The Sicatoka

And three D-IAA football programs have dropped since the end of the 2002 season: Fairfield, Canisius, and St. John's (yes, that's St. John's the basketball power). All were members of the MAAC. Michigan Tech is one. Who's the other DII?

Hey, Wantagh, pointing out the NHL CBA situation (the current one runs out at the end of the 2004 playoffs) and its potential impacts on decisions made by NCAAers is my schtick. Find your own.

Yes, I said that with a laugh, but I was serious. I'm not sure if you folks realize the money in 1997, 2000, and 2001 that UND left on the table by not being full DI, but making those Frozen Fours. Yes, move up. But, yes, I'm still afraid that it could well be fiscal suicide. In reality, the other choice (no move) isn't much better. That's the conclusion I've arrived at. It comes down to the question: Is it better to burn out or fade away? Or put another way, die, or die trying? Like you, tony, I've mellowed to the idea over time. (Remember, you wrote once that you didn't think the idea was a good one for NDSU at first either.) As I've mellowed, I've looked for mellowing from UND. That's why I locked onto that statement by Roger Thomas. That's the first thing that could even remotely be interpreted as mellowing in the official UND position (whether it was intended or not). The previous problems (money, conference, harsh probationary periods) still remain.

He said "one." PS: "didn't"

The rest, I have very few problems with so I won't comment, but, About point 3: No, the BCS schools can't move the world, but that's not the issue. (Remember to think about this outside the scope of football.) The "Ohio States" are the "NCC" of DI. They want the bigger numbers. It's what the "small budgets" decide is what moves things. With money getting tighter, and a growing number of small DIs, who knows. Could the "DII problem" replicate at the DI level? What would the "Ohio States" do then? No one knows. I say go DI for the Frozen Four money.

No, not really "apples and oranges." Think about this beyond the gridiron. Outside of football, Ohio State and NDSU will be competing "at the same level." How'd this problem develop in DII? An influx of schools with smaller budgets get there and, once there, and because they have numbers, start to change the rules. What's happening in DI? An influx of schools with smaller budgets. Don't think the "Ohio States" aren't noticing.

My point is money. It is what is really driving all of this conversation. NDSU is not happy with underfunded programs watering down DII. Fair enough. But the "Ohio States" (I'll pick them as an example) can't be happy about seeing the profit sharing check (from BB television primarily) keep getting smaller as low-budget programs keep popping up and taking a cut of the pie. NDSU made a move. What prevents the "Ohio States" from making a move to protect their fiscal positions? Now, let me make an argument why UND should go DI: Teams playing in hockey's Frozen Four get a cut of the profits .... if you are a DI in all sports. How much money did UND lose out on in 1997, 2000, and 2001?

Come on, any real Gopher fan would cheer for UND in the early west semi. Why? 1. WCHA (WCHA RS4 defeats CCHA RS champs? That helps the league in the future.) 2. Wouldn't they take more joy in ending the Sioux season versus Ferris' season? If they were brave and strong, they'd cheer for the Sioux on Friday.

Try looking here for starters: http://www.ncaasports.com/icehockey/mens/story/6263459 More info will probably come as the week moves along.

A bunch of schools join a division when they only have athletic budgets that are 20% of some of that division's powerhouses. The powerhouses don't like what they are seeing happening to their division. How long are they going to be bled, by folks spending 1/5 of what they are, on athletics? Now, am I talking about UM-Crookston joining DII (compared to NDSU) or Ohio State ($80 million on athletics) looking at the influx of comparatively small schools to DI? The big DIs are taking notice. That's what those NCAA articles show.

bisonguy: I know the date. I was doing some looking though what the NCAA was up to. Those were some eyecatching words no matter the date. My conclusion after reading some past issues of NCAA news? The NCAA has no idea what it is doing.

If UMD is fake, I don't want to see real.

The current rule is this: If a school hosting a regional is in the tournament, they play at that regional site. That's why Minnesota will play at Mariucci, that's why Michigan will play at Yost. BU is a host somewhere this year. They aren't hosting in their barn however, but they will play in the regional that they are hosting.

