The Sanctions and Punishments Have Arrived

[Benny Baker]

But the other choice was that UND would go on the sanctions list almost as soon as the trial ended, win or lose.

Doesn't winning a lawsuit necessarily imply that the Court afforded the requested relief to the Plaintiff? If the State won then UND wouldn't have been placed on sanctions. That's why litigation was commenced in the first place.

[ScottM]

Doesn't winning a lawsuit necessarily imply that the Court afforded the requested relief to the Plaintiff? If the State won then UND wouldn't have been placed on sanctions. That's why litigation was commenced in the first place.

No, the NC$$ would have, and later did, change their rules in a way that would made any victory very short-lived. And we'd stil be having this conversation. IIRC the rules involved internal approvals by some committee or whatever.

[jodcon]

No, the NC$$ would have, and later did, change their rules in a way that would made any victory very short-lived. And we'd stil be having this conversation. IIRC the rules involved internal approvals by some committee or whatever.

...which reminds me of a form of fraud called "Bait and Switch".

[Benny Baker]

No, the NC$$ would have, and later did, change their rules in a way that would made any victory very short-lived. And we'd stil be having this conversation. IIRC the rules involved internal approvals by some committee or whatever.

But the State's prayer for relief, among other things, was that the NCAA could do nothing to punish UND or prevent the nickname use, hosting playoff games, etc. The litigation wasn't exclusive to the policy at the time, it was clearly regarding whether the NCAA could actually take steps to sanction and/or punish UND. Thus, if UND won, any action taken by the NCAA to sanction UND would have been in violation of the court order and judgment. . . . Similar to how many people believe the State's actions have violated the settlement agreement. If the State sued the case out and won (not saying that they would have), then the athletic teams play as the "Fighting Sioux" without facing any sanctions.

But I guess it's all academic at this point.

[siouxkid12]

I'm a fan of the teams involved in said extracurricular activities. I've been cheering for the Sioux since I was very young, and I can only hope that there will continue to be a Sioux team for me to cheer for. If the name changes my favorite team becomes nothing more than a memory.

They will always be the Sioux in your heart but it is time to move on. The nickname will hinder us from moving forward (as it already has), I simply do not want to be playing the South Dakota School of Mines (NAIA?) on Saturdays and I diffenetly do not want to be moved down the list in the Hockey world (and play cake eating teams). For UND to become viable in the D1 world we have to let the nickname go. I understand the logo means a lot to people but you have to remember this is a fight between the NCAA and the ONE Sioux Tribe who is as stubborn as a mule.

The NCAA has laid out the rules for everyone to read and we have to follow them. I understand there are other schools that are D1 that might play us but I don't want to play the Central Michigans or Furman Colleges of the world, I want to play the big boys (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa) because when you play the big dogs you get better television/national coverage. We have already seen what schools will do (Iowa and Wisconsin not playing us) and what the NCAA will do (our UND Women's hockey team can't play at the REA for the NCAA tourny), so it is time to move on.

[82SiouxGuy]

Doesn't winning a lawsuit necessarily imply that the Court afforded the requested relief to the Plaintiff? If the State won then UND wouldn't have been placed on sanctions. That's why litigation was commenced in the first place.

You would think so, but the circumstances changed during the time of the lawsuit. I will try to give a Readers Digest version by memory. Someone can correct any mistakes I may have, and remember that I am not an attorney.

The UND lawsuit had several points. But the main point was that the NCAA did not follow their own policies and procedures or their bylaws in the way the Native American mascot policy was approved. The policy was put in place by an Executive Committee. The NCAA policy in place at that time said that issues such as this had to go to a vote of the general membership. One theory at the time was that the policy would not have been approved by the general membership so they tried to shortcircuit the process.

I also believe that there was an anti-trust element to the lawsuit. However, the judge himself stated that it was a very weak argument. He basically let it go to discovery only because the other point or points were relevant. But he said they would need to find a lot more before he would let them take the anti-trust portion to trial.

