The Sicatoka

I just needed to lay in the warm glow of this one more time. PS - I didn't just "make a pick," I saw Tony Quesada's numbers and realized they were nearly identical to Bobby Goepfert's, plus four of their top six forwards and half their defense played against UND in 2004. That, and Goldie seemed ripe for the pickin'.

Not about North Dakota, but a quote from a weekend to remember: http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/9NCAA/2006/west1_0427.htm Minnesota Hockey: Mercyhurst of the Midwest

This state really needs to take a hard, honest look at Bottineau, Mayville, Valley City, Williston, and Lake Region. With outreach and distance education capabilities already in place it's hard to justify keeping those. And I wonder how Dickinson State would come through (enrollment-wise) BSC becoming BSU.

Robbie's lucky his attempts to help his team win didn't cost his team the game (like when he couldn't skate and cover a man).

They were that this year (and arguably last year), but that was on paper just like what you're saying now. "On paper" doesn't matter. On ice (performance when it matters) does.

Ryan's stats will hurt him because of the significant number of goals coming against sub-par competition. (Look at the fraction of his goals that came against UAA.) Carle led the nation in assists. Not for defensemen, all scorers. Stats indeed.

Carle controlled the game, offensively and defensively, from the defenseman position. Rare, very rare, is the individual that can do that. That's why Carle would get my nod.

Well, you earned another game of hockey. What are you going to do with it?

Please wear the Sioux jersey to church in correct church seasonal color scheme: Christmas, Easter, holy days: white jersey Ordinary time: green jersey Funerals: black jersey Thank you. That is all.

(clears throat) (puts crap-eating smirk on face) (clears throat) "No comment."

I read that and think there's an extra extra word, "not", in the quote. I say that because the quote is contradicted by the words that follow it in the story. Take out "not" and it makes much more sense: "Creating a new conference is something that's going to be tough," Haskins said, noting that a few colleges in the area either recently have moved up or are considering it. That's my take on it.

Remember who votes on adding teams to conferences: University presidents (not ADs, not coaches, not fans, not media jackals). University presidents look at things like admissions requirements and school academic ratings, not just athletic programs, when they pick peers (aka conference members). Really. What a coincidence.

GK, The NCAA is running with a double standard. A group of Native Mexicans, MEChA, has asked San Diego State to change "Aztecs". The NCAA ignores them. Double. Standard. Just like Irish. Vandals. All, or none. Consistency. That's all.

Karl Goehring did long ago, but still there are non-believing heathen out there. The position description just says "Win." (No other requirements listed.)

I'm more worried about what UND puts onto the ice this weekend than what's under it.

He's listed as 5'8 155 and a DOB of 10-22-87. Let him do what Ryan Duncan did: Mature (physically) at that stature a little longer in the BCHL. That's why 2007 I'd guess. Imagine a Sparky-Dunk-Trupp line: "Under the Crossbar!" Of course you'd have to put a couple 6'7" D behind that.

Forgive me if I prefer ink on a National Letter of Intent, or better yet, body in Sioux jersey on ice during game. :)

The math the way I see it: Sure losses: Prpich, Marvin Pretty sure losses: Smaby, (forward TBD) Possible additional losses: (forward TBD) That's losing one D, one to three F, and a utility guy. Call it somewhere in the four range. Sure gains: Bina (off the redshirt) Heisenberg says: Darcy Zajac-RW Michael Forney-RW Chris Vandevelde-LW Chay Genoway-D/C <-- utility guy? Jake Marto-D I'd say Hak-n-Staff has it covered even in a "worst case" scenario. PS - Heisenberg says "Evan Trupp-LW" in 2007.

Is he bringin' that &@#^ thing with again.

I was going to ask that too. It seems "Andy Jackson" goes away entirely, and then some.

Phil played for, Jimmy was the assistant to, Bill Fitch, another NBA coach. Minor oversight in an otherwise nice overall rant. :)

I'm not a finance guy; heck, I don't even play one on TV (and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night either). However, what you're quoting is an annual return of 10%. The "normal" number I hear for expected return on an endowment is 5%. (In good years, meaning greater than 5% return on the investments, you use the extra to build the lump sum value for future return value.) If you need $3 MM annually you'd better have a $60 MM endowment would be my non-finance-guy take.

Best analysis I've seen on this yet.

Yup, but again, So why bring it up in comparison? Me thinks the green-eyed monster named Jealousy may have a shaved head as well.

Money is like goaltending and horsepower: There is no such thing as "too much." More seriously, Dr. Kupchella's office has said (from Feb 2002): Note the words "each year". An endowment (guaranteed revenue stream) providing that much annually would be best.