Oh, the Anxiety....

[Goon]

Other than in hockey, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa have all blacklisted UND. Saying that the Big Sky would not retract UND membership only makes sense if it can be demonstrated that the mindset demonstrated by these three schools is restricted to the upper Midwest, a proposition that I find preposterous.

We don't know if the NCAA is also pressuring the BSC behind the scenes, I wouldn't put it past them.

[Chewey]

Chewy, why don't you do us all a favor and not post on this topic until you have an original thought instead of continually posting your same laundry list of perceived grievances over and over again.

No "perceived grievances"; sorry to disappoint you. I suppose regurgitating propaganda from the same body that has presided over this debacle counts for original thought?

[dlsiouxfan]

No "perceived grievances"; sorry to disappoint you. I suppose regurgitating propaganda from the same body that has presided over this debacle counts for original thought?

All your side has is perceived grievances. It's also laughable you'd label anything propaganda since nearly all of your posts include half-truths, outright lies, or slanders against those who disagree with you.

[Chewey]

All your side has is perceived grievances. It's also laughable you'd label anything propaganda since nearly all of your posts include half-truths, outright lies, or slanders against those who disagree with you.

So Grant Shaft's public statement, without any corroborating proof, essentially that Notre Dame would not play UND because of the nickname is a half truth? Moving up a retirement deadline more than a year before its expiration in response to a tribal wide vote is a half truth? Terry Wanless contradicting much of what Faison and Kelley had claimed is a half truth? Pat Seaworth's commentary about Fighting Sioux jerseys being akin to just other piled up dirty laundry is a half truth? This is all there in black and white. It's neither a quantum leap in logic nor an employment of deceit or propaganda to realize and conclude that the SBoHE and other parties in charge handled this whole debacle - indeed, are still handling it - very poorly. That does not mean that they had to kiss the posterior of anyone. Certainly, this would mean that you don't make statements a la Shaft and Seaworth and certainly it means that you don't engage in the lobbying process vis-a-vis legislation and then initiate and engage in a legal scrum claiming that the legislative process which you just got done participating in is an unconstitutional infringement upon your authority. Certainly, it would mean that you don't truncate an approval process by over a whole year. Certainly, they could and have done all of this and more. Has it been smart? Obviously not.

[darell1976]

I would agree that it is probably too close to call. One thing that concerns me though is not everyone is going to understand it with the change in wording and will just pick one.....which means that the ending will not be a true vote of the people. I haven't actually decided which way I am going to go on this because I am torn about what to do.

d1siouxfan, I would be careful about generalizations such as "most of the fans and alumni". Unless you go out and ask every single fan and every single alumni that question, you have no way of knowing for sure. Unless you use sampling or another method....and that is still a generalization.

If you pick to retire the name UND will be off of sanctions, will be able to host football playoff games and scheduling will become easier. If you vote to keep the name. No matter how good our football team does we will NEVER see them host a playoff game, scheduling will be tougher (South Dakota State has threatened to cancel the 2013 game), and we will continue to lose recruits to teams that can host a playoff game like NDSU, SDSU, and USD. For the good of the school and the athletic department...retire the name. For those who ONLY believe in a nickname instead of the athlete...vote for the name. Just remember Grand Forks Central has had their name retired against their will (GF School Board) and its been Redskin-less since 1991. GFC has won titles in hockey, football, and basketball since. UND can survive without the Fighting Sioux name and logo.

[dlsiouxfan]

So Grant Shaft's public statement, without any corroborating proof, essentially that Notre Dame would not play UND because of the nickname is a half truth? Moving up a retirement deadline more than a year before its expiration in response to a tribal wide vote is a half truth? Terry Wanless contradicting much of what Faison and Kelley had claimed is a half truth? Pat Seaworth's commentary about Fighting Sioux jerseys being akin to just other piled up dirty laundry is a half truth? This is all there in black and white. It's neither a quantum leap in logic nor an employment of deceit or propaganda to realize and conclude that the SBoHE and other parties in charge handled this whole debacle - indeed, are still handling it - very poorly. That does not mean that they had to kiss the posterior of anyone. Certainly, this would mean that you don't make statements a la Shaft and Seaworth and certainly it means that you don't engage in the lobbying process vis-a-vis legislation and then initiate and engage in a legal scrum claiming that the legislative process which you just got done participating in is an unconstitutional infringement upon your authority. Certainly, it would mean that you don't truncate an approval process by over a whole year. Certainly, they could and have done all of this and more. Has it been smart? Obviously not.

