(10-27-2015 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  I've always thought that Stanford should have chosen "Sequoias." It's in their logo. It's their mascot. So why did they pick the totally random "Cardinal"? Stupid.

I always though the Cardinal nickname was a tacit nod to the Redwood trees of Northern California.

(10-27-2015 11:23 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  I've always thought that Stanford should have chosen "Sequoias." It's in their logo. It's their mascot. So why did they pick the totally random "Cardinal"? Stupid.

I always though the Cardinal nickname was a tacit nod to the Redwood trees of Northern California.

Right, the tree is a redwood, not a sequoia. I think they chose Cardinal to be similar to Harvard's Crimson, though they have a different "story" about it.

(10-17-2015 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 09:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  They should keep it fighting Sioux. It is not negative. Dakota is another name for Sioux. If they are forced to change the name even when a Sioux tribe is okay for them to use it? Then, Utah, The Dakota states, towns, Utah need to change their name Utes to something else, Florida State have to change their names from Seminoles to Criminols and so forth.

One tribe's leadership wouldn't allow a tribal vote on it. The NCAA wanted them to have unanimous support from the Sioux tribes and they don't.

The Trojans all got wiped out, so USC can keep their name.

How does FSU get to keep Seminoles when the only Seminole tribe that supports it is the tiny Florida branch that only wants it for their casino branding? It's the inconsistency that galls me about the UND decision. Did UND have anything as offensive as a white dude playing an Indian IN 2015 and a stadium full of rubes doing that grotesquely offensive "war chant"?

(10-27-2015 12:15 PM)justinslot Wrote:  

(10-17-2015 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 09:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  They should keep it fighting Sioux. It is not negative. Dakota is another name for Sioux. If they are forced to change the name even when a Sioux tribe is okay for them to use it? Then, Utah, The Dakota states, towns, Utah need to change their name Utes to something else, Florida State have to change their names from Seminoles to Criminols and so forth.

One tribe's leadership wouldn't allow a tribal vote on it. The NCAA wanted them to have unanimous support from the Sioux tribes and they don't.

The Trojans all got wiped out, so USC can keep their name.

How does FSU get to keep Seminoles when the only Seminole tribe that supports it is the tiny Florida branch that only wants it for their casino branding? It's the inconsistency that galls me about the UND decision. Did UND have anything as offensive as a white dude playing an Indian IN 2015 and a stadium full of rubes doing that grotesquely offensive "war chant"?

It had a wealthy casino operator, who used to play goalie for the hockey team, bequeath a shiny new marble laden arena to it with thousands of Sioux logos engraved. That enraged the PC professors and Brand, who was the NCAA President at the time and wanted to kill the Sioux name. Florida St is too powerful to take on, as US Senator and Reps from Florida would have defanged the NCAA.

(10-27-2015 12:34 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:15 PM)justinslot Wrote:  

(10-17-2015 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 09:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  They should keep it fighting Sioux. It is not negative. Dakota is another name for Sioux. If they are forced to change the name even when a Sioux tribe is okay for them to use it? Then, Utah, The Dakota states, towns, Utah need to change their name Utes to something else, Florida State have to change their names from Seminoles to Criminols and so forth.

One tribe's leadership wouldn't allow a tribal vote on it. The NCAA wanted them to have unanimous support from the Sioux tribes and they don't.

The Trojans all got wiped out, so USC can keep their name.

How does FSU get to keep Seminoles when the only Seminole tribe that supports it is the tiny Florida branch that only wants it for their casino branding? It's the inconsistency that galls me about the UND decision. Did UND have anything as offensive as a white dude playing an Indian IN 2015 and a stadium full of rubes doing that grotesquely offensive "war chant"?

It had a wealthy casino operator, who used to play goalie for the hockey team, bequeath a shiny new marble laden arena to it with thousands of Sioux logos engraved. That enraged the PC professors and Brand, who was the NCAA President at the time and wanted to kill the Sioux name. Florida St is too powerful to take on, as US Senator and Reps from Florida would have defanged the NCAA.

You have an argument, certainly. But that arena is the direct cause of the Fighting Sioux nickname being abolished.

UND had a chance to say "thanks, but no thanks". Engelstad was going to abandon the project in the middle of winter, if he didn't get his way.

(10-27-2015 01:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:34 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:15 PM)justinslot Wrote:  

(10-17-2015 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-16-2015 09:42 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  They should keep it fighting Sioux. It is not negative. Dakota is another name for Sioux. If they are forced to change the name even when a Sioux tribe is okay for them to use it? Then, Utah, The Dakota states, towns, Utah need to change their name Utes to something else, Florida State have to change their names from Seminoles to Criminols and so forth.

One tribe's leadership wouldn't allow a tribal vote on it. The NCAA wanted them to have unanimous support from the Sioux tribes and they don't.

The Trojans all got wiped out, so USC can keep their name.

