Negotiated Settlement?

[Taz Boy]

...But to say that North Dakota quit and got nothing isn't reasonable because it's not true.

My concern is more of the "be careful what you ask for" variety. I see a lot of punitive/restrictive language in the settlement that I wonder is part of the original policy impacting other schools. It's like, "OK, you want clarification on the policy, here it is. Now, violate anything in here and your back on the list." Restrictions on licensing/sale of "Fighting Sioux" and the Brien logo are now clearly in place. Details of the REA acceptable/unacceptable imagery are outlined like no other facility. Mandatory new nickname and logo selection with deadline. The thought that the REA was "saved" from the jackhammers is maddening. I could not have imagined a course of action that would have empowered the NCAA to dictate facilities' construction and decor.

Also consider this statement from 2i: "The NCAA believes, as a general proposition, that the use of Native American names and imagery can create a hostile or abusive environment in collegiate athletics. However, the NCAA did not make any other findings about the environment on UND's campus." (emphasis added)

What does that mean, exactly? What findings were made that are not in the "other" category?

All things considered, good riddance to the meddlings of the NCAA in our naming process. They shouldn't have interfered to start with, and I think the settlement effectively highlights that.

taz

[star2city]

I don't care if UND ever plays Minnesota, Iowa or Wisconsin in Football, big deal.

Seems to be a big deal to certain coaches and boosters, namely in football.

Second do you think that the Board isnt' going to get any back lash if the name is changed? I think that is far from the truth.

Dorgan, Conrad, and Pomeroy received no backlash from their inaction. Why would anyone else suffer? The Board members aren't even elected.

[The Sicatoka]

However, unfortunately it doesn't appear the elected tribal leaders have the vision and/or the common sense to realize this.

Some, like Sam Dupris, do:

[The Whistler]

So am I and so was Stenehjem last Friday. The media jackals, as you might expect, were full of cynacism and skepticism about the possibility of coming to an understanding with the tribes. But Stenehjem pointed out that he'd been involved in negotiations with the tribes on a number of legal matters and they'd found ways in which to work things out.

Besides, nobody gave up hope when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.

Forget it, he's rolling.

And it ain't over now. Because when the going gets tough...............

[star2city]

So am I and so was Stenehjem last Friday. The media jackals, as you might expect, were full of cynacism and skepticism about the possibility of coming to an understanding with the tribes. But Stenehjem pointed out that he'd been involved in negotiations with the tribes on a number of legal matters and they'd found ways in which to work things out.

Based on the my perceived earlier expectations of the lawsuit based on ND government official statement and the actual settlement, isn't that proof that a healthy level of skeptism is appropriate? Again, politically, this settlement is an ideal cover for a name change. In order for the Fighting Sioux name to be on any solid ground, Standing Rock and Spirit Lake would have to agree to some type of legal covenant with UND. An athletic department with its marketing and brand name can not be held perpetually hostage of the whims of tribal politics.

[dagies]

I can accept a payoff and I am an optimist, while at the same time a realist.

Despite the early comments and previous actions of tribal leadership, I think something CAN happen. Will it? I have no idea but "you're saying there's a chance?".

Really, what would tribal leadership have said last Friday. Do we really expect that their first public comments would be any different from the public comments/positions they have maintained for so long? Things can change when you close the doors and sit down at a table and begin to look at the possibilities. How many of us were dead set against a decision or a situation but later reversed that opinion upon receipt of additional information?

The landscape for these discussions has now changed. UND has much to gain and lose and should be a motivated party in these discussions. With a deadline approaching it is possible the groundswell of opinion (one way OR the other) may perculate. That could influence tribal leadership in ways we are unaware of.

I can accept a "pay-off" scenario because that's free market. If someone takes your photo and uses it on the cover of their mag, guess what? You get paid. If we're saying the tribes should have the ability to choose whether they allow UND to use this great nickname I don't see why monetary compensation should necessarily be seen as a bad thing.

Personally, as enumerated above, I believe there are other, even more beneficial ways that UND and the tribes can turn this into a mutually advantageous situation, but a pay-off won't make me blink either.

I'm very interested to see how this plays out. I'll repeat, I'm not confident, but I see reason for optimism.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Your Honor, I'd like to plead guilty to that charge.

One other thing for me to add: I'll admit that since last Thursday I've tended to post with more emotion than with rational thinking.

Numerous people have offered the quote below:

[The Sicatoka]

4. Athletics: With a name change, UND can play Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa. There was already pressure internally to make the change - now there's convenient cover.

My yes, .... how conveeeeeenient.

[The Whistler]

My yes, .... how conveeeeeenient.

Yep, maybe the powers that be just don't want the public to have any control of our property.

[The Whistler]

I am of the opinion that this particular settlement was out there about $800,000 ago.

Yep!

[PCM]

Based on the my perceived earlier expectations of the lawsuit based on ND government official statement and the actual settlement, isn't that proof that a healthy level of skeptism is appropriate?

Certainly. At this point, I'd say the odds are against UND retaining the name. But a great deal can change over three years and I believe the settlement creates a new dynamic. I think it's a mistake to assume that we're headed down a one-way path.

I also know that Kupchella has said the following:

...as reported to us (by the) the chair of the judicial committee of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council, they did a referendum in six of the eight districts on the reservation and they were unanimously or near-unanimously supportive of the university

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

2. Politics: UND leadership (especially the new President), the NDBoHE, and ND officials no longer have to take political heat if the name changes.

Not sure I understand the point here. If the lawsuit had continued and your side had lost, the Board of Trustees would have been off the hook too. If you had won and then the NCAA had ammended the constitution, then again, your Board is taken out of the equation. So IMHO the Board isn't going to take heat in a lot of situations where a nickname change is forced on you.

