-
Posts
4,558 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Everything posted by jimdahl
-
Congratulations SiouxBetcha for thread #10000 (and congrats for selling the tickets in a speedy 50 minutes).
-
It was an extremely misguided adjustment at best. I did a detailed analysis of its exact impact a year ago. Combined with the extension of the negative win exemption to the regular season, the easiest path to the top of the RPI seems to be schedule creampuffs and beat them. Miami currently has a comical 8 games thrown out of their RPI calculation for being negative wins, and 6 of the remaining 8 would currently be thrown out if won.
-
I know Brad's written that very same article in the past, I know the NCAA ice hockey committee has promised a crackdown on obstruction for years, the WCHA has pledged to open up the game for years. The NHL figured it out in 2004 when attendance and freefalling t.v. coverage forced them to do something to save the game. Frankly, unthinkable in my youth, the NHL is now a better, more watchable hockey product than college hockey. After all the false starts, the cynic in me worries that the NCAA and WCHA won't actually do anything until their survival depends on it, and I don't see the fan market applying sufficient pressure. The optimist in me hopes that the increase in the WCHA as a training ground for the NHL allows the NHL to apply sufficient pressure.
-
Everything we know so far is at the 2008 schedule wiki page. There have been rumors that an official schedule would be released around now, but nothing has come out yet.
-
Harsh -- I knew we wouldn't be able to pick the same player within a game, but across games, ouch. There goes my all-Jones all-the-time strategy. Gimme LaPoint
-
Probably -- as you noted, they currently have 7 games against TUCs and 2 more scheduled. The only TUC they've played "on the bubble" is Bowling Green at #21. Some other opponents in the low 20s could become TUCs, catapulting them past 10. It was just pretty shocking to me to see a top-ranked team in a position such that, given the current rankings, it will have only played 9 games against TUCs in the regular season.
-
With the usual disclaimers, it's always amusing when these come out: (From N.E. Hampton on hockey-l)
-
Anyone who wants to talk about the Sioux is more than welcome here, diversity of opinion keeps the discussions interesting (as long as they can be expressed respectfully). That said, the dead horse keeps neighing only because we all keep kicking it. (Quite a metaphor, eh?)
-
I wrote a blog post a couple days ago outlining where the current PWR leaves UND. I see no point duplicating USCHO or CHN's bracketology articles or such, rather it's more specifically focused toward UND's situation and Sioux fans with the assumption that you already understand PWR from some other source. They'll become more specifically forward-looking as it begins to make sense to do so. In summary, of the five teams to whom we're currently losing a comparison: Clarkson: UND could take TUC or COP (with a little help) to flip the 2-1 comparison CC: UND trails 1-4 with no h2h remaining. Ouch Denver: UND trails 1-4, but has two h2h remaining. Miami: UND trails 0-2. TUC isn't in play because Miami hasn't played enough, but the RPI comparison is within reach Michigan: UND trails 0-3. It's leads in TUC, COP, and RPI are formidable.
-
Buoyed by recent press clippings, his first career goal comes in his third year to Zach Jones.
-
Board adopts salary range
-
Topics resurfacing is fine, there are always new people and new things to say. The problem with the other thread was the appearance that you were just trolling for Bison fans (who I applaud for ignoring it), with statements such as: A, "So, do you think we'll finally get the rivalry game going again in '09," would've been met with groans some fans sick of the topic, but probably wouldn't have been closed by a moderator.
-
I think this is a good discussion to have. My thought on this topic are here.
-
I'll make a few comments about some of the moderation and appropriateness topics. I agree that people should be able to criticize players' and other public figures' public performance (not personal lives, except aspects that are otherwise in the news), though I would only do so myself with extreme care. Everyone should definitely follow Sicatoka's advice (which I think he stole from me) that before posting something negative about someone, you should think about if you would say it to their face. The call for less moderation is interesting, in that comments are usually in the opposite direction, that we let too much go. That's a helpful reminder that plenty of reasonable people disagree and that no matter where we set the bar, there will be people who think it's wrong in both directions. The feedback from discussions like these is helpful, and I always read it carefully. One thing that's started to concern us in moderating that you might not think about is reputational impact on UND. Most of the people talked about here do read the board or at least occasionally find out what is being said about them. When people search for information about UND or these people, this site is near the top of the search results. In those ways, the discussions here are a reflection on UND. Since SiouxSports.com is a reflection on me, I'm interested in that reflection on UND being positive. I'm happy to devote 1000s of my personal hours and dollars to bring information about UND to Sioux fans everywhere, but draw the line where I think the impact and reflection on UND becomes negative.
-
People who "register" but never click the link in the "confirmation of address" email are assigned a member number that can't be reused.
-
While the gap between the post numbers and the number of posts gets larger as the moderators and I go wild with our machetes, congratulations for post #300,000 goes to Sioux Hab-it for this dispute settling clarification.
-
I first saw this in a G.F. Herald article where they apparently thought this piece painted N.D. in a bad light, but National Geographic did a pretty cool spread on North Dakota ghost towns: North Dakota, The Emptied Prairie Not a hatchet job, in my opinion, but undoubtedly sad.
-
Long visits GF again Some interesting talk about the AD reporting structure, that's been discussed here many times...
-
I thought you were going to say: Bison fans owe star2city a few more apologies
-
The question has come up, outside of this forum, what are the posting policies and evaluation criteria referenced in the above post. Rules to which everyone agrees when they join: From: http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?act=Reg&CODE=00 Explanations of how moderation is applied: http://forum.siouxsports.com/index.php?showtopic=8853 Those materials could undoubtedly use refining, but everything you need to know is there.
-
Interesting topic -- I made "should the WCHA add Bemidji St." the front page poll. I'm a little surprised to see it 50-50 in early voting.
-
I was more responding to a question about the fan base than the players. It's a very young team, prone to mood swings and fits of talent mixed in with fits of mediocrity. Kolzig is really the one stable veteran, and Ovechkin is so ridiculously good that he shines no matter what else is happening. Though the Red Wings are one team they just haven't matched up well against ever since the '98 cup, I do agree that Washington has dramatically underperformed this season, for having added Nylander and Backstrom to Ovechkin and Semin. I can only repeat my stat from above -- they are 11-6-4 since Bruce took over as head coach (if only they hadn't started in a 7-14-1 hole).
-
This doesn't represent a change in any policy, rather will hopefully just make us more consistent in applying existing policies (which should make everyone happy). When you click "Report", it doesn't automatically do anything to the post; it just invisibly notifies us that it's one we should make sure to look at. When we do look, we'll evaluate it using the same criteria we do now for the posts we already read. This just makes sure posts that readers think are potentially troublesome are among those we read. Clicking "report" simply out of spite won't work because if there's nothing wrong with the reported post, we wouldn't do anything to it, and would instead probably get back to the person who made the false report.
-
If you report at least 1 post per month for 6 months, you get one of these. Oops, wrong link! I mean one of these:
-
Sorry I wasn't clear -- linking to interesting text someone else wrote is good, copying and pasting the text someone else wrote is bad.