rochsioux

NDH, I've never had a problem keeping it at 72-73 coming over from roch.

Tickets for the games at Wisconsin on 11/12 and 11/13 went onsale today (9/22), http://www.uwbadgers.com/

My understanding is that it now has to be approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel: http://web1.ncaa.org/committees/committees...mitteeName=PROP Best I can find for email addresses: Lawrence (Larry) G. Scott lscott@pac-10.org James E. Fallis Jim.Fallis@nau.edu Jeff Stapleton jstaplet@monmouth.edu John Iamarino jiamarino@socon.org James Fiore kimberly.wodiska@stonybrook.edu (executive assistant) Ted Gumbart tgumbart@atlanticsun.org Alan Patterson apatterson@triad.rr.com Janet Montgomery jlm@uwa.edu Ira Zeff izeff@nebrwesleyan.edu Donald E. Tencher dtencher@ric.edu Tom Byrnes tbyrnes@cacsports.com

I agree with everything he says, especially this: If were up to me I wouldn't change one thing in REA. In fact, I would work with SL and SR to expand the use of Native American imagery.

Not sure about hockey, but Dale Lennon was a UND player, assistant coach, and head football coach. He left to coach Southern Ill.

If the SBoHE wants to keep the nickname, then they would make a statement to the effect that they are going to give the tribes the full available time up to Nov. We are now 7 months from the deadline, it would be idiotic to terminate the name at this point. If Murphy was really in favor of the nickname or at least letting the tribal members vote on it, he would have issued a statement that the tribal leadership will work towards a vote on the issue if the SBoHE will give them the full amount of time, Nov. 2010. The fact that neither side is willing can only mean that both sides want to terminate the name but don't want to be blamed. If SR would schedule a vote on the nickname, IMO, there is no way in he!! that the SBoHE would terminate the name early. It would be a political disaster. Pretty sad when you have leadership like this. By every possible measure, a sigificant majority of the tribes and the general population are in favor of keeping the nickname. The leadership of the SBoHE and SR seem to be doing everything they can to ensure that the name goes (while avoiding the blame).

The SBoHE, UND president and athletic director, and I believe, Charles Murphy want the name eliminated. They just don't want to be blamed for it. I have been suspicious of Murphy's real stand on this issue for a long time. By all appearances he is just playing a waiting game with the SBoHE, letting them make the move on eliminating the name. Once they drop the name then Murphy has an out...he didn't get enough time to bring this to a vote. If Murphy was in favor of the nickname or a least in favor of putting it to a vote I believe something positive would have happened today. Looks like a game of hot patato going on...in this case they are passing the nickname around and I think the SBoHE will pull the plug on the music this week. If the nickname is dropped prior to the deadline I will put full blame on the SB0HE, Kelley, and Faison. If it goes to the deadline without approval and without a vote on SR then the full blame goes on Murphy.

Matt Frattin. I could see him scoring 25-30 goals next year. With his size, speed, and shot he is a handful. If things play out like I could envision he would be in the Hobey running. Danny Kristo. Had 15 goals as a freshman, should continue to improve, 20-25 goals is not unreasonable to expect from him. Jason Gregoire. Had more great scoring chances over the last 1/3 to 1/2 of the season than any Sioux player I can remember. If he learns how to finish he will also be in the discussion for the Hobey. He could get 25-30 goals. Evan Trupp. A bit of an enigma to me. At times he looks like the best player on the team and at other times I wonder what the heck he is doing. Can't have another 20 game goal-less streak next year. Great talent and I expect a big senior season from him. A 40-45 point season is possible. Corban Knight. I expect him to make a big jump forward. He was going to play juniors this past year and was brought in early due to Frattin being suspended. He wasn't really ready to provide much help the first half of the year. Not really sure what type of offensive numbers to expect but I look for him to take a big step forward in his development. Chay Genoway. As a selfish Sioux fan I can only hope he comes back for another year. That immediately makes the entire offense more dangerous. I can certainly understand if he moves on but I would love to see him go out skating around the Excel center with the National Championship trophy held high. Brad Eidsness. Did not seem to show much improvement over last year during the first 25-30 games this year, but then he was a huge factor for the Sioux getting hot the last 13 games prior to the tourny. He needs to improve his lateral movement and I expect him to take another step forward next year. Would expect a save % of at least .920 - .925 next year. With Eids back and a solid defense I would like Hak to turn the boys loose on the offensive end. When we get up a few goals midway in the game I want to see them put the other team away and not let them back in the game. Establish a killer mentality right from the get-go next season. This team should average around 4 goals/game and the defense should allow around 2/game. If they can do that they will be tough to beat. Assuming all underclassman are back this team should finish in the top two in the league and be able to get a #1 seed. If the team can stay relatively healthy (a big if based on past seasons) they will bring home #8.

