The Sicatoka

Right from the NCAA Rulebook, Rule 5, Section 3: paragraph 3: The referees were in on it, right "TC"?

Didn't Lee Goren back out of a verbal to Michigan Tech to come to UND?

Poor numbers? Cary was better than a "point-per-game" man over his career. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=7536

Whew! I thought we were playing BJ and Hawkeye's tent mate after Frank left.

A verbal is worth all the paper it's written on. The next signing period for National Letters of Intent begins on the Wednesday after the Frozen Four and runs through the summer.

Hak and Berry are defensemen. Eades is a forward.

Competition is good, right? Or is that situational?

People, people, people, the solution is clear. Just do the following. Television settings - Power: On Channel: Fighting Sioux Sports Network affiliate Volume: Mute Radio settings- Power: On Station: Fighting Sioux Hockey Radio Network affiliate Volume: As desired by user (I prefer a 42 or 43 on the Bose.)

I won't disagree. I think this gambit for "36 --> 24" was actually a red herring. That's too much of a change all at once and everyone knew it. However, now that people have talked about "24", proposing going down to "30" in a year or two doesn't sound quite as shocking. I suspect that a "30" proposal is coming sooner rather than later.

What station will they tune it to?

Anyone who doesn't think a high-end talent player can leave at any time hasn't been paying attention to college hockey for the last two decades.

Hakstol's records. That 1996-97 "midseason replacement" was after one game of that season. Apparently it only took management one game to figure out that the previous coach needed to be fired (and Hak got left holding that bag).

What scholarship reduction?

Let me follow up on the above thought. Last year UND scored averages of 4.44 GPG overall and 4.36 GPG in league. Guys who left after last season accounted for 1.70 GPG overall (1.64 GPG in league). Guys who returned accounted for 2.73 (and 2.71). This year's freshmen are supplying 0.75 (and 0.61). Yes, that is a step back in total offense; however, add last year's returners to this year's freshman and we have the potential for 3.48 (and 3.32). We are actually scoring 2.96 (and 2.72). That's more than a half a goal per game of underproduction of what we project to. What's that mean? The returning players are not scoring at last year's pace. They are underproducing. The returnees need to immediately step up, each and every one of them individually, and take individual personal responsibility for scoring starting right now. Don't expect the other guy to do it for you. Look what happened when you did that against DU last March.

They've convinced themselves that they can't score. I'm not sure if that's from practicing against their own defensemen (very formidable) or against their goaltending (again, very formidable). But in practicing against that I'm sure they've convinced themselves they can't score. They need to realize everybody doesn't have that level defense and goaltending. They need to stop telling themselves they can't score (because it's become a self-fulfilling prophecy). They can score. Now go prove it.

From the last paragraph of http://www.uscho.com/news/2005/01/11_009596.php If they eliminate the 15000 rule, wouldn't that entice even more schools to leave DI-AA for DI-A? Didn't they just institute the 15000 rule back in August?

I'd try to make a case for Spirko and Lamoureux and after that probably Zajac. Beyond that I have trouble even trying to apply "exceeds expectations" to anyone. There are a few "meeting expectations" and way too many "not meeting expectations".

Sounds like you guys are like me and expect Greene to be gone next season. That means we need Smaby, Radke, and Bina ready. Will they be? As far as the team, is there anyone that "exceeds expectations" for this season right now?

Tell me about Curtis Murphy. Tell me about Curtis Murphy when he was a freshman.

Since I went on a mini-rant above, let me add one more item addressed to the team: Quit whining about "no Parise, no Bochenski." If you're going to do that why not add "no Hrkac, no Joyce, no Greg Johnson, no Curtis Murphy, etc." They're all gone too. If you want to be known as a bunch of guys who couldn't do it on their own, so be it.

Don't forget about Sparky. He's one of the few guys that showed up both nights this weekend (and what a sweet one-timer Friday).

Amen. Imagine what Blaiser would have said about Mankato's third goal on Saturday. He'd have called it out by name and play. The cliche that gets me is "we're getting chances". So what. Get goals.

The crowd feeds off the team. The team feeds off the crowd. The crowd showed the same level of intensity that the team did.

Smaby needs to stop reaching for the puck (move your feet!) and start being decisive, even if the decision is "high off the glass" (which is way better than standing and getting picked clean at the blueline). Bina and Radke each had their bonehead plays on the weekend too.

As a team, Saturday was one of the least inspired performances I've ever seen from a Sioux team. I'm wondering where the passion for the game is from these guys. Jordan Parise needs to be held accountable. Any mite defenseman knows you don't move the puck up the slot in your own zone, and he's an NCAA calibre goaltender so he has no excuse. He's been told to let his defensemen handle the puck. In that situation he should have covered it or put it into the corner (so his defensemen could handle it). He needs to answer to himself, the coaches, and his teammates for that play. Remember those two points when home ice is assigned in March. Someone was quoted post-game as saying they were playing for OT. Too bad Mankato wasn't. But also in that statement is something that really bothers me: PASSIVITY. It sounds like they believe they can just turn it on at will whenever they feel like it and get what they need. Welcome to a harsh reality check courtesy David Backes. Also, if they think they can turn it on at will, how does that mesh with .... I believe this team has convinced itself that it can't score. There are three forwards with a combined five WJC tournaments of experience (and two gold medals) on that team. And it can't score? No, they've convinced themselves that they can't score. They soothe it with "but we're still getting chances." Chances don't go under the "W" on the stat sheet. If you are generating chances, why aren't you scoring? I'll answer that: They're going for "pretty"; they aren't going to the net. I saw more guys go to the net in one period by CC (against Minnesota) Sunday night than I did for UND all weekend. Not going to the net says passive and no passion for the game. That "turn it on" attitude and undercurrent of passivity smells like a lack of maturity to me. That should be the last problem on a team with this many seniors. Mentioning seniors .... Remember when this group of seniors were freshman and I preached "patience"? Forget that. This is the home stretch for that group. Last call boys. What do you want to be remembered as?