SJHovey

They are similar to the current banners in that they are rectangular, hanging the long way. I’d estimate 6 feet high by 4 feet wide. I’m a technology idiot. If someone can explain (in very simple terms) how I can post a photo that I’ll take with my phone, I’ll do it.

I know exactly what happened to them. It was following the 1996-97 championship season, which was also the spring of the great flood in Grand Forks. As I recall, the Sioux boosters lost a bunch of their stuff in the flood. The University also needed to order a new banner for the most recent championship. The five banners ('59, '63, '80, '82 and '87) that had been hanging in the arena were donated to the booster club for them to auction off and raise money. The 1980 banner was purchased by the owner of Tim Shea's nursery in Grand Forks, and I believe it used to hang in their facility, although I haven't been in there for years. The 1963 and 1987 banners were purchased by an alumni who used to be a state district court judge in Minnesota. He is a good friend of my father's. My brother has the 1959 banner, and if you were at the CC game when the '59 team was honored, you may have seen the banner. My brother couldn't be at the game, but he had a friend bring it, and a number of people took their pictures with it. The 1982 banner hangs in my office.

SCSU hasn't exactly dominated teams in the opposing team's rink. They're 1-1-2 at UMD and Miami, where UND went 2-2. They won four games at CC and Alaska, but three of them were one goal games excluding eng's. They blew out BC and lost to Northeastern. Yeah, they could come in and do to us what WMU did, but I could very easily see us play them the way we played DU, with a win and a chance to take the second game.

If this team has done anything though it has been to play to its competition. Thus, I expect at least one if not two close games in each of the four series coming up, and there is certainly no reason why they can't steal a game in each instance.

I understand. I was just being a smartazz because those teams I listed were truly awful and we'd probably have needed about a 32 team field minimum for them to get in. I still don't think this year's team faces an insurmountable hurdle. 22 wins by the time the Frozen Faceoff is over and this team will be in, unless there are just crazy upsets in the other playoffs resulting in a lot of autobids going to teams outside the pairwise top 16. 22 teams in a league like the NCHC will pretty much always lock you in. We have 12 now. We might even get in with 21. I still think this team needs to go 7-5 the rest of the regular season, win the first round of the playoffs and win one of two games in St. Paul. That's not impossible, or even that unrealistic for this team.

How many teams would the tournament need before our '91-'92, '92-'93 and '93-'94 teams would have made it, teams that finished 7th, 8th and 8th respectively in the old WCHA?

Maybe someone has done this, or maybe it's pretty much impossible to do, but man it would be great if there were a site or someplace where fans could go to see examples of each version of authentic jersey that North Dakota has worn over the years, by year.

That might be slightly overstating it. I plugged in your results into the CHN customization feature for the Pairwise. Because you didn't state which 6 we would win against UMD, SCSU, WMU and DU, I just went with sweeps at home and splits on the road. With the results as you suggested, we'd be sitting at the #3 overall seed heading into the playoffs. It's actually a kind of fun tool to play around with, in your spare time. Of course it assumes certain results elsewhere. I believe it bases those results on KRACH ratings. While they can be wrong, keep in mind they can be wrong in both directions (that is, to UND's benefit or detriment). If you play around with the customization feature, what you'll see is that in the absence of some absurd outcomes elsewhere in college hockey, what UND really needs is to sweep two remaining series and split the rest. If it does that it's most likely spot in the pairwise will be around #10 heading into the playoffs. Only one sweep and the rest of the series split will put us on the bubble, at around #15.

Home ice for the first round. Get to St. Paul. Win two against two teams without a ton to play for. It’s a formula that has been followed before and is certainly achievable.

Excellent. Good to know. Thanks.

By the way, I'm not certain those NCAA videos are actual videos of the entire game. Personally I've never purchased one from them. I think usually you are much better off just going on line and checking to see who has a copy that they recorded and that they're willing to give/sell/trade to you.

The issue here isn't what we are allowed, or not allowed to do. Everyone is allowed to offer their opinions and criticism. My efforts have been to try to get people to think rationally about what they are writing. Let's not kid ourselves. What we post here is not constructive criticism. Constructive criticism necessarily needs to be an interactive process involving feedback from the criticized. It also needs to have certain specifics that pretty much never show up in any posts around here. Typically you would point out the errors or deficiencies in the performance, using specifics, then give examples of how that performance needs or can be changed to cause improvement. People write here that Berry and the staff are not recruiting well enough. Ok. So where is the constructive criticism? What exactly should they be doing differently? How should their approach differ? Should they change where they recruit? Should they change what they say to the kids? Just complaining that we don't get high end recruits like we used to or like other schools do is not constructive criticism. The same with the complaints that the coaching staff's style of play that is taught to the players turns scoring players at the junior level into non-scoring players at the college level. Well, what precisely are the coaches doing incorrectly, and why? What needs to be taught differently, and how will that change the performance of the team?

