NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 2:51 pm

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:57 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 674
Location: Louisville, KY
I wonder if the State of North Dakota will ask the NCAA to finance the costs of the name change in exchange for not being sued by the state of North Dakota, which could jeopardize the NCAA's relationship with not only UND, but other schools in North Dakota.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:10 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
wbyeager wrote:
I wonder if the State of North Dakota will ask the NCAA to finance the costs of the name change in exchange for not being sued by the state of North Dakota, which could jeopardize the NCAA's relationship with not only UND, but other schools in North Dakota.

The legal precedent has already been set. This isn't like the NCAA just decided to point a finger at a single school, UND, and start all this up. There have been a number of other changes already, hardly just a few. It's an open/shut case from the NCAA side.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 9:32 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:52 pm
Posts: 473
Quinn wrote:
wbyeager wrote:
I wonder if the State of North Dakota will ask the NCAA to finance the costs of the name change in exchange for not being sued by the state of North Dakota, which could jeopardize the NCAA's relationship with not only UND, but other schools in North Dakota.

The legal precedent has already been set. This isn't like the NCAA just decided to point a finger at a single school, UND, and start all this up. There have been a number of other changes already, hardly just a few. It's an open/shut case from the NCAA side.


That's actually my confusion. Why is this just now becoming an issue? I remember when they started this years ago. I remember teams appealing and having to get permission or changing mascots. How has UND managed to avoid this for so long?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:46 am 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
SJSUFan2010 wrote:
Quinn wrote:
wbyeager wrote:
I wonder if the State of North Dakota will ask the NCAA to finance the costs of the name change in exchange for not being sued by the state of North Dakota, which could jeopardize the NCAA's relationship with not only UND, but other schools in North Dakota.

The legal precedent has already been set. This isn't like the NCAA just decided to point a finger at a single school, UND, and start all this up. There have been a number of other changes already, hardly just a few. It's an open/shut case from the NCAA side.


That's actually my confusion. Why is this just now becoming an issue? I remember when they started this years ago. I remember teams appealing and having to get permission or changing mascots. How has UND managed to avoid this for so long?


They haven't avoided it, hence the NCAA sanctions. They went through the process like other schools did, got a ruling and said they'd be making the changes...then said they weren't (kinda).

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:21 am 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 9:41 pm
Posts: 749
Location: Wilmington, NC
It seemed like the NCAA was willing to negotiate with North Dakota until they were told what was discussed would be under North Dakota open records law. This is likely why the new negotiation venue will be in Indianapolis instead of North Dakota. I figure the new NCAA president just wants this to go away as much as North Dakota does as this is not his issue, but the former, now deceased president. I would not be surprised to see some form of settlement arise from these negotiations as they do have 1 tribal approval and the other would get approved if a vote were allowed by the tribal leaders. Possibly an extension to get the 2nd tribal approval. But, the NCAA is in the driver's seat in this one and if they want to put their foot down they would likely (imo unfortunately) win a legal battle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:40 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1331
accseahawk wrote:
It seemed like the NCAA was willing to negotiate with North Dakota until they were told what was discussed would be under North Dakota open records law. This is likely why the new negotiation venue will be in Indianapolis instead of North Dakota. I figure the new NCAA president just wants this to go away as much as North Dakota does as this is not his issue, but the former, now deceased president. I would not be surprised to see some form of settlement arise from these negotiations as they do have 1 tribal approval and the other would get approved if a vote were allowed by the tribal leaders. Possibly an extension to get the 2nd tribal approval. But, the NCAA is in the driver's seat in this one and if they want to put their foot down they would likely (imo unfortunately) win a legal battle.
I'm not so sure about that, I've been very interested in this case and UND could file suit against the NCAA and claim it was basically threating them to break the state law, which has more authority over UND than the NCAA. I'm not 100% on that, but I think it would make a very interesting case because the state was well within its right to make a law like this. As far as I know, the other schools that changed their nicknames/mascot, like Syracuse, never had a state law hindering them from doing so. In the end I think the most likely outcome will be changing UND's nickname but that has no bearing on the possible legal desicions if this case ever made it to a courtroom.

