Perhaps Minnesota is dropping out of the Big Ten and just not telling us.
According to the Grand Forks (N.D.) Herald, Wednesday, the school’s advisory committee said it will continue it’s policy of only playing the University of North Dakota in hockey, even as UND transitions from division two to division one (it’s hockey team is currently the school’s only division one sport). Why would Minnesota not play it’s neighbor state?
Because of the school’s nickname: North Dakota is the Fighting Sioux. The school says the policy (created in 2003) discourages playing teams with American-Indian nicknames. Can’t play those kinda teams, can you Minnesota? Oh wait …
We don’t know where to start in shooting holes in the Gopher argument. More on that after the jump.
You see, Minnesota was a charter member of the Big Ten conference way back in 1896. So was another school, one slightly south of Minneapolis: Illinois. That school’s nickname? The Fighting Illini.
That’s an Indian nickname too, ya know? Somehow over 111 years Gopher nation never had a problem playing them.
Why would Minnesota not play North Dakota in all sports transitioning to D-1 except hockey? For the same reason U of M won’t stop playing Illinois: Money. North Dakota’s hockey team has won seven national titles, is traditionally one of the best, and the rivalry with Minnesota is always a sellout at both schools.
Who wouldn’t allow money to get in the way of an ethical argument?
In February, Minnesota did consider changing this policy. But according to the Herald, “Hartmann told committee members at a meeting Sept. 20 that he sees no reason to reconsider the policy because there have been no significant changes regarding UND’s court battle against the NCAA”. A 2005 NCAA policy bars North Dakota from displaying it’s logo at postseason play or hosting playoff games. The schoool is suing the NCAA.
If legality is such a huge issue, why continue to play hockey? Shouldn’t this policy be towards all sports, against all schools? Not just North Dakota hockey, but everything for Illinois, everything for Louisiana-Monroe (the Indians) … heck, don’t allow Washington Redskins paraphernelia on campus!
North Dakota’s associate athletic director Betty Ralston says the Minnesota committee’s decision is “unfortunate but not surprising”. We’d use the words “hypocritical”, “money hungry” and “ethically lacking”, but hey, that’s us.
Well, there is some degree of poetry in two of the most historically corrupt athletic departments in the Big Ten sticking up for one another…
Perhaps you didn’t realize that Minnesota was a member of the WCHA? If you had known that, you (hopefully) wouldn’t have made the irrational accusations you made about money driving the decision. The Universities of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa all have the same policy of not voluntarily scheduling any non-conference games with teams having race-based ‘Indian’ team nicknames. Both Wisconsin and Minnesota are in the same hockey league as North Dakota and therefore play North Dakota only in that one sport just as they play Illinois only in those sports where they share Big Ten membership.
But that’s not the only area where you are willing to make irrational conclusions based on lack of your knowledge about the facts. You are also uninformed in your statement about Louisiana-Monroe. They adopted a non-racial nickname (”Warhawks”) during spring 2005 and adopted a new logo in June 2006. But please don’t let any facts stand in the way of your willingness to jump to conclusions … like you did when you wrote “We’d use the words ‘hypocritical’, ‘money hungry’ and ‘ethically lacking’, but hey, that’s us” … because … but hey, that’s you!
Just saw a typo … both dates for ULM are 2006.
There is obviously a monetary element at play, but the real policy is that the U of M won’t play teams with American - Indian nicknames unless they are a part of conference play. Were the University to refuse to play UND and Illinois, the WCHA and Big 10 would still put both teams on the conference skeds, which would result in Minnesota forfeiting games. While this would no doubt result in a great social statement, both conferences would eventually kick Minnesota out for reducing UND and Illinois’ gate receipts. Thus Minnesota would then be forced to join a sub-standard conference (CUSA?) or join the independent ranks. Either way, the Athletic Department and the University as a whole would lose revenue and diminish one of the missions of the school, which is to provide top-notch intercollegiate experiences. The NCAA needs to realize the moral conundrum is puts Universities in by not banning these nicknames. What is truly worse? Minnesota’s hypocrisy, or the social statements made by the names?
