Sign in to follow this  
Evil Doctor

NCAA sanctions North Dakota

Recommended Posts

The state of North Dakota aren't the ones determining UND's membership in the NCAA though, are they?

The NCAA has laid out the stipulations for UND to be able to keep using the name. UND has so far failed to meet the criteria as laid out. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, this is the deal

But part of that deal is that UND can indeed keep using the name, they're simply subject to the aforementioned punishments. They have every freedom to choose to accept those punishments and continue using the name. And to this point, that's what's happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

UND has a contract with the NCAA. Rather than honestly and openly try to to re-negotiate the contract, the state has cravenly passed a law making part of that contract illegal. Cowards.

"State law" as the end all and be all has been an unpersuasive argument for nearly 150 years.

I don't disagree that it's sort of a backhanded way of going about this on ND's part, but if you think the NCAA had any interest in honestly and openly re-negotiating anything, you're crazy. They're team of leaders passed the rule, brazenly and in a full swoop called everything relating to the issue "hostile and abusive," and never once had any interest in negotiating.

The "our way or the highway" manner in which the NCAA has gone about this is exactly why the state legislature stepping in is a school's last and only resort.

It's not a pretty situation, but if they're going to fight something they perceive to be unjust, it's their only option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do you punish an institution because it is handcuffed by state law? That seems wrong and unfair.

But that's the NCAA for you -- wrong and unfair on a lot of things.

It's not the NCAA's fault that the state legislators behave childishly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Durrr.... howcome no one ever says Notre Dame's logo is racist?

I can only speak for myself, but I have no problem with Notre Dame's logo because it is a depiction of a leprechaun... a fictional creature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do you punish an institution because it is handcuffed by state law? That seems wrong and unfair.

But that's the NCAA for you -- wrong and unfair on a lot of things.

It's not the NCAA's fault that the state legislators behave childishly.

I may be on board with this state law issue if it was an existing state law, but creating a state law (correct me if that's not what they're doing) to try to back door this thing and/or sway sentiment does not garner any sympathy from me...the NCAA did not violate state law; it had position, if you will. And let's not act like "state law" truly handcuffs NDSU. They're all in it together. If the NDSU athletic department wanted, I suspect it could tell lawmakers "Don't do that. It'll make it worse."

Exactly.

UND has a contract with the NCAA. Rather than honestly and openly try to to re-negotiate the contract, the state has cravenly passed a law making part of that contract illegal. Cowards.

"State law" as the end all and be all has been an unpersuasive argument for nearly 150 years.

I don't disagree that it's sort of a backhanded way of going about this on ND's part, but if you think the NCAA had any interest in honestly and openly re-negotiating anything, you're crazy. They're team of leaders passed the rule, brazenly and in a full swoop called everything relating to the issue "hostile and abusive," and never once had any interest in negotiating.

The "our way or the highway" manner in which the NCAA has gone about this is exactly why the state legislature stepping in is a school's last and only resort.

It's not a pretty situation, but if they're going to fight something they perceive to be unjust, it's their only option.

If I was asked to summarize this in one snippet, I'd have a hard time saying something that did not resemble "disagrees with NCAAs decision so calls NCAA names." Really, would you ever say anything else, barring the NCAA eliminating the rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

North Dakota State has done it right. Just go with an animal.

They should go with Banshees. I think that would be the height of awesome...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Durrr.... howcome no one ever says Notre Dame's logo is racist?

I can only speak for myself, but I have no problem with Notre Dame's logo because it is a depiction of a leprechaun... a fictional creature.

Well then North Dakota just has to change their name to Eskimos and all should be well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do you punish an institution because it is handcuffed by state law? That seems wrong and unfair.

But that's the NCAA for you -- wrong and unfair on a lot of things.

It's not the NCAA's fault that the state legislators behave childishly.

Gothamite, I'm going to tell you this once, and only once:

DO NOT TELL NORTH DAKOTANS HOW TO ACT, OR WHAT WE SHOULD DO. THAT IS FOR US TO DECIDE. NOT YOU.

AND NEVER, NEVER, NEVER CALL NORTH DAKOTANS OR OUR LEGISLATORS CHILDISH. IT'S FOR NORTH DAKOTANS TO DECIDE IF THEY ARE CHILDISH, OR IF THEY ARE RIGHT.

There. I needed to get that out of my system. As you can tell, I'm very peeved about people telling North Dakotans what to do. Actions like that only make me more sure I will vote for keeping the Fighting Sioux nickname, regardless of the consequences.

Keep it up, Gothamite. You're only showing us why the NCAA is a bunch of pomous jerks.

