UND Fan Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 This is a copy of a letter I sent to Mr. Maturi (Gopher's AD) Dear Mr. Maturi, I am a resident of Minnesota and of course a long time Gopher fan. I also am a proud father of a son attending UND who is member of the Fighting Sioux baseball team. I can't tell you his disappointment in your announcement that the U of M will not be scheduling sporting events with UND. I feel your decision was hasty and without backbone. I have personally spent time on both campuses and have found racism at the U of M to be far more prevalent than at UND. If you are under the impression that a team name or logo contributes to racism, why is it that a school with a name and logo which could not be threatening to anyone, except maybe professional landscapers , have far larger issues with racism on their campus. I feel your decision was only to show the NCAA that you are on board with them and ad credence to their absurd position. Keep this in mind while making this decision, today you are not playing teams with native american references. What will it be tomorrow? You may want to add these teams to your list ( Sun Devils, Demon Deacons, Quakers, Crusaders, Friars, Saints, etc....) as individuals observe that the NCAA can force teams to bow to their will, those without religion or of differing religions will be next in line to force the NCAA to address what they find offensive. Very well- written! I hope Maturi is getting a lot of them! Maybe the religous angle is a good angle to take to show the NC00 that they may have bit off more than they can chew! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Athletic community rehashes controversial U policy Players who would take the field against the Fighting Sioux voiced opinions this week on a University policy that limits play with the University of North Dakota. Student-athletes expressed support for and concerns about an athletics department policy against playing teams with American Indian mascots and logos at a meeting of the Student Athlete Advisory Committee on Monday night. Other than one person saying that they hoped UND wouldn't be hurt by UMTC, it seemed all of the people supporting the policy were quoted. Not very even reporting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxnanigans Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 What do you mean when you say that racism is "much more prevalent" on the UMN campus than at UND? While I think that the letter is a great way to try to get the Goophers to schedule us, I think that claims that might have no basis (you might be basing it on something that I am unaware of, if so I retract this statement) makes us look a little foolish. Surely a campus that is much more liberal than that of UND would be more open to people of other races, colors, sexual preference and creed. In writing a letter I would push the opportunity for student athletes to compete. I would mention the UND athletes from Minnesota who want to play in front of their friends and family. I would bash Maturi by calling him a weenie and stating that the decision has no "backbone". After all, there are other schools in the Big 10 who have the same lack of "backbone" so Maturi is certainly not alone in his rational behind doing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Athletic community rehashes controversial U policy Other than one person saying that they hoped UND wouldn't be hurt by UMTC, it seemed all of the people supporting the policy were quoted. Not very even reporting. Good to see press given to the crew, softball, and tennis student-althetes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakotasota Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 What do you mean when you say that racism is "much more prevalent" on the UMN campus than at UND? While I think that the letter is a great way to try to get the Goophers to schedule us, I think that claims that might have no basis (you might be basing it on something that I am unaware of, if so I retract this statement) makes us look a little foolish. Surely a campus that is much more liberal than that of UND would be more open to people of other races, colors, sexual preference and creed. In writing a letter I would push the opportunity for student athletes to compete. I would mention the UND athletes from Minnesota who want to play in front of their friends and family. I would bash Maturi by calling him a weenie and stating that the decision has no "backbone". After all, there are other schools in the Big 10 who have the same lack of "backbone" so Maturi is certainly not alone in his rational behind doing this. I do know what you are getting at, and I'm sorry if the point I was trying to make was lost in the anger I was feeling when I wrote the letter. I was trying to make the point that racism will exist on any campus no matter what the team mascot or logo represents. I also was trying to point out that before the U of M jumps on board calling UND a hostile and abusive environment, which I believe is what they have done by enforcing this policy at this time, they should take a long hard look at the social dynamics of their own campus. "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones." I know we are trying to stay factual on this board and have solid numbers to back up our statements, but because of the social makeup of the U of M I felt I was pretty safe in making that judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 This is a copy of a letter I sent to Mr. Maturi (Gopher's AD) Dear Mr. Maturi, I am a resident of Minnesota and of course a long time Gopher fan. I also am a proud father of a son attending UND who is member of the Fighting Sioux baseball team. I can't tell you his disappointment in your announcement that the U of M will not be scheduling sporting events with UND. I feel your decision was hasty and without backbone. I have personally spent time on both campuses and have found racism at the U of M