Overall, Hak has done a pretty good job. The bar is always high, as it should be, for Fighting Sioux hockey. Any year we don't win the NC$$ championship is a disappointment to me...with that expectation I know I am going to have many, many disappointing results. No matter how disappointed I am at the end of a season, I am equally stoked at the start of a new season because I know the team will compete for a title. We have now had 10 "disappointing" seasons in a row. Over those 10 years, Hak was the coach for 6 and Blais for 4. We have been in the NC$$ tourny 9 times, the frozen four 5 times (championship game 2 times), first round loss 3 times, and regional championship loss once. Overall a pretty damn good record. Unfortunately no titles, which is the measuring stick for this program. Certainly Haks record over the past 6 years should allow him room to get that title. Personally, if there is no title during the next 4 years, regardless of frozen four appearances, I would probably be ready for a change. My one concern with Hak has been the slow starts. The first 5 years they started so slowly that they had to battle to get back into the NC$$ tourny. This year looked different as they started out 7-1-1 till Chay got hurt. I understand that was a huge blow to the team but it took approx. the next 20 games for them to get their act together again...no matter how important one player is I find it hard to understand this, and given Haks slow starts in the past it makes me wonder if they may have slumped to some degree anyway if Chay was not injured. There has been an awful lot of talent rolling thru the program and I find it difficult to comprehend how these slow starts can happen all the time. Basically every year under Hak they have had to have the peddle to the meddle the last 15-20 games of the year to ensure they would make the tourny. I just wonder how much energy is drained from the team as they try to get back in the race? It seems like the team is always pretty banged up come tourny time...is that a result of the effort that is needed to get back in the race and the feeling that players cannot sit out even though maybe they should cause we can't afford to lose a game ? Sometimes when you expend that much energy to get back in the race it is only natural for there to be a bit of a dropoff once you make it...it is too hard to maintain that high of a level for so long. Over the past years hockey has been more competitive from top to bottom. Since the tourny was expanded to 16 teams there are no first round byes for anyone. Even seemingly sure things have resulted in upsets (Holy Cross, RIT). In a one and done all a big underdog needs to do is play a good defensive system, get good goaltending and try to keep within striking distance. They don't need to be the better team they just need to win the battle on that particular day. Does anyone really believe that in a best of 7 series that Yale would prevail ? Or New Hampshire last year ? Or how about RIT over Denver in 7 games ? It was much tougher for a team years ago to pull an upset when there were an average of 8-9 goals a game...it is much easier now when the the games are closer to 5 goals a game. As the goal scoring in hockey decreases the upsets will increase.

How do you come up with a 9-7 record when Hak has only coached 6 years. The most any coach could lose in 6 tourny appearances is 6 games...unless you counted todays as 2 games. If so, I have no problem with that as it was worth as least 2 losses.

I believe when Chay came back he was wearing a cast on one hand which is what caused any problems he had. I don't think the problems he had were because of the time off. This year being off 4-5 months may be a reason for concern if he does come back.

