jimdahl

Another timely Argus Leader editorial. Once again, I'll break my own copyright rules and repost it because they remove them pretty quickly. Original source: http://www.argusleader.com/sports/Wednesda...yarticle2.shtml

Sic- It's actually pretty easy to discern the confusion here. JBB has heard some rumors of NDSU's negotiations, perhaps that a deal is even nearly worked out. Maybe JBB's daddy even works for NDSU. In his excitement and argumentativeness, he's lost track of chronology (a deal tomorrow does not mean a deal was worked out in the past, when NDSU announced the move to D-IAA). Just so he can continue to argue, he also ignores what a completed deal means. After droning on and on about how NDSU does have a secret deal that we don't know about, he finishes with the note that the details just aren't in place yet (which is exactly what you were claiming, that a deal has not been completed).

Again, you're responding to the fantasies in your own head instead of what we actually wrote. No one said anything about the lack of an announcement (which I agree, doesn't indicate anything). In fact, we both cited specific instances of NDSU announcing that they didn't have a conference affiliation. FACT: NDSU did not have a conference affiliation secured at the time they announced the move to D-IAA. They said so. Are you claiming they lied? NDSU is clearly working on getting an affiliation, and hopefully has a lot of interest or even something nearly lined up by now. That has nothing to do with our statements that NDSU moved without any sort of conference affiliation agreement, like UC Davis has.

Scoring summary (from http://siouxsports.com/hockey/result.php?G...MEDATE=20021022 ) Zach Parise (David Lundbohm, Quinn Fylling) James Massen (Tyler Palmiscno, David Hale) Colby Genoway (Ryan Connelly, Matt Jones) Ryan Hale (Jason Notermann, Colby Genoway) Brandon Bochenski (unassisted) James Massen (Tyler Palmiscno, Ryan Connelly) Nice to see the scoring spread around a bit, especially from the 1st years. Great to get a couple points out of Genoway in his first game. Parise continues to light the lamp. And, how about that Massen?

I agree, doesn't seem to be up. I guess it's not surprising that they forgot to "flip the switch" for the Tuesday night exhibition.

Tough time to go on the road against UNO, with a current conference record of 2-2. Neither team has looked like they have the last few years, but both are desperate. UNO has a pretty tough run offense, but not much of a passing game. It's always interesting when a tough run defense goes up against a tough running team. Against a not-so-great UNO defense, hopefully Bowenkamp can bring out last week's "Golden Arm" and hook up with Smith. I suspect turnovers (or the lack thereof) will dictate the winner of this game. FYI -- UND's last win at UNO was 1995.

From NDSU's own Carr Associates report:

The latest word is that the problem with Cutlip's transcript is that he's below the 2.0 GPA required to play. That's why they've been working so hard to ensure that any courses in which he did well are figured into his GPA. Apparently now they're trying to get some of his grades from CSU dropped because he left the classes when he was diagnosed with bi-polar disorder (manic depression). http://www.greeleytrib.com/article.php?sid=11148

I said NDSU jumped without a conference affiliation. NDSU indisputably moved to D-IAA without a conference affiliation secured -- no "jumping to conclusions" involved. You seem to be attempting to prove me wrong by substituing for my actual statements the ridiculous claim that NDSU will never have a conference affiliation. Clearly NDSU will join some conference eventually, most likely within a year or two. I stand by my original statement (with which you seem to agree, judging by your quote to which I was responding) -- jumping without a conference affiliation is a mistake that we both hope UND doesn't make.

I think NDSU's failure to secure a conference affiliation does teach UND a good lesson. While I'm a moderate supporter of UND moving (it's tough to know because we don't have all the information yet), we definitely shouldn't make NDSU's mistake of jumping without a conference affiliation. How can UND possibly conduct an honest cost assessment without even knowing who the opponents will be/where the games will be played?

This is just the beginning. There isn't much to cheer for at NDSU these days, so you're going to be seeing more and more North Dakotans taking an interest in UND athletics and hanging out at the UND message boards. JBB is a pioneer of sorts, the first NDSU fan to become obsessively occupied with UND sports.

