NCAA To Sanction UND if School Does Not Adopt New Nickname

[jackal]

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. 

 

 

Calm down. 

[iramurphy]

Appreciate Chewy's perspective and I understand. I can respect that you feel we are best served by remaining North Dakota. I disagree but I can live with being just North Dakota.  I disagree on the amount of blame on Kelly except for the fiasco and process used to select the new name. I would never put the issue to a vote of more than a select few but I would include remaining just North Dakota.  According to a gentleman closely associated with the final hiring process, Kelly was told by SBHE members the issue was resolved and he wouldn't need to deal with it.

Yababy you seem to infer from what others post,that it is directed at you personally. I assume you meant rhetoric when you referenced me.  I offered no criticism of you personally but I will reference you now.  Look at the difference between your last response and Chewy's.  Which do you think might lead to some sort of dialogue to come to a reasonable resolution?  If you can't see the difference, then ignore my posts.  We have to get past taking every comment being a personal slight before we might bring this to some sort of closure.  If we remain North Dakota then we move on and try and do what is best for UND. If we pick some goofy nickname ( almost all schools nicknames are a bit goofy), then we still need to move on and do what is best for UND.  Not what is best for Ira, Chewy, 82 or you but what is best for UND. 

[Hayduke]

Appreciate Chewy's perspective and I understand. I can respect that you feel we are best served by remaining North Dakota. I disagree but I can live with being just North Dakota.  I disagree on the amount of blame on Kelly except for the fiasco and process used to select the new name. I would never put the issue to a vote of more than a select few but I would include remaining just North Dakota.  According to a gentleman closely associated with the final hiring process, Kelly was told by SBHE members the issue was resolved and he wouldn't need to deal with it.

Yababy you seem to infer from what others post,that it is directed at you personally. I assume you meant rhetoric when you referenced me.  I offered no criticism of you personally but I will reference you now.  Look at the difference between your last response and Chewy's.  Which do you think might lead to some sort of dialogue to come to a reasonable resolution?  If you can't see the difference, then ignore my posts.  We have to get past taking every comment being a personal slight before we might bring this to some sort of closure.  If we remain North Dakota then we move on and try and do what is best for UND. If we pick some goofy nickname ( almost all schools nicknames are a bit goofy), then we still need to move on and do what is best for UND.  Not what is best for Ira, Chewy, 82 or you but what is best for UND. 

Good post.  

Other fans made fun of the Sioux name. We're going to be made fun of no matter what name we choose.  If we don't choose a name, the taunts will be worse.  But it really doesn't matter.  

I was thinking of the no nickname option, and I have to admit, it would be fun to give a big "stick it" to the NCAA.  If it weren't the NCAA , maybe we would  have a shot at winning in court.  I think being more cautious and just moving on is still the best option.  

 

 

[Goon]

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.

Wow, you're old.  

[yababy8]

Calm down. 

saying calm down as a response to my post makes absolutely no sense.

Regarding your bold highlights, I can only infer what you mean by that.  My guess is that you are suggesting I am indeed calling people names in the same breath as a say I am not.  Of course I most certainly am not and my guess is that is why you chose the vague method of doing nothing more than highlighting text.

I'm uninclined to go through an language lession when you have not specifically made any sort of assertion about those words and phrases you lighted.

I will say two things,;  I loved my asimilie and the "get over it" as a label for those who have perpetually said "get over it" is nothing short of completely appropriate (their words).  you know come to think of it the name for the other side of the fence is of course we all know,  the "name at all costs" crowd.  what's really super funny about that is that label(labels are not name calling) was created by the "get over it" crowd.  

So effectivly the get over crowd created both labels.  Funny!  ...yet you highlight my words and attempt to make me the guy who calls names by highlighting apropos labels.

 

it just doesn't stop.  absolutely relentless rhetoric. relentless. keep saying it, keep highlighting the words. someday it will be true that I have called names. I guess I just need to accept that.

sorry I didn't clean up this post, I used text to voice on my phone. too lazy to clean up. you all are wearing me down. ha,  pretty soon I'll end up getting frustrated and I'll have to call someone a name.