You crossed the line on this one, Gothamite, and forced me to cross the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do you punish an institution because it is handcuffed by state law? That seems wrong and unfair.

But that's the NCAA for you -- wrong and unfair on a lot of things.

It's not the NCAA's fault that the state legislators behave childishly.

I may be on board with this state law issue if it was an existing state law, but creating a state law (correct me if that's not what they're doing) to try to back door this thing and/or sway sentiment does not garner any sympathy from me...the NCAA did not violate state law; it had position, if you will. And let's not act like "state law" truly handcuffs NDSU. They're all in it together. If the NDSU athletic department wanted, I suspect it could tell lawmakers "Don't do that. It'll make it worse."

Exactly.

UND has a contract with the NCAA. Rather than honestly and openly try to to re-negotiate the contract, the state has cravenly passed a law making part of that contract illegal. Cowards.

"State law" as the end all and be all has been an unpersuasive argument for nearly 150 years.

I don't disagree that it's sort of a backhanded way of going about this on ND's part, but if you think the NCAA had any interest in honestly and openly re-negotiating anything, you're crazy. They're team of leaders passed the rule, brazenly and in a full swoop called everything relating to the issue "hostile and abusive," and never once had any interest in negotiating.

The "our way or the highway" manner in which the NCAA has gone about this is exactly why the state legislature stepping in is a school's last and only resort.

It's not a pretty situation, but if they're going to fight something they perceive to be unjust, it's their only option.

If I was asked to summarize this in one snippet, I'd have a hard time saying something that did not resemble "disagrees with NCAAs decision so calls NCAA names." Really, would you ever say anything else, barring the NCAA eliminating the rule?

I don't think I called the NCAA any names, did I?

I disagree with the NCAA's decision, and that would likely always be true barring eliminating the rule, but there are absolutely ways the NCAA could have gone about this that would have been a lot more respectable in nature. They could have treated the situation with consistency. They could have treated it with more knowledge and research (and honest consideration of that research). They could have simply made this ruling and stated they simply wanted to put to rest a controversy. Instead they suggested that all uses of American Indian imagery are hostile and abusive because those are buzz words that help their cause, whether they're honest or not.

So could I have ever agreed with the NCAA on this issue. Nope. Not a chance. But they could have behaved in a much more mature manner. You can call the ND legislature childish, but they're just fighting fire with fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can call the ND legislature childish

I did, and will again, no matter how many caps people care to throw around.

Passing a law in an attempt to circumvent a legal contract between the NCAA and the University just because some people don't like the terms of that contract is just that... childish.

More than that, it's a temper tantrum. Rather than ask the University to pull out of the contract, which it certainly could, or find a way to secure a license from the second tribe, the legislature made this peevish, public and empty gesture. Making the situation worse, not better.

And, for the record, before anybody claims bias, I'll repeat that I hope the second tribe grants the license. I think it's a good name, worth keeping, but it's not my call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can call the ND legislature childish

I did, and will again, no matter how many caps people care to throw around.

Passing a law in an attempt to circumvent a legal contract between the NCAA and the University just because some people don't like the terms of that contract is just that... childish.

More than that, it's a temper tantrum. Rather than ask the University to pull out of the contract, which it certainly could, or find a way to secure a license from the second tribe, the legislature made this peevish, public and empty gesture. Making the situation worse, not better.

And, for the record, before anybody claims bias, I'll repeat that I hope the second tribe grants the license. I think it's a good name, worth keeping, but it's not my call.

But they probably don't want out of the contract, Goth. They want to remain part of the NCAA. They're willing to abide by the contract, meaning they keep the name and take the punishments that go along with it.

It's not like this was a negotiated contract either. UND was a member of the organization and the NCAA changed the rules on them. Certainly something the NCAA gets to do. But it's not like UND agreed to those terms with full willingness and some point and is now changing its mind.

Again, I think this was a last resort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more time -- it's state law to keep the Fighting Sioux nickname.

And this time it's not the legislature's decision, because the legislature, after talks with the NCAA, rescinded the law. But the referral process allowed that law to go back into effect once there were enough signatures for a measure on the ballot to bring back that state law.

Nevermind the legislature rescinded that law, with a signature by the governor. Nevermind the State Board of Higher Education retired the Fighting Sioux nickname. Nevermind UND officially did not go by any nickname after Jan. 1 until the signatures were presented to the secretary of state. It's state law, period, and UND has no choice but to abide by state law over NCAA rulings.

Now, unless the State Supreme Court rules the original law by the legislature was unconstitutional, the people will decide if the Fighting Sioux nickname stays.

