Vote on your final 5 nickname choices (just ND is out)

[Siouxperfan7]

When one of the committee members states publicly that they thought no nickname should stay, but at the end of the day was fearful Kelly would veto it and disband the committee, he most certainly had something to do with the vote. That committee member just happened to rank no nickname least favorable, any higher ranking from one or two committee members and this discussion isn't taking place and no nickname is in the final ballot.

 

Gotta love the conspiracy theorist out there!! They make rationale topics so much more interesting!!

[breakin face]

Again I will ask the question how many more games would we have won had we had a nickname or the past three years?  

 

How many more people would have been at basketball games had we had a nickname?

 

The cooling off period was idiotic because it allowed all this divisiveness to fester, however not having a nickname did not damage any of our athletic or academic programs.  Volleyball and Women's Basketball both won conference titles under the no nickname banner, Baseball has had their most noteworthy seasons in a long time, and the football program has a shot of energy.  The argument not having a nickname somehow hurts every sport except hockey does not hold up for me at all.  However if a big donor out of the 6000 petitioned people (speculative, however if i'm 1% right that's 60 donors) decides they want to dispose their income elsewhere over this issue we lose far greater than by maintaining the status quo, and it's the non-revenue sports that will suffer because of that.

[The Sicatoka]

The only thing I would have added is the NCAA's stance on if North Dakota is acceptable.  One can assume it is or isn't but no one has addressed that on record.  There can be no grey area on this and finding out one way or the other after the fact is too late. 

 

One little statement clears much of this up. 

[The Sicatoka]

However if a big donor out of the 6000 petitioned people (speculative, however if i'm 1% right that's 60 donors) decides they want to dispose their income elsewhere over this issue we lose far greater than by maintaining the status quo, and it's the non-revenue sports that will suffer because of that.

 

Ah, yes, "the Engelstad scenario" -- do as I demand.

Look where we ended up with that. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

I get what you are say, but in some regard that is like telling me align my opinion to do as the president says, because he knows more about how the government operates.

 

No thanks. I like my opinion and given the opportunity to vote my opinion. I will do so.

 

In 1863, President Lincoln passed the Emancipation Proclamation. Much of the "majority" was upset, but it was eventually considered civilly and morally correct.

 

In 1920, President Wilson supported the 19th amendment. Although not nationally popular at the time, it became better understood and soon overwhelmingly accepted.

 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed by President Johnson, and although it was disputed at the time and continues to be challenged contemporarily, it has unarguably benefited this country. 

 

You can have your opinion, because as history suggests, everyone has one. But what history also suggests is that the popular opinion may not always be the right opinion. 

 

Now, I'm not trying to focus on discrimination, which is what the above historical acts were centered on, but what I am trying to display is the sometimes necessary submission of public opinion. 

 

In regards to UND and the nickname situation, I believe the opinion of the UND administration and athletic department is of the most importance, and although most, including myself, will miss the Fighting Sioux nickname, its time to move on. 

[jdub27]

When one of the committee members states publicly that they thought no nickname should stay, but at the end of the day was fearful Kelly would veto it and disband the committee, he most certainly had something to do with the vote. That committee member just happened to rank no nickname least favorable, any higher ranking from one or two committee members and this discussion isn't taking place and no nickname is in the final ballot.

 

So Kelley forced the committee to drop it and then potentially brings it back?

 

Since we're playing hypotheticals, during the June meeting if two committee members had changed their mind this discussion isn't taking place right now and "no nickname" doesn't make the final 7.  It was the lowest remaining option then as well.

[homer]

One little statement clears much of this up. 

It maybe moves the protest from Grand Forks to Indianapolis. 

[siouxfan512]

Ah, yes, "the Engelstad scenario" -- do as I demand.

Look where we ended up with that. 

 

... with the best hockey arena in the country

[Siouxphan27]

Again I will ask the question how many more games would we have won had we had a nickname or the past three years?  

 

How many more people would have been at basketball games had we had a nickname?

 

The cooling off period was idiotic because it allowed all this divisiveness to fester, however not having a nickname did not damage any of our athletic or academic programs.  Volleyball and Women's Basketball both won conference titles under the no nickname banner, Baseball has had their most noteworthy seasons in a long time, and the football program has a shot of energy.  The argument not having a nickname somehow hurts every sport except hockey does not hold up for me at all.  However if a big donor out of the 6000 petitioned people (speculative, however if i'm 1% right that's 60 donors) decides they want to dispose their income elsewhere over this issue we lose far greater than by maintaining the status quo, and it's the non-revenue sports that will suffer because of that.

exactly right.   I would give you a thumbs up, but alas, I am out for the day.  