...ahhh now I get it....

[jackal]

saying calm down as a response to my post makes absolutely no sense.

Regarding your bold highlights, I can only infer what you mean by that.  My guess is that you are suggesting I am indeed calling people names in the same breath as a say I am not.  Of course I most certainly am not and my guess is that is why you chose the vague method of doing nothing more than highlighting text.

I'm uninclined to go through an language lession when you have not specifically made any sort of assertion about those words and phrases you lighted.

I will say two things,;  I loved my asimilie and the "get over it" as a label for those who have perpetually said "get over it" is nothing short of completely appropriate (their words).  you know come to think of it the name for the other side of the fence is of course we all know,  the "name at all costs" crowd.  what's really super funny about that is that label(labels are not name calling) was created by the "get over it" crowd.  

So effectivly the get over crowd created both labels.  Funny!  ...yet you highlight my words and attempt to make me the guy who calls names by highlighting apropos labels.

 

it just doesn't stop.  absolutely relentless rhetoric. relentless. keep saying it, keep highlighting the words. someday it will be true that I have called names. I guess I just need to accept that.

sorry I didn't clean up this post, I used text to voice on my phone. too lazy to clean up. you all are wearing me down. ha,  pretty soon I'll end up getting frustrated and I'll have to call someone a name.

...ahhh now I get it....

My attempt to be a smart *** failed when my attempt to post a smile emoticon also failed.  

[yababy8]

Appreciate Chewy's perspective and I understand. I can respect that you feel we are best served by remaining North Dakota. I disagree but I can live with being just North Dakota.  I disagree on the amount of blame on Kelly except for the fiasco and process used to select the new name. I would never put the issue to a vote of more than a select few but I would include remaining just North Dakota.  According to a gentleman closely associated with the final hiring process, Kelly was told by SBHE members the issue was resolved and he wouldn't need to deal with it.

Yababy you seem to infer from what others post,that it is directed at you personally. I assume you meant rhetoric when you referenced me.  I offered no criticism of you personally but I will reference you now.  Look at the difference between your last response and Chewy's.  Which do you think might lead to some sort of dialogue to come to a reasonable resolution?  If you can't see the difference, then ignore my posts.  We have to get past taking every comment being a personal slight before we might bring this to some sort of closure.  If we remain North Dakota then we move on and try and do what is best for UND. If we pick some goofy nickname ( almost all schools nicknames are a bit goofy), then we still need to move on and do what is best for UND.  Not what is best for Ira, Chewy, 82 or you but what is best for UND. 

IIra, I did sense although I did not know(because you are correct you did not reference me specifically, however you chose to mention name calling in a post right in the middle of a back and forth regarding name calling. hence the sense that it was directed at me at least somewhat) however I chose to respond the way I did to your text because in the end whether or not you are speaking about me was not germane to my point.

I was making a broader point  which addressed the in general and overtime perpetual assertions(including the one you made in your post, which if it didn't reference me it applies to what I'm saying here) by the "get over it" crowd that the "name at all costs" crowd resorts to name call as well as other pejorative characterizations of our character, such as crying and whining, etc, etc, etc.  I think this had been nothing more than a manipulation by the get over crowd as I do not believe this has been the case with the people who have supported the Sipux name and now support the North Dakota option.

it has become so pervasive by the get over crowd that Tom Miller felt comfortable basically calling X su athletes babies. I plan to address that later in more detail. but as a point here it has been perpetual that's a good overcrowd has name called and unjustly defined those whodo not support or believe in giving us another nickname other than North Dakota(the current front line).