How does FSU get to keep Seminoles when the only Seminole tribe that supports it is the tiny Florida branch that only wants it for their casino branding? It's the inconsistency that galls me about the UND decision. Did UND have anything as offensive as a white dude playing an Indian IN 2015 and a stadium full of rubes doing that grotesquely offensive "war chant"?

It had a wealthy casino operator, who used to play goalie for the hockey team, bequeath a shiny new marble laden arena to it with thousands of Sioux logos engraved. That enraged the PC professors and Brand, who was the NCAA President at the time and wanted to kill the Sioux name. Florida St is too powerful to take on, as US Senator and Reps from Florida would have defanged the NCAA.

You have an argument, certainly. But that arena is the direct cause of the Fighting Sioux nickname being abolished.

UND had a chance to say "thanks, but no thanks". Engelstad was going to abandon the project in the middle of winter, if he didn't get his way.

The state wasn't going to let go of a $110 mill arena with flashy bells and whistles everywhere. The UND President at the time had to placate the PC forces and play tough, but Brand mistook that posturing as bullying by Engelstad.

Engelstad gave hundreds of millions to disabled, blind, health and catholic charities, and his estate just helped establish a UNLV med school. He was tough in business and that was why the Las Vegas mob hated him because he wouldn't obey them.

(10-26-2015 07:06 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 06:35 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  The Gordo (AL) Green Wave use the "G" common to UGA and Green Bay, and even have the Packers' colors. There are probably hundreds if not thousands of schools using a handful of tiger, bulldog, yellow jacket, etc. logos. Something like the hawk logo would be a slam dunk for licensing.

Pro franchises must have decided to tolerate high schools copying their logos as long as they're not marketing merchandise outside the area of their school. There are countless knockoffs of NFL logos, especially, in use by high schools.

Copying by colleges might not be so readily tolerated because college sports teams generally have greater visibility.

In Virginia, a preponderance of G-named schools use that G.

(10-27-2015 11:27 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 11:23 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  I've always thought that Stanford should have chosen "Sequoias." It's in their logo. It's their mascot. So why did they pick the totally random "Cardinal"? Stupid.

I always though the Cardinal nickname was a tacit nod to the Redwood trees of Northern California.

Right, the tree is a redwood, not a sequoia. I think they chose Cardinal to be similar to Harvard's Crimson, though they have a different "story" about it.

Sequoia = Redwood, no?

Either way, the Sequoia was named for a famous Native American. Kind of defeats the point of dropping the Indian nickname.

(10-27-2015 03:35 PM)ManleyPointer Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 11:27 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 11:23 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 10:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  I've always thought that Stanford should have chosen "Sequoias." It's in their logo. It's their mascot. So why did they pick the totally random "Cardinal"? Stupid.

I always though the Cardinal nickname was a tacit nod to the Redwood trees of Northern California.

Right, the tree is a redwood, not a sequoia. I think they chose Cardinal to be similar to Harvard's Crimson, though they have a different "story" about it.

Sequoia = Redwood, no?

Either way, the Sequoia was named for a famous Native American. Kind of defeats the point of dropping the Indian nickname.

Technically, I think they are part of the same classification. Colloquially (is that a word?), and the way I learned it, the ones that grow near the northern California coast (and in Redwood National Park) are called "redwoods", and that's the type that Stanford's tree is supposed to depict. The ones that grow in the Sierra (including the groves in Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon National Parks) that have thicker trunks are called "sequoias".

(10-27-2015 02:20 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 01:55 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:34 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(10-27-2015 12:15 PM)justinslot Wrote:  

(10-17-2015 08:50 AM)bullet Wrote:  One tribe's leadership wouldn't allow a tribal vote on it. The NCAA wanted them to have unanimous support from the Sioux tribes and they don't.

The Trojans all got wiped out, so USC can keep their name.

How does FSU get to keep Seminoles when the only Seminole tribe that supports it is the tiny Florida branch that only wants it for their casino branding? It's the inconsistency that galls me about the UND decision. Did UND have anything as offensive as a white dude playing an Indian IN 2015 and a stadium full of rubes doing that grotesquely offensive "war chant"?

It had a wealthy casino operator, who used to play goalie for the hockey team, bequeath a shiny new marble laden arena to it with thousands of Sioux logos engraved. That enraged the PC professors and Brand, who was the NCAA President at the time and wanted to kill the Sioux name. Florida St is too powerful to take on, as US Senator and Reps from Florida would have defanged the NCAA.

You have an argument, certainly. But that arena is the direct cause of the Fighting Sioux nickname being abolished.

UND had a chance to say "thanks, but no thanks". Engelstad was going to abandon the project in the middle of winter, if he didn't get his way.

The state wasn't going to let go of a $110 mill arena with flashy bells and whistles everywhere. The UND President at the time had to placate the PC forces and play tough, but Brand mistook that posturing as bullying by Engelstad.

Engelstad gave hundreds of millions to disabled, blind, health and catholic charities, and his estate just helped establish a UNLV med school. He was tough in business and that was why the Las Vegas mob hated him because he wouldn't obey them.

