Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

PCM

Members
  • Posts

    13,098
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by PCM

  1. PCM

    Pictures

    We're here for you, forecheck. We were once young and foolish. We know how you feel.
  2. You are an NDSU "spinster," but I never said that you were trying to blame UND for ending the rivalry. Saying that NDSU is no more to blame than UND is pure spin because it's simply not true. NDSU, all by itself, created the situation that jeopardized the rivalry. NDSU, all by itself, created the unequal situation under which it now expects UND to play. NDSU screwed it up, not UND. And that's the truth.
  3. As I posted in another thread, Inside College Hockey has some excellent photos from last weekend's series between UND and Boston College. They were taken by UND athletics photographer Scott Gaddini.
  4. PCM

    Pictures

    Morey00, head over to Inside College Hockey Web site. They have some great pictures from this past weekend's series with BC taken by UND athletics photographer Scott Gaddini. He has some good shots of Brandt that should help you.
  5. It looks as if there's more legal trouble on the way for St. Cloud State University, the school where protests of the Fighting Sioux nickname are routine. Last year it was anti-Semitism. This year it's age discrimination. How is it that such a politically correct university has so many problems with discrimination?
  6. I just noticed that Merry Ketterling responed to the remark I posted about the Brookings Register article. Here's what I submitted: Merry K wrote: Let me get this straight: Ted Turner can get phony public opinion survey results published in SI, but he can't stop the magazine from publishing a story that did a hatchet job on UND for its use of the Sioux name. That certainly makes sense to me. Merry's excuse about calls being made to tribal elders who "couldn't understand what was going on" ranks right up there with Doreen Yellowbird's claim that the telephone survey wasn't accurate because many people on the reservation don't have phones.
  7. Lennon said on his show Sunday night that even while the Nickel Trophy was being hoisted in the locker room, the players were talking about Mankato. He thought the outcome of last season's game would provide the necessary motivation to play well.
  8. At the time Lennon decided to start Bowenkamp over Wilson, I thought it was a no-brainer because Bowenkamp was obviously struggling. Although I knew Bowenkamp was capable of playing much better, it was Wilson who came off the bench and staged an amazing comeback against St. Cloud. Under the circumstances, it made a lot of sense to start Wilson. However, Bowenkamp certainly redeemed himself against SDSU and the Bison. Perhaps losing the starting job was the spark he needed.
  9. That's not spin, it's honesty, and I can appreciate that.
  10. Absolutely, totally, 100 percent false. I know it's the Bison spin, but that's all it is -- spin.
  11. Yeah, but Ma would be so disappointed if I quit truck driving school.
  12. I don't think it's only a matter of whether the Sioux lose, but how they might lose. All it would take is one or two impact D-IAA-caliber recruits to suddenly and decisively tip the advantage in NDSU's favor. If UND plays NDSU the next two years and gets trampled, how many Sioux fans and alumni are going to say, "A two-year contract with NDSU? Yeah, that was a good idea!"
  13. When will this silly arguement end? NDSU fans belittle UND for playing smaller, lesser-known schools, but then act is if the world's coming to an end when D-II UND refuses to play D-IAA NDSU. Maybe I should point out the the mighty Bison, victors over the Montana Grizzlies, were on Saturday defeated by the Sioux, victors over UM-Crookston. Who NDSU and UND have played and will play has nothing to do with whether the two schools should continue to play.
  14. We are not chumps. WE are not chumps.
  15. After re-reading Bakken's column, I don't think that's his point. His point is that it's the heighth of hypocrisy for NDSU to cast UND as the villain. It was NDSU, not UND, that decided to jeopardize the rivalry by unilaterally moving to D-IAA. I sincerely believe that if UND is pressured into making an emotional decision to continue the annual battle for the Nickel Trophy, a year or two years from now, Sioux alumni and fans and UND administrators will be kicking themselves for ever being suckered into the deal.
  16. Ah, but I'm already hearing NDSU crow about its recruiting successes as a result of its decision to go D-IAA. If the announced move is paying off for the Bison in the form of better recruits, then the playing field is no longer level. NDSU can't have it both ways. They can pat themselves on the back for the brilliant decision to go D-IAA and boast about the dividends it's already paying, then pretend both schools are on an equal footing for the next two years. Which is it? Is NDSU getting better recruits now or is it getting the same level of recruits as a D-II school? And what about next year and the year after that? Is NDSU going to brag about its recruiting successes while insisting that there is no real difference between NDSU and UND? Only a sucker would believe that, and I refuse to be played for a sucker.
  17. In Mike McFeely's Sunday column in the Fargo Forum, he implores UND and Sioux fans to throw logic and reason out the window, go with their emotions and agree to play NDSU for at least two more years. Here are some selected quotes and responses:
  18. Anyone who thinks the NDSU-UND football game must continue no matter what should read Sunday's Ryan Bakken column in the Grand Forks Herald.
  19. Here's the USCHO recap that nobody wants to read about Saturday's BC-UND game.
  20. I've seen many of those type of goals waved off, even where the intent was questionable. However, if the judgement of the officials on the ice was that it went in off a BC skate, then they had no choice but to call it a goal. I assume that you can't take it off the board after the official determination is made.
  21. PCM

    Great Game

    Thanks for the classy post, bisonguy. This was definitely a game for the ages.
  22. It's not difficult to judge Bochenski's intent when he says he deliberately used his skate to deflect the puck into the net. I'd be surprised if he gets away with that again.
  23. I have a better idea. Because hockey is UND's only DI sport and NDSU will be a DI school, from here on, NDSU's hockey team should play UND's hockey team for the Nickel Trophy. Seems fair to me.
  24. With the Nickel Trophy in Grand Forks for who knows how long, look for the taunting from NDSU fans and the Fargo media to be ratcheted up to a whole new level.
  25. Well, you have to remember, that is Dr. Bochenski's interpretation. Here's what the "2004 NCAA Men's and Women's Ice Hockey Rules and Interpretatons" say about such matters (special thanks to GDM for providing me with a copy of said rules): As I interpret the rule, a goal can be scored off a skate deflection as long as the player did not deliberately or intentionally direct the puck into the goal using his skate. Because Bochenski admits that he deliberately turned his skate to deflect the puck in, it appears he violated the rule. That being said, here is my impression of what happened. Schneider said he was simply trying to chip the puck in deep, but that attempt was partially blocked, which caused the puck to deflect toward the goal. Bochesnki and Forrest were tied up in front of the net. Forrest said he expected the puck to come toward the net, which is why he tied up Bochenski's stick. However, he said he did not see the puck coming and didn't know how it got into the net. Bochenski said he did see the puck coming and intentionally turned his skate to deflect it it. The word we initially received in the press box was that the puck went in off a BC skate and, therefore, the goal good. That's why Schneider initially received credit for the goal. However, at the time it happened, I was certain that it went in off Bochenski's skate, but that it was an accidental deflection rather than an intentional deflection. I didn't think that Bochenski saw the puck coming. Between periods, I watched the video replay several times. It seemed to confirm what I'd initially seen. The puck went off Bochenski's skate, but it appeared that neither player was aware of where the puck was before it was deflected in. If Bochenski did see the puck and did intentionally turn his foot to deliberately direct the puck into the goal, then he got away with one. He believes that as long as he didn't kick the puck in, it's legal. However, that is not how I would interpret the rules as stated above.
×
×
  • Create New...