to be far more prevalent than at UND. If you are under the impression that a team name or logo contributes to racism, why is it that a school with a name and logo which could not be threatening to anyone, except maybe professional landscapers , have far larger issues with racism on their campus. I feel your decision was only to show the NCAA that you are on board with them and ad credence to their absurd position. Keep this in mind while making this decision, today you are not playing teams with native american references. What will it be tomorrow? You may want to add these teams to your list ( Sun Devils, Demon Deacons, Quakers, Crusaders, Friars, Saints, etc....) as individuals observe that the NCAA can force teams to bow to their will, those without religion or of differing religions will be next in line to force the NCAA to address what they find offensive. Maybe the religous angle is a good angle to take to show the NC00 that they may have bit off more than they can chew! That is a really nice letter. Love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Judging from the message boards and media response, it seems very few fans actually support this decision. I would urge sympathetic Minnesota grads to take the time to write a letter (a real letter carries much more weight than an email) to Maturi and this advisory committee simply noting such. They are in these positions to represent our interests as stakeholders, and if the fans overwhelmingly want to see North Dakota on the schedule, those opinions could actually affect them. As a Minnesota alum and former non-hockey Gopher season ticket holder, I certainly intend to write such letters. Well it sounds like the status quo, most of the PC nazi don't care what the masses want, if one person in their opinion is offended then it is offensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegas_Sioux Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Todays Herald reports that the UofM will reconsider scheduling the University of North Dakota in other events besides hockey whether or not the name changes Sounds like the Arthur Ashe Accounting look one way and go in the opposite direction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Todays Herald reports that the UofM will reconsider scheduling the University of North Dakota in other events besides hockey whether or not the name changes Sounds like the Arthur Ashe Accounting look one way and go in the opposite direction Link to article... U of M committee looks at nickname policy Melissa Avery, chairperson of the school's Advisory Committee on Athletics, said Tuesday her committee will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Are they going to create an "FSU" or "not on the NCAA list" exemption? Or are they going to say "on campus for in-league (WCHA) games" is enough to get them in the door in all sports? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Pardon me, but what does“develop a process” to reconsider the policymean exactly? Isn't this a group that develops policy already? How have they done it up to this point? Have they no "process" they follow already for developing or revisiting policy? If they don't have that little, why do they exist? Are they really just a coffee klatch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Well if this is true University of Minnesota athletic director Joel Maturi said in December he brought the nickname policy to the advisory committee's attention with the hopes of loosening the policy and opening the door for Minnesota to play UND in several sports.and this is true At the time, committee members stressed that the athletic director makes all final scheduling decisions, not the advisory committee,... , where's the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Well if this is true and this is true , where's the problem? I thought you understoond that logic has nothing to do with this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I thought you understoond that logic has nothing to do with this issue. Silly me!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slap Shot Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Good luck you guys. While the U hopefully getting their head straight on this issue probably doesn't make a difference to the overall fight, I hope you guys win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Good luck you guys. While the U hopefully getting their head straight on this issue probably doesn't make a difference to the overall fight, I hope you guys win. We appreciate your support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Good luck you guys. While the U hopefully getting their head straight on this issue probably doesn't make a difference to the overall fight, I hope you guys win. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Pardon me, but what does Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 In PC parlance, I think it means "Uh, just a minute. We have to check with our attorneys. We may have future legal exposure here. We really don't get out of our ivory towers much and we really aren't in touch with what the legal consequences might be and our 'policy' may have collusion, restrait of trade, unfair restriction of free speech and financial/contractual repercussions vis-a-vis other institutions with 'offensive nicknames' that would otherwise play us." It's a CYA. "We'll probably get our butts into a future legal sling because UND is serious and other potentially impacted schools may get serious too. Therefore, let's come up with some B.S., act like we really considered it and change the policy." Aren't these the same types who complain that the legal action is a "waste"? I wonder how they would be behaving if UND had bent over voluntarily instead of fighting the attempted rape? I seriously doubt Minnesota would be in any legal jeopardy for refusing to schedule UND, except possibly for contractual obligations if they back out on the games already scheduled with UND