The Sicatoka Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 The NCAA policy is a bunch of BS. Yes, it is. But it's their party. Their rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 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". What "ira" forgot to mention is that the only way to make contacts and meet the people to find a decent job in that town is to attend that party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 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. My guess, and again it is only a guess, is that none of the Chippewa tribes had made any noise about being opposed. Or maybe they already had been involved in the discussion at some point and had stated they were not opposed. Going back and reading the stories about the Oklahoma Seminole situation leads me to this supposition. The NCAA spent several years studying the situation and discussing it with different tribes. They felt there was enough opposition to the use of Native American nicknames to go ahead with the ban. They were depending on the opposition by the Oklahoma Seminoles to give them ammunition to fight the approval of the Florida Seminole Nation because they knew Florida State was going to be a problem. When they discovered that the Oklahoma tribes were not opposed, they moved quickly to find a fallback position. The approval of a namesake tribe was that position. It gave the NCAA an out that had some basis in logic, saying that it would be acceptable if a tribe actually gave approval. Several schools took advantage of the option including Central Michigan. UND has had a vocal opposition for many years. It has probably been more vocal than most other schools using Native American nicknames. In spite of this, UND had the opportunity to take advantage of the single namesake tribe approval option. Lake Traverse might have been acceptable as an option, but I believe that they have been opposed to the nickname also. Reports have said that all Sioux tribes other than Spirit Lake have some kind of statement against UND's use of the nickname. Lake Traverse is also a member of the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's Association, and that group has been vocally opposed to UND using the name. The last vote was 11-0 against with 5 tribes missing. A previous vote was 15-0 with only Spirit Lake not voting. I have always thought that the NCAA picked Spirit Lake and Standing Rock for the settlement because Spirit Lake is the closest tribe and because they knew Standing Rock was very vocally opposed, so the NCAA figured it would be very hard for UND to get approval from both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 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. Another fine example of respect shown Native Americans. Ah for the good ol days when the only good injun was a dead one to now where the only good injun supports the logo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 My guess, and again it is only a guess, is that none of the Chippewa tribes had made any noise about being opposed. Or maybe they already had been involved in the discussion at some point and had stated they were not opposed. Going back and reading the stories about the Oklahoma Seminole situation leads me to this supposition. The NCAA spent several years studying the situation and discussing it with different tribes. They felt there was enough opposition to the use of Native American nicknames to go ahead with the ban. They were depending on the opposition by the Oklahoma Seminoles to give them ammunition to fight the approval of the Florida Seminole Nation because they knew Florida State was going to be a problem. When they discovered that the Oklahoma tribes were not opposed, they moved quickly to find a fallback position. The approval of a namesake tribe was that position. It gave the NCAA an out that had some basis in logic, saying that it would be acceptable if a tribe actually gave approval. Several schools took advantage of the option including Central Michigan. UND has had a vocal opposition for many years. It has probably been more vocal than most other schools using Native American nicknames. In spite of this, UND had the opportunity to take advantage of the single namesake tribe approval option. Lake Traverse might have been acceptable as an option, but I believe that they have been opposed to the nickname also. Reports have said that all Sioux tribes other than Spirit Lake have some kind of statement against UND's use of the nickname. Lake Traverse is also a member of the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's Association, and that group has been vocally opposed to UND using the name. The last vote was 11-0 against with 5 tribes missing. A previous vote was 15-0 with only Spirit Lake not voting. I have always thought that the NCAA picked Spirit Lake and Standing Rock for the settlement because Spirit Lake is the closest tribe and because they knew Standing Rock was very vocally opposed, so the NCAA figured it would be very hard for UND to get approval from both. The SL tribe are not even native to North Dakota. They are from Minnesota and were not "fighting" Sioux even. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 My guess, and again it is only a guess, is that none of the Chippewa tribes had made any noise about being opposed. Or maybe they already had been involved in the discussion at some point and had stated they were not opposed. Going back and reading the stories about the Oklahoma Seminole situation leads me to this supposition. The NCAA spent several years studying the situation and discussing it with different tribes. They felt there was enough opposition to the use of Native American nicknames to go ahead with the ban. They were depending on the opposition by the Oklahoma Seminoles to give them ammunition to fight the approval of the Florida Seminole Nation because they knew Florida State was going to be a problem. When they discovered that the Oklahoma tribes were not opposed, they moved quickly to find a fallback position. The approval of a namesake tribe was that position. It gave the NCAA an