PCM

IF it had been a normal Friday night/Saturday night series and IF weather hadn't been a factor, THEN I'd say you have a valid point and reason for concern. But between the circumstances being abnormal and the way the team's been playing, I think you have to expect a drop in attendance. Besides that, you know as well as I do that on a given Sioux hockey night, not every fan in the building is a die-hard UND hockey fan. There will always be a certain percentage of Sioux fans who stay home if they have an excuse or a reason to do so. I'm not saying that it's a good thing, only that it's a fact of life and that there's not much anyone can do about it.

Jordan Parise has been named the WCHA's defensive player of the week. Congratulations, Jordan!

Sorry, but your hyperbole falls into the category of gross exaggeration. While everyone would have preferred a packed house for Sunday's UND-UW game, to characterize the lower-than-average attendance as a "mass exodus" really does a disservice to those who turned out to watch the game and cheer on the Sioux. Many people make weekend plans based on their regular routines. Scheduling a game on an unusual day and time means that some people aren't going to attend because it interferes with their normal routine. Combine that with icy road conditions and a televised game, and you have another reason for people to stay home. While I agree that many Sioux fans are spoiled, using this particular game to paint all Sioux fans with a broad brush isn't being fair or reasonable. You don't think that it helps get people to the arena when the Sioux have players like Jason Blake, Jeff Panzer, Brandon Bochenski and Zach Parise in contention for the Hobey? Fans like to watch marquee players. The Sioux have some good players, but there really aren't any who stand out with star quality. The fact is, offense generates excitement, and more sports fans will turn out to watch a .500 team with a good offense than a .500 team with a good defense. Some of the best Sioux teams of the past weren't that great defensively, but they could win consistently by outscoring any team in the country. That alone made them fun to watch. And broad the point I'm trying to make is that it might be more reasonable to ask: Why has the average attendance remained so high at Sioux games when this has been a down season by UND's standards?

I'll toss out a few more reasons why the house wasn't packed on Sunday. The Sioux are at .500 in the WCHA, not far above .500 in their overall record, out of contention for the league title and on the bubble to make the NCAA playoffs. On top of that, the Sioux have no viable Hobey Baker candidtate, the team hasn't been lighting up the scoreboard and it can often be very frustrating to watch. The way this season has gone, I'm not surprised by a drop in attendance.

The old guy is back. Where did everyone go? People can read this if they want to. There's a cool Parise quote at the end.

Strinden? C'mon, the guy's even older than me. Give him a break.

By jove! You have unwittingly stumbled upon the secret of sudo-reporting!

I'm saying that what's done is done. Complaining about the hiring process isn't going to change anything. Further punishing Hakstol for something that wasn't his fault isn't going to improve the situation. Rather than making the job even more restrictive, maybe what Hakstol really needs is the freedom to run the team the way he wants to. Rather than running the team as the last coach did or as some would-be coaches might, maybe he should be allowed to succeed or fail based on his vision of what the team should be. I know it's a radical concept, but I'm not sold on the idea that tightening the vice and increasing the magnification of the microscope is going to bring out the best in Hakstol.

I rest my case.

Maybe you have to be dead. Even I don't know what that means.

Maybe we should consider the possibility that shortening the rope even more than it already is might make the situation worse, not better.

I agree. And remember who was in his first year as an assistant coach? It was the same person who was rapidly promoted to associate head coach that season. And remember why that happened? The associate head coach had to assume some of Blais' responsibilities while he was away from the team because of his daughter's life-threatening illness. We now know that Wendy Blais was gravely ill during Blais' last two seasons at UND. How much extra burden did that place on the associate head coach? We recently learned that Dave Hakstol has been coaching the team while his father fought cancer, a disease that ultimately took his life. Anyone who's watched a close relative die from a terminal illness knows that it's a physically and emotionally draining experience. Hakstol was there when Blais needed him and did an exemplary job. Shortly after he was selected head coach, I asked Dave if the time he spent filling in for Blais improved his qualifications for the position. He wouldn't even answer the question. He just did what he had to do. It was simply part of the job. He wanted no recognition for it. Hakstol has paid his dues to UND. He deserves a fair chance under better circumstances than he had this season.

All I know is that Mapletoft is wicked good in NHL 2004.

I guess you have to be old to remember this.

At the risk of getting flamed for shameless self-promotion, does anyone else remember this? Jan. 15, 2004, US College Hockey Online The Golden Boys Are Back In Town The Sioux are 0-4 against Wisconsin since Murray made that statement. It's time for Stafford and Murray to show the team how to beat the system they know so well.

You hate the Sioux and the Badgers? I know you're not happy with how this season is going, but I didn't realize it was that bad.

I'm going to say UM-Duluth because the Bulldogs don't get enough respect on this board.

I heard a rumor that that it's because his thong is too tight.

You might as well keep the pucks company.

Sounds like someone can't take the heat.

Spoken like a true pre-madonna.

I don't know if you're referring to me, but I never said Hakstol was a great coach. I have no idea at this point. I do know that he was highly recommended by Dean Blais and Gino Gasparini. I did say that he'd had a rough year and that I was willing to give him more time to get his system and players in place. Given that his father recently died after a long illness, I'm surprised that more people aren't willing to cut him some slack. Who among us would want to coach the Sioux under those circumstances? Also, I believe it's been stated here that Hakstol had little, if anything, to do with recruiting the current group of seniors. This is a large class that should be the heart and soul of the team. Those players haven't performed as expected. Maybe that's Hakstol's fault and maybe it isn't. My hope is that no matter how the season turns out, Dave can spend some time in the off-season thinking about what when right, what went wrong and getting everything sorted out for the next season. Perhaps it will take a new AD who's willing to make some tough decsions and enforce them to straighten out the situation. I say all this as someone who didn't like how the hiring process was handled and who wasn't sold on Hakstol as the best available choice. But he does deserve some time to prove himself, and part of the process he's going through a a new, young head coach is learning from his mistakes. Next season will tell us a lot more about Hakstol as a coach than this season.

I'm not giving up on Hakstol. He's had a rough year and deserves a chance to get his system and his players in place. I'm not nearly as disappointed with him as I am with the team's seniors and its leadership.

Sorry, Tim, I can't give credit to the Seawolves. If the Sioux can't defeat a bad, beat-up team, who can they beat? I'm dreading the Wisconsin series just like I dreaded the Denver series.

Now UAA gets an empty netter. It's 5-2. Nice work, guys.