So are Lennon, Kelly, Mussman, Hakstol, O'Keefe, and Faison all lying? Your side has slandered all of them. They all have substantially greater credibility on this issue than you, Rob Port, Frank Black Cloud, and the rest of the nickname idiots.

To this point all nickname supporters have done is lie repeatedly to muddle the issue. Petition circulators told numerous signers that keeping the law would force the NCAA to get rid of their sanctions. Their is zero evidence that this is possible and your side has blatantly misstated that position publicly.

[watchmaker49]

So are Lennon, Kelly, Mussman, Hakstol, O'Keefe, and Faison all lying? Your side has slandered all of them. They all have substantially greater credibility on this issue than you, Rob Port, Frank Black Cloud, and the rest of the nickname idiots.

To this point all nickname supporters have done is lie repeatedly to muddle the issue. Petition circulators told numerous signers that keeping the law would force the NCAA to get rid of their sanctions. Their is zero evidence that this is possible and your side has blatantly misstated that position publicly.

Has this really not been the case for many years now?

[geaux_sioux]

If you pick to retire the name UND will be off of sanctions, will be able to host football playoff games and scheduling will become easier. If you vote to keep the name. No matter how good our football team does we will NEVER see them host a playoff game, scheduling will be tougher (South Dakota State has threatened to cancel the 2013 game), and we will continue to lose recruits to teams that can host a playoff game like NDSU, SDSU, and USD. For the good of the school and the athletic department...retire the name. For those who ONLY believe in a nickname instead of the athlete...vote for the name. Just remember Grand Forks Central has had their name retired against their will (GF School Board) and its been Redskin-less since 1991. GFC has won titles in hockey, football, and basketball since. UND can survive without the Fighting Sioux name and logo.

i graduated a Knight and didn't think twice about wanting to have been a redskin. Fighting Sioux may be a better nickname than redskins. Redskins may be the dumbest nickname of all time by the way. The only red skin I've ever seen is sun burned white people in the beginning of summer. Anyway, although Fighting Sioux may be a more legit nickname compaired to redskins it still needs to go for the sake of the school itself. As a former athlete at UND I graduated a Fighting Sioux and grew up one but I have no delusions about how badly we can't afford to keep the nickname and logo. It's just time to move on, regardless of if some of us want it or understand why.

[Chewey]

So are Lennon, Kelly, Mussman, Hakstol, O'Keefe, and Faison all lying? Your side has slandered all of them. They all have substantially greater credibility on this issue than you, Rob Port, Frank Black Cloud, and the rest of the nickname idiots.

To this point all nickname supporters have done is lie repeatedly to muddle the issue. Petition circulators told numerous signers that keeping the law would force the NCAA to get rid of their sanctions. Their is zero evidence that this is possible and your side has blatantly misstated that position publicly.

I have been involved in quite a few of them and that is without merit at least for the ones I've participated in. Slander? Really? Faison and Kelley have been justifiably criticized, as has the SBoHE and Shaft. If muddying the waters is what you have a problem with, there's a pretty good example with Faison pre and post Wanless interview and with Shaft's baseless Notre Dame claim. Our "side" has acknowledged the existence and continuation of sanctions, as spelled out in the surrender agreement, with retention of the nickname. There is the claim that this is about more than a sports team and a nickname. There is the claim that the sanctions can be endured and tolerated and there is the claim that the Big Sky issue has been exaggerated. The Wanless interview and Faison's apparent backtracking would lend credence to this claim. Whether or not people think that his claims are entitled to any credibility as such concerns are "above his pay grade", the fact remains that you had Faison/Kelley/SBoHE claiming doomsday scenarios and Wanless, AD of Sacramento State a BS member (last I heard AD's were involved in scheduling games) contradicting them and saying that the matter was not even an issue in the discussions of conference ADs. The sanctions are a reality until or if SL wins in Court, ND's Congressional delegation gets a collective spine or the NCAA changes its position. Of these three, only the first seems to be remotely realistic. Who are these people who have received the misrepresentations? Please, give their names? Why have they not gone to the papers saying publicly what those misrepresentations have been and naming the locations and the petitioners who made them? We know the petitioners at every location. Why have these people not attempted to discredit the process then? You had a claim by people where some petitions were supposedly unattended in Cavalier. Why weren't these claims stated?

