Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

NoiseInsideMyHead

Recommended Posts

 
My post was about fan conduct and didn't have anything to do with buildings or hosts.  The regional was an NCAA event, regardless of where it was held.  Sic suggested that the NCAA was waiting to pounce on UND as a direct result of fan conduct at NCAA events and would do anything within its rule making power to do so.

I merely pointed out that not only did the NCAA not make a peep about the '15 regional in Fargo -- which happened to have been hosted by UND and where nothing but Sioux could be seen or heard from floor to rafter -- they went ahead and rewarded Fargo and UND with another regional in two years' time.

There are only two possibilities:  (1) Sic is absolutely right and '17 is the biggest trap in NCAA history; or (2) the NCAA really doesn't intend to do a damn thing about Sioux-related fan conduct now that it is no longer UND's official nickname.  My money is on the latter.

If UND has a new nickname and people chant "Sioux" and wear Siouw apparel, yes you are correct.

If UND does not have new nickname, the NCAA can easily say that UND did not do a good enough job retiring the old nickname.  They can bring up complaints by other schools saying the same thing as well that not having a new name allows the old name to stay around.  

If you think that the NCAA doesn't care about "lil old UND, that small school in North Dakota" than you are absolutely delusional.  Look at what happened 10 myears ago.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If UND has a new nickname and people chant "Sioux" and wear Siouw apparel, yes you are correct.

If UND does not have new nickname, the NCAA can easily say that UND did not do a good enough job retiring the old nickname.  They can bring up complaints by other schools saying the same thing as well that not having a new name allows the old name to stay around.  

If you think that the NCAA doesn't care about "lil old UND, that small school in North Dakota" than you are absolutely delusional.  Look at what happened 10 myears ago.  

Listen to yourself.  A few months ago, "UND did not have a new nickname" and the NCAA did NOTHING about the Sioux fans and Sioux chants and Sioux flags and Sioux apparel.  At its own championship event.  And then it proceeded a few months later to give UND ANOTHER championship event, when it still did not have a new nickname.

Delusion? I'll stick with facts, thank you.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
My post was about fan conduct and didn't have anything to do with buildings or hosts.  The regional was an NCAA event, regardless of where it was held.  Sic suggested that the NCAA was waiting to pounce on UND as a direct result of fan conduct at NCAA events and would do anything within its rule making power to do so.

I merely pointed out that not only did the NCAA not make a peep about the '15 regional in Fargo -- which happened to have been hosted by UND and where nothing but Sioux could be seen or heard from floor to rafter -- they went ahead and rewarded Fargo and UND with another regional in two years' time.

There are only two possibilities:  (1) Sic is absolutely right and '17 is the biggest trap in NCAA history; or (2) the NCAA really doesn't intend to do a damn thing about Sioux-related fan conduct now that it is no longer UND's official nickname.  My money is on the latter.

there it is ... money

 

the NCAA craves sold-out venues. 

 

I dont support Roughriders, or even Hawks, or <gulp> North Stars or Sundogs or even (heaven forbid) Nodaks because what the NCAA might do or not do, it's just because no nickname or the next best/worse solution of Nodaks just does not make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen to yourself.  A few months ago, "UND did not have a new nickname" and the NCAA did NOTHING about the Sioux fans and Sioux chants and Sioux flags and Sioux apparel.  At its own championship event.  And then it proceeded a few months later to give UND ANOTHER championship event, when it still did not have a new nickname.

Delusion? I'll stick with facts, thank you.

UND didn't have an "official nickname" during the regional, we were still in our cooling off period when it was awarded. Now that people are voting for a new name if no nickname is the "official" name the NCAA can do something about it. There is a difference between taking steps to retire the name for good (which happened from 2012-present time) and getting around the NCAA policy and keeping the Fighting Sioux as an unofficial nickname with no nickname and the NCAA knows this. Simple fix...pick a new name and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UND didn't have an "official nickname" during the regional, we were still in our cooling off period when it was awarded. Now that people are voting for a new name if no nickname is the "official" name the NCAA can do something about it. There is a difference between taking steps to retire the name for good (which happened from 2012-present time) and getting around the NCAA policy and keeping the Fighting Sioux as an unofficial nickname with no nickname and the NCAA knows this. Simple fix...pick a new name and move on.

If anyone honestly thinks that the NCAA will have quietly tolerated the atmosphere inside Scheels in 2015 and then freak out and go medieval on UND if the same thing occurs in 2017, there's just no hope for you.

Face it...if having the new nickname in place mattered that much to them, there ain't NO WAY IN HELL they would have awarded '17 to Fargo BEFORE the name was firmly attached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone honestly thinks that the NCAA will have quietly tolerated the atmosphere inside Scheels in 2015 and then freak out and go medieval on UND if the same thing occurs in 2017, there's just no hope for you.

Face it...if having the new nickname in place mattered that much to them, there ain't NO WAY IN HELL they would have awarded '17 to Fargo BEFORE the name was firmly attached.

The NCAA does what they want so no one really knows what they will or won't do.  That is about the only thing they have been consistent with. As far as they are concerned right now UND is working towards a new nickname to replace Fighting Sioux. The vote is next week. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NCAA does what they want so no one really knows what they will or won't do.  That is about the only thing they have been consistent with. As far as they are concerned right now UND is working towards a new nickname to replace Fighting Sioux. The vote is next week. 

