What do you think of the logo now??

[CarpeRemote]

The Sioux vs Hawks neurosis will fade. I just hope the program isn’t hurt much more in the meantime.

Athletes are literally asked to run full speed into a wall. As a former athlete, I believe to a 19 yr old it would be weird and a little disheartening playing for fans who are seemingly more concerned about a name than the players. 

Sioux jerseys are great, it’s a legacy; shouting down a name at events is harmful. Any adult should know this.

As a person who was disappointed with the loss of Sioux, I would wear a Hawk suit and do a polka on the ice if it meant another national championship. 

 

[jdub27]

2 hours ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Until something comes out saying UND is suffering in any way from the lack of logo support, all you're doing is demonizing those that dislike it. 

Talk to anyone who's worked in the athletic department in the last decade and ask what type of general effect the logo has had. Hell, start right at the top and ask the athletic director, who has only been here 2 years, if he thinks the logo and nickname continue to remain an issue. 

I'm sure he really looks forward to conversations where his goal is to talk about new facilities and how to improve the student athlete experience and instead he ends up talking about a retired nickname or logo and how they should just bring it back or that the new name is garbage or that UND is pushing too hard to market their new identity. 

Or talk to a student athlete and ask them how they feel about playing in front of their home crowd, yet hear boos when the nickname on their jersey is mentioned or especially the reactions that show up on social media any time a hawk logo is shown or the nickname is mentioned. The majority of these student-athletes don't have a tie to UND prior to coming here. They don't understand the absurd identity crisis that a subsection of fans go through yet they keep hearing things like "Sioux Forever" and have people telling them the logo they are wearing will never be accepted. I'm sure that goes over well.

[stoneySIOUX]

6 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

Talk to anyone who's worked in the athletic department in the last decade and ask what type of general effect the logo has had. Hell, start right at the top and ask the athletic director, who has only been here 2 years, if he thinks the logo and nickname continue to remain an issue. 

I'm sure he really looks forward to conversations where his goal is to talk about new facilities and how to improve the student athlete experience and instead he ends up talking about a retired nickname or logo and how they should just bring it back or that the new name is garbage or that UND is pushing too hard to market their new identity. 

Ok, but what is the effect? "General effect" means nothing to me. Are we losing fans? Is the school losing money? Are less tickets being sold?

Of course they are going to have to talk about it, but I'm asking for real proof that this is a deep-seeded issue. 

The general effect seems that people are just talking about it. 

[Siouxperfan7]

1 minute ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Ok, but what is the effect? Are we losing fans? Is the school losing money? Are less tickets being sold?

Of course they are going to have to talk about it, but I'm asking for real proof that this is a deep-seeded issue. 

So if the schools isn't losing fans, money, or ticket revenue, then people are justified to keep bitching about the name and logo because "it's not hurting anyone" right?!!

[stoneySIOUX]

1 minute ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

So if the schools isn't losing fans, money, or ticket revenue, then people are justified to keep bitching about the name and logo because "it's not hurting anyone" right?!!

Correct. 

[jdub27]

9 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Ok, but what is the effect? Are we losing fans? Is the school losing money? Are less tickets being sold?

Of course they are going to have to talk about it, but I'm asking for real proof that this is a deep-seeded issue. 

If you're asking for something concrete, that doesn't exist.

Countless hours and who knows how much money has been wasted on what continues to be an on-going issue that some of the "biggest supporters" of the University can't accept.

Impossible to quantify the net effect, but the last decade plus, while UND has been twiddling their thumbs trying to figure out who to be and what that should look like, other schools in the area have continued to push and enhance their brand. If you can't see that, than you haven't been paying attention.

Then you have that group of people who swears they will never donate any money to UND because of the nickname change. Is that a real faction and does it carry any weight? Yes, but no clue on the impact. But with the amount of threats that were made and continue to show up on social media, maybe there is money and/or tickets being missed out on.

While it isn't measurable, it is pretty hard to dispute that there has been an absurd amount of time and resources wasted on something that still causes issues, things that could have been applied on improving UND (fair argument on what good it would have done, but I digress). Time is finite, every hour spent on the nickname issues is an hour not spent on something else.

[stoneySIOUX]

17 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

If you're asking for something concrete, that doesn't exist.

Countless hours and who knows how much money has been wasted on what continues to be an on-going issue that some of the "biggest supporters" of the University can't accept.

