Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

And then there were three....


Teeder11

Recommended Posts

Born: Union Hospital, Mayville, ND

I find Nodak, when used by a non-North Dakotan toward a North Dakotan, is used as a derogatory term intended to mean "backwards" or "hick". 

Born: Mercy Hospital, Devils Lake, ND

Raised in a town of 220 people in North Dakota.

Resided in MN for the last 18 years. Been referred to as a Nodak plenty of times since venturing across the Red River, but never felt as though it was with a negative undertone. Maybe I need to re-evaluate.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If none of the 3 get 50% or more of the vote it will be a complete travesty then.

It truly will be. If one wins with 40 percent of the vote it will be a huge disservice to everyone. 

I don't believe the nickname will last if there isn't 50 percent vote. 

Edited by Sodacker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no fan of Rough Riders, but if the SEC can successfully market 3 Tigers and 2 Bulldogs, then I'm guessing UND could figure out how to differentiate itself from a CFL team in Saskatchewan, a local high school, and a minor league hockey team in Iowa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Rough_Riders

 

Don't forget Ottawa, up until 1996 there were 2 RR teams in the CFL.Ottawa_Rough_Riders_helmet_1995-1996.png

Edited by darell1976
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that it doesn't matter what they claim is the planned process anymore when they're obviously willing to modify the process based on how they feel about the result of the vote. They're going to have us all vote again, eyeball the numbers, and decide what to do then.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a runoff because none of the choices reached the 50% mark. 
In the runoff, the winner doesn't have to reach the 50% mark. 

Seems illogical that the reason that triggered the runoff may not actually be fulfilled by the runoff and yet there could still be a winner.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a runoff because none of the choices reached the 50% mark. 
In the runoff, the winner doesn't have to reach the 50% mark. 

With how the rules are currently amended, why is there a runoff?

Exactly.

Dear Pres. Kelley,

Just pick the fricken name that you want and we can move on. 

Signed, 

The rest of us that are still going to be here in two months

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a runoff because none of the choices reached the 50% mark. 
In the runoff, the winner doesn't have to reach the 50% mark. 

With how the rules are currently amended, why is there a runoff?

Agreed. The whole point of the runoff was to get a name to 50%. Now that they've abandoned that principle, why not just declare Fighting Hawks the winner, as it had a clear lead over the other two? What's the point of seeing how the Sundogs and Northstars votes get distributed across the remaining three, but not seeing how the Nodaks votes would get distributed across Roughriders and Fighting Hawks.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. The whole point of the runoff was to get a name to 50%. Now that they've abandoned that principle, why not just declare Fighting Hawks the winner, as it had a clear lead over the other two? What's the point of seeing how the Sundogs and Northstars votes get distributed across the remaining three, but not seeing how the Nodaks votes would get distributed across Roughriders and Fighting Hawks.

Always the logical view Jim. I think we can all agree that UND and Kelley are definitely not going to win any ethics awards with this process. However, seeing as we (the voters) are at the mercy of the process (whatever process that happens to be), I'm really hoping for two more votes. I'll go Nodaks with the first, and the second (if it is still available). Otherwise I'll go Nodaks then Roughriders.  Not a fan of fighting hawks at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always the logical view Jim. I think we can all agree that UND and Kelley are definitely not going to win any ethics awards with this process. However, seeing as we (the voters) are at the mercy of the process (whatever process that happens to be), I'm really hoping for two more votes. I'll go Nodaks with the first, and the second (if it is still available). Otherwise I'll go Nodaks then Roughriders.  Not a fan of fighting hawks at all.

I totally agree!  FH is awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. The whole point of the runoff was to get a name to 50%. Now that they've abandoned that principle, why not just declare Fighting Hawks the winner, as it had a clear lead over the other two? What's the point of seeing how the Sundogs and Northstars votes get distributed across the remaining three, but not seeing how the Nodaks votes would get distributed across Roughriders and Fighting Hawks.

That's why I think there will be a third vote if someone doesn't get 50 percent. It would have been easier to just announce fighting Hawks the winner and be done with it if that is the end game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. The whole point of the runoff was to get a name to 50%. Now that they've abandoned that principle, why not just declare Fighting Hawks the winner, as it had a clear lead over the other two? What's the point of seeing how the Sundogs and Northstars votes get distributed across the remaining three, but not seeing how the Nodaks votes would get distributed across Roughriders and Fighting Hawks.

Exactly my thoughts since the beginning. I posted this to the UND facebook page comments as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that it doesn't matter what they claim is the planned process anymore when they're obviously willing to modify the process based on how they feel about the result of the vote. They're going to have us all vote again, eyeball the numbers, and decide what to do then.

That defines arbitrary and capricious. You don't trust organizations that behave in that manner (cough - NCAA - cough). 

And that is why Twamley must go back to the voting process as originally defined. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I think there will be a third vote if someone doesn't get 50 percent. It would have been easier to just announce fighting Hawks the winner and be done with it if that is the end game

You have a lot more faith in them than I do.  If they want to get it down to one more vote, then have each person pick their top two favorites in the order they like them, then assign points to them.  If Hawks had a lot of first place votes but just as many 3rd place votes, it would be a better representation on how a third vote would go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I fail to see how he's damned if he sticks to the process that was laid out in black and white prior to the vote.  If he wanted wiggle room for a close vote, he didn't have to say the top-2 finalists would go into a runoff.  He could have said the top 2 or 3.  But when you lay out a specific process, you need to stick to that process if you want to maintain any credibility.  

Bingo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured since this is strictly an email election, there really couldn't be any error.  it's not like there's hanging chads, or someone screwed up the rest of their ballot while voting for county sheriff and their entire ballot got rejected, etc.   he's mucking up the process.  the sad part is he doesn't even realize it.    

minus th fact no one said the email wasn't coming from und and spam filters and blockers didn't clear the email. 

Edited by Vegas_Sioux
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...