The Sicatoka

I bolded that section to point out the obvious: Nobody knows the Illini Confederation of Tribes any more. The author had to explain "Illini" as to what it was. Remove "Sioux" and expect the same fate.

You have to make some assumptions when doing calculations without all of the details. I made a straight-line assumption because no other data was available. I'm sure I'd have been jumped on for making any other assumption too, so I took the most straight-forward. The following is undeniable however: Waiving $11 million bucks and then coming up short nearly $2 million says NDSU needs better accounting, accountability, or to give fewer waivers.

I could solve all of this right now. - Stop the "situational officiating". It's not the official's job to keep the game interesting or close, nor is there a section in the rules about putting the whistle away late in the game or in OT. - Call the rule book as written. I’m reading some interesting definitions that are clearly in the “never been read before” category. If you don’t have it you can download it in PDF here: http://www.ncaapublications.com/ProductsDe...w.aspx?sku=IH10 Rule 6-5: A player shall not butt-end an opponent. A butt-end is when a player uses the shaft of the stick above the upper hand to jab an opponent. Nowhere in that does it say what direction the action has to be. We normally think of a spearing action. No, you make the move with that part of the stick, landing it or not, and it’s a penalty. Rule 6-7: A player shall not deliver a check at or below the opponent’s knees. Clipping includes all cases in which an attempt to clip is made regardless of whether contact occurs. If you dive and contact a skater’s skates you’ve clipped. Rule 6-8: A player shall not make contact with an opposing player’s head or neck area in any manner. This one explicitly states “zero tolerance policy”. Yeah, right, whatever. I’d keep going but reading what the rule book actually says tells me I’m not watching ice hockey in REA. Instead, other recommended reading: 6-9: “making contact” means any contact, like a two-hander, right? 6-10b: “freeze it along the boards”? Anyone? 6-10f: It defines and clarifies “breakaway” as “A player with a breakaway is a player in control of the puck, on the opponent’s side of the center red line, without opposition between the player and the opposing goal and with a reasonable scoring opportunity." 6-16: “ … but any use of hands to make the puck unplayable should be penalized promptly.” 6-22: “A player shall not make physical contact with an opponent, including the goalkeeper (see 6-6-b), anywhere on the ice after the whistle has blown if, in the opinion of a referee, the player had sufficient time after the whistle to avoid such contact.” Shouldn’t that whistle be like a boxing ref’s “break command”? 6-44: “Refusal to obey the decision of the referee shall not be permitted.” Uh, hello? Anyone? 6-53: “A player shall not taunt an official or opponent.” … or as I like to call it “The Hextall Rule” 6-59b: “A player shall not trip or foul from behind a player in control of the puck on the opponent’s side of the center red line, thus preventing a reasonable scoring opportunity.” Now go back and read “breakaway”. A “reasonable scoring opportunity”. That’s a pretty low criteria. That’s a shot. Clearly, not enough penalty shot opportunities are being recognized and awarded.

I heard Brian Faison talk about this recently. He said he was hoping for a $10-20 million facility, depending on the "bells and whistles", where $10 million would be a good facility, and $20 million would be a facility that would be more capable and meet more needs for space, training rooms, and such. From the ND SBoHE minutes: I'm glad to see they requested authorization up at the high end, the "bells and whistles" end of that range.

Uhhh ... so I shouldn't pick Hrkac or Joyce either? Fine. John Noah.

That old axe is out of the shed again? I thought NDSU president Joe Chapman set the Legislature and the ND SBoHE straight on all of that and made NDSU's growth and budget wonderful. Joe's made it all "wonderful" for NDSU, yes indeed. And this will sting all of the NDUS schools because I suspect the Legislature will seriously relook at the power it gave to the ND SBoHE under the Education Roundtable.

That's what we're being told. I'd like to hear the auditors' view.

That's my experience (at UND) as well. That's the question you weren't supposed to ask.

