NorthDakotaHockey Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Assuming that we don't get approval then pick a new name. Let the kids build a new tradition. Well here's one. How about the North Dakota Brand. Seeing how we've been branded as hostile and abusive. By the NCAA and the indomitable Myles Brand. I know. Stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I disagree. One thing the University needs to do is differentiate itself from other Universities such as is done through the Aerospace program. The Native American programs does that for UND. NDSU has been trying to do that with various levels of success over the past few years. Rather than remain in a box, it is time to be forward looking. I don't agree with cutting the NA programs, but I see no reason to increase their funding or outreach after this ass-raping. If UND seeks to "differentiate" itself, I'd rather they spend more money on programs in the business school, science, technology, etc., that have a broader appeal, and broader societal benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted October 28, 2007 Author Share Posted October 28, 2007 I don't understand why this makes anyone angry. Do you think it's a realistic possibility that UND would adopt no nickname? I don't. According to paragraph 2.d. of the agreement, UND would be placed back on the list if the transition to a new nickname/logo isn't complete by the stipulated date. If UND decided dump the Fighting Sioux name and not to have a nickname/logo, I can't believe the NCAA would put UND back on the list. That would be rather foolish. UND could just say, we choose "no nickname/logo". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Overwhelming support to have no name? Sorry, but I don't see that happening. Visualize, North Dakota across the Jersey's no name... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Visualize, North Dakota across the Jersey's no name... I can visualize it. I just can't see most people going for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxtimestwo Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I don't agree with cutting the NA programs, but I see no reason to increase their funding or outreach after this ass-raping. If UND seeks to "differentiate" itself, I'd rather they spend more money on programs in the business school, science, technology, etc., that have a broader appeal, and broader societal benefits. Fair enough, but if it is UND's responsibility alone to cover the cost of any logo removals in order to comply with the settlement, then I think the cost should come from these programs' budgets. After all, the decision on the nickname is in the hands on the Native Americans in the state. We chose the Fighting Sioux nickname in tribute to their tribe and culture and the importance it played in our region throughout history and developed unique programs set up specifically for them. They have in turn chosen to consider these actions offensive and abusive. Our only ties to tribes was through the nickname. If it is no longer a part of the university, why should these unique privileges continue to be? Remember, the ball is in their court. They are the ones making the decisions now. If they decide our university is offensive, then why should we continue to provide privileges to them that are exclusive? Like I said earlier, if a Native American is qualified to attend the university, then we should by all means accept them with open arms, but I don't see anymore reason why we should be affording them advantages that aren't available to any other group in the state. I was lucky enough to get an academic scholarship to UND and graduated due to my performance in the classroom. I'm a Scandinavian/German so I didn't get any extra support from the university due to my heritage and didn't expect any since the school has no reason to take that into consideration. Before the nickname issue, I understood why UND might take a Native American's heritage into consideration when affording scholarships or granting admissions. Once we have a new nickname, I fail to see where this connection would exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Fair enough, but if it is UND's responsibility alone to cover the cost of any logo removals in order to comply with the settlement, then I think the cost should come from these programs' budgets. After all, the decision on the nickname is in the hands on the Native Americans in the state. We chose the Fighting Sioux nickname in tribute to their tribe and culture and the importance it played in our region throughout history and developed unique programs set up specifically for them. They have in turn chosen to consider these actions offensive and abusive. Our only ties to tribes was through the nickname. If it is no longer a part of the university, why should these unique privileges continue to be? Remember, the ball is in their court. They are the ones making the decisions now. If they decide our university is offensive, then why should we continue to provide privileges to them that are exclusive? Like I said earlier, if a Native American is qualified to attend the university, then we should by all means accept them with open arms, but I don't see anymore reason why we should be affording them advantages that aren't available to any other group in the state. I was lucky enough to get an academic scholarship to UND and graduated due to my performance in the classroom. I'm a Scandinavian/German so I didn't get any extra support from the university due to my heritage and didn't expect any since the school has no reason to take that into consideration. Before the nickname issue, I understood why UND might take a Native American's heritage into consideration when affording scholarships or granting admissions. Once we have a new nickname, I fail to see where this connection would exist. Correct...If the nickname goes, then so do all the freebies...You don't get to have it both ways... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I'd like anyone who is complaining about UND or the AG "caving" to elaborate on what they believe would have happened if/when "we" won this current suit in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I can visualize it. I just can't see most people going for it. I am not sure that I can visualize anything but a Sioux logo on the front of the jersey but also with the words Sioux across the front. I am also not so sure UND isn't going to suffer because of either the settlement either. The big boys can spin it anyway they want but I dont' see this as a possitive. I see it as an arena not being razed. So are we to now believe we have a good chance of getting a regional because we have complied or settled with the NCAA? There are going to be donors and alumni that aren't going to be happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan123 Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 OK, I will use my skills as a first year law student to look at the issue that I think is bugging everyone on the board, that is the change of the nickname. I find the language a little fuzzy but I think there might be some hope for fans of the name. I overall thought the settlement was a good one except for the fact that we would give up our name, but I thought that was a little particular because why would we give up more then what we had to under the Policy. But I think the settlement still allows UND to keep the name if we don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan123 Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Ok I read more of the policy UND also keeps the trademarks rights to the Sioux logo and such but I don't know how to read it correctly, does it mean we can still license to Nike and the such to make money for the Athletic Department? Also the agreement says that if there is a change of policy or a new policy UND can challenge that how ever they feel like doing so, so that right is still with us... thank goodness. Edit for correction to trademarks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I'd like anyone who is complaining about UND or the AG "caving" to elaborate on what they believe would have happened if/when "we" won this current suit in court.I'm not sure I understand the point of this question. Are you saying that either bringing or continuing the lawsuit had no value? I will try to share what I personally saw as the value of the case. I think it would have been valuable to get the NCAA on record as to how many "complaints" they had about ONLY Indian nicknames. And I would ask how many complaints they got about the Irish: because I know the answer is at least one. Then I'd ask what the minimum number of complaints is for action. I would ask them if they thought it made a difference as to "who" complained, and get that answer on record. (E.G., if a full-blooded Ute complained but a half-Ute person said "no problem", is that still a vote against the Utes?) I would ask them if they saw any difference between names like Sioux, Seminoles etc. and Irish, Vikings, Aztecs and the like; and get their answer on record. If I was thinking more clearly tonight, I could probably list out a few more answers I would like. And yes, assuming UND won and then the NCAA took the new rules and regs to their full convention, I'd then be raising those same issues on the floor. Namely (er, no pun intended) are we as an organization being fair to people of all races? After reading further, this earlier comment captures most of my thoughts on the value of continuing with the lawsuit vs. this settlement: If we had won the suit, I still have a difficult time believing that the NC$$ would have had the votes or political guts to implement a broad-range policy, through a vote of its membership, that would have roped in FSU and the like. For that reason, I am disappointed that they did not press on. One more thing as a general comment on whether or not its advisable to adopt a new nickname. If Illinois had been forced to drop our nickname, I was in favor of NOT choosing another nickname. The long and short of it for me was that if we didn't call ourselves anything new, in the minds of most casual fans we'd still be the Illini. Once we started calling ourselves "Praire Wind" or whatever we'd lose the small, tenuous connection we had to Illini among those who don't follow college sports avidly (and I think that is the majority of people). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 UND also keeps the trademarks rights to the Sioux logo and such but I don't know how to read it correctly, does it mean we can still license to Nike and the such to make money for the Athletic Department? I can tell you what happened at Illinois. The University retained all copyrights, trademarks, etc. to the Chief logo, but we cannot use them. No new merchandise can be ordered now. As it runs out, it runs out. The reason we retained the copyright is to keep the logo from falling into the public domain. If it did and someone started making Orange and Blue hats with the Chief on them, Indians everywhere (except Mexico, Florida and Utah) would suffer untold damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan123 Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I can tell you what happened at Illinois. The University retained all copyrights, trademarks, etc. to the Chief logo, but we cannot use them. No new merchandise can be ordered now. As it runs out, it runs out. The reason we retained the copyright is to keep the logo from falling into the public domain. If it did and someone started making Orange and Blue hats with the Chief on them, Indians everywhere (except Mexico, Florida and Utah) would suffer untold damage. I looked at it again, it looks like it is the same with UND. I get this idea from the language "and shall not but further assigned, released, abandoned, exercised, or otherwise used, except as expressly permitted herein, in connection with UND's Athletic Department." but this takes into effect only if we change our name, which is NOT something we HAVE to do if my analysis is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I looked at it again, it looks like it is the same with UND. I get this idea from the language "and shall not but further assigned, released, abandoned, exercised, or otherwise used, except as expressly permitted herein, in connection with UND's Athletic Department."