The new Super League is going down the tubes.

[willythekid]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Then again, since you think it's ok to insult a group of people as long as the majority think it's ok, well.....

Do you really believe that is what UND is doing to the Sioux tribes in the area, insulting them? I believe that if the majority of local Sioux indians think the nickname should be retained then it should be so... BTW, how big or small of a minority do you believe should be able to dictate over what the majority wants?

[cross cheque]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Then again, since you think it's ok to insult a group of people as long as the majority think it's ok, well.....

Precisely, in fact I wouldn't dream of insulting groups like the Tea Party because they have feelings too and since they are a minority we should all vote for Michelle Bachman so that she and her husband can cure homosexuality with "treatments" in their clinic. Also, she has some great ideas about outlawing pornography.......or maybe it's time to stop listening to special interest groups led by divorced women who cruise the internet looking for a new crusade like outlawing checking in youth hockey.

[alfablue]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Never mind- but one thing- the rights of a single person outweigh the wants of the majority. That's how it's supposed to work.

You are not forced into a single religion, forced to think a specific way, forced to (or not) have a gun, etc. There's a whole document of my rights over the majority.

[cross cheque]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Never mind- but one thing- the rights of a single person outweigh the wants of the majority. That's how it's supposed to work.

You are not forced into a single religion, forced to think a specific way, forced to (or not) have a gun, etc. There's a whole document of my rights over the majority.

You have the right to remain silent, start exercising.

[burd]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Do you really believe that is what UND is doing to the Sioux tribes in the area, insulting them? I believe that if the majority of local Sioux indians think the nickname should be retained then it should be so... BTW, how big or small of a minority do you believe should be able to dictate over what the majority wants?

That's where this case defies analysis. It's a tweener.

If it were before the US Supremes as an equal protection case or something similar, the Court's couter-majoritarian role would come into play, and the mere fact that a majority supported it would not save it from being possibly struck down. If a state passed a law requiring African Americans to sit at the back of the bus and the Supremes held that the law violated the 14th and 5th Amendments, African Americans could not validate the law by voting to accept it.

In this case, the NCAA has taken the position that the tribes can acquiesce, which makes no sense if the harm is real and ongoing. But that's where we are. Ownership of an image? Sure, vote on it. But acquiescing to harm that is presumably real and serious enough to trigger serious sanctions in the first place? No logic there.

I wish UND could keep the name, but there's just not sufficient up-side to continue this battle.

Oh well, the gophs will still suck, whatever the outcome.

[bcfan131]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Where are all of the people outraged about the Notre Dame Fighting IRISH? I mean they use a leprechaun as their mascot! What a bunch of RACISTS!!!!!

[Frank the Tank]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

We're talking about WORDS here, WORDS are protected. If someone wanted to create a university and nickname their athletic team the coons, its not YOUR problem. Just like the NCAA shouldn't give a crap what nickname a member institution chooses to use. A bunch of crusty white people in INDIANapolis, INDIANa should not be in the business of deciding what is hostile & abusive and deciding to force member institutions to change their nickname.

It is what it is. I believe a TON of NCAA rules are idiotic, but the point is that all of its members submit to its authority. It's NOT a free speech issue - that is only applicable to government regulation of speech. In contrast, the NCAA can absolutely regulate what its members can or cannot say, just as a private company that employs you can fire you for saying things in public that it might consider offensive.

I attended the University of Illinois, who had to remove its use of Chief Illiniwek after literally two decades of fighting with the NCAA. The school was at least allowed to keep the nickname by arguing that "Illini" could refer to all residents of the state of Illinois (just like a "Hoosier" describes an Indiana native). When faced at gunpoint, Illinois knew that it couldn't subject its athletic department to a ghetto of not being able to host NCAA events on campus, so it went as compromised as best as it could: it got rid of the Chief and any logos associated with it, but kept the name. UND is 100% certain to be in the same position unless, within the next 2 weeks, the descendants of the Sioux get a bunch of large payments from the school and some type of agreement to use their visage in the same manner that Florida State deals with the Seminole tribe.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

It is what it is. I believe a TON of NCAA rules are idiotic, but the point is that all of its members submit to its authority. It's NOT a free speech issue - that is only applicable to government regulation of speech. In contrast, the NCAA can absolutely regulate what its members can or cannot say, just as a private company that employs you can fire you for saying things in public that it might consider offensive.

