82SiouxGuy Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I haven't read this whole thread, so can someone tell me if the Summit has given UND any kind of deadline to apply by (with the nickname resolved)? If they haven't, it seems to me that with a matter of months left between now and the final deadline date (worst scenario) they are probably willing to wait for this thing to run its course, if they had someone else they were really interested in they would have probably moved them in by now. They know the nickname issue will be settled one way or the other soon, and we will gladly accept their offer whether we're the Fighting Sioux or something else. I think the closer we get to the deadline the less weight the "join the Summit now or be left out in the cold" theory holds. The Summit hasn't officially announced any dates, but I don't know if that means anything or not. We don't know if they have said anything to UND or any of the other schools. In the past they indicated that they wanted to add a school or schools at the same time that USD joins the league. That will officially happen on July 1, 2011. They have also said that they need to have a decision made and announced more than a year before that date, meaning before July 1, 2010. They need at least 1 year of lead time to make arrangements, make schedules, etc. That time line is pretty common, league changes are usually announced more than 1 year in advance of the change. They will also need some time to complete research, do campus visits, and make sure the school or schools are a good fit with the league. That will take at least 60 days, if not longer. So an application deadline would probably be some time between January 1 and April 1, 2010. Some things have changed since this time line was originally set up. At that time USD was announced as the 11th school in the Summit. They needed to add 1 school to get back to an even number, that's why they wanted to add at the same time. Since then it was announced that Centenary would be leaving the league at the same time USD joins. We don't know if that will affect the time line or not. They wanted to add teams to get to 12 and go to division play. If that is still a major concern they may still want to add schools on the same schedule. Or they may be able to push the date back 1 year. Nothing has come out in public about which way they would go. There are several other schools that have indicated interest and that would probably be acceptable to the Summit. UND seems to be the best fit, but not the only school that they could choose. If the Summit feels they need to follow the time line they originally established, UND may be sitting on the outside if they don't make the arrangements needed. The Summit can make whatever rules they want, it is their league. So if they want to add schools during the next 6 months and don't want to consider UND until the nickname is resolved, then UND will have to choose to either keep the name or apply for membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yababy8 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Does anyone remember when the NCAA adopted the "get rid if the Native American nickname thing"? and does anyone remember when Ralph sent the letter to the SBofE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 The Summit hasn't officially announced any dates, but I don't know if that means anything or not. We don't know if they have said anything to UND or any of the other schools. In the past they indicated that they wanted to add a school or schools at the same time that USD joins the league. That will officially happen on July 1, 2011. They have also said that they need to have a decision made and announced more than a year before that date, meaning before July 1, 2010. They need at least 1 year of lead time to make arrangements, make schedules, etc. That time line is pretty common, league changes are usually announced more than 1 year in advance of the change. They will also need some time to complete research, do campus visits, and make sure the school or schools are a good fit with the league. That will take at least 60 days, if not longer. So an application deadline would probably be some time between January 1 and April 1, 2010. Some things have changed since this time line was originally set up. At that time USD was announced as the 11th school in the Summit. They needed to add 1 school to get back to an even number, that's why they wanted to add at the same time. Since then it was announced that Centenary would be leaving the league at the same time USD joins. We don't know if that will affect the time line or not. They wanted to add teams to get to 12 and go to division play. If that is still a major concern they may still want to add schools on the same schedule. Or they may be able to push the date back 1 year. Nothing has come out in public about which way they would go. There are several other schools that have indicated interest and that would probably be acceptable to the Summit. UND seems to be the best fit, but not the only school that they could choose. If the Summit feels they need to follow the time line they originally established, UND may be sitting on the outside if they don't make the arrangements needed. The Summit can make whatever rules they want, it is their league. So if they want to add schools during the next 6 months and don't want to consider UND until the nickname is resolved, then UND will have to choose to either keep the name or apply for membership. Thanks, that helps get me up to speed on the whole Summit deal. Bad thing is they haven't really made any 'take it to the bank' type statements have they? Like you said, they may be talking to UND as well