The Sicatoka

NCAA sanction list or not, as long as there are Big Sky Presidents who think more like Roy Saigo (former SCSU president) and less like 2/3 of Spirit Lake Nation the moniker will be an "issue".

In other news, the sun rose in the east.

1. I pointed that out because --> Even Roebuck changed when the circumstances around him forced him to. (There's a moniker message in that statement.) 2. I spelled it correctly north of the 49th parallel. (And thanks for the ad hominem attack.) And dude, why so angry?

Eaves' coaching philosophy seems to match the organizational philosophy.

Herter to UMD? WIll that make four coaches in four years for the Fargo Fo(u)rce? Blais - Johnson - Herter - (insert UND associated name here)

Isn't Roebuck the coach who'd only ever played one style of defence ... until the switch to DI.

They're drowning (thank you Devils Lake). I'd guess that is taking most of their attention (and they've made their statement).

BSC Commissioner Fullerton responds to Sen. Mac Schneider: http://legacy.grandforksherald.com/pdfs/BigSkyLetterSchneider.pdf

The NCAA is holding all of the cards here. They have the settlement (aka surrender) agreement in hand. And have proven, are proving, and will prove again, that they are more than willing to make life a living hell for UND as long as it has "that moniker". So that's what they'll do. The NCAA is run by academics. For them, dealing with real issues (cheating, money, doping) is hard. Dealing with feel-good "lookee-lookee what we did!" issues is great cocktail party chatter and makes them feel useful. So that's what they'll do.

So let's see how I did ... Grimaldi 19, actual 33 = -14 Miller 20, actual 15 = +5 Simpson 81, actual 92 = -11 St. Clair 181, actual 212* = -31 Total: -51 * 212 is "undrafted" as the last pick was 211.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=566902&navid=mod-rr-headlines Philly comes away with: Wayne Simmonds Brayden Schenn Jakub Voracek CBJ's first round 2011 pick (#8 overall) LAK's second round 2012 pick CBJ's third round 2011 pick Philly unloads: Mike Richards' and Jeff Carter's contracts. I'd say Philly got themselves a decent replacement line and is going to use those picks and solidify their goaltending situation.

"Tar Heels" is based on a North Carolina (pro-slavery) Civil War unit. Doesn't. Matter. "Sooners" is based on people who stole Indian lands sooner than it was legal to. Doesn't. Matter. The NCAA's own "monikers policy" says "race-based" yet Notre Dame, Michigan State, Southern Cal, and Idaho have race-based monikers. Doesn't. Matter. Pointing out Minnesota's rouser. Doesn't. Matter. UND having one tribe (Spirit Lake) approval just like Florida State, Utah, and Central Michigan have one tribe approval. Doesn't. Matter. NCAA's "catalyst for social change" agenda. All. That. Matters.

This is bad. http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?wfo=bis&gage=mion8&view=1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1"

That is a classic, thinly-veiled, passive-aggressive, realm-of-academia threat.

The bolded part is the fact. From whom comes the threat is possibly a question (BSC or NCAA?). Anyone who reads this letter from the BSC and can't see that needs to re-read the letter.

Yup. It was a pressure-point the NCAA could use for their agenda.

As I said ... This situation reminds me more and more of a certain recent April day in The X versus Michigan.

We thought the moniker wasn't an issue to the Big Sky until that letter showed up. Where will it show up as an issue next? Your guess is as good as mine. But if the NCAA is involved ...

Same editorial: More specifically, " ... everlasing angst from the NCAA ... " and potential conferences, because that's all we'll ever have is potential conferences as no one will touch UND.

All of my statements are situation appraisal, save for the very last two words. If that's "telling others what to do" ... Much of life is accepting the wrongs that others believe are right because the others have the power. UND is stuck in one of those situations.

Well, that's the NCAA when they called such monikers "hostile and abusive". But the NCAA is too big to fail so they won't be allowed to.

Al Carlson put it "the well has been poisoned". I'll say the bell has been rung. You can't unring a bell. Al Carlson's bill was a renig on a legal agreement. That's not how North Dakotans do business. There's no honor in that. The NCAA won't change. UND will have to. Accept it.

The NCAA is a private organization. The first step would be to get them declared a "state actor". Then, as a pseudo-govenmental entitiy, they'd be subject to Constitutional provisions. The best (only) hope for the NCAA to be declared a "state actor" would be under this (from the link): Now can I get one of the resident legal observers to comment on the potential applicability of Brentwood v. TSSAA to the NCAA? My guess is that the scope isn't right and Brentwood doesn't apply, or else someone would've gone after the NCAA with it already.

This is the last big place where Kelley is dropping the ball. Don't just say "we need to move on". WHERE do we need to move on to? Having a plan to move forward is called "leadership". If you're taking away something beloved have something half decent* to fill the void or the old won't go away. *Examples of EPIC FAIL at this are Dartmouth (Big Green?) and Stanford (Cardinal, as in the color, not the bird or holy man). Miami of Ohio had something good, not great, but good. Arkansas State had something good, not great, but good.

The paragraph in question from the letter. Honestly, the first and last sentence in that paragraph read like they were written by Fullerton/BSC. The middle two, namely, read like they are straight out of an NCAA handbook. The aloof " ... are merely a reflection of the will of the members ... " is classic. The will of the members, that's why this policy came from the Executive Committee and only later was the full membership consulted to determine if the Executive Committee had such powers.