I know it would be easy for you or anyone else to say that both sides have done their fair share of name calling and less than admirable behavior. I just don't think this is true and the series of posts are a great example of that

just read through the post and see,.I have been called a name, and I have been incorrectly accused of calling people names and needing to calm down too.  It's hilarious the way a group of people on here attempt to undermine the views of the majority of the people invested in the nickname controversy.  

regarding your request to compare the tenor of my post vs Cheweys, my posts were across a range from expressing ire of a post which manipulated the meaning of the 2012 vote to defending myself against false accusations.so I think it's a little unfair of you to compare what I've been saying today versus what someone else talking about something else is saying. it's a little bit apples and oranges.

[UND1983]

There are more ex Su athletes than just hockey players.  Like a hell of a lot more.  That give a lot of money also. 

Notice the hockey players haven't said anything since that little rant they went on the one day?  Look into it.

[yababy8]

My attempt to be a smart *** failed when my attempt to post a smile emoticon also failed.  

I hear ya brother, im done posting from my phone..  This new UI had some bad glitches too.  I would let Jim know but posting more sounds like work right about now.

[yababy8]

There are more ex Su athletes than just hockey players.  Like a hell of a lot more.  That give a lot of money also. 

Notice the hockey players haven't said anything since that little rant they went on the one day?  Look into it.

there's something you're missing here. something significant.  

[iramurphy]

IIra, I did sense although I did not know(because you are correct you did not reference me specifically, however you chose to mention name calling in a post right in the middle of a back and forth regarding name calling. hence the sense that it was directed at me at least somewhat) however I chose to respond the way I did to your text because in the end whether or not you are speaking about me was not germane to my point.

I was making a broader point  which addressed the in general and overtime perpetual assertions(including the one you made in your post, which if it didn't reference me it applies to what I'm saying here) by the "get over it" crowd that the "name at all costs" crowd resorts to name call as well as other pejorative characterizations of our character, such as crying and whining, etc, etc, etc.  I think this had been nothing more than a manipulation by the get over crowd as I do not believe this has been the case with the people who have supported the Sipux name and now support the North Dakota option.

it has become so pervasive by the get over crowd that Tom Miller felt comfortable basically calling X su athletes babies. I plan to address that later in more detail. but as a point here it has been perpetual that's a good overcrowd has name called and unjustly defined those whodo not support or believe in giving us another nickname other than North Dakota(the current front line).

I know it would be easy for you or anyone else to say that both sides have done their fair share of name calling and less than admirable behavior. I just don't think this is true and the series of posts are a great example of that

just read through the post and see,.I have been called a name, and I have been incorrectly accused of calling people names and needing to calm down too.  It's hilarious the way a group of people on here attempt to undermine the views of the majority of the people invested in the nickname controversy.  

regarding your request to compare the tenor of my post vs Cheweys, my posts were across a range from expressing ire of a post which manipulated the meaning of the 2012 vote to defending myself against false accusations.so I think it's a little unfair of you to compare what I've been saying today versus what someone else talking about something else is saying. it's a little bit apples and oranges.

But the point I seem to be having trouble getting across is that most of all of that doesn't really matter.  What matters is what is best for UND and UND athletic teams. You and I should be able to deal with being slighted now and again if we are going to get into debates on a blog.

 The only issue at hand is whether or not we chose a nickname.  There isn't a name everyone will like and I don't believe time will change that.  If we choose a name can you and others live with it and move on? If we have no nickname I can live with it until some legislator or well meaning group resurrects the issue. As a former athlete and coach the name (including our former names) are not, nor have they ever been what is most important.

[UND1983]

there's something you're missing here. something significant.  

You better help me out?

[yababy8]

But the point I seem to be having trouble getting across is that most of all of that doesn't really matter.  What matters is what is best for UND and UND athletic teams. You and I should be able to deal with being slighted now and again if we are going to get into debates on a blog.

 The only issue at hand is whether or not we chose a nickname.  There isn't a name everyone will like and I don't believe time will change that.  If we choose a name can you and others live with it and move on? If we have no nickname I can live with it until some legislator or well meaning group resurrects the issue. As a former athlete and coach the name (including our former names) are not, nor have they ever been what is most important.

