The Sicatoka

Random observations from channel surfing five channels yesterday*: 1. ECAC teams should *never* play on Olympic ice. Never. Talk about no puck possession, perimeter games. Womens games on NHL ice have better possession time. 2. (And this applies to UND very much so): The quality of skating in college hockey has taken a noticeable drop in the last decade. The Corn/Q game had nothing but a bunch of human Zambonis out there. The Ohio State guys were tripping over open ice. Heck, Brandon Bochenski would have looked like Tara Lipinski out there in just about every game. (RIP Nancy Berggraf ) 3. Now that realignment has happened, put the events back on campus for a while, until new rivalries have been established. The empty seats are disheartening. Good grief, even The X was empty last night, with Goldie playing no less! *Yes, if you have the Midco sports package you had FCS (ECAC), FSN (WCHA), BTN (Big Ten), NBCSN (HEA), and CBSSN (NCHC). Thanks to the buddy that clued me in on that little factoid.

That's why BC consistently has their way with Hakstol teams: BC plays down the center swath (between the dots); UND plays outside the dots.

After last night and knowing what it'll take today I need to go and do something that'll put me in a better mood than this. I'm going to pay my taxes. Ouch.

What have I learned this year? Senior-laden teams dominate. Teams with few seniors struggle. Oh, wait, I knew that.

UMass-Lowell controls our fate. <facepalm> No, wait, it's worse: UND has to beat WMU in a game that is everything to us, nothing to them. I recall that scenario recently ... <facepalm>

The slow start thing is finally coming home to roost. The "go conservative" with a lead thing is finally coming home to roost. The lack of offensive creativity must be fixed.

NDSU fans are cocksure of what NDSU can do ... to a fault. UND fans are cocksure of what UND can not do ... to a fault. <-- UND fans need to work on this. End the negative waves.

No, the key is play the game in Miami's zone which means control puck possession and tempo. Miami in the offensive zone - lethal Miami in the defensive zone - uh, not so great ...

I believe I have all these channels on my Midco cable (with sports package): All times Central (and who UND fans should cheer for in CAPS) 1:00 pm FSN Bowling Green v MSU-Mankato (cheer for Ferris State) 2:00 pm BTN Penn St v WISCONSIN 3:07 pm FCS Cornell v UNION 4:00 pm NBCSN NOTRE DAME v UM LOWELL (anyone but New Hampshire) 4:00 pm CBSSN Denver v Western Michigan 6:07 pm FSN Alaska-Anchorage v FERRIS STATE 6:37 pm FCS QUINNIPIAC v Colgate 7:00 pm BTN Ohio State v MINNESOTA 7:00 pm NBCSN New Hampshire v PROVIDENCE 7:30 pm CBSSN Miami v NORTH DAKOTA FSN - Fox Sports North, formerly the "all Goophies, all the time" channel BTN - Big (can't count to twelve) Ten Network FCS - Fox College Sports (nation feed) NBCSN - aka Notredame Broadcasting Company's Sports Network CBSSN - The NCHC network

Interesting factoid here: http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/03/19/vasectomies-on-rise-during-march-madness/ Dare I say this just goes to show that basketball fans have no ...

The City of Grand Forks thanks you. C'mon, you know if you hang the curve and it gets taken for the big fly.

Questions (don't know): - Do those schools have the requisite 16 sports to be FBS? There's expense if they don't. - Do those schools have the requisite grant-in-aid levels, in total, to be FBS? See NCAA DI Manual 2013-14 Section 20.9.3 for details. It's not just FB grants, but there are all-sport, athletic department, totals to hit as well. - Do those schools have the funds to go from 63 to 85 scholarships (times two because of Title IX remember)? - Do those schools have an existing travel budget that would support FBS (and potential longer travel), or are they in bus leagues? If you had to add two sports, and 44 scholarships (for FB and Title IX) and maybe more for Section 20.9.3.2, and suddenly had to start flying to games, yeah, it'd add up fast. Won't disagree. But if you already had 20 plus sports, more than enough grants, and were flying in a western US conference already, the issue becomes the 44 grants (for FB and Title IX), right? Well, that and stadium seats*. *Attendance too you say? That's easy. It's the EMU solution. Money that's already going to support football gets run through this process.

Place kicking. Punting. Heck, the way contact is being elimi-ruled from the game slowly but surely, why not.

By your own words the key requirement is ... I don't see a limit on the number of invitations a conference can give. Wild? Outlandish? Unprecedented? Yes. Yes. And ... yes. Possible? Yes.

OK, so what's to stop FBS conference X from inviting all of the teams, each individually, from FCS conference Y?

Uh, the two bolds are backs, big backs ... who didn't play last year because I thought the guys who did play are fast and the big backs were too slow, ... uh ... math ... not ... working.

It's from the same folks that brought you ...

College coach goes and watches a HS game and sees an interesting freshman. Thinks: Maybe after HS and a year of juniors ... five years. HS coach goes to a bantam game and sees and interesting 9 year old. Thinks: Maybe in ... five years (as a freshman or 8th grader).

Partial credit. Going sentence by sentence ... You have to average 15k attendance (actual or ticket sold) once every two years. You are allowed to use a different stadium to count as one of your "home" games (and thus toward your attendance numbers). Not attainable? Things as they are now always will be this way? Alerus can't be modified? UND attendance can't improve? No, NDSU does not qualify for FBS right now. The attendance aspect? Yes. The bona fide* invitation from an FBS conference? Not so much. *If you've read the NCAA manual on the subject you'll know I'm quoting.

We have it in evidence that "1 + 1 = 2". What we have in evidence (fact) is that UND did not apply for conference membership in 2005. What we have in evidence (fact) is that NDSU did not apply for conference membership in 2010. What we do *not* have in evidence is what would have been the outcome if either *had* applied. We don't have evidence on the outcome because (wait for it ...) neither applied. Because it never happened it is not in evidence and any assumed outcomes are merely conjecture. Thus ends the discussion on factual evidence versus conjecture.

10,000 is a fine goal for a post-season tournament. Did you know UND is currently averaging 11460 during this regular season for a sport "nobody cares about"?

Again with conjecture. Yes, 1 + 1 = 2; but, we only have one "1", namely UND did not apply. You're assuming a second "1" (that UND would not get in) which is strictly conjecture. I'm saying there's only one "1" and thus 1 = 1, or, there was no application to join so we'll never know what may have happened. Same would apply for NDSU in 2010.

You've stretched too far again. UND never applied in 2005; hence, UND did not get into the BSC in 2005. That's all that can be said. Beyond that is conjecture. NDSU never applied to the BSC in 2010 so again, we'll never know, and anything more is again conjecture.

Funny thing is, two sides make a contract. Both Idaho and the BSC signed it. The BSC signed a document stating losing UND would be a significant loss.

Thought that bore repeating.