Walsh Hall
-
Posts
709 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Walsh Hall
-
-
1 hour ago, MafiaMan said:
We’re all familiar with the 2:00 power play and the 5:00 major. Up until the 1956 season in the NHL, players receiving 2:00 penalties stayed in the box the whole 2:00, regardless of how many goals were scored. How much of an impact has that decision had on the game in the last 60+ years? I could totally envision the current generation of casual fans pushing the envelope for ideas on evolving the game further.
If we love 3x3 OT so much because it creates so much open space and more scoring chances, why isn’t the game played that way ALL the time? I won’t tell you why myself but you can go watch an old NHL All-Star game where the scores were 17-14 or 16-13 and find out for yourself. BORING!
Not sure where you come up with this stuff. They play the game. The game will always be 5x5. Sure there will be minor tweaks, take out the red line... but the game is the game.
After the game has concluded there are a few options. Leave a tie, play 5x5 for some duration, play 4x4 for some duration, play 3x3 for some duration, or have a shootout. There are way more ties happening so leaving it as a tie isn’t an appealing option. In the past, games tied after regulation were just deemed a tie. Back then ties were relatively rare.
I’ve never heard anyone advocate for anything by 5x5 and I can’t believe anyone would advocate for anything else.
i don’t get the feeling that, “we love 3x3 so much.” It’s just a reasonable way to break a tie at the end of a formal game. No more no less. No one is calling for huge nets or 3x3 or any other crazy modification to regulation.
-
1
-
-
They desperately need Lewis and Gordon to pan out in the coming years.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens with Sano and Buxton. So much talent if they could stay in shape/stay healthy/learn to deal with a curve ball down and away.
-
20 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:
So if someone blows out a knee during a non-conference shootout (which counts for NOTHING in the NCHC standings), we shouldn't have a problem with it? SMH
And like I said before, I don't care how many people like shootouts. I think they are a stain on the integrity of a team game.
If a majority of fans wanted to make the nets 50% bigger, should we just do that as well?
Injuries unfortunately happen. No one with any sense would attribute your hypothetical injury to being related to the inclusion of a shootout.
The majority of the fans wouldn't be in favor of a huge net because that makes no sense. There are a few options when a game ends regulation in a tie. The numbers of ties has risen substantially in recent years. Of the potential viable options it seems that the fans, owners, player's associations, media, ... of EVERY SINGLE LEAGUE have come to the same conclusion. Pee Wee teams use the same system for ties.
-
Ties were a part of hockey for a long time... and they sucked...and there started to be way to many of them. Lower scoring games, more parity, way more ties.
Strategies change. Equipment changes. Games Evolve. Rules change to fit the times.
in the past 12 years UND has had an average of 4.5 ties/year. From '46-'82 the average was less than one tie each year.
-
Do any leagues not use a shootout in the regular season? This issue has been decided. You don't have to like it, but it's already decided.
Leaving a game after a tie is awful. In many ways it's worse than a loss from a fan perspective. It sure seems to me that the excitement level of the fans and players ratchets up several notches for a shootout.
There's no chance playoff games will be decided by a shootout.
-
9 hours ago, MafiaMan said:
Nice anecdotal evidence. I’ve seen fans leave a 3-2 game with 1:00 left on the clock in regulation. Are you claiming that a shootout is more popular than a one-goal game late in the 3rd?
What does a one-goal game in the third period have to do with the popularity of a shootout? If you want to compare things, at least try to compare comparable things.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, MafiaMan said:
OK, so why don't we make hockey a full-time 3x3 game?
What? They play the game. Many hockey games end regulation in a tie, so 3x3 is a viable method to have a skilled and exciting way to break the tie.
I personally think the regular season NHL games are more exciting in the last few minutes of regulation and OT now than under the old rules where there was basically no offense and teams played for the tie.
-
17 hours ago, MafiaMan said:
If open space is the issue, why are you opposed to Olympic-size ice sheets?
Open ice in an area a player can score leads to offense. Olympic ice does not do this. There's just a bunch more ice in places from which a player can't score.
3x3 and Olympic ice are no comparison in regard to creating offense.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cratter said:
Same could be said with lots of newspapers around the country. Including the Minot Daily and Bismarck Tribune.
Absolutely. Outside of fluffy local pieces it's all the same outdated news and syndicated columns. They could just as easily have the "Dakota Forum or Dakota Tribune" for the whole state. I suppose it's more profitable to market under the different names for each town.
-
24 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:
But I imagine the Fargo Forum remains as fat as ever.
Thus my theory of what is coming.
Not really. All the ND papers are pretty scant. Being owned by the same company it would make sense to consolidate. The Forum has plenty of UND sports coverage. I don't see how a consolidation would have any impact on UND. At least 90% of the current content of the 2 papers has to be the same already.
