The Sicatoka

The NCAA wants money? Say it ain't so.

Please, send one guy to the blue line at the far boards from the puck and don't ever make the long pass to him. I'll keep defending the front of the net. Thanks for making it my five (plus goalie) defending the net from your four. This ain't football. You defend the goal, not the guy. Here's your consolation prize. WYO: Would having teams with staggered probation dates be beneficial to a conference in some way?

Self-contradicting argument: No long passes .... but spread out the defense on wide ice. The only way to spread the D in hockey is spread out and use the whole ice: bigger spacing = longer passes. Back to topic: So, if UND goes DI, and builds an indoor passing/training facility, (which are the topics that started the thread, see WYO, I'm trying ), which other programs have that?

Hey Bulldog, impressive signature line. But don't you wish it could say: Conference Champs 6 of the last 11 years 2003 National Runner-Up 2001 National Champions I know one that can.

David Klema is a Roseau native (and FM IceShark?) and would have been a senior for BU this fall. http://board.uscho.com/showthread.php?t=42061

(A least once per season I have to explain this. Sigh.) There is nothing worse than amateurs on wide ice. Why? Make a pass, miss the target, puck goes wa-a-a-a-ay over to the far boards, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, (no puck possession by either team), skate, skate, skate, skate, to it, control it, move with it, make another bad pass, it goes wa-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-ay over to the far boards, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, skate, .... you get the point. The puck spends more time off a stick blade than on. Hockey is a game of puck possession. When the puck is sliding free (after a bad pass) or sitting uncontrolled along the boards (because no one has gotten to it yet) it is not exciting to watch. When a team is in possession making perfect, clean passes and controlling the puck there is nothing better to watch. My opinion: Amateurs should only be allowed on 85' wide (NHL) ice. Professionals, who can make long, clean passes, and who need the added space because of professional size and professional speed, should only be allowed on 100' wide (Olympic) ice. (And when I say "professionals" I mean the NHL. Even the AHL looks bad on wide ice.) Sorry for the diversion. Back to subject: I heard Doug Fullerton may have racked up some "Hilton Honors points" at the UND Hilton Garden Inn this week.

Are you sure you and Rick aren't Czechoslovakian brothers? You are "two wild and crazy guys!"

Enjoy the "good time" now. The tab is coming. --> How come The Forum hasn't done a follow-up on this story from back in May? September is here and gone. There hasn't been a progress/follow-up story to date. As Sioux Hockey announcer Tim Hennessy would say, "How's she goin'?" in terms of raising that roughly $1 MM to cover this year's budget is the question. The budget issues are the biggest DI issue for anyone as geographically remote as the Dakotas are.

Did Kupchella send them, or did Martinson? Either way, the request would be made sooner or later by some paper and it would go AP shortly thereafter. Contract negotiations (which is what deal with a conference is at its essence) are exempt from sunshine laws until a deal is done. Letter? No. Position paper? Yes. What was asked for? You have to admit, we both are assuming a lot in regard to that one position paper. (You admit you assumed it was a "thinly-disguised PR gambit". I'll admit it was too in-depth to be targeted to respond to just one legislator.)

Yup, that'd be him. Clearly recognizable in the photos in the link. PCM must be the alias he runs under now that he's dumped the "Fred Garvin" alias. Who is Fred Garvin? Should we start calling Rick "Slick" instead?

If you check the details and look back to Dr. Kupchella's February 2002 position piece, a statement from UND on the subject was requested by a member of the legislature. That's why he (and UND) wrote it. As such, it would have been public domain information (sunshine laws).

I just realized something fundamental here: The point of what UND is looking at is an indoor training facility. The key there is training, not track. Track will benefit from it, but the goal is more than just track. NDSU has a track mindset. UND has a hockey mindset. To each their own. The question originally was "... The Division I Question? New Answer?" About the only thing more silly than discussing the merits of minutial details like banked 200m ovals versus flat 300m ovals (that include 80 yards of indoor practice field which would mean a modular 200m oval could be temporarily brought in and set up) to a UND fan at this juncture, under this question, would be trying to explain the merits of NHL width versus Olympic width ice for home hockey games to NDSU (no NCAA hockey at all) fans. What should be noteworthy here is what bisonguy posted, namely: I believe some folks wanted a story in something other than the hometown college press. Well, there it is.

Use of "MM" for million is pretty common in banking.

I'm pretty sure all CSTV sent to Grand Forks last year for Boston College at North Dakota hockey as the national game of the week was on-air guys. I believe they did their own production (which shots to show when) but used the normal arena camera crews. Having the built in capabilities allows for one other item that you guys brought up, and must be important because NDSU just did this with Bohl's show: having direct control over broadcast content.

Go back and look at what you first said: "all that is need is $40k for the compressors". Sure back in 199x. But you don't pay 199x prices in 200y. The ~$250,000 for ice in the dome was a gnat in terms of "sway" compared the $42 MM price tagged arena they wanted.

Hey WYO, you may want to change your signature line. The Bears in Greeley slept pretty peacefully the night of September 4. PS - I'm not saying UND doesn't have a dog bite right now.

Not completely true. The numbers folks were tossing around back in 2000 (the failed Fargo Arena vote era) were in the $250,000.00+ range.

I've pondered aloud here if it is possible. It looks to these eyes like south endzone seating could be added. (The Aurora ballroom and kitchen spaces limits the north end.) It probably couldn't go "full bowl" but maybe "four sides" (like Fargodome), but in this case "three sides". This is the pondering of someone else: Harmeson generally isn't the type of guy that would roll that out there unless he thought it possible.

Give Matt Greene an aluminum shaft stick.

Joe Albi in Spokane holds 28646. Woodward Field holds 6000. They have plans to expand it .... to 11000, or 2500 fewer seats than The Alerus Center today.

Womens hockey is up and running: Welcome to Season III and being the newest member of the Womens WCHA. Having Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Ohio State (WWCHA members) coming in can't hurt attendance, nor will UM-D, SCSU, or MSU-Mankato. UND is actually in pretty good shape regarding Title IX. Adding womens hockey helped the numbers. As far as BSC sports, recently Portland State got an exemption (budget woes) from the mens and womens tennis requirement.

2002 season football seating capacities: Montana 18845 Montana St. 13500 Weber St. 17500 Idaho St. 12000 Portland St. 20000 Cal St. Sacramento 21195 Northern Ariz. 15300 Eastern Wash. 6000 Those are the latest stadium capacity numbers I have. I know Montana has gone close to 24000 seats since then. I don't know about the others. As far as "15000", Montana State and UND are in the same position. Idaho and Eastern Washington are worse off. Northern Arizona really isn't much better off than Montana State or UND. Having seats is one issue; filling them is quite another.

Bulldog: Since you seem to like Massey Ratings, what do you think of this? 10/09 at North Dakota (139 4-1 ) [ 23 14.0 -24.1] ** That "23" just right of the "[" means that Massey thinks you have a 23% chance of winning the game against UND. Massey expects a 24-14 UND victory. Thoughts? ** http://www.mratings.com/rate/team.php?tm=134349