--- John Edwards <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> UND is moving to D-I in all sports, so it's now more of a possibility. The U
> of M is playing NDSU (who just moved up) in basketball this year, and I
> believe they played them in football.
> 
> That said, this is still pathetic grandstanding. If you find the nickname to
> offensive for your basketball for football teams to play, then it shouldn't
> be any different in hockey. Either its offensive or it isn't. If it's
> important enough to "take a stand" on, then stop playing them in hockey. UND
> will take the 4 or 8 points, I'm sure.
> 
> John
> 
IMO, ditto for Dartmouth.  If the name was so offensive, they shouldn't have invited them, or
should have disinvited them.  Most likely, Minnesota is subject to some long term contractual
obligations to play North Dakota in hockey that would be expensive or difficult to get out of. 
Dartmouth was under no such long term obligations.

Minnesota could also have stated their stand in a way that didn't make it quite so pointed toward
hockey.  They could have said "will not schedule non-league games against North Dakota" or "will
not schedule games with North Dakota unless obligated by league regulations" etc.  Other than
hockey, there are plenty of alternatives to North Dakota.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com