The Sicatoka

And it's about perception, because that becomes reality. If the 129 v. 282 numbers were common knowledge, no matter the "third prong" compliance, NDSU would be taking some heat from parents with daughters and other advocacy groups. Ask yourself, which would you rather be when standing behind the mike and in front of the cameras: "Sure we have less than half the number of female athletes as male athletes, but they have a well paid male coach and nice locker rooms" or "We have male/female participation numbers that correspond to our general enrollment population." The P5/G5 use the first prong for precisely that reason: public relations (aka perceptions).

Title IX -- the actual words: It only mentions participation, not outcomes (success or not). 282 male NDSU students have opportunity to participate as DI athletes. Just 129 female NDSU students have that participation opportunity. (Again, for reference, UND numbers: 244 male, 205 female)

And you'd better make sure your surveys are accurate and reflect the (ever changing) interests and abilities of your student body and potential student body. As to the spirit (opportunities for women) of Title IX, I guess I struggle with that when I see 129 women competing in DI at NDSU while there are 282 men. (UND numbers: 205 women, 244 men) If that makes me a "first prong safe harbor thinker" I'm guilty. I guess I see it more as getting females onto the playing surface.

That's about 75 scholarships between those two sports. You'll have to do wrestling also I'd expect. Can we say about 85 for the men? And double that to cover the women. Say $3000 per, that's an extra cool half a million dollars. Figure 5 home games, and 20000 seats per, or 100,000 stubs sold --> add $5 per stub, right? I assume none will balk at that.

Admittedly just a cursory read through the NCAA document, but I find this interesting: When was the last survey done at NDSU? Did it include the very good womens club hockey team players and friends? The reading I have done about the third prong approach is that the survey results can easily be gamed by folks looking to do so. Also, the process allows for unreturned surveys to be tallied as "no interest" which seems sketchy at best.

I'm catching up on the reading. I only download the 2012 NCAA reference over the weekend and haven't started that.

Football pays for itself nowhere save for a few P5 schools. Basketball is better because of far fewer scholarships but still not a lot of places. Hockey pays for itself at a very very few unique places. College athletics is subsidized for the most part most everywhere.

That singular statement needs reiterating. A scholarship can be written into overhead of the cost of doing business (running the university). FCOA is cutting a check for real funds* out of a real account. "Straight cash, homey." -- Randy Moss

I look at what the BSC sponsors and what UND sponsors, and think: drop baseball and M/W swimming and diving.

Sundogs Judy's Bar Big .... nevermind If I see "FLICKERTAILS" on the list I know we've been had. FLICKERS.

You solved the "war" word: thUNDer hammer. But would we have to get Trevor Hammer's approval to use the name?

Topic already exists. Closing this thread. Please use: http://forum.siouxsports.com/topic/20531-university-of-north-dakota-hockey-2015-16-season/

Correct: Title IX was written to address money, ... and opportunity to participate.

As long as I'm in the lead I ain't checkin' nothin'.

When you keep getting challenged and keep needing to evaluate what you're doing, don't you think that maybe you should re-evaluate what you're doing to better align to what the rest of the NCAA does?

Sorry for the ugly formatting, but ... Source: http://www.willamette.edu/wucl/pdf/sportslaw/spring07/art4.pdf Basically that says when criteria for use of the third prong (interests and abilities survey) was loosened up, the NCAA was opposed. --> Urged members to decline use of the Additional Clarification (a.k.a. the third prong approach). Why were the NCAA and 140 Congressional representatives opposed to the survey approach? As it says, 129 womens athletes at NDSU (third prong: interests survey); over 200 at UND (first prong: proportionality). 8 mens, 8 womens sports at NDSU; 10 mens, 11 womens sports at UND.

Flip the Nevermann logic: We only get Arrington for a year. We get Nevermann after that. No doubled-up season.

I know its not scholarships/money spent but NDSU participation rates are, shall we politely say, interesting: NDSU: 349/188 men/women (282/129 unduplicated) UND: 289/268 men/women (244/205 unduplicated) NDSU undergrad: 6100/4700 M/W UND undergrad: 6500/5000 M/W Run the numbers and the ratios are nearly identical. But, ... UND athletic participation ratio is 51/49 or 54/46 (duplicated or unduplicated). NDSU's ratio is 65/35 and 69/31 (dup and undup). I'm stunned at how NDSU can sustain this in today's equality minded world. Can anyone show me another DI institution with both football and wresting that doesn't offer additional womens sports to compensate those mens numbers? (NDSU has 8 mens and 8 womens sports.) NDSU is meeting Title IX by using the third prong; but, their proportionality is way, way out of whack. You have to wonder when someone will question their survey (to meet third prong) or their sincerity in providing opportunity for females in DI athletics. Just 129 females at NDSU are DI athletes. There are over 200 female DI athletes at UND.

With all the twists and turns in the college athletics landscape over the last decade or so, I've come to expect the unexpected.

Honestly, you'll see NDSU womens DI hockey before mens because of proportionality and interests challenges to NDSU Athletics under Title IX.

That's not what Volley said. He said the Summit could make it tough on NDSU by mandating mens soccer. The money that would've gone for FCOA would have to fund mens soccer instead.

Hammersmith quoted a number for FCOA at UND. Remember, that number is a max that a school can pay -- the full cost of attendance. A school can offer a lesser amount. UND uses the first prong (proportionality) to comply with Title IX. UND's student body M/W ratio is basically proportional to its student athete M/W ratio. NDSU uses the third prong (interests and abilities survey). That prong is not the one the NCAA recommends using; however, it is still legal were NDSU to be challenged in Federal court. What NDSU should worry about is their vastly disproportionate M/W ratios and their very, very good womens club hockey team and someone challenging their survey techniques i.e. how come NDSU isn't looking to add a womens sport (good womens club team = interest and ability).

So we're talking CFB only, right? Bernie Berggraf doesn't qualify? Put Bernie and Sid in a room together and Ozzie Osborne would qualify as an interpreter.

It's not hard to find a rat.

I'd support it in a heartbeat. The official name "Mjolnir"; in the SID information that goes out to media you'd explain that Mjolnir is war hammer used by Thor, the Norse/Germanic thunder god. The media would pick up on "war hammer" immediately and you'd soon hear TV and radio guys use it just like the media references "the herd" instead of the B-word for that yellow school in Fargo. Remember, only the worthy wield Mjolnir.