Walsh Hall

Looks like Caggiula is at 0.634 pt/gm for his career. Hrkac was 2.024. I wonder what that would have been if he played 4 years. Had it not been for Kristo's incident his pt/gm would likely have been higher, as usually the last two years are better than the first 2. Any which way, I'll take Kristo and Caggiula on my team any day of the week.

I'd be curious to see the number of MIP/MIC's issued in the 50's, 60's, 70's... compared to today. For better or for worse things are handled in a different manner. I know for a 100% fact that if this happened in the mid-90's there would have been no police involvement, and depending on the RA, possibility no write-up. (Whether it was a hockey player or a typical student.) Again, there was no party, loud noise.. etc., just what appears to be a nosy RA.

So in this situation an RA saw an alcoholic beverage in their room and called the police. By the looks of it, nobody was disorderly or drunk. Everyone was polite and cooperated including taking the preliminary breath test. Is this standard policy now to call the police if an RA sees ANY alcohol? When I was around they'd take the alcohol and "read you up." I by no means condone their consumption of alcohol, but wow things have changed. These guys have to know they have a target on their backs.

I completely agree. If you are older than the player it seems creepy to me to have their name on your back. If there is anything on the back of your jersey you better be a kid.

The problem is one school is so important to the success of the tournament. If the tournament doesn't include UND they are screwed. UMD and St. Cloud would bring some fans, but nothing compared to UND. This year would have been an unmitigated disaster if UND didn't beat CC in game 3. I'm such they realize that major problem and would like to find a way to ensure UND is involved in the tournament each year. At least in the WCHA it would have been unlikely to have both UND and U of M TC miss. If a joint tournament could be held with the WCHA or B10 that would make for an incredible weekend of hockey.

I'm a huge homer, but you can't argue with Miller's numbers. He was miles ahead of the next goalie. While Panzer had a nice lead in total points, he was 3rd in points per game. Starting in Millers' year (2001) 2 of the 14 winners are from the East. Hardly an East Coast bias.

I agree as well. Our record, and some bad losses, wasn't what hurt the SoS. If was the cumulative poor losses by the NCHC teams. 2/3 of the way into the season the die had been cast. All the NCHC teams had a low SoS and hence a lower ranking, so playing each other (when they were playing much better than their SoS indicated) just had everyone treading water.

I'm biased, but I think it would be a huge mistake for him to turn pro. He has the chance to have a great junior year and greatly increase his stock/leverage. He isn't close to being an NHL player at this time. Seems to me that it would be mutually beneficial for him to play another year. Wouldn't he also be a free agent after next year?

I hate this thread. Every time I log on and it is at the top of the list my heart starts racing...

I think it would have been a close game. I think that ND's style of play frustrated the gophers, and would have been a better matchup against Union. ND's advantage over the gophers was the defense, and ND would have cleared the front of the net against Union. I thought UND and Union were pretty similar in many respects. ND gave up more that 3 goals once in the last 31 games (Saunders). (U of M allowed more than 3 in 6 of last 34 games). Doesn't mean they wouldn't have given up a bunch to Union, but I'd guess it would have been a tight game.

I see Chyzk and OD having productive years in '14-'15. I thought OD was one of the best forwards at the end of the year. In the Ferris game he was the best forward in my opinion. Unlike nearly everyone else, he was aggressive, on his toes, and confident. I don't see either of those guys being healthy scratches.

Rocco's a tough guy to play with. TH has mentioned and eluded to this several times on the radio. He has played with pretty much the entire roster at one point or another. At the world juniors the same problem arose. I love Rocco's intensity and what he brings to the table. That said, I don't see him making the players on his line better.

Holl picked up the puck around the top of the circle in his own end. Schmaltz had no option of pinching. In his own end he was in perfect position and blocked the shot. I see no mistake and Rocco was in position on his back check. It was really just an untimely seeing-eye shot after the blocked shot landed on a covered gopher's stick. Warnings goal was odd as well. Rau was trying to shot far corner off his own rebound and pretty much fanned on the shot. It dribbled to Warning for a tap in.

I 100% agree. The Sioux played an incredible game, out shot and out chanced them. Wilcox and Gothberg both were great. A great hockey game (minus that last few seconds). They played their hearts out and did all they could. Sometimes the bounce goes our way, sometimes it doesn't. I have nothing but pride for the team's play last night.

