andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Does anyone have an idea on what the University's next move will be now that their appeal was denied? Will there be legal action? Or will there be a different move? I am just wondering what is going on because they must have some sort of plan. Also, I have figured that if they can not get permission to use the nickname and logo they should just put white spots on their jerseys where the name and logo are supposed to be. I never want to see them use a different name! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 Does anyone have an idea on what the University's next move will be now that their appeal was denied? Will there be legal action? Or will there be a different move? I am just wondering what is going on because they must have some sort of plan. Also, I have figured that if they can not get permission to use the nickname and logo they should just put white spots on their jerseys where the name and logo are supposed to be. I never want to see them use a different name! While I thought that the plan was always to take the ba$tards to court, there's 'discussion' going on now. 1. Take them, NC$$, to court. 2. Keep the name and logo and not host any NC$$ events and wear generic uniforms when we compete in NC$$ events. 3. Change the name and logo. I have to admit that I'm disappointed. Before the denial, which everyone, even my dog knew was coming, the Administration, SBoHE, and the State's Attorney were all, "We're going to sue the MF's" or words to that affect. Now, it's "Well, gosh, gee, I don't know, maybe, but, what if..." : (Pansies! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsensa Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 While I thought that the plan was always to take the ba$tards to court, there's 'discussion' going on now. 1. Take them, NC$$, to court. 2. Keep the name and logo and not host any NC$$ events and wear generic uniforms when we compete in NC$$ events. 3. Change the name and logo. I have to admit that I'm disappointed. Before the denial, which everyone, even my dog knew was coming, the Administration, SBoHE, and the State's Attorney were all, "We're going to sue the MF's" or words to that affect. Now, it's "Well, gosh, gee, I don't know, maybe, but, what if..." : (Pansies! ) IMO, #2 should not be an option. Home ice/field/court advantage is too important in tournaments plus hosting events provides a nice economic boost for GF. Has anyone at UND ever tried to get a petition signed by the actual Sioux members outside of the governing bodies of the Sioux nation? If UND was able to get overwhelming Sioux nation support via a signed petition, I think it would help our case with the NCAA. I am not anywhere near ND so this isn't something I could do but it seems like there should be someone up there working on something like this. Am I wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 While I thought that the plan was always to take the ba$tards to court, there's 'discussion' going on now. 1. Take them, NC$$, to court. 2. Keep the name and logo and not host any NC$$ events and wear generic uniforms when we compete in NC$$ events. 3. Change the name and logo. I have to admit that I'm disappointed. Before the denial, which everyone, even my dog knew was coming, the Administration, SBoHE, and the State's Attorney were all, "We're going to sue the MF's" or words to that affect. Now, it's "Well, gosh, gee, I don't know, maybe, but, what if..." : (Pansies! ) Relax. It is just good business sense at this point to very carefully weigh the positions and the odds of success on both sides of the argument. It is now that you would finally spend some money to get solid opinions from excellent, experienced counsel in this subject, considering exactly what legal point or points are available for contesting the NCAA and the probabilities of success. Then you need to be sure that everyone is on board with the plan. From here on out, if it does become a legal battle each step has to be carefully planned, anticipated, and carried out. It is not the time to prematurely fire your gun in the wrong direction or at the wrong target. If legal action becomes the plan, this will be a long project, with plenty of discovery and testimony development on both sides. Since UND hadn't exhausted all of the appeals process, there wasn't much that could have been done before this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 The attorneys will also have to determine if it is possible to take legal action before the plaintiff (UND) has become an injured party, such as being denied hosting a home playoff game, or suffering financial impact from not hosting a home playoff game that they should have hosted. If so, there might not be legal action until after the policy has been in place. Obviously I'm guessing here, but that may be a consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted May 10, 2006 Share Posted May 10, 2006 If UND commences legal action, it could attempt to get a temporary restraining order to keep the policy from going into effect during the pendency of the litigation. However, in order to obtain a TRO, UND must (among other things) be able to convince a judge that it is likely to succeed on the merits. -- OR -- If UND would make the move to DI already, it would be on playoff probation for a few years and there would be time to sort all of this out. In that case, hockey would essentially be the only sport this policy would impact (at least for a few years). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 The attorneys will also have to determine if it is possible to take legal action before the plaintiff (UND) has become an injured party, such as being denied hosting a home playoff game, or suffering financial impact from not hosting a home playoff game that they should have hosted. If so, there might not be legal action until after the policy has been in place. Obviously I'm guessing here, but that may be a consideration. I'm not sure what you mean. The 'policy' is in place, well, untill the NC$$ changes it again. Unless UND ceases using the Fighting Sioux name and logo, we will not host any NC$$ events nor will we be able to compete in any NC$$ events wearing the Sioux name and/or logo. We just hosted a Regional playoff series. It was touted as being one of the most successful in years, if not the most successful. The games were all sold out or pretty darn close. The economic loss to the school and community would be huge! And easily proved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I'm not sure what you mean. The 'policy' is in place, well, untill the NC$$ changes it again. Unless UND ceases using the Fighting Sioux name and logo, we will not host any NC$$ events nor will we be able to compete in any NC$$ events wearing the Sioux name and/or logo. We just hosted a Regional playoff series. It was touted as being one of the most successful in years, if not the most successful. The games were all sold out or pretty darn close. The economic loss to the school and community would be huge! And easily