The Sicatoka Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 How were we suppose to gain control of this process? By demanding immediate action and not wallowing in despair for something that was already lost. A strong alumni response then would have forced Dr. Kelley's hand. Now he has pacified that base. As soon as folks adopted the "we don't need a nickname" canard it gave Dr. Kelley exactly what he wanted: time and space to do things his way. Look at the survey data: Alumni are now asking that they be the majority voice in the decision. Key word? Asking. If alumni had stepped up when the name stopped being sustainable they wouldn't be "asking". I hate to blow a good source on this, but when one of the first committees formed (probably five years ago already) they thought they were there to get a new moniker in place. That committee had both Ed Schafer and Leigh Jeanotte on it. (That's pretty much as opposite in ND politics as you can get.) Those two agreed the process should happen quickly. Schafer and Jeanotte ... agreeing on something. Ponderous, eh? Who didn't agree with them? Dr. Kelley. And look where we are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 When (or if) they remodel Memorial Stadium to be FBS ready, they could rename it Arrowhead Stadium. (I don't think the Chiefs would mind) Memorial Stadium should stay Memorial Stadium until/unless someone gives a large donation to renovate the facility, which would allow them to place their name on it. I prefer not to have Arrows associated with NA. As I have said before, arrows have been used for thousands of years by many cultures and the name cannot be claimed by the NA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Memorial Stadium should stay Memorial Stadium until/unless someone gives a large donation to renovate the facility, which would allow them to place their name on it. I prefer not to have Arrows associated with NA. As I have said before, arrows have been used for thousands of years by many cultures and the name cannot be claimed by the NA. An arrowhead Is just the tip of an arrow, it's not the name of a tribe or a tomahawk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 An arrowhead Is just the tip of an arrow, it's not the name of a tribe or a tomahawk. I recognize that, but when you say Arrowhead Stadium, people think of Chiefs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxstudent Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Not a fan of arrows sorry too lame for me, just blah when you actually think about it. How about SuperSonics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 I recognize that, but when you say Arrowhead Stadium, people think of Chiefs. ...and I'd bet the NCAA bigwigs think that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 30, 2014 Author Share Posted December 30, 2014 ...and I'd bet the NCAA bigwigs think that too. I figured that you would be adding to the conversation at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Of all the ideas thrown out, I'm beginning to dislike this one the least. We need to move forward with something, so I can get behind being the University of North Dakota Arrows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 By demanding immediate action and not wallowing in despair for something that was already lost. A strong alumni response then would have forced Dr. Kelley's hand. Now he has pacified that base. As soon as folks adopted the "we don't need a nickname" canard it gave Dr. Kelley exactly what he wanted: time and space to do things his way. Look at the survey data: Alumni are now asking that they be the majority voice in the decision. Key word? Asking. If alumni had stepped up when the name stopped being sustainable they wouldn't be "asking". I hate to blow a good source on this, but when one of the first committees formed (probably five years ago already) they thought they were there to get a new moniker in place. That committee had both Ed Schafer and Leigh Jeanotte on it. (That's pretty much as opposite in ND politics as you can get.) Those two agreed the process should happen quickly. Schafer and Jeanotte ... agreeing on something. Ponderous, eh? Who didn't agree with them? Dr. Kelley. And look where we are now. Tried to pat yourself on the back and...missed! I'm not buying it - there was no obvious replacement for alumni to rally around - without it, it's too much to expect that everyone would demand an immediate change as quickly as possible after such an acrimonious battle. Even today, no candidate has stepped to the forefront to become anything resembling a consensus replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Siouxperfan7 Posted December 30, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted December 30, 2014 What baffles me is there are people, many on this board, who think that if the committee narrows the list down to 2 or three names, that Kelley is going to just pick one of his own. There is zer chance that is going to happen. Many people think this committee to decide the process is all a front and Kelley will do whatever he wants. Why would he do that? Why waste the time of thousands of alumni filling out surveys, having townhall meetings, and having hours upon hours coming up with a process and then even more time deciding a new name and implementing it if Kelley is just going to pick one? Do you think that he wants that to be his legacy at UND? To pick a new name that nobody wants? Come on people! Just let the process fo through and see what comes up. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Tried to pat yourself on the back and...missed! I'm not buying it - there was no obvious replacement for alumni to rally around - without it, it's too much to expect that everyone would demand an immediate change as quickly as possible after such an acrimonious battle. Even today, no candidate has stepped to the forefront to become anything resembling a consensus replacement. I'm not saying there was a consensus name then. I'm saying we should've done all of this work then and have long since moved on. Instead, we wallow along. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackheart Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 By demanding immediate action and not wallowing in despair for something that was already lost. A strong alumni response then would have forced Dr. Kelley's hand. Now he has pacified that base. As soon as folks adopted the "we don't need a nickname" canard it gave Dr. Kelley exactly what he wanted: time and space to do things his way. Look at the survey data: Alumni are now asking that they be the majority voice in the decision. Key word? Asking. If alumni had stepped up when the name stopped being sustainable they wouldn't be "asking". I hate to blow a good source on this, but when one of the first committees formed (probably five years ago already) they thought they were there to get a new moniker in place. That committee had both Ed Schafer and Leigh Jeanotte on it. (That's pretty much as opposite in ND politics as you can get.) Those two agreed the process should happen quickly. Schafer and Jeanotte ... agreeing on something. Ponderous, eh? Who didn't agree with them? Dr. Kelley. And look where we are now. The way the whole name change was handled from the start leads me to believe that Kelley had his mind made up and short of 20,000 alumni all contacting his office at once (that would have been cool by the way) he was going to handle/mishandle this this thing his way. That's all water under the bridge now but I think it's pretty optimistic to say that people could have much say in this. Just my 2 cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDPritch Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Arrows is beginning to sound good to me. It surely can't offend anyone (as earlier post said, NA's don't own it) and, most importantly, arrows take down/wipe out Bizon, Goofers, Badgers, 'Dawgs (however may types there are out there, a dime a dozen), Pioneers, Red Birds (Miami?), Mavericks, Huskies, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIOUXFAN97 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 When (or if) they remodel Memorial Stadium to be FBS ready, they could rename it Arrowhead Stadium. (I don't think the Chiefs would mind) Fennell Field sounds better 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiSioux Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Personally not a fan or Arrows... It is boring. What kind of mascot or cheers come from arrows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Personally not a fan or Arrows... It is boring. What kind of mascot or cheers come from arrows? A big giant Arrow, or Thunder the bleacher creature. We don't need a mascot that goes with the team. Ex. Cleveland Indians Slider, that bird for the Miami Hurricanes among others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMSioux Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 No. Kidding. Please stand by: The following is a pat myself on the back session. When this fiasco started I said we needed to replace the name immediately to maintain control of the process. (By "we" I mean folks that care about UND Athletics and that supported the retired name as long as it was sustainable.) Well, we didn't and now we don't have control. We have committees and processes ... and delay, delay, delay. We, those who care, lost control. This is where I say my four favorite words: I. Told. You. So. We should have a new name and logo for about a decade already. We should have moved on. Instead we live under the specter of the old logo, including every little possible incident that can be remotely associated to the old name (see: last spring's t-shirts). When I realized that's where we are I changed my avatar to what it is today. My avatar is the DC Comics character "The Spectre". I agree with your thoughts but having a new name/logo would not have prevented what happened last spring or in the future nor will it remove UND from the blame game because the source of the blame game continues to exist on campus. Ironically they have their own private building on campus built with public tax dollars. And while they shouldn't even be on the list of organizations having a say in the name you can bet they will be very vocal (and I"m betting that they will find some way to have a problem with any name that even remotely could be referenced back to Native American culture.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 We don't need a mascot that goes with the team. Ex. Cleveland Indians Slider, that bird for the Miami Hurricanes among others. Miami's 'U' and Sebastian the Ibis are easily two of the most instantly-recognized brands of college football. Pure genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoiseInsideMyHead Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Personally not a fan or Arrows... It is boring. What kind of mascot or cheers come from arrows? The men's teams are set... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share Posted December 31, 2014 Personally not a fan or Arrows... It is boring. What kind of mascot or cheers come from arrows? UND didn't have a mascot with Fighting Sioux. For Arrows, how about an archer. Cheers will come from the fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 UND didn't have a mascot with Fighting Sioux. For Arrows, how about an archer. Cheers will come from the fans. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 C'mon Darrell, Ra's al Ghul killed him off a couple weeks ago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 UND didn't have a mascot with Fighting Sioux. For Arrows, how about an archer. Cheers will come from the fans. For a school that hasn't had a mascot in decades, why is a new dancing-on-the-sidelines act so important now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxphan27 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 For a school that hasn't had a mascot in decades, why is a new dancing-on-the-sidelines act so important now? I agree. Unless we go with my name idea of Hooters, the dancing/bouncing sideline act should not be an important factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share Posted December 31, 2014 For a school that hasn't had a mascot in decades, why is a new dancing-on-the-sidelines act so important now? Agreed. Just providing an idea for those who think it necessary. 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.