During the discovery process the NCAA corrected their problem. They sent a new policy to a vote of the general membership that would allow the Executive Committee to pass this type of policy. Everyone knew that this was happening because of the lawsuit and the NA policy. The new policy passed by a large margin, which really showed that the general membership would probably also support the NA mascot policy. Then, the Executive Committee passed the same NA mascot policy a second time. I believe that it passed the January after the settlement (that would be January 2008), but it may have been before. They had already processed all of the school appeals, so they could easily have stated they wouldn't take any more appeals and that sanctions would immediately be in effect for any school that wasn't in compliance.

This is why UND could have won the lawsuit on their main point and still been on sanctions within days or months at the latest. UND could have been on sanctions some time in 2008 with no hope of getting tribal approval of any kind since Spirit Lake didn't give approval until 2009 (I believe that the trial was scheduled to start right around Christmas 2007). The settlement gave UND 3 years to get approvals and guaranteed almost 4 more years using the nickname with at least a little hope of keeping it long term.

[Benny Baker]

You would think so, but the circumstances changed during the time of the lawsuit. I will try to give a Readers Digest version by memory. Someone can correct any mistakes I may have, and remember that I am not an attorney.

The UND lawsuit had several points. But the main point was that the NCAA did not follow their own policies and procedures or their bylaws in the way the Native American mascot policy was approved. The policy was put in place by an Executive Committee. The NCAA policy in place at that time said that issues such as this had to go to a vote of the general membership. One theory at the time was that the policy would not have been approved by the general membership so they tried to shortcircuit the process.

I also believe that there was an anti-trust element to the lawsuit. However, the judge himself stated that it was a very weak argument. He basically let it go to discovery only because the other point or points were relevant. But he said they would need to find a lot more before he would let them take the anti-trust portion to trial.

During the discovery process the NCAA corrected their problem. They sent a new policy to a vote of the general membership that would allow the Executive Committee to pass this type of policy. Everyone knew that this was happening because of the lawsuit and the NA policy. The new policy passed by a large margin, which really showed that the general membership would probably also support the NA mascot policy. Then, the Executive Committee passed the same NA mascot policy a second time. I believe that it passed the January after the settlement (that would be January 2008), but it may have been before. They had already processed all of the school appeals, so they could easily have stated they wouldn't take any more appeals and that sanctions would immediately be in effect for any school that wasn't in compliance.

This is why UND could have won the lawsuit on their main point and still been on sanctions within days or months at the latest. UND could have been on sanctions some time in 2008 with no hope of getting tribal approval of any kind since Spirit Lake didn't give approval until 2009 (I believe that the trial was scheduled to start right around Christmas 2007). The settlement gave UND 3 years to get approvals and guaranteed almost 4 more years using the nickname with at least a little hope of keeping it long term.

Good to know, thanks.

[82SiouxGuy]

Unreasonable demands, like changing your identity. If I had the power to call the shots I would fight the NCAA for as long as possible. If and when we reached a point where they had us backed into a corner I would simply tell them "fine, if that's the way you're going to play I don't even want to be a part of your association anymore". Yeah, it's the ultimate sacrifice. I get that. But when forced to choose between that and selling your soul, I consider the ultimate sacrifice to be the lesser of two evils. Being submissive to the demands of the NCAA equals whoring yourself out, and I could never look myself in the mirror again if I whored myself out. It's a matter of pride and principle.

You know the old saying, "Pride goeth before the fall", which is a shortened version of "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall". You can believe anything you want about the nickname, and you can refuse to be a fan if the nickname is changed. But you have absolutely no right to try to force the destruction of the Athletic Department to win your war, especially since you have absolutely no connection to the University other than being a fan of the nickname.

[jodcon]

Yeah, the first part of the name doesn't change. I get that. The only problem with that is the fact that the second part is the one that matters to me, I can live with the first part of the name changing. Case in point : When I was little I liked the old Oakland Raiders, way back when Ken Stabler was their QB and John Madden was their coach. They moved to Los Angeles and I continued to cheer for the because they were still the Raiders, and eventually they moved back to Oakland. I liked them in Oakland the first time around, I liked them in Los Angeles, and I liked them (for awhile) when they returned to Oakland. Location makes no difference to me. Where the team is at geographically means jack squat when 99% of the games I watch are being watched from the comfort of my living room. In the case of the Oilers/Titans, if I was a Houston Oilers fan I would have been a Tennessee Oilers fan but not a Tennessee Titans fan. In the case of the Washington Bullets/Wizards, if I was a Bullets fan I would not be a Wizards fan.

