Hammy

I am glad sioux_11 had a great time this past weekend.

May I ask a question (no flames intended).... Can you honestly say the ref shouldn't have blown the whistle when he did? It looked to me like UMD's goalie had the puck covered (I certainly didn't see it loose) and the puck only came loose after the whistle was blown when a North Dakota player pushed hard on the goalie.

As Sicatoka was always so fond of pointing out prior to this season (ironic that he was doing it to try to punch holes in the quality of the Gophers returning goaltending), using the overall season stats of two players to make a comparison is less valid because the toughness of each respective team's schedule is different. Minnesota's overall strength of schedule ranks in the top 2 or 3 in the nation. Last I checked, the Sioux schedule ranked out of the top 20. You could make an argument that Vanek's overall stats would be higher if he played the schedule NoDak has played. Similarly, you could make the argument that ZP's points wouldn't be as high if he played Minnesota schedule. Even limiting a comparison of stats to just league play is tough now that WCHA teams don't play a balanced schedule. Either player is certainly worthy.

And we remember how some Sioux fans said our defense was skilled but not "very good" defensively. Maybe that says that goalies can be bad but defensemen can make them look better and sometimes defenses may not be as good but their goalies can make them look better.

I apologize. I did offer to take it elsewhere. I will stop.

If you are going to be a child and take my comments out of their context, it only exposes that you have nothing of substance to refute them. Clayton, In my very first post on this thread, I said the following: In other words, I went out of my way to point out that I was not accusing the Sioux of anything on this thread. My statements were aimed toward a few FANS on here who talk about cutting this guy or that guy (imagine that, I am defending a Sioux player) due to performance and telling them that I don't agree with cutting players based on performance. I feel a coach (ANY coach whether it be Lucia, Blais, Dahl or whoever) shouldn't cut a player because of performance in games. If a coach recruited him and told him that he would get a scholarship of x% during his time at the school and the kid commits to that amount, then live up to that. I use that same standard for my own team so I don't think it is hypocritical for me to say that here. I don't have any issues with a coach kicking a player off of a team for behavior or for not keeping up grades. But I think it is a cop out for a coach to yank the rug from underneath a player for game performance when they are the one who recruited that player to the school. (And I'll repeat, I say that of my own team as well.) I agree with jk. It would be best if we let the topic die and you guys can focus on your upcoming series. Unfortunately, this has turned into exactly what I knew it would.

Just speaking the truth. I don't want to stir up a hornet's nest. That why I offered long ago to take it to Email.

I can't help it if you fail to see rather obvious points. I just didn't realize I had to repeat certain things over and over again just so somebody understands I know certain facts ( I mean, did I really need to spell out that I understand scholarships are renewed every year? That was never my point anyway.) Nor do I have any issues being challenged. Its not like I just got on these boards yesterday and never had that happen. I am just trying to diffuse a situation on this board because I know a lot of Sioux fans probably don't care to read it from a Gopher fan. I respect Blais. You overrate any Blais bashing I have done. I do think some people are too willing to blame the Sioux players and don't really seem to place any responsibility on the coach when they falter. Blais isn't immune from making errors. Neither is Lucia. I just don't think the player who tries everything to succeed for his team (in practice and off the ice) needs to take the gas pipe because the coach made the error in recruiting him in the 1st place. You feel otherwise..... so be it.

Gee PCM, I didn't realize I had to say 100 times that I know that a scholarship is renewed every year. I just figured you had the intelligence to understand that coaches will tell a recruit what to expect for future scholarship amounts beyond one year. I didn't say all four years were put in writing at the same time and didn't have to be renewed. Comprende? If you want to continue, Email me. Otherwise, I don't want to drag this on on this board. All it is gonna do is rile people up and I do not want to do that.

Where did I say otherwise? I never said it never happens. I said more often than not, it is an academic/behavioral issue but I didn't say players never get gas piped by a coach for lack of performance.

I don't know what he tells prospective players because I am not there But I seriously doubt he goes in to a recruit's house and makes an offer based on one year. Parents and their kid want to know what they can expect during their time in college and if a coach gives them a vague idea, they aren't going to go with him. If he walked into Sidney Crosby's home (or a top recruit of that nature) and said, "Sidney, I know you have a full ride for 4 years on the table from a few other top schools but we do things a little differently and look at scholarship amounts on a year by year basis. We may not give you a full ride every season if things don't work out to our expectations. What do you think?" He'd probably get laughed out of the house. I don't think Blais is stupid. I think he knows if he wants to win a recruit, he has to be pretty clear (like other coaches) on what he plans to offer over the kid's college years. No kid worth a damn is gonna blow off other top schools (who tell him what they will offer over four years) in order to go to play for a coach who doesn't give them any idea of what to expect beyond one year. If a player is told they'll get a 75% scholarship from a school during his eligibility but another school says they only will talk about doing that for one year, who do you think is gonna win that recruit 90% of the time?

