Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

The Sicatoka

Moderators
  • Posts

    37,088
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    578

Everything posted by The Sicatoka

  1. Funny thing is, the most successful team under the "Fighting Hawks" name is ... 2016 Men's Ice Hockey National Champions. Yes, the name was in place at that time. It was used by ESPN during the game.
  2. No worries. But that's how the NCAA rolls.
  3. Yup. Exactly. No flashbacks to Frozen Four of 1997*. *Michigan was so sure they'd be in the final they overlooked BU. Whups.
  4. FYP. That's the NCAA's thing.
  5. " ... significant re-allocation of budgetary resources ... " or ...
  6. A. And then you line up and try to make it 6-1 before the horn. In your scenario you need those two players for the next game more than anything else.
  7. Still waiting for Jack Michaels to roll out a "Track it down Marge!" during a UND FB game.
  8. Gopher freshmen? Work? Stop it. You're killin' me.
  9. Saying they've retained Baker Donelson is a message from UND to the folks that won't be happy (and there are sure to be some). From the link, here's the Baker Donelson message: The Baker Donelson message: We know what we do, we do what we do, and we don't lose when we do it. If you're going to play in the Title IX/OCR sandbox, yeah, you hire someone like that.
  10. With the NCAA that's as bad or worse than the cigar!
  11. No. It's worse. It's a bird with teeth.
  12. Same acting classes as your team I see.
  13. Didn't know you spoke Latin ... sort of.
  14. So you're blue/green color blind. Tough break.
  15. Anything involving women has significant budgetary impacts. That is all. Next question.
  16. A soccer player callin' ya out as a diver. Oh SNAP!
  17. Hiring a Title IX consultant tells me something other than men's sports will be getting the stink-eye this time around.
  18. Well, it's not so bad, we've lost five times too ... wai-wha? You mean in the NCAA tourney? I thought you meant championship games.
  19. I see "Far go ND" <-- Prophesy Yoda-esque spoken as!
  20. Actually, the rule as written is the problem. I suspect the officials don't understand the rules. You can call "diving" without calling anything else --> "A diving penalty is a standalone penalty." Embellishment is when a penalty has happened but so has exaggeration --> "called in conjunction". Diving and Embellishment are two different things. They should separate them in the rule book.
×
×
  • Create New...