Chewey Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Even if they do agree, all that has to happen is for a new tribe leader to be elected that doesn't like the deal and he can call it off any time he wants. Any agreement would have to be for a series of years or else what you pointed out will happen. If there is an agreement for a series of years and one party bolts, there will be remedies. The big question is whether the remedies would be sought in tribal court or state district court. Anyone in law knows just how much of a cluster#$%^ tribal courts are. No UCC for the enforement/establishment of creditor rights. In most cases, the tribal court judges are anything but unbiased. Petty, decades-old grudges are the coin of the realm. There have been no "racist" incidents to report which is why DYB and others of her ilk can only talk about what they've heard or been told by various "victims." Who are those people? Where are the police/campus reports to back up the "racist" claims? What really irks me about the nickname debate is that various people can argue "racism" without a shred of evidence and the NC00, for its own purposes, takes such b.s. claims as gospel to support its claim that the nickname/logo is "hostile and abusive." There is no accountability for outright fabrication. Rather, such lying and deceit is rewarded for purposes of accomplishing cynical, political ends. If keeping the name means that UND has to wipe the nose of every PC hack who concocts or, more likely, hallucinates a "racist incident" and must conduct an "investigation" and impose "consequences," pitch it. While I would not support cutting programs for indians that are presently in place, I certainly would not advocate for more programs/services. In that 99% of the alumni probably feel the same way, alumni dollars will probably become more "narrowly tailored." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Boy Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 I don't think the NCAA believes it's being inconsistent. As I recall, the association maintains that as long as it doesn't receive a specific complaint from a tribe about the use of its name, it assumes that no complaint exists and makes no effort to find out. Depending on which statement one wants to believe, either members of the Spirit Lake tribal council support UND's use of the nickname or they're against it. Of course, the NCAA chooses to believe that the tribe is against the Fighting Sioux nickname while UND believes it has the tribe's support. From the NCAA's point of view, the issue isn't that UND needs to get the permission of two tribes, it's that the NCAA believes there are two tribes in North Dakota who are on record as opposing UND's use of the Sioux name. I don't expect anyone here to think this makes sense because I think it's nonsense. I'm just attempting to explain why the NCAA thinks it's necessary for UND to seek the approval of both the Standing Rock and Spirit Lake tribes. PCM: One of the conditions listed in the settlement is the recognition that the Spirit Lake resolution from 2000 is valid, but requires a written confirmation from a representative that in fact the resolution is still supported by the tribe. I do not know how much difference there is between formalizing support of a pre-existing resolution, or crafting a new resolution, but can we say that the NCAA is giving us a concession on Spirit Lake? taz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 the Pro-name change people who are they and what do they do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Even if they do agree, all that has to happen is for a new tribe leader to be elected that doesn't like the deal and he can call it off any time he wants. Exactly my concern. Unless UND can broker some type of long-term "lease" agreement with the tribes to use the Sioux name during this 3 year period, I would not want a "day to day" agreement with the Indian leadership we have come to know and love over past number of years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 One of the conditions listed in the settlement is the recognition that the Spirit Lake resolution from 2000 is valid, but requires a written confirmation from a representative that in fact the resolution is still supported by the tribe. I do not know how much difference there is between formalizing support of a pre-existing resolution, or crafting a new resolution, but can we say that the NCAA is giving us a concession on Spirit Lake? That's the way I read it, too. But then, I think the state received several important concessions from the NCAA in the settlement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 For those who have worked in the political arena, and I believe PCM is one of them, what can be done legislatively to reign in organizations like the NCAA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 For those who have worked in the political arena, and I believe PCM is one of them, what can be done legislatively to reign in organizations like the NCAA? It was tried on the congressional level and never went anywhere. I'm sure it didn't help that none of North Dakota's congressional delegation backed the mesaure. Philosophically, I'm not even sure it's a good idea to use the federal government to attempt to control the NCAA. It would be better if the organization's membership decided that it should stick to the business of regulating college athletics and back off from Myles Brand's "catalyst for social change" movement. But with academia being what it is, there's probably not much chance of that happening, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 then we probably don't want to become the Fighting NCAA's either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 But with academia being what it is, there's probably not much chance of that happening, either. Did you want me to finish the sentence for you? You know the college professor, ussually in the arts and sciences, lets say sociology, antrhopology, you know the type, the hand wringing, pc of a ________________persuasion... I know exactly what your talking about. I have a masters degree in this