I hear the point you're trying to get across and I don't disagree with that at all. I think you are correct in what you say. but please understand my original post yesterday when I drove into this thread was an objection to what 82 had posted regarding the 2012 vote.

We all should have a huge problem with anyone on here or in the media who attempts to assert from the results of that vote anyone's support or lack thereof of the use of the Sioux name.  

it is simply wrong and way way out of line for someone to assert that.  and it is our responsibility to not allow that truth to be manipulated. we all know why people voted to retire the name in 2012.

so you and I are posting about two different things and I do not disagree with yours. what say you about mine? because it would make me feel a lot better if I started to hear some other people on here reinforcing the value in what I'm talking about when it comes to this 2012 vote.

[yababy8]

You better help me out?

I definitely can and will.  I've been working on a little essay so to speak.  Its a little more work than a simple  post so give me a bit.  I plan to have it up here in the next week.  Hopefully you as well as others will look at it with an open mind.  I do believe it addresses something many people have been missing in all of this and I don't think it has been said...

[iramurphy]

I hear the point you're trying to get across and I don't disagree with that at all. I think you are correct in what you say. but please understand my original post yesterday when I drove into this thread was an objection to what 82 had posted regarding the 2012 vote.

We all should have a huge problem with anyone on here or in the media who attempts to assert from the results of that vote anyone's support or lack thereof of the use of the Sioux name.  

it is simply wrong and way way out of line for someone to assert that.  and it is our responsibility to not allow that truth to be manipulated. we all know why people voted to retire the name in 2012.

so you and I are posting about two different things and I do not disagree with yours. what say you about mine? because it would make me feel a lot better if I started to hear some other people on here reinforcing the value in what I'm talking about when it comes to this 2012 vote.

If I understand correctly you are saying that polls showed that the majority of Native Americans and others supported keeping the name. I agree. If you are saying that the vote to keep the name which was defeated was primarily to protect UND from sanctions rather than how people really felt about the name, I also agree.  I'm sure you understand that although I agree with this, I also believe it is no longer relavent to our present situation and where we need to go from here. 

[yababy8]

If I understand correctly you are saying that polls showed that the majority of Native Americans and others supported keeping the name. I agree. If you are saying that the vote to keep the name which was defeated was primarily to protect UND from sanctions rather than how people really felt about the name, I also agree.  I'm sure you understand that although I agree with this, I also believe it is no longer relavent to our present situation and where we need to go from here. 

yes you have accurately, and with good pros I might add, stated my position.

I do agree with your assertion that it is not relevant to the present situation and where we go now.  

However, just because it is not relevant to the present situation does not make it irrelevant. Aside from how we move forward now, independently, it is very relevant as it is-or shall I say it speaks of- the historical record of a wrong that was committed. It was wrong that we had to give up the Sioux name and when a wrong has been committed I believe as most do that keeping an accurate and fair historical understanding of all of the events that transpired is imperative. It really comes down to the value of history in society or humanity and I think if you ask anyone that has a respect for history they will tell you of its importance. If not for any other reason than those invested parties who were wronged may have an opportunity to heal a little better with the knowledge that history is not lying about thier wrong. I think it's very important.which is obviously why I chose to so vehemently object to 82's post.

For the record I have also read several news articles recently which site that vote in a manner that simply suggest the people of North Dakota voted to get rid of the name. To characterize the vote in that way is nothing short of reprehensible.

So again, although it is not germane to the current situation and the events which need to transpire regarding the name now, it is still a worthy topic which should be discussed and when I saw 82 play that card (a card that I told him he and others would play back in 2012) I chose to jump in and call him on it..  Hopefully moving forward we can all do that.

Remember the Alimo'

Remember the blackmail vote'vote'

Ha!

Edited August 22, 2015 by yababy8

[The Sicatoka]

The historic record?

A cadre of likeminded folks within the NCAA, who didn't like one category of team nicknames, had the power to take most of them out, and did. 

That's the key triggering event, the cause.  After that it's effect. 