4. Athletics: With a name change, UND can play Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa. There was already pressure internally to make the change - now there's convenient cover.

"Convenient cover": definitely something all politicians seek, but that doesn't make it a good thing morally or ethically. And it can backfire politically.

[HockeyMom]

Based on some of the comments Sioux-cia and Hockey mom make to each other on this board, it seems they would probably come up with some interesting new Rough Rider cheers?

I don't know what you are talking about.....

[Sioux-cia]

I don't know what you are talking about.....

[ScottM]

In order for the Fighting Sioux name to be on any solid ground, Standing Rock and Spirit Lake would have to agree to some type of legal covenant with UND. An athletic department with its marketing and brand name can not be held perpetually hostage of the whims of tribal politics.

Moreover, since you are dealing with ostensibly "sovereign" nations, you are dealing with entities that can you to "pound sand" at any time, with little or no recourse for UND. I also agree that I do not like the idea of UND being subject to the whims of often-capricious "governments", whether it's the NC$$ or some tribe.

I don't have a copy of the settlement here, but does anybody know if the entity that controls REA has signed this thing?

[Fetch]

REA has signed this thing?

legally or UND wise - I don't think the Foundation has anything to say about it

Earl Strinden was on the Radio afterwards saying the same ol stuff the commercial from the Ralph says every home game - Unless they have some new ideas or a plan from Ralph (before he passed on) & I hope it's not just a Radical excentric request - what else can they do ? Unless they have the Big $$$ to buy the name once & for all

What keeps eating at me is how most if not all Tribes no longer use Sioux - Instead they have changed back to original names Lakota / Dakota Etc. or Like Spirit Lake, went with Nation - Didn't the NCAA give a pass to one of the other big schools because there were not really any left ?

Even the little Tribe down in Shakopee (with all the Casino $$$) now calls themselves something else & I thought they were once part of the SIOUX from Fort Yates (Or Sisseton) ? ? ? - But you sure don't see them sharing the wealth with them or any other Sioux

[ScottM]

legally or UND wise - I don't think the Foundation has anything to say about it

Not necessarily. It's been awhile since I've thought about it, but I recall the REA was put into a separate entity to keep it away from the campus politics of changing the name. I'm not sure if the Foundation directly controls it, or a separate entity operates it for benefit of the foundation. Conceivably, REA could tell the NC$$, the tribes and UND to "pound sand" if the settlement agreeement did not properly address this structure.

[SportsDoc]

Not necessarily. It's been awhile since I've thought about it, but I recall the REA was put into a separate entity to keep it away from the campus politics of changing the name. I'm not sure if the Foundation directly controls it, or a separate entity operates it for benefit of the foundation. Conceivably, REA could tell the NC$$, the tribes and UND to "pound sand" if the settlement agreeement did not properly address this structure.

If memory serves, didn't Kupchella talk about a written agreement that turns the Ralph over to the school from REA at some point, that is concrete and already set? If I remember correctly he declined to say when that time was, but that it was already agreed to by all parties.

Anyone else remember seeing or hearing this?

[Fetch]

Maybe it is all less complicated then we make it http://slog.cstv.com/rinkrat/2007/10/sioux_what.html

[PCM]

I don't have a copy of the settlement here, but does anybody know if the entity that controls REA has signed this thing?

The information you seek is here.

[SiouxMeNow]

To me - the HUGE HUGE fly in the ointment (assuming there is some settlement) is the out the tribes have that if "anytime in the future" they feel UND isn't representing their name properly, UND has to drop it. Think of it this way...someone gives you the keys to their car and says go ahead - drive it! BUT if, at any time, I see you speeding or not signaling for a turn or (god forbid) you forgot to wash it - I'M TAKING IT BACK IMMEDIATELY!

Regardless of the fact you've proven yourself a responsible driver for many years - who would agree to those terms unless you were so desperate for a car they had no other alternative? UND (and their alums) can afford their own "transportation" - THANK YOU!

I'm about as hardcore of a "bleed-green" guy you will ever see but I'm also a realist...the details of this settlement STINK! The only smart thing they did was ensure some features of the Ralph are "cost-prohibitive" to replace. It will keep the spirit of the nickname alive if nothing else. Regarding the actual nickname? I say drop it! Just NORTH DAKOTA for a few years and lets see where we are in 2010...assuming they won't have a problem with the name of our state

[PCM]

Maybe it is all less complicated then we make it http://slog.cstv.com/rinkrat/2007/10/sioux_what.html

Olshansky makes a good point, but it doesn't address concerns about schools that won't play UND as long as it retains the Fighting Sioux nickname.

[UND92,96]

The information you seek is here.

I hope the AG's office fixes the spelling on the link for the "Order of Judgement (sic) for Dismissal."

[Fetch]

We could become the West Minnesota's or East Montana's Or South Sask. or Manitoba's

I'm running out of ideas & if I do, I may start heating up the tar & saving the feathers from the Birds I shoot this fall

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

To me - the HUGE HUGE fly in the ointment (assuming there is some settlement) is the out the tribes have that if "anytime in the future" they feel UND isn't representing their name properly, UND has to drop it.....

And I haven't had time to read everything, but from what I can see the two tribes can agree to let you use it on December 1, 2007 and that ends all talk of the "three year period" and as of that date you are on your own. So on December 31, 2007 if one of those two tribes votes to say "we don't like the way you're using it, we take back our permission" you're out of business forever. The year 2010 has become meaningless; and there is no possibilty of a re-vote from the tribes to once again grant permission.

Its JMHO, but the NCAA has stacked the deck entirely against you: and AFAIK, neither Florida State nor Utah are starting out with this handicap. Nobody has ever told them "once you lose it, you lose it forever" nor have they talked about the approval of TWO tribes.