Throughout the Stanley Cup Playoffs, NHL on TSN analyst and former NHL goaltender Jamie McLennan ranks the netminders after each game night. Today he grades the performances from Saturdays games between Detroit and Chicago and Los Angeles and San Jose. Number values assigned are out of five with five being the best performance. Corey Crawford - 3 – He didnt get a ton of help tonight. First time I have noticed a few rebounds off of him, so he has been really efficient with puck control. Got beat short side on the Franzen goal. His positioning is very strong, even on the Fillpula goal, but it goes through the body - a goal he would like back. Jimmy Howard - 4 – He was not tested much, but made a huge save on Saad in the first that showed his compete and read in the net. Pushed across from his left edge, and extended to get the right pad on it. He fought through a screen to make a great save on Hossa. Was really dialed in all game Jonathan Quick - 4 – He was the story again for the Kings. Made a huge save on Desjardins - right pad in second period – which was his best. Put on a show with a combination saves in the third on Pavelski. Active stick all night long in his blue paint to redirect chances away from the net. Great shot from Couture to beat him high glove on the winner. Antti Niemi - 4 – He duelled Quick all night long and won the battle. His best save was on Penner on the back door, when he got the right pad on it. Puckhandling, which is not his biggest strength, was good all night long. Stan Smith Store . -- Its been a long road back for Sean Bergenheim. Cheapest Air Max Tn . It was hard for Luck to pull off another comeback, or even get into the end zone, while standing on the sideline. Rivers threw a 22-yard touchdown pass to rookie Keenan Allen and Nick Novak kicked four field goals to give the Chargers a 19-9 victory against the Colts on Monday night. http://www.cheapestairmaxstore.com/fake-air-max-90-cheap.html . Ryan Garbutt had a goal and two assists as Dallas snapped a six-game losing streak with a 5-2 victory over the Edmonton Oilers on Tuesday night. Fake Yeezy 700 Store . Now tied for second in the league in shootout goals, the 24-year-old likes to see what the opposing goaltender has in store before he ultimately lands on a move. Cheapest Air Max 97 . "I was fortunate to play many years at this level with a great organization and unbelievable teammates," said Hejduk in a statement. Lets be clear up front: North Carolinas response to the NCAAs notice of allegations is a little arrogant, a little elitist and, well, a lot right.The school is essentially saying that, yes, the courses in the African-American Studies department were a sham. And yes, a disproportionate number of athletes took those sham courses. But, the school counters, the NCAA shouldnt be able to charge the school with lack of institutional control or failure to monitor for two reasons:Its not the NCAAs businessSitting next to the scores of mens and womens basketball players and football players were everyday students.To the casual reader it is downright laughable. What else does the NCAA have to do other than to maintain academic integrity among its athletes? And since when is the retort, well everyone else was doing it, too a good defense?As ridiculous as the argument sounds, theyve got a point.In what is arguably the biggest case, in both scope and the brand name of the school being investigated, to fall on its enforcement staffs desk in decades, the NCAA may very well have a difficult time landing its two most serious charges. For that, it has no one to blame but itself and a thick rulebook that intentionally glosses over academic integrity.The NCAA membership worked long and hard studying and trying to decide what should and shouldnt be a bylaw, what is and is not within the manual, athletic director Bubba Cunningham said. The quality of the class, we understand and have said for some time didnt meet our normal standards, but that doesnt mean its a violation of a bylaw.There are two issues at play here.First up: What exactly is the NCAAs job? From the organizations own mission statement:Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount.The key words are to govern competition. Nowhere does it say that the NCAA has a say so in the governance of or determining the merits of an institutions academic courses. In fact, the same organization that somehow has deemed itself worthy to determine if thousands of high schools meet their standards for initial eligibility is purposefully standoffish when it comes to telling colleges and universities what is and is not up to snuff.Once an athlete is enrolled in school, the NCAA monitors whether he or she is making the proper progress toward graduation -- i.e., taking enough, and passing enough, courses; makingg sure that student athletes are graduating at a proper rate.dddddddddddd If not, the NCAA penalizes schools.But it does not -- nor does it want -- to police whether the courses athletes are taking are worth a fig. Its the NCAAs version of a separation of church and state.Weve got sports; you get class.The organization, in fact, hasnt created a by-law regarding academic integrity since 1983.For many, many years we have had presidents on the council and faculty athletic representatives on the council and each and every time when theyve looked at what the role of the NCAA is relative to academics they stay out of it, Cunningham said. They dont want the NCAA in the classroom. ... We work with our accrediting agency for academic issues. The NCAA Is our athletic agency. They each have different jurisdictional responsibilities.The second problem for the NCAA? The number of regular Joes and Janes who took the same courses as the athletes did. The NCAA tried to point to the paper classes as an impermissible benefit, a gift given to athletes to help them along because of their stature as big men and women on campus. Critics naturally and logically argue that if the academic support staff steered athletes to these courses they were, in fact, receiving an extra benefit.But UNC is asking, if everyone on campus was given the same chance to take the courses, no matter how fraudulent they were, how can it be construed as a benefit given only to athletes?The simple answer: It cant.The NCAA knows it cant, which is why in April the organization announced new rules regarding academic misconduct. Schools now must adhere to strict academic integrity policies. A violation of those policies now will equate to an NCAA violation. Heres the kicker from the NCAAs own press release:Additionally the proposal recognizes schools cant predict every type of academic integrity issue that could occur. Therefore, some misconduct committed by staff members or boosters that doesnt violate a schools academic misconduct policies may still violate NCAA rules.In other words, well know it when we see it.Surely under those rules, North Carolina wouldnt have passed the smell test.In adjudicating UNCs case, the rules are too little too late, enacted after the NCAA began its investigation.Instead the school is allowed to make what, by all accounts, is a nervy, illogical and downright laughable defense.And it just might work. ' ' '