The Sicatoka

Rats. Someone has finally figured out that I'm really Johnny Damon of the Red Sox "Idiot Brigade". Need more proof? Never panic.

Kessel being from the Madison area, I still think Buckie has as good of a shot as Michigan and both of those are probably better than Goldie's. I'd put UND as a very long long-shot.

Where'd the career record start from? Did it get tilted by taking over a struggling program? What's been the direction of the program to this point? Are there logical explanations for a problematic season (youth)? Last season, 2003-2004, only improved the career conference record. It had to have been in that realm before that season. If 0.336 is the tripwire for removal, why wasn't she removed before last season? What's the standard?

I assume your application for the position is in.

You know, I've never seen the official rule in the book. You could well be correct on having to do both. Winning the league is really no big deal at this point to them either. From this week's NSIC release: They've got a share of the NSIC title guaranteed already and there's about no imaginable way they'll fall from the top ten. All that UND can do is all that any of us can do: Control what's yours to control. If UND wins, controls what's its to control, the rest takes care of itself.

Doesn't the silly earned access rule say that if a conference has one team in the regional top ten the conference is guaranteed one of the six playoff slots? For Winona State to not make it at this point would take a series of immaculate misfortunes.

What standard will Hakstol be held to when he has a very young team a year from now? I'm trying to be consistent: Come off winning season (and NCAA appearance) to a sub-par performance and get one (<--- key word) more chance to prove yourself. More food for thought: NDSU's VB coach has 2 seniors, 1 junior, 6 sophomores, and 5 freshman, and a 7-17 record this year. Should she be on the hot-seat also? Sure it's a different situation, but her wins are over "lesser" programs (like MSU-Moorhead) and she has the funding also. What's the standard there? I'm just trying to find the standard that the UND coaches are expected to live to. If my standard is too easy, show me one that is consistent and works for the long-term goals of UND Athletics and I'll gladly get on board. Boy I'm glad these decisions aren't mine. I don't know how RT lives in that fishbowl.

I want winning teams for every program in UND Athletics. I also want the coaches to know what the standard is. I don't want any UND Athletics program to become a "revolving door" for coaches because of a single sub-0.500 season after a couple winning ones. The standard to this point for coaches with preceding winning records has been a down season with a young team doesn't alone put a coach "on the outs". The next season is when the tough scrutiny comes and actions are taken (if warranted). Late edit: That's no insult to Blais or Lennon. They earned theirs. Bruggeman, by the same standard, has earned hers. We know what Lennon and Blais did after down years. Let's see what happens in this case and go from there.

I see coaches with winning seasons coming off NCAA appearances having a young team and a down year getting the next season to reprove themselves. (Lennon, Blais) You see what you choose to see for the reasons you choose to see it that way. I can only speak to my perspective and view. My motivation is consistency in handling coaches. What perspective and view are you seeing from? What are your motivations? I don't know.

I did not say "not accountable". I did not say "no scrutiny". I said make sure actions are for real trends and not bumps along the building path. The record (as counted from FightingSioux.com, and I may have miscounted along the way but should be pretty close): Sioux Volleyball under Bruggeman: 2005: ??-?? <-- Answer. 2004: 8-16 (season on-going) <-- Bump or Problem? 2003: 19-12 NCAA 2nd round 2002: 24-11 2001: 20-13 2000: 16-16 (incomplete record) 1999: 16-16 For comparison, Mr. Lennon and Sioux Football: 2004: 7-1 (season on-going) 2003: 12-2 <-- Answer. 2002: 5-6 <-- Bump or Problem? 2001: 14-1 2000: 8-3 1999: 9-2

Let's recap: Using the ".500 is not cutting it" criteria should Lennon have been cut loose after 2002? How about Blais after 2001-2002? Both followed NCAA appearance seasons with below 0.500 (conference and overall) seasons with young teams. The toughest coaching is during and after the down season. Lennon and Blais and came back strong. What'll this one do? We'll find out together. Again, I hope you're never a coach some day in this type of situation facing this type of scrutiny. PS - Never panic. Panic is a sign of disorganization and weakness. Don't let things surprise you. Know the possibilities. Think. Plan ahead. Take a measured, logical, orderly approach that will put you on a path to success and implement it. (And that's not sports advice, that's life advice.)

One poor season with a young roster shouldn't be time to panic. I didn't with Dean. I won't (right now) with Maria. I'll be in the same position next season when Hakstol loses all of this season's seniors (plus probably a couple underclassmen) and his team is very young.

Slow down, I'm trying to take notes. (scribbling furiously) Lucy hangs around Mary Oochi. Sue is seen at Ralph's place. OK, got it.

OK. If you say so.

I define off-court as personal life. I stay out of those unless the coach makes it an issue by their own actions. Back to the point: Shouldn't every coach that has some record of success be given some margin for one season?

Don't put words in my mouth. Maria ain't Blaiser. However, I'll give a coach with past success in their record a ("a", as in singular) season with a young team as a time to struggle. It's called consistency by a fan and alumnus like me. Some day if or when you're a head coach in a struggling season you'll appreciate fans and alumni like that. If there's off-court stuff that's inappropriate, that changes the conversation. There's been nothing to show anything like that to my knowledge.

I remember another UND coach not that many years ago - having come off NCAA appearances - with max allowed scholarships - with a young freshman line-up - having a losing season. I cut him some slack for that year. His name was Dean Blais. If I'll be patient for one growing year there I believe every other coach deserves that same chance. One season does not a trend make. A year from now could be a whole other story.

If the referee had done his job, "strict enforcement" and all, young Vanelli would have been on his way to the penalty box before the nasal adjustment was performed: NCAA Rule 6.14b:

Who was Brandon Bochenski's centerman at Blaine HS when Blaine won the Minnesota state title? (I wouldn't be asking if I didn't already know. Let's see who else does.)

Two seniors. No juniors. 14 sophomores and freshmen. That's UND's volleyball roster this season. You'll understand why, personally, I cut them some slack on the record this year.

People, for the record, it's Friday night against BC on CSTV's Friday night hockey game of the week. http://cstv.collegesports.com/tvschedule.h...deSearch=Friday If Brandt really isn't going I'd expect: Friday: Parise v. BC Saturday: Lamoureux v. Northeastern

The Saturday Omaha forecast also says run: Breezy.

Curtis: Well, the Sister was right. You boys could use a little churching up. Slide on down to the Triple Rock, and catch Rev. Cleophus. You boys listen to what he's got to say! Jake: Curtis, I don't want to listen to no jive-ass preacher talking to me about Heaven and Hell! Curtis: Jake, you get wise! You get to church!

Do they offer a course we could enroll some folks in?

Well those same folks should have been really ticked when Minnesota completely undressed our guys Saturday night.