The Sicatoka

On what grounds? They are separate, independent nations. What you're asking for is the equivalent of France suing Argentina to make Argentina vote on whether or not they like red wine.

The ACC and SEC follow the NCAA policy regarding sanctions against the states of Mississippi and South Carolina. It's not a stretch other conferences to follow that lead.

Sioux County is not Standing Rock. The settlement agreement with the NCAA says a duly elected official or body of Standing Rock must convey their approval to the NCAA. A vote by Sioux County is not that.

The Sky, the Big Sky, is falling ... away from UND. Listen to Doug Fullerton. He wasn't making threats. He was stating cold realities. He's no longer sounds like an advocate for UND with the Big Sky. Lose the commissioner, lose the spot.

One of two groups could end this now: 1. The NCAA. They could back away from their policy. That would mean admitting they were wrong. Not going to happen. 2. Spirit Lake. They could take away their approval. Any basis for retention of the name goes away. There's a "strong possible" to end it group: 3. Standing Rock: They could approve which would put a lot of pressure on the NCAA to approve the moniker. Beyond those three, all we'll have is an ongoing sucking chest wound.

Not according to the moniker or self-immolate crowd.

I know how you feel. I'm there with you. At some point, pragmatism has to overcome the rainbows-unicorns-wishful thinking that the NCAA will ever back down from their policy.

And that's being optimistic. They could adopt policies similar to Minnesota and Wisconsin. Get ready to see the "Fighting Sioux" playing the Brandon bantam travelling team.

FIFY.

Unless the conference votes and adopts the same policy as the NCAA regarding use of logos.

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.