Some interesting words from NCAA press releases: May 25, 2001 July 24, 2001

I don't have all the numbers but I'll work from your list. (You have to love Friday afternoon and a search engine. ) ~500 million on flood protection: The Army Corps says about 2/3 of that number for both GF and EGF. GF and EGF pick up significant chunks of that with local dollars. 100+ million (plus attendant costs to the city improving infrastructure of several million more) on the Ralph: The Ralph was $104 million (and change) of private donation dollars. Yes, the city put in some infrastructure, but not much. It sits on pre-existing streets in a pre-developed area. A recent GF Herald article stated that REA brings $17,000+ per month in sales tax revenue to GF. Nearly 100 million on the Alerus: The Alerus ended up at about 75% of the number you cite. What's interesting here? Sales tax revenue (see The Ralph above) goes to pay this off. 11 million dollar publicly-financed hotel: No, CANAD would build the hotel. Private dollars. Yes, they'd get a lease on the land similar to that of NDSU to Fargo for the land to build FargoDome on, plus some tax breaks. 20+ million (if the GFH gets what they want) on an indoor waterpark: From The Herald: "To me, the only acceptable one is the $7 million one because that's the only one we can afford and the only one that will pass (a vote of the people)," (GF city) commissioner Bill Hutchison said. None has been decided on. GF lost their water park to the 1997 flood. A new arena (7 million): Again, privately financed by REA. No taxpayer dollars. Dome over Memorial: Dome is way too strong of a word. Sports bubble, and it would just cover the turf and track so they could be used all year. $1 million on new turf at Memorial: Did UND know the Aurora/Alerus would ever pass and be built? Your number for REA max is about 4000 too high. They only got 13500 in for KU hoops. Old REA is 31 years old and you can see through the exterior wall in some spots (seriously, see 'rust' above). There is talk (first link in thread) of bringing it down. Hyslop is 80+ years old. UND has found a way to update its athletic facilities without being a strain on the State or city of GF. (Yes, GF built the Alerus Center. And Fargo built FargoDome. Call it a wash there.) I'm not sure what your concern is. And at the risk of repeating myself, the rational explanation follows Fargo's explanation for building FargoDome: If you build it they will come. Right? The knock on GF has always been "nothing to do up there." Well, now there's something to do there. The chances for getting new business and industry (non-service sector employment) improves. That is also part of the "build FargoDome" rationale, yes? Why shouldn't GF it a shot?

Roger Thomas said what he said. That's the first thing I've heard any UND official say that wasn't strictly "stay DII." It's worth noting. Does it mean anything? Like I've said, it should be an interesting summer. The BSC is looking at possible expansion. You're reading into that. And I never said "NDSU will not." I'd give them a chance, but others have better chances. (It's travel that is the sticking point.) Idaho may have solved the current problem, but the NCAA is looking at defining a home game more closely to prevent Wyoming from playing a home game in Memphis again. This would most likely affect Idaho's plan as well.

tony: Your questions are more than fair. First, GF (city) is 49,300+ people alone (2000 census). That times your "$25k" and that's about $1.25 billion dollars. Are you sure you have the right numbers? The rational explanation follows Fargo's explanation for building FargoDome: If you build it they will come. Right? The knock on GF has always been "nothing to do up there." Well, now there's something to do there. The chances for getting new business and industry improves. That is also part of the "build FargoDome" rationale, yes? Why not give it a shot? The Hyslop (north half) was built in the 1920s. I'm sure you've been in it. It has its problems. The 1997 flood, the June "flashflood" (same one put 12' of water in FargoDome), and general wear has cause some issues with the old REA. (Whoever came up with the idea of creating a building with an exterior designed to rust?) It sounds like UND wants to bring old REA down and use the space for something else. (Past Herald story.) Regarding seats and the city: Alerus 13500, REA 11406, so, no, you can only seat about half of Grand Forks. The other half, and EGF, and everyone else, has to stand. Remember, Alerus is the city's, not UND's. Hyslop holds 5000. Old REA held 6067. Being a little tongue in cheek, but from the news report "no taxpayer dollar will be harmed in the making of a new arena." REA must have the funds or they wouldn't offer. "Hey, I think that we've got enough infrastructure now?" --- When has Fargo ever said that? Oops, April of 2000. Sorry.

