NCAA To Sanction UND if School Does Not Adopt New Nickname

[Goon]

Such delusion.  You won't hear "let's go Sioux"  within three years after a new name is chosen...except maybe the person next to one or two fans. 

I am going to agree with Cratter, the Let's go Sioux cheer isn't going anywhere, fast. 

[Siouxphan27]

Yeah, but then folks would shorten it to 'mongs, and someone would mishear it as Hmong and we'd be toast all over again.  

 

Lol well, just get Stenehjem to strike a sweet deal with the ncaa to get permission from the two nearest Hmong tribes.

[Hayduke]

Kelley would be run out of town on a rail if Sundogs is the new nickname. 

it would definately get unpleasant for him.

[choyt3]

Ever been to a game outside the REA? It's not so loud in fact it's almost non-existent in the Alerus.

For eff sake. Quit turning this into a "hockey fan vs all other sports fan" issue. Over simplify the situation much? 

You at a game at the Alerus? Which one? 

I'm with petey. This has been a cluster from the beginning. The fact that Sundogs remains as a viable option disqualifies the process in my eyes. It's unfortunate that Dr. Kelley has decided to retire and this is not yet resolved. But, that should not force him to pick a lesser name from these remaining choices just to pick a name. Committees bring forth "crappy" options (choices, candidates, etc.) all the time in academia and business. It wouldn't be the first time leadership recognized the quality of choices (or candidates) and rejected them all and reconvened a committee. I'm less concerned with throwing it in the lap of the next UND president than getting the "right" name, whatever that may be. 

Blow it up and try again. 

Edited August 27, 2015 by choyt3
Language

[NoiseInsideMyHead]

Lol well, just get Stenehjem to strike a sweet deal with the ncaa to get permission from the two nearest Hmong tribes.

That would be a Hmongous task.

[zonadub]

Going back and creating a process to choose a new nickname? Yes without a doubt that is what is best for UND. The first try failed. Learn from it and try again.

There is no 'good' process to pick a new nickname to replace one that was a beloved as the Sioux name was.

 

What would you suggest? Another committee? This one was trying to do the best job they could for the University of North Dakota. Yes, the results are not full of names that have people saying "how can we be expected to pick one name from a list of such awesome names". I don't know if you have ever given time to a government committee, but they are not the place to go for inspired innovation.

 

A student vote? Like Cal State Santa Cruz? Banana Slugs?

 

We were all witness to the excellent suggestions of the 'marketing consultant'. What a great inspiration his input to the process was!

 

Maybe you would rather a committee of one pick the name? Well, that would fall on the President, and I am pretty confident that you, and most everyone else, would not want Kelly to make that selection on his own.

 

Maybe you would want that committee of one to be petey23.  Sure, that would work. Then you would be happy. On the other hand, I doubt even you could come up with a nickname that would have universal appeal, however. This is why the consultant came up with a 'safe' <school color> <name a bird> recommendation. At least UNDErmines came up with something imaginative. Uninspiring, but imaginative.

 

There is no way to pick a perfect name. Can you imagine the University of Minnesota going through something like this and picking a name like ... Gophers?! How about the University of Oklahoma coming up with a name like Sooners? Yet those schools would probably fight over having their names taken stolen from them now, too.

 

There has been 10 years of this fiasco and more than 3 years of moratorium since North Dakota (the University and the state) succumbed to the NCAA. And that is not enough time? Seriously?

 

Yes, I may be more accepting of this process than some because I felt that Roughriders was a good choice from the get-go, but there have also been several names that have been removed from consideration that I felt would have been better than any of the ones still under consideration, including Roughriders. For example, I really liked ericpnelson's suggestion of Wolves, especially after the video clip he posted of the pack of wolves taking down the bison.   Don't really like seeing the inclusion of any weather phenomenon as a choice, but this is the 21st Century, and that's the world we now live in. North Stars is OK, but don't think a North Dakota flagship university should name itself after a neighboring state. And would rather have seen Owls or even Pheasants as the bird instead of Hawks (on the other side of it, Lowell Schweigert championed the Hawks theme and his loyalty and devotion to UND are without question), but the committee (and Pres Kelly) are in a no-win situation.

