The Sicatoka

And mine is that the other aspects are so objective that either you meet it or don't. The fuzzy, open to litigation angle, is always "equity" so that's where the challenges come.

Most Title IX suits go after the Participation angle. Why? It's the "squishiest". The other two (financials, opportunity) are pretty objective. https://nwlc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Final Athletics Fact Sheet.pdf

Me (to siouxforce19): Weltanschauung? siouxforce19: Schadenfreude.

I barely hit save and Rasmussen scores for CHI. I should've given the boys the C note to go out on the town with earlier.

Change "Wild" to "Blackhawks". Change "$20" to "C note".

Um ... Yeah. Uh-huh. Sounds right so far. Sure. Uh-oh. Gulp. Facepalm.

Butcher, Janssen, Marcinew, Romig, Ritt, VanVoorhis, Cowley, Ogard. <-- They lose a big group of seniors including a Hobey winning defenseman. Honestly, I suspect if DU has early departure motion it'll be late (as in after Montgomery makes his decision because his name is coming up in a lot of NHL talk).

Heathen.

Regarding Title IX, you only have to meet one of the three prongs. UND appears to be going for pure equity (prong 1)*. You can try to prove (sue) UND is failing another prong; however, by meeting one of the three you've met all of Title IX. *NDSU appears to use prong 3 - opportunities and interests.

Wanna keep women's ice hockey?

More what than football? ... Scandinavians? And about men's sports on the block ... wrestling, baseball, swimming, golf's on life support ...

Anyone seen Ray77?

The odds of it happening just went up ten percent.

... with a $20 in a $2 whore house. < line shamelessly stolen from another >

Not as crazy as it sounds at first ... https://www.google.com/search?q=albuquerque+skiing&oq=albuquerque+skiing&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l3.9176j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Sandia+Peak+Ski+%26+Tram,+Cibola+National+Forest,+NM-536,+Sandia+Park,+NM+87047/The+University+of+New+Mexico,+Albuquerque,+NM+87131/@35.133995,-106.628957,47081m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x87189968f2d2a8a3:0xa109e383666554da!2m2!1d-106.3659116!2d35.1689133!1m5!1m1!1s0x87220b5a2481f1bd:0x7777c7361d5ed347!2m2!1d-106.6197812!2d35.0843187!3e0

Making sure there's another copy of this. Me, in the lead ...

More info on changes: http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-di-council-approves-early-signing-period-for-football-prohibits-oversigning/?irgwc=1&clickid=Ue%3A0TA2%3AawAOQNlxWhW7o1VfUkhyAIXJs0RCzc0

Title IX is not about women's sports. Title IX is about opportunities and gender equity. UND was ripe for a Title IX suit after baseball was cut ... a suit by male athletes.

Not sure if I'd venture $20 on that ...

Canadiens? Let's not go crazy there Mafia. There are limits to what even I'll believe.

... including the late add of the "no ejection" clause? (Have to scroll about four posts down from linked.) The estimate is a school like Minnesota will get $43-56 million annually in TV revenues over the next six years. My 10% of that number is $4.3-5.6 million annually. That's 20-25% of UND's current athletic budget! And I just figured out how to spin it: Give us that money or we blame YOU for us having to ax WIH.

Lots and lots of news here about today's events: http://footballscoop.com/ - early signing periods - no more two-a-days - hiring of a player's former HS coach - and more ...

You are the company you keep. Having your name dropped along side the B1G schools is not bad. I've set out my "must haves" list for UND should this become more than speculation.

< drops the mic >

I just really looked at the ice in The Denny. (Picture above.) About the only space without an advertisement on it is the goalie crease. The NCAA will need a lot of whitewash there.