1. You're not going to win lots of friends in small town ND telling parents that they're paying tuition for someone other than a professor to be teaching their kid. (I'm from the realm that says you need to have a masters to teach folks working on a bachelors, and a doctorate to teach masters degree classes.) 2. You need those "more undergrads" to pay their tuition bill (which is a part of the shortfall per Dr. Hanson). In my UND days there was a word for someone who didn't pay their tuition: Disenrolled. Apparently the word for that at NDSU is: Headcount.

Let's go further inside the numbers. At NDSU 3066 waivers, 14186 students: 21.6% on a waiver. Let's talk dollars instead. NDSU waivers: $11 million UND waivers: $7 million If NDSU went down from $11 million to $7 million in waivers that

Dern it, you guys got me. All that Summit League noise had me thinking there was a hard date in February. Settlement Agreement

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/263086/ And NDSU fans were worried about waivers for 18 womens hockey scholarships?

Folks, it can't. The NCAA agreement says UND has to have agreement from both tribes by Feb 2010. We're no longer up against "soft" deadlines from the ND SBoHE; we're up again hard deadlines from the agreement.

Looked at that way, that's a real "ouch" to the students.

That's wonderful. But wouldn't it be nice if the NDSU Foundation had that "bling" to cover this gap?

Now press that against this: " ... a $1.55 million cost overrun for a new home for North Dakota State University's president, ... " Add back one $22k Washington DC boondoggle and the expense of the $83k (average of last five years) "magic credit card" someone had, and there might not be a $1.8 million shortfall at NDSU.

"Big dogs" in desitination conferences? I wouldn't expect them to move. Because the potentials are *not* "big dogs" is the reason why a more measured approach is called for.

I love it when people make my work easy. Bruce McLeod proved he is clueless about the state of the speed and safety of the game. Read this article. When all the commissioners were asked, "If you could uniformly institute or amend one rule, what would it be?" there's a notable gap as there is not a comment on the subject from Bruce McLeod. The other commissioners talk about "calling the game tight", "eliminating the trap", "make fighting/throwing a punch an automatic ejection", or "hits to the head and those circumstances where players are in vulnerable positions ... " Bruce? He. Had. Nothing. He had no quotes, no ideas, noted in that section of the article. What's Bruce most concerned about? Adding BSU and UNO and making more money from the Final Five.

That's where the commissioner's office will probably be looking at costs versus benefits of various league sizes. Going to 12 makes sense: You sell the conference FB championship game. That I'd expect is net positive overall. Going beyond 12, then you have to start looking at splits from the MBB tourney payout. If you don't get more teams in, and more wins from those who do get in, you're dividing the same share among more "mouths". That's net negative. Then comes the evaluation of Big Ten Network and potential TV sets and advertising revenues. It's enough that it'll take some serious business case analysis.

UND should add mens lacrosse to add event dates to Alerus Center in the spring. Our Canadian friends would love it too. The preceding message was brought to you so you all could see GeauxSioux post a smilie.

I've always enjoyed: Big Te(leve)n Big Can't Count As far as the Big Ten-or-so going for 14, I can't see it. The biggest benefit is going to 12 for a conference championship game. Beyond that I don't see benefit for an "end point" conference like the Big Ten. The Atlantic 10 is not an "end point" conference. Teams in it would go if invited to a BCS conference. The A-10 is at 14 to cover the possible event of an unplanned departure with no impact on their status (and autobid).

Translated: We're making Delaney earn his check this month. He needs to use the "internets" to gather data on a short list of schools we might be interested in. Important stuff, like best pre- and post-game bars, and how much money we can squeeze out of them as an admission fee. And that dern star2city fellow knows the list somehow already.

I'd like to see the WCHA be the same for officials as it is for players: The best and brightest move on to the professional ranks. The others, after four or five years, move on to life after hockey and other careers.

No, it's both a BS answer and the sad reality of today. And ScottM nailed it: They've learned nothing from Bina, LaPoint (twice, concussion and slew foot), and now Genoway. I hope I'm not there the day that Travis Roy seems minor and instead they need a body bag.

The blatent problems with lack of control and willingness to do their jobs by officials is getting more and more notice in this league. Virg Foss spent some ink on the issue recently.