NCAA To Sanction UND if School Does Not Adopt New Nickname

[82SiouxGuy]

Nice try 82.

I told you and F.S.F. and scottm on here back in 2012 when you were demanding I give one good reason why one should vote to keep the name that that "one hood reason" was so that people wouldn't be able to say B.S. like what you just said

We all know what the Sioux as a majority wanted.  That was clearly demonstrated  in the polls before 2012.  They like everyone else voted that way to protect UND from sanctions as the aggressive media campaign said they should.  Even Hak said it.  

So F.off with your petty B.S. manipulations of that vote.  You know the truth!  The Sioux wanted and still want by majority to keep their name..

You're truly the worst kind of cancer to this whole situation.  The fact that anyone listens to your rhetoric is beyond me.

Sorry you don't like to hear facts. The actual election is the only "poll" that counts. We have the results of the elections. I do know the truth, and the truth is that it is time to move forward by selecting a new nickname rather than extending this mess indefinitely.

[bigskyvikes]

Easy pal, we are all in the same boat of this nickname situation, its just some of us are looking out for the future of the school which could include sanctions if there is no nickname. Let's not break out the name calling.

How can you guys be shocked by that response? 

You want to protect the school but people with other views want to harm UND! You constantly tell us ND namers aren't as smart as you, group us as Sioux only people! I can't believe the harsh comments didn't start sooner. On top of that we have to read your same shyt over and over every other page. Every other page you guys give your condescending speeches to someone different! Why don't you give it a rest? If we want to refresh on your doom and gloom all we have to do is flip back a page and read 12 paragraphs of it!

[darell1976]

How can you guys be shocked by that response? 

You want to protect the school but people with other views want to harm UND! You constantly tell us ND namers aren't as smart as you, group us as Sioux only people! I can't believe the harsh comments didn't start sooner. On top of that we have to read your same shyt over and over every other page. Every other page you guys give your condescending speeches to someone different! Why don't you give it a rest? If we want to refresh on your doom and gloom all we have to do is flip back a page and read 12 paragraphs of it!

You can have a civil conversation without the name calling and verbal abuse which mods can ban a person for. As for reading our stuff over and over, right back at you.

[bigskyvikes]

You can have a civil conversation without the name calling and verbal abuse which mods can ban a person for. As for reading our stuff over and over, right back at you.

Count our sides of the conversation, I guarantee you and the other 2 are 6-10 to 1 of mine! You guys might hide your comments better, but you all are as much name calling and verbally abusing as anyone on here! You just use words like uneducated, or all of you, etc....

[82SiouxGuy]

http://www.grandforksherald.com/letters/3822135-letter-no-nickname-und-games-just-arent-same

[jdub27]

You constantly tell us ND namers aren't as smart as you

Continuing to refer to North Dakota as a nickname doesn't help your case.  It is the name of the University (and state which the University is named after).  But being in favor of "no nickname" doesn't quite sound as good so I get why people continue to avoid using it.

 

http://www.grandforksherald.com/letters/3822135-letter-no-nickname-und-games-just-arent-same

Again, someone with ties to the athletic department using concrete, personal examples of why it is time to move on. Not sure I've seen a single student-athlete that wasn't a hockey player in support of having no nickname.

[Old Fella]

Wow.  

The reason I don't want it even being left to vote is because nobody will ever let go of the Sioux nickname if a new one isn't chosen.  Then, we will continually hear stupid stuff about it forever.  And the NA office on campus will never shutup either.  Sick of hearing them tell everyone how hostile the campus is even after it getting voted the #1 campus in country for NA's.

I firmly believe that the issue and bickering/media grandstanding will never go away if a new name isn't chosen.  That is my opinion.

Eyerone is entitled to there option/even if it is wrong

[Hayduke]

Can Kelly or someone at UND please just relase a letter to all UND stakeholders and the Herald and just tell everyone their resoning for wanting to choose a new nickname and not just go as North Dakota?  This should have been done days after it was initially cut.  But I feel it would be beneficial to do it before the public vote hapens.  There is information that Kelley and others have, conversations with NCA officials, conversations with Big Sky officials, other AD's, that the general pulic is not privy to.  There is a lot of information labeled as "scare tactics" that proboably does carry some weight and is legit.  This administration needs to get control of this situation.  This process has been overly transparent, except on this issue.  It needs to be addresed but Kelley.

 Agree 100%

[Hayduke]

Count our sides of the conversation, I guarantee you and the other 2 are 6-10 to 1 of mine! You guys might hide your comments better, but you all are as much name calling and verbally abusing as anyone on here! You just use words like uneducated, or all of you, etc....

