NoiseInsideMyHead Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Being known as North Dakota using the interlocking ND is unique Except that the interlocking ND is not unique. Nothing could be further from the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90siouxfan Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 More like in touch with reality. The sooner you realize that, the better.That is your opinion, I will take Fighting Sioux to my grave. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Except that the interlocking ND is not unique. Nothing could be further from the truth. Wow. I can't believe I need to spell out the context of my remark, which you decided to quote, but conveniently left out the majority of the sentence. But, here goes: Being known as ND, with no nickname, is what is unique. SMH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northdakota18 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Yeah let's not pick a new nickname and go against the agreement we signed with the NCAA which says that we have to select a new nickname. That'll stick it to them, and it worked so well for us the first time right? http://www.ag.nd.gov/ncaa/SettlementAgreement.pdf Page 5 section 2d "If UND does not adopt a new nickname and logo, or if the transition to a new nickname and logo is not completed prior to August 15, 2011, then UND will be returned to the list of institutions subject to the policy." We got an extension on that date obviously, but the settlement clearly says that we have to pick a new nickname, like it or not. Nobody is going to force you to like the new nickname or the fact that we're getting one, and I think the majority of us will always refer to them as the Fighting Sioux, but a new nickname is going to be picked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxjoy Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 That's the second time I've heard a comment like that attributed to Kelley. Is this something he routinely does at games - make sure people hear him out loud expressing his disdain for someone else's cheering? Yup, right after he has kicked a bunch of puppies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Wow. I can't believe I need to spell out the context of my remark, which you decided to quote, but conveniently left out the majority of the sentence. But, here goes: Being known as ND, with no nickname, is what is unique. SMH No need to be a jerk. You're the one who used the words "interlocking ND" and "unique." Ain't no "context" gonna fix that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I stated earlier I am not in the no nickname camp for the reason of keeping on using the Sioux name. Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Yup, right after he has kicked a bunch of puppies... Excellent use of sarcasm - but I have a very good friend whose hockey seats are near his who can indeed confirm that it has happened once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Excellent use of sarcasm - but I have a very good friend whose hockey seats are near his who can indeed confirm that it has happened once. It is no secret Kelley wants nothing more than to have anything and everything said and/or seen "Fighting Sioux" at UND athletic events gone ASAP if he could wave a magic wand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
90siouxfan Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 It is no secret Kelley wants nothing more than to have anything and everything said and/or seen "Fighting Sioux" at UND athletic events gone ASAP if he could wave a magic wand.So my plan to mail him a card filled with Kelly Green, White, and Black glitter and a small card that says Sioux Forever every day for the rest of his life has some merit? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 So my plan to mail him a card filled with Kelly Green, White, and Black glitter and a small card that says Sioux Forever every day for the rest of his life has some merit? http://shipyourenemiesglitter.com/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. This is precisely the reason a new name must be slected. If you don't think the NCAA would do such a thing than you are kidding yourselves. Imagine UND football making the playoffs in football and bidding on a home game and the NCAA coming in and saying that they can't host because they have not lived up to the settlement agreement. What if the college hockey playoffs go to host schools again and UND is not allowed to host and has to go on the road as a #1 seed. SOme people will say, "oh that will never happen". Really? And we never thought the NCAA would come in and force schools to drop their nicknames. It's the NCAA, anything can happen!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. U are so wrong about everything that I will refuse from ever speaking to u about it (unless u really pizz me off) only thing ur right about is I will be a Fighting Sioux Forever but not for the reason u stated - u make me feel sorry for u & ur way of thinking 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I'm hurt deeply. I'm not sure I'll ever get over it. . . . . I'm over it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Big Cocks or Rough Riders...........let's vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 http://kriis.com/Mosasaur/files/page16_1.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Big Cocks Athletics...it's Shagadelic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Google all the images Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 No need to be a jerk. You're the one who used the words "interlocking ND" and "unique." Ain't no "context" gonna fix that. I apologize for coming off as a jerk. For the record it seemed as if you were too, by only quoting half my sentence and drawing an inaccurate conclusion that was not based on the context of my post. Yes, the context. Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. I change my vote: Here come your University of North Dakota Fear Mongerers!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 It is no secret Kelley wants nothing more than to have anything and everything said and/or seen "Fighting Sioux" at UND athletic events gone ASAP if he could wave a magic wand. I can't say I blame him. What a weird thing for a college administrator to have to deal with every day. If I was in his position, I might want it all to vanish too. But, I'm not. I'm a pesky alumnus that will wear his Fighting Sioux gear to games when they are called the Fighting Screaming Weasels. (I'm holding out hope...) 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Laudable for you; however, many in the "no nickname" camp really are for it for the specific reason you cite: to be able to continue using the old one (and think or feel like they are "stickin' it to the man!"). One morning the NCAA attorneys will: - wake up, - find that a Power 5 school has a scandal brewing, - need a distraction for the media from that, - realize that they've been played by those hick in fly-over North Dakota, - pull out their copy of the Settlement Agreement, - highlight the word "new", - make a statement about "not selecting a new nickname is fostering a hostile and abusive environment" which is what the Policy and the Settlement were to prevent, - put UND back under the Policy, - and put out a press release about it. The media lackeys will miss the P5 scandal story and instead write about how the NCAA is serious about "diversity and inclusion" and how they are rightly slapping down those contract-breaking rube hicks that are still fostering a hostile and abusive environment by not taking the last step in retiring their terrible nickname. Grandiose? Boisterous? Preposterous? Really? Uh ... the same type of scenario got us ... here. Perhaps they may need a media distraction from Paterno's ghost. http://www.wsj.com/articles/will-penn-state-rain-on-ncaas-parade-1421279399?autologin=y Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Perhaps they may need a media distraction from Paterno's ghost. http://www.wsj.com/articles/will-penn-state-rain-on-ncaas-parade-1421279399?autologin=y That would work to get us through the first three bullet points of my list. The NCAA surely does not want that dominating the college sports politico-chatter. Instead they'd rather say ... "Don't look at how we wrongly strong-armed Penn State and they're now fighting back. Look over here at how we can strong-arm UND and get away with it!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 That would work to get us through the first three bullet points of my list. The NCAA surely does not want that dominating the college sports politico-chatter. Instead they'd rather say ... "Don't look at how we wrongly strong-armed Penn State and they're now fighting back. Look over here at how we can strong-arm UND and get away with it!" Guess who blinked first ... http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/sports/ncaafootball/joe-paterno-penn-state-ncaa-wins-restored.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news 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.