 

Off topic- What's up with the rationing of thumbs anyway?

[Siouxphan27]

Gotta love the conspiracy theorist out there!! They make rationale topics so much more interesting!!

That's a far milder conspiracy theory than the one about our least favorite hockey ref, sending us a "message" from the NCAA that we better pick a name.   Just saying- plenty of speculation from all sides.

[The Sicatoka]

It maybe moves the protest from Grand Forks to Indianapolis. 

 

You don't think Kelley would love that? He'd look like the good guy and the bad guys look worse. Win-win for Kelley. 

[siouxfan512]

In 1863, President Lincoln passed the Emancipation Proclamation. Much of the "majority" was upset, but it was eventually considered civilly and morally correct.

 

In 1920, President Wilson supported the 19th amendment. Although not nationally popular at the time, it became better understood and soon overwhelmingly accepted.

 

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed by President Johnson, and although it was disputed at the time and continues to be challenged contemporarily, it has unarguably benefited this country. 

 

You can have your opinion, because as history suggests, everyone has one. But what history also suggests is that the popular opinion may not always be the right opinion. 

 

Now, I'm not trying to focus on discrimination, which is what the above historical acts were centered on, but what I am trying to display is the sometimes necessary submission of public opinion. 

 

In regards to UND and the nickname situation, I believe the opinion of the UND administration and athletic department is of the most importance, and although most, including myself, will miss the "Fighting Sioux nickname, its time to move on. 

 

 

thats cute, I was just joking around and trying to through a shot at Obama and the rest of this country's "leaders", and you went and looked up a bunch of historical dates (which I'm not even going to read through).

 

I get that these people are the "experts" and have more insight that myself on the issue as a whole, but I will not let anyone tell me what my opinion should be.

 

My Opinion:

 

• If we could have remained Fighting Sioux with no sanctions; I would have wanted that.
• Now that UND/North Dakota/No Nickname has been fine over the past few years. I prefer to stick with it.
• My preference is to not adopt a new nickname and remaing just University of North Dakota; barring the NCAA clearly stating (not people on this board trying to make interpretations) that No Nickname/Remaining just UND or North Dakota is unnacceptable and will result in the same sanctions as remaining Fighting Sioux

Nobody needs to agree with this, but it is my opinion. Given the chance to vote on it, I will.

[siouxfan512]

Well it has been fun discussing and debating, but it is definitely time to head to the lake.

 

Go North Dakota!

[willythekid]

thats cute, I was just joking around and trying to through a shot at Obama and the rest of this country's "leaders", and you went and looked up a bunch of historical dates (which I'm not even going to read through).

I get that these people are the "experts" and have more insight that myself on the issue as a whole, but I will not let anyone tell me what my opinion should be.

My Opinion:

• If we could have remained Fighting Sioux with no sanctions; I would have wanted that.
• Now that UND/North Dakota/No Nickname has been fine over the past few years. I prefer to stick with it.
• My preference is to not adopt a new nickname and remaing just University of North Dakota; barring the NCAA clearly stating (not people on this board trying to make interpretations) that No Nickname/Remaining just UND or North Dakota is unnacceptable and will result in the same sanctions as remaining Fighting Sioux

Nobody needs to agree with this, but it is my opinion. Given the chance to vote on it, I will.

This... If a nickname beats out just being North Dakota in a public vote I'm fine with that. But let people have a say.

[The Sicatoka]

That's a far milder conspiracy theory than the one about our least favorite hockey ref, sending us a "message" from the NCAA that we better pick a name.   Just saying- plenty of speculation from all sides.

 

The NCAA put Marco Hunt on the ice with UND after UND got him removed from the list of NCHC officials. Was it so we could kiss and make up? 

[CMSioux]

No matter where everyone falls in this debate.  One thing cannot be debated

 

This has turned into a major debacle.

Did anyone who really took any time to look at the process think it would have ended up otherwise? I can't think of any scenario where trying to appease everyone and letting everyone have a say in a decision doesn't turn out as a major debacle. I would love to hear how UND could have handled this in a different manner that would not have ended up as a major debacle - there is no way that some group was not going to be majorly unhappy with the results. 

