Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

And then there were 7 (vote!)


jimdahl

Which remaining names are acceptable  

184 members have voted

  1. 1. Which could you live with? (vote more than one)

    • Fighting Hawks
      14
    • Green Hawks
      8
    • Nodaks
      19
    • North Dakota
      75
    • North Stars
      33
    • Roughriders
      116
    • Sundogs
      11


Recommended Posts

Does it seem so incredibly painful that if they go with the easy, lame and unoriginal Roughriders, like has been talked about for so many years....

That this whole god forsaken process was a magnanimous waste of time, money, and resources?

I mean really we are coming down to....for all the time and money spent,

Either pilfering a used nickname form a high school down the street, or just not even picking one.

The lessons on failure here should be taught in every school in the state, from elementary to MBAs

 

 I would pretty much have the same opinion of this whole process as yours if the final selection turns out to be just "North Dakota."  What a monumental waste of time this will have been. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I would pretty much have the same opinion of this whole process as yours if the final selection turns out to be just "North Dakota."  What a monumental waste of time this will have been. 

I think you are right on.  For that reason I don't think just North Dakota is going to happen.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at the poll on this thread Ridas wins by a landside "majority" of the vote!  And we all know we are pretty smart around here.

 

"I'll take "What is the definition of majority" for $800 Alex"....................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 As has been pointed out, people can vote multiple times on some of these newspaper polls, and here at SiouxSports there's what, a hundred plus rubes that have voted....  is that enough to have a true pulse of all those who may vote?

 

a lot of people have mentioned we need to have a nickname, as it's important for branding, and like Norm on Cheers, everyone will now know our name.  Nationwide, worldwide even. 

 

But,  when the consultants recommend that Roughrider is a poor choice for marketing and branding reasons because, outside of the immediate region, it is only well known for its dirty connotation, the pro nickname/pro Roughrider folks apparently all of a sudden don't care about branding  and marketing ability outside the immediate region anymore.   It's an interesting take, for sure.

 

The consultants have probably taken 5 minutes to read the Wikipedia entry concerning Roughriders, and realized that the Roughriders were not North Dakotans.  Only one Roughrider, a 16 year old son of the Head Veterinarian at NDSU, was from North Dakota.   The consultants are most likely struggling with the tangential link to get from southwestern U.S. cavalry group, to Teddy Roosevelt's time in North Dakota, to North Dakota nickname.  (oh that's right, there's an award, lol)  The consultants probably don't understand why some people are interested in choosing a condom name that creates marketing and branding challenges.  The consultants were hired for a reason.  Hopefully the committee doesn't go all rube and just do their own thing without taking any advice.  Hopefully the committee listens to the consultants' concerns.

 

Where the rubber meets the road, Roughriders might be a hard sell.  

  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if their isn't a dirty connotation that can be applied to a name, it probably sucks.  And if the name doesn't suck then it probably has already been used by somebody. And if.....

 

We can go round and round forever.  ITS A F'CKING NICKNAME.  Get over yourselves.  Pick a damn name and get this over with so the University and it's fans can move on and start investing our capital in something that matters.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The consultants were hired for a reason.  Hopefully the committee doesn't go all rube and just do their own thing without taking any advice.  Hopefully the committee listens to the consultants' concerns.

 

  

 

You do know that mentality, if followed by the committee, will leave UND with either _____ Hawks or Sundogs when this is all said and done?   I do hope you fully understand that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no Fighting Sioux tribe* either but that didn't work.

The < adjective > < tribe name > pattern (like Fighting Sioux, or North Dakota) as a nickname would not pass muster.

*There's Spirit Lake Sioux, and Standing Rock Sioux, and Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux, but no Fighting Sioux tribe.

 

I get what you are saying, but Chewey makes a solid point, that they would be identifying as a State, not a tribe. your are simply disecting the state name to support your own initiative.