I don't think anyone here has made fun of the educational opportunities at Portland State University.   

[UND1983]

Eyerone is entitled to there option/even if it is wrong

You dont see my scenario happening?

[darell1976]

Continuing to refer to North Dakota as a nickname doesn't help your case.  It is the name of the University (and state which the University is named after).  But being in favor of "no nickname" doesn't quite sound as good so I get why people continue to avoid using it.

 

Again, someone with ties to the athletic department using concrete, personal examples of why it is time to move on. Not sure I've seen a single student-athlete that wasn't a hockey player in support of having no nickname.

I'm sure someone will spin that letter around. Heaven forbid there are athletes outside of hockey.

[Chewey]

How can you guys be shocked by that response? 

You want to protect the school but people with other views want to harm UND! You constantly tell us ND namers aren't as smart as you, group us as Sioux only people! I can't believe the harsh comments didn't start sooner. On top of that we have to read your same shyt over and over every other page. Every other page you guys give your condescending speeches to someone different! Why don't you give it a rest? If we want to refresh on your doom and gloom all we have to do is flip back a page and read 12 paragraphs of it!

It's fear and frustration that motivate all of it.  I have more respect for many of the anti-nickname crowd  who have spines, passion and a collective will to effect "change", than I do for some of the disassembling, propagandizing, expedient-minded, move on at all costs types (even with a boring, unimaginative, rip-off nickname) on this board.   The purpose of the committee was to get input from the various stakeholders and choose a new nickname based upon the input gathered from those stakeholders.  A great many of those stakeholders have said that they want to remain "North Dakota" so let's include it and see how a vote of all of the stakeholders shakes out.  Why don't some want to see that?  They don't want it because they fear that their claim that only a small, vocal group wants it will be proved incorrect .  They don't want it because they fear that "North Dakota" will receive a majority.  These fears are well-founded. 

If "North Dakota" is not an option, even though many people want it, the process will be revealed as  more of a sham and a "fix".  What business stops producing something because a sizeable # of people want it?  What politician, other than one who has something to fear or hide, avoids an issue that is important to a lot of people?  What reporter, other than one trying assist a sleazy politician, squelches an idea or a story that may be important to a lot of people?  Does doing any of these things cause an idea or issue to go away?  Wouldn't an issue, idea or concern only persist and gain strength?  Does anyone think that the issue will not continue to fester among young students/people who generally think and do the opposite of what they're told they should think and do?  Does anyone think that the alumni, Native Americans and many others who support "North Dakota" are just going to go away?  Not including "North Dakota" will only cause the whole process to live on.  It will become a perennial fertile field for people to sow the seeds conspiracy-minded paranoia and harvest the yield of ever-deepening, visceral animus. 

How did attempts to deny and squelch legitimate points of view work out with the Vietnam War, the 1968 Democratic National Convention (the squelching or "moderating" of the anti-war sentiment lead to Richard Nixon's election), Watergate (Richard Nixon's antics only led to deepening inquiries), Ford's pardoning of Nixon (only gave more grist for Watergate controversy) 1976 Republican National Convention (squelching or moderating of conservative points of view resulted in the election of Jimmy Carter who would have likely otherwise lost irrespective of Ford's pardon and his "Communism isn't a threat" nonsense), Iran-Contra, Hillary Clinton's email scandal, etc.? 

Aren't Kelley and like-minded academics all about having open "conversations"?  The only way a position loses momentum is to fully allow people to voluntarily consider its merits or lack thereof.   Anything less constitutes an amputation of reason and legitimacy. 

Edited August 22, 2015 by Chewey

[yababy8]

Easy pal, we are all in the same boat of this nickname situation, its just some of us are looking out for the future of the school which could include sanctions if there is no nickname. Let's not break out the name calling.

I am not in same boat as a person who aims to manipulate the truth.  '82 citing the 2012 vote as having any reliance to the people's support or lack there of is tantamount to revisionist history as it has ever been revised in the history of man.  And my outrage at such asinine rehototic is well founded and placed as there is nothing more rought with evil and dispair as one who aims to assaninate the truth of our history.  Do not pretend to suggest that the truth of the desires of the Sioux people through this whole identy rape is anything less than historically relevant.  Not just what Murphy did with his two faced deciet but what the Sioux people said to those who would listen.  Certainly not the "move on" crowd.  They never listened at all.  Too busy working their agenda. 

You say, 'let's not break out the name calling"?  You must be talking about Sioux83?,

"So we can tell people to f*ck off now, like bigbaby did above?  Mods let us know what goes."

