lawkota

I sit in an upper corner of the lower bowl so the net was directly in my sight line for play in my end. I didn't really notice it. I would guess the experience would be different for those directly behind the goal, especially for seeing play in the other end.

Hey, I got nothing against Greyeagle. My post was not meant to be mean-spirited and I don't think it reads that way. Just poking a little fun, that's all. But if we're playing nice today, so be it. I apologize. Now in an attempt to prevent this thread from drifting even further off topic: I'm excited about Smaby. From what little I've see (Green & White), he may provide the element that this team needs. I've never thought we've gotten poor point production from our d-men. On the contrary, I've been very happy with the way that Schneider, Jones and Fuher handle themselves in the offensive zone. But we have struggled breaking out of the defensive zone the past two years. That first pass.

resurrecting a very old thread here, but: REA to have netting for Wild game Interesting that the netting will come down after the game. That and Blais' statement gives the impression that they have no intention of making it permanent until made to do so. Has anyone heard anything about the NCAA mandating this? Do any NCAA venues use the netting?

To recap: The quote, as part of the entire story, is in context. By posting only the quote, Greyeagle takes it out of context, allowing everyone to interpret it their own way. He then gives the quote an interpretation that does not fit if taken within the entire story. Finally, he defends himself by saying the quote may have been taken out of context because he doesn't know what came before or after the quote in the story he took the quote from. Classic.

For the Rascal Flatts concert last Friday, there were cars parking in the undeveloped lot to the north. From the looks of things though, alot of the space in that lot that was used last year is not available now. So, if this lot is open, I would say arrive at least 30 minutes before game time, if not earlier. If it's not open, your chances of parking around the arena without a parking pass are nil.

What is the main reason then? That's Glas talking, not Thomas. Here's my take on what's going on. There is a strong push within UND to follow the Bison but its being driven by the football folks. That really ticks off the rest of the coaches who feel they are shut out of the process. Added to this is the perception at UND that the non football coaches at NDSU were pretty much shut out of the D-1 debate there. I don't know if this is the case or not but the perception is there. So I believe alot of this talk has less to do with the Bison then you would think, it's more of a power play within the Athletic Dept at UND. Glas is the biggest advocate against a move up. Why? Because he can continue to recruit the guys, like Beasley, who can't get into a D-I school. This, the new REA and the fact that he's a good recruiter, gives Glas the opportunity to bring in very good talent, perhaps even better talent than the Bison might attract as D-I. Certainly enough talent to contend for D-II national championships. I might tend to agree with this line of reasoning if there were prospects of regular Elite 8 appearances. The problem is that Hallstrom is wrong, Glas is not a very good coach. His teams consistently underperform and will continue to do so. I would just as soon see him leave.

Here's my prediction. Minnesota will run away with the McNaughton. The Sioux, Duluth, CC and Denver will fight it out for the 2-5 placings with SCSU and Mankato sneaking around looking to grab home ice if one of them falter. Tech, Anchorage and Wisco have no chance to get home ice but Wisco will not be a team you want to play in the first round of the playoffs. Eaves will have them playing well by the end of the year. Goaltending has not been Minnesota's strength the past 2 years (although Weber was wonderful against Michigan in the semis) so this loss does nothing to change my opinion that the Gophers will be the overwhelming favorite to win the league. They are so deep at forward its scary. Let's face it Sioux fans, we may have the talent to match up at lines 1 and 2 with Minny but that's it. While our bottom forwards may have the potential, theirs have already proved it. We deal with ifs and maybes, they deal with facts. Furthermore, they have more talent on the blue line than anyone else. I love our d-men but was disappointed with how they played down the stretch when Hale was out. I am confident they will be better now knowing that David is not going to be there but again, we are dealing with ifs and maybes. The gophs have a hole to fill in Martin but I have never been a big P-Mart booster anyway, I've always thought he was overrated. Replacing him is nothing compared to replacing Leopold. The Sioux finished last year DOA. Other than a handful of players, the team showed no grit or determination. Could they challenge Minnesota? Sure, if things fall into place. But my head says not likely. I hope I'm wrong but I refuse to go into this season with high expectations for this team when the evidence is not there to support it.

I'm sorry, I completely misread your post.

Coteau, I think Fedorov is referring to giving priority to student season ticket holders from prior years for the reserved center ice seats. As pretty much everyone has said, there really is no good way to implement this awful plan. The senate really dropped the ball here. However, Fedorov is right that this whole mess could have been avoided by giving the students ample corner seating when the arena opened.

Exactly. Which is why I think Miller and Oien couldn't have handled this any worse for SDSU. The "find a conference" requirement is a catch-22 because you can't market yourself to a DI conference until you've made a D-I decision (UCD was a unique case). Given the situation NDSU and SDSU were in, it makes sense to announce then use your exploratory year(s) to make headway towards a conference. If things don't progress as you'd planned or hoped, you have the option of moving back. I suspect a NCC founding member would be welcome back with open arms. I still believe that NDSU handled this the right way and that SDSU's administration has embarassed itself by allowing the BOR to slap a condition on their jump and then ignoring that condition. SDSU should have announced last year; their noncommittal cost them credibility with conferences and by association, hurt NDSU as well. That's not to say that things won't fall into place for both schools by this time next year. I hope they do. I wish both the Jacks and the Bison good luck. I wish UND were joining them.

Glad to sign. Randy, what is the reasoning behind this? Why should the other D-III schools care if a few are using scholarship $$ to play-up in D-I? I would hope there is something more to this than simple jealousy of the recognition that schools like CC, Clarkson, Johns Hopkins, etc. receive for the success they have achieved.