That's interesting. I would guess probably 95%+ of people think the other way, they could live with a new name but a new location could lean them toward a different team.

So if the nickname does indeed change when this thing finally settles are you really going to quit being a fan of UND sports?

[trenchballer]

You know the old saying, "Pride goeth before the fall", which is a shortened version of "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall". You can believe anything you want about the nickname, and you can refuse to be a fan if the nickname is changed. But you have absolutely no right to try to force the destruction of the Athletic Department to win your war, especially since you have absolutely no connection to the University other than being a fan of the nickname.

bump

[Fetch]

I think it will take many years to rebuild the brand & loyalty

That is why a AHL team Named Fighting Sioux would be a excellent idea - still good Hockey by prospective NHL talent

UND can..... what's the expression ? palm face

[zonadub]

But I guess it's all academic at this point.

That is the most succinct statement you have made, Benny. The NCAA is run by academics, and they know they know better than a bunch of hicks from the Dakota sticks or a namesake Native American tribe.

[iramurphy]

Unreasonable demands, like changing your identity. If I had the power to call the shots I would fight the NCAA for as long as possible. If and when we reached a point where they had us backed into a corner I would simply tell them "fine, if that's the way you're going to play I don't even want to be a part of your association anymore". Yeah, it's the ultimate sacrifice. I get that. But when forced to choose between that and selling your soul, I consider the ultimate sacrifice to be the lesser of two evils. Being submissive to the demands of the NCAA equals whoring yourself out, and I could never look myself in the mirror again if I whored myself out. It's a matter of pride and principle.

That would work for those who sold their soul to the Fighting Sioux in the first place and very few of us are that stupid. You talk as if the NCAA didn't give us an out. They did and we didn't take advantage of that in 2005 when we only needed one tribe for the ok.. You were likely sitting in your living room watching your Raiders because you weren't doing anything to help the rest of us. They didn't "back us into a corner" they simply told us the party is by invitation only and because it is their party, there is a dress code and we have to wear a tuxedo. We asked if we could wear a suit and tie and they said we could beut we had to show up on time and we had to have a date. We didnt' show up on time with the date so they said then we had to wear a tuxedo. We had the opportunity to come to their party as invited and neither UND, the State of N.Dak.nor the Tribal councils showed up properly dressed and on time. We showed up late with a sport coat and turtle neck and no date and asked if we could get in. They said OK but then we had to go home and dress in a suit and tie and bring two dates but had to be there before midnight. We didn't do that either. Now we sit outside looking in and we are no longer welcome on those terms. We can still party with these folks but we are going to have to wear the tuxedo and begging or threatening to crash their party doesn't work. I tried to make a simple analogy for the simple folks who don't get it. This has nothing to do with the ultimate sacrifice. If you really believe that Dave, put down the remote and get out and explore the world. Don't forget to turn the tV off.

[FSSD]

The NCAA originally intended to force its policy on Florida State, even though it knew the school had the approval of the Seminole tribe in Florida. The NCAA merely assumed that the Oklahoma Seminole tribe was against Florida State's use of the Seminole name. But the tribal council of the Oklahoma Seminoles quickly passed a resolution nearly unanimously giving Florida State permission to use the nickname. It was only after that happened that the NCAA created the namesake approval exemption.

According to this article in the USA Today ( http://www.usatoday....-approved_x.htm ) The NCAA granted namesake exemption without formal approval from the Oklahoma Seminole tribe. Based on everything that I have seen, the Oklahoma Seminole tribe has never approved the use of the name.