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:21 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm
Posts: 58
tkalmus wrote:
86mets wrote:
Agreed, political correctness does get silly. Fighting Irish or Seminoles isn't the issue: it is a case by case scenario, whereby, certain tribe members had a beef w/ the nickname. This is a flagship state institution of higher learning, therefore, you have to respect these citizens who are offended and change the nickname--even if it's only a perceived small number of malcontents. Again, big picture, this is a nickname/logo at issue here--meaningless in the whole scope of things micro or macro.
If I'm not mistaken the Native American tribes don't pay taxes so they have little say in deciding the nickname of a public institution, that honor falls to the people elected to represent the public, who said they want to keep the nickname. Do you really believe a handful of people should be able to override an entire state? That sounds idiotic, what if the environmentalist decide that the Lumberjacks is an offensive nickname, or the Greeks deem the Spartans and Trojans offensive? You can't give in to tiny minorities for PC reasons or it will never stop. It's extremely ironic that the NCAA is coming down on UND while Auburn, Oregon, UNC, and Ohio St are getting away with bloody murder...or should I rephrase that last part because it may be offensive to families or murder victims?


What is idiotic is fractured logic. First off, Native Americans, Sioux or otherwise are US CITIZENS, and whether they pay taxes or not is irrelevant. And what exactly is the stand here on not "giving in" to minorities, however "tiny" you deem them to be?
So let me get this straight: by your logic, because this group of Sioux are "tiny" in population, don't pay taxes, and are not affiliated with the university in question, they should just be okay with an elected group of state politicians--also unaffiliated [officially] with UND--requiring the university by law to keep its nickname "honoring" this group of Sioux, even though it is against the explicit wishes of certain Sioux members and the university administration; this, all in the name of simultaneously honoring and not giving in to the wishes of the very group in question? That is either insane, malicious, controlling, or a combo of all three.

Additionally--and for our purposes on this board--the NCAA, the governing body for UND athletic teams, deems the nickname offensive and wants it removed. It was agreed upon by UND to be resolved. End of story. However, external political grandstanding has decided that since they themselves don't like it, they will send a delegation to convince the NCAA that their state university didn't really mean to agree to the regulations imposed regarding the nickname/logo issue and 'would you please reconsider.' Wow, all this for a nickname/logo? Insane. Not to mention a colossal waste of time, moeny and energy. You want to play in the NCAA, here are the rules to abide by. If you don't like them, don't join. It's freedom of choice.

As for your other examples, they are unworthy of comment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:46 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1331
86mets wrote:
tkalmus wrote:
86mets wrote:
Agreed, political correctness does get silly. Fighting Irish or Seminoles isn't the issue: it is a case by case scenario, whereby, certain tribe members had a beef w/ the nickname. This is a flagship state institution of higher learning, therefore, you have to respect these citizens who are offended and change the nickname--even if it's only a perceived small number of malcontents. Again, big picture, this is a nickname/logo at issue here--meaningless in the whole scope of things micro or macro.
If I'm not mistaken the Native American tribes don't pay taxes so they have little say in deciding the nickname of a public institution, that honor falls to the people elected to represent the public, who said they want to keep the nickname. Do you really believe a handful of people should be able to override an entire state? That sounds idiotic, what if the environmentalist decide that the Lumberjacks is an offensive nickname, or the Greeks deem the Spartans and Trojans offensive? You can't give in to tiny minorities for PC reasons or it will never stop. It's extremely ironic that the NCAA is coming down on UND while Auburn, Oregon, UNC, and Ohio St are getting away with bloody murder...or should I rephrase that last part because it may be offensive to families or murder victims?


What is idiotic is fractured logic. First off, Native Americans, Sioux or otherwise are US CITIZENS, and whether they pay taxes or not is irrelevant. And what exactly is the stand here on not "giving in" to minorities, however "tiny" you deem them to be?
So let me get this straight: by your logic, because this group of Sioux are "tiny" in population, don't pay taxes, and are not affiliated with the university in question, they should just be okay with an elected group of state politicians--also unaffiliated [officially] with UND--requiring the university by law to keep its nickname "honoring" this group of Sioux, even though it is against the explicit wishes of certain Sioux members and the university administration; this, all in the name of simultaneously honoring and not giving in to the wishes of the very group in question? That is either insane, malicious, controlling, or a combo of all three.

