The Sicatoka

Shhhh ... no prompting from the studio audience.

This is probably the least I've thought about "who's in, who's out" in the last 15 years or so. I guess something else had my attention. Defense: LaDue is gone. Stetcher is too. Thompson? I'm gonna say it: He's not ready. He may think he is; the LAK may be afraid of him pulling a Vesey; but, he's not ready. Poolman? I'd worry, but I think he wants to play a season with his brother (and dad with them at the bench). I've heard nothing about Ausmus so that's safe ... well as safe as anything is. Figure we'll lose two at best, three at worst. Forward: Boeser is staying. I'm hoping Jordan talks to Nick and tells him to stay for a junior season. Many are saying Luke Johnson is gone. He'll probably go, and have a long AHL career. Poganski is the only other wildcard I see (because Trevor Olson tweeted he's coming back. ) So we lose four senior forwards and let's say two more. That's six (?) forwards and three (?) defense. Now comes the tough part: Who comes in? I'd say the guys who are age 20* as I write this, namely, ... Defense: Poolman and Johnson. If they need another ... Bast? Peski? Evers? Forward: Smith, Yon. Jost is a gimme. Hoff, Bowen* ... then ... Keane? *Take that Big Ten **A nice "have" in case another defender is needed.

So other schools knew commodities prices (oil, ag) were going to tumble, decimate the State budget, and that the Governor would be ordering all State agencies to prepare cuts at 4.05% and 10% levels? Until I see public plans and statements from the remainder of the NDUS schools, I stand by my prior assessment. I hope I'm wrong and they aren't just hoping to slide by, but to this point I haven't seen much to believe otherwise.

Things that look like that on org charts always humor me. They result from having to do something with a person after they've proven "The Peter Principle". I call them "uncle" positions because they are out there like an uncle who doesn't have a family of his own.

One more rant: I'm against the NCAA's approach at division levels. Making a school have n programs (x women's and y men's) to claim a "division level" reeks of elitism. If UND wanted to play men's ice hockey at the top collegiate tier and no other sport, so what? If Johns Hopkins wanted to play lacrosse at the top collegiate level and nothing else, so what? If NDSU wanted to play football and nothing else, so what? Instead we have a system designed to force creation of and then subsidize athletics programs (bankrupt their host institutions?) that are of little to no interest to the general public or even to the vast majority of folks that should be constituents. Tell me, honestly, does anyone besides friends and family attend collegiate golf events? How about rowing? Fencing? Skiing? But you have to have those to make your "magic number" to claim a division level. It's time for a Cafeteria Plan in the NCAA.

Here's another not so popular spin from me, but I've said it before. Public funds for public education institutions should be for curricular activities. Extra-curriculars are just that: extras. I'd extend that through all levels (JHS, HS, college). There's no reason why football, basketball, soccer, < insert other sports here > couldn't be done as privately run, independent from the schools, club organizations. Here's where folks will blather about "opportunity" and "under privileged*", but guess what, a private club program with private funding will find the talent and support it. If your kid can play, the club will support them because they want to win. Better? The players would be without the additional constraints that organizations like the NCAA and the HSAAs put onto "student athletes". Don't get me wrong. We're too far down the rabbit hole for that to ever happen. But if I could go back in time and change it, I would. *I've always chuckled at the phrase "under privileged". A privilege is a special right, something above and beyond the usual. Under privileged means "normal".

UND is leading from the front on this. Why? Because our (interim) president has been through this (state budget cuts) before. He understands that it's best to be seen as leading (meaning making the tough choices) as well as meeting the directives out of Bismarck. (Make Bismarck happy now, use to your advantage later.) The other schools? I hear crickets. I suspect they think they can just slide by unnoticed and they hope that somehow magically the problem solves itself. That never works. When you do that someone comes and solves the problem for you, and seldom is the outcome what you'd wished. Doing nothing is weak and cowardly and shows no leadership. Actually, it probably also shows impotence because you more than likely have no idea what to do. Ed Schafer: cleaning up Kelley's messes; leaving a lean, mean, clean house for Kennedy. Too late to get Ed to run for the White House?

Uh-huh, uh-huh, go on ...

As the proprietor of this thread/game, I hereby empower myself with a second entry called "the other guys", aka "sleepers". Get ready ... Chimera, Beagle, Martin (NYI), Ward, Brouwer, Desjardins Chorney, Schultz (PIT), Parayko, Oduya, Lehtonen

Ovechkin, Crosby, Tavares, Kane, Perry, Sequin Niskanen, Leddy, Doughty, Keith Holtby

Here are some realities I see: No one believed UND should be maintaining 21 Division I athletics programs. We wanted some pruning. Non-revenue sports will always get the skeptical eye first. This region is not great for "summer sports" as NCAA sports. Face it, baseball and golf are summer activities and those seasons, the climate, and the academic calendar do not align at UND. We live in a world of Title IX and people willing to bring lawsuits just to watch the wheels turn. The State of ND is in a budget mess right now. (Argue the why and the politics elsewhere.) This move set the stage for who knows what later. If the State stays a mess, expect M/W S&D to be in trouble, and maybe even more (women's hockey). If not, this could open opportunities for men in other areas. Brian Faison has made some unpopular, but turned out right, decisions; and he's accomplished some big things (see: HPC, NCHC). I think he's earned a little bit of trust in making a call for UND Athletics. I trust Ed Schafer. Is today what I expected? Yes and no. I expected cuts, but not what was cut. Not having the information that the decision makers had, I'll trust them (Faison, Schafer).

Big Sky doesn't sponsor baseball and men's golf is not a core (required) Big Sky sport. There's the answer key.

Uh, no. Division affiliation is per the NCAA. See the NCAA Division I manual, I believe it is in section 20.

I just looked at the M and W S&D schedules: few meets, and can go by bus (Brookings, Iowa City, Vermillion, Minneapolis).

" ... 7 out of 10 ... " -- Dan "The Common Man" Cole

Or those women's scholarship dollar could be reallocated to women's programs not at full scholarship funding.

If it is cuts, going from 21 to 19 NCAA DI sports is a good thing. If it is M/W S&D (and that'd be my guess if it is cuts) that's the logical choice as they are not Big Sky sports. If it's not cuts it's that the final clause in Ralph's will kicked in when #8 was won. CHA-CHING!! (Hey, a guy can dream, right? ) I'd still bet on S&D being cut.

He claimed we hit three of their guys with elbows to the head.

I just realized how this season started (Cam giving up two goals on his first two shots). " ... It's how you finish." -- Cam Johnson when asked about this at the press conference.

If you want to shake your head listen to the QU coach's post-game comments.

Some say "finally"; dare I say back on top.

Dear Benny, Your request ... Has been approved.

Dear Michigan, we're at the door ...

F'Hawk yeah!

This thread? Dead ... Until October.