The Sicatoka

The old Pontiac logo actually used an Indian chief head. The current logo is still a downward pointing arrowhead. (Look at it.) No Indian imagery. Myles Brand, and his sponsor car, must stay home.

Link fixed. Myles Brand driving an Indian mascot car into his "catalyst for social change" championships. ROTFLMFAO.

The stuff you learn watching TV: 1. The official car of the NCAA this year is the Pontiac. http://www.ncaa.org/releases/miscel...003031401ms.htm 2. Pontiac is named after Pontiac, the Ottawa Indian Chief! 3. Thus, the NCAA has an Indian mascot car at all of its championship events. 4. Thus, by its very own edict, the NCAA and its Indian mascot official car should not be allowed to participate in its own NCAA championship events, or should at least have to drop Pontiac, or leave them at home. An organization based in Indianapolis, Indiana, with Pontiac as the official mascot car, getting "righteous" about Indian names. Now that-thar, that's funny, I don't care who you are.

I know sponsor doesn't equal require. I wish more conferences would sponsor sports (and allow associate members) and require fewer. As far as cherry-picking, "so what" is what I say. Pick a few things that you can succeed at and do them exceptionally well. If Ohio State can do exceptionally well in 36 sports good for them. I won't be jealous, I'll just hope UND can do exceptionally well in the sports it's chosen. The minimum sports thing is just a ploy by the big-budget schools to keep the schools that could be powerhouses in one or two sports from focusing on just those. In having to focus on maintaining a minimum number of sports those schools can't build the powerhouse and thus the big-budget schools stay on top. I say "so what" if a school like Gonzaga only had mens basketball and womens soccer (for Title IX). I say "so what" if a school like Bemidji State just had mens and womens hockey. It'd probably be better for the school's overall budget. (We all know resources that could go for academics are funnelled to athletics at just about every school out there.) I know this is blasphemy to some, but there is nothing magical about an "all-sports" conference. Pick a few things that you can succeed at and do them exceptionally well.

Yup, you keep quoting Dr. Kupchella on that one and you keep being correct. :lol: Didn't NDSU and SDSU use the "all our old rivals moved up" argument (Montana, Montana St., et al) as part of their basis? Isn't that the exact same argument?

The issues are money and conference. This travel you mention is the money part of that. Explain to me how non-conference travel to all of those places as a DII is any cheaper than non-conference travel to similar distance places as a DI? I still say conference is the issue that is more important than money when discussing DI. Why? A known conference sets about half of your travel schedule per year. Knowing travel, even part of it, makes budgeting (money) easier to do. Not having a conference (completely unknown travel) means you start each budget cycle guessing how many miles you'll be travelling. And travel, at $2+ per gallon of gas, ain't cheap.

I looked at the NCC and the five nearest DI (A or AA or AAA) conferences: Big 10, Big Sky, MAC, Missouri Valley, MidCon. What'd I find? All sponsor: M: BB, golf, CC, I Tr, O Tr. W: BB, golf, CC, I Tr, O Tr, Soc, Tennis, VB Note: UND fits all of those perfectly. NDSU has no W Tennis. All but the BSC sponsor: M: baseball, swim W: softball, swim Note: UND fits all that perfectly. NDSU has no swim teams. All but the NCC sponsor M tennis. Note: That fits neither UND or NDSU. If somebody is worried about "conference", not having any tennis or swimming (including an Olympic pool) seems to be the bigger issue than fans on a chat board tossing about the notion of maybe dropping M/W golf. As far as fiscal sense, golf is cheap, but it's also sure red ink: no gate. On a personal note, I believe this "minimum number of sports" concept is crazy. How about sports departments that play what they and the fans can and will support.

No, but which conference? All we have here is hypotheticals! Heck, we could dream up a conference that could require lacrosse if we really wanted to. And would you really want to join a conference where golf, or even swimming, (not the revenue sports) is the deal-breaker? You can't control hypothetical bids to hypothetical conferences. You can control what's yours to control. PS - The NCC and Mid-Con sponsor swimming, but don't require it for membership. What an interesting concept: sponsor, not require.

Let me help you out with that one also. From UND's second appeal:

Firstly, it is Buning. Secondly, I can't speak for others, but I've put the word "lacrosse" and the thoughts of dropping baseball and golf past Mr. Buning (and others in key positions at UND). Can't the same be said of swimming for about any conference (save the Big Sky)? (Or do we not want to talk swimming because NDSU doesn't have teams and most nearby DI conferences sponsor swimming?) Under the counting rules for sports for DI, UND currently has 20 sports: M(9): FB, BB, hockey, golf, baseball, S&D, CC, indoor track, outdoor track. W(11): BB, hockey, golf, soccer, VB, softball, tennis, S&D, CC, indoor track, outdoor track. The DI rules only mandate 6M and 8W sports. The key is to not drop "track" (which gets you CC, indoor, and outdoor teams counting for "3" teams per sex relatively cheap). Beyond that, personally, I'd say go with what makes fiscal and competitive sense. And again, UND can't control potential conference affiliation requirements. UND can only control what is its to control.

From the Herald: Don't ya love it when Phil talks the lawyer talk.

.... again. Come on Myles "catalyst for social change" Brand. I thought this was great social and moral issue. If it is stick to your position and deny UND's second appeal (and stand by to get yours handed to you in court on legal grounds).

The M-SP area non-NCC school with the wherewithall (is that a word?) to make a jump to a potential DI-AA NCC would be St. Thomas (long before C-SP).

