7NationalTitles

Well I will know people at the game to call or otherwise I figured I would just watch the game thread on here. It's only a problem for Thursday because I'll be cheering them on for title #8 in person on Saturday! Thanks for the help.

I'm stuck here in Minneapolis/St. Paul at work for the game against BC on Thursday. Does anyone know if a radio station in the cities will be picking up a feed for the games? I'm unable to listen to the internet feed of the game at work. If anyone has any information, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. Go Sioux!!!

The U should should just change their name to the Fighting Dakotans and say that they are using it because it is the state's name. They won't be forced to change it because even though it's a group's name, it is also the state name. I'd like to see the NCAA's off-the-wall and illogical response to denying that name also.

He must be one of those "hang around the fort Indians" as GK has called them in the past.

Well since you asked, I was able to find it in my deleted folder. According to the email he said, "It was interesting that both Kessel and Oshie had only four points against the league's top three defensive teams (replacing Minnesota with fourth-best CC in Kessel's case). Also, Kessel got 48.5 percent of his league points in games against the bottom three defensive teams (Anchorage, Tech, Duluth) while Oshie got 45.8." Yes, those were the interesting stats I was referring to. Seems to me neither did a whole lot against the top teams while Kessell did a little better during the weakest teams. Anything else Slap Sh*t?

Hey, if you're looking for tickets, I hear the Gopher players have some extra comp tickets on hand. All you have to do is get some of the underage players into the bar. Just kidding, but I had to say it.

I actually emailed the WCHA writer for USCHO. I don't know if he was just feeding me a line or if he was serious but he said he hasn't yet determined who his ROY is for his column. I'll take him for his word since I have no reason to question it. He said he hasn't yet decided but will announce his honors in his column this week. He also said a lot of the voters that he has talked to are debating the ROY also. So even though Kessel may win it, Oshie appears to be getting attention from the voters. He also listed a few stats between the two players that I don't recall anymore but the stats he through out there I hadn't seen before and both of them were neck and neck in those stats. At least he seemed objective in his response to me and wasn't blindly handing the award to Kessel.

Those could not have been real Native Americans. According to GK, those must have been stand around the fort indians....or whatever he calls them. Because if all Native Americans felt the way GK does, then those dancers at the game would not have performed and put themselves in such a hostile situation. Maybe the symbolism behind the dancers performing at the game really means that most Native Americans (or a great majority more than GK leads us to believe) could care less about the whole nickname issue. Wait, no, that couldn't be, could it?

That may have been true because Vanek had a very good postseason run. I was referring to at the time the ROY was announced during the week of the Final Five, Parise had more points at that time. Whatever happened after, and that was when Vanek passed Parise in points, didn't have any affect on the voting.

Didn't Parise lead the country in freshmen scoring when Vanek won the ROY?

Interesting stat I just looked up. Kessel has 33 league points from what I can tell (12 G, 21 A) and Oshie has 24 league points (13G, 11A) (USCHO has 12 league goals for Oshie but I counted 13 from league games. I may have counted wrong but didn't want to take the time to find the difference). But if you throw out 4 games for Kessel against Anchorage and two games for Oshie, the stats look like this for league games. Kessel 22 points (10G, 12A) and Oshie with 23 points (12G, 11A). Oshie overall appears to be a better two-way player and meant more to his team's success than Kessel did to his team's overall success. The Gophers would have been good this year with or without Kessel (definitely top three in the league) but ND would very likely be playing on the road for the first round without the play of Oshie. I'm hoping some of the voters will analyze not only the stats a little closer but also the intangibles to the team and overall two-way play....and even overall play without the man advantage. Maybe the voting can be closer than what we think and a potential upset.

Yes, sorry, when I say the NCAA's I am referring to the 16-team field that is playing in the 4 regionals to go to the Frozen Four. I was making the observation that if the Sioux advance past next weekend and make the Final Five, then that would be enough to get them a spot in the NCAA tournament. As long as they make the Final Five, I don't think they will have to win a game there, that they would be assured a spot in the NCAA's even if they lost their first game. But as was stated, as long as they keep winning there is nothing to worry about.

Sioux-cia, When you say regionals doesn't mean anything, are you referring to the West Regional in Grand Forks? If so, yes that does mean something. The winner goes to the Frozen Four. If you mean the first round playoffs next week, if either the Sioux or Denver lose those series, it hurts their chances to make the NCAA's immensely. Hope that helps but if you could clarify your question a little more I can try to answer it better.