Bigbaby sounds a little like name calling.  I assume you were talking about that correct?

No?, you meant me??? Oh,  I guess I missed that?  Where was it that I called someone a name??

 

 

[yababy8]

You can have a civil conversation without the name calling and verbal abuse which mods can ban a person for. As for reading our stuff over and over, right back at you.

You must be one of tthose, 'if you say it enough it must be true' fellas huh?

Still looking for the name calling??

...Did you report SSioux83 to the mods yet??

Edited August 22, 2015 by yababy8

[darell1976]

You must be one of tthose, 'if you say it enough it must be true' fellas huh?

Still looking for the name calling??

...Did you report SSioux83 to the mods yet??

Everyone needs to calm down and take a breath, this issue is splitting up the fan base more and more everyday we go without a vote. Get the voting on and pick something.

[UND1983]

Everyone needs to calm down and take a breath, this issue is splitting up the fan base more and more everyday we go without a vote. Get the voting on and pick something.

They don't care if it splits up anything.  They want everything back the old way or as close to it as they can get.  Hence the Stay North Dakota charade.  

[UND1983]

I am not in same boat as a person who aims to manipulate the truth.  '82 citing the 2012 vote as having any reliance to the people's support or lack there of is tantamount to revisionist history as it has ever been revised in the history of man.  And my outrage at such asinine rehototic is well founded and placed as there is nothing more rought with evil and dispair as one who aims to assaninate the truth of our history.  Do not pretend to suggest that the truth of the desires of the Sioux people through this whole identy rape is anything less than historically relevant.  Not just what Murphy did with his two faced deciet but what the Sioux people said to those who would listen.  Certainly not the "move on" crowd.  They never listened at all.  Too busy working their agenda. 

You say, 'let's not break out the name calling"?  You must be talking about Sioux83?,

"So we can tell people to f*ck off now, like bigbaby did above?  Mods let us know what goes."

Bigbaby sounds a little like name calling.  I assume you were talking about that correct?

No?, you meant me??? Oh,  I guess I missed that?  Where was it that I called someone a name??

 

 

You just used the word "rape" and "assassinate" (I spelled it right) in a post about a frickin nickname.  Let that sink in.

Also, nobody took the Sioux name from them.  Their identity is still that I believe.  They were never defined by the University of North Dakota.  

[zonadub]

Nice try 82.

I told you and F.S.F. and scottm on here back in 2012 when you were demanding I give one good reason why one should vote to keep the name that that "one hood reason" was so that people wouldn't be able to say B.S. like what you just said

We all know what the Sioux as a majority wanted.  That was clearly demonstrated  in the polls before 2012.  They like everyone else voted that way to protect UND from sanctions as the aggressive media campaign said they should.  Even Hak said it.  

So F.off with your petty B.S. manipulations of that vote.  You know the truth!  The Sioux wanted and still want by majority to keep their name..

You're truly the worst kind of cancer to this whole situation.  The fact that anyone listens to your rhetoric is beyond me.

Unfortunately, in the politically correct world of the NCAA, the majority would not sway their opinion. The basis of political correctness is that the majority is wrong at the expense of the few, the minority. So, in the infinite wisdom of the NCAA, the majority is often wrong and the minority must make the rules.

[The Sicatoka]

You can have a civil conversation without the name calling and verbal abuse which mods can ban a person for. As for reading our stuff over and over, right back at you.

Pretty telling when darell comes off as a voice of reason. 

(No offense intended, darell.) 

[The Sicatoka]

Unfortunately, in the politically correct world of the NCAA, the majority would not sway their opinion. The basis of political correctness is that the majority is wrong at the expense of the few, the minority. So, in the infinite wisdom of the NCAA, the majority is often wrong and the minority must make the rules.

PCM used to say it was a minority of a minority that was dictating. He was and is right. But they won. 

[iramurphy]

The postings on this blog if nothing else prove how devisive this issue has been. 82Siouxguy posts his opinion and cites facts and is accused of belittling people. In a debate like this you shouldn't feel belittled as people try and express their views. We have derailed this debate back to whether or not UND had proper permission to use the name and whether or not the majority of the people on the reservations support the use of the name.  It no longer matters. 

I believe those who wish to either keep the name or remain nameless believe that is best for UND and are loyal UND fans just like those who want to select a name. We derail the whole issue by trying to insult those with opposing opinions.  If someone's post makes you mad then counter it with some semblance of intelligent discussion and counter their facts with facts.