I won't disagree. But they dared say "DI" aloud in St. Cloud which was truly surprising. And that same pressure would also be felt in Vermillion. And of course "if SCSU can do it" the folks in Duluth and Mankato will say .... Honestly, if the NCC dominos fell that way, I'd see Augie to the NSIC and UNO to the MIAA (backfilling Missouri-Rolla's spot) and the rest taking a shot at DI-AA. (I said "shot." Success is a whole other matter.) Then again, UNO might look at a non-conference, all bus trip, BB schedule that could easily include Creighton, Drake, UNI, Iowa, Iowa State, and "Big Red". It's going to get more confusing before it gets clearer.

Canada v. Russia? Too much red on the ice, and maybe not enough red on the ice in some cases. Quick, call your bookies! I just got the short box score from the gold medal game. GAME SUMMARY Scoring By Period RUS 0-0-0 -- 0 CAN 0-0-1 -- 1 First Period

But you repeat yourself.

Heck, that's easy. Northern Colorado NDSU SDSU Now rumblings at SCSU ....

I agree with your assessment. That's how I see it also. But how is that worse than a (week-long, think: lodging) trip to Florida, two to Kansas, and about a 18 regional bus trips (between baseball and mens golf)? Five travel weekends can be 10 road games leaving six home games. The goal of course would be 8 home, 8 road games. And as far as "remote location", Denver and Air Force are not exactly in the heart of lacrosse territory right now either. Yes, they have "pair" factor, but a team coming to GF could try to schedule an exhibition in Winnipeg against a Canadian team. Our EADA data shows 45 on the baseball team. All go to Florida for the week, don't they? And doesn't lacrosse limit the "travel party" like hockey does also? (Hockey only, by rule, takes 22 on the road; the others stay home.) Here I think we'll agree: 1. Baseball at DI doesn't make sense for UND (if UND were to go DI). 2. Lacrosse is a viable option given the existing infrastructure and nature of the fan base. 3. If a move to DI were to occur, cutting would happen long before adding. (I accept and acknowledge that.) My point in the conversation is this: UND needs to look at all, all, of this as a blank piece of paper to be filled in.

Golf? Golf? And here all along I thought it was strong academics (you are creating your "peer group" by coming together in a conference, right?), solid foundations (fiscal, facilities, fans), and either football or basketball programs that can produce (national tourney dollars) that conferences look for. Tell Dale Lennon, tell Craig Bohl: It's golf. For the record, of the conference names normally invoked in these discussions (NCC, Big Sky, Missouri Valley, Mid-Con, and heck the MAC and Big Ten) all sponsor swimming. No, wait, all except the Big Sky. But not having swimming in looking for a conference doesn't seem to come up as a "gotta have" issue as golf has. Something seems amiss.

Given the FY 2005 EADA data showing UND with a (albeit very small) profit and NDSU with a perfectly magical "break even" (to the dollar no less ), should we read into these comments concerns about programs at schools who've recently made the jump as well?

This lacrosse notion was brought up to face the realities that would come if (I said if) UND were to move to Division I. - UND does not have good Division II, much less DI, baseball or softball facilities. - UND would not be competitive in baseball, softball, or golf at the DI level. - Baseball draws poorly today (averaging around 250). - UND's weather does not support baseball, softball, and golf. - UND and GF under-utilize The Alerus Center as an asset in the spring. - Canada (long a prime ground for UND) loves lacrosse. - Canadian chain is building a hotel on The Al (marketing). The fiscal realities are stark any way you turn. Forgive me for thinking outside of the box and stepping away from something proven over 50 years to not work and looking at something that may have a better shot at better drawing in fans (and gate revenues). Another thought that matters: Title IX. The 2004 EADA data said UND had 45 baseball players v. 18 softball players and 17 mens v. 11 womens golfers. Going to M/W lacrosse of equal sized teams (and dropping the aforementioned programs) would better balance the M v. W athletes "books".

Lacrosse schedules normally four home and four road weekends and plays two games per weekend. Look at the baseball and softball and golf (M/W) schedules and then look at a sample (e.g. DU) lacrosse schedule. Baseball is taking a trip to Florida and trips (2) to Kansas this year plus the normal "around the region" bus trips (5 or 6) in the NCC. Softball is pretty much the same (save the two Kansas trips). Golf (M/W) both do the "around the region" tour (5 or 6 bus trips). The Florida trip is one weekend. Figure three regional bus trips would be about the same a one longer trip. Baseball and mens golf does 12 bus trips (not counting baseball to KS x2). There's the other three road weekends of "four weekends on the road" of lacrosse, and it should work M or W. And who knows, if (I said if) UND were in a lacrosse league with Ohio State and Notre Dame maybe you bus there to save flight costs. I don't see where the travel costs in total would be all that different. Start-up costs would be the bigger issue (equipment) is my guess. Then again, how bad does Nike want that "swoosh" on the front of UND's hockey jerseys? Bad enough to supply .... ?

Let's repeat this here because this is what I believe is going on: Rich wants to pass Gunther and go out on top. But what a way to go .... My personal belief right now: As the Ravens were to Mike Tice, so the Minot State Beavers are to Rich Glas.

Someone needs to look up the really big word "jocularity". But you did catch on the key to this whole issue: " ... I interpret ... " Yeah, that's how you interpret it. Others interpret it as intended: jocularity. Here's where "PC" has killed the world: It's not what you say, but how others may have interpretted what they thought you might have said.