petey23 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 13 hours ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said: So, it turns out Ed had all the answers -- including, it would seem, a bulletproof and uniquely "professional" approach to name selection. Yet, nobody bothered to ask him, and now he's content to throw everyone under the bus? Interesting tactic. #mondaymorningquarterbackmuch #thursdayafternoonquarterback Looks like Ed and I are in agreement. I said they should have just come out with a name and logo and the reasoning and meaning behind it and been done with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 2 hours ago, darell1976 said: Which one is worse in your opinion, Sun Dogs or North Stars. I would have never worn either. Like Ed said when you leave it up to the masses that's what you get. I would still love to hear from someone on the committee how they could possibly justify having North Star on the list. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 3 hours ago, darell1976 said: Just remember folks...we were almost named Sundogs. That alone makes me ill. I wish they could show the 2 logos that are in the running or show the ones that didn't make it. terrible idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 3 hours ago, Teeder11 said: Yeah, I almost got turned away at the door after I failed the retinal scan and forgot the secret password! The password is changed periodically but the default is Blatz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 6 minutes ago, CMSioux said: I would have never worn either. Like Ed said when you leave it up to the masses that's what you get. I would still love to hear from someone on the committee how they could possibly justify having North Star on the list. I would like to know that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyjr Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 14 hours ago, ArchyAlum11 said: Gotta at least give Ed this, he isn't trying to pretend that the name is anything other than what it is, generic and bland. But I would agree that he is omitting the larger role that Kelley and the Committee played in selecting the nicknames. 4 hours ago, The Sicatoka said: I think Ed is pointing out 2000 amateurs picked "Hawks", just like thousands of other amateurs picked Hawks at so many other schools transitioning from Native related names. So yeah, he is saying it's generic and bland. Professionals would have taken time to really find something that is unique and distinct to and about North Dakota. Ed comes from the mindset of "this is my job, I'm going to do it". You could see it in the way he handled the budget; if he could have, he'd have handled the nickname the same way. The predecessor was all committees and consensus; all that gets you is bland and generic. Yeah, he said it was generic and bland: "but we're not starting out saying this is really meaningful to North Dakota," he said. "It's not some unique special thing North Dakota has" The problem is that the criteria this team they put together was supposed to use included exactly that. 2000 amateurs submitted 1990 terrible ideas and a couple decent ones. A few of those were unique and/or unique/relevant to North Dakota and yet we came out with a generic non-relevant one. It should blow my mind, but it doesn't. Full disclosure: I submitted "Badlanders" (and still love it) which I think made it through a couple sets of cuts . . . I also submitted Plainswalkers, hahaha and Green Reapers (like death with a green hood or eyes and a big scythe for cutting down wheat). I think North Dakota Spirit Lake would have been awesome too, but no way they would let that one through. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 53 minutes ago, petey23 said: #thursdayafternoonquarterback Looks like Ed and I are in agreement. I said they should have just come out with a name and logo and the reasoning and meaning behind it and been done with it. Be careful. Ed's father Harold was the guy that started Medora and selling the TR/Roughriders imagery of the State. Ed might have come out with something I lobbied for (and that "Abe Vigoda" didn't like). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoreSiouxForYou Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 4 hours ago, UNDBIZ said: Not the ones we hired. They were pushing hawks. SME was hired after F Hawks was selected. Correct? Are you referring to the Committee professionals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoreSiouxForYou Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 4 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said: Will all that info eventually be subject to ND public records laws? On one hand it is a private firms records, but on the other hand it was for a public institution in ND. I thought the story cited the Drafts Rules. Drafts are not always public record because they are not a completed idea. Could be way wrong but I know I had heard that someplace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 17 minutes ago, MoreSiouxForYou said: SME was hired after F Hawks was selected. Correct? Are you referring to the Committee professionals? Yes to all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 13 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said: Yes to all. The Committee was presented with thousands of public suggestions, and (after scrubbing for vulgarity and other formalities) it was the Committee that -- very publicly -- winnowed the list down to the finalists. Are you suggesting that the Committee was steered in a particular direction by someone and if so, based on what information? The hired "facilitator" (or whatever term was used) didn't have a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 As for your comment that Schaefer threw everyone under the bus - he had nothing to do or say about the process that ROK put in place. Schaefer was not president and only had one vote like the rest of us. His comment reflects the sentiment of many that the selected nickname is not unique. I have to admit, I'm still trying to figure out how UND ended up with the Fighting Hawks nickname. Have come to the conclusion that it was the Ivall logo that people thought would be the new UND logo plus people who thought at least the 'Fighting' part of Fighting Sioux name would remain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 This website should be required reading for anyone (including former Governors and other second-guessers) wanting to criticize or dredge up the topic of nickname selection by UND. For all of the faults of the process, transparency was not one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 2 minutes ago, zonadub said: As for your comment that Schaefer threw everyone under the bus - he had nothing to do or say about the process that ROK put in place. Schaefer was not president and only had one vote like the rest of us. His comment reflects the sentiment of many that the selected nickname is not unique. You mean other than being dismissive of a thoughtful (if flawed) process and calling everyone a bunch of "amateurs"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post The Sicatoka Posted June 3, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted June 3, 2016 A little mouse was in the room when Kelley first put together and met with one of his infamous committees. That mouse spoke with me. The mouse told me that Kelley came into the room and started explaining his grand plan for a committee to report to a committee to select the committee to designate the panel to report to the panel selection committee which would lead to a suggestion committee then to a selection committe. Two people in the room (the first committee, circa 2011) were stunned and both said: Deal with this. Now. Get it done. Now. And of course, Kelley, smarter than both, did it his own way anyway. What is stunning is those two, who were both saying "we do this here and now" were ... Leigh Jeanotte and Ed Schafer Why wasn't Ed in place 12 months earlier ... < sigh > ... heck, why wasn't it Ed instead of Kelley for the whole Kelley regime. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 10 minutes ago, zonadub said: I have to admit, I'm still trying to figure out how UND ended up with the Fighting Hawks nickname. I'll see you at the next support group meeting. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdub27 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 23 minutes ago, zonadub said: I have to admit, I'm still trying to figure out how UND ended up with the Fighting Hawks nickname. Have come to the conclusion that it was the Ivall logo that people thought would be the new UND logo plus people who thought at least the 'Fighting' part of Fighting Sioux name would remain. When you have a large group of people selecting something, the generic choice will rise to the top. People have strong and differing opinions on what is "unique", therefore those choices fall further out on the bell curve. People will pick generic over what they deem to be an unacceptable unique name. Kind of like why groups of people tend to order pepperoni pizza. However I do believe that your last two points did play a partial role in it as well. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodak78 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 25 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said: A little mouse was in the room when Kelley first put together and met with one of his infamous committees. That mouse spoke with me. The mouse told me that Kelley came into the room and started explaining his grand plan for a committee to report to a committee to select the committee to designate the panel to report to the panel selection committee which would lead to a suggestion committee then to a selection committe. Two people in the room (the first committee, circa 2011) were stunned and both said: Deal with this. Now. Get it done. Now. And of course, Kelley, smarter than both, did it his own way anyway. What is stunning is those two, who were both saying "we do this here and now" were ... Leigh Jeanotte and Ed Schafer Why wasn't Ed in place 12 months earlier ... < sigh > ... heck, why wasn't it Ed instead of Kelley for the whole Kelley regime. I believe Kelley had a committee to decide which committee would hand him Toilet Paper after a committee told him it was time for him to do #2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 50 minutes ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said: This website should be required reading for anyone (including former Governors and other second-guessers) wanting to criticize or dredge up the topic of nickname selection by UND. For all of the faults of the process, transparency was not one. How about when just using "North Dakota", which likely would have won the vote, was pulled not once, but twice. That was someone's agenda. I still have heartburn that my suggestion, Arrows, was dumped because it was considered "Native American Imagery". Never mind that arrows date back thousands of years and over multiple continents and cultures. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericpnelson Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 3 minutes ago, GeauxSioux said: How about when just using "North Dakota", which likely would have won the vote, was pulled not once, but twice. That was someone's agenda. I still have heartburn that my suggestion, Arrows, was dumped because it was considered "Native American Imagery". Never mind that arrows date back thousands of years. my wolves was thrown out, I assumed, because we didn't want to be a generic animal... little did I know I should have suggested fighting wolves 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 18 minutes ago, GeauxSioux said: How about when just using "North Dakota", which likely would have won the vote, was pulled not once, but twice. That was someone's agenda. I still have heartburn that my suggestion, Arrows, was dumped because it was considered "Native American Imagery". Never mind that arrows date back thousands of years and over multiple continents and cultures. Just North Dakota carried with it problems that have been hashed over ad nauseam on here. I had hoped it would be dropped the first time, was miffed when it was back on the table (regardless of how genuine or disingenuous that gesture was) and was glad it was eliminated a second time. A real nickname, in the truest sense of how we all know them to be, will be better for UND in the long run, IMHO. We are already "North Dakota" and that's not changing anytime soon. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 12 minutes ago, GeauxSioux said: How about when just using "North Dakota", which likely would have won the vote, was pulled not once, but twice. That was someone's agenda. I still have heartburn that my suggestion, Arrows, was dumped because it was considered "Native American Imagery". Never mind that arrows date back thousands of years and over multiple continents and cultures. No nickname would have been an interesting outcome for a committee empaneled solely for the purpose of selecting a nickname. Once the decision was made that UND would indeed have a name, it's hard to say that pulling 'no nickname' from the ballot had any effect on the quality of the names put forth by the Committee and ultimately chosen by voters. I just don't see the underlying agenda there. As for NA and NA-related names, it's safe to assume that UND didn't have the stomach for a fight, but we'll never know how the NCAA might have reacted. I agree 100% that a single NA connotation should not have been used as a reason to remove any name from consideration without further debate. But there were also plenty of non-Hawks on that list that wouldn't have caused any NA problems whatsoever. The quality of the name (or at least the variety of choices) was the responsibility of the Committee, plain and simple. And until Ed Schaefer reveals his couldn't-miss "professional" solution, I think his criticism of the entire process is misplaced and rings a tad hollow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 25 minutes ago, GeauxSioux said: ... suggestion, Arrows, ... 21 minutes ago, ericpnelson said: little did I know I should have suggested fighting wolves You should've called Eric and suggested "Fighting Arrows". 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWSiouxMN Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I'm ready for this to be over with. A year and a half drama with the new name and logo is just tiring. This should have been done by this time last year... period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geaux_sioux Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 29 minutes ago, SWSiouxMN said: I'm ready for this to be over with. A year and a half drama with the new name and logo is just tiring. This should have been done by this time last year... period 10 years of drama...... Probably more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.