Nobody really knows what people on the reservations want or don't want or what they wanted back in the 1930's. I believe most supported the use of the name then and do now but none of us knows for sure.  Really it no Longer matters.  As I said before the fact is that the people on the reservations and the tribal councils had years and ample opportunities to turn this issue in the favor of keeping the name which I and I believe the vast majority of Sioux fans and Natives supported.  The fact is that unless the NCAA completely reverses their stance on Native names and imagery, that ship has sailed and UND athletics is on shore and we can wave goodbye .  

The whole naming issue has been a fiasco.  The people on the committee are doing what they think is right for the University and includes people who wanted to keep the name wanting to adopt a new name because they think we need a name and need to move on. No reason to insult them. I don't know how they can come up with a way to vote on this issue because there is no way to define your voting constituency.  

To me the only question that remains is what is best for UND and UND athletics.  From what I have read, having a name allows us a brand and identification that allows us marketing opportunities that remaining North Dakota doesn't. Remaining just North Dakota leaves this debate open and decisive for the foreseeable future and doesn't resolve anything, it postpones what even many who wish to remain just North Dakota is inevitable.  I and others understand the emotional and historical ties associated with the Fighting Sioux name and the wish and inclination that we will never give up. Beyond that, what is the value to UND in remaking just North Dakota?  Forget what the name was, and the heavy handed way the NCAA dealt with the issue here and elsewhere.  The name for athletic teams allows an identity that eventually gets back to the University and the teams and just like the Gophers, Cornhuskers, Cobbers, Jackrabbits, etc. we will adjust and be fine. If we get a cool logo, we will adjust faster.  More importantly than the name is that our fan base at this level has resorted to name calling and threatening to pull donations or stop supporting UND.  That issue is more important that what name we eventually choose.  Convince me we can do the same thing without a name. Leave out all of the debate about what the tribes wanted or who is to blame. The issue is simply name or no name.  The University and our athletic teams remain the constant. Attach any of these names or many of those dropped and we will be fine. The time to adjust will be shorter with a name than without in my opinion.

Edited August 22, 2015 by The Sicatoka

[MafiaMan]

You know what?  I've finally been beaten into total capitulation.  I have far bigger things to worry about than the nickname of a school I attended almost 25 years ago.

[Chewey]

The postings on this blog if nothing else prove how devisive this issue has been. 82Siouxguy posts his opinion and cites facts and is accused of belittling people. In a debate like this you shouldn't feel belittled as people try and express their views. We have derailed this debate back to whether or not UND had proper permission to use the name and whether or not the majority of the people on the reservations support the use of the name.  It no longer matters. 

I believe those who wish to either keep the name or remain nameless believe that is best for UND and are loyal UND fans just like those who want to select a name. We derail the whole issue by trying to insult those with opposing opinions.  If someone's post makes you mad then counter it with some semblance of intelligent discussion and counter their facts with facts.

Nobody really knows what people on the reservations want or don't want or what they wanted back in the 1930's. I believe most supported the use of the name then and do now but none of us knows for sure.  Really it no Longer matters.  As I said before the fact is that the people on the reservations and the tribal councils had years and ample opportunities to turn this issue in the favor of keeping the name which I and I believe the vast majority of Sioux fans and Natives supported.  The fact is that unless the NCAA completely reverses their stance on Native names and imagery, that ship has sailed and UND athletics is on shore and we can wave goodbye .  

The whole naming issue has been a fiasco.  The people on the committee are doing what they think is right for the University and includes people who wanted to keep the name wanting to adopt a new name because they think we need a name and need to move on. No reason to insult them. I don't know how they can come up with a way to vote on this issue because there is no way to define your voting constituency.  

To me the only question that remains is what is best for UND and UND athletics.  From what I have read, having a name allows us a brand and identification that allows us marketing opportunities that remaining North Dakota doesn't. Remaining just North Dakota leaves this debate open and decisive for the foreseeable future and doesn't resolve anything, it postpones what even many who wish to remain just North Dakota is inevitable.  I and others understand the emotional and historical ties associated with the Fighting Sioux name and the wish and inclination that we will never give up. Beyond that, what is the value to UND in remaking just North Dakota?  Forget what the name was, and the heavy handed way the NCAA dealt with the issue here and elsewhere.  The name for athletic teams allows an identity that eventually gets back to the University and the teams and just like the Gophers, Cornhuskers, Cobbers, Jackrabbits, etc. we will adjust and be fine. If we get a cool logo, we will adjust faster.  More importantly than the name is that our fan base at this level has resorted to name calling and threatening to pull donations or stop supporting UND.  That issue is more important that what name we eventually choose.  Convince me we can do the same thing without a name. Leave out all of the debate about what the tribes wanted or who is to blame. The issue is simply name or no name.  The University and our athletic teams remain the constant. Attach any of these names or many of those dropped and we will be fine. The time to adjust will be shorter with a name than without in my opinion.