 

Then again, there is the clarification of "no nickname", making the argument of "North Dakota" involving a tribal name even less relevant. Real question here is, "Is remaining The University of North Dakota acceptable to the NCAA?" If the NCAA and UND answer that questions publicly, we can drop the majority of this debate and come to a conscensus.

 

If "UND" is acceptable, then it really comes down to a vote, and I see it doing very well. Keep in mind that there have been no great polls to show conscensus. They have all been directed towards different crowds. A real vote would involve a much broader group.

 

If "UND" is not acceptable, then we drop a big fight. At this point I see the "UND" crowd being split between NoDaks and Roughriders. With Roughriders already having so much steam, I see this winning in a popular vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know that mentality, if followed by the committee, will leave UND with either _____ Hawks or Sundogs when this is all said and done?   I do hope you fully understand that!

All the remaining new nickname choices fail to live up to the parameters set forth at the beginning of this process...  and I find none of them to be great choices. 

 

But, with what's left, If a nickname is chosen, i'd be fine with one of the Hawks, or Nodaks.   North Dakota is filled with Hawks.  Watching them sit stoically on a post, or hunt their prey in the fields never gets old.  

 

Nodaks probably works for a majority of the no nickname crowd, and would allow for many possibilities for mascots and logos that reflect North Dakota pride.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it seem so incredibly painful that if they go with the easy, lame and unoriginal Roughriders, like has been talked about for so many years....

That this whole god forsaken process was a magnanimous waste of time, money, and resources?

I mean really we are coming down to....for all the time and money spent,

Either pilfering a used nickname form a high school down the street, or just not even picking one.

The lessons on failure here should be taught in every school in the state, from elementary to MBAs

 

Whats your suggestion for a new name?  I think its easy to point at the list and say everything sucks, but whats your solution.  Understand that your suggestion will be picked apart by the majority of people who think they get a say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reaction to the final 7 here on the MN side of the river is a big fat, "Meh....is that all they've got?"

 

http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2015/06/hawks-dogs-daks-and-war-in-und-nickname-race/

 

If I was running PadillaCRT - the firm that's "consulting" on the new name, I'd hate to have my name associated with this whole process.

 

I know names can grow on you - reaction to the "Timberwolves" and the "Wild" was far from unanimously positive, but this collection of mediocrity could have been generated by a middle school marketing class.  Any chance for an 11th hour admission that these all stink and a reboot with new committee members and advisers?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reaction to the final 7 here on the MN side of the river is a big fat, "Meh....is that all they've got?"

 

http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2015/06/hawks-dogs-daks-and-war-in-und-nickname-race/

 

If I was running PadillaCRT - the firm that's "consulting" on the new name, I'd hate to have my name associated with this whole process.

 

I know names can grow on you - reaction to the "Timberwolves" and the "Wild" was far from unanimously positive, but this collection of mediocrity could have been generated by a middle school marketing class.  Any chance for an 11th hour admission that these all stink and a reboot with new committee members and advisers?

 

We're all ears -- what have you got for an idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If UND would have decided to go with Roughriders in 2012 after the public vote to retire the name, there would have been lynch mobs with burning torches demanding that the people get a say in the process.  So know that there has been overwhelming public imput into the name and full transparancy in the process, people are upset.  So I guess it's a lose/lose situation.  But I think that being as transparent as possible is better in the long run.  Maybe Roughriders would have been selected had they nt taken public input and formed committees and had all these narrowing down procedures.  Sure it may have taken more time, cost a lot more money, but the process is more accepted (not saying better) thatn a group of people in a closed room deciding on a nickname.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if their isn't a dirty connotation that can be applied to a name, it probably sucks.  And if the name doesn't suck then it probably has already been used by somebody. And if.....

 

We can go round and round forever.  ITS A F'CKING NICKNAME.  Get over yourselves.  Pick a damn name and get this over with so the University and it's fans can move on and start investing our capital in something that matters.

 

Like a new on-campus football stadium? Lets do it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if their isn't a dirty connotation that can be applied to a name, it probably sucks.  And if the name doesn't suck then it probably has already been used by somebody. And if.....