If honoring the Sioux tribes and observing and respecting their traditions and listening to what they have to say are of such concern with respect to the nickname and if determining what is intended and conveyed by their ceremonies is important, Frank Black Cloud, Archie Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson, John Chaske and 70% of the Spirit Lake Tribe all have a lot more credibility than you or those whom you mentioned.

[watchmaker49]

I have been involved in quite a few of them and that is without merit at least for the ones I've participated in. Slander? Really? Faison and Kelley have been justifiably criticized, as has the SBoHE and Shaft. If muddying the waters is what you have a problem with, there's a pretty good example with Faison pre and post Wanless interview and with Shaft's baseless Notre Dame claim. Our "side" has acknowledged the existence and continuation of sanctions, as spelled out in the surrender agreement, with retention of the nickname. There is the claim that this is about more than a sports team and a nickname. There is the claim that the sanctions can be endured and tolerated and there is the claim that the Big Sky issue has been exaggerated. The Wanless interview and Faison's apparent backtracking would lend credence to this claim. Whether or not people think that his claims are entitled to any credibility as such concerns are "above his pay grade", the fact remains that you had Faison/Kelley/SBoHE claiming doomsday scenarios and Wanless, AD of Sacramento State a BS member (last I heard AD's were involved in scheduling games) contradicting them and saying that the matter was not even an issue in the discussions of conference ADs.

If honoring the Sioux tribes and observing and respecting their traditions and listening to what they have to say are of such concern with respect to the nickname and if determining what is intended and conveyed by their ceremonies is important, Frank Black Cloud, Archie Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson, John Chaske and 70% of the Spirit Lake Tribe all have a lot more credibility than you or those whom you mentioned.

Of those that voted. Where was your concern for all the NAs that were against the logo?

[Siouxperfan7]

You're voting in favor of putting the Fighting Sioux to death... and you have a Sioux logo as your avatar.

Hypocrite!

You are a fans of the University of North Dakota and you support a law that will destroy the UND athletic department as we know it. Who's the hypocrite??

[82SiouxGuy]

So Grant Shaft's public statement, without any corroborating proof, essentially that Notre Dame would not play UND because of the nickname is a half truth? Moving up a retirement deadline more than a year before its expiration in response to a tribal wide vote is a half truth? Terry Wanless contradicting much of what Faison and Kelley had claimed is a half truth? Pat Seaworth's commentary about Fighting Sioux jerseys being akin to just other piled up dirty laundry is a half truth? This is all there in black and white. It's neither a quantum leap in logic nor an employment of deceit or propaganda to realize and conclude that the SBoHE and other parties in charge handled this whole debacle - indeed, are still handling it - very poorly. That does not mean that they had to kiss the posterior of anyone. Certainly, this would mean that you don't make statements a la Shaft and Seaworth and certainly it means that you don't engage in the lobbying process vis-a-vis legislation and then initiate and engage in a legal scrum claiming that the legislative process which you just got done participating in is an unconstitutional infringement upon your authority. Certainly, it would mean that you don't truncate an approval process by over a whole year. Certainly, they could and have done all of this and more. Has it been smart? Obviously not.

Let's try this again. Grant Shaft never said that Notre Dame would not play UND because of the nickname. Notre Dame never said that they would not play UND, so Shaft never would have tried to give a reason.

What really happened was that Notre Dame had a choice of which hockey conference they wanted to belong to. They chose not to join the new National College Hockey Conference with UND, and instead will join Hockey East which includes some schools with which they already have relationships. When Notre Dame announced their decision, Shaft was asked if he knew why they came to that decision. He speculated that one of the factors may have been the issues with the UND nickname. He did not say that it was the only factor. If was a stupid thing for him to say. No one knows for sure why the decision was made, although television rights issues seemed to be a large factor. But Shaft never said that Notre Dame was not going to play UND because of the nickname, because there has never been a statement from anyone saying that Notre Dame was refusing to play UND.