Additionally--and for our purposes on this board--the NCAA, the governing body for UND athletic teams, deems the nickname offensive and wants it removed. It was agreed upon by UND to be resolved. End of story. However, external political grandstanding has decided that since they themselves don't like it, they will send a delegation to convince the NCAA that their state university didn't really mean to agree to the regulations imposed regarding the nickname/logo issue and 'would you please reconsider.' Wow, all this for a nickname/logo? Insane. Not to mention a colossal waste of time, moeny and energy. You want to play in the NCAA, here are the rules to abide by. If you don't like them, don't join. It's freedom of choice.

As for your other examples, they are unworthy of comment.

First I was attempting to point out that UND is a public STATE institutions, the tribes are governed by FEDERAL LAWS and only pay (from what I've read on other boards since I'm no expert on Native American affairs) FEDERAL TAXES, so yeah it matters since the school is funded by the STATE.
86mets wrote:
certain tribe members had a beef w/ the nickname. This is a flagship state institution of higher learning, therefore, you have to respect these citizens who are offended and change the nickname
I was simply stating that UND being a flagship institution of the state has no bearing on the issue, NOT that the Soiux shouldn't have a say.
86mets wrote:
--even if it's only a perceived small number of malcontents.
If you have read any of these articles (which I don't think you have) you would know that 2 of the three Sioux tribes in North Dakota have said it was okay, the third tribe is holding out and refuses to allow its members to vote on the matter (like the others did) and instead the leadership has unilaterally said that it is offensive to them. THAT is a small minority in the leadership of one specific tribe AND a small minority of the North Dakota Sioux in general. My point is not to not give in to the Sioux people if they all said that it was offensive, it was not to give into a minority of the Sioux people (NOT ETHNIC MINORITY) who have come out against the nickname.
86mets wrote:
the NCAA, the governing body for UND athletic teams, deems the nickname offensive and wants it removed. It was agreed upon by UND to be resolved. End of story.
not quite, the state funds the institution and has the most say in all things concerning the university, you can't simply dismiss their opinions, while I agree with you that this is an extreme waste of time, money, and energy it still brings up a very important issue, when it comes to athletics does the NCAA have more control than the state? At a glance the answer is no, and if I was a lawyer for UND I would sue the NCAA for threatening them to break a state law. I would assume that the NCAA would simply respond by stating that UND's athletics could join any of the many other collegiate organizations like the NAIA if they do not want to abide by their rules, to which UND could respond by claiming that the NCAA has a monopoly over the elite tier of collegiate athletics and is abusing its power in violation of many anti-trust acts, which could start a sequence of hearings that eventually setup a system of oversight like they have in professional sports. I have no dog in this fight but I find this very interesting.

And finally how are my examples unworthy? If I was an ancestor of a Trojan or Spartan and formed a group in order to protests USC/Troy/Mich St, would those institution be required to change their nicknames despite having a majority of other Trojans/Spartans ancestors in favor of their use?

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:01 pm 
Offline
Sophomore
Sophomore

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:22 pm
Posts: 58
I'm well aware of the voting tribes and that's their own intra-politics to deal with and yes, they are state residents also. Fair enough on the minority thing, etc. I'm not enamored with PC-motivated behavior, but the issue to me is if you have something as innocuous as a college nickname/logo causing all this controversy, just change the name and logo. (A recent Euro-centric example is Hofstra changing from Flying Dutchmen to simply Pride. Besides, any ethnic nicknames are kind of weird in this day and age when you really examine it.) This is not curriculum or admissions, etc., that we are talking about--that is certainly worthy of debate, discussion and protestation--it's a school name, and as such should never for one second interfere with the larger mission of the school. A name change is not THAT big of a deal in the whole scheme of things and will ultimately behoove the student athletes the most. Plus, new merch sales in the long run will help offset costs of name transition. But that's another matter.

Look, nicknames are changed all the time and as a college you do have to be sensitive to a wide spectrum of people, as that is who your student body will ultimately reflect. Surely there is a benign name and logo that best encapsulates the school, region, and state. Move forward and be done with it. Yes state law trumps NCAA, except nobody requires UND to join the NCAA, and it's not a fight that is conducive to UND--they look bad regardless of outcome. It's a nickname that some strongly object to--enough to bring heaploads of negative attention to their school--deal with it and move on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:47 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3802
I'm with ya 86mets.