Impossible to quantify the net effect, but the last decade plus, while UND has been twiddling their thumbs trying to figure out who to be and what that should look like, other schools in the area have continued to push and enhance their brand. If you can't see that, than you haven't been paying attention.

Then you have that group of people who swears they will never donate any money to UND because of the nickname change. Is that a real faction and does it carry any weight? Yes, but no clue on the impact. But with the amount of threats that were made and continue to show up on social media, maybe there is money and/or tickets being missed out on.

While it isn't measurable, it is pretty hard to dispute that there has been an absurd amount of time and resources wasted on something that still causes issues, things that could have been applied on improving UND (fair argument on what good it would have done, but I digress). Time is finite, every hour spent on the nickname issues is an hour not spent on something else.

This is all I want. If it's something quantifiable and tangibly hurting UND, they need to get out in front of it and tell the fans this.

I've said it now probably 100 times. People who don't like the logo accept that the Sioux name isn't coming back, in general. They just don't like it. Ignore it and time will move them. 

[jdub27]

19 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

This is all I want. If it's something quantifiable and tangibly hurting UND, they need to get out in front of it and tell the fans this.

I mean, you're basically asking for something that is impossible to calculate and then more or less stating there is no tangible effect because someone can't give you a hard number. The fact that people directly involved (athletic department, student-athletes, etc) state that it is an issue should be proof enough. They are the ones that deal with it.

[Siouxperfan7]

24 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

This is all I want. If it's something quantifiable and tangibly hurting UND, they need to get out in front of it and tell the fans this.

I've said it now probably 100 times. People who don't like the logo accept that the Sioux name isn't coming back, in general. They just don't like it. Ignore it and time will move them. 

A school that has a divided fanbase supporting two different names and logos in something that is tangibly hurting UND.  If you can't see that, then you are part of the problem.

[stoneySIOUX]

1 hour ago, jdub27 said:

I mean, you're basically asking for something that is impossible to calculate and then more or less stating there is no tangible effect because someone can't give you a hard number. The fact that people directly involved (athletic department, student-athletes, etc) state that it is an issue should be proof enough. They are the ones that deal with it.

I'm certainly not denying this is something they're hearing this all the time. I'm just questioning the effect and what it means. Tangible means "hard" data. 

[stoneySIOUX]

53 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

A school that has a divided fanbase supporting two different names and logos in something that is tangibly hurting UND.  If you can't see that, then you are part of the problem.

And again, I feel like this "division" is incredibly overblown. I've seen nothing to indicate that attendance is going down or we're making less money BECAUSE of this issue. 

[jdub27]

 

19 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

And again, I feel like this "division" is incredibly overblown. I've seen nothing to indicate that attendance is going down or we're making less money BECAUSE of this issue. 

And that's your opinion, which is made from a distance. I suggest talking to those who it impacts every day and get their thoughts and feelings on it.

The fact that you refuse to believe that there is actually a problem because someone can't put an exact, quantifiable number on it is a bit of an odd take. 

[stoneySIOUX]

7 minutes ago, jdub27 said:

 

And that's your opinion, which is made from a distance. I suggest talking to those who it impacts every day and get their thoughts and feelings on it.

The fact that you refuse to believe that there is actually a problem because someone can't put an exact, quantifiable number on it is a bit of an odd take. 

Definitely my opinion and not trying to be rude, but you have no idea who I am nor who I know in Grand Forks, at UND or within the Athletic Department. So, feel free to think my opinion is unfounded. Doesn't bother me. 

I don't understand why it's an odd take. I'm not arguing that the "division" exists, because it does. I, for one, don't think it's that prevalent. I also don't understand why it's an odd take to think the effect isn't a big deal because of a lack of actual, tangible evidence to indicate it other than people whining on the internet.

I don't feel it's that big of a problem. You do. That's alright by me. I'm still going to support UND in any way that I can that doesn't involve buying the logo that I don't like.  I'm assuming you'll do the same.

[ericpnelson]

19 hours ago, Siouxphan27 said:

 I guess I think it’s more like let’s say I was mutually, happily married to Pamela Anderson, but then one day some a hole social justice warriors came along and decided our love was forbidden.  We were forced to divorce, and I was forced to get remarried to my choice of  Rosie O’Donnell,  Madeline Albright, Janet Reno, or Whoopi Goldberg.  