The whole pairwise system needs to be scraped or drastically remade. It is an absurd system where it may be better to lose a game than win due to the TUC cliff. Let's look at the current UND/Yale comparison. RPI: UND 0.5541 to Yale 0.5460 UND wins COP: UND 1-2-1 to Yale 2-0-1 Yale wins TUC: UND 9-10-4 to Yale 4-2-2 No point awarded since Yale has less than 10 games against TUC. Since it is 1-1 the tie is broken by RPI so UND wins the comparison. So it is OK to use an extremely small sample to award an entire point for COP but TUC needs at least 10 games ? Where is the logic in that ? Since Yale is at 8 games why not just "award" them 2 losses which makes them 4-4-2 and would then give them the TUC point which means they win the comparison 2-1. In other words, if one team was 0-10 against TUC and the other one was 9-0 then no point gets awarded ? That is ridiculous. Assume the team that is short games loses the remaining number to get to 10. If they still have a better TUC record then award them the point. There are so many holes in the pairwise that it is just not a creditable system.

fwiw, just to show how important one game can be: If we don't come back to win the Friday CC game we would be 10th in pairwise. On the other hand, if we would have held on to the 2 goal third period lead against Miami instead of a tie we would be a #1 seed right now (4th in pairwise). Need a sweep this w/e.

Been posted in the past but here's another one of the WCHA "leaders": http://www.southwestreviewnews.com/main.as...amp;TM=39340.01

I'm sure you don't think there will be any significant fallout from retiring the nickname early. You would be wrong. I think you need to change your name to "ChickenLittle". You wouldn't be opposed to a name change would you ? It seems pretty obvious that the Summit wants UND. If UND is the best fit (and I believe they are) then Douple would be an idiot to pass over UND to take another team when this issue will be resolved prior to YE. Based on what Douple has said about the nickname issue he may indeed be an idiot but I am betting that he will do what is right for the league in the longterm and that is to add UND.

Exactly how has SR had enough time ? The current council took office in Oct so they have had just over 4 months to attempt to address this issue which is not, and should not be their highest priority. The previous chairman was against the nickname and in no way would allow a vote to be taken. Under RHHT's watch there was no chance of getting approval. To me the jury is still out with Murphy. He was against the nickname years ago but appeared to have changed or softened his stance on that to the point of at least not being opposed to a tribal vote. What will come of this I don't know but 4 months is not a lot of time. If this is allowed to play itself out until 11/30 I believe there is a good chance that the nickname can be kept. I know there is a 0 % chance of keeping it if the State Board doesn't give SR the time needed. Even if Murphy is against the name I believe he will let a vote take place if the tribal members want to keep it. If he is against the name, part of the strategy may be to see who blinks first. No one wants to take the blame so if he can get the state board to terminate it early then SR can always say they didn't get enough time and no one will blame them. However, if progress is made (petition) and the state board backs off then Murphy will get the blame if the name goes and I suspect he doesn't want that to happen.

I don't believe that for a minute. Yes, there is no 100% guarantee that UND will be admitted if they wait until 11/30. There is also no guarantee if they change the name today, tomorrow, or next month. IMO, the only risk of waiting until 11/30 is a delay of one year...very, very little price to pay. If they change the name prior to 11/30 while SR is still working on the issue, then there will be problems for many, many years. It will be difficult enough to change the name if that has to happen come 11/30. There will be some that will never accept a change, but there will be far more that will not accept the change if they thought there was a chance to keep the name but UND and the State Board pulled the plug too early. This will be costly to UND, both in cost of making the change and loss of alumni $$$. Make no mistake, pulling the plug early will result in a lot of ticked off people and this will result, I believe, in a significant drop in donations. If the State Board wishes to pull the plug early then the state should be ready to write a blank check to UND to cover any financial loss. It is just not worth throwing in the towel on the Fighting Sioux nickname to gain access to a bottom feeder league one year earlier. Based on the statements by Douple regarding the nickname I have no confidence in his ability to run a conference successfully longterm. I will be extemely surprised if there aren't major changes in the league membership over the next 5-10 years.

No one is denying the bball team anything. They are not eligible for post-season for a few years, by that time the nickname issue will be resolved and UND will be in the Summit where they will be able to play for the right to be a 14-16 seed in the NC$$ tourny. The pros far outweigh any perceived negatives to let this play out until 11/30.