 

We can go round and round forever.  ITS A F'CKING NICKNAME.  Get over yourselves.  Pick a damn name and get this over with so the University and it's fans can move on and start investing our capital in something that matters.

The bolded part....  are you referring to Roughriders, or Sundoggers?   Please specify....   :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worry about the consultant's capabilities and credentials if they know nothing about certain words beyond what they read on urban dictionary. Then again, maybe they are personally familiar with certain definitions of certain words, and unfamiliar with Teddy Roosevelt and his relationship with North Dakota. 

 

 

Then again, that probably explains every consultant's fascination with < school color here > Hawks. It's "safe" and all they know. :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the voting here, it appears that Roughriders is gaining the momentum I believed it would.  However, the second place name, "North Dakota", is carrying quite a few votes also, even though it is trailing Roughriders by quite a bit. 

 

I discount websites, including the Fargo Forum, that allow multiple votes.  I hope the committee allows one vote per stakeholder, and that they include Roughriders, North Dakota and another name that has support.  I think Roughriders would easily gather over 60% of the vote and be considered the nickname, but to be truly transparent in the process, North Dakota deserves to be in the final three.  If North Dakota is not put in the final three, there will be a very vocal minority feeling left out of the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the voting here, it appears that Roughriders is gaining the momentum I believed it would.  However, the second place name, "North Dakota", is carrying quite a few votes also, even though it is trailing Roughriders by quite a bit. 

 

I discount websites, including the Fargo Forum, that allow multiple votes.  I hope the committee allows one vote per stakeholder, and that they include Roughriders, North Dakota and another name that has support.  I think Roughriders would easily gather over 60% of the vote and be considered the nickname, but to be truly transparent in the process, North Dakota deserves to be in the final three.  If North Dakota is not put in the final three, there will be a very vocal minority feeling left out of the process.

 

I too agree that North Dakota should make the final 3.  However, if the vote is truly what will decide the final nickname, a plurality cannot be named the majority in such case.  A vote should be held on the 3, and if there is not a clear majority (greater than 50%) in favor of one name (or no name), the bottom choice should be dropped and a final vote held on the top 2.  Not the best process, but majority (not plurality) should rule.

 

People (Port) writing about how a majority want no nickname, when in reality it's maybe 30%, has been bothering me.  The vocal minority has been controlling this whole thing for decades (first white professors against the name, then a minority wanting to force UND to keep the name and face sanctions, and now a minority wanting UND to remain nameless) and it's long past time to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'd probably Chrysler!*

 

 

*Say it slowly ... cry slur. :D

I'm not sure if you beat me or just beat me into submission.  but either way...UNCLE!

 

Does it seem so incredibly painful that if they go with the easy, lame and unoriginal Roughriders, like has been talked about for so many years....

That this whole god forsaken process was a magnanimous waste of time, money, and resources?

I mean really we are coming down to....for all the time and money spent,

Either pilfering a used nickname form a high school down the street, or just not even picking one.

The lessons on failure here should be taught in every school in the state, from elementary to MBAs

 

 

If UND would have decided to go with Roughriders in 2012 after the public vote to retire the name, there would have been lynch mobs with burning torches demanding that the people get a say in the process.  So know that there has been overwhelming public imput into the name and full transparancy in the process, people are upset.  So I guess it's a lose/lose situation.  But I think that being as transparent as possible is better in the long run.  Maybe Roughriders would have been selected had they nt taken public input and formed committees and had all these narrowing down procedures.  Sure it may have taken more time, cost a lot more money, but the process is more accepted (not saying better) thatn a group of people in a closed room deciding on a nickname.

exactly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worry about the consultant's capabilities and credentials if they know nothing about certain words beyond what they read on urban dictionary. Then again, maybe they are personally familiar with certain definitions of certain words, and unfamiliar with Teddy Roosevelt and his relationship with North Dakota.