[Chewey]

Of those that voted. Where was your concern for all the NAs that were against the logo?

Oh, this again? Really? Erich Longie and his ilk have been trying to militate against the nickname and logo ever since the vote. They even got one of the pro-nickname tribal council person bounced for some alleged misdoings but, guess what, the person that replaced him is even more of a supporter. If all of these NA's at SL who are against the nickname and logo actually exist, Erich Longie would have had another vote by now or some other action contravening that vote would have happened by now. It's not rocket science. The Committee for Understanding and Respect exists on SL because it has the overwhelming support of the people, as was indicated by the 70% vote in favor. Cling to your Erich Longie inspired pseudo-logic all you want but the fact remains that all of these anti-nickname NA's did not care enough to vote, presuming they exist at all. And, where is your concern for the people who voted and who want to retain the nickname and logo?

[Chewey]

Will not join NCHC because of nickname/logo vs. Will not play UND because of nickname/logo - distinction without a difference at its core. Actually, one could argue that the former is probably worse than the latter. Notre Dame will not join the conference because of the nickname and logo and, therefore, will not be in that conference to play UND because of the nickname and logo.

Borrowed without permission from Goon's blog:

You really have to be arrogant or stupid to interject the Sioux nickname controversy into the Notre Dame decision. But then that's what we get from the higher education in this state. They don't care what the public thinks. All we are is a flock of sheep for them to fleece to benefit those that work for the University system.

One could say that the SBoHE has had the Midas touch for those it's working against on this issue. Who except the NCAA has been a better advocate, albeit unintentional, for the so-called (inaccurately labeled) "nickname at all costers" than the SBoHE?

[dlsiouxfan]

I have been involved in quite a few of them and that is without merit at least for the ones I've participated in. Slander? Really? Faison and Kelley have been justifiably criticized, as has the SBoHE and Shaft. If muddying the waters is what you have a problem with, there's a pretty good example with Faison pre and post Wanless interview and with Shaft's baseless Notre Dame claim. Our "side" has acknowledged the existence and continuation of sanctions, as spelled out in the surrender agreement, with retention of the nickname. There is the claim that this is about more than a sports team and a nickname. There is the claim that the sanctions can be endured and tolerated and there is the claim that the Big Sky issue has been exaggerated. The Wanless interview and Faison's apparent backtracking would lend credence to this claim. Whether or not people think that his claims are entitled to any credibility as such concerns are "above his pay grade", the fact remains that you had Faison/Kelley/SBoHE claiming doomsday scenarios and Wanless, AD of Sacramento State a BS member (last I heard AD's were involved in scheduling games) contradicting them and saying that the matter was not even an issue in the discussions of conference ADs. The sanctions are a reality until or if SL wins in Court, ND's Congressional delegation gets a collective spine or the NCAA changes its position. Of these three, only the first seems to be remotely realistic. Who are these people who have received the misrepresentations? Please, give their names? Why have they not gone to the papers saying publicly what those misrepresentations have been and naming the locations and the petitioners who made them? We know the petitioners at every location. Why have these people not attempted to discredit the process then? You had a claim by people where some petitions were supposedly unattended in Cavalier. Why weren't these claims stated?

If honoring the Sioux tribes and observing and respecting their traditions and listening to what they have to say are of such concern with respect to the nickname and if determining what is intended and conveyed by their ceremonies is important, Frank Black Cloud, Archie Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson, John Chaske and 70% of the Spirit Lake Tribe all have a lot more credibility than you or those whom you mentioned.

That's a pretty bold statement. So Frank Black Cloud, Archie Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson, and 70% of the Spirt Lake tribe have more credibility than Dale Lennon, Dave Hakstol, and Chris Mussman? What have any of them ever done in service to the university? Not a goddamn thing and you know it.

Frank Black Cloud lied openly regarding the sanctions in the Grand Forks Herald when he said that the nickname will not harm the university. It already has and he knows it as he's a shameless liar much like yourself.

[82SiouxGuy]

Will not join NCHC because of nickname/logo vs. Will not play UND because of nickname/logo - distinction without a difference at its core. Actually, one could argue that the former is probably worse than the latter. Notre Dame will not join the conference because of the nickname and logo and, therefore, will not be in that conference to play UND because of the nickname and logo.