 

How do you come up with a replacement for the Sioux name that will be accepted? I think the people on the committee did what they felt was best for the university and provided a list of five names they felt were appropriate. They eliminated 'North Dakota', but left the totally lame and unimaginative shortened version Nodaks, which makes me shudder. I would rather see Sundogs over Nodaks, but at least they should be given credit for accepting a volunteer position which could not possibly have a widely acclaimed and universally supported outcome.

 

You have said that you 'can live with' Roughriders (my paraphrase). While not happy about most of the choices, the one I, personally, would not like to see chosen is not having a nickname at all. If it is such a good idea, why wouldn't a well-known and respected school like Stanford (which could stand on its own without a nickname if any school could) have already gone that direction? If no nickname is included in a popularity poll, I hope it is defeated because it, for lack of better wording, just doesn't feel right.

 

Waiting another 3, 5 or 10 years to do it all over again in the hope that this time they 'get it right' doesn't make sense, because I don't think that the next time will produce a significantly different or better result. It's UND's Kobayashi Maru.

 

My hope is that you will accept that my position on this has nothing to do with fear-mongering and everything to do with accepting that the committee was put into an impossible situation and tried to do the best job they could for the University of North Dakota, it's students, alumni and fans. They should be thanked for their service and their efforts, not vilified because the list of names doesn't please everybody (we could, after all, be bestowed with a name like Banana Slugs). No list could, now or in another 3, 5 or 10 years.

 

Sorry, I was only going to a write a couple short paragraphs, but one thought led to the next and turned into a rant.

[fightingsioux4life]

Sorry, I was only going to a write a couple short paragraphs, but one thought led to the next and turned into a rant.

Hey, as a frequent contributor of "rants" to this forum, yours was pretty good!  And I agree with it 100%.

[petey23]

 

Then then when the second process fails, third times a charm, or fourth, fifth, tenth.

I can post something and you can read it but I can't make you understand or comprehend it.

They don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater here....just rewind a couple steps in the process and tweak the order of the process.

[UND-1]

I can post something and you can read it but I can't make you understand or comprehend it.

They don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater here....just rewind a couple steps in the process and tweak the order of the process.

Break it down for us since we apparently don't understand how far to rewind the tape.  

[petey23]

There is no 'good' process to pick a new nickname to replace one that was a beloved as the Sioux name was.

I agree, you aren't going to replace one of the top 5 names and the top logo in all of college sports. An argument could have been made to go with North Dakota in hopes that over time a name would organically come forward vs. developing a process in the first place.

 

What would you suggest? Another committee? This one was trying to do the best job they could for the University of North Dakota. Yes, the results are not full of names that have people saying "how can we be expected to pick one name from a list of such awesome names". I don't know if you have ever given time to a government committee, but they are not the place to go for inspired innovation.

I have laid out a pretty common sense approach to this. Don't need another committee, just need to back up the process to where they were at 15 names or maybe even the previous cut down. Then make a couple tweaks in the order and process of implementing the plan and we are back on track. The way Kelley or his people laid this out shows no real world or business instincts what so ever which is probably why they are in education to begin with.

 

A student vote? Like Cal State Santa Cruz? Banana Slugs?

Well if there is going to be a vote then I guess students should be part of the vote along with Alumni, Faculty, and Stakeholders(read, non alumni donors). I would have rather seen the committee formed, go through a better laid out process, let the public know when they are down to 4 or 5 choices and reveal those names along with the marketing and branding plans put together for them and get public sentiment and then come up with the top 2 and give them to Kelley to choose from.

 

We were all witness to the excellent suggestions of the 'marketing consultant'. What a great inspiration his input to the process was!

As I have said a few times. A complete joke and waste of time and money. We have several people locally with UND ties that would have provided better services for free as they would have a vested interest personally and financially business wise in the final result.

 

Maybe you would rather a committee of one pick the name? Well, that would fall on the President, and I am pretty confident that you, and most everyone else, would not want Kelly to make that selection on his own.

Nope.

 

Maybe you would want that committee of one to be petey23.  Sure, that would work. Then you would be happy. On the other hand, I doubt even you could come up with a nickname that would have universal appeal, however. This is why the consultant came up with a 'safe' <school color> <name a bird> recommendation. At least UNDErmines came up with something imaginative. Uninspiring, but imaginative.

I could go back and copy and paste pretty reasonable common sense plans that anyone with above an 8th grade level understanding of marketing could have came up with. If you search under my moniker you can find them yourself.