 And not only did I have to remarry  one of them, but I had to keep hearing from these social justice warriors, and others, about how great my new wife is, and that I should buy whatever she’s selling.  

don't blame me, I wanted to marry Janet

[Siouxphan27]

16 minutes ago, ericpnelson said:

don't blame me, I wanted to marry Janet

We can’t blame you for that.  they didn’t call her Janet ‘Roughrider’ Reno back in the day for nothin’   

[90siouxfan]

this took an unexpected turn, but refreshingly better

[UND1983]

3 hours ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Ok, but what is the effect? "General effect" means nothing to me. Are we losing fans? Is the school losing money? Are less tickets being sold?

Of course they are going to have to talk about it, but I'm asking for real proof that this is a deep-seeded issue. 

The general effect seems that people are just talking about it. 

you are focusing on the negative - are we growing as an athletic department when taking all factors into play?  That is what's important and I think I know that answer.

[stoneySIOUX]

10 minutes ago, UND1983 said:

you are focusing on the negative - are we growing as an athletic department when taking all factors into play?  That is what's important and I think I know that answer.

Completely fair point and fair question. I'd be willing to say that I don't think the "division" of the fanbase doesn't help growth. However, I don't believe the division is really a thing that's causing a big problem.

[Irish]

1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Definitely my opinion and not trying to be rude, but you have no idea who I am nor who I know in Grand Forks, at UND or within the Athletic Department. So, feel free to think my opinion is unfounded. Doesn't bother me. 

I don't understand why it's an odd take. I'm not arguing that the "division" exists, because it does. I, for one, don't think it's that prevalent. I also don't understand why it's an odd take to think the effect isn't a big deal because of a lack of actual, tangible evidence to indicate it other than people whining on the internet.

I don't feel it's that big of a problem. You do. That's alright by me. I'm still going to support UND in any way that I can that doesn't involve buying the logo that I don't like.  I'm assuming you'll do the same.

I, too, support our Athletic Department.  However, there is a good group of people who know the Fighting Sioux is done but will never wear the pathetic Fighting Hawks logo - myself included.  This issue is not as big as the pro-Hawk crowd makes it but it will be an issue until the logo is changes.

[Siouxperfan7]

20 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Completely fair point and fair question. I'd be willing to say that I don't think the "division" of the fanbase doesn't help growth. However, I don't believe the division is really a thing that's causing a big problem.

It's more annoying than anything else.  Even more annoying is when you are reprimanded from a fellow UND fan for waring anything Fighting Hawks. 

[stoneySIOUX]

23 minutes ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

It's more annoying than anything else.  Even more annoying is when you are reprimanded from a fellow UND fan for waring anything Fighting Hawks. 

Vice versa, while not as prevalent, is also annoying. Sorry that that's happened to you, man. Being honest, there. 

[Blackheart]

27 minutes ago, Irish said:

I, too, support our Athletic Department.  However, there is a good group of people who know the Fighting Sioux is done but will never wear the pathetic Fighting Hawks logo - myself included.  This issue is not as big as the pro-MIKE Hawk crowd makes it but it will be an issue until the logo is changes.

fixed your post 

[The Sicatoka]

So is every fall, the annual start of college athletics, going to be our own private Festivus with it's annual Airing of the (Logo) Grievances? 

If so, count me out. 

[stoneySIOUX]

42 minutes ago, Irish said:

I, too, support our Athletic Department.  However, there is a good group of people who know the Fighting Sioux is done but will never wear the pathetic Fighting Hawks logo - myself included.  This issue is not as big as the pro-Hawk crowd makes it but it will be an issue until the logo is changes.

Completely agree with you, unfortunately.

[Frozen4sioux]

Everytime the core few here are trashing the people who support UND athletics but hate the new logo.... THAT is what is continuing to cause any potential issues.

Its basically similar to another aspect of our culture now, People screaming that everyone else MUST have the opinion they hold or they are wrong and causing the problem..... label them with an ..."ist" label.

Forced indoctrination and coerced acceptance is not working to aliviate anything. ZERO number of suppporters want to be told how they MUST feel.

Now if anyone in the AD office is sitting around wringing their hands about the bird not being loved...... they need to be FIRED immediately!! What a waste of time.

This victim mentality is what will hold back UND Athletics for decades.