WCHA hockey = ACC basketball = SEC football Summit basketball = Atlantic hockey

I like hockey, football, and basketball. When I lived in Grand Forks I used to go to all three and rarely missed a game over a 10 year period. I still travel back for almost all the hockey games but not for football and basketball since they only play one game. My passion for watching sports live is with hockey by far. If UND made it to March Madness that would be fun, but in all likelyhood they would not be a 12 seed, more like a 14-16 seed wich means they would have to beat a 1-3 seed to advance, possible but not real likely. As a basketball fan the best I can ever hope for would be the sweet 16. If the Sioux could make the sweet 16 (or NDSU) I would consider that the equivalent of winning an NCAA hockey championship for those teams. Almost every year UND has a shot at a NC$$ title in hockey. I suspect the absolute best you could hope for in basketball is to make the tourny once every 8-10 years and then advance past the first round maybe 1 out of 4 times. That means you make the sweet sixteen once every 32-40 years which may be stretching it...hard to get real excited about it. I agree that Fighting Sioux is all sports and all sports deserve to keep the tradition that is the Fighting Sioux. The State Board and UND need to let this play out till 11/30 if need be to try and keep the name. Anything less than that will make any transition to a new name much more difficult and will cost the university $$$. The only downside I see is a delay of a year in starting the Summit league schedule which may cost the school $$ in scheduling and travel but will be far less than the cost of changing the name and the loss in donations. If they do everything right and in the end the name has to change it will be costly but I believe the cost and bitterness will be much higher if they pull the plug too early...the rancor will never go away for some as the belief will be engrained that the nickname could have been saved but the effort was not made. Standing Rock appears to be starting to move on the issue and a lot can be done in the next nine months that could result in saving the name...unless the state board and UND really don't want to save the name.

No way to spin this other than this is not a very good team right now. The proof is in the record, 6 wins in the past 19 games (3-4-2 at home, 3-5-2 on the road, 6-9-4 overall). To me that is the definition of mediocrity. Hopefully, they can still salvage something positive from the season.

I believe it is a three year contract with FCS.

You really can't compare the game today with what it was over 20 years ago.

The ones that stick out for me are games against Wisconsin.

I agree that Eidsness isn't bad. He just isn't a shutdown goalie at this point. With the decrease in goal scoring over the years it becomes more and more a goalie game and "isn't bad" isn't good enough. I think Eidsness has the potential to become a shutdown goalie, however I am losing some confidence in my position as the season progresses. Last year he started 40 games and played in 41. He had a GAA of 2.58 and save pct of .905. This year he has so far started 22 and played in 24 with a GAA of 2.23 and save pct of .906. Very similar numbers. Unfortunately, to me, that is not good. I was satisfied with his numbers last year because he was a freshman. By the start of his soph. year he already had played in 41 games, more like the numbers a junior might have. So I don't think it was unrealistic to expect him to show some improvement this year. He was the first UND goalie drafted in over 10 years and had considerable playing time as a freshman (almost every game). This year I was looking for more of a .920 save pct similar to what Cheverie put up as a soph (he only played 5 games as a frosh). That save pct would mean 8 fewer goals this year. Given the number of ties and one goal losses it would probably mean at least 4 more wins. If that was the case then we would still be looking at a good chance as repeating a WCHA champs and an NCAA playoff bid would be close to a certainty. He has now started 62 games, time to start taking over and steal some games. The next three series (Denver, St Cloud, UMD) are going to be tough. The Sioux could win all six or lose all six. Great goalie play would go along way to winning those games. Just making the NCAA tourny is not good enough for me or most Sioux fans I suspect. Since they went to 16 teams in the playoffs you have to win four games to get the championship. It is very difficult to win all four with just good goaltending. Very hard to tell what kind of goaltending we got at Cornell since they only had 31 shots for the w/e. This w/e with Denver is as good as time as any to make a noticeable leap forward in the net. I want all 4 points and I want to see curious George fall off the dasher .