I hope they can set that "taste" aside and close the season in the manner that I would choose. No matter how they close the season, however, I hope they use that "taste" over the summer as a motivator to make things right next year. Adversity happens. I'm interested in seeing how it is responded to.

Let me ponder aloud (sort of) some aspects to this: First, going any smaller than the current Hyslop is not a good idea in my opinion. However, they can't go too much bigger or the "why not play at Alerus?" question comes into play. Solution? About 5000 seats. Not all have to be fixed seating. Why not have some "mobile seating" that could be shared with the Olympic hockey rink? Going to the REA site offers built-in televising capabilities. You can use the existing control rooms and up-links. All you have to do is set cameras and run the cables. That matters. Why? Broadcast rights equal revenues. Another aspect of going to the REA site: Beer, and that also equals revenues. (Remember, positive revenues from REA go back to UND. Remember the check for womens hockey last fall?) The Ralph has the best training facilities around. If you want to grow the BB/VB programs (nodakvindy mentioned "DI potential") access to those facilities is key. With the size of those facilities, 20-some hoopsters and a dozen volleyballers isn't going to make much of a difference in equipment availability. And, last time I looked, there is still "undesignated space" that could be made into training areas in the ice level of REA. Is there an indoor running track around the Olympic rink right now? Will there be? There's another training facility. Who knows why types of training facilities (or athletic office space) may also be planned for such an expansion. The ice in the main arena is a problem right now. Let's get that primary problem fixed. Then let's see what putting a court on and off it will do. Still, I see the Kohl Center model and I don't like what it's doing for Wisconsin. So .... Play the majority of the BB games in the new facility. (I like "full houses.") The coaches like to play where they practice. Let them. Part of the problem with REA right now for the BB teams is it doesn't feel like "home" when they play there. Getting them more time in "the facility," even if its just using the training spaces, even if most games are played in a new arena, will make the main arena floor seem more like home. Also, wouldn't you bring the current Hyslop floor to the new arena? I'd guess you'd use that in the main REA arena for games played in there as well. (I know coaches aren't fond of the current REA court.) Other thoughts?

Not to be too much of a downer here, but how effective is a guy who has been out for two months going to be in the playoffs? I can't imagine, considering the nature of his ailment, that he is in game shape.

Are we sure who the WCHA ROY is. From HobeyBaker.com (as of the time of this posting):

I agree. Building it any smaller than Hyslop doesn't make sense.

Well here's a new twist to the whole conversation: UND eyes 'Ralph' expansion Highlights (from the GF Herald): - $7 million basketball/volleyball venue attached to the west side of Engelstad Arena's Olympic-size ice sheet building - NDSBHE gave the go-ahead to UND administration to negotiate with REA - 3,200-seat capacity for basketball game days; options could allow for seating up to 4,000 - No state money is needed for the project, financing would be handled by REA - Kupchella told the board that it's his understanding if men's and women's basketball moved to Ralph Engelstad Arena and the proposed expansion, most of their games would be played in the large 12,000-seat hockey arena (not sure how much I like that) The article includes discussion on options for Hyslop if this were to happen. I guess a wellness center just north of REA makes a little more sense now.

Simple things at this point: - cheer for those ahead of UND in the PWR to win (it's tough to catch people in PWR unless you win) Closer to home, I'd actually like to see Minnesota beat MSU-Mankato and then have MSU-Mankato lose to UMD in the third place game (on short rest, assuming CC beats UMD). Look at the PWR. That would maybe set MSU-M below UND (rather than a tie).

The 16 teams are: - six conference tournament winners (WCHA, CCHA, ECAC, HEA, MAAC, CHA) get auto-bids - the ten highest ranked teams in the Pairwise Rankings that do not have autobids