Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

[EQguy]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

I do think that hanging your hat on "the local tribes approve so that is ok" is extremely weak. If you place a policy about not playing a team with a native nickname then don't play any.

I would bet that a large part of this is gamesmanship with a big hockey rival.

[joeboo22]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

I thought that the Sioux Tribe didn't approve the name.... or atleast they haven't yet because didn't Utah get taken off of the list because their tribe ok'd it?

[bincitysioux]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

I thought that the Sioux Tribe didn't approve the name.... or atleast they haven't yet because didn't Utah get taken off of the list because their tribe ok'd it?

There are 3 Sioux tribes in the Dakotas. 2 tribal councils oppose the name. The Spirit Lake tribe, which is the closest to UND (~50 miles), has passed a resolution giving support of the name "as long as it is used in a respectful manner".

[filbert]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

Earlier post here Filbert...it certainly is a conference deal...they can't refuse to play a conference opponent regardless of what the NCAA honchos advocate.

Ah, OK. I'm traveling a lot and am speed-reading most posts, with the attendant loss of comprehension . . .

[Hammersmith]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

There are 3 Sioux tribes in the Dakotas. 2 tribal councils oppose the name. The Spirit Lake tribe, which is the closest to UND (~50 miles), has passed a resolution giving support of the name "as long as it is used in a respectful manner".

I don't think that's what they said. The quote I've seen from the 2000 Spirit Lake resolution goes:

“as long as something positive comes from this controversy, (the tribe is) not opposed to keeping the Sioux name and present logo at UND.”

The crux of the point is that a conditional "not opposed" is not the same thing as "support". If the Spirit Lake Nation tribe or council would clarify their position, UND or the NCAA might be able use it for their argument. As it is, it's just too vague be used as conclusive proof by anyone. Sam Dupris, a NA hired by the Ralph Engelsted Arena, certainly didn't help matters this summer when he allegedly misrepresented statements made by the SLN chairwoman to the president of United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck.

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

I don't think that's what they said. The quote I've seen from the 2000 Spirit Lake resolution goes:

“as long as something positive comes from this controversy, (the tribe is) not opposed to keeping the Sioux name and present logo at UND.”

The crux of the point is that a conditional "not opposed" is not the same thing as "support". If the Spirit Lake Nation tribe or council would clarify their position, UND or the NCAA might be able use it for their argument. As it is, it's just too vague be used as conclusive proof by anyone. Sam Dupris, a NA hired by the Ralph Engelsted Arena, certainly didn't help matters this summer when he allegedly misrepresented statements made by the SLN chairwoman to the president of United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck.

And wasn't the statement of support from some committee and not the actual council? Or am I getting the different nations mixed up.

[Hammersmith]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

And wasn't the statement of support from some committee and not the actual council? Or am I getting the different nations mixed up.

You've gotten them a bit mixed up. The one you're thinking of came in 2006 from the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux's judicial committee. The chairman, a long-time proponent of the nickname, sent a letter to the NCAA just before they made their decision on UND's appeal. The chairman of the tribe(the top guy) sent a letter to the NCAA the following day saying the tribe was still against the nickname, as per the older 1998 resolution. The tribal council debated the issue a few days later, but tabled the vote, thus leaving the older resolution still in force.

Quick breakdown:
There are five resevations in, or partly in, North Dakota. Three are Sioux, one is Three Affiliated Tribes, and one is Chippewa. Here's how they stand.

Spirit Lake:
Nation: Sioux
Location: Devil's Lake, ND(~90mi from UND)
Stance: Conditional "not opposed"(2000 Tribal Resolution)

Standing Rock:
Nation: Sioux
Location: South Central ND/North Central SD(~325mi from UND)
Stance: Opposed(1998 Tribal Resolution)

Sisseton-Wahpeton(Lake Traverse):
Nation: Sioux
Location: Sisseton, SD(~150mi from UND)
Stance: Opposed(1999 Tribal Resolution)

Fort Berthold:
Nation: Three Affiliated Tribes(Arikara, Hidatsa, Mandan)
Location: West Central ND(~325mi from UND)
Stance: Opposed(2002 Tribal Resolution)

Turtle Mountain:
Nation: Chippewa
Location: Far North Central ND(~175mi from UND)
Stance: None(Chairman, a UND alumnus, approved of the nickname in 2005)

[1stRowFANatic]

Re: Minnesota won't reconsider playing UND

Quality information there, and rep points given. Thanks for the clarification.