This!!! ^^^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not advocating what this fellow is doing, but what you stated cannot be backed up with anything but the fellows statement.  The agreement is a document that must be followed by UND and the NCAA.  That is the law, not NCAA conjecture.  Not choosing a nickname would have met the requirements, since the NCAA does not have any requirements that a school must have a nickname.  As far as the complaint issue, the NCAA has no current grounds to sanction UND since they would have met the requirements of the agreement.  Please give me their current guidelines about fans speech that would have backed up this fellows statement.  I will save you time, because I have looked, and it does not exist.  You can make the same statement about them possibly sanctioning UND if people continue to wear Sioux gear and yell "Sioux" when the new nickname is decided.  That does not have standing either, but is just fearmongering.  This should have been explained quickly, but I do not feel the administration wanted to, and the Almuni Administration has just been hands off in this whole process (other than information for voter id), which is also sad.

I'm on record in several places in this forum advocating that UND not knuckle under if there's a particular nickname they want that they fear someone might complain about. BUT as has been covered by others already, the NCAA doesn't need any sort of existing rule or bylaw that covers this situation. They just need to decide they want to do it.  And actually communicating with UND to say they would, in this instance, is enough for me to say UND should stay out of the gray area of not choosing a new nickname, because it's almost certainly going to lead to additional trouble for UND, and it's doubtful, to me, that UND can win this one in the court of public opinion.

Choose another nickname that meets the guidelines, then I'm more willing to fight that battle for public opinion, because no one can ever say that UND didn't fully comply with the NCAA.   Not choosing another nickname....a certain segment is going to view that as evasion, not compliance.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone honestly thinks that the NCAA will have quietly tolerated the atmosphere inside Scheels in 2015 and then freak out and go medieval on UND if the same thing occurs in 2017, there's just no hope for you.

Face it...if having the new nickname in place mattered that much to them, there ain't NO WAY IN HELL they would have awarded '17 to Fargo BEFORE the name was firmly attached.

For some reason I cant give anymore green arrows up???????? WHY?!

But..great stuff, I see the same old blah blah bad ju ju things will happen crap is still being spewed by the same 2-3 screen names. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason I cant give anymore green arrows up???????? WHY?!

But..great stuff, I see the same old blah blah bad ju ju things will happen crap is still being spewed by the same 2-3 screen names. 

I see that too and you are one of those screen names.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on record in several places in this forum advocating that UND not knuckle under if there's a particular nickname they want that they fear someone might complain about. BUT as has been covered by others already, the NCAA doesn't need any sort of existing rule or bylaw that covers this situation. They just need to decide they want to do it.  And actually communicating with UND to say they would, in this instance, is enough for me to say UND should stay out of the gray area of not choosing a new nickname, because it's almost certainly going to lead to additional trouble for UND, and it's doubtful, to me, that UND can win this one in the court of public opinion.

Choose another nickname that meets the guidelines, then I'm more willing to fight that battle for public opinion, because no one can ever say that UND didn't fully comply with the NCAA.   Not choosing another nickname....a certain segment is going to view that as evasion, not compliance.

 

I am not sure why people do not understand the NCAA must also comply with the settlement agreement.  This is a legal document and not a NCAA document.  It was stated that not having a nickname would have complied.  There is no "partial" compliance or gray area of this agreement, which again is a legal document that the courts said the NCAA must comply with.  They stated that no nickname, just remaining North Dakota was compliance.  Period.  If the NCAA tried to sanction North Dakota based on public speech, I would have been willing to deal with that.  I know we are now voting for a new nickname, but there have been a lot of people not honest about the "No nickname" issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure why people do not understand the NCAA must also comply with the settlement agreement.  This is a legal document and not a NCAA document.  It was stated that not having a nickname would have complied.  There is no "partial" compliance or gray area of this agreement, which again is a legal document that the courts said the NCAA must comply with.  They stated that no nickname, just remaining North Dakota was compliance.  Period.  If the NCAA tried to sanction North Dakota based on public speech, I would have been willing to deal with that.  I know we are now voting for a new nickname, but there have been a lot of people not honest about the "No nickname" issue. 

where was it stated that not having a nickname complied? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NCAA has sent a clear shot across the bow.   If UND remains "North Dakota" and other schools complain that the school or fans are essentially maintaining use of the Fighting Sioux nickname, they could reinstate sanctions.  To me, Kelley had no other choice but to remove it from the ballot.   Why is this so difficult for people to understand?   

The sentence in bold above sounds downright silly.  Seems to me that one must have to try hard to believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sentence in bold above sounds downright silly.  Seems to me that one must have to try hard to believe it.

And if someone told you in 2004 the NCAA is going to make UND and other schools change their Indian nicknames you would've thought that was silly too.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The settlement agreement was pretty clear that UND was obligated to adopt a new nickname.  

http://www.ag.nd.gov/ncaa/SettlementAgreement.pdf

If the NCAA has subsequently agreed to waive that part of the settlement agreement, I'd love to see that document.

 

Goon got the statement from a NCAA spokesman and Pete Johnson with UND admin verified.  There is no reason to waive anything in the agreement, because not having a nickname met the requirement, unlike what some folks had been pushing.  The reason for this all along is because the NCAA has nothing in their bylaws requiring a member university to have a nickname.  This is all moot now because it is not an option. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goon got the statement from a NCAA spokesman and Pete Johnson with UND admin verified.  There is no reason to waive anything in the agreement, because not having a nickname met the requirement, unlike what some folks had been pushing.  The reason for this all along is because the NCAA has nothing in their bylaws requiring a member university to have a nickname.  This is all moot now because it is not an option. 

Precisely.  The ones who are propagating falsehoods and who "just don't get it" are the ones who still are saying that the surrender agreement requires UND to adopt a new nickname.  The committee indicated that this was not the case.  I believe Kelley indicated this was not the case, too.  In any event, it's been publicly stated that it's not the case.  It might be a good idea to read something recent before regurgitating the same false pablum that was mentioned a year ago.  Just a thought. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...