The Sicatoka

And that goes back to --> Does one party have to enforce terms of a contract immediately? Is there a statute of limitations on when the NCAA may choose to enforce it? It seems perpetual, because if UND were to reinstate "Fighting Sioux" in the year 2102 it's back on the "naughty list". This is where I'll repeat, I believe the NCAA (OK, maybe their legal council) is prudent enough to not force the issue while UND was hamstrung by state law. Again, notice Kelley had all the transition machinery up and running overtly immediately after 1/1/15. The NCAA may well view that as "good faith" and is holding off.

Any takers that Wyoming finds their pen and signs Nevermann's release on Sunday, September 6, 2015?

Yes, because UND was " ... in transition to a new ... " Step one was complete -- dropping old Step two was in process -- wait out state law to 1/1/15 Step three to infinity were in the works or running -- committee after committee after committee I believe the NCAA (OK, maybe their legal council) is prudent enough to not force the issue while UND was hamstrung by state law. Again, notice Kelley had all the transition machinery up and running overtly immediately after 1/1/15.

Correct. It says UND must remain in compliance with the Settlement Agreement and the Addendum to stay off the naughty list. (Key: settlement agreement, and that's where those words are coming from) What I'm saying is the Settlement Agreement says " ... in transition to a new ... " and that is the current state since that Addendum. Sure, the timelines are screwed up by in-state Legislative actions. But does the NCAA want to fight that, or hammer on UND even more for things out of their control*, or did they give UND time and space to ride that out, complete this "transition" phase (as drawn out as it may be), and move to "new". *UND did as much as it could under ND law up to Jan 1, 2015. Notice all the Kleinsasser and Goehring committees got commenced and broadcast starting about that time to give a clear signal regarding "transition" is still underway since the law expired.

Compliance because they were "in transition" is the open question. Again, if the transition stops, do we fall out of compliance?

The dead body one seems more appropriate for this.

As in "continue to be as specified", sure. "Remains" in the status of " ... in transition to a new ... ". The minute there's no "transition" (and no "new"), is UND in violation of the original settlement and the addendum?

I was fighting for it when it was still winnable. So today I don't despise it; what I despise is the sucking chest wound it has become.

" ... provided the University remains in compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and this Amendment." Isn't that circular back to what does "transition to a new" mean and is the University in compliance with it?

It's been done.

As of morning of April 28 (please verify): 43 - UND-RedSox fan 40 - Ray77 37 - fight on sioux 36 - jimdahl 35 - The Sicatoka 34 - andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! 30 - MafiaMan

Anything to sell a few more ads.

Yup. And before they did it because they thought they could whenever the arbitrary and capricous whim struck. Now? Now they're authorized by the membership to be arbitrary and capricious.

I laughed when the only penalty of the game is called against Washington's fluffiest defenseman. If you're going to call one to give NYI a PP to try to tie it, at least call it on Orpik.

There's one factor fogotten in all of this: The NCAA membership has since authorized the NCAA Executive Committee to act unilaterally, as a star chamber, in such matters going forward. Don't think the settlement means "adopt a new nickname"? Well, we're one ExecComm "clarifying mandate" away. And I wouldn't put it past them if all processes stopped and "no nickname" became permanent and the old name became the de facto new name. Personally, I don't believe the parties that reached the settlement believed that "no nickname" was a legitimate outcome.

Folks, here it is, right from Al Carson: You don't have to like it; heck, you don't have to agree with it; but, as Al found out "we've got to live with what has happened."

John F. Kennedy. His friends called him "Jack". Would John be a nickname or a proper name?

Do we know everything that came out of this meeting (note the dates): http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-08-12/north-dakota-change-nickname Implicit in that is an NCAA acknowledgement that the State of North Dakota has some legal and legislative processes to follow to get into compliance because they didn't crash down with sanction (back on naughty list) immediately. The NCAA gave some time and space to Dalrymple, Carlson, et al who visited to get that done. How much? Has anyone asked them (meaning the ND officials who were sent packing or the NCAA)?

Inforum.com 1.0 GFHerald.com 1.0

Their cause celebre is dying already. A new nickname finishes it off. The media will be ... ... and off to their next "advocacy".

What are the odds some chuckle-head there, in an official capacity (not some random fan), still refers to UND under the old nickname to make their "Cowboy Kickoff" more "Cowboys and ... ".

The sooner we kick the soapbox out from under Leigh Jeanotte, Lucy Ganje, Erich Longie, et al, the better.

Remember the first role of a newspaper in today's world: Make money. If they have to stir the pot to sell more ads they have no issue with that.

Sure looks that way.

Seems the spelling bee might be getting too high-brow for ESPN; will it move to A&E?