All true. But if UND had been upfront that "we want the arena, but we will not allow you to put difficult to remove Sioux head logos everywhere in it", and it had thus never been built ... UND might still have the nickname.

Probably most alumni and fans would take the arena over the nickname, but maybe a smaller majority than you think.

Too many Hawks in the NCAA


A group of us took out an anti-Hawk pro-Roughrider ad in the student newspaper. Seems to be gaining traction with the students, as Adjective Bird seems to be the favorite of Presidents and Consultants.

Revote started today.

Which names are left, in the latest voting?

(11-02-2015 06:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Which names are left, in the latest voting?

First round
Fighting Hawks - 31 %
Roughriders - 21%
NoDaks - 20%

Our President changed the rules to allow in the third place NoDaks and said thus would be the final vote, even if no nickname has a majority. There was an ensuing uproar as the game rules were changed in the middle and the President again decreed that if 50% wasn't reached, the top two would have another vote.

(11-02-2015 06:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Which names are left, in the latest voting?

First round
Fighting Hawks - 31 %
Roughriders - 21%
NoDaks - 20%

Our President changed the rules to allow in the third place NoDaks and said thus would be the final vote, even if no nickname has a majority. There was an ensuing uproar as the game rules were changed in the middle and the President again decreed that if 50% wasn't reached, the top two would have another vote.

Gotta go with roughriders on that one

(11-02-2015 06:15 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Which names are left, in the latest voting?

First round
Fighting Hawks - 31 %
Roughriders - 21%
NoDaks - 20%

Our President changed the rules to allow in the third place NoDaks and said thus would be the final vote, even if no nickname has a majority. There was an ensuing uproar as the game rules were changed in the middle and the President again decreed that if 50% wasn't reached, the top two would have another vote.

Gotta go with roughriders on that one

Agree with RR, though I'm sure some will find that offensive as well. While the Nodaks as a nickname is cool, it lends itself too easily to some type of dog logo.

(11-03-2015 08:55 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:15 PM)DogPoundNorth Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Which names are left, in the latest voting?

First round
Fighting Hawks - 31 %
Roughriders - 21%
NoDaks - 20%

Our President changed the rules to allow in the third place NoDaks and said thus would be the final vote, even if no nickname has a majority. There was an ensuing uproar as the game rules were changed in the middle and the President again decreed that if 50% wasn't reached, the top two would have another vote.

Gotta go with roughriders on that one

Agree with RR, though I'm sure some will find that offensive as well. While the Nodaks as a nickname is cool, it lends itself too easily to some type of dog logo.

Cleary the biggest upside to Roughriders is that all the students could wear these to every home game

(11-02-2015 06:14 PM)NoDak Wrote:  

(11-02-2015 06:06 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Which names are left, in the latest voting?

First round
Fighting Hawks - 31 %
Roughriders - 21%
NoDaks - 20%

Our President changed the rules to allow in the third place NoDaks and said thus would be the final vote, even if no nickname has a majority. There was an ensuing uproar as the game rules were changed in the middle and the President again decreed that if 50% wasn't reached, the top two would have another vote.

Will the NoDaks voters throw their weight behind the Roughriders or vice versa?

Second Round

Fighting Hawks 46%
Rough Riders 28%
NoDaks 26%

NoDaks eliminated. Next round starts Thursday.

Fighting Hawks would have to be the lamest name around for a flagship school. It still gains a lot of support because Fight Sioux can be shouted in place of it and the Chicago Blackhawks bird logo is popular, even though it can t be used.

(11-08-2015 07:25 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Second Round

Fighting Hawks 46%
Rough Riders 28%
NoDaks 26%

NoDaks eliminated. Next round starts Thursday.

Fighting Hawks would have to be the lamest name around for a flagship school. It still gains a lot of support because Fight Sioux can be shouted in place of it and the Chicago Blackhawks bird logo is popular, even though it can t be used.

Hmm. I liked NoDaks, but I guess it wasn't meant to be.

Rough Riders just doesn't sound right.

But will NoDaks voters throw their weight behind RR because they don't like Hawks?

(11-08-2015 08:22 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(11-08-2015 07:25 PM)NoDak Wrote:  Second Round

Fighting Hawks 46%
Rough Riders 28%
NoDaks 26%

NoDaks eliminated. Next round starts Thursday.

Fighting Hawks would have to be the lamest name around for a flagship school. It still gains a lot of support because Fight Sioux can be shouted in place of it and the Chicago Blackhawks bird logo is popular, even though it can t be used.

Hmm. I liked NoDaks, but I guess it wasn't meant to be.

Rough Riders just doesn't sound right.

But will NoDaks voters throw their weight behind RR because they don't like Hawks?

It probably isn't enough.

Roughrider State is on the signs welcoming people to the state. Fighting Hawks didn't exist until now.

Fighting Hawks attracts just 10% of the fans on our board. RRidershad 54%. It's alumns and students that haven't even investigated the choices that are making the difference. Low information voters.