as other schools and rubes like us will never know, they've definitely been eerily quiet in the media. Maybe Centenary leaving them with an even number again has softened the timeline on their push to 12, maybe not. Would be nice to have some sort of inkling of what they are thinking, but like most every step in this nickname resolution process, we are in the dark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Thanks, that helps get me up to speed on the whole Summit deal. Bad thing is they haven't really made any 'take it to the bank' type statements have they? Like you said, they may be talking to UND as well as other schools and rubes like us will never know, they've definitely been eerily quiet in the media. Maybe Centenary leaving them with an even number again has softened the timeline on their push to 12, maybe not. Would be nice to have some sort of inkling of what they are thinking, but like most every step in this nickname resolution process, we are in the dark. It seems like they have kept quiet since the flurry of publicity last spring. They don't want bad PR and got at least a little when it looked like they were sticking their noses into a situation that didn't affect them, so that may be why they are so quiet. Unless UND has been notified otherwise, they will have to follow the schedule that was established last spring. I don't mind being in the dark if UND knows what is going on. My biggest concern is whether they are getting the information they need to make the best decision possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 It seems like they have kept quiet since the flurry of publicity last spring. They don't want bad PR and got at least a little when it looked like they were sticking their noses into a situation that didn't affect them, so that may be why they are so quiet. Unless UND has been notified otherwise, they will have to follow the schedule that was established last spring. I don't mind being in the dark if UND knows what is going on. My biggest concern is whether they are getting the information they need to make the best decision possible. I think the biggest reason for the lack of information is that nobody wants to be perceived as a 'bad guy' when this is all said and done, especially someone like the Summit. Better to keep quiet than have every statement you make dissected by all parties involved. Probably a smart move on their part, let the SBHE and UND deal with the backlash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Does anyone remember when the NCAA adopted the "get rid if the Native American nickname thing"? and does anyone remember when Ralph sent the letter to the SBofE? I don't feel like going back to look for sure, but I will take a shot. Ralph sent the letter (I believe it went to Kupchella because he was reviewing the nickname issue and then the SBoHE stepped in) during construction of the Ralph. Since that opened during the Fall of 2001 I believe it was during the winter of 1999-2000. And IIRC it was August 2005 that the NCAA announced the ban on Native American nicknames. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 It is very quiet and I am very sure that's been quite purposeful. I am sure the ones involved have been told to keep their mouths shut. The PR people for the Summit have probably advised them to stay silent; it's obvious that they did not have PR people earlier this year. The PR people for the SBoHE are probably trying to keep their jobs following the deadline fiasco and they're probably trying to find a way to "diplomatically" drop the bombshell but they know that there will be huge backlash. So, they're probably in consultation with the Summit saying that they'll get the name thing resolved by November, 2010, especially now that the SR attorney has come out with the conclusion that the vote to prevent the vote was unconstitutional. They're probably in consultation with some members of SR who are indicating that a vote will happen. I think the Judge dismisses the suit and that the SBoHE gives another "deadline" by which SR is to have a vote. If the vote approves the name in the same manner as SL, I think the 30 year thing is gone. If the SBoHE wanted a 30 year agreement, it should have included it in the surrender with the NC00. If both tribes approve, the conditions are satisfied. What can you do when 70% of the NA's and 98% of the alumni and student body approves of the nickname? Politically speaking and as a matter of common sense soothe the masses, you stick to the original terms and you convince the Summit (perhaps not much convincing is necessary) to give you some cover/cushion -- this means "Summit, please ease your own ill-advised deadline and let this matter play out." If the SBoHE truly believes it is in the best interests of the university and the athletic programs to truncate the process just to lock in to the Summit (ostensibly necessary for the benefit of the athletic department and school) while really, really angering 98% of UND backers/alumni, they are either very shortsighted or they're being given some extremely bad advice. The reality will be very sobering and fallout from that decision will be around for decades, at the very least. 