The Sicatoka

Yo, "MplsBison", you asked that question other ways and places. Try this and see: " .... MplsBison, just out of curiousity, would you be angry if NDSU anounced that some of the resources that would've gone to football will now go to help the volleyball and baseball teams with the transition?" I think you'll find yourself giving the same answers that PCM gave.

The flip side of these results is if a group showed up with the money and a conference option opened up it's all out there on the table: The DI supporters could show they've met the criteria of the majority of folks.

Going with the "echo chamber" thought, again, will all of the data be put out there for review? I want to compare what I've seen with those results (to re-adjust all the mental filters). I say that because the underlined portions below make no sense. Where's this "favoring raising $1.5 million more yearly" phrase coming from? Either we need the context of the question (and group questioned), or someone at the Herald needs to re-write that to be more understandable.

Two key take-aways from the Herald: Like I've said, it comes down to: Cost Conference

Dude, you have to admit an offer and pull-back is out there. I'll say you turned out to be correct, but I didn't assault you as a source (I questioned something even you first called a "rumor") so I don't believe an apology is in order. How could this occur? Who all was direct witness to it? I'd expect better from Buning. (If an apology is in order it may be from Buning to the Army for forgetting what they taught him about professionalism.)

Is the Herald going to be putting all of the questions and results out there?

That "90% ... conference" thing is even stronger than past GF Herald polls (not that you should ever trust on-line polls all that much). http://forums.grandforks.com/n/mb/message....sg=23.1&ctx=256 http://forums.grandforks.com/n/mb/message....g=112.1&ctx=256 Those two were fairly consistent in: About 1/3 yes, about 1/3 "if conference", and about 1/3 no. "90%" is a mammoth number in any survey.

OK, I'm somewhere between very stunned and very shocked. I'd expect more from an Army man. (Context of the sequence of events would be very useful.)

Where's that guy that always says: Follow the Benjamins. All will become clear. Meanwhile, last night on Fox News at 9 out of Fargo, I see Governor Hoeven talking about how the NCAA has overreached and how he long expected it to go to court and that he expects UND to win.

Nooooooooooo ..... Show him The Betty and The Ralph!

Forgive me, but I don't see a former Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army being as unprofessional as that, and I say that out of respect for the US Army as much at Mr. Buning. I'd chalk that up as less than rumor, maybe even wishful thinking by some at best.

http://www.pointstreak.com/framedc/players...playerid=558815

Isn't there some quote about "cows" and "free milk" that'd fit in here somewhere? Indiana? Isn't that where our beloved Myles Brand was president (and where he fired some hack hoop coach named Knight from)?

Joe Chapman -- Press release! Charles Kupchella -- No press release. Seems accurate.

Same question could hold for any paper in the region. My answer to the question: Because local media throughout this region can't dig a story, much less know where to look for one. If it doesn't come in as a press release on their fax machine don't expect a report. (And I'm slamming everyone, print, radio, TV, with that.)

The NCAA says there's just "DI" in hoops. (Mid-major is an undefined term thrown about like it means something.) And by admitting that you are admitting there is a whole realm of "wannabes" out there in DI, or a whole missing level.

No, with Zajac and VandeVelde at F (and Genoway at D) the Sioux would have 13 forwards. (Trupp for-sure coming in would only make 14, but that's unknown right now.) F: Oshie, Toews, Kozek, Duncan, Watkins, Porter, Fabian, Miller, Mertens, Kaip, Foyt. (11) F: Zajac, VandeVelde.

To: - face a lot of rubber in practice (saving the other guys) - to be there in case the team needs him

They're most likely "institutional support." And be caresul on that topic. The sword has two sharp edges. (NDSU is looking at some in their minor sports is what I've read.)

I think it would never happen. The rule isn't as much about football as basketball (and keeping a team from "loading up" for a season).

Reviewing Article I, Section 8, "commerce among the several States" is something that Congress has Constitutional power over. If "commerce among the several States" doesn't define what the NCAA is doing what does? Yes, this is in the realm of the enumerated powers of Congress. Step up and do something is what I'd say. I guess I'd rather him take a stand than appear to duck.

The Fool'em hard at work: Saturday stories: http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=125877 http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=125878 Sunday's editorial: http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm...section=Opinion

The roster as of today: F (11): Oshie, Toews, Kozek, Duncan, Kaip, Watkins, Porter, Fabian, Foyt, Martens, Miller D (7): Bina, Radke, Chorney, Jones, Lee, Finley, Alexander G (3): Parise, Lamoureux, Walski That's 21 on today's roster. The folks I see projected for this fall are: F: Darcy Zajac, Chay Genoway, Chris VandeVelde. That's 24 (and only 14 forwards). Most times fall camp has a 26 or 27 man roster with 15 forwards, 8 (or 9) defense, and 3 goalies. Toss in that there are a ton of open questions right now: - Robbie Bina: A clean bill of health is one thing. Game ready is another. I don't question his abilities; I worry about how he'll respond to the first full-speed game hit. He's been through a lot. - Eric Fabian: Six month recovery for a major knee injury isn't that long. If anyone is mentally tough enough to do the physical work required however, it is Eric Fabian. - Will the NHL Draft shorten depth at forward further? - And what of this continual buzz of Jordan Parise considering signing? Yes, UND has signed letters of intent from Jake Marto and Derrick LaPoint, but defense isn't the issue this fall from what I see. (I suspect it will be in fall of 2007 however.) With that in mind, letting those two develop in the USHL in 2006-2007 would make good sense. Michael Forney has little (if any) junior experience. Plus, his post-HS season hockey this spring was cut short by injuries. He's a big question mark right now (health-wise). Will he be ready for a WCHA season this fall or would the USHL be better for him also? Then there's Evan Trupp. When I first heard of him I thought "Another smallish forward?" With Duncan and Spirko already in that smallish playmaker mold in place it didn't make sense. With Sparky not returning, now I wonder if the plan to have Trupp in the BCHL in 2006 (after a solid rookie BCHL season in 2005) may have changed. Still, even under my thoughts (Trupp comes now), that's only 25. Sure you have Bina and Genoway who can play either forward or defense on gameday, but you don't have the numbers to run a full practice under the systems Hakstol has used. The conversation about goaltender could get sticky. Let's let that play itself out. Then again, I guess that's the beauty of having two guys who'd be #1 goalies on 90% of NCAA squads. When I look and think about all of that I'm wondering what the rest of the plan over the summer is for Hak and Staff: - Is my speculation of Trupp coming now that Sparky left accurate? - Do they have a plan in case Parise signs and jumps? - Are they looking at inviting a forward (or two even?) to walk on or will they bring Forney now? Tune in again tomorrow for "As the Roster Turns".

Hallstrom admits he had Miles going to UNC-Whichever in that column.

I didn't say anything about "in" a particular sport (note the "and" between the "name schools" thought and the "BB RPI" thought). Quite simply: Montana or IUPUI? Montana State or Centenary?