 

There is no way to pick a perfect name. Can you imagine the University of Minnesota going through something like this and picking a name like ... Gophers?! How about the University of Oklahoma coming up with a name like Sooners? Yet those schools would probably fight over having their names taken stolen from them now, too.

Agree.

 

There has been 10 years of this fiasco and more than 3 years of moratorium since North Dakota (the University and the state) succumbed to the NCAA. And that is not enough time? Seriously?

I guess it is how you use the time. If you don't know what you are doing(Kelley) and you put together a crappy plan like they did then yes you have wasted quite a bit of time that could have been better used. In the end we still have a fixable process and it would be better to roll back the plan(not scrap it), tweak it a bit and move forward again. The goal should still be to get the best result possible going forward rather than "welp, I guess this will do!"

 

Yes, I may be more accepting of this process than some because I felt that Roughriders was a good choice from the get-go, but there have also been several names that have been removed from consideration that I felt would have been better than any of the ones still under consideration, including Roughriders. For example, I really liked ericpnelson's suggestion of Wolves, especially after the video clip he posted of the pack of wolves taking down the bison.   Don't really like seeing the inclusion of any weather phenomenon as a choice, but this is the 21st Century, and that's the world we now live in. North Stars is OK, but don't think a North Dakota flagship university should name itself after a neighboring state. And would rather have seen Owls or even Pheasants as the bird instead of Hawks (on the other side of it, Lowell Schweigert championed the Hawks theme and his loyalty and devotion to UND are without question), but the committee (and Pres Kelly) are in a no-win situation.

I sort of agree. Out of what's left I think North Stars is the best name but not usable for UND and Roughriders is tolerable. The other 3 are terrible.

I think that during the process they got rid of 6 or 7 names that are better and were certainly more marketable and easier to brand than what is left which is why I continually point out the flaw in the plan and the order of their process.

They are in a no-win situation now because that is the corner Kelley led them to. Back out of the corner and go a different direction.

 

How do you come up with a replacement for the Sioux name that will be accepted? I think the people on the committee did what they felt was best for the university and provided a list of five names they felt were appropriate. They eliminated 'North Dakota', but left the totally lame and unimaginative shortened version Nodaks, which makes me shudder. I would rather see Sundogs over Nodaks, but at least they should be given credit for accepting a volunteer position which could not possibly have a widely acclaimed and universally supported outcome.

having the consultant and a few people on the committee with a prior agenda didn't help. Not having the leadership or stones necessary to announce that "North Dakota" would not be an option and explain why it wouldn't be at the very beginning of the process has helped create the mess Kelley has to deal with......his poor decision making and lack of being forthright, and lack of leadership are why we are the cusp of choosing a name that will have far less than 50% approval in reality and far far less than that in public perception(perception is reality).

 

You have said that you 'can live with' Roughriders (my paraphrase). While not happy about most of the choices, the one I, personally, would not like to see chosen is not having a nickname at all. If it is such a good idea, why wouldn't a well-known and respected school like Stanford (which could stand on its own without a nickname if any school could) have already gone that direction? If no nickname is included in a popularity poll, I hope it is defeated because it, for lack of better wording, just doesn't feel right.

I want North Dakota for now not permanently due to the fact that the process failed to produce the desired result. Maybe we are better off letting it happen organically but I do believe that if this had been handled by professionals from the beginning we would not be in the predicament we are currently faced with.

 

Waiting another 3, 5 or 10 years to do it all over again in the hope that this time they 'get it right' doesn't make sense, because I don't think that the next time will produce a significantly different or better result. It's UND's Kobayashi Maru.

Like I said. Back it up a couple months, make some common sense tweaks and move forward again.

 

My hope is that you will accept that my position on this has nothing to do with fear-mongering and everything to do with accepting that the committee was put into an impossible situation and tried to do the best job they could for the University of North Dakota, it's students, alumni and fans. They should be thanked for their service and their efforts, not vilified because the list of names doesn't please everybody (we could, after all, be bestowed with a name like Banana Slugs). No list could, now or in another 3, 5 or 10 years.

I agree. With the guidelines and plan they were given and the lack of leadership from the beginning from Kelley they were put in a bad situation that was destined to get us to where we are today. About to choose a name that in the public's perception will have very little support. People can twist numbers if they want but in talking with other fellow alumn and seeing the students vote the perception will be that remaining North Dakota is the choice of around 55-60% so if you narrow it down to Roughriders vs. North Stars and Roughriders wins the perception will be we just chose a name that received 20-25% of the vote. Not removing "North Dakota" from consideration and owning that decision  is why we are here.

