ScottM Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 yet another article that omits the fact that the spirit lake Sioux are fighting this. Doesn't mention that the spirit lake Sioux have filed a federal lawsuit against the NCAA. doesn't mention that the spirit lake SIOUX are leading the petition efforts. .. oh I know all of you get rid of the name crowd think that the spirit lake Sioux involvement is not newsworthy. and the media just knowS that people don't give a crap about that and that it is not important, but it is a little interesting that this article states that they're going to give a history of everything and even included Ralph Engelstad's logo strategy. they just always forget to include how the native americans are the ones that are spearheading this fight. I know the irony in that is just not interesting right guys?! come on get a f****** clue! it's called propaganda!! go ahead ScottM and Sioux82 telus all how all this stuff shouldn't be in the articles and how its makes perfect sense. What's readily apparent is that you can't even distinguish between an "article" and an "opinion piece". Then again, you probably think SAB is as credible as The Wall Street Journal, or High Times. In any event, I think you should write the NC$$ and express your outrage and tell SL's valiant story. I'm sure your articulate, well-reasoned prose will show them the error of their ways, and they'll relent on this silliness by Monday. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 It is pretty clear they are both lacking facts around this issue. That's being addressed. A follow up will probably be in the works quite soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 It is pretty clear they are both lacking facts around this issue. Many facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Thats what happenes when you try to get a complex issue in 3 mins. That guy had no clue and would not give the woman time to talk. The guy reminded me of the anti nickname folks from UND that argued against the name no matter what, it didn't matter what facts you used to defeat their argument. Most of us in the ready to move on crowd, before it buries UND knows the truth. Anyone of us on this forum would have argued the facts better than those two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Keyword = Comply - No Sioux during ncaa events - most events are not ncaa - we can be ND for playoffs ncaa can kiss our azz the rest of the year Teams who refuse to play us can also kiss our azz - I think they are the ones being racist I thought the report was OK - We need Bill ORiley to get on our side - the spin coming from most of you worry warts would make him eerp 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 http://www.inforum.c...0/group/sports/ “In North Dakota, we have a tradition of doing the right thing even if it’s hard to do, and that is what we need to do in this case,” Johnson said. What's this "we" you're talking about, Sean? What are the impacts of the sanctions on you? You left campus years ago, and were never an athlete then either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 If the Fighting Sioux law is declared unconstitutional, the question remains what is constitutional and if the board can challenge any law approved by the Legislature, he [John Bjornson, a lawyer for the Legislative Council] said. The ND SBoHE isn't challenging just any ol' law. It's challenging a law that appears to infringe upon its state constitutionally defined "administration and control" powers over state universities. If the ND SBoHE was challenging the speed limit on state highways Bjornson might have a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The ND SBoHE isn't challenging just any ol' law. It's challenging a law that appears to infringe upon its state constitutionally defined "administration and control" powers over state universities. If the ND SBoHE was challenging the speed limit on state highways Bjornson might have a point. I'm kind of curious why Clueless Al, et. al., didn't decide to pull this "legislation" in 2007 when the settlement was signed. If he was so concerned about the power of the Board, that would have been a perfect time to "right this injustice". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teeder11 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 This just in: An aspiring SAB reporter and student "journalist" from NDAC weighs in. At least, he's about as consistent with this facts as SAB. Must read! :lol: http://www.ndsuspectrum.com/opinion/not-caring-about-anyone-1.2808127 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 What the heck is that? It surely isn't a news article, and it's too short on facts and has too many "non-facts" (trying to avoid saying made up crap) to be an opinion piece. I'm thinking he went to a proctologist to retrieve that before submission. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 What the heck is that? It surely isn't a news article, and it's too short on facts and has too many "non-facts" (trying to avoid saying made up crap) to be an opinion piece. I'm thinking he went to a proctologist to retrieve that before submission. What's his "handle" on this board? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 What the heck is that? It surely isn't a news article, and it's too short on facts and has too many "non-facts" (trying to avoid saying made up crap) to be an opinion piece. I'm thinking he went to a proctologist to retrieve that before submission. He got close to 10% of the story right. If he is representative of the NDSU Journalism Department they might want to audit that program. It might rank with some of the Dickinson State programs for educational quality. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/231414/ Jaeger has declared the petitions appear to have a sufficient number of signatures to make the June ballot, but his office continues to validate signatures. By law, he has 35 days — until March 13 — to certify the petitions, and no decision will be made until that date, he said. So things could change next week...what if there were a lot of invalid signatures. Boy this issue could have more turns than a roller coaster. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I still believe the NDSC will find the original law (and thus the repealing law) to be unconstitutional under the ND constitution. If that were to happen, why hold a vote to reinstate a law that is immediately defunct (unconstitutional)? Mentioning all this, when should we expect to hear from the NDSC on the suit filed by the ND SBoHE by the NDAG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 That "article" may have had less facts than SAB. It was written by a moo U student so the fact that a majority of the words were spelled correctly is impressive. If only he had the truth of it and the debate was over and the nickname was gone until that magical day when SL wins their lawsuit against the ncaa (a guy can hope right???). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I still believe the NDSC will find the original law (and thus the repealing law) to be unconstitutional under the ND constitution. If that were to happen, why hold a vote to reinstate a law that is immediately defunct (unconstitutional)? Mentioning all this, when should we expect to hear from the NDSC on the suit filed by the ND SBoHE by the NDAG? I thought it was this month...maybe I am wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I still believe the NDSC will find the original law (and thus the repealing law) to be unconstitutional under the ND constitution. If that were to happen, why hold a vote to reinstate a law that is immediately defunct (unconstitutional)? Mentioning all this, when should we expect to hear from the NDSC on the suit filed by the ND SBoHE by the NDAG? I believe that the AG wanted a decision before the ballots were printed. The deadline for candidates to gather signatures to get their names on ballots is approximately 60 days before the election, which would be mid-April. I wouldn't be surprised if we hear a decision by about the same time. It could be even a little earlier than that if the Court believes that it's a straightforward case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Here is some info on the case: http://www.ndcourts.gov/Calendar/ So far no date for the case yet http://www.ndcourts....et/20120112.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I thought the original filing date deadline was March 2. When SL CUR was added to the case they (Soderstrom, their attorney) were given three additional (non-weekend) days to file briefs. Apparently we'll be seeing Soderstrom's filing tomorrow or he'll miss the bell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I thought the original filing date deadline was March 2. When SL CUR was added to the case they (Soderstrom, their attorney) were given three additional (non-weekend) days to file briefs. Apparently we'll be seeing Soderstrom's filing tomorrow or he'll miss the bell. I thought the deadline for all parties was today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I thought the deadline for all parties was today. I think that the date given when Soderstrom was out of town was today. But when the Legislature got involved I think they had a deadline of March 9th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zonadub Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 This just in: An aspiring SAB reporter and student "journalist" from NDAC weighs in. At least, he's about as consistent with this facts as SAB. Must read! :lol: http://www.ndsuspectrum.com/opinion/not-caring-about-anyone-1.2808127 I must have read a different opinion column than the rest of you did. Considering that this was written by an NDSU student, I thought it sounded pretty sympathetic to the position that the NCAA has put UND in. Even if he did not have 100% of the facts correct (really now, who outside of the frequent commentators on this board have delved so deeply into this issue), the tone of the article was not the usual type of opinion that comes out of the Fargo campus. Lighten up, y'all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I must have read a different opinion column than the rest of you did. Considering that this was written by an NDSU student, I thought it sounded pretty sympathetic to the position that the NCAA has put UND in. Even if he did not have 100% of the facts correct (really now, who outside of the frequent commentators on this board have delved so deeply into this issue), the tone of the article was not the usual type of opinion that comes out of the Fargo campus. Lighten up, y'all. It was sympathetic to the UND side, and some of the concepts were in the ballpark, but even our friends to the south recognized that it lacked a lot of facts. That wouldn't have been so bad except for the fact that it was written by a journalism student. And the fact that it was printed in the school newspaper. Someone studying journalism should be able to get some more facts in the piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Standard-Examiner (Utah newspaper) : OUR VIEW: North Dakota's offensive nickname Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Standard-Examiner (Utah newspaper) : OUR VIEW: North Dakota's offensive nickname Losing eligibility to compete in playoffs if UND keeps the name?? UND loses the ability to host nc$$ playoff games, not to play them (unless we refuse to wear an alternate jersey). Where do these papers get their information from? I'm all for the retirement of the name to save our athletic programs, but that article was a bunch of garbage written by idiots who think people should be protected from themselves because they don't know any better. 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.