jimdahl

Not to try to prolong the dwelling on this, because as Sicatoka said, "it's over", but the NCC released its findings: http://www.northcentralconference.org/more.php?id=289 Essentially, they said the timing was inconclusive. Their rules dictate that it is not possible to score with 0.3s, but is with 0.4s. It appears that the shot was from inside the 3-pt line, but the line was obscured by spectators from the camera's angle. They reiterated that the NCC and NCAA do not allow changing the outcome of contests, the review is just to better educate officials and improve games in the future.

I was just thinking, there's a way everyone can leave this weekend happy. The Sioux can sweep and get 4 pts, and the Gophers can get two of those "moral victories" they treasure (and the accompanying 4 "moral points"). That should make everyone happy, n'est pas?

This actually clears things up a bit for me. I honestly didn't understand how the sweatpants were offensive. If this group of people used to sew flags on their pants' rear ends as a way to denegrate the flag and America, it's understandable that they view anything else on the rear end of pants as being denegrated (despite a wave of change in fashion that they failed to notice). Lacking the historical context, I'm just used to seeing team names sewn on the rear-end of sweat pants and exercise shorts. The coeds who wear such items are people who are "behind" the team, not people who are against it.

Yeah, it dynamically generates itself from a copy of the same database that generates the rest of the site (box scores, schedules, etc...). It doesn't deal well with conference games not being in pairs, so will probably only be updated on Sunday after all games for a weekend have been played.

Check out my new handy "what-if" calculomatic. http://siouxsports.com/hockey/wchawhatif.php Definitely easier than using an envelope back. It's a bit onerous with so many games remaining, but that will get easier. You can also save a little time by focusing only on those teams in contention, if you so choose. (Works best with IE6, but I'm working on that) I came up with CC beating UND by 2 points in the final standings, but UND a strong 2nd.

Don't get me wrong, the campaign against shot glasses and beer mugs is crazy and racist. But what's up with attacking the sweatpants (the word is too near your behind? you sit on it?) Wait until they discover the offense of boxer shorts with logos!

Awkward plug: Or buy stuff online to help keep SiouxSports.com alive (http://siouxsports.com/hockey/merchandise.htm) Seriously, though, this is a very dangerous precedent. If outsiders perceive the bookstore as a UND institution, it changes the situation from a small minority opposing the Sioux logo to a school institution taking the stance that the logo needs to be hidden away. While it's true that REA next door will pick up any slack in availability of merchandise, further moves in this direction could send very dangerous signals if they're perceived as coming from a UND institution. I now the bookstore is private, so can do whatever it wants, but that's not how a lot of people will perceive it.

I don't think the question is will a Gopher take a cheap shot at Parise, but rather when will DeMarchi take what cheap-shot? Perhaps we should start a pool. I'll take DeMarchi with a spear at 4:37 in the 1st (should DeMarchi somehow find himself ineligible for the game because he beat up some old lady on the way to Mariucci, I'll take Ballard). For bonus points, what will Greene do to DeMarchi after he returns to the ice?

Same mistake you always make JBB. You think there's a collective mind of "UND folks". Your ability to demonstrate inconsistencies between things I say and things other fans/the Herald/UND says is not surprising, we don't all agree. I know it's hard for you to comprehend because you so religiously tow the pro-NDSU/anti-UND line. As far as I can tell reading your "rebuttals", you actually agreed with me on points #1 and #2. #3 just seemed to be "NDSU has always ruled and always will" chest-thumping that failed to address the quote you chose (correlation between home ticket sales and playing pay-to-get-beat-up-on-the-road games). Hah, you've got to get a shot on net before you can get a goal. I'm not even sure you have your pads on right.

Blais just said that Ranfranz earned himself a Saturday start in Minnesota. Looks like your wish could be coming true. You never know if that promise will really hold up, but sounds good for Ranfranz.

There's little doubt Ranfranz saved this game. Probably doesn't mean much for his playing time going forward, but gotta make him feel good against what should arguably be the #1 team in the country.

Though I take no pleasure in being right, gotta point to my prediction that we'd be unable to repeat the special teams performance that made the difference last night. CC 3/3 on the PP so far. That's definitely been the difference. Update: I guess they heard me doubting. The Sioux have killed 2 power plays and scored on a late PP goal and the tying goal with the man advantage with the netminder pulled.

