Teeder11

While others are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Pick your idiom to fit your views on Kelley's leadership and him as a person, I guess. The jury is still out on my opinion of the man. Overall, as a whole, I have seen solid leadership (best in the University System, by far, though, that is not saying much right now). That is not to say that I have not seen some missteps. So far, I've seen a guy trying to make decisions for the good of the entire institution and not just a few parochial interests. I think this is a bad example of an "issue" for us to start oiling the torches and sharpening the pitch forks to run the guy out of town. On balance, I give Kelley a C+.

Yes. He was at times. But not all the time. In the late 1960s through the fall of the Nixon Administration, Tom was viewed as very much the establishment, and was often at odds with students over the counter culture causes of the times. I think he handeled those situations quite well, in hindsight, and "we" often wax eloquently and fondly about him, even to this day because of it. But, I think, "we" tend to be the type of folks who agree with the political slant that Tom espoused. That was not the ideological temperment of the students body once upon a time ago. Sadly, if he were president today, I think even our old friend Tom would have succummed to some of the PC pressures and voracious political agendas that dominate our society. You could get a way with a lot more in Tom's day, before the 24-hour news cycle, the Internet, message boards, Facebook, Twitter, partisan blogs, local and regional issues talk radio and Government Sunshine and Freedom of Information laws. It was a beautiful time to be an executive of any big organization back then, but, again, those days are long gone.

From the Herald circa January, 2008: "Kelley has a distinctive voice, quiet and husky, which his wife, Marcia, said creates a beautiful tenor. "I sound like my father down to the line," Kelley said. "I can let Marcia (a speech pathology lecturer at Wyoming) explain it anatomically... I have very tight, narrow vocal cords. My larynx is my larynx. That's what I've got and that's what I sound like." Buzzkill. I know; I'm sorry.

Well said. "overly fastidious and pedantic fussbudget," I like that. Kind of sums up the inflation of this totally overblown topic.

This is exactly what happened. Much ado about nothing.

How do you sit next to someone in an online classroom? Just asking. Please explain.

Well, of course, NDSU online courses are going to require "very little effort." Try an accredited online curriculum from UND sometime and you can become an alum of a true flagship school!

I like what I am seeing out of Men's BB, after so many tough transitional years. All five of our starters from the end of last season's Great West champion team are back and they are all SOPHOMORES!!! Three more solid seasons (hopefully), including two seasons full-D1 in an autobid conference, to look forward to with this roster. I also like the fact that two big men, Goodman (6'8") and Wilmer (6'11''), are back from injuries this year. Don't know much about the incoming frosh, especially this Antwi Lenny kid out of Canada. Should be an exciting run for the next few years. I hope Jones can keep loading up like it appears he has been doing in recent years. Oh by the way, last year's 19-15 record was an +11 swing from the year prior! Very nice

Hands to the face

Personal foul SUU

Sioux pick 2!!!

safey sioux!!!!

3 and out SUU

PUnt downed at SUU 2 yd line

Sioux to receive kick off.

Pass protection will be key for Sioux offense today. If that is solid. I like our chances.

No problem, green team, it was my pleasure. About the announcers, and not to harp on it, but they called Mo "Michelle" a few more times in the game. But on the bright side, we were called "Notre Dame" only once. Now that's progress, right?

www.goterriers.com I had to pay $10 for the monthly subscription. Oh well, I figure it's like $5 for a ticket for each game. Not bad.

BU wins 1-4. Sioux D gets gobbled up at the point by Wakefield while Sioux were on a PP. Got to make those basic plays at the point. It was a soft pass to the point and the D (don't know which one, might have been Furia) lost the puck at the blue line and Wakefield jumped on it and took it all the way. Shot trickled in on Ney. That was the only tally of the third. Sioux played strong the rest of the game after that. I hope they can build on that momentum tomorrow. The game was closer than score indicates. Lamoureauxs were shutdown, Karvinen is getting used to the college game and the other Euros passing was off. BU goalie was hot as hell after letting in first goal of the game 50 seconds in. On the bright side, I think UND outshot BU 32-30. I predict tomorrow's game to be closer, grittier and a Sioux victory.

Yeah, you're right. I just thought the East Coast elite could do a little better. OK. Score is now 1-3 BU. Sioux speed was dominant in second but penalties killed them. They are up to 8 now. BU is 2-8 on the PP. Ney had no chance of first goal. It was by her before she turned her head toward the shooter. Really no soft goals by her to speak of. Wakefield has a rocket for a wrister. BU passes seem crisper than the Sioux outside of the Twins. So BU appears slower but better passing is making up for it. Our D seems shaky especially on the few PP we've been fortunate enough to get. I don't think Idalski minds the penalties, though. I think he'd say something like he'd rather see his girls be aggressive and take the play to them.

1-0 Sioux after 1 period at BU. BU is carrying the play after the Sioux go 5 for 5 on the penalty kill. Wiebe scored on a early break away 50 seconds in to open the scoring. Ney has been solid in net. BU announcers are brutal, referring to "Michelle Lamoureaux" and they act like they no nothing about Mary Loken, Michelle Karvinen and the other Euros, as they talked about UND's only big threats being the Twins and Wiebe.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I stand corrected after doing my own number crunching. UND's on-campus enrollment is 12,032 compared to South Dakota State's overall enrollment of 12,725.

Just so we are all working with factual numbers, the UND Office of Institutional Research reports, as of the fourth week of classes, Fall Semester 2011: Traditional face-to-face undupl. headcount: 10,544 Combo (combination of online and traditional): 1,488 Total UND students who take at least one class on campus: 12,032 Total UND Distance education headcount: 2,665 Total enrollment: 14,697

I know Johnny's just ribbing us, but all that aside, I too find this whole "online enrollment" thing to be a bit perplexing. There's a guy on the IN-FORUM Web site's comments section that chimes in with the whole "UND has a lot of online students" argument every time there's a topic even remotely addressing NDUS enrollment. I think he/she goes by screen name "Tony," and I can only surmise that it is the one and only "Tony" from "Cow-ville," er, I mean, "Bisonville" fame. Anyway, when you listen to this nonsense, it's like no other school in the university system has online students -- just UND, and you'd think that it doesn't take any money or resources to provide an accredited education for these students. They're just souless figments of our imagination that sit on our enrollment sheets to bolster numbers. B.S., I'm here to say that an online education does mean something and that it does take resources and expenses to grow it and make it as successful a part of UND's Graduate School program as it has become, especially an accredited one like UND has. It shows that a UND education is in demand from people all over the world. I don't think anyone should be poo pooing online students, especially, friends, supporters and alumni of a school that does the exact same thing, just to a lesser degree. It's just that UND does it better and thus attracts more of those kinds of students. All that said, UND's on-campus enrollment (excluding all distance learners) is growing too. UND Housing officials have been quoted as saying there have never been more students living on campus in residence halls than the fall semester of 2011. Lastly, and not that it matters one iota, but UND's on-campus face-to-face headcount is still more than the two South Dakota members of the so-called big-time"Dakota 3" schools. And the third one of those three (NDSU), is now losing population (though, they'll use PR speak and say "holding steady), due to overspending and poor administrative decisions made by its previous regime, to the point that if it doesn't get its act together, it might one day find itself playing second fiddle when it comes to face-to-face enrollment, too. Again, for accentuation sake, not that it REALLY matters. But the whole thing just keeps getting brought up. Whew! I'm done. Go Sioux!

Mario!