBHE would need to get a constitutional ruling if it doesn't agree with what's happening. Oh, and Mr. McGibblets is pretty awesome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillySioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 But the contract doesn't say UND has to remove the name, it says UND must remove the name OR be placed under sanctions. The law removes the "or" and makes UND's choice for it. The legislature making a choice for UND goes against the constitution, which gives the power to the SBHE. This is why the SBHE would need to get a constitutional ruling if it doesn't agree with what's happening. Oh, and Mr. McGibblets is pretty awesome Taco is hilarious. I don't believe it matters if there is a remedy built into the contract. Bottom line is that the law prohibits UND from complying which they surely want to do. That prohibition violates the contracts clause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Taco is hilarious. I don't believe it matters if there is a remedy built into the contract. Bottom line is that the law prohibits UND from complying which they surely want to do. That prohibition violates the contracts clause. Maybe the AG could argue to the NCAA that UND "wants to comply", but the State just won't let us....................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 KFAN is the rest of the Country & Berreiro is your hero & you respect his oppinion It will make the yes vote a landslide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Taco is hilarious. I don't believe it matters if there is a remedy built into the contract. Bottom line is that the law prohibits UND from complying which they surely want to do. That prohibition violates the contracts clause. More importantly, Carlson's Folly infringes on the Board's express constitutional authority to oversee higher education institutions in the state, which includes binding it and the state to certain agreements, e.g., the settlement they were party to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I see a large % of the State & the residents of GF tired of how this has been handled & maybe even tired of paying for UND (or many colleges) Sports (Tired of UND & NDSU Alumni spending) & tired of funding Higher Ed like it has been - We need trade schools to train the new workforce for the Bakken & other jobs for the future - not just to export college grads. All this & the economy will brings the walls tumbling down You are such an idiot; you must be a cop. Okay small mind you can turn the U into grand forks state college and be forgotten in time. Also, oil will not last forever so what is your plan for 100 years down the road? This will inevitably turn our great hockey program into a program who struggles to be average; the worst part is that is all we would have. You also seem to not understand that UND is a great research institution that generates MILLIONS of dollars in economic impact; but you seem to be happy with the thousands that a trade school would generate. How could you be so small-minded; what good would a logo be if NOBODY SEES IT!? exporting grads? wtf maybe some of that is because certain industries simply cant be found in Nodak. Maybe there is more money to be made elsewhere and moving back down the road is a real option. You sir might be the dumbest person I have encountered on any message board - congratulations. I am so pissed off at how stupid some people are! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Anything would be nice if we got the sioux. I loved the division two days oer our division one days anyway. Division 2 is ncaa as well you genious; since you are a bit slow I will spell this out for you. We would be under heavy sanctions there too. On a side note aren't you a little embarassed seeing the University of North Dakota playing some !@#$ school such as winona State? wtf is wrong with some people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 You are such an idiot; you must be a cop. Okay small mind you can turn the U into grand forks state college and be forgotten in time. Also, oil will not last forever so what is your plan for 100 years down the road? This will inevitably turn our great hockey program into a program who struggles to be average; the worst part is that is all we would have. You also seem to not understand that UND is a great research institution that generates MILLIONS of dollars in economic impact; but you seem to be happy with the thousands that a trade school would generate. How could you be so small-minded; what good would a logo be if NOBODY SEES IT!? exporting grads? wtf maybe some of that is because certain industries simply cant be found in Nodak. Maybe there is more money to be made elsewhere and moving back down the road is a real option. You sir might be the dumbest person I have encountered on any message board - congratulations. I am so pissed off at how stupid some people are! INTERJECTING MY MODERATOR DUTIES. FEEL FREE TO MAKE YOUR POINT OR OPINION KNOWN, BUT PLEASE DO SO WITHOUT THE PERSONAL ATTACKS OR NAME-CALLING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post homer Posted February 9, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 9, 2012 The most frustrating thing about some of the nickname supporters posting on here is you can't tell the difference between their posts and the posts of the bison fans who troll this board pretending to be Sioux fans. That says a lot about both parties. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 http://www.und.edu/o.../dearchuck.html if one reads Ralph's letter it is clear he held up contstruction at one time to make sure the logo's were OK. I read this as he didn't want to spend time and money if it wasn't going to be approved for the arena. Once he was given permission he moved ahead and his threat to Kupchella was after he had continued with the logo as part of the arena, Kupchella started waffling. It was the fact that Ralph couldn't seem to get a consistent direction from Kuppy that led to his frustration. There is not, nor was there ever, a requirement for UND to keep the name and logo in order for the arena to go to UND after the 20 years. Ralph also says in his letter, the arena is for UND hockey and the UND athletic department. Some mistakenly believe Ralph was completely focused on UND hockey. This letter from Ralph says otherwise. I was in the meeting room in the old Hyslop the day he made the announcement he was donating $100,000,000 to UND. Eddie Balfour was there with the Stanley Cup. Clifford, Strinden and a number of UND hockey staff and alumni were there. It was clear Ralph's gift was to build the finest hockey arena in the world and it was to benefit the hockey team and UND athletics and the University. Initial