crap and they tripped all over them selves trying to lecture us on the evils of the fighting Sioux name and none of them were a Native American. One went so far to call the UND name a red faced minstral (sp). That academia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Did you want me to finish the sentence for you? I could've sworn there was a period at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndahl Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Now that there aren't going to be other Vikings in our conference, we could be the Vikings. That, or Cavalry, which seems to have decent support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 None of the above. Drop the name if we must, but do not replace it......at least for awhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Now that there aren't going to be other Vikings in our conference, we could be the Vikings. That, or Cavalry, which seems to have decent support. As an avid Chicago Bears fan, I don't think I have it in me to cheer for the Vikings!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I could've sworn there was a period at the end. Yeah your right there wasn't a question mark... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 As an avid Chicago Bears fan, I don't think I have it in me to cheer for the Vikings!! Wouldn't that confuse Gopher fans when we play them in hockey to hear them boo the Vikings in Minneapolis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxjoy Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Ron his Horse Thunger I don't know if this was intentional or not, but it made me giggle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I would like to see somebody from UND contact the powers-that-be at Florida State. Arrange a meeting with them and find exactly out what kind of compensation deal they have with the Seminole tribes, and then offer a deal that is just as good if not better to the Sioux tribes. At this point we have nothing left to lose. You hit the nail right on the head. This whole thing will come down to getting paid. If you want this, then I need this much $$. I can tell you now, there will never be enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxCrew11 Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 You hit the nail right on the head. This whole thing will come down to getting paid. If you want this, then I need this much $$. I can tell you now, there will never be enough. True that. We don't have the money that FSU does/did to just make this go away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 True that. We don't have the money that FSU does/did to just make this go away. Well, regardless of how much it is, getting whatever amounts is going to help people on the reservations a lot more than not getting them. I can't claim to understand the pathology of the PC mindset but it seems obvious to me that more money to the tribes would be a good thing. If someone came up to me and indicated that he/she would pay me $500,000 per year to use my name, I'd jump at the chance. If the tribes were to indicate that they would disallow use of the name if the PCers could come up with money to pay them, I wonder what the reaction of the PCers would be. It's a no-brainer to any rational person: An additional income stream vs. no additional income stream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Hopefully to a agency that truely helps http://www.nrcprograms.org/site/PageServer...name=snrf_index Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I like the idea of no new nickname. The basketball teams could have Dakota on the front. We could have a football helmet similar to what I said here. Hockey could go back to the "North Dakota". I will miss the logo, but UND will always be the Sioux to me and I don't think I like any of the nicknames that I've heard, even the ones that I've thought of. Worst things UND could do!!! Being just UND, thus essentially having no athletic team identity. UND Fighting Calvary. 'Nuff Said!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 The end all is that Goon is right. I want to believe like PCM does, but I think Goon is right. The pro-nickname changers and the tribes have a golden opportunity to push the majority around and further their "woe is us" agenda. NO WAY IN HELL do they let that pass. If they were to come to any sort of agreement, even one that may push the boundaries of good taste (such as some sort of financial benefit to the tribes), their position will be weakened and they'll look weak. If they change their minds later on (as MplsBison suggests) then they'll look bad. So, with that in mind, perhaps we should start making arrangements to change the name? I like the idea of Fighting Scouts or Fighting Cavalry. I'm sure the Tribes will oppose Fighting Cavalry, but their opposition will be baseless based upon the fact that UND will be complying with the wording of the flawed, but seemingly bulletproof NCAA sanction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 The end all is that Goon is right. I'm sure the Tribes will oppose Fighting Cavalry, but their opposition will be baseless based upon the fact that UND will be complying with the wording of the flawed, but seemingly bulletproof NCAA sanction. I may or maynot be right, I am just being realistic. I also believe that we shouldn't and don't need to consol the tribes government on what the new nick name should be. I think the name changing is damage enough and they will have gotten what they want. Wether if it is what a majority of their people want or not. I sick and tired of this mindset of if something offends someone then it has to change. Well I am offended by the fact that Hillary Clinton thinks she deserves to be president, but that doesn' mean she is going to be kicked out of the election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I don't know if this was intentional or not, but it made me giggle. Nah, it was a misspelled word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 The end all is that Goon is right.. I just want to once hear mrs Goon say that... 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.