Submitted Nicknames

[Old Time Hockey]

As much as I love all of this boring legal chatter. My vote would still be to remain "University of North Dakota" "UND" What determines a nickname? North Dakota can be our name, nothing offensive there.

And for that you are in the majority. No nickname will be the majority over any nickname that has been presented.

[darell1976]

And for that you are in the majority. No nickname will be the majority over any nickname that has been presented.

Proof?

[siouxfan512]

Proof?

 

Read any message board or comments related to the subject. No name is by no means unanimous; it is most certainly the majority. Doesn't mean it will actually happen, but it is certainly the most popular choice among fans.

[fightingsioux4life]

Read any message board or comments related to the subject. No name is by no means unanimous; it is most certainly the majority. Doesn't mean it will actually happen, but it is certainly the most popular choice among fans.

Not scientific at all.

[siouxfan512]

Not scientific at all.

 

Unless you have anything to support your statement that it isn't the most popular, go troll somewhere else. Your statement carries as much weight as mine does, so stop looking for an argument. If University of North Dakota makes it to the ballot, my opinion is that it will be chosen. IF it makes it to the ballot.

[nodakhoops]

Read any message board or comments related to the subject. No name is by no means unanimous; it is most certainly the majority. Doesn't mean it will actually happen, but it is certainly the most popular choice among fans.

 

The vocal minority is not always the majority. For example when this issue went to a statewide vote, by reading message boards, facebook comments, etc I would've thought people would've voted to keep the name, but it wasn't even a close vote. Not saying you are wrong, but I would caution using things like message boards and social media to get the pulse of the majority on this. 

[darell1976]

Read any message board or comments related to the subject. No name is by no means unanimous; it is most certainly the majority. Doesn't mean it will actually happen, but it is certainly the most popular choice among fans.

Unless they poll 100% of UND fans across just North Dakota there is no clear majority.

[darell1976]

The vocal minority is not always the majority. For example when this issue went to a statewide vote, by reading message boards, facebook comments, etc I would've thought people would've voted to keep the name, but it wasn't even a close vote. Not saying you are wrong, but I would caution using things like message boards and social media to get the pulse of the majority on this.

^^^^this

[fightingsioux4life]

Unless you have anything to support your statement that it isn't the most popular, go troll somewhere else. Your statement carries as much weight as mine does, so stop looking for an argument. If University of North Dakota makes it to the ballot, my opinion is that it will be chosen. IF it makes it to the ballot.

I was stating a simple fact, get over it.  You cannot base anything on what is on a message board.  I would like a scientific poll done on this topic, that would carry some weight.  Certainly more weight than you and others on here that somehow think a legally-binding agreement suddenly doesn't matter.

[CMSioux]

The vocal minority is not always the majority. For example when this issue went to a statewide vote, by reading message boards, facebook comments, etc I would've thought people would've voted to keep the name, but it wasn't even a close vote. Not saying you are wrong, but I would caution using things like message boards and social media to get the pulse of the majority on this. 

There were a lot of people who voted no that in reality would have wanted to keep the name but they felt they had to vote no because it was being presented that UND would be voted out of the Big Sky, that every school in the country wouldn't schedule us (in part because the NCAA sent them a letter telling them not to). If it would have been a simple matter of do you want to keep the nickname (and there were no threats on the table) I think the vote would have gone differently. 

[engelbunny]

Here is the actual NCAA Policy:  http://nmai.si.edu/sites/1/files/pdf/seminars-symposia/NCAA-Mascot-Policy.pdf

 

By not having a nickname, UND violates no part of the policy. 

 

As far as hosting events, the Alerus Center has no imagery that violates the policy.  As for the Ralph - that was settled, and the settlement is referenced in this press release from the ND Attorney General:  http://www.ag.nd.gov/NewsReleases/2012/09-26-12.pdf

[mksioux]

 

As far as hosting events, the Alerus Center has no imagery that violates the policy.  As for the Ralph - that was settled, and the settlement is referenced in this press release from the ND Attorney General:  http://www.ag.nd.gov/NewsReleases/2012/09-26-12.pdf

Thanks for finding this.  Here is the relevant part:

 

Once the outside signs are removed the arena is in compliance and UND would be entitled to host championship events in the two facilities. The NCAA also will remove the University of North Dakota from the list of offending schools deemed to be using hostile or abusive names and imagery.

 

For those of you that like to strictly construe paragraph 2(d) of the settlement agreement as not allowing "no nickname" and think this is a black and white issue  -- Please tell me why the NCAA, as part of an addendum to the settlement agreement in September 2012, would affirmatively remove UND from the list of offending schools when it was, according to you, in violation of the settlement agreement?

