NoiseInsideMyHead

Off. Would that be Easy, Jack, or F? Or Nikolai Volk?

Truer words were never spoken. Winning is a state of mind, and can obviously transcend coaches and individual players. Not a Bison fan, but, wow.

The chants could be epic, with fans pointing to a different female on each "Ho".

Probably better than Seamen.

Now there's a name change idea. Would solve the Notre Dame dilemma, too.

Checked out the new ICON Sports Center this evening. An awesome facility of which Grand Forks should rightfully be proud.

Screening, or clearance. Big difference, there. http://www.foley.com/intelligence/detail.aspx?int=8593 Pick an original name, and there are no problems. Pick something that everybody and their brother is using, it will all come down to having a distinctive logo/mascot and even then, you could still have problems. Not to mention the lack of decent domain names. And therein lies the problem of a "public" process; you pretty much have to buy up dozens of domains before the list goes public or else the cybersquatters will have a field day.

Oh, this is the worst-looking hat I ever saw. What, when you buy a hat like this I bet you get a free bowl of soup, huh?

I figured as much. I'm just wondering who shortens it.

Interesting they chose not to capitalize/emphasize the UND in AhundyP. Where does that even come from? Who says "a hundy p"? (Auto-correct changed mine to "a handy p", but that must be based on my search history.)

Creepy stuff. More than enough DNA in there to clone the dude. Of course, that would solve any goaltender recruiting issues.

Yeah, we can get that clip from Superman II into the pre-game video and chant "Kneel before Sod!"

Y'all better hope the girl dancing at 0:15-0:19 is of age, or they will be Slapping…the cops are gonna slap the handcuffs on most of you. Cuffs start slapping…if you're real lucky you will only do a year or two.

At some point, the discussion I hoped to have about quantity inexplicably devolved into one of quality. This isn't about whether Mark is a good singer or whether he should be replaced altogether; this is about variety. Personally, I'd rather hear Dudley Dawson belch the anthem than listen to the same voice every single night. Do you eat the same thing for breakfast every day, too? Some people ascribe a ridiculous level of reverence to the anthem; I bet F.S. Key couldn't sing it for crap.

When it was announced that UND was going with a full-time national anthem singer at REA this year, I didn't think much of it. However, a few weeks in, and with all due respect to the talented Mark J. Lindquist, the lack of variety is starting to grate. Sometimes you just need a bunch of little kids screaming off-key into the mike, or the lead singer of some forgotten 80's-90's metal band, or the Pride of the North, or Roseanne, or a world-renowned kazooist, or a pretty co-ed, or several pretty co-eds. Am I crazy for even caring?

If you're looking for bulletin board material, put a cork in it.

Is it too late to enact a 'No Cowbell' ordinance at REA?

Comedy is but a hobby; debunking widespread paranoia about mythical NCAA sanctions certainly pays the bills.

If the requirement to be on the list is that the institution must be using a hostile and abusive name/logo, and an institution is not using such a name/logo, simple logic dictates that the institution cannot be on said list. Period. End of story. An association has to follow its own rules, or it will get sued and lose. Period. End of story. The only legal remedy for not following through on a contractual promise is an action for breach of contract, in which the aggrieved party must prove the contract, the breach, and the harm. Period. End of story. Love or loathe the NCAA, there is not a phantom punishment or mythical sanction here. The NCAA could sue, sure, but the contract is ambiguous on its face, the facts and timeline are convoluted and murky, and the NCAA would be hard pressed to articulate how it has been harmed. That, and lawyers cost money, and even the big bad NCAA has its hands full at the moment. Now, if you'll excuse me, check-out time at the Holiday Inn Express is 11:30.

In each of the cases you reference, there was (arguably) a violation of NCAA rules. Whether it was eligibility or academic or whatever. I don't recall the basis for PSU - was it some kind of lack of institutional control or FB program oversight? And IIRC, PSU rolled over and took it in the shorts for PR reasons...not so much as a peep in its own defense AND it consented to the ridiculous monetary sanction. At any rate, there was an established rule that was perceived to have been broken. The hammer hath not yet fallen on UNC...that could be devastating. SMU/death penalty kind of stuff, based on what I've read. The missing piece with UND is that - at best (worst?) - there is a perceived slight. No rules violation whatsoever. A garden variety breach of contract (even proving that would be an uphill fight). And don't get me started on my villain-victim analogy. Victims and villains aplenty in some of the listed cases, especially at PSU (* understatement of the century). Hero NCAA will need a new shirt when it's done patting itself on the back.

The top one looks like an obstructed bowel.

You and I are speaking the same language. However, I want to be clear about one thing: if the NCAA is torqued about some aspect of the settlement agreement, its only legal remedy is to sue for a breach of contract. Sanctions on members would only be available for violations of NCAA rules and policies. I have said all along that there is not likely to be a meaningful economic remedy for the NCAA, because they haven't really been damaged. And I don't think a court would order the extraordinary relief compelling UND to select a nickname. If there isn't already a mandatory nickname rule, sanctions are completely off the table. My prediction: NCAA won't sue, and if they do, nominal money damages and maybe a rebuke by the court for wasting its time.

That's what I keep waiting for someone to explain. "Sanctions" for violating what NCAA rule? Is there a "no pissing us off" misdemeanor?

I will give you this: if the NCAA pushes back now, then all the UND people who were mocked for complaining that the NCAA was out to get them will be completely vindicated. Circa 2005, the 'hostile and abusive' nickname policy was directed at how many schools? At least a dozen, right? And the whole thing was spun as good vs evil. There were villains (schools using nicknames) and victims (socioeconomically depressed citizens of color). In come the heroic NCAA knights in shining armor. A crusade that perhaps some moderates could even justify. Fast forward to 2015. How many member institutions would be affected by a mandatory nickname rule? One? And who's the victim now? Nobody, except maybe the NCAA's pride? Not so much a crusade as a campaign of retribution against one small little school in the Northern Plains that dared to fight, and then backed down anyway. Is the NCAA prepared to take on that sore-winner/bully role, especially now, given all that's on its plate?

Like it or not, you've got an ambiguous contract sitting out there, and if one party doesn't like what the other party is doing, you're bound to end up in a lawsuit. I have not once advocated suing the NCAA to establish a right to go nameless; I am merely suggesting that IF UND chooses to go that route, one of the NCAA's few options is to sue. Also, do not forget that under at least one fair interpretation, UND is already technically in breach. The 'deadline' in the settlement agreement has come and gone and we have not yet 'announced a transition to a new name.' UND does not have a contractual right to stretch out the process, any more than it has a contractual right not to pick a name. It's ultimately the NCAA's call whether to push the issue. I don't think they will; they (and their goofy nickname policy) already won.