There are few organizations I have less respect for than the NCAA. So it irks me that there is actually an issue I agree with them on. It's not being overly PC to the point that it makes me sick, like the rest of puritanical america seems to force on people (FCC, etc). It's as simple as a set of rules existing: if the tribes want the names, you get to keep them (Seminoles, Utes, Illini, etc). If they don't, you change it. Case closed.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:14 pm 
Offline
Freshman
Freshman

Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 6:42 pm
Posts: 38
Location: Orange County, CA
north dakota isnt solely funded by the state. they get federal money just like every other public school in the US so your argument about state/federal funding is unfounded. regardless if 1 of the 3 tribes, or 3 of the 3 tribes objects to the name, they do not have a unanimous decision that the name isnt offensive. the natives had everything stolen away from them by the white man, so the least he white man can do is change the name of a fucking school if said people dont like it. bringing up the fighting irish is asinine. yes the irish were a minority for a while in the US but they werent massacred & pillaged of their lands so its comparing apples/oranges.

bringing up that the ncaa has a monopoly on the "top tier" programs & tournaments is neither here nor there. there are other athletic affiliations that north dakota can join. joining the ncaa isnt mandatory nor has the ncaa mandated that north dakota change their name. they arent forcing north dakota to do anything. the ncaa is well within their right to not award post season games or hosting to any school that doesnt follow their rules. you say "if you were a lawyer", but what kind of education do you actually have? have you passed the bar in any state? im applying for law school now & i personally would NOT want to represent north dakota against the ncaa in this instance because frankly, theyll lose & anyone siding with north dakota against the ncaa would be a smear on their resume. north dakota has no basis for an anti trust lawsuit IN THIS INSTANCE against the ncaa.

i myself am a man of minority, have no affiliation with north dakota, am not of native american decent & have a large disdain for the ncaa so it irks me whenever i side with the ncaa. i have no preconceived notions pertaining to this case other then my own opinion of the whole matter. the state of north dakota is in the wrong & the ncaa doesnt need to change any of their rules. if the state of north dakota wants its flagship university to be a part of the ncaa, it should repeal that asinine law mandating that north dakota keep the logo/mascot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:59 am 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 5:18 pm
Posts: 95
More and more indications are coming out from BobcatReport.com regarding the Montana schools and their intentions to join the WAC...

BobcatReport.com has broken most of the stories related to the WAC in the last several months, including the move to accept UT-Arlington.

The latest from the BobcatReport.com..

Quote:
I just got more confirmation that the Montana schools have been working behind the scenes on a jump to the WAC and FBS. The existing WAC schools are aware of these talks and expect a deal to get done.

We would not see any announcement from either school until after this football season. Any announcement would cause both schools to lose post season eligibility. That could be why the lid is being kept so tight on this issue.

My money is on an announcement after this season.


http://bobcatreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=19967#p19967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:18 pm 
Offline
Junior
Junior

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 5:18 pm
Posts: 95
Updated comments from Fullerton...

Quote:
"When I invite Utah State and Idaho to join the Big Sky," he says, "I'm basically about 40 percent serious and 60 percent trying to make a point. The point is they always talk about taking our teams. Why would our teams go?"

With 13 football playing schools in 2012, Big Sky teams will have three to four postseason opportunities in football, compared to one for WAC schools.

"We can win championships; they're going to compete against $140 million (athletic budgets)," Fullerton told a group of about 30 people at the Lindquist Alumni Center on Thursday in an event sponsored by the WSU Young Alumni Association. "I'm fearful for their ability to do that. So yeah, I'm half-serious when I invite them in."


http://standard.net/topics/sports/2011/ ... dreams-big


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:24 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 674
Location: Louisville, KY
So if the Big Sky loses the big two, how does the conference respond?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:44 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2753
Location: Reedley, CA
Can't do much, no D-II school in the area w/ fb can afford to move up. UVU or CSUB would be their options, they'd have to drop the must have fb rule to do it.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 356 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Quinn and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group