estimates were an arena costing around $50,000,000 and the rest to UND for priority needs. Fetch you make reference in one of your goofy comments that UND doesn't deserve Ralph's gift. You don't have to earn a gift, it was given freely by Ralph without strings attached regarding the name and his letter and the contract bear that out. No one deserves someone elses $100,000,000. UND was quite fortunate. With regards to your other comment that UND should drop hockey and an AHL team should move into the arena is a comment that lends the readers to understand the depth and knowledge involved in your opinions. If they still don't understand then they could reference the pink lamb you have seemed to have grown attached to. There is no hockey other than the NHL that will draw and create the atmosphere we get with UND hockey. You and your pink girlfriend in her wool jacket would be able to sit almost anywhere in that arena with a few hundred others who may have a passion for the game no matter who plays or what level but it wouldn't be 11,000 per game. Lastly, with regards to Kelly's comments, he follows direction from his bosses. He did that when it was time to retire the name and he does now. He isn't a cheerleader and he isn't going to be. Last spring he was wearing Sioux logo gear, yet some of you have tossed him under the bus and criticized him for the agreement reached before he arrived. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Division 2 is ncaa as well you genious; since you are a bit slow I will spell this out for you. We would be under heavy sanctions there too. On a side note aren't you a little embarassed seeing the University of North Dakota playing some !@#$ school such as winona State? wtf is wrong with some people Just ask Indiana, PA. They had to change their Indians name and logo...It is ALL NCAA divisions not just DI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post The Sicatoka Posted February 9, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted February 9, 2012 I think this is an important post that may help explain the difference of opinion between the two sides of debate on this forum. Is it accurate to paint the two groups as those who: * Would rather cheer for the Grand Forks Fighting Sioux (AHL) while UND drops its athletics programs * Would rather see UND continue with its athletics programs under a name other than Fighting Sioux If that's really the difference, it really helps illuminate why some fans of the current Sioux are so far apart on this issue. To all those who want to cheer for the "Fighting Sioux" I have your solution: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/16709-fighting-sioux-hockey-is-having-an-oustanding-season/ To those who want to see the proud tradition of University of North Dakota Athletics continue, tell the ND SBoHE to challenge Carlson's Folly on constitutional grounds, and if it comes to it, vote no. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 To all those who want to cheer for the "Fighting Sioux" I have your solution: http://forum.siouxsp...tanding-season/ To those who want to see the proud tradition of University of North Dakota Athletics continue, tell the ND SBoHE to challenge Carlson's Folly on constitutional grounds, and if it comes to it, vote no. How do we do this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 UND announces record enrollment for this spring, yet one of the myths that is liberally shared by anti nickname professors and others at UND is that the name hurts enrollment. I realize we have to move on for the good of UND but the lieing and hypocracy involved in this by the liberal do gooders is just sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
108498 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Division 2 is ncaa as well you genious; since you are a bit slow I will spell this out for you. We would be under heavy sanctions there too. On a side note aren't you a little embarassed seeing the University of North Dakota playing some !@#$ school such as winona State? wtf is wrong with some people I don't care who we play as long as I can cheer GO SIOUX!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bison Dan Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't care who we play as long as I can cheer GO SIOUX!! Looks like your going to get your wish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 UND announces record enrollment for this spring, yet one of the myths that is liberally shared by anti nickname professors and others at UND is that the name hurts enrollment. I realize we have to move on for the good of UND but the lieing and hypocracy involved in this by the liberal do gooders is just sad. And the same day the student body president comes out and says UND students are tired of the whole thing and the time and energy spent on the nickname flip flopping could be better spent somewhere else. Maybe like attracting even more students. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't care who we play as long as I can cheer GO SIOUX!! 1. You can still cheer GO SIOUX without handicapping UND athletics with the nickname. Everyone will know who you're talking about. 2. You've really lost any credibility you may have ever had on this site. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't care who we play as long as I can cheer GO SIOUX!! You'd be ok watching UND playing in a nearly empty alerus center? A bunch of ridiculously undersized or slow white boys playing together at a level slightly above high school? I'm sure the "LETS GO SIOUX" chants would be a great homefield advantage. "Hey honey, wanna go watch the Sioux play tonight? Big rivalry game tonight! Jamestown College has a tough team!" That is what you are going to say around this time of the year for basketball games. Hockey...I hope you enjoy playing Bemidji, Duluth, Mankato, etc. instead of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Hockey...I hope you enjoy playing Bemidji, Duluth, Mankato, etc. instead of Minnesota and Wisconsin. And that's being optimistic. They could adopt policies similar to Minnesota and Wisconsin. Get ready to see the "Fighting Sioux" playing the Brandon bantam travelling team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trunk Monkey Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Never thought I would ever say this but I agree that it is time for the name to go. The risks/consequences far outweigh the benefit of the Sioux name and I would hate to see UND as an institution irreperably harmed. I blame myself for not fighting harder years ago to try and keep the name but to have that fight now is just a little to late considering the consequences to THE UNIVERSITY of NORTH DAKOTA. 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.