Here's the Midco schedule web site: http://www.midcocomm.com/und_sports/und_sports.html

The funniest part is watching the moves when we didn't even play. I understand UND moving ahead of Maine (who lost 0-3 to CC). However, how did we overtake Cornell, who also didn't play? I guess where 0-0-0 Cornell fits into the polls is a tricky question, though.

http://www.fightingsioux.com/sports/wsocce...RELEASE_ID=1475

I agree entirely. However, the double-standard is NOT the choice of Sioux-name supporters, but rather an awkward compromise to try to stretch the life of the nickname as long as possible. "Fight on Sioux" was traditionally opened with a long Indian-style drumbeat, and is still a bit of a native sounding song (in fact, it was not used for a few years in the early 90s for that reason). The entire student section at hockey games used to (in the 80s) do an Indian chant led by the band. The removal of all Native American sounding chants/cheers/songs is part of the attempt of UND to prove that 'Sioux' is not a mascot. Apparently, some people believe that the team using Native-sounding cheers actually dishonors them in the same way as a caricature (because it's not authentic and its being done by non-Natives). Personally, I'd rather see the Sioux name used with all of its heritage, or a new name chosen instead of this compromise in which everyone has to tiptoe around the name. You can't have it both ways, if it really is honorable instead of disrespectful, then honor the entire culture like you used to.

Good article in the Fargo Forum about the NCC's plight. I personally think UMD is a great addition. However, if SDSU leaves, we're still only 7. Who else to add? Whoever it is will almost undoubtedly be a weaker team (of course, that would be a perfect replacement for this year's NDSU team http://www.in-forum.com/columnists/article...ist=jeffkolpack

Counting only the primary market, SDSU is in a MUCH smaller primary market than UND. When you go to the larger (~75 mile) market, Fargo and Grand Forks (~97,000) lump together to form a pretty solid population base. My point is that the move seems demographically less feasible for SDSU than for UND. That's why I find SDSU so interesting -- if it works for them demographically, it should work for UND (though, of course, UND and NDSU are splitting the population in their larger area; theoretically, that might mean that it's actually better for NDSU if UND doesn't move).

I actually read CSL's executive summary as being neutral to negative toward the move (particularly the demographic/socioeconomic survey): http://www3.sdstate.edu/ClassLibrary/Page/...CSL_Summary.pdf The executive summary also included focus group and market surveys. Those indicated that people in the area wouldn't find a Division I team less attractive (won't hurt academics, etc...), but weren't willing to pay a lot more for it either. This is all interesting because, as Sicatoka has said before, if Brookings is demographically attractive for D-I, then Grand Forks certainly is.

Here's the NCAA news article. It's a bit dull, but contains some real nuggets of insight into how the NCAA plans to deal with the Indian mascot issue: http://www.ncaa.org/news/2002/20021014/awi...de/3921n08.html So, the big news seems to be that the NCAA is now going to make schools with Indian mascots regularly certify that they're using them respectfully. As long as Florida State and Illinois are there for us, any resolutions from the NCAA will be similar toothless. However, the interesting point is the crackdown on tournaments/championships at Indian-mascot schools. Sounds like if we want to hold a tournament in Engelstad we have to obscure every Indian-head logo and every sign that references "Sioux". Looks like they're also encouraging conferences to adopt the same rules for conference tournaments.

I like the part where a fan challenged that they wouldn't win national championships anymore once they moved D-IAA, and the athletic director answered, "It's not like we've (SDSU) been banging down the doors for national championships (in Division II)." Remember that NDSU pledged not to move without a conference affiliation. However, when their Big Sky plan fell through, they pushed the move through anyway. In the end, it's what the administration wants that counts.

It must be a new policy. I definitely remember players winning both rookie and either offensive or defensive POTW in the same week. Parise wasn't even nominated for rookie of the week, so it's probably fair to assume he wasn't eligible.

Stats unchanged-- after 2 games, Parise is still averaging 4 points per game

I don't know the correct terminology either, but the winner of a match is the team that wins 3 of 5 games. Unfortunately, UND was actually swept (24-30, 27-30, 24-30) by SDSU tonight Since I went to college, volleyball has apparently switched to what's called rally scoring. That means that someone gets a point on every serve. Traditonally, you can only score when you served, and you play to 15. In rally scoring, whoever wins each serve gets a point, and you play to 30. I've seen one college game in rally scoring (UW vs. Penn State) and don't like it nearly as much. The problem is that once a team is behind 7 points or so, there's no coming back. It used to be that you could stage a reasonable comeback because even if your opponent gets a "sideout", you just have to get the serve back without allowing a point. Now that sideout is a point instead. Apparently the switch to rally scoring was because matches under rally scoring last a predictable length, making them more suitable for television

Yeah, you can't really have two losers for a contest. It also seems incredibly unfair for it to be recorded as a loss for UND when there was an ineligible player on the field. The most common forfeitures are in end of season tournaments, in which the winner of the tourney forfeits the win, but the loser get nothing. I think, however, that regular season games are very different because their outcomes still determine post-season eligibility. It seems to me that the best solution would be to call it a "no contest", but count it against UNC when determining playoff berths. Unfortunately, the NCC hasn't asked me for my opinion (yet).