98% of those who went to UND for the last 60 years and who are not dead will vehemently oppose how the process was conducted and that opposition will manifest itself in terms of money/support. It's just a simple reality. Plus, the "Dartmouth" effect will befall the school, in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 I would love to see the name stay, and to let it play out at Standing Rock. But does it honestly have to take another year? Perhaps I'm naive to the ways of the legal system and tribal politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 I would love to see the name stay, and to let it play out at Standing Rock. But does it honestly have to take another year? Perhaps I'm naive to the ways of the legal system and tribal politics. It doesn't "have to". But it could very well take a year or longer. Tribal affairs work at their own pace, not necessarily the same as Federal or State government affairs. But if they wanted to move the issue through the system it could look something like, December the Tribal Council agrees to allow a referendum, January the nickname proponents get petitions signed and present to the Council, Council sets election for February or March, election is held and if it passes, Tribal Council allows use of nickname in March. Of course the chances of it happening in that time frame are pretty slim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Nice piece on Brand's effect on IU and the NCAA... The Politically Correct and Altercationists Anonymous "When you hear them announce the name at the start of a hockey game (UND has an enthusiasm for hockey not unlike IU's for basketball), it gives you goose bumps," Frank Black Cloud -- not surprisingly, a Sioux -- told The New York Times. "They are putting us up on a pinnacle." Well, of course they are. Why would a university or, for that matter, a sports team adopt as a nickname or a mascot something that was not inspiring? The politically correct fussbudgets and various malcontents insist that these Indian remembrances are hostile references or somehow insulting to Indians. Actually, as anyone with any sense knows, they are acknowledgments of the tribes' dignity and original inhabitancy of the land. Extirpate their names and it is just another extirpation of their history. Doing so is what one might expect from Americans who hate the Indians, and there was a time when many Americans did. Adopting references to them is a way to honor them. Black Cloud is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 But does it honestly have to take another year? Folks, it can't. The NCAA agreement says UND has to have agreement from both tribes by Feb 2010. We're no longer up against "soft" deadlines from the ND SBoHE; we're up again hard deadlines from the agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 It is very quiet and I am very sure that's been quite purposeful. I am sure the ones involved have been told to keep their mouths shut. The PR people for the Summit have probably advised them to stay silent; it's obvious that they did not have PR people earlier this year. The PR people for the SBoHE are probably trying to keep their jobs following the deadline fiasco and they're probably trying to find a way to "diplomatically" drop the bombshell but they know that there will be huge backlash. So, they're probably in consultation with the Summit saying that they'll get the name thing resolved by November, 2010, especially now that the SR attorney has come out with the conclusion that the vote to prevent the vote was unconstitutional. They're probably in consultation with some members of SR who are indicating that a vote will happen. I think the Judge dismisses the suit and that the SBoHE gives another "deadline" by which SR is to have a vote. If the vote approves the name in the same manner as SL, I think the 30 year thing is gone. If the SBoHE wanted a 30 year agreement, it should have included it in the surrender with the NC00. If both tribes approve, the conditions are satisfied. What can you do when 70% of the NA's and 98% of the alumni and student body approves of the nickname? Politically speaking and as a matter of common sense soothe the masses, you stick to the original terms and you convince the Summit (perhaps not much convincing is necessary) to give you some cover/cushion -- this means "Summit, please ease your own ill-advised deadline and let this matter play out." If the SBoHE truly believes it is in the best interests of the university and the athletic programs to truncate the process just to lock in to the Summit (ostensibly necessary for the benefit of the athletic department and school) while really, really angering 98% of UND backers/alumni, they are either very shortsighted or they're being given some extremely bad advice. The reality will be very sobering and fallout from that decision will be around for decades, at the very least. 98% of those who went to UND for the last 60 years and who are not dead will vehemently oppose how the process was conducted and that opposition will manifest itself in terms of money/support. It's just a simple reality. Plus, the "Dartmouth" effect will befall the school, in my opinion. 98% is pretty specific...so I'm assuming you have some sort of poll or something to back that up, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MplsBison Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Folks, it can't. The NCAA agreement says UND has to have agreement from both tribes by Feb 2010. We're no longer up against "soft" deadlines from the ND SBoHE; we're up again hard deadlines from the agreement. So what was all this stuff about Nov 2010 that everyone and their mother on this site has been so vocal about? Or is it that agreement has to be had by Feb 2010 and that the name has to be retired by Nov 2010? