The Sicatoka

The name Iowa is based off the Kiowa tribe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiowa

I'd rather prove it's a public actor.

The NCAA needs to spend some time watching and learning from this:

And here's where I can finally begin to understand the NDSU "we don't want/need to play UND" mindset after they got into the MVFC.

I disagree. Here's why: If USD was in the BSC the rivals would be set out differently and UND probably would have UNC and USD as rivals. I'm happy with Montana State instead.

Just stop there. So what if BC wants to host in Scottrade Center again.

Nashville is the Predators and unfortunately for them Vancouver is their "Dateline with Chris Hanson".

Yes, Carcillo. The mocking of the Buffalo bench after the goal was uncalled for. The stick destruction over the boards was uncalled for. You could see Pronger call him out on that on the bench as Carcillo went down the tunnel. I loved Don Cherry's compilation of Carcillo's antics. Surely you saw that between periods last night. (Cherry's calling for Carcillo's benching because the loose cannon antics don't work in the Cup playoffs.) Yes, Carcillo. And no, not Philly.

I think you answered your own question.

If only ... hmmm ... what could possibly stop a higher seed from hosting an NCAA tournament home game ... hmmm ...

The NCAA is an "only game in town" type of monopoly when it comes to college hockey because the NAIA doesn't sponsor college hockey.

It's 1, 2, 3, and 5 in both conferences. I've never been a Caps fan (sorry Jim); Carcillo's behavior in Game 7 v. Buffalo confirmed that I can't cheer for Philly; Boston's just waiting to implode (sorry Goon); and Tampa playing that hideous 1-3-1 and holding on for a "soccer" win (1-0) is an affront to the game. That rules out the East for me. Out west I just can't cheer for either Vancouver or "Saint Joe". I guess I'm left with Detroit and Nashville to follow.

Understatement of the day.

How about when a monopolistic entity made up of primarily public institutions tries to censor freedom of speech of a member?

Closing thread. Moving posts to Early Departures 2011 thread.

I always heard 5 Chippewa tribes in Michigan. I didn't hear of "both tribes" for UND until the settlement. And the State agreed to it in the settlement (for whatever reason). When the settlement came out Stenehjem said he believed he could negotiate with the tribes because he'd done so on other difficult issues. The better question is this: Where was the ND SBoHE when it came to driving the AG to go and negotiate for them? Stenehjem's just the attorney; his client (SBoHE) has to direct his actions.

NDSU: They know your meat.

Here are two things working in UND's favor: http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/metals/precious/gold.html http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/energy/crude-oil/light-sweet-crude.html

I indict both of you of making mountains out of mole hills. (I was tempted to use the word "impeach", in its "to accuse" form, but figured that'd be gas on the fire.)

Well, Hextall has decided to move on to PHX. And now the hot rumor (for what they're worth) is that Cichy and Bruneteau are leaving. If all that came to pass, the roster would be down to 14 forward. That's too few. So would the team bring in a 17 year old recruit a year earlier than planned (Matteau, Koules are planned for fall 2012), or do they have another pleasant surprise (ala Taylor Dickin) waiting in the wings?

Well, that, or that all the youth programs in Canada are geared to hockey and lacrosse because those are the two national sports of Canada. You really need to dare to venture out into thinking of something other than a "it's all football or basketball" way of thinking. There's a whole world out there and the vast majority care more about ... football (i.e. what you'd call soccer). Neither you nor they are wrong, you just see things differently.

Let's compare Hextall's situation to Gregoire's. (I'm quoting myself from the Hextall thread.) Hex: Gregoire: If I were the advisor to each, I guess I'd have told Hextall to sign now and I'd be telling Gregore to stay (giving himself three years to develop before that first non-entry contract).

Now, let's look at Gregoire. Hextall is almost a full year (10.5 months) older than Gregoire. Gregoire is 22 right now. Per that same link, Gregoire can only sign a two-year deal (22 and 23 year olds can only sign two-year deals). But he could sign a two-year deal a year from now also. Would Gregoire be better off signing now with two-years to try to stick with the NYI organization, or ... Would he be better off playing a senior year, and still being able to sign a two-year entry deal a year from now, and then evaluating all of his possibilities, including (having played four college years) waiting to sign until August 15, 2012 when he becomes a free-agent able to sign a two-year deal with anyone? To me, staying for his senior year at UND puts Gregoire no worse off for a contract duration, but may make him more valuable (potential free-agent). And staying gives him three years (one at UND, two on the entry contract) to become the best player he can when it comes time to sign a first non-entry level contract. (Signing now only gives him two years to develop to that key milestone.)

I'm trying to figure this out, and I think I have. Brett is 23. The report is that he signed a two-year deal. That makes sense given the information in the "Entry-level Contract" thread. So if Brett were to stay at UND another year, he'd be 24 and only be able to sign a one-year deal (see same link). That's one year to make or break with your pro team. By signing now Brett has two years to catch on with the PHX organization. Given all that, Brett made the choice that I think (with all that information) I would have recommended to him.

" ... except for the UND faculty and staff ... " Uh-oh. Now somebody went and said it. However, for the record, I believe the UND staff supports the name (per survey circa 2000). The issue is the UND faculty. That stance is required to keep their "academic elitist club" decoder rings.