I attended the University of Illinois, who had to remove its use of Chief Illiniwek after literally two decades of fighting with the NCAA. The school was at least allowed to keep the nickname by arguing that "Illini" could refer to all residents of the state of Illinois (just like a "Hoosier" describes an Indiana native). When faced at gunpoint, Illinois knew that it couldn't subject its athletic department to a ghetto of not being able to host NCAA events on campus, so it went as compromised as best as it could: it got rid of the Chief and any logos associated with it, but kept the name. UND is 100% certain to be in the same position unless, within the next 2 weeks, the descendants of the Sioux get a bunch of large payments from the school and some type of agreement to use their visage in the same manner that Florida State deals with the Seminole tribe.

Why are the member institutions required to follow Title IX but the NCAA can regulate speech?

[Frank the Tank]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

That's where this case defies analysis. It's a tweener.

If it were before the US Supremes as an equal protection case or something similar, the Court's couter-majoritarian role would come into play, and the mere fact that a majority supported it would not save it from being possibly struck down. If a state passed a law requiring African Americans to sit at the back of the bus and the Supremes held that the law violated the 14th and 5th Amendments, African Americans could not validate the law by voting to accept it.

In this case, the NCAA has taken the position that the tribes can acquiesce, which makes no sense if the harm is real and ongoing. But that's where we are. Ownership of an image? Sure, vote on it. But acquiescing to harm that is presumably real and serious enough to trigger serious sanctions in the first place? No logic there.

I wish UND could keep the name, but there's just not sufficient up-side to continue this battle.

Oh well, the gophs will still suck, whatever the outcome.

As I've mentioned before, there's no case here. It doesn't matter if the Sioux nickname was approved by 100% of the Sioux tribe and 100% of all North Dakota citizens. First Amendment claims ONLY apply to government regulation of speech. The NCAA is not the government - it is a voluntary private organization of schools that is completely free to impose whatever restrictions that it wants on its members (including what it can use in terms of nicknames and logos). If the University of North Dakota tried to file a lawsuit against the NCAA, it would immediately be dismissed because there's no claim in the first place - there's no such thing as a First Amendment violation for a private organization like the NCAA imposing speech restrictions. Believe me, I can't stand the NCAA on a whole lot of levels, but from a legal perspective, there's absolutely NOTHING that UND can do here unless it's willing to suffer a lot of consequences from the NCAA. Once again, I went to Illinois and saw this unfold at a school with a ton of financial resources and wealthy alums ready to fight, but those NCAA restrictions are absolutely killer for an athletic department, so the U of I ultimately had to fold since there literally is no basis for a lawsuit whatsoever.

[Frank the Tank]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Why are the member institutions required to follow Title IX but the NCAA can regulate speech?

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at. Title IX is a federal law. If a school doesn't comply with Title IX, then it is literally breaking the law. In contrast, NCAA rules are the rules of a private organization, which is no different than, say, the rules of a private golf club. The NCAA can tell its members what it will allow for nicknames, just as a private golf club could restrict your speech, or the NBA can fine players that criticize refs, or your employer can fire you if you make racist remarks, etc.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

As I've mentioned before, there's no case here. It doesn't matter if the Sioux nickname was approved by 100% of the Sioux tribe and 100% of all North Dakota citizens. First Amendment claims ONLY apply to government regulation of speech. The NCAA is not the government - it is a voluntary private organization of schools that is completely free to impose whatever restrictions that it wants on its members (including what it can use in terms of nicknames and logos). If the University of North Dakota tried to file a lawsuit against the NCAA, it would immediately be dismissed because there's no claim in the first place - there's no such thing as a First Amendment violation for a private organization like the NCAA imposing speech restrictions. Believe me, I can't stand the NCAA on a whole lot of levels, but from a legal perspective, there's absolutely NOTHING that UND can do here unless it's willing to suffer a lot of consequences from the NCAA. Once again, I went to Illinois and saw this unfold at a school with a ton of financial resources and wealthy alums ready to fight, but those NCAA restrictions are absolutely killer for an athletic department, so the U of I ultimately had to fold since there literally is no basis for a lawsuit whatsoever.