 

Anyone who can find a copy of the actual 2012 addendum to the settlement agreement (rather than just the press release), please post. 

[darell1976]

Thanks for finding this. Here is the relevant part:

For those of you that like to strictly read paragraph 2(d) of the settlement agreement word-for-word and think this is a black and white issue -- Please tell me why the NCAA, as part of an addendum to the settlement agreement in September 2012, would affirmatively remove UND from the list of offending schools when it was, according to you, in violation of the settlement agreement?

Anyone who can find a copy of the actual 2012 addendum to the settlement agreement (rather than just the press release), please post.

Maybe because of the cooling off period. The NCAA knows they won't be the Fighting Sioux or any other name for 3 years, guess what times up and a new name will be picked next month.

[engelbunny]

Addendum:  http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/AddendumToSettlement.pdf

[Siouxperfan7]

Addendum:  http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/AddendumToSettlement.pdf

 

The key phrase that you need to take note of:

 

The University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the policy......provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Amendment."

 

So in order to remain of the list of instituions not in compliance with the policy, and have the ability to host NCAA playoff games, it must be compliant with the terms of the settlement agreement which required UND to have a new nickname.

 

I am not sure how people can think there is any grey area here.  It is that simple.  It is in black and white, in writing signed by Wayne Stenehjem representing the University of North Dakota.

[engelbunny]

Again, here is the actual settlement agreement:

http://www.ag.nd.gov/ncaa/SettlementAgreement.pdf

Paragraph 2.d. on page 6 (page 5 of the .pdf) is the one that everyone is focused on.  I feel that the first sentence is the controlling language for the paragraph:

 “UND will announce that its Athletic Department will transition to a new nickname and logo which do not violate the Policy or render UND subject to the Policy”

UND has retired the Fighting Sioux name and logo.  UND currently does not have a nickname, but it does have a logo, the interlocking ND.  The current logo does not violate the policy nor does it render UND subject to the policy.

Does UND need to pick a new nickname?  I don’t think so.  I am no attorney, and have not stayed at a Holiday Inn Express lately, but as a reasonable person, I believe the language was written by people who just assumed that any NCAA member school would have one.  However, it is not an NCAA requirement that its members have a nickname to be able to compete in NCAA sanctioned events.  Also, not having a nickname does not violate the actual policy in question, nor does it do any harm to the NCAA.

Sentence three seems to give everyone the chills: “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.”  That seems to demand that a new nickname be adopted.  

However, I read it more like this: “If UND decides to retain the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, or if the transition away from the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo is not completed...”  That doesn’t seem so ominous. 

 

Remember, the NCAA never said UND couldn't be the Fighting Sioux or use the logo, they just said they couldn't do it at their sanctioned events, and wouldn't be able to host events.  They really don't care what an institution's name or logo is, or if they even have one, so long as their name and logo does not viloate the NCAA policy.

I don’t believe that the NCAA will declare UND subject to a policy it is not currently violating, and by the policies own language, UND is not subject to.  To do so, the NCAA would have to make the argument that by having no nickname, UND, as an institution, is affirmatively sanctioning the use of the Fighting Sioux name, or some other name that would violate the policy.

 

In addition, the arenas UND plays in, both the Alerus and the Ralph complex, are in complete compliance with the NCAA policy; the Alerus always was and the NCAA declared the Ralph complex to be in compliance by execution of the addendum to the settlement.



(Edited for spelling - probably still full of mistakes.)

[siouxfan512]

This thread has gotten pretty obnoxious with all of the legal chatter, likely from people who have no realy knowledge on the matter. I'm still pulling for "University of North Dakota"; lets see how it plays out.

[siouxfan512]

Again, here is the actual settlement agreement:

http://www.ag.nd.gov/ncaa/SettlementAgreement.pdf

Paragraph 2.d. on page 6 (page 5 of the .pdf) is the one that everyone is focused on.  I feel that the first sentence is the controlling language for the paragraph:

 “UND will announce that its Athletic Department will transition to a new nickname and logo which do not violate the Policy or render UND subject to the Policy”

UND has retired the Fighting Sioux name and logo.  UND currently does not have a nickname, but it does have a logo, the interlocking ND.  The current logo does not violate the policy nor does it render UND subject to the policy.

Does UND need to pick a new nickname?  I don’t think so.  I am no attorney, and have not stayed at a Holiday Inn Express lately, but as a reasonable person, I believe the language was written by people who just assumed that any NCAA member school would have one.  However, it is not an NCAA requirement that it's members have a nickname to be able to compete in NCAA sancitoned events.  Also, not having a nickname does not violate the actual policy in question, nor does it do any harm to the NCAA.