proved. I think what Siouxman is saying is that UND may not be able to sue until the policy is enforced or until damage is done, such as being denied a home playoff game in football or basketball. There is no way to prove that UND would definitely host a playoff game in the future (in spite of the past successes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I think what Siouxman is saying is that UND may not be able to sue until the policy is enforced or until damage is done, such as being denied a home playoff game in football or basketball. There is no way to prove that UND would definitely host a playoff game in the future (in spite of the past successes). That is correct. It may take the situation where the football team makes the playoffs and is ranked higher than its opponent, but the NCAA has the opponent host the game. At that point UND has been harmed. Since hockey playoff sites have been determined for a number of years, and those sites are chosen years in advance, it could be a long time before the hockey team suffers damage. Even so, it could be tough to prove the policy resulted in not choosing the REA to host a regional. The football team is much clearer. Throughout the playoffs, the higher ranking team gets to host the game. A sudden situation where the higher ranked team does not host stands out and can be easily proven that damage happened. UND may have to wait for that to happen to strenghten their case, but that is a call for the lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I understand. So the fact that they say these things will happen and they have a rule/regulation/policy that says teams with hostile and abusive names/logs cannot host NC$$ events and the teams cannot wear their name and logo at NC$$ events isn't cause of action until they actually follow through on the rule/regulation/ policy. So we might have to sit on this until football season is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 I respectfully disagree that UND will have to wait until it's actually harmed. While it might make the university's case stronger, I don't think it's a necessity. A large part of the legal case is based on the grounds that the NCAA has no authority under its own consititution and bylaws to do what it did, which goes toward the breech of contract argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 You may be right PCM. I am not an attorney, but my guess is that whether they wait or not may depend on what case they want to make the focus. If it is the breech of contract and the fact that the NC$$ has overstepped its authority they may go ahead soon. If they want to concentrate on the financial side it may be advantageous to wait until it happens. The attorneys will make that call depending on what they think is the strongest case. But, with the speed our legal system works at currently it may be quite awhile before anything is decided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 You may be right PCM. I am not an attorney, but my guess is that whether they wait or not may depend on what case they want to make the focus. I'm not an attorney, either, but I was hoping that someone who is would chime in. To me, it appears obvious that the intent of the "no hosting" part of the NCAA policy is to financially harm any school that doesn't comply. Maybe the NCCA could argue otherwise, but I have a difficult time believing that they could sell that position to a judge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsensa Posted May 11, 2006 Share Posted May 11, 2006 Has anyone at UND ever tried to get a petition signed by the actual Sioux members outside of the governing bodies of the Sioux nation? If UND was able to get overwhelming Sioux nation support via a signed petition, I think it would help our case with the NCAA. I am not anywhere near ND so this isn't something I could do but it seems like there should be someone up there working on something like this. Am I wrong? Does anyone else think this would be a worthwhile thing to do? I am assuming not since I didn't hear any comments back. Does that mean most of you think that the Sioux should be left out of this and that it is between UND and the NCAA now? Just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! Posted May 12, 2006 Author Share Posted May 12, 2006 Does anyone else think this would be a worthwhile thing to do? I am assuming not since I didn't hear any comments back. Does that mean most of you think that the Sioux should be left out of this and that it is between UND and the NCAA now? Just curious. I think the Sioux Indians should support UND in the use of the logo and nickname. But I also think that just because someone (or a group of people whether they are the majority of not) is offended by the nickname and logo is no reason you should not be able to use it. The University of North Dakota should be able to use it with or with out the support of the Sioux Indians. I will be offended if they change the name, yet it will not be changed back because I am offended. It is like owning a gun. You can still own a gun even if the majority of the people in this country are offended by it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 Does anyone else think this would be a worthwhile thing to do? I am assuming not since I didn't hear any comments back. Does that mean most of you think that the Sioux should be left out of this and that it is between UND and the NCAA now? Just curious. I doubt that such a petition would have any impact on the NCAA. They've made it clear that the approval of the tribal government is all that they'll consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsensa Posted May 12, 2006 Share Posted May 12, 2006 I doubt that such a petition would have any impact on the NCAA. They've made it clear that the approval of the tribal government is all that they'll consider. It couldn't hurt but it sounds like it wouldn't change the fact that THE NCAA SUCKS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 According to news reports tonight, Kupchella met with the Attorney General and others to discuss options. The AG is going to research the possibilities and present the options to the June Board of Higher Education meeting. It sounds like they are concentrating on the vague way that the NC$$ has handled this case and overstepped it's bounds rather than the name itself. Kupchella said that they are continuing to work with the tribes to improve those relationships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 According to news reports tonight, Kupchella met with the Attorney General and others to discuss options. The AG is going to research the possibilities and present the options to the June Board of Higher Education meeting. It sounds like they are concentrating on the vague way that the NC$$ has handled this case and overstepped it's bounds rather than the name itself. Kupchella said that they are continuing to work with the tribes to improve those relationships. Nice to have a UND grad in the AG's office for this! 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.