One last point because I don't want to be misunderstood. The vast majority of the players you see being shown the door are because of academic or behavioral issues. I have no issues when a coach boots a player for that. If a player breaks team/school rules, I feel the coach has to do what is right and enforce the rules. (The Findlay players broke team/school rules which is why they were dismissed.) I just have an issue with any program that yanks a scholarship from a kid because that coach did a poor job of evaluating what that kid could contribute on the college level. If a kid works hard, goes to practice, goes to his classes but just doesn't pan out like the coach thought, I don't feel it is right to pull his scholarship. That is the only thing I am saying

I had a rather lengthy response to this but I realized it will likely turn into an argument on your board (see one poster's touchy response above as an example) and I have generally tried to be respectful when I come here. I think the way some people are looking at the recruiting process of players is pretty naive. I'd be more than willing to talk about the topic via Email if you (or others) choose. But, I am just going to show some respect for your board and drop it.

Anybody who thinks a coach recruits a kid without telling him what he can expect for scholarship support over their full 4 years at an institution is kidding themselves. Yes scholarships are renewable but coaches generally lay things out for a player when they are being recruited. Recruiting is far too competitive to give a player "we'll see how it goes on a yearly basis" types of comments and making them doubt whether or not you are fully committed to them.

I tend to agree with jk in regards to dismissing players. I can see cutting a guy if he breaks team rules, becomes academically ineligible or something along those lines but I feel when you take away a player's scholarship because you misjudge what type of performance he would give on the ice, you are making the college game too much like the pros. Frankly, if a player doesn't pan out for his team, some of that responsibility should fall on the man who recruited him. Sometimes coaches misjudge in recruiting and that plays a part in some situations. If a player is doing all he can to live up to his end of the deal (meaning working hard), I feel the coach should live up to what he offered a kid when he came to the school. If that is "Gopher logic", so be it. I'd rather have the man who leads my program be a man of his word than to break promises to kids. Maybe that means we get stuck with a Leimbek, Pagel, etc. but I feel that is why the coach must be smart about who he recruits. Scholarships are renewable each year but most coaches lay it out far ahead of time on what they plan to offer a recruit during their four years... they don't say, "Well, let's see how you do and maybe we'll renew you for next year." If they said that, they wouldn't land many recruits. P.S. - That kind of cut throat mentality in cutting players would get used against you in recruiting a lot... you can bet on that. And Goon, loyalty is a two way street. If you aren't going to shed any tears if a hardworking player gets cut, then you shouldn't ever complain if a top player leaves early for the pros (whether they are ready for it or not). Why should a player show loyalty to a program if that program doesn't show loyalty to all the players? (The above is just a hypothetical for argument sake. I am not sayng the Sioux are doing all of these things.)

No need to be sorry. I think your feelings are probably felt by fans on many WCHA teams in regards to most Mavs fans.

23 games at home and only 14 on the road? Won't be a very road tested team.

Wow Taz... and you think we are preoccupied with a rival!? That is quite an in-depth analysis (though misguided in many respects). Lots of respect for the Sioux program from many Gopher fans. Doesn't mean we don't want to kill the Sioux whenever we play them but there is certainly respect there. But I think we feel very good about what we have going down at the U. No need to be jealous of anybody else.

OK Taz, you tell us Gopher fans why we do it. I mean, you must know how Gopher fans think since you are one, right? You can believe what you want to but I don't see any reason not to talk about the Sioux (and other teams in the WCHA) especially at this time of the year with playoff positioning and pairwise rankings at stake. If the Gophers struggle with Denver and the Sioux gain ground next weekend, are you telling me that is of no interest to you? Well, it goes both ways. We each have an interest in how the other does right now. You would seem intelligent enough to understand that.

Out of curiousity Taz, who is saying Parise is a bust? I haven't seen anybody use that term with him as far as Gopher fans go. I don't think you can necessarily argue that he has slumped some recently but I don't think anybody is ripping him and saying he is a bust. That would be stupid. As far as Gopher "fascination", it only makes sense we would be interested in our closest pursuers in the league. I don't know why that would seem so odd to you.

Only doing you guys a favor and not writing the negative here like you asked. Maybe that is impressive.

Sounds like Jensen stole one from you guys. Gopher fans can sympathize. We peppered him in Mankato on a Friday night but he stood on his head and the Mavs eeked out a one goal win. Sounds like a very similar game tonight.

I am not going to inflame the matter with a bunch of rips. I am just a visitor here and any deserved ripping I do will be done elsewhere. My only point was to show the obvious flaws in somebody's attitude ("Seems much easier to get a "rep" among officials if you do something to MN") as if prior matters with the Gophers are going to have any effect on a game they aren't even involved in that occurs almost a year later. Somehow, I doubt in the heat of the moment some ref is gonna go, "He is the guy from that MN game last year! Let's get him!"