baseball. I can't think of any viable theories, and I've yet to hear any UND official even hint that they are considering legal action against Minnesota. It's possible financial considerations are coming into play here, but the financial benefit for the UofM in scheduling UND is not significant enough to go against the PC wrath that would ensue if this policy were reversed. I predict the policy will remain intact. They just might formalize it more, make findings, etc. so that it appears more defensible from a PR standpoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I predict the policy will remain intact. They just might formalize it more, make findings, etc. so that it appears more defensible from a PR standpoint. Sadly, I think you're probably right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I seriously doubt Minnesota would be in any legal jeopardy for refusing to schedule UND, except possibly for contractual obligations if they back out on the games already scheduled with UND baseball. I can't think of any viable theories, and I've yet to hear any UND official even hint that they are considering legal action against Minnesota. I agree with this. Minnesota is free to schedule anybody, outside of conference or other contractual obligation. It's possible financial considerations are coming into play here, but the financial benefit for the UofM in scheduling UND is not significant enough to go against the PC wrath that would ensue if this policy were reversed. I predict the policy will remain intact. They just might formalize it more, make findings, etc. so that it appears more defensible from a PR standpoint. I'm not so sure about this. Minnesota alums have a tremendous deal of clout, and money. They're going to need to pay for that new TCF stadium somehow, as well as figure out how to get people back into Williams. I recall UND has about 7000(?) alums in/around MSP, as well it's a short hop for others in the upper midwest. My guess, since academia is generally one big whorehouse, is that any new policy will allow some 'case-by-case" exceptions, perhaps based on existing rivalries in other sports. I think a pivotal issue is any settlement with the NC$$. If the parties figure out a way to "make nice" before trial, it may open a few doors, or at least get "The Scarlet A" off UND's chest in some quarters. I don't see a jury verdict for UND having the same effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I agree with this. Minnesota is free to schedule anybody, outside of conference or other contractual obligation. I'm not so sure about this. Minnesota alums have a tremendous deal of clout, and money. They're going to need to pay for that new TCF stadium somehow, as well as figure out how to get people back into Williams. I recall UND has about 7000(?) alums in/around MSP, as well it's a short hop for others in the upper midwest. My guess, since academia is generally one big whorehouse, is that any new policy will allow some 'case-by-case" exceptions, perhaps based on existing rivalries in other sports. I think a pivotal issue is any settlement with the NC$$. If the parties figure out a way to "make nice" before trial, it may open a few doors, or at least get "The Scarlet A" off UND's chest in some quarters. I don't see a jury verdict for UND having the same effect. With regard to the last point, I think a trial and jury verdict, or at least some sort of Court Approved settlement, is a necessity. I would rather have some form of binding legal precedent rather than a tea drinking session through which a pact is agreed that would only be temporary. Given the pathology of the "PC infrastructure," as "Old Pio" puts it, the bed-wetters would only be sharpening their blades for some future engagement. When that time comes, perhaps we have a weenie as an AG, like the fool that ran against Wayne this past year. Perhaps we have weenies in the State Board of Higher Education. Even if we don't have any weenies, it would take some effort to arrange the resources and machinery that has now been arranged. In the end, it will be much easier to go forward with legal precedent and fight the next step/stage than it would be to simply walk away with an "agreement." Let the NCAA try to put the matter through a member-wide vote, like it should have done. Make the NCAA "change its policy" like Brand threatened. The only reason that the NC$$ ran the policy through Brand's Star Chamber was to allow the higher ups at some universities to wash their hands of the policy or claim an inability to do anything when questioned by alumni. If the policy is brought to a member vote, the higher ups at each university that votes in favor of it will be held accountable by the respective alumni groups. The "cushy job" (A Flintstones image) of each admin official who would conceivably vote in favor of the policy would be too precious to risk that. If too many of the effete, pharisaic PC wonks were held to account to various alumni groups and replaced by more sensible types, the NC$$ power structure would be in danger. I see your point, but I don't think a settlement is the appropriate way to go when the opposing side is so intricately connected with the PC absolutists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted February 26, 2007 Author Share Posted February 26, 2007 http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/n...al/16752074.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 From the article Division I-A football schools, such as Minnesota, usually guarantee opponents between $125,000 and $400,000 per game, coaches said. That is a nice hunk of change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farce poobah Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 From the article That is a nice hunk of change. It is and it isn't. To U of M, its free - 10,000 Sioux fans at $25 each = $250,000 of "incremental ticket revenue". To UND's athletic budget, yup. 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.