Borrowed without permission from Goon's blog:

You really have to be arrogant or stupid to interject the Sioux nickname controversy into the Notre Dame decision. But then that's what we get from the higher education in this state. They don't care what the public thinks. All we are is a flock of sheep for them to fleece to benefit those that work for the University system.

One could say that the SBoHE has had the Midas touch for those it's working against on this issue. Who except the NCAA has been a better advocate, albeit unintentional, for the so-called (inaccurately labeled) "nickname at all costers" than the SBoHE?

He said it might be a factor, not the entire reason. That is completely different from stating that Notre Dame will not play UND. The Big Sky Conference has said they may not want UND because of the nickname issue, but have not said that the schools will not play UND. They are totally different issues. You and your cohorts try to use any inflammatory language you can to paint the UND administration and the SBoHE in as bad a light as possible. That includes stretching the truth and outright lies.

As a matter of fact, many of your arguments are downright petty. Like the SBoHE deciding to move up the date to change the name. Everyone that was paying any attention knew that Standing Rock was not going to change their position. They refused to even discuss it. They weren't going to have another election before the deadline. At the same time, South Dakota was being accepted into the only conference that had shown interest in USD and UND, while that conference wouldn't even accept UND's application. If Standing Rock wasn't going to move from their position it was a good business decision to try to do something to lock in a conference. The deadline was the latest that UND could go without changing the name, it wasn't a guarantee that they would wait until that date. Yet you and your group believe it was part of some kind of conspiracy from the beginning to get rid of the name.

The SBoHE has tried to make good business decisions for UND on this issue. They have made mistakes. But they have made much more of an effort to do what is right for UND than the current nickname-at-all-cost supporters. Most of your group is acting on emotion. Or they don't understand the actual ramifications for UND. Or they don't care. Forcing UND to keep the nickname is a bad business decision, and that is how the decision should be made. What is best for the University of North Dakota, not what is going to make people feel good. The right decision isn't always what is easy or popular. This is one of those issues. Keeping the nickname would be the easy and popular decision. Retiring the nickname is what is best for UND and for the state.

[Chewey]

That's a pretty bold statement. So Frank Black Cloud, Archie Fool Bear, Eunice Davidson, and 70% of the Spirt Lake tribe have more credibility than Dale Lennon, Dave Hakstol, and Chris Mussman? What have any of them ever done in service to the university? Not a goddamn thing and you know it.

Frank Black Cloud lied openly regarding the sanctions in the Grand Forks Herald when he said that the nickname will not harm the university. It already has and he knows it as he's a shameless liar much like yourself.

When it comes to what the Native Americans want, the fact that they have not been heard on the issue and what is intended by their customs and ceremonies, yes. The nickname does not harm UND. The nickname was given honorably and it has been used with honor and has represented an honorable people and a first-rate university for over 80 years. The NCAA's baseless, paranoid, racist, inconsistent and illogical "policy" and its economically monopolistic status, in addition to any other universities who blindly cower to the NCAA, are what can hurt the university.

[Chewey]

You and your cohorts try to use any inflammatory language you can to paint the UND administration and the SBoHE in as bad a light as possible. That includes stretching the truth and outright lies.

The UND Administration and the SBoHE have done that to themselves and no one else can claim credit for it. On the one hand, we're referred to as idiots and a "blind mob" but on the other hand we're smart enough to sustain a campaign of deceit and propaganda sophisticated enough to frustrate and overwhelm the SBoHE, the UND Administration, et al and all of the resources available to them? Contrary to the other side, our message has been simple, truthful and to the point all along. How is it that your "blind mob" has managed to "pull one over" on the ND voter whom your side believes to be uninformed and, as some here have irresponsibly claimed, unintelligent? I guess those presumptions should be no surprise now since that's the perspective that's evidently been held by the UND Administration and the SBoHE all along.

[82SiouxGuy]

You and your cohorts try to use any inflammatory language you can to paint the UND administration and the SBoHE in as bad a light as possible. That includes stretching the truth and outright lies.