(emphasis added) I forgot about a few things when I wrote above about only the fear of an abandoned copyright. A group of our former Chiefs offered to start a scholarship fund for Indians to study at Illinois, and they said they would (tastefully) use the logo on t-shirts, etc. to help fund those scholarships. Now AFAIK the very quick answer of "no &*% way" came from our Board of Trustees; but it may have been written into whatever we signed with the NCAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Supporter Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 ...I also do not favor adopting another name/logo, nor do I favor any more pandering to the tribes, or expanding any more outreach programs... It strikes me that since that your school has been shouldering the cost of these scholarships, etc available only to Indians for a number of years but now the NCAA has set themselves up as the sole judges of what is insulting to Indians and the protectors of the feelings of Indians everywhere-at the very least the NCAA could peel off a few $$ million from that $6 billion dollar contract and take you guys out of this responsiblity. Any complaints about the lower payouts? See the president of Hartford University, or the other committee members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Whistler Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I'd like anyone who is complaining about UND or the AG "caving" to elaborate on what they believe would have happened if/when "we" won this current suit in court. A. The case would have stayed in North Dakota. The North Dakota Supreme Court is very efficient often seeing cases within 6-8 months of having a case submitted. Must be all of those UND grads up there. B. A properly done case would have concerned the matter with not only had the NCAA acted against their bylaws but is the logo itself hostile and abusive. Winning on that count would bar the NCAA from changing their policy again. C. If we lose we lose. I can live with that. As it is now we lost without fighting. Stenejhem seems proud that the NCAA is going to put on a disclaimer that we are not hostile and abusive on their website. But if that's the case then we should keep the name, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bincitysioux Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Do you think it's a realistic possibility that UND would adopt no nickname? I don't. I think having no nickname at all is hands down the best alternative if the Fighting Sioux is retired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I think having no nickname at all is hands down the best alternative if the Fighting Sioux is retired. I'm beginning to warm up to this idea. It's kind of a play on the "We are Marshall". I think "We are North Dakota", could be very effective. Consider the programs who have a nickname that's one of their schools' colors, yet for marketing purposes use an unrelated mascot that holds some significant meaning to the program: Alabama Crimson Tide uses an elephant for their mascot. I think marketing UND as synonymous with the entire state could be very effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Walrus Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 Why do we need a Nickname or Logo.....? We are the University of North Dakota ! I'm beginning to warm up to this idea. It's kind of a play on the "We are Marshall". I think "We are North Dakota", could be very effective. Consider the programs who have a nickname that's one of their schools' colors, yet for marketing purposes use an unrelated mascot that holds some significant meaning to the program: Alabama Crimson Tide uses an elephant for their mascot. I think marketing UND as synonymous with the entire state could be very effective. I mentioned this earilier, it may only be a temporary solution (5-10 years) then maybe a logo, slogan, mascot or idea will arise that is just the right fit for UND....... When changing 75 years-? of history .....Do not rush into it. Til then......We are the University of North Dakota Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I'm beginning to warm up to this idea. It's kind of a play on the "We are Marshall". I think "We are North Dakota", could be very effective. Consider the programs who have a nickname that's one of their schools' colors, yet for marketing purposes use an unrelated mascot that holds some significant meaning to the program: Alabama Crimson Tide uses an elephant for their mascot. I think marketing UND as synonymous with the entire state could be very effective. I tend to agree. I see no reason for UND to put itself into another "debate" about a name/logo, and trying to appease every freakin' interest group under the Sun from the NC$$ to some tribes to PETA to some other college that may have the same name. There's no requirement for a team name, and I see no reason to search for a replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 I tend to agree. I see no reason for UND to put itself into another "debate" about a name/logo, and trying to appease every freakin' interest group under the Sun from the NC$$ to some tribes to PETA to some other college that may have the same name. There's no requirement for a team name, and I see no reason to search for a replacement. If I am reading some of your comments is bascially saying that after three years of not being badgered by the NCAA UND could just tell the NCAA to go pound sand and keep the logo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 As it is now we lost without fighting. We did fight. We fought harder than any of the other 18 schools on the NCAA's list. Other than getting the exemption that five schools got, we got more than what any of the other 13 got. And if any of the tribes supporting the five with exemptions change their minds (and it's just a matter of time until some do), UND will have a better deal than any of them. If we would have continued the court fight and lost, we likely would've spent millions with absolutely nothing to show for it. And that's not even taking into account the possiblity that the NCAA could amend its bylaws and make a legal victory a moot point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 We did fight. We fought harder than any of the other 18 schools on the NCAA's list. We fired a shot then we surrendered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted October 28, 2007 Share Posted October 28, 2007 9% Yes 84% No - UND gave up too much 1% No - The NCAA gave up too much 5% I'm not sure, yet Total votes: 956 Far be it from me to cloud the issue with facts but it seems from the poll over on the news page that there are many people that aren't very happy with the settlement so maybe the ones plugging it are the ones that are in the minority. Just a thought. 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.