 

Sorry, I was only going to a write a couple short paragraphs, but one thought led to the next and turned into a rant.

I like it.

[darell1976]

For eff sake. Quit turning this into a "hockey fan vs all other sports fan" issue. Over simplify the situation much? 

You at a game at the Alerus? Which one? 

I'm with petey. This has been a cluster from the beginning. The fact that Sundogs remains as a viable option disqualifies the process in my eyes. It's unfortunate that Dr. Kelley has decided to retire and this is not yet resolved. But, that should not force him to pick a lesser name from these remaining choices just to pick a name. Committees bring forth "crappy" options (choices, candidates, etc.) all the time in academia and business. It wouldn't be the first time leadership recognized the quality of choices (or candidates) and rejected them all and reconvened a committee. I'm less concerned with throwing it in the lap of the next UND president than getting the "right" name, whatever that may be. 

Blow it up and try again. 

I go to the Potato Bowl every year and there is less and less Sioux gear and cheering lets go Sioux than at a hockey game. How much cheering is there for the "Sioux" at the Betty? At Kraft? At the Hyslop? It is pretty much hockey vs all other sports when it's about funding and the Sioux name.

[darell1976]

Can I take this? That not at all true. The Fargo Regional, The WJC game between Canada and Russia, the Xcel with UND in the championship (a couple of times), game seven Boston vs. New Jersey in the old Garden and the UND Regional before the Michigan Game were the loudest games I have ever attended. Let's not forget UND vs. WSU in a playoff game at the Alerus, that was really loud, too. 

The playoff game in the Alerus when UND was still the Fighting Sioux and not in a cooling off period.

[Benny Baker]

I go to the Potato Bowl every year and there is less and less Sioux gear and cheering lets go Sioux than at a hockey game. How much cheering is there for the "Sioux" at the Betty? At Kraft? At the Hyslop? It is pretty much hockey vs all other sports when it's about funding and the Sioux name.

This is a good thing then!  If Fighting Sioux chants are already fading into oblivion, then there really is no need to worry about those new threats of sanctions; i.e., other schools complaining to the NCAA about the use of Fighting Sioux.

Let's move forward as North Dakota!

[petey23]

This is a good thing then!  If Fighting Sioux chants are already fading into oblivion, then there really is no need to worry about those new threats of sanctions; i.e., other schools complaining to the NCAA about the use of Fighting Sioux.

Let's move forward as North Dakota!

Box.

[petey23]

I go to the Potato Bowl every year and there is less and less Sioux gear and cheering lets go Sioux than at a hockey game. How much cheering is there for the "Sioux" at the Betty? At Kraft? At the Hyslop? It is pretty much hockey vs all other sports when it's about funding and the Sioux name.

Boxed

[zonadub]

 

I like it.

thank you. respectful disagreement can be constructive.

[fightingsioux4life]

This is a good thing then!  If Fighting Sioux chants are already fading into oblivion, then there really is no need to worry about those new threats of sanctions; i.e., other schools complaining to the NCAA about the use of Fighting Sioux.

Let's move forward as North Dakota!

All it takes is for one person or school to complain to the NCAA about some fans wearing Fighting Sioux gear (which I will continue doing) to bring back the scrutiny and potentially bring back the sanctions. And there are still enough people at hockey games (home, away and at postseason tournaments) that wear the name and logo and voice their support for them to make this a potential pitfall in the future.

Sorry, thanks for playing, please play again.

Edited August 27, 2015 by fightingsioux4life

[Benny Baker]

All it takes is for one person or school to complain to the NCAA about some fans wearing Fighting Sioux gear (which I will continue doing) to bring back the scrutiny and potentially bring back the sanctions. And there are still enough people at hockey games (home, away and at postseason tournaments) that wear the name and logo and voice their support for them to make this a potential pitfall in the future.

Sorry, thanks for playing, please play again.

I don't recall seeing anything about sanctions resulting from "one person" complaining.  I do, however, know that the NCAA allegedly saying that if "schools" (meaning more than one) complained, the NCAA would then investigate the situation, which "might, might" result in sanctions.  

Sorry, but I'm unable to thank you for playing when you're purposefully misrepresenting the few facts that we know, so there's no need for you to play again.  Move along.