[The Sicatoka]

The issue today:

What is best for UND? A nickname or no nickname? 

I'll state my belief: a nickname.

Why? I see the benefits that NDSU has from the multiple marketing options (NDSU, Bison, spelling out North Dakota State University, different logos, art or word marks). They can target different audiences and different media using all the resources available to them. I see all the words written out in some ads. I see just the cow head in others. I see the letters "NDSU" in some places and the word Bison in others. They have options and use them to target demographics and media platforms.

Not having all the possible resources and options handcuffs UND from what I see. We used to have all the options and they were used well so clearly they were at minimum useful if not necessary. Our best logo right now is mostly misrecognized as that of a school in Indiana. If we just put the words "North Dakota" on something do people know "U of" or "State of" without additional context? (Say "Bison" and it is clear.) 

The reasons I can find for not having a new nickname and logo:

- the options we have stink 

- stick it to the NCAA

- I don't want one so I can keep saying the old name

If you believe one or more of those, that's fine. We've beat those topics again and again. 

But in the end it comes down to:

What is best for UND? Why would not having all the options other NCAA schools have going forward be a good thing. 

[GeauxSioux]

I have gravitated to the no nickname stance, due to the lack of a good choice as a new nickname.  I understand the position of a nickname means $$$ to UND.  I also think the wrong nickname would be less $$ to UND , than no nickname. Right now a bad nickname is going to anger a lot of folks, some of them being stakeholders. UND can go with no nickname and come up with a new marketable logo that will produce $$.  Years from now, a new nickname may grow organically. Let's not force a bad choice, just to have a nickname.  

[Oxbow6]

If "you" are inclined to accept one of the 5 options remaining for a new nickname you are probably for a new nickname. Now if one of the 4 remaining name options is picked over the one you can or could live with you then fall back into the we should have gone with no nickname crowd. I am not in the camp that all/any of the 5 new nickname options would be a benefit to UND long term over no nickname regardless of the proposed potential doom and gloom that has spread like wildfires around here. Also as I have stated before this whole process of trying to resolve and satisfy the requirement of moving forward from the Fighting Sioux nickname has easily been one of the most mishandled, amateurish cluster _____ that I have ever witnessed on any level. Regardless of the final outcome this whole situation just needs to end!

[Oxbow6]

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.

I am completely with you on this.

[sprig]

I am completely with you on this.

I am as well. Time for some football

[Hawkster]

Having no nickname isn't going to work.   We all know what the agenda is of the no name crowd   There is no need to refight  the same battles again year after year and the only way we avoid this is go with a nickname.    While Roughriders isn't my first choice, I can live with it and would support it.   I can't live with or support being the University of North Dakota UND's.

[MafiaMan]

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

I walked around Yost Ice Arena back in 1998 prior to and during intermission of the Sioux/Wolverine game.  Can't tell you how many folks I ran into who were happy to let me know that "Spartans suck" or yell "Go back to East Lansing" to my face. The geometric Sioux head on my green jersey meant squat.  People see what they want to see or what they're accustomed to seeing.  Hell, I still have to explain to folks in western WI the difference between UND and NDSU.  Having a nickname won't change that.

[82SiouxGuy]

I walked around Yost Ice Arena back in 1998 prior to and during intermission of the Sioux/Wolverine game.  Can't tell you how many folks I ran into who were happy to let me know that "Spartans suck" or yell "Go back to East Lansing" to my face. The geometric Sioux head on my green jersey meant squat.  People see what they want to see or what they're accustomed to seeing.  Hell, I still have to explain to folks in western WI the difference between UND and NDSU.  Having a nickname won't change that.

Yet the National Park guy I talked to in Boston 10 years ago wanted to talk to me about the UND hockey team after seeing the UND logo on my sweatshirt (before I said anything more than hello). Maybe nicknames and logos do make a difference with some people. If names and logos didn't make a difference in marketing you wouldn't have the logos below or any of the million other logos on products, or the nicknames and logos for every other sports team in the US.