tnt

Taylor Chorney got called up by Pittsburgh.

Might be more of a southwestern type thing, but Caballeros would lend itself to a decent logo. I know Gauchos is a recognizable nickname already, kind of similar in nature. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/caballero

Hey, I'm on board with Badlanders. I do think you could come up with a cool logo with an old west type person with character. I also think that while it doesn't roll off the tongue perfectly, I think it could become second nature. I bet nobody thought Cornhuskers sounded like it rolled off the tongues right away either, and now anything else but that would seem strange for Nebraska. I could also get on board with Explorers or Trailblazers, depending on whether you are a Chevy or Ford fan.

Are you saying unique to colleges, or unique period? I would bet that it isn't totally unique, and if it is, I would guess that it won't be inspiring or representative of the state. Badlanders is unique, but would people deem it inspiring?

Just like all job descriptions are seldom met by applicants, I would bet that the nickname picked will not meet all of the criteria they set. In fact, I think we might be asking why more of the criteria weren't met, especially if it is something lame like the Gleeful Peacocks.

One thing he might take into consideration is that I would think Tomek would get a bit of net time next year, especially if he goes fairly high in the draft. It was different for Zane, in that he stayed that extra year in the USHL, but I don't think that is the plan for Tomek. Do they risk the chance of losing Tomek if he doesn't get playing time? I can't pretend to know what he would do in that scenario, or what the team that drafts him expects of his development.

I submitted Rough Riders and Sonic Jets. I too, thought North Dakota Jets was missing something, but didn't think "Fighter Jets" would be something they would approve.

Considering that Tom Ward used to play for the gophers, it is nice that he can be objective.

For sure, they should all stay, but I would have said the same for Gregoire, Jordan Parise, etc.

...and neither were 80 percent of the guys who leave early, but they leave. How many early signings this year will be playing next year in the NHL, not many. Not saying he will leave or would even contemplate it, but none of us has a clue what these guys are thinking, so to be so confident in percentages they stay or go seems strange, kind of like people who gave UND little chance to land Boeser or Mismash.

With guys that came in a little older, like Ladue and Poolman, teams might want to get them in their system. I know Schlossman has mentioned Ladue as a flight risk several times, so maybe he has heard rumblings.

Why would you say that? Stecher is a free agent, and a lot of people need help. You look at the impact of a Torey Krug in Boston, and Stecher is a similar player with a high compete level. I hope he stays, but I hardly think it's a given. I'm hoping if he leaves, it means we won a national championship.

I think super talented teams that have a few elite stay even after they win one championship will happen occasionally, but with the parity in hockey now, I think those lengthy runs will be few and far between. Time will tell I guess. Moving to campus sites of higher seeds might change my opinion a bit.

There is one reason Omaha is still alive in the tournament, and it isn't Dean Blais, it is Ryan Massa. For the mostpart, they were outplayed by RIT, but Massa made the saves to give Omaha the chance to strike first, and when they did it was game over. That happens more than people would like to admit.

That is true, but no matter what, you are going to lose faceoffs, so it's a matter of what you do after you lose them, and hope that someone doesn't rip the perfect shot, or get lucky with a deflection. Bottom line is that if they score off a faceoff people will say it was a huge problem, if they don't, not quite as much.

Exactly. Sometimes I think the perception doesn't meet reality. Even when the numbers have been good in the past on the power play and other things, we still get people saying how bad it is.

They did have re entry at the X, only they stamped your hand and required your ticket. There was a short wait, but nothing like the gong show at the Target Center. You shouldn't have to work on things like opening the doors when they are supposed to open.

Tickets sold.

What would row d be like at the south club lounge? Which end would Sioux shoot twice at?

So, I thought the tickets I got through the Fighting Sioux Club were Standing Room tickets at the Club level. Are they actually seats?

I have two South Club lounge tickets. Row D, seats 19 &20. $175 each. PM me, if interested.

Wouldn't mind going somewhere that appreciated the fans rather than thinking they are a hassle. The unfriendly disposition of many of the ushers and others I met, just rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe I just ran into every bad apple, but you would think they would have staff with a friendly manner, even when they have to do things that may not sit well with the fan. It wasn't always a matter of what the staff said, but the manner and tone in which they said it.

I think LL means lower level, and the GA means general admission. Read cubs2323 post on the clarification of this from Scheels.

Was the donation on your email receipt?

Did you get a receipt by email? If so, was the donation included in that?