I understand and appreciate what you're saying.  However, ramming something through is only going to accentuate the divisiveness.  I want to be "North Dakota" in perpetuity but many of the "North Dakota" crowd simply don't think it's a net positive for UND to move forward with a with either an unimaginative or appropriated nickname no matter how cool any logo is.  With how emotionally charged this whole process has been and with how unacceptable all of the nickname replacement are moving forward with one of them would not be moving forward at all.  This fallout is not the fault of the "North Dakota" crowd or of most people who genuinely support UND.  It's not wrong for people to react the way they're reacting.  This is the fault of the PC anti-nickname crowd, the NCAA and Kelley and his administration (for how they've handled it and for the propaganda they've been throwing out there).  As I said before, I'm sure Kelley is a nice enough man and, no doubt, he has had a very tough job with all of this.  I don't think either he or Peter Johnson or the whole Administration have been at all forthright and genuine about it though.  This has been quite apparent and the latest example is the GF Herald screed concerning what the NCAA may or may not do to regulate speech.  The duplicity and the failure to engage people in a straightforward manner is a primary reason why we're seeing accentuated divisiveness.  Kelley should just put "North Dakota" on the ballot or just say that all of the replacements are terrible and that we're staying North Dakota for 5 more years or 3 more years or whatever.   

[homer]

I understand and appreciate what you're saying.  However, ramming something through is only going to accentuate the divisiveness.  I want to be "North Dakota" in perpetuity but many of the "North Dakota" crowd simply don't think it's a net positive for UND to move forward with a with either an unimaginative or appropriated nickname no matter how cool any logo is.  With how emotionally charged this whole process has been and with how unacceptable all of the nickname replacement are moving forward with one of them would not be moving forward at all.  This fallout is not the fault of the "North Dakota" crowd or of most people who genuinely support UND.  It's not wrong for people to react the way they're reacting.  This is the fault of the PC anti-nickname crowd, the NCAA and Kelley and his administration (for how they've handled it and for the propaganda they've been throwing out there).  As I said before, I'm sure Kelley is a nice enough man and, no doubt, he has had a very tough job with all of this.  I don't think either he or Peter Johnson or the whole Administration have been at all forthright and genuine about it though.  This has been quite apparent and the latest example is the GF Herald screed concerning what the NCAA may or may not do to regulate speech.  The duplicity and the failure to engage people in a straightforward manner is a primary reason why we're seeing accentuated divisiveness.  Kelley should just put "North Dakota" on the ballot or just say that all of the replacements are terrible and that we're staying North Dakota for 5 more years or 3 more years or whatever.   

Having already drug this on for 4 years is hardly ramming down anyone's throat?  What nickname did you suggest to the committee?  I submitted Tribe. Did you attend any of the meetings in person or via conference call?  I didn't although I had plenty of opportunities. How about phone calls or emails to the committee members who's names were well published?  

Point being, over the last several months there have been opportunities to get your voice heard. Whether you attempted or not, I have no idea. 

[yababy8]

Everyone needs to calm down and take a breath, this issue is splitting up the fan base more and more everyday we go without a vote. Get the voting on and pick something.

So after two posts of accusing me of name calling, when I call you on the fact that I did not name call, you respond by saying everyone needs to calm down?  Impressive..

 And then after I point out the false accusation, IraMurphy post more rehototic accusing people of name calling?

Where is all of this name ccalling??

 Is that what this clan of "get over it" activists does?  Just simply make things up to paint the picture which serves them best?

My post which started the last several posts was simply to point out that 82 was incorrectly portraying history.  Almost all of the negative responses that you all have come up with have revolved around name calling and not being able to get over the debate about the name. It is truly truly amazing how you all manipulate a debate.  The one constant I see is that you all always make it about something else:

Name calling, crying, not giving up on a fight, belittling,  yada yada yada. You all just making stuff up as you go.  

Again, I was challenging 82 on his assertion that the 2012 vote indicated the Sioux people's position regarding the use of their name.

That's all.  That's it.  Nothing more.  

And I have called no one a name.

Further and to be clear, I have zero interest in debating with you all about the value of our name -The Sioux- or the unjust events which have occurred or who did or didn't do something to prevent this rape (look it up spellckeck 83) and assassination of our name.  I have been down that road and the character of the "get over it"  team who post like rabbits hump on this board has been clearly revealed to me.

Like I have said about 8 times now.  I am simply calling out 82 on being manipulative in his B.S. accounting of history.