The Sicatoka

So being an FCS school playing mid-major BB is an acceptable status. Isn't that just saying that there's really a missing level in collegiate athletics? Some really smart guy I know has been stating that for over five years. Or at risk of really getting some folks' knickers in a twist ... Maybe the real problem is the over-focus on program development at some schools. Could those over-focused schools have created an over-inflated level beyond the collegiate, amateur level that Myles Brand loves to tout. Let's face it, Duke runs it's basketball team more professionally than the LA Clippers and Florida runs it's football team better than the Dolphins have been run lately. PS - Found this blog just for "DaveK": http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_co...ge-footbal.html DISCLAIMER: I believe BSC Commissioner Fullerton. I believe a "big bang" is coming in college athletics. What it will be is the question. Could this be it? http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_co...ase-for-th.html

DI-A or FBS. DI-AA or FCS. Fine. But what prevents "the big lie" as some seem to want to call it from being told just the same to any ol' recruit? To play off the UI/SIU scenario above, what prevents the following hypthetical scenario? UI Baseball Recruiter: "SIU? You don't want to go there. They're small-time. Heck, you ever see them play in a bowl game on TV? You want, you need to go big time. Bowl games, excitement. UI is big time, not them."

Agreed.

Did you miss the insert in this weekend's Fargo Forum? It is/was the opening splash page ... http://www.fightingsioux.com

This is my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Last year with Oshie, Duncan, Kozek: Kozek acted more along the boards (getter) and Duncan served as the primary shooter. Kozek can be a getter, but he's a natural shooter and is more likely needed in that role this year. The question is: What roles will guys be asked to play in this year?

I think you mean back to intramurals. Technicially that's where he was before he was brought in. PS - There's additional new information at http://www.areavoices.com/undhockey

Yes, their knickers are in quite a twist I'd say.

Lubbock in September. http://www.myforecast.com/bin/climate.m?ci...mp;metric=false

Ladies and Gentlemen, We have a tie in the race for the least credibility in Grand Forks: The Herald (for printing it) and Hoff (for writing it) are running neck and neck.

They probably owned the "Great West" logo and trademark so it was easiest to just keep that name for now.

Is that the piece I'm missing? I thought this approach was created so everyone used the same pattern.

They swapped the pairs to MSU-M/UMD and UAA/MTU in about 2003 or 2004. Just look at last year's and this year's schedules to see I'm right. (We play four against both MTU and UAA, 4/4, this year. You don't do that against a "rivals pair". You play 2/4 or 4/2 against a "rivals pair".) The reason: Tech and Anchorage are the two toughest (travel logistics) places in the conference to get to. Making them a pair makes travel a little better for the rest of the WCHA. And, really, UMD/MSU-M make more sense as "rivals" too.

Mentioning staffing ... http://www.fightingsioux.com/ViewArticle.d...;ATCLID=1546728 It looks like Faison has his staff in place with the exception of a CFO. http://www.fightingsioux.com/ViewArticle.d...p;ATCLID=736144

July 21: Clear Channel contract renewed for 1 year. July 31: New external operations AD hired.

How about: Because they're a WCHA team and in the "rivals scheduling rotation system" used this is the year that UND plays UAA four times. This year for UND it is: Home and Road: SCSU, Wisconsin, MSU-Mankato, CC, UAA Home only: Minnesota, DU Road only: UMD, MTU Last year is was: Home and Road: SCSU, Minnesota, UMD, DU, MTU Home only: CC, UAA Road only: Wisconsin, MSU-Mankato Give the info in the link and the last two seasons you can see that the "rivals pairs" are: UND/SCSU; UM/UW; CC/DU; UMD/MSU-M; MTU/UAA. Manitoba is a cheap, easy game to schedule as an exhibition. Plus, it builds goodwill and collaboration between two premiere prairie universities. (Look into it and you'll see UND has been building ties with UManitoba.) The U-18 game is a recruiting tool. You want those kids in to see The Ralph and keep the buzz going. You do realize of course that USC and UCLA are not playing NCAA ice hockey but merely ACHA club ice hockey. They are playing club hockey. Not NCAA. Club, ... not even junior varsity*. Quite honestly, cherry-pick the UND intramural league to create a UND club roster and you'll give either (USC, UCLA) way more than they want on the ice. * JV implies that the school is playing the bill. Club means just that "club", kids paying their own way with the exception of maybe a couple thousand dollars from the Student Senate, the same couple thousand bucks the campus chess club and GLAAD chapter get from the Student Senate. JV = Athletic Department; Club = self-funded.

Stroup took a couple bad penalties last year that got him talked to on the sidelines by the coaches. Add in his off-field issues and the picture became clearer to me. What surprises me are the NDSU fans worried about UND's RB and LB situation when they have an unproven (collegiately) QB who has no backup and their MLB (in a 4-3 scheme) is gone to graduation.

I didn't dig too deeply, but the NCAA used to "de facto" consider there to be 3 sub-divisions: DI-A, DI-AA, and no football (e.g. Marquette). A quick scan of the 2007-08 DI manual shows they seem to consider now only "bowl" conferences and "non-bowl" conferences (meaning the old DI-AA is now lumped in with the non-football schools for committee membership breakdowns, see Section 21 of the DI manual).

If the impression is that the GWC is being "oversold" by UND that has to be coming from the media (Forum Communications: The Forum, The Herald) and not UND. I base that on two items both from this link: 1. Listen to the press conference with ROK and Faison. The auto-bid question is asked. They state there isn't one. 2. This quote from UND's release (emphasis added):

Regarding the time and place of the news conference, a guy who thinks about and does these things professionally just posed this to me:

Ahem, ... http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idio...a+pin+drop.html

So who else has noticed the new "splash page" at FightingSioux.com?

I think we have passed the rumor phase with this: http://greatwestconference.cstv.com/ Note the word "football" no longer appears in that link. And this is a pretty good give-away on the news too. http://www.fightingsioux.com/ViewArticle.d...;ATCLID=1507318 PS - Anyone think they put the press conference today to get the message out to those participating in the Sioux-per Swing who might not otherwise hear about it for some period of time?

It appears that all of the players in this new conference set a common time for local press conferences as a collaboration. As such, you'll probably have some conflicts for some of them, in this case UND's Sioux-per Swing event.

So, in a fervent attempt to disparage lacrosse, you've pointed out why lacrosse is a sport, classic sport: You need a team, a top to bottom team, of well-rounded, total athletes. You can't get away with an overspecialized line-up like basketball (a dribbler, a shooter, a big guy, a rebounder, and a defender and you have a team) or football (blockers, runners, throwers and that's all they do) or baseball (power hitter, slap hitters, average hitters) as they've become today. You need a team of five skill players: Run Fast, Run Agile, Toss Accurately, Toss Hard, Catch (what would be called a "five tools guy" in baseball). Every guy on the team needs to be able to run, catch, and toss. So yeah, you'd need the best total package athletes from those other sports, because the others would be missing something that's needed in lacrosse.