dmksioux Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 UND always has always been, currently is and always will be North Dakota. And you realize this is about a nickname/logo right? Its in inanimate object that people are treating like a deity. So many people are stuck in the Denial and Anger stages of grief and don't realize it. If they took a step back and realized it, things would be a lot easier for them. Exactly. Have you read the comments on social media about why they want to keep the no-nickname option alive? Many are hopeful to keep it alive until a new president is on the job and can bring back the Sioux name. I really hope that the vote isn't truly open to anyone. Some are worried about what opposing fans will vote for...I'm somewhat worried what many of our own "fans" will vote for. Only people that should be allowed to vote are Students, alumni, faculty, donors and season ticket holders. If that group votes for no nickname, I can live with it. If it's not Roughriders, I'd rather have no nickname at this point. I also feel that if we have no nickname, we will be revisiting this issue constantly until a new name is chosen, just as Jason Hadju has written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 There are several reasons why popular opinion via polls is misleading. Although the polls regarding this subject may be accurately projecting popular opinion in the Grand Forks area, I just don't see that majority as being rational thought, but rather emotional, impulsive subjectivity. When I sit in the stands to watch UND compete on the field, court, or ice, I do not think about the nickname/logo. Instead, I concentrate on the players, the competition, and how UND can defeat their opponent. That's the same thing that the players and coaches are thinking, and should it not be the same thing that the fans/supporters/alumni in the stands are thinking? By delaying this process, UND continues to take attention off the student-athletes and the competition on the field/court/ice. The nickname standoff should not be the focus! I want to see UND win conference titles, FCS titles, NCAA hockey titles, not some abstract nickname civil war. Let's move on and worry about what we as UND supporters, fans, alumni, etc. can do to affect the score on the scoreboard, not the name on the jersey. That means if people would attend football and basketball games with the same enthusiasm that they are attacking this fiasco with, UND would be a top 10 school in all sports, and it is that that disappoints me the most in my fellow North Dakotans. To sum up: "That thing you are passionate about is stupid, move on" There is nothing wrong with people being passionate about it. Just as you are passionate about moving on. The only group to blame about making this process such a focal point is the committe, the president and the school for poorly designing, manipulating, and drawing out this process. I agree with you that we need to get the process done. But to simply say, hurry up and move on from Sioux, or North Dakota, or No Nickname or Whatever is easilty stated, when it aligns with your own opinions. Other people feel differently, and that is a reality you need to accept too; just as the rest of us may have to accept moving on from North Dakota ... BUT only after the process has seen itself through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 All these good questions being turned 180 degrees today, are folks ready if they swing back 180 again? I ask myself this question every day: Are you ruled by logic or emotion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 No one is flip-flopping. Kelley had zero to do with what happened Tuesday, no one was praising him for the committee making the right decision. The committee had zero to do with what happened today, no one is condemning them for Kelley appeasing a vocal group of people, many who threw public temper-tantrums. So I'll ask you again: 1-10 (1 being a trainwreck) where do you rate this ENTIRE process as of this minute? All I want is a number as I'm curious to your stance.........I do not need some pollyanna explaination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 To sum up: "That thing you are passionate about is stupid, move on" There is nothing wrong with people being passionate about it. Just as you are passionate about moving on. The only group to blame about making this process such a focal point is the committe, the president and the school for poorly designing, manipulating, and drawing out this process. I agree with you that we need to get the process done. But to simply say, hurry up and move on from Sioux, or North Dakota, or No Nickname or Whatever is easilty stated, when it aligns with your own opinions. Other people feel differently, and that is a reality you need to accept too; just as the rest of us may have to accept moving on from North Dakota ... BUT only after the process has seen itself through. Picking "no nickname" is not moving on, it is kicking the can down the road. UND's SID, who job actually entails dealing with this, posted that exact sentiment. It isn't some message board scare tactic or whatever today's deflection buzzword is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 So I'll ask you again: 1-10 (1 being a trainwreck) wher do you rate this ENTIRE process as of this minute? All I want is a number as I'm curious to your stance.........I do not need some pollyanna explaination. What's my timeline to start and end at? And are we talking about the only the process itself? I only ask because I have considerably different opinions on various parts of it. And I can guarantee you the score didn't go up this morning... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 No one is flip-flopping. Kelley had zero to do with what happened Tuesday, no one was praising him for the committee making the right decision. The committee had zero to do with what happened today, no one is condemning them for Kelley appeasing a vocal group of people, many who threw public temper-tantrums. Read the boards, there are plenty of people (and I clearly state, not all) that are flip flopping. If you truly believe Kelley had not influence on the committee or the process, you are too naive to have this discussion with. I think Kelley and the committee underestimated how upset a significant percentage of people would be about taking away the option to even vote on this issue. I read something, which was well stated, that it would already be a large undertaking to implement a new nickname and logo. BUT if you are going to take away the public's ability to at least vote and have their say (essentially what you are doing by removing North Dakota), you have going to have a much more difficult time getting people to buy into a new nickname. If North Dakota goes up for a vote, and loses, I will be much more inclined to "move on". I won't be thrilled, but I will be content in know that I got to have my input, and the process worked the way it was supposed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND-FB-FAN Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 To sum up: "That thing you are passionate about is stupid, move on" There is nothing wrong with people being passionate about it. Just as you are passionate about moving on. The only group to blame about making this process such a focal point is the committe, the president and the school for poorly designing, manipulating, and drawing out this process. I agree with you that we need to get the process done. But to simply say, hurry up and move on from Sioux, or North Dakota, or No Nickname or Whatever is easilty stated, when it aligns with your own opinions. Other people feel differently, and that is a reality you need to accept too; just as the rest of us may have to accept moving on from North Dakota ... BUT only after the process has seen itself through. There will always be two sides of the fence, but that doesn't mean both sides should be contemplated lengthily; that is why popular opinion is being tested here. The vast majority of the people coming out of the woodwork on this issue are of the "hockey-only" crowd. If those individuals were truthfully passionate about University of North Dakota athletics, they would support all sports, not just one. Furthermore, it's their opinion that excludes the holistic approach to UND athletics. Lastly, UND needs to worry about competing on the field of competition, by improving academic standards, facilities, and instruction/coaching, not how to politically deal with impulsive behavior regarding a nickname/logo. This is what is called prioritizing, and to the "hockey-only" crowd, their athletic priorities are biased drastically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWSiouxMN Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 So I'll ask you again: 1-10 (1 being a trainwreck) wher do you rate this ENTIRE process as of this minute? All I want is a number as I'm curious to your stance.........I do not need some pollyanna explaination. -3 I'm seriously at a point to where they need to start from scratch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Hajdu is (as one American president coined it) "the man in the arena". It's wise to listen to that point of view; you don't have to agree with it, but you do need to consider it with an open mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 So I'll ask you again: 1-10 (1 being a trainwreck) wher do you rate this ENTIRE process as of this minute? All I want is a number as I'm curious to your stance.........I do not need some pollyanna explaination. 1 - regardless of what if any name is picked. Complete Trainwreck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homer Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I think if the No Nickname option went to vote, and lost, people would be much more accepting of it. I know I would. My anger in the situation, was being told up front that my opion (or vote) would not be hear. Should I make my vote and still lose, sure I'll be bummed, but at least the process would have played out. The no nickname option did go to the vote of the committee and lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 And that's his opinion and I don't really agree with it. I watch a lot of sports and I never see media analysts talking about it more than 30 seconds or so. Also, over the past 3 years we have been in limbo in regards to a nickname. If and/or when North Dakota is chosen I believe the media will put it to rest. We would just be North Dakota and that sounds ok to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scpa0305 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The no nickname option did go to the vote of the committee and lost. A real vote that is representative. That committee is anything but representative. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Not going to elaborate on whether or not I think UND should remain North Dakota, those who have been on these message boards know my position well enough on the nickname, and even more so my opinion on this appalling process.That being said, I do have to laugh and shake my head at some of you. Since the North Dakota was eliminated from consideration, some (not all) of you (Anti- "North Dakota"/Anti-No Nickname) crowd, have been posting comments and opinions blasting people for even being upset. Of course people are going to be upset! The Fighting Sioux nickname was something people were incredibly passionate about. Moving on from the name was already hard enough, and I think people were able to cope with just North Dakota. Asking people to move on again, from North Dakota, and replace the nickname completely is going to be difficult. Don’t argue me on the benefits of moving on, I understand them, as do many others, but understanding your arguments an reasoning doesn’t mean I agree with them or am willing to change my own opinion. Just as I don’t expect my reasoning or arguments to change yours.This same crowd is now blowing up the message board, stating how ridiculous this is, that the President has no backbone (which I agree, he doesn’t), that this committee is a job, etc. While I think we can all agree on most of these points based on the process; the funny part is that as soon as the process turns away from your opinions, you explode in anger, when mere days ago this same group of people was stating (to paraphrase), “That’s the way it is. Get over it and move on”Not saying this changes anything, or that UND will even have the opportunity to remain North Dakota. BUT when you are going to rant on the message board about how people are being stupid, and they need to just get over an issue that they are passionate about and invested in, remember that their passion and emotion may match, or even exceed, yours about that very same issue; even if their opinion is on the opposite end of the spectrum. It is far easier to find common ground, if you understand and empathize with someone, rather than chastise them; even if you don’t agree with their view.Go North Dakota! (stepping off my soapbox) Nominated for post of the year. I hope as you stepped off your soapbox, you dropped the mic! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 What's my timeline to start and end at? And are we talking about the only the process itself? I only ask because I have considerably different opinions on various parts of it. And I can guarantee you the score didn't go up this morning... The ENTIRE process.......everyone involved, decisions made....blah, blah, blah. A number.....that's all I wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 So just out of curiousity, what happens if Roughriders is eliminated but the No nickname option remains? You think these threads were entertaining the last few days, imagine how they'd be if that happens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Lets see how many people we can get together this afternoon and go have a picnic on a sidewalk around campus. Doesn't seem to take much to get the president to change his mind. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. My assumption is that it took a lot of feedback from numerous sources for him to step up and make this move. What evidence do you have that "It' doesn't take much to get the president ot change his mind." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmksioux Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The ENTIRE process.......everyone involved, decisions made....blah, blah, blah. A number.....that's all I wanted. I'd give it a five. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 There will always be two sides of the fence, but that doesn't mean both sides should be contemplated lengthily; that is why popular opinion is being tested here. The vast majority of the people coming out of the woodwork on this issue are of the "hockey-only" crowd. If those individuals were truthfully passionate about University of North Dakota athletics, they would support all sports, not just one. Lastly, UND needs to worry about competing on the field of competition, by improving academic standards, facilities, and instruction/coaching, not how to politically deal with impulsive behavior regarding at nickname/logo. This is what is called prioritizing, and to the "hockey-only" crowd, their athletic priorities are biased drastically. The vast majority of the people coming out of the woodwork on this issue are of the "hockey-only" crowd. - Speculation. Of course you are going to get more hockey fans speaking out. There are just more hockey fans at the school; sad truth. I agree, it would be great to see this same crowd support football, basketball, etc, but that does not change the fact that people are passionate about what the name was, is and will be. School supporters want to voice their opinion, and do not want to be told what their opinion should be. Lastly, UND needs to worry about competing on the field of competition, by improving academic standards, facilities, and instruction/coaching, not how to politically deal with impulsive behavior regarding at nickname/logo. - Agreed, the focust SHOULD BE on developing the programs, facilities, athletes. That being said this issue is not something the university can afford to just overlook. They do have to consider the number of supporter that may be affected by this. Right or Wrong, there will be people who choose to stop supporting the school based on this outcome (I am not condoning that) but UND does need to consider that long term ramifications. This has been a LONG LONG LONG battle going back to way before I was a Sioux fan, and I think we are close to seeing some finality. Should be important to finish this the right way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 So just out of curiousity, what happens if Roughriders is eliminated but the No nickname option remains? You think these threads were entertaining the last few days, imagine how they'd be if that happens? Either one of those options are my top 2 right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engelbunny Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 There will always be two sides of the fence, but that doesn't mean both sides should be contemplated lengthily; that is why popular opinion is being tested here. The vast majority of the people coming out of the woodwork on this issue are of the "hockey-only" crowd. If those individuals were truthfully passionate about University of North Dakota athletics, they would support all sports, not just one. Furthermore, it's their opinion that excludes the holistic approach to UND athletics. Lastly, UND needs to worry about competing on the field of competition, by improving academic standards, facilities, and instruction/coaching, not how to politically deal with impulsive behavior regarding a nickname/logo. This is what is called prioritizing, and to the "hockey-only" crowd, their athletic priorities are biased drastically. Please expand on what the definition of the "hockey-only" crowd is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Read the boards, there are plenty of people (and I clearly state, not all) that are flip flopping. If you truly believe Kelley had not influence on the committee or the process, you are too naive to have this discussion with. I think Kelley and the committee underestimated how upset a significant percentage of people would be about taking away the option to even vote on this issue. I read something, which was well stated, that it would already be a large undertaking to implement a new nickname and logo. BUT if you are going to take away the public's ability to at least vote and have their say (essentially what you are doing by removing North Dakota), you have going to have a much more difficult time getting people to buy into a new nickname. If North Dakota goes up for a vote, and loses, I will be much more inclined to "move on". I won't be thrilled, but I will be content in know that I got to have my input, and the process worked the way it was supposed to. Yah but it won't take long for them to trot out the old "If we don't have a nickname the Big Sky will revisit our membership, other schools will stop scheduling us, other coaches will use it against us in recruiting...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan512 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 The no nickname option did go to the vote of the committee and lost. Wrong vote buddy. You can try to make a ridiculous argument, but you know what I was talking about. The public has made it very clear that a significant (not necessarily majority) percentage want no-nickname. That should be enough to warrant a spot in the public vote; Just as Roughriders deserves a spot in the final vote, based on the popularity of public opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I'd give it a five. So about how you thought it would sake out? 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.