Tonight Eddie Belfour stopped 50 shots against the Devils, setting an NHL record for the season. That gave him a .980 SV% for the night on 1 goal allowed He's really having a stellar season, with 5 shutouts already, a .930 SV%, and a 2.01 GAA.

Though UND has had a friendly schedule to date, we might be letting rivals' chatter mask the teams' success in that schedule a little too much. What's happened so far At 18-1-2, here is the breakdown of UND's success: Opponents .500 or under: 13-0-1 Opponents over .500: 5-1-1 Not only has UND won the games it should have won, but it has done quite well when tested. Compare that with Minnesota who is nipping at UND's heels in the WCHA (and whose fans and media are the loudest detractors of UND's schedule): Opponents .500 or under: 6-1-2 Opponents over .500: 5-4-2 Sure they've had fewer sub-.500 opponents, but they've performed MUCH worse against those opponents. Also, Minnesota has had more opponents >.500, but the comparative success against those opponents speaks for itself. Looking to the 2nd half The '97 championship team had 10 losses, '00 had 8. Starting from the current base of 1 loss, use whatever optimism or pessism you want to count your own projection of the losses in the remaining contests: CC (1 game) @UMN @AA @CC Tech @Denver @Mankato Duluth @Wisconsin Hard to picture this team finishing outside of that championship range, isn't it? Even if we split out, that will be only 10 losses on the season. Be patient -- opponents' grousing now doesn't affect the outcome of our games. This is a team that has won ALL of the games it was supposed to win and done incredibly well against tougher opponents.

Well, this isn't really fair. Sure a team has it's ups and downs, but there's a much higher chance that a school that makes the D-IAA transition to a decent conference will have a worse record over the next 20 years than if they hadn't moved. When all the plans for such a transition assume growing attendance, this could be an issue when combined with my conference concerns... We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I think the average NDSU fan gets more excited right now to watch UNC, UNO, UND, SDSU come to town than they would be to see Idaho St, Eastern Washington, Portland St, etc... At first playing D-IAA teams may be exciting and draw a crowd and eventually many of those teams will be well-known rivals like the teams I named above. However, in between I think there's a lag-time in which fans wonder why they're paying to watch their school lose to a bunch of crappy teams they've never heard of. The problem gets a lot worse if NDSU doesn't hit the dream of Big Sky and plays even lesser known (in the Dakotas) teams. That's the likely situation UND faces. I really don't think those get-paid-to-get-beat-up games generate a lot of fan interest back home. I think the die-hard fans love to see them, but I'm not sure they convince anyone new to buy season tickets. I remember hearing much less about the away game in our home/away 2-year series with Kansas basketball. I do understand the allure of the big name opponents, I'm on record as saying that I think a single win in the NCAA basketball tournament would be more meaningful as a fan than a D-II championship. I just think way too many fans think they're going to start flying in Minnesota for wrestling and Duke for basketball if they move to D-IAA. (Disclaimer -- it's no coincidence that 2-3 of the NCC teams I named as interesting are leaving the NCC).

Perhaps most impressive for the Sioux was giving up only 2 power plays and allowing 0 PP goals. Had you told me that would be the stat before the game, I would've predicted that the Sioux would have won 7-3 or so. Worries me a little because I'm not sure we can play so mistake-free tomorrow night, so we need to improve the goaltending or defense a bit to get the same result.

It seems to only show the top nominees -- no way to see players below that. I find it interesting that they're doing it themselves this year instead of through USCHO (sorry if this has been beat to death on USCHO, I haven't been there in a while).