And if the people decide the nickname will stay, I sure as heck hope any non-North Dakotan doesn't call the people of North Dakota childish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope that if they decide the nickname will stay that they're ok with the consequences of their actions, which could include the inability to participate in NCAA-sanctioned events.

Though judging from the numerous threads we've had on this, I don't expect that to be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the people decide the nickname will stay, I sure as heck hope any non-North Dakotan doesn't call the people of North Dakota childish.

I will call that a childish, petulant act. Because that's exactly what it is.

If they had the intellectual honesty to call for renegotiation of the NCAA agreement, I'd respect it. If they made a grand public pitch to the second tribe, offering to find common ground or some special accommodation for its nationals in exchange for licensing the name, I'd respect that. If they voted to have the University pull out of the NCAA, I'd respect that as well. Mockba's right. That would make all the difference in the world.

But this? A toddler's loud temper tantrum designed to make them feel better without actually addressing any of the relevant issues. It's as petulant and childish as it is both dishonest and completely beneath the dignity of the great state of North Dakota.

More to the point, this puts the lie to their protestations that the name is somehow really intended to be respectful to the people who bear that name. Were that the case, they wouldn't go against the express wishes of half those tribes. Respect begins with self-determination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope that if they decide the nickname will stay that they're ok with the consequences of their actions, which could include the inability to participate in NCAA-sanctioned events.

Though judging from the numerous threads we've had on this, I don't expect that to be the case.

The consequences are in the original post of this thread.

The NCAA could increase them, I suppose, but as of now the consequences are that UND cannot host postseason events and that UND cannot wear American Imagery on their uniforms in post-season events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be suprised if UND had their day in court.

The NCAA deserves to be Sioux-ed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do you punish an institution because it is handcuffed by state law? That seems wrong and unfair.

But that's the NCAA for you -- wrong and unfair on a lot of things.

It's not the NCAA's fault that the state legislators behave childishly.

Gothamite, I'm going to tell you this once, and only once:

DO NOT TELL NORTH DAKOTANS HOW TO ACT, OR WHAT WE SHOULD DO. THAT IS FOR US TO DECIDE. NOT YOU.

AND NEVER, NEVER, NEVER CALL NORTH DAKOTANS OR OUR LEGISLATORS CHILDISH. IT'S FOR NORTH DAKOTANS TO DECIDE IF THEY ARE CHILDISH, OR IF THEY ARE RIGHT.

There. I needed to get that out of my system. As you can tell, I'm very peeved about people telling North Dakotans what to do. Actions like that only make me more sure I will vote for keeping the Fighting Sioux nickname, regardless of the consequences.

Keep it up, Gothamite. You're only showing us why the NCAA is a bunch of pomous jerks.

You crossed the line on this one, Gothamite, and forced me to cross the line.

The rights of the minority should never be decided by the majority. And that's exactly what's happening in North Dakota right now; the majority is trying to control the right the minority has to its intellectual property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, in a nutshell.

The majority is actively saying to that minority "We don't care that you don't want us to use your name. You don't get a say in this."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the people decide the nickname will stay, I sure as heck hope any non-North Dakotan doesn't call the people of North Dakota childish.

They are acting childish though. You say that the UND shouldn't be punished by the NCAA for being bound by state law.

Well since you like using caps, I'll explain it to you in a way you'll be familiar with.

THE STATE ONLY MADE THE LAW IN THE FIRST PLACE TO TRY AND GET AROUND THE NCAA'S POLICIES.

That's childish. And a case of putting the cart before the horse, intellectually speaking.

I just hope that if they decide the nickname will stay that they're ok with the consequences of their actions, which could include the inability to participate in NCAA-sanctioned events.

Though judging from the numerous threads we've had on this, I don't expect that to be the case.

The consequences are in the original post of this thread.

The NCAA could increase them, I suppose, but as of now the consequences are that UND cannot host postseason events and that UND cannot wear American Imagery on their uniforms in post-season events.

Could? They will. It's like anything else disciplinary-related, really. You have someone (an organization in this case) that's not willing to play by the rules. So you punish them, lightly at first. If they don't get the point and continue to break the rules they get punished a second time, with more severe consequences. This goes on and on, with the consequences get more and more severe each time the entity being punished refuses to follow the rules. It's simple. No amount of wasteful North Dakotian state grandstanding is going to change this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe. These are the exact same punishments that the NCAA announced with the policy years ago.

It's almost less of a punishment and more just part of the policy.

That said, the NCAA is run by power hungry men who will no doubt be ticked that someone is challenging them, so I suspect you're right. They'll keep rewriting their rules to whatever gives them the most power and control.

That's why I'm not upset at the state of North Dakota for doing the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this