out that had some basis in logic, saying that it would be acceptable if a tribe actually gave approval. Several schools took advantage of the option including Central Michigan. UND has had a vocal opposition for many years. It has probably been more vocal than most other schools using Native American nicknames. In spite of this, UND had the opportunity to take advantage of the single namesake tribe approval option. Lake Traverse might have been acceptable as an option, but I believe that they have been opposed to the nickname also. Reports have said that all Sioux tribes other than Spirit Lake have some kind of statement against UND's use of the nickname. Lake Traverse is also a member of the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen's Association, and that group has been vocally opposed to UND using the name. The last vote was 11-0 against with 5 tribes missing. A previous vote was 15-0 with only Spirit Lake not voting. I have always thought that the NCAA picked Spirit Lake and Standing Rock for the settlement because Spirit Lake is the closest tribe and because they knew Standing Rock was very vocally opposed, so the NCAA figured it would be very hard for UND to get approval from both. You, my friend, should change your name to "82SiouxEncyclopedia" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 You, my friend, should change your name to "82SiouxEncyclopedia" I've been told that I can be rather verbose at times. And that was by my mother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benny Baker Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I've been told that I can be rather verbose at times. And that was by my mother. So long as it's not filled with rhetoric, I say "the more the better." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Yep, that's why I keep saying either make them change the rules or else tell them we do not wish to associate ourselves with that kind of party. To continue associating with the NCAA is to indirectly approve of their racist policy. How do you propose to make them change their rules? And, again, leaving the NCAA would mean destroying the Athletic Department and that isn't an option. Since you don't like associating with the NCAA you should just stop watching all college sports other than the NAIA. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 Yep, that's why I keep saying either make them change the rules or else tell them we do not wish to associate ourselves with that kind of party. To continue associating with the NCAA is to indirectly approve of their racist policy. Seems our own Don "DaveK" Quixote has found his windmill to tilt at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Destroying the Athletic Department may be an option for you and a few others. It isn't for the other 95% of us. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Yes it is an option and who says I haven't considered boycotting all college sports? People here fail to comprehend just how much integrity is at stake. Oh do tell us about "integrity". And while you're at it, tell us about "loyalty" as well. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 He has been asked about it, and he has answered the question. PCM is pretty much spot on. And Wayne has said that the one thing that the NCAA wouldn't negotiate was the need to get approval from 2 tribes. They wouldn't agree to the settlement without that point. I'm sure that the NCAA knew Standing Rock would not change their mind easily. But the other choice was that UND would go on the sanctions list almost as soon as the trial ended, win or lose. Then at that point they should have just went ahead and won the lawsuit rather than settle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Yes it is an option and who says I haven't considered boycotting all college sports? People here fail to comprehend just how much integrity is at stake. Has nothing to do with integrity. There are people on both sides of this issue, even those radicals on both sides who have integrity. The minunderstanding of this issue and associating the importance of this name or a fight with a private organization making rules we don't like is not the same as the civil war, the civil rights movement, or the atrocities of WWII. There are those with no integrity but not because of their stance on this issue. You want to take a stance for what is right, how about taking a stance against the politicians who are using UND as a pawn in their private battle to gain control of the SBoHE? Keep in mind the constitution does in fact protect the SBoHE for this exact reason. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 So much for this thread being about the sanctions and punishments, I guess. Seems ever thread is the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSSD Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 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. Hey thanks for the Aug 5th date, I took my date from the news article discussing the policy. I understand your comment about not being directly against, but the NCAA has been very strict with UND on getting approval - I believe they rejected approval letters from SL. Another aspect of the Oklahoma tribes backing off "could" be related to record revenue at the Florida casinos - $2 billion and growing. http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/content/report-says-seminole-tribe-casinos-are-cashing-despite-economy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSSD Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 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. My guess, and again it is only a guess, is that none of the Chippewa tribes had made any noise about being opposed. Or maybe they already had been involved in the discussion at some point and had stated they were not opposed. Actually the interesting note about CMU is that State of Michigan passed a resolution against NA usage in the mid 90s. I believe the E. Michigan changed its name from the Huron and CMU has not. Here is a link to the state resolution and a chapter out of a book talking about the issues