I agree Dave. That 1999 lose was a tough one. They absolutely bottled us up. We could get nothing going. Very frustrating. When the Gerbe debacle game turned, it turned in a hurry. By the end of the first that one was done. I still think that those '05-'08 games were toss-ups. Those BC teams were not dominant teams. (Compared to many UND teams, Michigan... in that era)

To a large extent, yes. There are so many factors in a one and done format. Where the regionals and FF are played, how you match up with the teams you are paired with, bounces of all shapes and sizes, who is the ref and how is the game called, hot goalie or cold goalie, other upsets, sick/injured players, hitting a post or two vs. the other team hitting a post, breaking a stick at the wrong time... If the Sioux win it this year there is no question they got some fortunate breaks. Well deserving, but also a good helping of luck. That's just the way it is.

BC's overall success is not an anomaly, just like our overall success has not been an anomaly. Winning 3 of 6 is an anomaly. While success is largely measure in national championships, that really isn't the best way to do the measuring. The Frattin team was the best team in the nation. I cant believe they would have lost a 5 or 7 game series to any team at the end of the year. They lost. The 1997 team would have been taken apart by that Michigan team (very likely), and would have had virtually no chance in a 5 or 7 game series. They got lucky (via BU) and won. Such is the way the puck bounces. BC isn't doing anything different. There is no magic pill. They are doing the same thing at as high a level as anyone else.

I was being a dink to all the folks (experts) whining about Hak's system. I 100% agree with everything you just wrote because you, more importantly, are 100% right.

Dave - My mistake - Thanks for the correction

Come on... the experts here have clearly indicated the dump and chase technique doesn't work against a trap. Haven't you watched BC?

Kinda sad. For better or worse that is something he should keep.

Goon - That's for the dump and chase post - You are 100% correct. The trapping systems of today were not the norm in college hockey in the mid to late 1990's. The game has changed. To not change your approach would be incredibly stupid. Team wins in the last five years: BC- 113 UND - 105 Union - 104 Minn. - 97 Denver/QU - 90 BC has been successful, no question. UND has also been incredibly successful. I will bet that you haven't watched 5 BC games in the past 2 years. Probably far less than that. Do you honestly think their "style" is not substantially similar to ours? Do you think that BC, and BC only, have discovered some magical formula that no other college coach can decipher. Can the BC players, and BC players only, magically skate through an effective trap? If Wisconsin hadn't pulled an incredible comeback against Ohio St. we wouldn't have made the NCAA's. That would have had zero to do with Hak. Now many are saying what a great job he has done with this team. Would the opinion of Hak's job this year be different if Ohio St. wins that game? You indicate that BC's system is similar to the old Blais system. I ask again, please explain in detail Blais's system and the current BC system. In other words, please explain the logic underlining your conclusion.

What is Blais's winning percentage as a college coach and what is Hak's? Surely Blais's Porsche is substantially better than Hak's Pinto. If we are collecting Bridesmaid dresses what is Blais collecting? When did a "trap" style of play become the norm in college hockey? Please describe the various left wing lock and trap methods and for each the most effective manner in which to advance the puck. Please describe the various in-zone and neutral zone penalty kill strategies and your thoughts on the best method to counteract the strategies. I ask that you answer these questions without the assistance of the interweb. In response to these thoughts, please indicate specifically where Hak's coaching is inadequate, and what in-game changes he should be making. Maybe Blais can help write a response as he typically has free time this time of year.* Thanks in advance. If the reply is that we need to carry the puck into the zone without further explanation I don't think I'll be able to stop pounding my head into my desk. *No offense to Mr. Blais. I love the man and what he has done to continue and advance our program.

The logistics of not having sites selected for the regionals until the bracket is announces would be very problematic. I like the 2 out of 3 idea, but it would be strange to have that format in the first two rounds and jump to one and done in the more important games.

First, many people's opinions are just flat out wrong. I can say a Honda is a nicer car than a Porsche. It's my opinion, but my opinion is 100% wrong. It astonishes me how limited some folks' perspective is. To say Hak is anything but an elite coach is moronic. In many of the past seasons we are talking about literally a bounce or two from a national championship. It's just as nuts to say Hak's a great coach because we won this past weekend where we got a bounce, as to say he is inadequate because we lose a tournament game in a similar fashion. Look at the body of work. It speaks for itself. If we weren't competitive, weren't in the mix for league championships I would have a problem as well. To the folks that say Hak doesn't change from his system: I really don't understand this one. I haven't seen a game this year where the breakouts, forechecks, PP, etc. haven't been modified during the game. Doesn't mean that it works, but the system 100% changes. If you can't see that you have no business complaining.