I've tried to make this point a few times as a potential negative for a move that doesn't involve recreating the NCC. I'll use UND moving alone as an example so fans of other schools don't think I'm criticizing their school. UND's best case dream: Big Sky conference After the novelty of playing Montana wears off, is a football game against Montana (and especially Sac St., Weber St., Northern Arizona, Portland St.) really going to be a better draw than playing NDSU (and UNC, UNO, SDSU)? Even further, fan bases can drop dramatically when a team puts together a few sub-.500 seasons (look at NDSU attendance this year). Other possibilities: MidContinent, new conference? Where's the draw in playing D-IAA schools that are worse than the current NCC teams but that don't have the name recognition as rivals in Grand Forks? I can't imagine in-conference attendance going up in this situation. I think a move to D-IAA without any natural rivals and that leads to sub-.500 seasons could result in an actual decrease in attendance, whereas the plans that make such a move economically feasible tend to figure in an increase. An annual non-conference game against a D-IA team could help fill some of that revenue, but does little to generate local interest. That's why I thought the NCC moving (if they could rally enough support) was a no-brainer, whereas moving alone is a lot riskier. We're now in a bit of a hybrid situation in which some of the traditional rivals would leave us if we stayed, but may not be there if we jumped anyway. Disclaimer: I intentionally ignored stadium size because I was focusing on the possibility of attendance actually decreasing instead of increasing

You've noted yourself that a possible landing spot for NDSU and SDSU is the creation of a new conference. Now, however, there seems to be a wrench in that plan since I'm not sure SDSU is actually allowed to move without having an existing conference accept them. If that interpretation is correct, that would eliminate the most probable conference affiliation for UND because that new conference definitely would have had open arms. Since SDSU is primarily a basketball school anyway, Mid-continent might be next in line if they can't get into Big Sky. That does have the potential to also be a UND home, but since football would definitely be the sport driving any UND move, it's a pretty poor choice. UNC wanted to get away from the Dakota schools, can't imagine they'd have wanted an even wider conference that includes the Dakota schools. They seem quite content to rough it out as an independent for a while. That was always party of the problem with the D-I NCC plan, UNC was going D-I partially to get away from the NCC. I think that's a big part of why UND is waiting -- there aren't any great conference opportunities for it. As you've also correctly pointed out, even NDSU's unlikely successful entry into Big Sky probably wouldn't generate an opportunity for UND.

Well, according to the Herald the final 3-point shot for the win was clearly taken from inside the 3-point line. Video replay apparently confirms. You really hate to lose that way. PS - I was using upset in the traditional meaning of a lower ranked team winning a contest

Argh -- not only are the women upset, but the men miss out on a big upset opportunity. The men lost by one (78-79) on a 3-pointer at the buzzer by USD. You always hate to lose that way. Sounds like the women played a little more dominantly than USD, but had horrible shooting. Not a great way to begin the NCC season.

Let me introduce you to something called context. Yes, I said profits weren't relevant TO THE PRESTIGE OF AN ATHLETIC PROGRAM. I'm not going to repeat my arguments, but it's on record that you failed to address them, but instead take every opportunity to quote me out of context. Regarding the rest of your drivel -- it's been hashed out here. Do you really think that Ralph gave UND a gift that was an ongoing cash-drain or liability? He's clearly set it up to be self-sustaining for a long time to come.

OK, while I did agree with you on the "scandal" argument, I gotta disagree with your others: As Husby is fond of mentioning when its not relevant, the profitability of a program is critical to its survival. Conference affiliation affects travel costs and fan interest (especially in fair-weather Fargo) which in-turn affect the ability of a program to sustain itself. That's why we talk about those issues. I know you're unwilling to admit there's any risk because NDSU has already jumped head first, but I would prefer UND enter any such endeavor with its eyes open (as SDSU has done). Assuming by "Dakotas" you mean the land grant ag schools (UND is also a Dakota school), many of us disagree with this presumption. If I thought UND really weren't considering D-IAA, this forum wouldn't exist. We're not all as obsessed with NDSU as you are UND. We talk about it because it's relevant to UND.

Sigh. I can't believe these people don't realize how silly that argument sounds. The institution, its coaches, its boosters, and its athletes are completely in control of what rules they do or don't follow. Classification has nothing to do with it except that the more people care about your program, the bigger news a scandal is. If the Allen situation had occurred at Duke, we all would have heard about it through national media outlets (see Minnesota). Avoiding the prestige of Duke athletics because we don't want our dirty laundry aired that publicly is ridiculous.

Actually, that particular separate forum exists to discuss the impact on UND of the changes in the NCC and the possibility of UND moving to D-IAA. That forum would be closed tomorrow if the possibility of UND moving to D-IAA was really off the table. One has to be quite naive to actually believe they're not watching everything and continually reevaluating the possibility (particularly given that Lennon decided to stay).