Scheduling shouldn't be a concern bisonguy, no matter what conference the other sports are in. Ohio State and Wisconsin seem to do alright, with the difference being that at both these schools, men's BB gets priority. I can't imagine that ever being the case at UND. In any event, if the Big 10 and the WCHA can get along, I don't see why the WCHA and whatever low-level D-I conference UND would probably be in couldn't as well. Any conflicts would be in January-March, not November and December, as this is nonconference season for basketball and I believe one of the press releases stated that nonconference games would be primarily in the new arena. This leads me to my concern though - that the Sioux will continue to host a majority of their WCHA home schedule early in the season so as to ease scheduling pressure in January-March. I don't like that. Also, I don't want REA to be a multi-sport arena. Its a hockey arena. I think the best news to come out of this is that no changes are being made to the main arena to make it more "basketball friendly", thereby reducing its allure as one of the finest hockey arenas in the country. I'm still at a loss as to why this new facilty needs seating for 4K if its not the "home" of Sioux basketball. I'm inclined to agree with Sicatoka. Or maybe its wishful hoping.

You can get better look at the floorplans here. Interesting that they are using a different architect. Or maybe its the same guy who's now with a different firm.

This whole thing is a head scratcher for me. If the main arena is to be the primary home for BB, why does the new facility have 4000 seats? And if the new facility has 4000 seats, why on earth would the basketball teams ever have to use the main arena (other than for the Bison games or regionals)? REA has an agenda and I'm not so sure its primary aim is to benefit the basketball and volleyball programs at UND. Todd Berning is a very smart facility manager and he obviously sees an opportunity here. With this new addition, the REA complex will be larger than the Alerus. According to the release, groundbreaking is set for.....tomorrow. Pictures of the new facility

Some very good Sioux players came out of the AJHL, including the current assistant coaches. Nice to see the team looking this way again with Kyle Radke.

You do more than tease Hammy, you have strongly insinuated in other threads on other boards that Blais does this. I thought that maybe you had some actual knowledge but you have now admitted that you do not, your "raised eyebrows" notwithstanding. Is this is a common technique of yours, to make a bold statement and then back away with a "I'm just rustling feathers" comment?

I'm just curious, when has Blais done this? I agree with you on these points but I'm struggling to find a situation where Blais pulled a scholarship on a player who displayed these qualities.

I wasn't trying to smack you or anything. I know that on USCHO, this stat got brought up and someone from Wisconsin scoffed at the numbers because UND had so many more home games than Minny or Wisco. It was taken as fact. Problem was, it wasn't true. I was going to post my research there but by the time I gathered it, the thread had moved in a different direction. So I had all these numbers with nowhere to go until....... BTW, Wisconsin's reported total of 228,612 is for 20 dates, an average of 11,430 a game. So Wisco led the nation is average attendance. In the final analysis.......big deal. Minnesota led the nation in the only stat I care about.

The reported figure of 256,591 for UND is for 23 dates, an average of 11,156 a game (300 less per game than last year). The Manitoba exhibition game is not included in UND's official release (attendance at that game was 7,131) Highest attendance Mich Tech - Sat 11,659 Colo Coll - Sat 11,641 St. Cloud - Sat 11,487 Duluth - Sat 11,472 Mankato - Fri 11,431 Lowest Attendance Denver - plyfs #1 10,264 Denver - plyfs #2 10,597 Canisius - Fri 10,643 Denver - plyfs #3 10,674 Niagara - Fri 10,701 The reported attendance of 240,670 for Minnesota is for 24 dates and includes the exhibitions with Italy and US Natl team (but not the HOF game at Xcel). This is an average of 10,028 a game, 4 less than last year. The highest attended games for the gophers were St. Cloud #2 (10,218), Alabama Fri (10,191 - banner raised), UND Sat (10,160), Mich St. (10,153) and Wisco Sat (10,150). The lowest attended games were the exhibitions and the playoff series with Tech.

This is laughable. There wasn't a "no standing" policy that was policed last year so that cannot be a reason for a perceived lack of atmosphere. And here's this old man's opinion - for the past 10 or so years, the students collectively have added little to the atmosphere of a Sioux hockey game. They stand the entire game. Big Deal. Look, we're standing. Can't you see by our standing what great fans we are. Let them try a boycott. It won't work. They couldn't get more than a dozen students to protest. And the ones that do leave, nobody will miss them. The people waiting to get season tickets will be much more rabid fans than any students willing to give theirs up. I said before and I still believe that the students should get at least the same number of lower bowl seats as before but this attitude of entitlement really ticks me off. For $65 or so a year (20+ games for the price of 4), the students feel they should get their choice of seats and should be able to stand the entire game, even though most don't actually cheer while standing and the ones that do can't be counted on to develop anything other than banal chants.

I believe the overuse of the phrase in your post is exactly the point of DamStrait. Nobody doubts the claim, it's just annoying to have it stuffed down your throat. It's also borderline pretentious, which is so un-Minnesotan.

REA is coddling to the wishes of the suite holders by putting the students in another section, in front of different suite holders? Maybe the standing in the two center ice sections affects the view of more suites than standing in a corner section. Nevertheless, they'll be pissing off Peter to placate Paul. I thought that the problem with the suites was solved when they roped off the top two rows.

I don't think you can compare the 4 teams by watching the semis, they were completely different types of games. That being said I think the Gophers are the favorite because of more forward talent and the play of Weber. Although I don't think Minnesota can afford to slog through the opening period again. I think the more highly touted goaltender stumbled in each game. As Sica mentioned in another thread, Montoya was asleep on Vanek's OT winner (which was a beaut). On UNH's game winner (scored in the 2nd), I thought LeNeveu got caught looking away from the puck.

Same for me. Wanted to go to Buffalo (even had tickets through the lottery) but couldn't justify cost of going with Sioux not there. Will be in Boston next year - maybe sitting next to the Greyeagles.