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 So what was all this stuff about Nov 2010 that everyone and their mother on this site has been so vocal about? Or is it that agreement has to be had by Feb 2010 and that the name has to be retired by Nov 2010? The deadline to gain tribal approval under the settlement is November 30, 2010. If an agreement is not reached by that date, then UND must start transitioning to a new nickname. That transition must be completed on or before August 15, 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 The deadline to gain tribal approval under the settlement is November 30, 2010. If an agreement is not reached by that date, then UND must start transitioning to a new nickname. That transition must be completed on or before August 15, 2011. MK is right and if you look at the settlement the dates are in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dern it, you guys got me. All that Summit League noise had me thinking there was a hard date in February. Settlement Agreement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dern it, you guys got me. All that Summit League noise had me thinking there was a hard date in February. Settlement Agreement I believe that the SBoHE were using a February 2010 date originally. If they didn't think they were making any progress with the tribes by that point they were going to start the process of replacing the name with a final decision probably coming before school started in August 2010. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/1...ing-team-names/ Pretty nice article blasting the late Myles Brand and the mess that the NCAA execs started. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/1...ing-team-names/ The University of Illinois' logo until recently showed the stern countenance of an Indian chieftain in full headdress, representing its nickname, the Fighting Illini - the Illini being a local Indian tribe. I bolded that section to point out the obvious: Nobody knows the Illini Confederation of Tribes any more. The author had to explain "Illini" as to what it was. Remove "Sioux" and expect the same fate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 http://www.crookstontimes.com/news/x167909...al-court-ruling Appeal Time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 http://www.crookstontimes.com/news/x167909...al-court-ruling Appeal Time. The important part: Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem says an appeal won't be worth much unless Morley can persuade Northeast District Judge Michael Sturdevant to delay his ruling from taking effect until the appeal is decided. I'd be very surprised if Judge Sturdevant stays his ruling during the appeal. Normally, the party asking to stay the effect of the order has to provide security (usually in the form of a bond) to protect the other party from damages if the district court's decision is ultimately upheld on appeal. Here, the SBoHE will tell the court that damages associated with being forced to keep the nickname (i.e. exclusion from the Summit Conference) are incalculable and someting a bond can't protect against. And even if Judge Sturdevant stays his order, that decision is immediately appealable (often on an expedited basis) and would likely be reversed. So in sum, this appeal is not likely to save the name or even allow more time for Standing Rock to get its act together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 the SBoHE will tell the court that damages associated with being forced to keep the nickname (i.e. exclusion from the Summit Conference) are incalculable and someting a bond can't protect against yeah and everyone forgets about the expense of changing the name has that been calculated ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 yeah and everyone forgets about the expense of changing the name has that been calculated ? That's a very good point. Unless there is some very clear indication that the Summit will choose someone else, the damages from delay by virtue of an appeal are not there. Conversely, the damages incurred by not letting the process play out (i.e. spending 1M - estimate - to "clean" the Ralph of those "offensive" NA images - how stupid, right?) are very apparent. The harm of waiting 10 months and letting the process play out and, possibly, saving 1M in costs is < than the unknown consequences relating to the Summit issue that would occur during that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 That's a very good point. Unless there is some very clear indication that the Summit will choose someone else, the damages from delay by virtue of an appeal are not there. Conversely, the damages incurred by not letting the process play out (i.e. spending 1M - estimate - to "clean" the Ralph of those "offensive" NA images - how stupid, right?) are very apparent. The harm of waiting 10 months and letting the process play out and, possibly, saving 1M in costs is < than the unknown consequences relating to the Summit issue that would occur during that time. The Summit does have other options that would be able to fill the holes in the league. The question is whether they will take those options or are willing to work with UND. Also, there are questions about how much work will have to be done at REA and when it will have to be done. There is a schedule set up in the court settlement, but REA was not a party to that agreement. Therefore they can't be forced to change anything. The NCAA may have a problem with UND using that facility, but that problem will be worked out in some way. It's possible that the agreement could be modified to replace symbols as needed, in other words they would be replaced when that feature needs to be fixed or upgraded. Or another arrangement could be made. So it is hard to predict at this time what the bill would be in the REA if the nickname is changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted December 22, 2009 Share Posted December 22, 2009 I'd rather they (REA) get a AHL team & tell everyone to stuff it PS...I wish Ralph was alive "Long Live The Fighting Sioux" 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.