UND files its appeal

[PCM]

I agree with all of your points...as far as I can tell, the only thing we disagree on is how important it is to have done that work...I just believe it would have made for a stronger argument...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And all I'm saying is that any time you make a categorical statement, you're inviting someone to knock it down and call you a liar.

[PCM]

What's easier to knock down and be called a liar for:

(1) "probably proportionately more than any

institution of higher education in the United States"

Not this one. The use of "probably" qualifies the statement.

(2) "In terms of number of Native American students enrolled as a proportion of the total number of Native Americans of student age in the state, UND ranks XX, as revealed in U.S. DOE statistics."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're assuming that the statistics to make this statement are readily available and beyond reproach in their accuracy. Maybe they are. Maybe they aren't. I don't know.

However, I suspect that if making the statement above was as easy as you seem to think it is, Kupchella would have done so. I've had enough experience using statistics on political issues to believe that he probably had a good reason for not making a categorical statement.

Besides that, I don't really see this as being central to UND's appeal, nor do I think that making a categorical statement on this point at this time will have a significant bearing on what the NCAA's decides. IF the case goes to court, THEN UND might want to consider nailing down the numbers, assuming it's possible.

[PCM]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this...in my experience, people substitute general statements for specific ones when they know they can't back up the specific ones...not saying that's what K. is doing, but it is one of the first things that comes to mind...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are correct. However, there are sometimes valid reasons for making general, qualified statements instead of specific ones. Maybe this is one of them. Or maybe someone felt that getting the appeal submitted quickly was more important than conducting time-consuming research to make a concrete, factual statement on a point that wasn't central to UND's appeal.

[mksioux]

You are correct. However, there are sometimes valid reasons for making general, qualified statements instead of specific ones. Maybe this is one of them. Or maybe someone felt that getting the appeal submitted quickly was more important than conducting time-consuming research to make a concrete, factual statement on a point that wasn't central to UND's appeal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good point PCM, I think UND should have gotten their appeal out about a week earlier when the political pendulum was strongly swining it its favor. They waited just long enough to give the activists time to regroup and mount a counter-attack. Waiting even longer to fine tune the details would have been counter-productive.

[Diggler]

Problem is that the NCAA didn't get back to UND until last Thursday(?), so they couldn't have filed their appeal much quicker. They couldn't send the appeal to the NCAA before they wrote it.

[best0186]

I think the appeal was good. It addressed the points that needed to be addressed. At first I was upset that there were no specific numbers and statistics to back up some of the things that were mentioned. But the more that I think about it, the issues were addressed.

Anyway, if this would somehow go to court the University would want to have something more to argue. This is where the hard hitting statistics would have a lot of power. It is hard to argue against the numbers and facts.

In this case the NCAA would really look stupid on a national stage where there is a lot more attention with a lot more press looking in that on an appeal.

You don't want to put all the cards on the table at once.

[mksioux]

Problem is that the NCAA didn't get back to UND until last Thursday(?), so they couldn't have filed their appeal much quicker.

[Diggler]

I don't think UND could get away with a piece of crap appeal like FSU did and still get an exemption. FSU is a big name school and wields much more power than UND, therefore they didn't need to rely on their appeal as much as they could rely on we're FSU and you better not screw with us. UND on the other hand needed a well written and well thought out appeal to get an exemption.

[mksioux]

I don't think UND could get away with a piece of crap appeal like FSU did and still get an exemption. FSU is a big name school and wields much more power than UND, therefore they didn't need to rely on their appeal as much as they could rely on we're FSU and you better not screw with us.  UND on the other hand needed a well written and well thought out appeal to get an exemption.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Point taken. UND needed to do something more than FSU. I just wish it was put out a little quicker.

[PCM]

(2) "In terms of number of Native American students enrolled as a proportion of the total number of Native Americans of student age in the state, UND ranks XX, as revealed in U.S. DOE statistics."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now that I've gone back and read the actual statment in question in UND's appeal, I see that there's a very good reason why the word "probably" was used.

"The University of North Dakota's relationship with the American Indian people is far more substantive and fundamental than the use of a nickname. UND enrolls more than 400 American Indian students and has more than 25 programs

[southpaw]

Now that I've gone back and read the actual statment in question in UND's appeal, I see that there's a very good reason why the word "probably" was used.

[PCM]

It's the proportionally part that could have gotten them in trouble and would have probably taken a lot of time to figure out.  For all you know, there could be some school in oregon that has 1 native american student and offers 2 native american classes.  that would make their number of students to classes much higher than UND's, despite the fact that it is only 1 person.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. Making a categorical statement of that nature would simply have invited someone to disprove it. Plus, what's the definition of a program "designed to support American Indian students"? Every university could define that differently and claim to have more programs than UND.

[rochsioux]

It appears that UND is the second school to have filed an official appeal.

Having granted FSU's appeal it would seem logical for UND's to be granted also. Unfortunately, I believe the NC$$ will do their best to deny the appeal. Granting it would make it two for two on appeals, one school with support of the tribes and one without support. Once school has a mascot, one doesn't. It would seem to make it very difficult for the NC$$ to deny most any other schools future appeal. There is no way the NC$$ will grant 18 appeals or anything close to that. I believe they will use the fact that the tribal councils do not support the name as THE reason for denying the appeal, although they may give them leeway for the regional since the contract has already been signed. I don't see anyway they will grant the appeal and be able to wordsmith it such that it too is a "special case" but "we are still serious about this issue". The more successful appeals there are, the more they look like the idiots they are, in this case to people on both sides of the issue. The best case I see is that the NC$$ will see the handwriting on the wall and decide to pull the issue off the table for "further review", thereby avoiding appeals from each of the remaining schools. At some point I think they will be looking for "cover" on this issue since it was not well thought out.

I do like appeal letter that UND put together. Even if they had the support of one or more tribal councils it may not be in their long-term interests to base the appeal largely on that (i.e, FSU) unless you could be 100% certain this would never change.

It seems that every reputable scientific poll suggests the overwhelming majority of Native Americans do not oppose the use of these nicknames, not even close to a sizeable minority in opposition. A society cannot please everyone nor should it attempt to do so.

[Sioux-cia]

A society cannot please everyone nor should it attempt to do so.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh man, there goes my retirement plan......

[petey23]

One part of the appeal was about providing access to the athletes that the NCAA is supposedly representing. How does this sound....UND football team goes undefeated this year and is ranked number 1 in the country, has a viable facility to host a playoff football game and the NCAA sends them on the road. UND practices all week and then a few days before the game files and gets an injunction against the NCAA and in effect stops the playoffs. Far fetched? Maybe, but does the NCAA really want to go dowwn that road with their weak and poorly thought out mandate?

[PCM]

How does this sound....UND football team goes undefeated this year and is ranked number 1 in the country, has a viable facility to host a playoff football game and the NCAA sends them on the road. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It can't happen this year because the part of the NCAA policy affecting the hosting of playoff games doesn't go into effect until Feb. 1, 2006.

And stop jinxing the football team by saying that they'll go undefeated.

[Diggler]

I got a football question too. What happens when UND and the Newberry College Indians play each other in the National Semifinals? Does Myles Brand's head explode?

[petey23]

If that happens maybe just maybe the Fargodome will get their long awaited playoff football game!!!!