The problem is we are talking about higher education institutions and they as a whole think they no better than everyone else...its why the ivy league schools were so quick to abandon native american nicknames and imagery. Here is a question. Did the NCAA institutions vote on some bylaw that states universities cannot have hostile and abusive imagery and nicknames? If not why isn't UND trying to push something through that removes any power from the NCAA to dictate nickname and imagery to its member institutions?

[Frank the Tank]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

The problem is we are talking about higher education institutions and they as a whole think they no better than everyone else...its why the ivy league schools were so quick to abandon native american nicknames and imagery. Here is a question. Did the NCAA institutions vote on some bylaw that states universities cannot have hostile and abusive imagery and nicknames? If not why isn't UND trying to push something through that removes any power from the NCAA to dictate nickname and imagery to its member institutions?

The NCAA rule restricts schools from the use of "derogatory" nicknames during postseason events that are run by the NCAA:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2125735

It's not a ban on the nicknames themselves, per se, but the punishment of not being able to host NCAA postseason events is pretty detrimental to athletic departments.

As to why UND isn't leading a charge to change that rule, you halfway answered your own question. The vast majority of people that actually run universities (whether prestigious or not) are Ivy League-types, which is why that rule got passed in the first place. Trying to change that rule would be about as popular as a Tea Party candidate running for the mayor of San Francisco. If schools like Illinois and Florida State couldn't get the rule changed, I don't quite see how UND is suddenly going to make a different move (especially within the next 2 weeks).

[dggoddard]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

I wish UND could keep the name, but there's just not sufficient up-side to continue this battle.

Millions of dollars in annual merchandise sales is plenty of "upside."

[Frank the Tank]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

Millions of dollars in annual merchandise sales is plenty of "upside."

Illinois had exponentially more merchandise sales with the Chief Illiniwek logo, including being one of the original cornerstone Nike schools (the largest schools that agreed to use Nike for their entire athletic department). That ended up not mattering. Whether it's right or wrong, UND is going to lose this fight.

[burd]

Re: The new Super League is going down the tubes.

As I've mentioned before, there's no case here. It doesn't matter if the Sioux nickname was approved by 100% of the Sioux tribe and 100% of all North Dakota citizens. First Amendment claims ONLY apply to government regulation of speech. The NCAA is not the government - it is a voluntary private organization of schools that is completely free to impose whatever restrictions that it wants on its members (including what it can use in terms of nicknames and logos). If the University of North Dakota tried to file a lawsuit against the NCAA, it would immediately be dismissed because there's no claim in the first place - there's no such thing as a First Amendment violation for a private organization like the NCAA imposing speech restrictions. Believe me, I can't stand the NCAA on a whole lot of levels, but from a legal perspective, there's absolutely NOTHING that UND can do here unless it's willing to suffer a lot of consequences from the NCAA. Once again, I went to Illinois and saw this unfold at a school with a ton of financial resources and wealthy alums ready to fight, but those NCAA restrictions are absolutely killer for an athletic department, so the U of I ultimately had to fold since there literally is no basis for a lawsuit whatsoever.

I'm aware of the Tarkanian decision regarding the NCAA's status on the state action question. Just clearing up some misconceptions regarding majoritarian principles and offering my 2 cents why NCAA's approach to the "harm" issue by seeing tribal consent makes little sense. But it is what it is, and UND will eventually have to deal with it, it seems.