I don't think it's necessarily a given that Mankato will drop out of the TUC. Losing to a team that is 6th in the RPI (the Sioux before bonus) isn't going to kill Mankato's RPI as many think it would. It will be close but I don't think it's a given they will drop from a TUC. And as it stands right now, if Mankato drops out of TUC, there will be only two comparisons that the Sioux lose.....the Alaska Fairbanks and Ohio State. Dropping two comparisons right now moves ND to the #11 in the Pairwise with bonus. A #11 seed means that MN won't be coming to the Ralph because of bracket integrity won't be maintained. If the Sioux make the Final Five, they make the NCAA's.

Haven't seen the topic posted yet or the item discussed, but with only two weeks left before the Final Five, is it a forgone conclusion that Kessel wins the WCHA ROY or does Oshie have an outside chance at it? I don't know who does the voting (just coaches or media as well). When looking at the stats it breaks down as follows: Kessel has played in 32 games with 14 goals and 28 assists for a total of 42 points (1.31 points per game) while Oshie has played in 34 games 19 goals and 15 assists for a total of 34 points (1.00 points per game). Kessell has 33 league points (12 g and 21 a) while Oshie has 22 league points (12 g and 10 a). Kessel also has a lot more experienced and high-scoring upperclassmen playing with him and has good passing skills hence the high number of assists. Oshie has been an integral part to UND's season so far. Going into the season I thought it would be between Kessel and Toews although I still think Toews is a better overall player at this point; Oshie has been better than expected he would be this soon into his career. Personally I think Kessel has the inside track going into the last two weeks based on his stats and the Gophers winning the McNaughton but I'm wondering what the rest of you think. Does Oshie have a chance at it? Points isn't necessarily the only determining factor since a couple years ago Vanek did win with less overall total points than Parise. But I think Kessel and Oshie will be one and two in the voting. Sorry if this has been discussed previously. And I'm not trying to start a flame war over this. I'm looking for some discussion over it and other fans thoughts.

To answer your question ATLSiouxPhan, Yes, it is a rule. The NCAA has stated so. They try to avoid intra-conference match-ups in the first round if at all possible while maintaining bracket integrity. They have said, though, that if five or more teams make the tourney from one conference, that this may be unavoidable depending on what seeds the five teams are because the NCAA isn't going to move a team from one band to another band (i.e. from a #4 seed to a #3 seed) just to avoid an intra-conference match-up in the first round if five or more teams from the same conference make it. Under that scenario, they would try to maintain bracket integrity. But to further answer your question, see my post above about it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the Sioux to finish as a #4 seed.

If UND makes the tourney, it will be as a #3 seed. The way all the comparisons would shake out in the end, I think it will be very hard for UND to finish 13 or 14 (which would be a #4 seed). Like I said, if they make the tourney, they will make it as at least a #3 seed. I've sat and analyzed the Pairwise and various scenarios and it's very hard to come up with a scenario that would play out where UND would finish #13 or #14 overall. They are either out of the tourney or in at least as a #3 seed (or #2 if they get hot the last couple weeks). This could be seen by the last few weeks and looking at the Pairwise. After some Friday nights, UND has ended up as a #3 seed and then after Saturday night, the Sioux would be out of the tourney. Over the past few weeks, UND has not been a #4 seed in any projected bracket using the bonus. It's always been #3 or out of the tourney. From what I can tell, the same will hold true come the end of the season.

Thanks, sorry, I didn't see it in the Kessel thread from the parts I've read in it. I guess I wouldn't have thought of looking for a UNH suspension article in the Kessel in Madison thread.

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere (I didn't see it) but here is the link: http://www.uscho.com/news/id,11777/UNHSusp...ameAtMaine.html UNH has suspended 7 players (all forwards) for this Friday night's game against Maine. The reason for the suspension hasn't been stated but there is speculation on USCHO that it was for drinking. This suspension could have an effect on the Sioux's RPI and bonus points. If UNH were playing with a full team this weekend and could somehow sweep Maine, it would help their RPI get closer to the top 15. The Sioux need this in order to get the bonus points for the win and tie earlier in the year at New Hampshire. I was really hoping for a sweet by UNH and getting some momentum to get into the top 15 RPI by season's end. On a side note, if it was for drinking or violating any other team rule, you have to give credit to the coach for suspending his players for a big game. The person that comes to mind is Don Lucia-pet and how when his players were caught drinking underage (violation of a team rule), no one was given any kind of suspension or no punishment was ever made public. Again, as noted, many players do it but not all of them are caught on tape doing it. Personally, it just goes to show the kind of class and resolve that is shown between the two coaches. Kind of like when Lucia-pet always seems to bring up that UND is the only hockey team that fights or is always one of the two teams involved in a fight.