The UND Administration and the SBoHE have done that to themselves and no one else can claim credit for it. On the one hand, we're referred to as idiots and a "blind mob" but on the other hand we're smart enough to propagate a campaign of deceit and propaganda sophisticated enough to frustrate and overwhelm the SBoHE, the UND Administration, et al and all of the resources available to them? Which is it? Contrary to the other side, our message has been simple, truthful and to the point all along. How is it that your "blind mob" has managed to "pull one over" on the ND voter whom your side believes to be uninformed and, as some here have irresponsibly claimed, unintelligent? I guess those presumptions should be no surprise now since that's the perspective that's evidently been held by the UND Administration and the SBoHE all along.

I've pointed out several times that your side has been less than truthful. The simple truth is that you are playing on emotion and using that emotion to spin your message. First, people don't like change. Asking to change something that has been around for a long time is difficult. Second, many people in the state aren't paying attention to all of the information. They read that the NCAA is trying to steal the Fighting Sioux nickname. They react by saying no. Some of them will change their mind as they learn the facts. Third, North Dakota has always tried to fight against outsiders. You just try to take advantage of that. The NCAA are the outsiders, and then you paint Kelley and Faison as outsiders also. Many North Dakota residents will automatically come down against the outsiders until they learn the facts.

Many people don't understand the ramifications of the sanctions. You and your group say that the sanctions won't hurt UND, so people believe you. People that understand the situation, like coaches and administrators, disagree. Then you have groups like some NDSU fans that love to support your position because they believe they are helping to destroy UND athletics. Its funny that NDSU supporters understand the situation better than most of your group. I only hope that this group isn't what puts the nickname supporters over the top.

[The Sicatoka]

So what happens when we wake up Friday morning and SL's case has been tossed out of Federal court because of lack standing in a matter strictly between UND and the NCAA?

[Hawkster]

I'm a fan of the North Dakota Fighting Sioux. I do not want UND athletics to exist under a different nickname. If the two choices are a Sioux team under sanctions or no team at all, I'll take the Sioux team under sanctions as my "lesser of two evils" choice. Anybody who wants the nickname gone (for whatever reason) has no business putting a Sioux logo in their avatar.

Wow. Two words mean more to you then an entire institution. I wish my degree was in Psychology rather then Poli Sci, because I sure would love to analyze you.

[darell1976]

I'm a fan of the North Dakota Fighting Sioux. I do not want UND athletics to exist under a different nickname. If the two choices are a Sioux team under sanctions or no team at all, I'll take the Sioux team under sanctions as my "lesser of two evils" choice. Anybody who wants the nickname gone (for whatever reason) has no business putting a Sioux logo in their avatar.

But if the name stays our athletic teams will slowly go down the drain like Alcorn State except ASU has a conference we won't (except hockey), so that means UND will have to find 11 teams to schedule in football and roughly 32 for basketball. Without a conference thats a lot of money coming out of the athletic department which will slowly go down the drain until we pull an Omaha and drop football but then no money for basketball without a home so we drop basketball, except the NCAA tells UND you have to have a minimum number of sports to remain in the NCAA, and since hockey is not in the NAIA...you get where this is leading to, and all for a nickname and logo.

[Goon]

Borrowed without permission from Goon's blog:

HA!!! That's ok, it's on line so no problem.

[Goon]

I'm a fan of the North Dakota Fighting Sioux. I do not want UND athletics to exist under a different nickname.

That's because you have no skin in the game... That's because you never spent a day in the classroom at UND, you don't feel any connection to UND other than sports. UND will be UND no matter what name they call it. Thank God it won't be Flicker Tail either.

[Siouxperfan7]

I'm a fan of the North Dakota Fighting Sioux. I do not want UND athletics to exist under a different nickname. If the two choices are a Sioux team under sanctions or no team at all, I'll take the Sioux team under sanctions as my "lesser of two evils" choice. Anybody who wants the nickname gone (for whatever reason) has no business putting a Sioux logo in their avatar.

You are a fan of a name and logo, not a fan of the University of North Dakota. I get how you feel. You don't want the teams to be known by any other name. But there comes a point where you have to let your selfish desires not blind you by reality. You will take the Sioux team under sanctions, but is that really what is best for the University? Killing our athletic department so you can see your team where a cool looking jersey? Just because you don't want to change, doesn't mean UND shouldn't. Open your eyes!!