The Sicatoka

Of course hockey is the center of the athletics universe at UND. Seven NCAA titles at the highest level of NCAA play and drawing 250,000 people per season at $16 per ticket it has to be. It is the fuel that makes it all go. You don't hurt the goose laying golden eggs. Now regarding rules with exceptions and "minor sports" and the like: Couldn't the IAA/IAAA rule be regarded as an exception allowing teams to "play down" to where they might be able to compete? Wasn't that why IAA was created in the first place, for the minor football programs?

I think Andy Murray is practicing for a political career.

Don't blame me for the title of this thread. I'm just repeating the headline in the Fargo Forum. "Status low: Scheduling hassles among obstacles NDSU faces as an independent in

Knowing - Coach Roebuck didn't like playing in the main arena - the new one will hold 4000 - they (men and women) averaged less than that last year - there are TV and radio capabilities in there I'm beginning to wonder about this "main arena as home court" thing. We'll see. About the only thing the place doesn't have is a weight room. I guess there's one near by. And just for Bison_Kent: No taxpayer dollars were harmed in the making of this facility. ;)

I'm hoping that Roger Thomas' open items list has now been cut down to just dealing with The Rainmaker and then working on his golf handicap for the rest of the summer. (I'm guessing that whether we like it or not RT was feeling pressure from within UND to hire a new senior womens administrator to replace the recently retired one.)

Not to pick a scab here or restart anything, but in light of recent developments I don't think Roger Thomas has been idle during this time. He's hired two new assistant ADs and I'm sure he was a part of the hiring for the new head of the Fighting Sioux Club mentioned in there as well. And now add in that a BB arena announcement is expected later this week and I don't think Roger Thomas has been asleep at the switch. I'm sure Roger would have liked to have Dean Blais' extension done by now but you can't do everything at once.

The Kings took Brady Murray? I'm not surprised.

Since we all seem so interested in the predictions of such knowing sources, who's going to post the predictions of Dark Star and Grandpa Sid? The draft will be what it will be. The days after the draft will be the ones I'm interested in watching. There could be some very interesting story lines.

Here are the forwards invited to the Canadian camp as listed at CanadianHockey.ca And here is the whole invited roster for Team USA. Both are PDFs. Brady Murray is page 16 of 24 in the first link.

Follow this link to 2002-2003 USHL goalie stats. The column headings are "hot." You can click one to sort by that category. But be careful what you look at when you are there. You just might find that Jordan Parise is a better (statistical) goaltender by save percentage and GAA last year than not only Layne Sedevie, but Nate Ziegelmann too.

Mankato and that hoppy-skippy-bouncy-jump defense? The team should have a "fire" play (dive over the best run blocker?) called in the huddle as an alternate every time. When Bowenkamp sees that whole Mankato D line jump up and shift left-right-up-down-in-out-whatever call the "fire" and hit those guys when they are standing up and not ready for it. You'll push through them for at least four yards and blast a few of them onto the seats of their pants.

What I've really started to notice by watching so much of Giggy of the Ducks: The leg pads have been modified to work with the butterfly style. Look at them. The tops are square to match up when they are down: No five-hole. The insides of the knees are now what a goalie puts on the ice. It almost looks like Giggy (et al) are kneeling behind two sandbags. What's left facing the shooter is two recectangles a foot high and three feet wide each. (You see the whole "front" of the pad.) The bottom of the net is completely gone when they are down. You could just as well put sandbags down. Comparatively, when goalies dropped in the past they went down on the "front" of the pad (not behind them), even down there was a five-hole, and they, the pads, just seemed to cover less of the front of the net.

Phil Lamoureux is going to play in Lincoln this coming season and come to UND in the fall of 2004 as was the original plan when he first committed. (Wasn't that in the Herald?)

Mr. Engelstad's collection includes a Pope-mobile. Was Ralph the Bishop of Rome? Mr. Engelstad owned a car previously owned by Liberace. So could Ralph play the piano if enough candle stands were on and around it?

So I believe the concensus here is that if a player: - "keeps their nose clean" outside of school - works hard in the classroom/goes to class - stays eligible academically - works hard in practice - helps his team on the ice in games (be it scoring or another role, even off-ice*) the player should stay on the roster. Fair enough. Tough to disagree. However, do we know all of these things about any of the players (of any team) in question? Do we know everything that happens off the ice in a player's life? I'd guess far from it compared to what their coaches know. Do we know if players attend class and work hard at school? Not unless you sit in the room with them (as a fellow student or instructor). Do we have the grades of players? I hope not, or academic confidentiality died a little more today. (The most we should ever know is "eligible" or "ineligible.") Do we all attend every practice to see how hard they work? Dare I say, no. What do we see? The stat sheet at the end of a game. We base what we think we know from that, and, ultimately nothing more. We see a sliver of the total picture. The coaches see the total picture. You have to trust the coach's judgement. That's what they were hired to do, namely, make judgements, on an annual basis. * For example, David Hale's presence at games during his illness as a moral support.

Could you imagine if Jordan Parise walked on and made it? Handyman's greatest (G-rated) fantasy could become reality: Parise with the save. He passes off to Parise who moves up ice, around the defense, shoots and SCORES! Parise with the save and the assist on the goal by Parise!

Hammy, I understand your question. It's more than fair. Let me try answer it this way: Lincoln drafted Sydney Crosby in a late round of the USHL draft. Do we expect to see him in a Stars jersey this year (if ever)? Genoway was listed as a sophomore last year but it was his first WCHA season. He had played in some WHL exhibition games so it cost him a "sit out" year. A year away, just practicing, isn't the same as playing. He almost looked rusty at times. I'm not quite ready to give up on him. I hope he hasn't given up. About roster space: I only see five lines worth of guys. That's normal load isn't it? Seniors: Hale, Lundbohm, Palmiscno Juniors: Bochenski, Canady, Connelly, Fylling, Genoway, Massen, McMahon Sophomores: Parise, Prpich Freshmen: Murray, Porter, Stafford

You mean like The Forum did?

Didn't the Florida Panthers do that when they played for The Cup in 1996?

I feel obliged to point out that of the two sponsors of the bill, the NDSU alumnus bill sponsor (Froelich, Selfridge, D) voted for it and the UND alumnus bill sponsor (Wald, Dickinson?, R) voted against it. Suddenly I have the urge to quote 'tony': Who did "help trot out that lame horse of a bill" and voted for it? Who did "sponsor something just so the issue gets aired" and voted to "put to rest"?

The NCAA says the ice should be as close to 200'x100' (aka Olympic ice) as possible, but only 10 of 60 teams last season had it. Most play on something more like NHL (aka North American standard) ice (200'x85').

tony: As you pointed out factoids about legislation sponsorship earlier, I'll point out a factoid about legislation: Most of it has "grandfather clauses" in it covering pre-existing cases.

Unfortunately, this is not true in the specific case you mention. From NDSU's Carr Sports Associates report: 27 times 2.

Read where the annual American Hockey Coaches Association convention was held and it will all become clear to you.

The very frugal ND Legislature passes a law stating that donated buildings (in this case one specifically for athletics) must be self-sufficient so as to not drain general state funds from academics (to support athletics) at the institution. The very frugal ND Legislature introduces (but does not pass) a law stating that state funds should not be used for Division I athletics so as to not drain general state funds from academics (to support athletics) at the institution. Why is one case regarded as obviously ill being afoot (by one party against another) and the other case not? Both seem to me like a frugal Legislature at work.