siouxfan512 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 This committee was put together to come up with a new nicname for UND. ANd now that it is apparent that they will do that, people that wanted no nickname are upset?!! People....this was what they were asked to do. TO come up with a new nickname. North Dakota is not a nickname. Also, putting TO in all caps doesn't give that sentence any additional significance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 I really think the list of schools that have dropped native american nicknames and gone to some version of "xyz Hawks" needs to get more play in the public eye. Was that you, jdub27 that put that list together? That's an eye opening list that basically says dropping your nickname and picking something with Hawks in it is like jumping over the cliff with the rest of the lemmings. The only think it is better than is Sundogs. Letter to the Herald, anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 You got your way, we know, so you are all giddy, we get it... I didn't get my way, my top choice was eliminated long, long ago. I really think the list of schools that have dropped native american nicknames and gone to some version of "xyz Hawks" needs to get more play in the public eye. Was that you, jdub27 that put that list together? That's an eye opening list that basically says dropping your nickname and picking something with Hawks in it is like jumping over the cliff with the rest of the lemmings. The only think it is better than is Sundogs. Ask and ye shall receive. Source here. There is also a handful that changed to a variation of "Hawks" that previously didn't have a NA related nickname that is not included on the list below. Not to mention Hawks (or some variation of) is used by 28 other 4-year schools, the 8th most popular. Pretty original too. There are 9 other colleges at various levels who had a Native American related nickname and now have some variation of "Hawks": Chowam Hawks - formerly Braves (2006) Dickinson State Blue Hawks - formerly Savages (1972) IUP Crimson Hawks - formerly Indians (2006) Louisiana-Monroe Warhawks - formerly Indians (2006) Miami RedHawks - formerly Redskins (1997) Ripon Red Hawks - formerly Redmen (1985) Southeast Missouri State Redhawks - formerly Indians and Otahkians (2005) Seattle Redhawks - formerly Chieftains (2000) Stonehill Skyhawks - formerly Chieftains (2005) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'm a little surprised people are questioning the integrity of the committee members. If a fix was in, perhaps in the composition of the committee (such that one constituency was outnumbered), but the committee seriously debated the names and did their best to follow the process. Dropping North Dakota was far from unanimous, and there were numerous attempts from the expected constituencies (athletes, students) to keep it alive. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodakhoops Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's been said already but this has really shown the vast majority that want no nickname just wanted it to remain fighting Sioux. I think everyone should consider what would happen if that were the case. The same nickname controversy hampster wheel we've been on for the past 20 years will continue going. There were probably groups ready if that happened. That is not something we need, we need to move forward. i think at this point people need to rally around what ever name they like best for UND whatever that is of the five. If Sundogs only has 10 percent of the vote there is no way Kelly picks it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4evrSIOUX Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 UND was forced to give up the Fighting Sioux nickname because Standing Rock would not allow the tribe to vote on the issue. Most intelligent people believed that a vote by the tribal members would have been in favor of keeping the name. In today's society the majority no longer matter. What do they know ? The fact that a small minority can dictate what happens just rubs a lot of people the wrong way. A similar thing is now happening in deciding what to do about a new nickname. Arguably a majority of UND fans would like to continue without a nickname but a small group thinks it knows what is best for all and will not allow that option to be put to a vote. What are they afraid of ? The same thing that Standing Rock was afraid would happen, that the vote would not go the way they wanted. Exactly!!!! History is repeating itself. Different committee, same behavior. It was that behavior that got us in this mess in the first place! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'm a little surprised people are questioning the integrity of the committee members. If a fix was in, perhaps in the composition of the committee (such that one constituency was outnumbered), but the committee seriously debated the names and did their best to follow the process. Dropping North Dakota was far from unanimous, and there were numerous attempts from the expected constituencies (athletes, students) to keep it alive. Fix........that's a stretch. Guidance from Twamley Hall.........zero doubt. Consultants were brought in to only to give this committee what consultants do and what Kelley wants......a simple generic non-descript, non offensive name that will be palatable by the masses. My sense from hearing from some that know way more than me on this process is that Fighting Hawks is the leader heading down the stretch with Sundogs being the "let's pray we don't get stuck with that" option as to make Fighting Hawks much more acceptable. It kind of like do you want hot fudge or whip cream with sprinkles on your smoldering pile of ____! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'm a little surprised people are questioning the integrity of the committee members. If a fix was in, perhaps in the composition of the committee (such that one constituency was outnumbered), but the committee seriously debated the names and did their best to follow the process. Dropping North Dakota was far from unanimous, and there were numerous attempts from the expected constituencies (athletes, students) to keep it alive. There have been multiple sources, saying the committee is already set on North Stars, regardless of what happens going forward. Not saying those sources are all accurance; but all too often, when there is smoke, there is fire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's been said already but this has really shown the vast majority that want no nickname just wanted it to remain fighting Sioux. I think everyone should consider what would happen if that were the case. The same nickname controversy hampster wheel we've been on for the past 20 years will continue going. There were probably groups ready if that happened. That is not something we need, we need to move forward. i think at this point people need to rally around what ever name they like best for UND whatever that is of the five. If Sundogs only has 10 percent of the vote there is no way Kelly picks it. I agree. If Sundogs comes in last, which I think it will, he won't pick it. However, I believe that if Fighting Hawks comes in a close second to Roughriders (Which I think will win the vote), he picks Fighting Hawks with the excuse that it is easier to trademark. The only way I see Roughriders or any other name beating out Fighting Hawks is if it has overwhelming support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4evrSIOUX Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I can hear it now... "Here comes your University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks" drowned out by SIOUX! Awesome! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's been said already but this has really shown the vast majority that want no nickname just wanted it to remain fighting Sioux. I think everyone should consider what would happen if that were the case. The same nickname controversy hampster wheel we've been on for the past 20 years will continue going. There were probably groups ready if that happened. That is not something we need, we need to move forward. i think at this point people need to rally around what ever name they like best for UND whatever that is of the five. If Sundogs only has 10 percent of the vote there is no way Kelly picks it. The no nickname option seemed doomed with this committee from the start. If brought to public vote, it may have won or come close to winning. I think they wisely dumped it to avoid the controversy and potential danger of being the defacto Fighting Sioux for years to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 There have been multiple sources, saying the committee is already set on North Stars, regardless of what happens going forward. Not saying those sources are all accurance; but all too often, when there is smoke, there is fire. With what is left I could deal with North Stars! I hope your info is right and mine is not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I can hear it now... "Here comes your University of North Dakota Fighting Hawks" drowned out by SIOUX! Awesome! I don't even mind the Fighting Hawks. But, using "Hawks" is too generic and seems like the common way to get rid of a Native American nickname. I prefer something unique, that's a big reason I support Roughriders. We'd be the only D-1 school with that nickname. It also fits our state very well. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundog Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'd like to propose the first Fighting Hawks battle cry. Imagine thousands of fans yelling in unison---"FHAWK!" Nice job committee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4evrSIOUX Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'd like to propose the first Fighting Hawks battle cry. Imagine thousands of fans yelling in unison---"FHAWK!" Nice job committee. Hahaha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Teeder11 Posted July 22, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted July 22, 2015 I don't even mind the Fighting Hawks. But, using "Hawks" is too generic and seems like the common way to get rid of a Native American nickname. I prefer something unique, that's a big reason I support Roughriders. We'd be the only D-1 school with that nickname. It also fits our state very well. I will go with whatever is selected regardless, as I have always said the University and its student athletes are who I am really cheering on anyway. But I think Roughriders also falls in line with American tradition where the flagship universities in each state are nicknamed after some sort of official or unofficial nickname of their state. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I agree. If Sundogs comes in last, which I think it will, he won't pick it. However, I believe that if Fighting Hawks comes in a close second to Roughriders (Which I think will win the vote), he picks Fighting Hawks with the excuse that it is easier to trademark. The only way I see Roughriders or any other name beating out Fighting Hawks is if it has overwhelming support. Let the campaign begin!! UND Roughriders!! Jump on the bandwagon!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Letter to the Herald, anyone? I know, it was my idea but I'm really hoping someone who writes better (and frankly, has more time to write it than I do) will pick up that baton and run with it. H I'm a little surprised people are questioning the integrity of the committee members. If a fix was in, perhaps in the composition of the committee (such that one constituency was outnumbered), but the committee seriously debated the names and did their best to follow the process. Dropping North Dakota was far from unanimous, and there were numerous attempts from the expected constituencies (athletes, students) to keep it alive. I agree with you. I may be frustrated with the results, but actually a couple of the final options really are just fine with me (but I fear at least one of them as well). But based on what I have read I think the committee has done the best job they could given the process available to them. I've been in a jury situation before, and on the surface we can make judgments about people and their commitment/intelligence, but what I learned is that when people are given responsibility, they typically will try to do the best they can. We may not like the results, but I don't think it's because anyone in the committee was screwing the process or incompetent. I just wish they had kept Bombers on the list (and it wasn't even one of my suggestions!). With what is left I could deal with North Stars! I hope your info is right and mine is not. Same here. I actually like the name but don't like the whole MN connection. But I'd take that any day over Sundogs and Fighting Hawks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I'd like to propose the first Fighting Hawks battle cry. Imagine thousands of fans yelling in unison---"FHAWK!" Nice job committee.So we are the team from FHAWK U? Sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 But I think Roughriders also falls in line with American tradition where the flagship universities in each state are nicknamed after some sort of official or unofficial nickname of their state. It really is JUST THIS SIMPLE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxperfan7 Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Look at the criteria that the committee laid out for a new nickname. Then look at the 5 names left. It is fairly obvious that only one of the names best fits that criteria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Then President Kelly never should have said it was on the table at the beginning of the process, and the committee should have eliminated it immediately. When you leave it on the list throughout the entire process, then it was an option. You can't blame people for being upset, when one of the most (arguable THE most) popular option is eliminated during the last cut. You don't have to like that particular option, but with its popularity, and it being in contention up to this point, the ONLY reason to remove it now is that it doesn't align with what the committee members want. This is the only thing I agree with with considering the "No nickname" option. I don't believe UND officials were ever going to allow not picking a new name (which I agree with) and that it should have been removed much earlier in the process. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Anyone remember Brewsters Millions? The option of voting for None of the Above may be appealing considering the available choices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightingsioux4life Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Libtards, in no way can they ever be held accountable for something being considered controversial at any time in the future. Personally, I think if you are worried about that, you have no business being on this committee. Just wanting to take the easy way out. Nevermind how unpopular it is with the vast majority of fans and alumni. Opposing fans are crying they are laughing so hard at us right now. This "libtard" is against Sun Dogs and is for Roughriders. But you can continue to believe what you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxstudent Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's been said already but this has really shown the vast majority that want no nickname just wanted it to remain fighting Sioux. I think everyone should consider what would happen if that were the case. The same nickname controversy hampster wheel we've been on for the past 20 years will continue going. There were probably groups ready if that happened. That is not something we need, we need to move forward. i think at this point people need to rally around what ever name they like best for UND whatever that is of the five. If Sundogs only has 10 percent of the vote there is no way Kelly picks it. So you think everyone is just going to drop their Sioux gear and pick up that new logo jersey....Keep dreaming. This wont be a rallying of any sort, it will cause a huge rift in the fan base etc and make for an extremely awkward sports season whenever it does happen. 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.