krangodance

5! no 7! i don't know. how many?

actually they do allow more games if you play alaska schools.

i don't think the sioux would willingly switch to the ccha just because they wanted us to. i think teams in the top three leagues like being in those leagues. i'm not predicting any trouble from uno, but to flat out say it won't happen? that's pretty bold. i could see the sioux wanting something in return for switching conferences so i don't see any reason another team wouldn't also want something in return. as for money dispursement from the final 5/6/etc, there's something to be said for home ice advantage, which transcends money. i'm certain it's helped umtc on several occasions. how many times it made the difference between umtc competing in the ncaa tourney or not would require more research than i'm interested in doing right now, but i'd have to assume it's made a difference here and there. making the ncaa tourney means money in your school's pocket that teams in the wcha who don't make the tourney will not see. again, i'm on board with the prediction that uno will be in the wcha next year, but let's now count our chickens before they've hatched.

this opinion sounds earily accurate. i sure hope it doesn't turn into a pissing contest between omaha and the wcha. if it does, then i think it would be time to start negotiating with uaf, they would be a much easier sell and wouldn't ask for anything in return. the opportunity to play 2 to 4 conference games against their biggest rival, uaa of course, would be enough motivation for them. my biggest concern is for bsu. if they get screwed in all this, college hockey suffers, wcha, ccha, or otherwise. clearly the wcha is courting omaha right now, but i hope the league is willing to be as flexible as possible with other options for the benefit of college hockey, who's future obviously has a direct impact on the wcha's future success.

i don't like this idea at. this eliminates bsu from college hockey completely. not acceptable. uaa for uno and osu, now that would be awesome. i'm already an osu hater in football, now i can be a real hater in a sport my team can beat them in. again, i realize this will never happen, so there's no need to pull the "wrong, this is what's really going to happen, just watch" action.

again, i've already stated twice why i think uaf makes the most sense, for all of college hockey, not just certain self-serviing members of the wcha. remember all that talk about having both alaska schools in the same conference and keeping western schools in the western conference? you, and others, clearly don't agree with that position (to each his own), but this business about "i'm not sure why you think uaf makes more sense" that i've heard from a couple people now? i don't know what more you want to hear from me. i feel i've been clear in expressing my opinion on that matter. i've also already stated my opinion that uno is likely going to be selected, so i won't be the least bit surprised if i do see such an announcement soon.

i've already stated twice why i think it makes more sense, you can look those up if you want to.

all signs point to uno, no doubt. i still think uaf makes more sense, though. that, however, is not going to happen. it will be fun to face a blais team. i see a standing ovation when his name is announced at the ralph the first time we play uno at home.

i said every other team in the wcha would spend two weekends in alaska, whether they're back-to-back weekends to cut down on travel or separate trips so basically you're just agreeing with me on that, which may have been your purpose. as for uaa, they'd still travel more than they did before because they'd have to play 10 teams in the lower 48 states as opposed to the 9 teams they've been playing (this is because of the addition of bemidji). my idea keeps them from having to travel even more by adding two more teams from the lower 48 states to the conference. i realize you don't play every team at home and on the road every year, but my logic should be considered over time. as far as missed school time, i will repeat my arguement that uaa travels a lot more than twice a season and they make it work so other teams would make it work too. it simply makes the most sense to have both alaska schools in the same conference and, given their geographic location, the western conference is the most logical.

uaf makes the most sense since we already have one alaska school in our conference and we're supposed to be the western conference. other teams would, of course, have to have the option of doing back-to-back weekends at alaska to play both teams, thereby cutting down on travel. however, i don't think that is absolutlely necessary. the alaska teams already have to travel from alaska to the lower 48 states eight or nine times a season, so who cares if every other team has to travel up there twice in a season. i honestly don't think true competitors focus on such petty things the way their fans might and the schools that go up there already get compensated for doing so. uaa already plays uaf every year, might as well make it count rather than bringing on omaha, thereby forcing uaa to travel the distance for yet another weekend each season. so bemidji and uaf join the wcha and the ccha swaps uaf out for alabama-huntsville. that leaves 12 teams in each league and both alaska schools are in one league, which is as it should be. plus no d1 schools have to drop their hockey program. let's just do it already.

not a great post. oh no, montana doesn't respect college hockey! what will we ever do? weak. there are 59 d1 college hockey teams in the nation. that's more teams than in any professional sports league. the sioux hockey team has consistently been among the best teams in d1 college hockey for decades now. you compete against teams in your league in any sport and, with rare exception, nobody cares outside of that league. does that make accomplishments in that league any less sweet to the fans of teams within that league? of course not. by the logic demonstrated in this post, even a d1-aa football championship for und or ndsu would mean nothing because nobody cares about d1-aa except schools who participate in d1-aa. this argument is nothing but a passive-aggressive shot at und hockey. it is rather flattering, though, to note that sioux sports are powerful enough to draw so many non-sioux fans to their fan site. few other college sports fan sites in the nation are able to do that. clearly our hockey dominance has attracted more than a little attention, even without montana's support.