Sentence three seems to give everyone the chills: “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.”  That seems to demand that a new nickname be adopted.  

However, I read it more like this: “If UND decides to retain the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, or if the transition away from the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo is not completed...”  That doesn’t seem so ominous. 

 

Remember, the NCAA never said UND couldn't be the Fighting Sioux or use the logo, they just said they couldn't do it at their sanctioned events, and wouldn't be able to host events.  They really don't care what an institutions name or logo is, or if they even have one, so long as their name and logo does not viloate the NCAA policy.

I don’t believe that the NCAA will declare UND subject to a policy it is not currently violating, and by the policies own language, UND is not subject to.  To do so, the NCAA would have to make the argument that by having no nickname, UND, as an institution, is affirmatively sanctioning the use of the Fighting Sioux name, or some other name that would violate the policy.

 

In addition, the arenas UND plays in, both the Alerus and the Ralph complex, are in complete compliance with the NCAA policy; the Alerus always was and the NCAA declared the Ralph complex to be in compliance by execution of the addendum to the settlement.

 

 

hahaha, love the Holiday Inn Express part

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

I am not sure how people can think there is any grey area here.  It is that simple.  It is in black and white, in writing signed by Wayne Stenehjem representing the University of North Dakota.

 

"Black and white, clear as crystal."

 

[mksioux]

The key phrase that you need to take note of:

 

The University of North Dakota will be removed from any list of institutions not in compliance with the policy......provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Amendment."

 

So in order to remain of the list of instituions not in compliance with the policy, and have the ability to host NCAA playoff games, it must be compliant with the terms of the settlement agreement which required UND to have a new nickname.

 

I am not sure how people can think there is any grey area here.  It is that simple.  It is in black and white, in writing signed by Wayne Stenehjem representing the University of North Dakota.

The key word here is "remains" which means "to continue in the same state; continue to be as specified."  This proves my point.  As of September 24, 2012, the NCAA considered UND to be in compliance of the Settlement Agreement.  On September 24, 2012, UND did not have a nickname.  Figure it out.

[siouxfan512]

Lets say the NCAA requires a "new" nickname and logo, meaning anything other than Fighting Sioux. There is no stipulation on what that name and logo is, so long as it is not deemed Hostile or Abusive. Therefore, why is can "University of North Dakota" "North Dakota" "UND" not be considered the nickname of the University's choice? There is no stipulation within the NCAA, that I am aware of, that mandates a nickname fall withing the category of some type of obscure animal, person, group, color shape, etc.

 

So long as UND is not the Fighting Sioux or another non-PC name, I don't see the NCAA having a big issue. If Pres Kelley said "University of North Dakota" was still on the table at some point, then it is probably fine from an NCAA stand point. There have probably been plenty of conversation between him or University groups and the NC$$ that we don't hear about.

[mksioux]

Addendum:  http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/AddendumToSettlement.pdf

This addendum to the settlement agreement convinces me that the NCAA considers UND to be in compliance with the Settlement Agreement without a nickname.  There's really no other logical way to interpret it.  This is likely why the committee and President Kelley have said "no nickname" is an option.  But I know many of you won't see it that way.  

 

I'm not saying "no nickname" is the best way to go.  Many of you have good arguments for why UND should adopt a new nickname.  But please stop using the Settlement Agreement as the basis of your argument. 

[darell1976]

The key word here is "remains" which means "to continue in the same state; continue to be as specified." This proves my point. As of September 24, 2012, the NCAA considered UND to be in compliance of the Settlement Agreement. On September 24, 2012, UND did not have a nickname. Figure it out.

They can't have a nickname until the cooling off period is over Jan 1st it was over and here we are picking a new name. Saying we haven't had a nickname since 2012 is not entirely true since we were bound by law not to have one until 2015.

[nodakhoops]

Fan of no name, but this whole argument is why UND should move on for the betterment of the school. We are playing in the Frozen Four today and people are talking about the schools name. Pick a name and start marketing/branding it. The people who want to remain nameless will eventually come around.  After the last 10 years of this it has gotten old. 

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

They can't have a nickname until the cooling off period is over Jan 1st it was over and here we are picking a new name. Saying we haven't had a nickname since 2012 is not entirely true since we were bound by law not to have one until 2015.

 

Yet, the enactment of a law by the North Dakota legislature is NOT a defense to breach of contract.  Had the NCAA been so inclined, it could have sued UND for failing to adopt a nickname in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement.  The legislatively mandated 'cooling off' period would have explained the breach, but not excused it.

 

I wonder why the NCAA didn't go that route.  Hmmm...