[UND-FB-FAN]

thats cute, I was just joking around and trying to through a shot at Obama and the rest of this country's "leaders", and you went and looked up a bunch of historical dates (which I'm not even going to read through).

 

I get that these people are the "experts" and have more insight that myself on the issue as a whole, but I will not let anyone tell me what my opinion should be.

 

My Opinion:

 

• If we could have remained Fighting Sioux with no sanctions; I would have wanted that.
• Now that UND/North Dakota/No Nickname has been fine over the past few years. I prefer to stick with it.
• My preference is to not adopt a new nickname and remaing just University of North Dakota; barring the NCAA clearly stating (not people on this board trying to make interpretations) that No Nickname/Remaining just UND or North Dakota is unnacceptable and will result in the same sanctions as remaining Fighting Sioux

Nobody needs to agree with this, but it is my opinion. Given the chance to vote on it, I will.

 

 

That's cute?

 

Try show a little respect, particularly when making assumptions. 

 

Lastly, your opinion is perfectly fine, as granted by the first amendment of the U.S. constitution. With that said, those with qualified knowledge and experience in college athletics and administration will likely have the final say. 

[SiouxScore]

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.

Agreed I didn't even really notice it during the frozen four.

[homer]

Did anyone who really took any time to look at the process think it would have ended up otherwise? I can't think of any scenario where trying to appease everyone and letting everyone have a say in a decision doesn't turn out as a major debacle. I would love to hear how UND could have handled this in a different manner that would not have ended up as a major debacle - there is no way that some group was not going to be majorly unhappy with the results. 

 

1. Not forming multiple committees only to possibly disregard the final committees output. 
2. Get an opinion from the NCAA on what will be acceptable and make it public knowledge.
3. Release the statement made today about a year ago when the process started.  If you truely are the final decision maker, your desired outcome and reasons why should be layed out from the beginning.

[bigskyvikes]

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...

Ha-ha...another answer by the politician!

[Oxbow6]

 

1. Not forming multiple committees only to possibly disregard the final committees output. 
2. Get an opinion from the NCAA on what will be acceptable and make it public knowledge.
3. Release the statement made today about a year ago when the process started.  If you truely are the final decision maker, your desired outcome and reasons why should be layed out from the beginning.

 

 

 

Stop!   This........^^^ all makes way too much sense over what actually transpired.

[breakin face]

Again I will ask the question how many more games would we have won had we had a nickname or the past three years?  

 

How many more people would have been at basketball games had we had a nickname?

 

The cooling off period was idiotic because it allowed all this divisiveness to fester, however not having a nickname did not damage any of our athletic or academic programs.  Volleyball and Women's Basketball both won conference titles under the no nickname banner, Baseball has had their most noteworthy seasons in a long time, and the football program has a shot of energy.  The argument not having a nickname somehow hurts every sport except hockey does not hold up for me at all.  However if a big donor out of the 6000 petitioned people (speculative, however if i'm 1% right that's 60 donors) decides they want to dispose their income elsewhere over this issue we lose far greater than by maintaining the status quo, and it's the non-revenue sports that will suffer because of that.

[siouxfan512]

That's cute?

Try show a little respect, particularly when making assumptions.

Lastly, your opinion is perfectly fine, as granted by the first amendment of the U.S. constitution. With that said, those with qualified knowledge and experience in college athletics and administration will likely have the final say.

Lighten up buddy. Like I said I was just joking and takin a shot at the president (as big a fan of him as I am of sundogs)

[Siouxphan27]

The NCAA put Marco Hunt on the ice with UND after UND got him removed from the list of NCHC officials. Was it so we could kiss and make up?

You just answered your own question as to why he was put on the ice. Had nothing to do with the choice North Dakota still being on the nickname list at the time.

[bigskyvikes]

To me, this "hockey-only" talk is insulting and unnecessary. I'm betting a lot of them are like me. I didn't go to UND, but I care about the University of North Dakota because I grew up in the state. My circumstances didn't allow me to go to UND, but I would rather have my daughters go to UND than to my alma mater (Minnesota). Yes, my passion comes out more for UND hockey--mainly because it's on a national stage. But I care about the university because my passion for all things North Dakota started at a young age and has continued throughout my life. Now, I don't agree with the people that say they will no longer support UND because of a nickname. However, most of the "hockey only" crowd truly care about UND. The University of North Dakota isn't just important to students and alumni. It goes beyond them. It's the flagship university of small state with proud people.

Well said!