"But dissent has been voiced within the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, primarily by general council member David Narcomey, but the council has taken no official position on the FSU issue, according to Jennifer McBee, the tribe attorney general. Narcomey, saying he was voicing his opinion only, wrote in an e-mail to USA TODAY of the decision: "I am deeply appalled, incredulously disappointed ... I am nauseated that the NCAA is allowing this 'minstrel show' to carry on this form of racism in the 21st century."

The amazing part of all this is that the NCAA issued the policy on Aug 12th 2005 and by Aug 23rd 2005 the NCAA had changed the policy to allow namesake exemptions and completed a review and approved a school to use this exemption in one in 8 business days.

[jodcon]

The amazing part of all this is that the NCAA issued the policy on Aug 12th 2005 and by Aug 23rd 2005 the NCAA had changed the policy to allow namesake exemptions and completed a review and approved a school to use this exemption in one in 8 business days.

Yeah they're quite efficient in handling their...um...business...when it suits their needs.

[ScottM]

Yeah they're quite efficient in handling their...um...business...when it suits their needs.

$$$$$$$$$$$

[82SiouxGuy]

According to this article in the USA Today ( http://www.usatoday....-approved_x.htm ) The NCAA granted namesake exemption without formal approval from the Oklahoma Seminole tribe. Based on everything that I have seen, the Oklahoma Seminole tribe has never approved the use of the name.

"But dissent has been voiced within the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, primarily by general council member David Narcomey, but the council has taken no official position on the FSU issue, according to Jennifer McBee, the tribe attorney general. Narcomey, saying he was voicing his opinion only, wrote in an e-mail to USA TODAY of the decision: "I am deeply appalled, incredulously disappointed ... I am nauseated that the NCAA is allowing this 'minstrel show' to carry on this form of racism in the 21st century."

The amazing part of all this is that the NCAA issued the policy on Aug 12th 2005 and by Aug 23rd 2005 the NCAA had changed the policy to allow namesake exemptions and completed a review and approved a school to use this exemption in one in 8 business days.

I'm pretty sure the policy came out on Aug 5, 2005.

Using Native American names and imagery in college sports had been a topic of conversation for a while. I found this article on the issue from the Florida State perspective in the Jacksonville newspaper, http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/081205/col_19484407.shtml, from Aug 12, 2005 that says:

Last month the Oklahoma nation defeated a motion to denounce the use of Native American nicknames and images in sports and other events by an 18-2 vote, according to tribal officials.

That isn't exactly direct approval, but they weren't against.

From a St. Petersburg paper that same day, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1461861/posts:

A controversial NCAA decision restricting Florida State University's use of an American Indian mascot was based on incomplete information and will be reconsidered, a top NCAA official said Thursday.

Walter Harrison, who chairs the committee that approved a policy directed at 18 schools with "hostile and abusive" American Indian mascots, said FSU has "good grounds" to appeal.

Among the reasons, he said, are that the NCAA Executive Committee thought the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma opposed FSU's use of the Seminole image as a mascot.

That was based partly on letters the committee received from David Narcomey, a member of the General Council of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma.

But Narcomey was not authorized to speak on behalf of the tribal nation and "misrepresented" its view, the tribe's attorney general said Thursday.

In fact, Narcomey pushed for a tribal resolution condemning the use of American Indian mascots and imagery, specifically at FSU. It was defeated last month by an 18-2 vote.

Sounds like a relative of Ron His Horse is Thunder.

[iramurphy]

Okay, so based on that analogy I would like to tell them "Screw you! Nobody can force me to wear a tuxedo, therefore I don't even want to be at your stupid party".

Then you will be stuck at home watching the Raiders on TV. If UND gets sanctioned and we lose recruits (evidence presented by Lennon that is already occuring}, we don't get into the Big Sky ( I think we probably will, but there is a real threat as outlined by Fullerton), we lose games.(aleady occuring) then you won't have a team to call the Fighting Sioux. UND alumni aren't going to spend money to support an NAIA school which seems to be what you prefer. UND fans would rather see quality athletic events in a quality conference than watch UND play Crookston, Minot State, U of Mary etc. Not sure why it seems so difficult to see that. Maybe after watching the Raiders the last few years you see those schools as a step up?

