Hambone Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 I have heard it is because it is a conference issue. Just as Minnesota and Wisconsin play UND in hockey. The teams from the two conferences are locked in due to their conference affiliation. Isn't it also because the policy's at Minn and Wisco are to not play a team that is on the NCAA sanctions list, which Florida State is not on? I thought that this was part of the discussion...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 GeauxSioux, ever wonder how Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota don't have a problem playing Florida State in the Big 10/ACC basketball challenge? Those "we can't play you because of university policy" issues go right out the window when money talks. I have heard it is because it is a conference issue. Just as Minnesota and Wisconsin play UND in hockey. The teams from the two conferences are locked in due to their conference affiliation. And because Florida State is not on the NCAA "hostile and abusive" list because FSU has all their required tribal approvals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 If Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin were SERIOUS about their commitment, they would ask the Big 10 to kindly schedule them against Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest, Miami, North Carolina State, Boston College, or any other ACC team not named "Seminoles." They aren't locked in by conference affiliation at all. The school policy is that they will not schedule any teams with Indian-related imagery and/or mascots. They're hypocrites and they know it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 GeauxSioux, ever wonder how Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota don't have a problem playing Florida State in the Big 10/ACC basketball challenge? Those "we can't play you because of university policy" issues go right out the window when money talks. Florida St. is not on the hostile and abusive list, and they are not under NCAA sanctions. North Dakota is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 GeauxSioux, ever wonder how Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota don't have a problem playing Florida State in the Big 10/ACC basketball challenge? Those "we can't play you because of university policy" issues go right out the window when money talks. Who cares, their hypocrisy is not the issue. Getting mad at them for playing FSU in basketball does nothing for UND or its athletic department. They are NOT going to play UND in hockey after 2012, get it through your head. That argument is the same as the nickname crusaders saying they are "sticking up for the native americans". How righteous. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Florida St. is not on the hostile and abusive list, and they are not under NCAA sanctions. North Dakota is. The official school policy of all three schools does not mention any preference for "NCAA-approved schools with Indian imagery". Check out Iowa AD Gary Barta's quote below... “We have a policy that came out several years ago indicating that we would not play any university outside of the Big Ten Conference who had a Native American mascot,” says Iowa athletic director Gary Barta. ...unless we can make money from scheduling that opponent, then we'll do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 If Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin were SERIOUS about their commitment, they would ask the Big 10 to kindly schedule them against Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest, Miami, North Carolina State, Boston College, or any other ACC team not named "Seminoles." They aren't locked in by conference affiliation at all. The school policy is that they will not schedule any teams with Indian-related imagery and/or mascots. They're hypocrites and they know it. Yes they are hypocrites, the whole policy is hypocritical. But as the others have pointed out, every other school has either change their name or gotten the necessary tribal approval which is what UM, UW, etc use for rationalization to play those schools. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 If Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin were SERIOUS about their commitment, they would ask the Big 10 to kindly schedule them against Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest, Miami, North Carolina State, Boston College, or any other ACC team not named "Seminoles." They aren't locked in by conference affiliation at all. The school policy is that they will not schedule any teams with Indian-related imagery and/or mascots. They're hypocrites and they know it. So what are you going to do about it - complain on the internet? You complaining about MN and their hypocrisy does nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Who cares, their hypocrisy is not the issue. Getting mad at them for playing FSU in basketball does nothing for UND or its athletic department. They are NOT going to play UND in hockey after 2012, get it through your head. That argument is the same as the nickname crusaders saying they are "sticking up for the native americans". How righteous. REALLY? Walter Dickey, chairman of the University of Wisconsin Athletic Board, says the Badgers would play the Sioux because of their previous games in hockey. “We have an exception in our policy for what we call a traditional opponent, and you’re a traditional opponent,” Dickey says of the Sioux. “The policy is under review. We’re considering stuff. One of the things we’re looking at is what the NCAA is doing.” Minnesota would quickly do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 If Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin were SERIOUS about their commitment, they would ask the Big 10 to kindly schedule them against Duke, North Carolina, Wake Forest, Miami, North Carolina State, Boston College, or any other ACC team not named "Seminoles." They aren't locked in by conference affiliation at all. The school policy is that they will not schedule any teams with Indian-related imagery and/or mascots. They're hypocrites and they know it. Doesn't matter if they are hypocrites or not. They have been consistent in applying their policies to UND. Wisconsin played us in softball and basketball when we were off the sanctions list. Iowa agreed to a home-and-home in women's basketball. Once Carlson's law went into effect, negotiations ended and games were cancelled. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 REALLY? Walter Dickey, chairman of the University of Wisconsin Athletic Board, says the Badgers would play the Sioux because of their previous games in hockey. “We have an exception in our policy for what we call a traditional opponent, and you’re a traditional opponent,” Dickey says of the Sioux. “The policy is under review. We’re considering stuff. One of the things we’re looking at is what the NCAA is doing.” Forgot about that part. What do you think the NCAA is telling them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 So what are you going to do about it - complain on the internet? You complaining about MN and their hypocrisy does nothing. Complaining about Minnesota? I'm simply pointing out that three schools essentially ignore official university policy...and yet you think this ban would stick with hockey no questions asked. I respectfully disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 The official school policy of all three schools does not mention any preference for "NCAA-approved schools with Indian imagery". You are wrong. Both Minnesota's and Wisconsin's policies specifically mention the sanctions list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND1983 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 REALLY? Walter Dickey, chairman of the University of Wisconsin Athletic Board, says the Badgers would play the Sioux because of their previous games in hockey. “We have an exception in our policy for what we call a traditional opponent, and you’re a traditional opponent,” Dickey says of the Sioux. “The policy is under review. We’re considering stuff. One of the things we’re looking at is what the NCAA is doing.” Minnesota would quickly do the same. Nice job quoting an article from 2007. You nickname crusaders will do anything to try and rationalize your thoughts. Do you think their stance has changed since 2007? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnboyND7 Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Nice job quoting an article from 2007. You nickname crusaders will do anything to try and rationalize your thoughts. Do you think their stance has changed since 2007? Nah, 5 years and a lot of drama later would not change anyone's stance! Silly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 God forbid North Dakota doesn't get to play Iowa and Minnesota in athletics. It'll be the end of UND's athletic program as we know it. Who is going to take UMN and Iowa's place since they've been yearly opponents and supporters of UND's program for so long . . . oh, wait . . . I think UND will be just fine not playing institutions that they've haven't played in decades. The bigger issue is conference affiliation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 REALLY? Walter Dickey, chairman of the University of Wisconsin Athletic Board, says the Badgers would play the Sioux because of their previous games in hockey. “We have an exception in our policy for what we call a traditional opponent, and you’re a traditional opponent,” Dickey says of the Sioux. “The policy is under review. We’re considering stuff. One of the things we’re looking at is what the NCAA is doing.” Minnesota would quickly do the same. Faison talked to the AD's at both Wisconsin and Minnesota after the petitions were turned in this week. Both of them said that they would not be scheduling UND in any sport, including hockey, now that UND is back on the NCAA sanctions. The tentative deal to play Wisconsin in the future is off the table for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Pro nickname folks can speculate all they want about what could happen in regards to scheduling, conference affiliation, recruits etc. But history and facts show what the reality is and that reality is not good if we vote to keep the law. Letting SL give it their best shot in Federal court is the only option for keeping the name and not screwing the University. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 God forbid North Dakota doesn't get to play Iowa and Minnesota in athletics. It'll be the end of UND's athletic program as we know it. Who is going to take UMN and Iowa's place since they've been yearly opponents and supporters of UND's program for so long . . . oh, wait . . . I think UND will be just fine not playing institutions that they've haven't played in decades. The bigger issue is conference affiliation. Wisconsin and Minnesota have been long time rivals in hockey. They will be playing in another conference starting in 2013. Neither will play UND with the Fighting Sioiux nickname when they are in a different conference. Yes, the conference affiliation is huge. Losing Wisconsin and Minnesota as opponents in hockey will also be a large issue. And there is nothing to prevent more schools from adopting the same policy. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Wisconsin's policy was amended AFTER the NCAA's "hostile and abusive" language was added to its own policy. The previous policy had always been pretty simple: No non-conference scheduling of any teams with Indian nicknames and/or imagery. Period. After 2007, that policy was scrapped in favor of "except when...". "Nickname crusader"? I love the nickname as much as anyone else and have been resigned to its departure whether I like it or not. I'm undecided as to whether or not the latest measure is a wise one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Wisconsin and Minnesota have been long time rivals in hockey. They will be playing in another conference starting in 2013. Neither will play UND with the Fighting Sioiux nickname when they are in a different conference. Yes, the conference affiliation is huge. Losing Wisconsin and Minnesota as opponents in hockey will also be a large issue. And there is nothing to prevent more schools from adopting the same policy. Since Lucia and UMN have had a noncomittal stance regarding UND hockey ever since the BTHC conference was created, don't assume this is entirely a nickname issue. The Gophers are committed to playing Notre Dame for four years. Why didn't UMN sign up to play North Dakota after we all thought the nickname controversy was over? It'll be interesting to see everyone's reactions when UND changes the name back to nothing and the school is still not playing the gophers in hockey. And no, their is nothing to prevent other schools from adopting this position, but I'm not going to assume that the 350 Division 1 schools in existance are all going to collectively adopt this same position. Remember Al Carlson was wrong in his assumption that the state law would change the NCAA's stance. Losing hockey rivalries will be unfortunate. But UND may lose those regardless of the nickname. Other than that, screw Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. The Big Sky is infinitely more important. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 “As far as conspiracy concerns, I leave that with the JFK folks. It’s reality that we are where we are. It’s reality that I’ve talked to Joel Maturi (Minnesota athletic director) and Sean Frazier (Wisconsin deputy athletic director) and we’ve been working on schedules for 2013-14, but that stops because of the nickname and logo. They can’t play us. That’s reality. That’s nothing I’ve made up. That’s been on the books for eight years. We lost a home and home with the University of Iowa in women’s basketball — the opportunity to host a Big Ten team here. This isn’t fiction. This is all real, and we have to deal with reality. That’s my job.” Faison stressed the importance of competing against men’s hockey rivals Minnesota and Wisconsin. “I’ve heard from some fans that say it doesn’t matter if we can’t schedule Minnesota,” Faison said. “I look at them incredulously (and say), ‘Really?’ Of course it matters.” That's the UND Athletic Director quoted today. If any fans on this board have more direct information from employees or agents working on behalf of the athletic departments of Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Iowa which contradicts this information, lay your cards on the table. Otherwise, this is the most up to date, accurate information regarding the future of UND athletics playing these opponents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 “As far as conspiracy concerns, I leave that with the JFK folks. It’s reality that we are where we are. It’s reality that I’ve talked to Joel Maturi (Minnesota athletic director) and Sean Frazier (Wisconsin deputy athletic director) and we’ve been working on schedules for 2013-14, but that stops because of the nickname and logo. They can’t play us. That’s reality. That’s nothing I’ve made up. That’s been on the books for eight years. We lost a home and home with the University of Iowa in women’s basketball — the opportunity to host a Big Ten team here. This isn’t fiction. This is all real, and we have to deal with reality. That’s my job.” Faison stressed the importance of competing against men’s hockey rivals Minnesota and Wisconsin. “I’ve heard from some fans that say it doesn’t matter if we can’t schedule Minnesota,” Faison said. “I look at them incredulously (and say), ‘Really?’ Of course it matters.” That's the UND Athletic Director quoted today. If any fans on this board have more direct information from employees or agents working on behalf of the athletic departments of Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Iowa which contradicts this information, lay your cards on the table. Otherwise, this is the most up to date, accurate information regarding the future of UND athletics playing these opponents. The hockey only crowd will not believe Faison but they would believe Hakstol in a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Wisconsin and Minnesota have been long time rivals in hockey. They will be playing in another conference starting in 2013. Neither will play UND with the Fighting Sioiux nickname when they are in a different conference. Yes, the conference affiliation is huge. Losing Wisconsin and Minnesota as opponents in hockey will also be a large issue. And there is nothing to prevent more schools from adopting the same policy. Since Lucia and UMN have had a noncomittal stance regarding UND hockey ever since the BTHC conference was created, don't assume this is entirely a nickname issue. The Gophers are committed to playing Notre Dame for four years. Why didn't UMN sign up to play North Dakota after we all thought the nickname controversy was over? It'll be interesting to see everyone's reactions when UND changes the name back to nothing and the school is still not playing the gophers in hockey. Exactly. Bemidji, Nebraska Omaha, Duluth, Mankato, St Cloud, etc...will all be lobbying Minnesota and Wisconsin to stay on their schedules. Folks thinking UND would play Minnesota and Wisconsin in non-conference action EVERY hockey season REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE NICKNAME IS are sadly mistaken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 Some folks just don't understand "hot" until they put their hand on the (NCAA sanctions) burner. And those same folks will be the first ones to complain that a burned hand doesn't work like it did before. 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.