[darell1976]

I don't recall seeing anything about sanctions resulting from "one person" complaining.  I do, however, know that the NCAA allegedly saying that if "schools" (meaning more than one) complained, the NCAA would then investigate the situation, which "might, might" result in sanctions.  

Sorry, but I'm unable to thank you for playing when you're purposefully misrepresenting the few facts that we know, so there's no need for you to play again.  Move along.

St. Cloud State, Wisconsin and Minnesota and that's just from playing them in hockey not bad for starters. 

[Benny Baker]

St. Cloud State, Wisconsin and Minnesota and that's just from playing them in hockey not bad for starters. 

How is it that you know for a fact St. Cloud State, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will all go "complain" to the NCAA because someone's wearing a fighting sioux jersey?  How is that you know for a fact that the NCAA will sanction UND as a result of this fan wearing a fighting sioux jersey?

[Cratter]

I don't recall seeing anything about sanctions resulting from "one person" complaining.  I do, however, know that the NCAA allegedly saying that if "schools" (meaning more than one) complained, the NCAA would then investigate the situation, which "might, might" result in sanctions.  

Sorry, but I'm unable to thank you for playing when you're purposefully misrepresenting the few facts that we know, so there's no need for you to play again.  Move along.

So change the thread title of "to"  to "might"  and you described it accurately. 

[Benny Baker]

So change the thread title of "to"  to "might"  and you described it accurately. 

True.  The tread title actually pertained to the settlement agreement and addendum.  Darell, 82SiouxGuy, Sioux83, Sicatoka, and a few others all claimed that "no nickname" would violate the settlement agreement and result in sanctions.  They were wrong, as usual.

Now, some of them are creating assumptions from hearsay to fulfill their own personal belief that the NCAA will sanction UND at all costs.  It's as if these guys want nothing more than UND to get punished.  Kind of odd if you ask me.

[Siouxperfan7]

So there is a chance that the NCAA may impose sanctions on UND if no nickname is selected and UND chooses to go by just "North Dakota."  Is it a good chance, or is it far fetched....doesn't matter.  No matter how much, you don't think that other schools UND recruits against are going to use that against us?  Sure the chance is small, but it is out there and it will hurt recruiting.  This is not a scare tactic.  Coaches pull out all the stops when recruiting a player that is persued by another school.  Why give other schools ammo against us?  

[Benny Baker]

So there is a chance that the NCAA may impose sanctions on UND if no nickname is selected and UND chooses to go by just "North Dakota."  Is it a good chance, or is it far fetched....doesn't matter.  No matter how much, you don't think that other schools UND recruits against are going to use that against us?  Sure the chance is small, but it is out there and it will hurt recruiting.  This is not a scare tactic.  Coaches pull out all the stops when recruiting a player that is persued by another school.  Why give other schools ammo against us?  

Don't recall seeing anything about that either.  Again, whether or not there is a new nickname, the report from UND's office was that if other schools complain, the NCAA would investigate, and it might, might result in sanctions.

If the anti-no nickname crowd actually cared about UND like they allege they do, they should make a bigger effort to stomp out the use of Fighting Sioux at UND games regardless of a new nickname. 

Instead, we have people like fightingsioux4life, who obviously cares nothing about UND, and says he's going to continue to wear Fighting Sioux gear at UND games regardless of what the NCAA says.  If sanctions occur, I guess I know where to point the finger!

[fightingsioux4life]

I don't recall seeing anything about sanctions resulting from "one person" complaining.  I do, however, know that the NCAA allegedly saying that if "schools" (meaning more than one) complained, the NCAA would then investigate the situation, which "might, might" result in sanctions.  

Sorry, but I'm unable to thank you for playing when you're purposefully misrepresenting the few facts that we know, so there's no need for you to play again.  Move along.

First of all, I will not be "moving along" anytime soon.

Second of all, this is the same song and dance we heard when the policy was announced on August 5th, 2005: People were pooh-poohing the potential negative consequences of the nickname policy if it was not overturned and we kept the name and logo as so many men's hockey rubes wanted (because, after all, we can't host regionals anymore anyway, so just accept the sanctions).

The NCAA remembers who we are and they probably will never like us. So why give them an opening to attack us again? We need to cover our a$$es so our coaches and athletes can focus on winning and not stuff like this.