Walsh Hall

It's different in the parity. Minn, Michigan, Wis, BC, BU, and UND were all outside the top 20. The elite kids are recruited at an insanely young age. There's as many misses as hits in recruiting a 14/15 year old. There also are way more kids to pick from that are essentially equal, and a stagnant number of college teams. The talent level difference isn't that great anymore. Add in the misses, and "lower" schools having generally older players, it isn't difficult to see why UMinn isn't dominant every year. Add to the early recruiting, if the kid becomes a blue chipper, he's gone in a couple years. Recruiting and striking a balance has to be extremely difficult, and certainly much more difficult than 15-30 years ago.

Please list the "facts." 1.

I guess I don't see the big deal here. Athletes take supplements. The supplement he took was inappropriate or tainted. An athlete is responsible for what he/she puts in their body. There's an automatic suspension. I see this as an unfortunate situation, not some grand conspiracy. Occam's Razor. Similar to the Nate Schmidt suspension. If he was getting HGH or steroids from a trainer that would be different. Same suspension, but totally different circumstance.

Apparently you missed MANY years if you think this is the most pathetic team since 1984. This is a competitive and slightly above average team in the nation.

That was certainly odd. I thought the first shouldn't be a penalty shot as it didn't take away the scoring chance. The guy still has a breakaway after the first trip. The second trip was the one that ended up taking away the scoring chance.

Average attendance for the MJHL http://www.hockeydb.com/nhl-attendance/att_graph_season.php?lid=MJHL1999&sid=2017

Find a young D2 guy what's innovative, energetic, and motivated to advance, and give him a shot. No lateral move or retread. I'd much rather strike out or hit a home run opposed to a single.

Recruiting is so much harder today than it was 20 years ago. Look at the current top 20. I'd argue that only 3 teams in the top 20 are the old blue bloods of college hockey. Denver 7, Michigan 14, UND 17, no Minnesota, BU, BC, Wisconsin... With the depth of kids coming up, early recruiting, and a relatively static number of programs the old days of the other Minnesota programs truly being gopher rejects just isn't the case any more. Minnesota used to essentially have their pick of the top five Minnesota HS players every year. We still get a nice percentage of the kids we target, but the percent that pan out isn't the best. That's really no different than the other top programs. Good luck predicting the 14 or 15 year old kid that will be able to pick a corner at an elite level when he's 20 or 21. Or do you wait and see if 17-19 year old kids that develop are uncommitted and still hope they can produce at the college level? Add in the young recruit that pans out is probably gone after 2 years. If they don't pan out you're stuck with a below average player for 4 years. I think the expectation of any program being elite year in and year old is flawed.

I guess I'm still confident in this team. There are certainly many issues, but the D is very good, and the goaltending has largely been fine. They could be sitting a lot better, but there is a ton of season left. Reminds me of a team 5-6 years ago that was written off by most on here that ended up in the frozen four. I'll let this play out a bit more before casting judgment.

I don't recall saying I wasn't a Champions Club member... The gouging isn't an issue for me, but it is just a common courtesy and rubs me the wrong way. If I'm in line with 20 other folks to buy a hot dog, and there are only 5 left, it doesn't cross my mind to buy all 5 to resell them to the others who want them. I guess I do feel a camaraderie with my fellow UND fans and don't see them as a potential source of profit.

I cannot understanding selling above face to a fan of the same team. The people doing the gouging had to be nearly exclusively champions club members. That stuff leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

I think on the 81-82 team there were 12 future NHLers. Two incredible teams for sure. Hopefully the 15-16 team adds a couple more.

7 of those played in the NHL. Pretty crazy.

A plus number you win the amount and get your bet back. With (+210) Bet $10 get $31 when cash the ticket. With a minus (-110) you need to bet $110 to win $100. Bet $11 cash $21.

It appears that GF HS’s have a grand total of one state championship going back to the 1940’s. (Central 2005). That has to be an indication of the relevance of the sport in the community.

Is anyone familiar with the talent of the Bantam Elite league? What percentage of the top MN players opt to play in this league? In looking at the ND team I know ND could field a MUCH better team if you could hand-pick a team. The bottom half/third of the players are definitely not elite for that age group.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.