Im sure you could find many many other schools that have Indian-related nicknames. UND is one of only a few schools that chose to use a specific Tribal Name. Thus involving those specific tribes.

See how much better the information can be when you clarify it? Your first post made it seem like all Sioux tribes have refused the use of the nickname. When you clarify things at the outset, it helps when you try to make your point. Also, still waiting about the Mandan Braves corrupting young adults minds with their "abusive and hostile" nickname. Did those 7 Sioux tribes you listed also pass similar resolutions about Mandan High School? If so, I would like to know the reason why not if anyone can tell me that.

Oh really? They have now, have they? Well if memory serves me, the Spirit Lake Sioux tribe has yet to rescind their resolution (from 2000 or 2001 - I forget the year) allowing UND to use the name and logo. So this doesn't fit your story that the Sioux tribes have asked it to be changed. Are you trying to fill us with false statements again? Perhaps you should be a little more careful and clarify some of your statements. It would make you look less ignorant. Oh, and by the way.......where is the outrage over the Mandan, ND High School Braves? I'm still waiting to hear the outcry there.

Wow, all the outrage over the UND name when I haven't heard one person mention the outrage of the high school in Mandan, ND using the Braves as it's monicker. And they have an Indian-head logo too. Where's the outcry GrahamKracker? I want to hear them bashed as much as UND. What about the fact that minors are being corrupted by the use of the name? Let's all take a stand now against Mandan. Oh wait, sorry, I forgot. It's only UND that the name change proponents here in ND care about.

I stated a question/opinion on another topic that GrahamKracker started but have yet to hear a response from anyone on it. I'm curious as to what GK's thoughts are on the subject. I'm interested to see how he spins it. Here is what I had posted: I've been watching the debate for a long time from the sidelines. One thing that has struck me is that the proponents of the name change state that the logo and nickname stereotype the Native Americans and Sioux in a derogatory way. They say that it causes others to think about them in a negative way. The name change proponents are so very concerned about negative stereotypes. On that note, I would think that many would agree that Native Americans in the past have been stereotyped in other negative ways. One being is that those who are racist have occasionally called Native Americans a bunch of gambling drunks. Now I don't condone this type of thinking but am using it to make a point. This is a harsh and negative stereotype against Native Americans and one that I don't condone. Proponents of the name change say that as long as the Sioux logo and nickname are around, there will continue to be negative stereotypes based on the logo and nickname. Well OK, if this is a negative stereotype then why do Native Americans have the Indian name and Indian logos plastered all over casinos. These casinos nowadays are highly synonomous with Native Americans. So I ask this....isn't the continued use of the Native American name and images on the casinos by Native Americans causing the ongoing stereotype that I mentioned above...the gambling drunks stereotype? The casino being synonomous with gambling and also liquor. If one item (the logo and nickname) cause continued misrepresentations of the Native American community, then isn't the use of casinos doing the same? I've never heard that argument by the proponents before. I guess it's OK for one negative stereotype to be gotten rid of while the continued stereotyping of another exists. It must be the fact that Native Americans profit directly off the casinos and not the University and this is why Native Americans are concerned about one stereotype and not another. I'm curious to hear a response to this (the spin will be quite extraordinary I'm sure) or if anyone else has any comments. Have a Merry Christmas all.

I've been watching the debate for a long time from the sidelines. One thing that has struck me is that the proponents of the name change state that the logo and nickname stereotype the Native Americans and Sioux in a derogatory way. They say that it causes others to think about them in a negative way. On that note, I would think that many would agree that Native Americans in the past have been stereotyped in other negative ways. One being is that those who are racist have occasionally called Native Americans a bunch of gambling drunks. Now I don't condone this type of thinking but am using it to make a point. Now that is a harsh and negative stereotype against Native Americans and one that I don't condone. Proponents of the name change say that as long as the Sioux logo and nickname are around, there will continue to be negative stereotypes based on the logo and nickname. Well OK, if this is a negative stereotype then why do Native Americans have the Indian name and Indian logos plastered all over casinos. These casinos nowadays are highly synonomous with Native Americans. So I ask this....isn't the continued use of the Native American name and images on the casinos by Native Americans causing the ongoing stereotype that I mentioned above? If one item (the logo and nickname) cause continued misrepresentations of the Native American community, then isn't the use of casinos doing the same? I've never heard that argument by the proponents before. I guess it's OK for one negative stereotype to be gotten rid of while the continued stereotyping of another exists. It must be the fact that Native Americans profit directly off the casinos and not the University is why Native Americans are concerned about one stereotype and not another.