InHeavenThereIsNoBeer

As much as people pile on Cam, it'll be nice to have a solid sr. netminder because our other option would be throwing Tomek into the deep end and praying he swims.

If you wouldn't mind, please drop all the Duluth fans off in Des Moines and tell them it's Chicago

Ah, that makes sense. If true that it came out of the league, then not UND's fault.

You can't? Presumably they were the only ones that knew, hence the leak.

Yeah I'd rather not find out my athletic career at UND was ending via twitter.

I'm glad you're in no position to make this decision, what a terrible idea

Well put

Gonna agree to disagree, feels like you're making more of it than it is. Using words like hero, selfless, crusader seem extreme and were never used by Hakstol or anyone else explaining him. I'm not arguing whether or not the women's team had a legitimate gripe(don't have enough information) but, to me, Hakstol supporting their cause isn't a terrible thing. Especially if he has more information about it than I do.

The easy thing for Hak to do would have been to keep quiet about it which is why no one of consequence has spoken outside of a generic NHLPA and a vague statement that the men's team may boycott as well. People with the Flyers have connections in USA hockey as I'm sure Hakstol does and he won't hold onto that 7 figure job or gain any job security by 'feeding his ego' as you claim. In fact, this probably does more to hurt Hakstol as far as future job prospects in the league by upsetting other GMs with close connections to USA hockey. I don't see how him supporting the initiative(whether or not you agree with it) with a tweet is so terrible. No one's saying pin a Purple Heart on the guy, are they?

I believe 'slippery slope' is the term Just like bubble hockey!

I've also heard the argument that while we're reviewing offsides after goals why not go all the way back and review all dump-ins to see if the player actually gained the red line? Could be a really fun exercise of 'is the puck actually on his stick?'

You are correct, some fans handed it over the glass for the players.

Excited to see what you come up with!

You asked a question and I answered it. Not interested in a pissing match. Go Sioux

Yes he did in a press conference and no I'm not going to go find it.

Never change gfhockey... never change

How'd you know that?!

I've never seen a team luckier to get out of a regional than UMD in Fargo. Ohio State, while completely outplaying Duluth in every sense of the word, must have had 10 chances in OT to end their season and failed miserably every time. Pulling for Harvard but the first 2 teams I pulled for(UND then Air Force) didn't work out well. Third times a charm, right?!

Careful petey, we're not allowed to discuss this play anymore according to Kim Jong... err I mean 'SJHovey' But at the risk of being chastised for discussing the most important hockey play of our season on this hockey message board... yes, I agree that the linesman was in great position to see down the line and they had been calling offsides pretty tightly all game from what I could tell. It's one of those instances I think that Sicatoka's suggestion to look at how much the offsides in question actually led to the goal(similar to skate in the crease) would be a welcome change.

She didn't respond to anyone but me. And I never once called a ref a bozo or a clown... at least not on this board Seriously though, you think the offsides review process and/or the offsides play from Friday should be off limits for discussion?

1. Harvard 2. Denver 3. Notre Dame 4. Meteor 5. Duluth

I didn't bring it up, I responded to a poster about having cameras down the blue lines while talking about the game that brought this discussion about. Is it sour grapes if it's true? Of course the coach took the high road, he's a classy coach and great guy and doesn't want to detract from the team's performance. However, I'm not the head coach of UND hockey and am not employed by UND hockey so I do not need to be in lockstep with everything they say. The officials were 'probably right' but the point is that we can't be sure, which is what conclusive evidence requires to overturn a call. Maybe it's just me but I don't appreciate someone coming onto a board telling us what we can and cannot discuss because they think we should get over it because we lost. Part of this message board(to me at least) is to vent and debrief after these types of games. I'm not going to be talking about it all summer, but we're less than a week removed from the game that ended our chance to defend our national title. Sic, if my comments detracted at all from what you were trying to pursue in this thread, I apologize.

You're missing the point completely with that post, but I appreciate your suffocating level of censorship on a thread you could simply choose not to click on. You seem kind of new so welcome to siouxsports.com. This is not a site that bends and shapes to your will just because you think people should 'live their lives', which apparently consists of talking about early departures and whether or not Dane Jackson will leave the team. We like to 'live our lives' a little outside the box... at least outside your box thankfully.

To be clear, you're complaining about discussing a call that ended our hockey season 72 hours ago on a message board dedicated to talking about our hockey team. And you wish we'd instead focus on "living our lives in general". Have I missed anything?

You're literally on a Sioux sports message board... should we not speculate because you'd prefer we don't? Believe it or not, some people are capable of talking about sports and living 'life in general'. There's a handy log off button if you're not able to.