surrounding CMU. State Resolution http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mascots_69612_7.res.pdf Interesting Reading. http://books.google.com/books?id=0TG2s-lIldYC&pg=PA64&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false I find it interesting that the NCAA gave approval despite this information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 How about taking a stance against the corrput NCAA, the corrupt SBoHE, and the corrupt people who are currently in power at UND? Those three groups are currently using the UND athletic dept. as a pawn in their PC crusade against the Sioux nickname, disguising it as trying to protect Native Americans when in fact what they are actually doing is disrespecting Native Americans. It is so far beyond sickening and disguting. I'm so angry about this issue I can't even find words strong enough to describe my feelings. Sorry, Dave. It's not about disrespecting the Native Americans any more. As much as it may have begun that way, it has now become a struggle to avoid sanctions and punishment levied on UND by the NCAA. And for the Fetch crowd that thinks a Grand Forks Fighting Sioux AHL team is the answer, please take it and a use it with respect so that UND can get off the NCAA sanctions list. (If memory serves, though, the NCAA settlement agreement requires UND to retain control of and prevent the re-use of the Fighting Sioux name) We pretty much all agree that the NCAA is abusing their position and power in this situation, but that abuse does not mean that they cannot continue on the path they have already charted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Hey thanks for the Aug 5th date, I took my date from the news article discussing the policy. I understand your comment about not being directly against, but the NCAA has been very strict with UND on getting approval - I believe they rejected approval letters from SL. Another aspect of the Oklahoma tribes backing off "could" be related to record revenue at the Florida casinos - $2 billion and growing. http://www.tampabay....despite-economy I have never heard of any approval letters from Spirit Lake, at least from anyone with any authority, until after the 2009 election. Even at that point the Tribal Council hesitated to send a letter. I vaguely remember some comments from someone that said, "We've said all we're going to say on the matter" or something like that. But it wasn't from anyone authorized to sign for the tribe and it wasn't in writing. If you have some evidence of a prior approval letter it would be good to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 How about taking a stance against the corrput NCAA, the corrupt SBoHE, and the corrupt people who are currently in power at UND? Those three groups are currently using the UND athletic dept. as a pawn in their PC crusade against the Sioux nickname, disguising it as trying to protect Native Americans when in fact what they are actually doing is disrespecting Native Americans. It is so far beyond sickening and disguting. I'm so angry about this issue I can't even find words strong enough to describe my feelings. Dave, you disrespect everyone that has an opinion different from your own. I would bet that you have never met any of the people at the NCAA, the SBoHE or the UND administration. You don't know what has actually happened with any of them. Yet you call them corrupt. And you are willing to destroy decades of UND athletic tradition just to keep a nickname and logo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Then at that point they should have just went ahead and won the lawsuit rather than settle. What good would it have done to win the lawsuit and go on sanctions within weeks? The NCAA fixed their mistake during the trial. UND would have been on sanctions in early 2008 with no chance to use the nickname beyond that. Unless you're saying that we could have avoided this entire mess of the past several years by getting put on sanctions back in 2008. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I call them corrupt because what they're doing is corrupt. It's as simple as that. Sorry you can't (or don't want to) understand. You are quickly reaching Lakes status with your opinions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FSSD Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I have never heard of any approval letters from Spirit Lake, at least from anyone with any authority, until after the 2009 election. Even at that point the Tribal Council hesitated to send a letter. I vaguely remember some comments from someone that said, "We've said all we're going to say on the matter" or something like that. But it wasn't from anyone authorized to sign for the tribe and it wasn't in writing. If you have some evidence of a prior approval letter it would be good to see. I will have to look for the information... I believe it is noted in the UND lawsuit against the NCAA or in the SL lawsuit against the NCAA. I will take a look and give you a link when I find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I will have to look for the information... I believe it is noted in the UND lawsuit against the NCAA or in the SL lawsuit against the NCAA. I will take a look and give you a link when I find it. If it is the Spirit Lake lawsuit they may be referring to the 2000 tribal council approval (if I remember right it was more like we aren't opposed than we are in favor). If that's it, the NCAA wanted a letter after their policy was passed to make sure the tribal council hadn't changed their mind. That 2000 approval might have been noted in the UND lawsuit also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 You're entitled to your opinion. You're so far off the mark it isn't even funny, but whatever. Quite frankly I really don't care how many people don't get it, I refuse to change who I am and what I believe in. I know the difference between right and wrong, and I will never stop fighting for what is right. You aren't related to Carlson are you? That would explain a lot. And you both live in Fargo. 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.