krangodance

I thought I had too until a friend pointed out I was actually drinking bum urine. Until that was pointed out I thought it was awesome that for $2 I got to drink right from the spigot.

Amen.

Fetch obviously was not aware of this rule but do you really have to be so insulting? I'm all for a good debate but it really bothers me when people have the audacity to personally insult total strangers over something so trivial.

118

I know the pwr no longer matter now that the NCAA tournament is set. However, call it obsession, I am interested to know where the Sioux can finish. If they win the national championship (a long shot, I know) can they also finish the season out at #1 in the pwr? Is there a tool somewhere that I can use to compute the different pwr outcomes based on the outcome of the NCAA tournament? I know the polls release an end of season rankings list but every year they just pick the winner as #1. I'm interested to know if the Sioux can still finish #1 in the pwr, which is supposed to be an accurate measurement of a teams overall success on the season so far. Again, I'm clear on the fact that pwr no longer matter this season but I just think it would be kind of sweet if there was still a way we could win the national championship and finish #1 in the pwr in the same season. That would just cement us as the best team in the country, not only in the post-season, but on the entire season as a whole. Obviously winning the Frozen Four is the only important goal though.

Lot of fisherman from 'ol Bisonland on this thread. Don't get caught in their nets.

They still knew which time slots were at the X and knew MN would likely play in one.

Other than a bit of shuffling to keep Michigan and Michigan State from playing in the first round and some minor movement to get teams closer to home, I think they followed the true bracket pretty closely. I still think my picks would have been even closer to true bracket integrity while still putting teams in locations where they'll draw a crowd. Then again, I almost always agree with me.

My picks under the topic "Too Early to Predict Predictions", which was posted at 3:46pm yesterday while the two 3rd place games were just under way: Northeast (1) BC vs (4) AF (2) Miami vs (3) UM-Lowell - move to East Midwest (1) Mich vs (4) Cornell (2) UMD vs (3) Maine - move to Northeast East (1) Union vs (4) WMU - swap WMU with MSU (2) Ferris vs (3) DU - move to Midwest West Regional (1) UND vs (4) MSU - swap MSU with WMU (2) UMN vs (3) BU

Northeast (1) BC vs (4) AF (2) Miami vs (3) UM-Lowell - move to East Midwest (1) Mich vs (4) Cornell (2) UMD vs (3) Maine - move to Northeast East (1) Union vs (4) WMU - swap WMU with MSU (2) Ferris vs (3) DU - move to Midwest West Regional (1) UND vs (4) MSU - swap MSU with WMU (2) UMN vs (3) BU

Update: 29-10, 7-0-0

This has probably been mentioned somewhere but the Sioux have outscored the competition 25-10 on their way to a 6-0-0 record in March.

Northeast (1) BC vs (4) AF (2) Miami vs (3) UM-Lowell Midwest (1) Mich vs (4) Cornell (2) UMD vs (3) Maine East (1) Union vs (4) WMU (2) Ferris vs (3) DU West Regional (1) UND vs (4) MSU (2) UMN vs (3) BU

What did you use to figure this out?

Yep. Even the best teams in the history of college hockey lost about a third of their games. In a four round, one and done format, the odds are against every team who shows up. That's hockey. Look at the NHL playoffs last year in fact. Out of 15 series the lower seed won the first game of the series 7 times, which is almost half the time. Hell, five of those series were won by the lower seed, a full third of all series. The Sioux have had a couple poor post-season games over the past seven years. However, the vast majority of the time they played well and lost because of a statistical anomaly, such as losing when you outshoot a team 40-20, or bad luck, such as a puck bouncing straight off a back wall and somehow ending up right in front of the net for a goal all in less than 2 seconds. Simply because one realizes these facts and recognizes the consistently strong on-ice play of every Hakstol-led team over the past eight seasons doesn't mean one is satisfied with just "being there". We all want the Sioux to win it all every year. We're fans of the team, which is why we also give credit where credit is due rather than forming opinions out of sheer emotion and throwing Hakstol under the bus.

Facts are facts. Hakstol has never missed the NCAA tournament in seven tries, including five trips to the frozen four and one championship game appearance. Now the Sioux, even though they are very young and riddled with injuries, are sitting in a position where they just need to win 2 of 3 at home against a team they have historically dominated, especially at home, and they're likely into the tournament for an eighth time. Anybody who looks at these statistics and comes to the conclusion that Hakstol is not an elite coach in college hockey needs to go be a fan of almost any other team in college hockey for a few years (other than Boston College) and then tell us how you feel about Hakstol.

I doubt anybody is hurt by this post. I'm certainly not. That doesn't mean I have to think it's funny. This is way too juvenile for my tastes. To each his / her own though. Personally, when it comes to humor, I'm a big fan of irony and the ironic aspect of this post is we've had to listen to folks like the two of you for years about how insensitive we all are for supporting the use of the term Sioux as our logo. Nobody said you had to be consistent I suppose.

It appears you accidentally posted on SiouxSports.com. You were looking for the wiki page hosted by your Jr. High. You're welcome.

Absolutely. It would be enough just to see UND in the tournament after the way this season has gone. Getting placed at the X would be a huge bonus.

I haven't heard anything about the ECAC going away? Nevermind. I see that was addressed a couple posts later. So we agree then? Probably six auto-bids after the expansion?

Once the NCHC and B10 start up then there will probably be six auto-bids since the CCHA will go away.

I think your source is outdated. When the CHA existed there were six auto-bids but now there are only five. They are the winners of each conference tournament: WCHA, CCHA, HEA, ECAC and AHA

You the man!

I'm jonesin' for this week's pwr predictions. Anything going up this week, Jim?

What is the point in looking at the polls for college hockey? We all know the the pwr are all that matter in the end yet we look at polls and act like they mean something. Take Minnesota for example. They're 3rd in both major polls (USCHO and USA Today) yet they're 13th in the pwr. Let's assume the conference tournaments are over and the Gophers are still 13th in the pwr. We know one thing, no AHA team is getting in without winning their conference tournament, which means the top 15 in the pwr are in. With Cornell the only possible at-large out of the ECAC an upset in that tournament reduces the at-large field to the top 14. That means one of two things will happen: 1. There are a couple more upsets in the other three conference tournaments and suddenly the top 12 in the pwr are in, leaving the Gophers out. or 2. The Gophers get in as the number 13 and are therefore a four seed. Does it make sense that a team that would either be a four seed or out of the tournament altogether if their season continues down its current path should be ranked #3 in the country? The same goes for Colorado College and, on the exact opposite side of the spectrum, you have Mass-Lowell who are 3rd in the pwr but don't make the top 10 in the polls. What, then, is the point of looking at the polls? If you're a fan of Minnesota or Colorado College they might give you a temporary feel good moment but, once realilty sinks in, you have to realize those rankings mean nothing and have no impact on your chances. The pwr mean everything. Unless the selection process changes I see no point in looking at the polls.