not a chance. the gap between great fbs teams and great fcs teams is much too large. talent in football is definitely spread across a wider spectrum than it is in other sports. look at hockey for example. just about every team in d1 has several players who are already pro material, that is not the case at all when you compare fbs football to the nfl. if one player on a given college football team could go pro, then that team is probably awesome. plus a football tournament can't really have more than 16 teams in it. even with 32 teams, you'd have to play five games to win it all. that's half the number of games they play in the entire regular season, which isn't going to happen. so with only 16 teams, you would never see a team currently playing fcs in the tournament, so what's the point? at least in basketball and hockey, you can win your conference and get in. football couldn't support that policy though. personally, i think they should just call the divisions what the are: fbs = d1 fcs = d2 d2 = d3 d3 = liberal arts college...focus on your studies

as of 5/12: NHL Ryan Bayda, Carolina Hurricanes Jonathan Toews, Chicago Blackhawks AHL Tony Hrkac, Houston Aeros Bryan Lundbohm, Houston Aeros ECHL Jean-Philippe Lamoureux, Alaska Aces

that's four more sioux still playing in may. i'm referencing this article: http://www.areavoices.com/undhockey/?blog=50647 i commented to let them know that blake, stafford, and oshie are playing for team u.s.a. and zajac is playing for canada, but they decided not to approve my comment. at least i'm assuming they decided not to approve it since that was two days ago. next up...russia. time for payback after the 4-1 beating we took last weekend.

the quarterfinals start today. the u.s. plays at 1:15pm central time. you can watch the game here: http://universalsports.com/ once you've followed the link above, click "watch now" at the top of the page next to "hockey live now!"

my bad. i didn't consider that our gd would go down as their's goes up. we currently have a gd of +2, latvia is +1 and the swiss are -5. based on that, here's where the u.s. finishes depending on what happens: win: 3rd place lose by 1: 3rd lose by 2: 4th lose by 3: 4th lose by 4 or more: 5th basically, we have to either win or lose by three or less to make the quarterfinals. i know, i'm having an arguement with myself here.

sweden won. as long as the u.s. either wins or loses by six goals or less, we're in the quarterfinals.

you can read the story here: http://www.areavoices.com/undhockey/?blog=50529 this is not true. if the u.s. loses to switzerland, then there will be at least a three way tie between the u.s., switzerland, and latvia. i say at least because if france can find a way to upset sweden, then sweden would be involved in that tie as well, making it a four way tie. in either case, there would be a round-robin of wins, which would mean goal differential would be used as the tie-breaker. considering the u.s. currently has a gd of +2 and the swiss have a gd of -5, they would have to beat us by at least seven goals before they'd have a chance of making it to the quarter-finals. more than likely, the four teams from our group who advance will be russia, sweden, u.s.a., and latvia. in fact, if the u.s. beats the swiss and sweden does find a way to actually lose to lowly france, then the u.s. would finish 2nd in the group.

what happens when a regular season champ and a tournament champ are the same team? extra at-large bids?

i don't know about the rest of you, but i can't believe i didn't realize this transgression earlier. i hate espn classic. i can honestly say i've never watched the channel for more than ten minutes. this seems like it should have been such an obvious issue for me to rant about. i suppose i just didn't realize until recently what i was missing by not getting espnu. now that i know, it's time to rant: the politics of failure have failed...it's time to make them work again! it's time to move forward, not backwards; upward, not forward, and always twirling...twirling towards freedom! abortions for some, little american flags for others. down with espn classic! up with espnu!!

i need to stop coming to this site, it just keeps depressing me that hockey is over. now it's baseball season. i really do not enjoy baseball. i guess it's time to get my canoe and hiking gear out and spend some time with nature until football season starts.

yeah, i didn't know about that one. they should just go with a 38 or 40 game limit and not put any restrictions on which games count and which do not, other than maybe the trip to alaska because i can understand that.

i'm sure he didn't mean you never travel, but it's very rare. you proved that with your post. those four trips you took are spread out over eight seasons, the new hampshire games being in 2002. the gophers have gone on the road for non-conference games seven times in the past eight seasons combined. two of those season they didn't go on the road for even one non-conference game or series. the sioux, on the other hand, have gone on the road 13 times in that same span for non-conference games or series. really, we could claim a higher number than this because there were a couple instances when we made two stops at two different campuses in one weekend (princeton and yale in 2002, bc and new hampshire in 2004), something the goofs didn't do once in those eight seasons. whenever the goofs have played two non-conference teams in one weekend, it's at a tournament or invitational. i also noticed that the goofs only played one series against bemidji in that time. it was in 2003 and it was, of course, in mpls. the first night the goofs only one 2-1, which very likely could have gone the other way if the game was played in bemidji. the second night was a 5-1 routing by the goofs, but the beavers are a better team now. there are probably many emotional reasons not to allow the beavers into the wcha, but there aren't any logical reasons in my opinion.

the goofs position on this is well known. i don't agree with any logic that reduces the number of division one hockey teams, but to each his own. my opinion: good for bsu? definitely, they don't have a team if this doesn't happen, so that's a no-brainerl good for the wcha? i don't see how it hurts the wcha. bsu will have good seasons and i'm confident they will finish in the top five some years. good for d1 ncaa hockey? absolutely, letting worthy teams (which bsu is) die is terrible for our future as an ncaa sport. this makes the two questions above moot.

nevermind, i just saw that somebody posted that the icebreaker tournament was exempt. if we did go to a 30 game conference schedule, i wonder if we'd still be able to play just as many non-conference games? perhaps increasing our conference schedule by two games would increase our maximum allowed games by two as well.