[PCM]

According to this article in the USA Today ( http://www.usatoday....-approved_x.htm ) The NCAA granted namesake exemption without formal approval from the Oklahoma Seminole tribe. Based on everything that I have seen, the Oklahoma Seminole tribe has never approved the use of the name.

I think you are correct that the Oklahoma Seminole never approved FSU's use of the Seminoles nickname, but the tribal council did vote down a resolution to condemn FSU's use of the nickname by an 18-2 margin. That was widely interpreted as the tribe giving its approval. David Narcomey had long been an outspoken critic of Florida State's use of the Seminole nickname. This USA Today story shows how the NCAA started to back off its policy and began to create the "namesake exemption" after the Oklahoma Seminoles rejected Narcomey's position.

Here's another story from that time period about what happened.

FSU's chances of success have drastically improved in the past two days with the clarification that the Oklahoma tribe does not oppose the "Seminoles" name or imagery used by the university. Several members of the NCAA executive committee that handed down the decision last week have said they believed the Oklahoma tribe -- unlike the Seminole Tribe of Florida -- condemned FSU.

"Now I've learned that one member of the [Oklahoma] Tribal Council spoke loudly and vociferously but really wasn't representative of the entire council. For me, that's a very significant factor in this decision relative to Florida State," said executive committee member Arthur Kirk, the president of Saint Leo University, near Dade City.

He stressed that he spoke only for himself and not the entire committee or NCAA. "If the Seminole tribes in Florida and Oklahoma do not find it offensive or objectionable," he said, "then that's significant."

Here's yet another story detailing how the NCAA thought that Narcomey spoke on behalf of the Oklahoma Seminole tribe when he really didn't.

[Matt]

I have not watched a Raider game since they acquired Randy Moss prior to the 2005 season. They lost me as a fan when they made that trade.

It appears there isn't very much depth to your allegiances. This is why UND can't make decisions with "fans" as fickle as yourself in mind.

[jdub27]

I have not watched a Raider game since they acquired Randy Moss prior to the 2005 season. They lost me as a fan when they made that trade.

But they were still the Raiders. I thought the name was all that mattered, not the players or the location?

[Goon]

I have not watched a Raider game since they acquired Randy Moss prior to the 2005 season. They lost me as a fan when they made that trade.

Which is funny since you have cheered for bigger d-bags that have played with the Pens.

[PhillySioux]

For a bit of AM humor (though it is applicable) I thought I'd attach this short film.

The NCAA/Big Sky in the role of King Arthur and UND in the role of the Black Knight (as scripted by Al Carlson, Reed Soderstrom, DaveK, Fetch, Frank B. et al)

Enjoy

[darell1976]

I'm pretty sure the policy came out on Aug 5, 2005.

Using Native American names and imagery in college sports had been a topic of conversation for a while. I found this article on the issue from the Florida State perspective in the Jacksonville newspaper, http://jacksonville...._19484407.shtml, from Aug 12, 2005 that says:

That isn't exactly direct approval, but they weren't against.

From a St. Petersburg paper that same day, http://www.freerepub...s/1461861/posts:

Sounds like a relative of Ron His Horse is Thunder.

Among the reasons, he said, are that the NCAA Executive Committee thought the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma opposed FSU's use of the Seminole image as a mascot.

Did they ask any Chippewa tribe in Minnesota, ND, Wisconsin and other states about Central Michigan's use of the name? The NCAA policy is a bunch of BS. Even if the Oklahoma tribe was against the name the NCAA would have backed away from FSU some other way.

[Benny Baker]

Did they ask any Chippewa tribe in Minnesota, ND, Wisconsin and other states about Central Michigan's use of the name? The NCAA policy is a bunch of BS. Even if the Oklahoma tribe was against the name the NCAA would have backed away from FSU some other way.

Or at the least the three other Chippewa tribes in Michigan. I've also wondered why UND didn't need approval of the Lake Traverse Sioux Reservation, which like Standing Rock, is mostly within the state of South Dakota.