The Sicatoka

Feel free to speculate, or ask the NCAA as the authors of the Idaho report did (via the WAC).

Dehydration. It is Arizona after all.

Not because of, but because their work focus was the budget. Subtle difference. But, I've had to work on two important things at once. These folks can't as well?

(Pure speculation by me) But the WAC maintained a pulse. Conferences that don't do that probably can't (see: now defunct Southwest Conference).

Where are you guys finding this report? Nevermind, Found it.

Seems here doesn't come the merchandise. I heard on the morning news today that SME is behind because UND officials have been focused on the budget and not able to communicate on this subject. Delay, delay.

C'mon man, the city needed that space to zone in nineteen more Starbucks and seven new marijuana retailers.

Sing along if you know the words: Stand up and cheer, stand up and cheer for ...

I was sure it was Electromagnetic Fields and Waves or Quantum Mechanics.

I believe UND is using the first prong test to comply with Title IX: "Provide athletic participation opportunities that are substantially proportionate to the undergraduate enrollment."

FYP. Rumors that the "rancher" used a CCM Ultra Tacks left-handed stick can not be confirmed at this writing. Wait. My report is from Cincinnati.

Wolverines? Dead.

Mentioning new logo, wordmarks, etc ... < tapping foot > < glancing down at watch >

Another forward beyond what you list (and that assumes keeping Schmaltz).

I'm wondering the same things about the defense situation. Say we have the "pass the Maalox!" situation: Bring in Bowen as a defenseman; and need two forwards. The 97s are Cakebreak and Keane. Cakebread is an enigma; Keane was less than awe-inspiring in his USHL time. To me the best case is keep Schmaltz, bring Bowen as a forward, and trust that Bast is ready.

At forward I'm thinking Jost, Hoff, Yon, Smith, and Bowen. That's five to replace the departing five. (I'm hoping Schmaltz stays.) At defense, Poolman and Johnson. I'd love to say Bast, but I'm not sure because he missed most of last season. But, if those are the incomings that would bring in all the 95 and 96 DOBs in the pipeline plus Jost.

I don't see Mattson coming straight from HS.

I've heard something similar to that recently somewhere ...

I'm seeing this consistent theme. Please explain to me what is behind your statements. Does UND not have to follow Title IX (Federal law). I want to find out what you know about this and what the concern is. Otherwise it just seems to be generalized complaining about a law (that I'll plainly admit I have some issues with). I'm looking for an open, honest answer about what the issues and concerns are, not just "women's hockey is too expensive".

No kidding. That coach knows a precedent could be set. He's worried for his program (and job).

Who you pick is who you have for four rounds is why a lot of folks were skeptical of DaveK's roster.

Welcome to the InterWebs.

Uh ... yeah. You pick based on who you think will generate point throughout the entire four rounds. If you didn't ...

Rather than make a statement that any hockey fan here knows to be correct (and thus shakes their head at you), why don't you go look at a schedule and educate yourself a little more about hockey?

That's so cute! You actually believe that outdated notion.