ULM is the Warhawks now.
Well, UND is in the Gopher’s Hockey Conference, the WCHA, so if they didn’t play them, they’d be forfeiting conference games. Much like if they didn’t play the Illini in Big 10 games. All other sports, it just comes down to not scheduling non-conference games with the school.
Do your research.
As a recent U of Minnesota grad, this issue has been contested all over campus. Many agreed when Minnesota decided not to play the UofND anymore. However, we were confused when we realized that they would still play in hockey. As an avid hockey fan, the games between these two schools are incredible, however the money aspect just shows how hypocritical the U of M really is. It should not be about money, but principle. With the increase in tuition every year I do not know how much the university would be hurt by not playing NoDak or Illinois. Maybe the U of Nodak should go back to their original name of the Flickertails.
Not to fervently defend the U of M administration, but the actual school policy reads that the teams will no longer schedule NON-conference games against teams with Native American nicknames. Since Illinois and Minnesota are both obviously in the Big(11)Ten, they are allowed to play. Since the Big Ten doesn’t have its own hockey conference, Minnesota is in the WCHA, along with UND, therefore it can play the Fighting Sioux in hockey, but in no other sports. So if the Gophers refuse to play UND in hockey, they would have to pull out of the best hockey conference in the nation and join the CCHA or some joke conference.
The “Fighting Illini” was not created in reference to Native Americans. Its use was initiated in connection with the construction of Memorial Stadium in honor of those “Fighting Illini” who died in WWI, which is why the NCAA rescinded its critcism of its continued usage. I can understand why everyone may assume it is in reference to Native Americans given the subsequent employ of the Chief symbol, etc.
Our mistake on Louisiana-Monroe - memory error.
Of course we realize UND plays in the same hockey conference with Minnesota. That’s of course the problem: Minnesota is taking a stand against playing American-Indian nicknamed schools OUT of conference, but it won’t take a stand against the Big Ten or, in this case, the WCHA. Why won’t it? Are you seriously saying this is purely about a conference/non-conference policy? We doubt seriously it’s that simplistic an argument.
Yes, Sean, it’s that simple. It is a policy based on not voluntarily scheduling any non-conference games with race-based schools.
Also, the Gophers almost lost to North Dakota in football last year, and seeing as they’re terrible , probably just dont want to be embarrassed
Actually the gophers almost lost to North Dakota STATE. A team that, although it jumped to D-I sports first (not counting the Sioux hockey team), has a decidedly crappier and less-storied sports program on all counts. I guess that just means that maybe Alex is right, they just don’t want to expose themselves as being more D-I AA material than Big Ten material once again, and are jumping on the NCAA’s Sioux-hating bandwagon as an excuse…
North Dakota State got its Big Ten revenge in hoops when it upset Wisconsin in Madison.
Decidedly crappier and less-storied sports program??? Are you freaking kidding me? NDSU has won 17 Division II national championships compared to UND’s 4. NDSU won 8 of them in football back when it meant something to win a championship in Division II. UND will always be NDSU’s b!tch.
Hey Gundreso, UM policy of not scheduling nonconference games against schools with Indian nicknames goes out the window with men’s basketball games against Central Michigan and Florida State. Women’s games vs. Utah. And how about scheduling the Sioux in your women’s hockey tourney earlier this year? Which was not a conference tourney. Don’t let the facts get in the way of you defending the UMtc. Your response will be the game vs. FSU was the Big Ten ACC challenge. Minnesota’s policy is as pathetic as those who find mascots abusive and hostile. You should be embarrassed defending the policy. I guess that loss to Holy Cross shouldn’t count either since it’s a Christian name. You should be ashamed of yourself for defending Minnesota’s pathetic policy. UMtc could have asked for another school other than FSU to play also but didn’t because they wanted a big time school to play against. And to Tom Buning GROW UP!