Then again, that probably explains every consultant's fascination with < school color here > Hawks. It's "safe" and all they know. :D

It doesn't appear the consultants are using the urban dictionary for their research; if they were, Sundogs would've also been flagged as dirty.

I think they're just looking at the potential challenges of rebranding a very well known condom as a nickname.

I think their role is to help point out problems that could arise, and steer schools away from making risky/risqué decisions that could result in a choice that winds up backfiring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too agree that North Dakota should make the final 3.  However, if the vote is truly what will decide the final nickname, a plurality cannot be named the majority in such case.  A vote should be held on the 3, and if there is not a clear majority (greater than 50%) in favor of one name (or no name), the bottom choice should be dropped and a final vote held on the top 2.  Not the best process, but majority (not plurality) should rule.

 

People (Port) writing about how a majority want no nickname, when in reality it's maybe 30%, has been bothering me.  The vocal minority has been controlling this whole thing for decades (first white professors against the name, then a minority wanting to force UND to keep the name and face sanctions, and now a minority wanting UND to remain nameless) and it's long past time to stop.

Sounds like the Louisiana Jungle Primary system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they're just looking at the potential challenges of rebranding a very well known condom as a nickname.

 

We should ask the Trojans, all of them, how they deal with that:

 

Anderson College (Anderson, South Carolina)
Dakota State University (Madison, South Dakota)
Hannibal-LaGrange College (Hannibal, Missouri)
Mount Olive College (Mount Olive, North Carolina)
Taylor University (Upland, Indiana)
Trevecca Nazarene University (Nashville, Tennessee)
Trinity International University (Deerfield, Illinois)
Troy University (Troy, Alabama) (former name: Troy State University)
University of Arkansas-Little Rock (Little Rock, Arkansas)
University of Southern California (Los Angeles, California) (men's team)
Virginia State University (Petersburg, Virginia)
 
Goodness people, I thought universities promoted such things these days. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't appear the consultants are using the urban dictionary for their research; if they were, Sundogs would've also been flagged as dirty.

I think they're just looking at the potential challenges of rebranding a very well known condom as a nickname.

I think their role is to help point out problems that could arise, and steer schools away from making risky/risqué decisions that could result in a choice that winds up backfiring.

 

I agree with your last sentence that that is their job, but I don't agree that they are doing it well. As multiple posters pointed out one of the most recognizable names in college is the USC trojans and if a high school is mature enough to be called Roughriders I think a D1 college can be. How highly paid consultants can't see that is beyond me. The Roughrider name has more ties to the state than any of the remaining names and we would be the only Roughriders in D1 athletics, but they can't see that either i guess. Must be what you get when you hire east coasters who have probably never stepped on ND soil before. Luckily the committee realized it is one of the top choices and voted it as such. 

 

I also agree with someone who said if we let the consultants decide we are going to end up with Sundogs or some type of Hawk. The list of schools that changed from native nicknames to some type of hawks is mind blowing. Glad the highly paid consultant are only paid to give "input." I'll take being a Roughrider over some PC Sundog or Hawk any day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with your last sentence that that is their job, but I don't agree that they are doing it well. As multiple posters pointed out one of the most recognizable names in college is the USC trojans and if a high school is mature enough to be called Roughriders I think a D1 college can be. How highly paid consultants can't see that is beyond me. The Roughrider name has more ties to the state than any of the remaining names and we would be the only Roughriders in D1 athletics, but they can't see that either i guess. Must be what you get when you hire east coasters who have probably never stepped on ND soil before. Luckily the committee realized it is one of the top choices and voted it as such.

I also agree with someone who said if we let the consultants decide we are going to end up with Sundogs or some type of Hawk. The list of schools that changed from native nicknames to some type of hawks is mind blowing. Glad the highly paid consultant are only paid to give "input." I'll take being a Roughrider over some PC Sundog or Hawk any day.

So similar to every other post...you want rough riders :). Don't worry bud, it looks as though that one has a strong chance of winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...