-
14 hours ago, burd said:
That's true, but then there are guys like ZPar, who was small, not the fastest skater, and with a good not not great shot. But he knew the game inside and out and had an on-ice intelligence that was outstanding. A lot of that no doubt came from his living hockey from birth and getting the best coaching along the way. And passion.
I completely agree. That’s why it’s so hard. zPar was incredibly polished and he must have been at 14. Some pan out and some don’t. I suppose the coaches look at a young kid and if they think they can’t miss they offer. There’s just way more risk and unknowns.
-
It has to be so hard to recruit kids that age. We all know kids that dominated their sport at 14, but by 18 their physical advantages are gone and they are average players.. Also, I see more and more kids that are completely polished at 14. They've had intense coaching since they were 3. Another 14 yr. old who has more natural talent may not touch the skates from the last game to the first practice. I'm always concerned that the polished physically mature young kids aren't going to improve as much from 14-18. Their relative physical advantages are only going to diminish, and they are already maxing out their talent.
-
The ticket sales at UND and NDSU are interesting. Since 2006 UND’s has seen a moderate increase. I suppose the hockey numbers are relatively maxed out. NDSU’s ticket sales in 2005 were under 900k and were 5.6m in 2017. That’s an impressive increase without adding a revenue sport.
-
1 hour ago, geaux_sioux said:
Football revenue will grow a ton.
What component of football revenue will increase significantly? I'm surprised by the ticket revenue being so low. NDSU's ticket sales were over $1,000,000 more than UND, and UND had 21 home hockey games last year.
-
1
-
-
I wonder if any teams have turned down "blue chip" type players because they needed more grinders. I doubt it. I think teams typically get all the top guys they can and fill in what's needed. Some times there's a lot to fill in, some times not much.
As a case study, Minnesota used to essentially have their pick of the top 5-6 Minnesota HS kids. That led to very good teams, but no championships in large part to the lack of roll players and the star mentality of all the incoming kids.
I think the key is having high end guys that are willing, and able, to play the roll of a 3rd or 4th liner if they aren't top line guys at this level. Essentially, anti-Patrick White players.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, nd1sufan said:
I do realize that there are expenses to selling tickets. But if those expenses are costing you 52% of the ticket revenue, you are doing it wrong. The staff at the REA selling FB tickets will be there anyway selling for other events. If it would take say 5 to 10% that would be reasonable for FB tickets. If UND hired one or two people to sell FB tickets on their own, maybe it would cost them 15 to 20%, not anywhere close to 52%.
One or two people handle all entrances, ticketing, sales, scanning, reentry, set up the system, monitor the system... for a football or hockey game? Good luck with that
-
1
-
-
It about Synergy. Makes zero sense to have (2) separate ticketing employees/systems... The hockey team has the same deal as the football team. 52% to REA, 48% to the University.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
24 minutes ago, nd1sufan said:I would just ask supporters of this ticket revenue practice to find other D1 schools that have 52% of their ticket revenue taken off the top by the venue they PLAY THE EVENTS in, much less events they have nothing to do with putting on the event. It is a fair question.
You do realize there are expenses relating the ticketing/accounting... that entail the 52/48 breakdown? You do realize that if the REA wasn't handling the duties that there would be expenses to hire all the staff and other related expenses to get this done? There is a difference between gross income and net income.
To think the hockey program is the beneficiary of this "issue" is laughable. To think the football program is harmed by this issue is laughable.
The football team needs to get better. Getting better has zero to do with the this ticketing issue and the hockey team/REA.
-
2
-
4
-
1
-
That's really cool. Looks like that auction had a ton of weird and interesting things.
-
Anyone happen to know how many of the Engelstad opening night commemorative 23 Sioux jerseys were made? - Thanks
-
I was looking through some old rosters on hockeydb.com. Any guesses on what team had the most players that played at least one game in the NHL?
-
I don’t understand the CM hate. Lanky guys suck at pull-ups. I guess you can bash Gretzky’s attitude for not lifting and saying he’s never seen a barbell score a goal.
-
1
-
-
All MIPS. One other player present, but not a minor. Doesnt look like anyone was over .08. Vehicle stopped for equipment violation. Looks like everyone was cooperative.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Not sure why Adams wouldn’t be here next year. I think he’s gonna be a very good college player. He has the skill set to be a high end two-way player. I think this year will be a wake-up and he’ll step-up.
-
5
Prospective Recruits
in Men's Hockey
Posted
Jeff and Jay both had one son on the Aviators last year. I watched the team play a few times last year and collectively they were very solid and polished. I don’t think I saw any of their D men flat out get beat. That said, I didn’t think anyone really stood out as being head and shoulders about the other kids.