The Sicatoka

To all those who want to cheer for the "Fighting Sioux" I have your solution: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/16709-fighting-sioux-hockey-is-having-an-oustanding-season/ To those who want to see the proud tradition of University of North Dakota Athletics continue, tell the ND SBoHE to challenge Carlson's Folly on constitutional grounds, and if it comes to it, vote no.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/juniors/2012/02/08/king_ncaa_chl/ They're trying to paint Hakstol as the bad guy, but really, isn't the core problem here the NCAA rule that claims a 16 year old who plays one game against a 20 year old who played one game in the NHL is now a professional. The problem is the NCAA rule. If a kid hasn't reached age 19 yet, and hasn't signed a professional contract, so what if he's played in the CHL.

The "Dear Chuck" letter was in the context of UND doing it for no reason but their own internally. The world today is that UND is being cornered (coerced) to change from the outside. Different circumstance don't guarantee Mr. Engelstad would've view them both the same way.

Contractually obligated ... until they and UMD decide maybe they'd rather play in a conference with Mankato and Bemidji and leave that contract.

All you see is "Fighting Sioux" and only "Fighting Sioux Hockey" at that. I see the University of North Dakota.

You presume to know what Mr. Engelstad would do when painted into such a corner. He seemed like a pragmatic businessman to me. He wished he could do business with a handshake but changed with the times and hired piles of lawyers to make his agreements. He surely didn't like that, but he did what the times forced him to. PS - Your heated response based in pure fantasy (AHL team?) tells me that you're finally realizing that the NCAA and its cohorts aren't bluffing and that you've either been fooled or have been fooling yourself to believe they'd back down from their (legal settlement agreement) position.

Don't worry. The SAB.com crowd will claim Fullerton reallly isn't serious and we all should believe them over the Big Sky commissioner and the NCAA.

Too much of this has become politics. And yes, I'm beginning to think that many politicos want this to come to a head in the State Supreme Court and die there. When Carlson pointed out today that the law has no penalty told me and the world he doesn't really believe in that law or its efficacy. Maybe he realizes he's screwed UND and he'll probably face repercussions politically for it.

Can't go NAIA: no hockey there. If this stays and UND stays on sanctions and the predictable repercussions happen (no conference, bad schedules, start losing recruits) the first folks to complain about all that and losing records will be the folks who forced the name to stay. Again, predictable.

Now it's time for folks to read the North Dakota Constitution, Article VIII, Section 6, paragraph 1, and subparagraph (a): Seems the ND SBoHE should be the controlling, administrating body in this matter. Why they didn't quash Carlson's Folly initially is still a mystery to me.

That, ladies and gentlemen, in poker is called a "tell". Al Carlson just admitted a law without penalty is just a wish aloud.

Dang. I'd have thought they'd have planned ahead better.

If you are on the North American continent and less than 500 miles from an ocean there's just this blob of open land in the middle of the continent that really doesn't matter. Hence, eh, North, South, whatever Dakota. It's nothin'. So don't let stories like this surprise you.

Folks were saying before that the state law regarding the moniker was in violation of the state constitution. Well, that allegedly unconstitutional law is active again this morning. The ND SBoHE apparently (if you believe the unconstitutional claim) had it's state constitutional power usurped, again, by the moniker law (or as I like to call it, Carlson's Folly). I'm betting that by close of business today, Feb 8, 2012, the ND SBoHE will file suit claiming that the state law is in violation of the state constitution and thus is void. Takers?

Numbers, dates, details, all in the link.

Good to hear there's no profit for Soderstrom angle to this. But ScottM's prior point still exists: Soderstrom working to get the petitions in place to restore the State law actually harms his client's (SL's) case as the power goes to the State and is taken from SL.

Amazing what one can find online ... http://www.nd.gov/sos/forms/pdf/initiating.pdf Starting at page 5, "Gathering Signatures", explains what should have happened up to now, what has to happen by midnight, and what happens after that as far as the Secretary of State's office is concerned.

Just thinking out loud here: Did Soderstrom realize that if the petitions are there it undermines his case in Federal court (and a lot of possible billable hours)? If the petitions are there, the SL case loses key footing. If the petitions aren't there Soderstrom can pressure his clients to pay to accelerate their case.

The VNL.com story has been updated with ... One guy says they have 15k signatures. Their attorney says he's not as confident? Attorney speak? Or does Soderstrom know something about some of the petitions?

It's the same academic mindset (trying to create utopias) in this as there is running the NCAA. Oh, wait, it's the same group of academic elitists. Not Surprised.

Maybe renovating the defunct logos out of and off of the facility? That'd be long-range and a capital cost.

They're 6-2-1 (7-2 if you count the shoot-out win as a win) since starting to wear these at home ... and they're smiling. I'm guessing they'd like to wear those and be home if they earn that right (rather than be subject to the NCAA moniker policy and be on the road).

I wonder what folks will say and do when the UND womens hockey team earns a home first-round NCAA playoff series but is denied it by the NCAA because of the NCAA moniker policy and this petition putting UND back under sanction of it.

http://www.valleynew...have-signatures Seems we may be live witnesses to what UND will do. I'm guessing this will be a more thorough than usual "thorough process".

Is it true that you don't buy green bananas?