burd

Overall, though, he's played well tonight. Moved the puck well.

Niagra looks dispirited, in addition to not a lot of skill. A little hard to watch, actually.

I'm sure you're a good guy to have a few pops and watch a game with, Cratter, but I've never read all that information below your sig line. Sure explains the need you have to win another banner and the boasting value it would give you.

Hanglseben was pure stud in a day when the game was very physical.

You sure hit the nail for me, yzer.

You know the phrase "A man of ideas?" Well, gfhockey is a man of an idea. Don't try to take it away from him--it's all he's got. He's fun to have around, though, so it's all good.

Of all the discussion about firing Hakstol, very rarely are there informed and knowledgeable observations what, exactly, it is about his coaching that falls below the standard. If would have no problem firing Hakstol or any other coach if I were convinced his actual coaching was below par and there was an other candidate who would probably coach better and who would come to UND. A fourth-grader who can count to one but who has never seen a hockey game can make a loud argument that Hakstol should be fired because he hasn't won a single title. People can make the argument that the proof is in the pudding, and it is. But I'd like to see a reasoned discussion about what he is doing on and off the ice with his teams that makes him a liability. I know we all tend to start with a result then build reasons to compliment or criticize the performance, but at least then there is some reasoning--not simply a reaction to frustration. I've wondered aloud whether Hak's game-coaching skills were up to his obvious program coaching skills, and I'd still like to see some proof that he has reached a top level in that area. But I'm not really knowledgeable about college hockey coaching, and I'd like to see others address it., But the conversation usually doesn't go that far. It gets hung up at the banner count level, which is kind of mindless, IMO. Being a Sioux hockey fan has given me a lot of watching pleasure over the last 10 years. We've been consistently in the hunt like few other programs. Very few. Something very good is being done by both players and coaches. I'd like to see number 8 too, but winning one is not going to be the sole and only reason I support keeping or firing the head coach.

Makes sense to me.

Many of us were questioning why OD should be on the ice late last year and early this year. It looks like what the coaches saw in practice is bearing fruit. Now, if Murphy would start coming around like that . . . .

Sioux radio has always been very good with Hennessey, IMO, but the color guy with him now interrupts all the time. Painful to listen to sometimes.

Sioux have played well. They haven't been bottled up in their own end, as often happens to them.

Good period of hockey.

Cam made some very nice saves last night. After LSSU, he needed that.

Bunch of Gopher recruits in the stands tonight wondering wtf.

I just hope the Sioux can play a clean and disciplined game tonight. We'll see how mature they are after last night.

I'm not getting audio on UND Insider either

They may not be interchangeable, farce, but I'll bet they've moved a fair amount in the last 20 years. Downward, mostly.

LaPoint's injury was pretty horrific. At least to witness.

Miami's forwards could motor. Speed in hockey is a funny thing. So much depends on rhythm and anticipation. A good passing team will look fast. But this year's team has real nice speed up and down the lineup, and they can play the greasy game too. Not a lot of elite level ability but a real nice mix of character and skill. Another thing I like is the fact that they are not soft but most of the boys seem to have learned to keep their composure pretty well when someone is trying to egg them into the box. One-and-done playoffs are impossible to predict, but I like this team's chances.

I felt that way too about the outcome. The difference in team speed was obvious.

I thought the Lakers played better Saturday night and had much greater influence on the flow of the game then. The Sioux were focused on the D game, obviously, but the Lakers were winning more puck battles and not allowing as many prime scoring opportunities.

Of all Hak's faults, perceived and real, sugarcoating has not been one of them.

It was a little reminiscent of Derrick LaPoint.

There's no better time to have a non season ending injury though.

I think their primary objective tonight was play tight D. They have done that, though I don't know how the Lakers missed that one wide open net.