I guess I would ask this. In the world of sports fans, how big of a difference is it really between fans who are filling message boards with statements to the effect that the coach can't coach, the coach can't recruit, the coach isn't hard enough on his players, the coach teaches a style that turns good recruits into bad players, etc... (all basic allegations made on this board) and a fan who types "coach must be fired." When someone repeatedly makes the first set of accusations, isn't the demand he be fired kind of implied? I don't come to this board often enough to name names with 100% certainty, but I can tell you that there are a handful of posters here who were the most strident about Hak having to go because he couldn't get us over the hump and win the championship, then were the first ones in here saying, "see, I told you so. I told you we needed someone like Brad Berry to get this program it's next championship" and are now among the most critical of the job Berry is doing.

I think you might find them on Amazon. The NCAA also used to let you order them direct from them, but they were pricey. https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_2?rh=n%3A2625373011%2Cn%3A!2644981011%2Cn%3A!2644982011%2Cn%3A!2998369011%2Cn%3A332040011%2Cn%3A341039011%2Cp_n_format_browse-bin%3A2650304011&page=2&ie=UTF8&qid=1547128156 Edit: In looking through the Amazon list, I see '87 and '97, but not '80.

The funny thing is this. My guess is the coaching staff was maybe caught off guard by Jost's departure after one year. It happens and you have to deal with it, but they probably had a reasonable expectation he'd be here at least two years. If he stays, we probably end up a 2-3 seed in the NCAA's last year. Do we make the Frozen Four? Hard to say, but the season probably wouldn't have caused anyone to jump off a bridge, or even give it a second glance. We're .500 this year. We're not 2-16, coming off a 3-31 season from the year before. The team has shown that on any given night they can beat the best teams in the country and on any given night they can lose to the worst teams in the country? What does that say about this team? Not sure, but things could be a heck of a lot worse. I love sports fans. We're sitting here evaluating the performance of a person who holds an elite level coaching position in the sport of hockey. It's a position where if you do it very well, you get a chance to get hired to fill one of the 31 most important coaching positions on the planet in that particular sport. That's what's being done by our fan base that posts here, a group that is likely qualified to coach a mites team, or maybe a high school JV team. It's like we're discussing the ability of someone to be the head of cardiac surgery at Johns Hopkins just because we had an ekg done once. No one here should take this criticism personally. It's done by every fan base in every sport. But we really do need to think about the rationality of our behavior.

I think it'll be important to get off to a good start in the second half. Ideally they'd win the first six games, although I assume Omaha will play us tough as usual. Then go 4-4 during that tough stretch in late January and most of February, and finish strong against CC and Omaha to end the regular season. Get to 20-22 wins before the playoffs and they should be hosting the first round again. In a four game national tournament, anything can happen, especially playing in Fargo. Limit shots, which this team has generally been good at, hot goaltending and a timely goal here and there and who knows. But right now their margin for error is pretty thin. Can't be going off on any 3-4 game winless streaks.

If the letting "kids be kids" means looking the other way as underage individuals consume alcoholic beverages, yeah the REA doesn't get to do that. If that means the kids will find somewhere else to "be kids," so be it. There are substantial consequences to a facility like REA that looks the other way regarding underage consumption of alcohol. North Dakota's dram shop liability statute is broad. One of those kids gets in a car and causes an accident, it'll be on the REA. It'll also be on the idiot friend who bought the beer for him. The REA needs to be ejecting underage drinkers. Every time they do that, I bet they keep track of it. That way when they get sued because someone was drunk and is underage and was at the REA, they can trot out their policies, and they can bring in the security people who will talk about the zero tolerance policy and talk about the number of people kicked out, etc... Plus, that completely ignores the entire liquor licensing issue. You sell to minors, you lose the license.

I've always been puzzled by this argument. Minnesota, and the other B1G schools, already received the BTN money (all of it) even before adding a B1G hockey conference. Adding a B1G hockey conference added literally zero dollars to the B1G schools. They didn't get BTN money because they formed a college hockey conference. The B1G takes all of it's money from BTN, the bowls, etc..., pays its expenses, then divides up the money among the schools on an equal basis. I think a couple of the more recent additions get a lesser share, at least for a few years, but all of the old members like Michigan and Minnesota already got full shares. The formation of the B1G hockey conference certainly gave the BTN some "programming" to throw onto their schedule, although to be honest, there is very little in the way of college hockey on the BTN schedule. You're much more likely to see a rerun of a football game condensed to sixty minutes than you are an actual college hockey game.

If you're thinking of the same store I am, I think it closed exactly two years ago, right after Christmas. It was called the "college store" or something like that and as I recall it was over near the Sears store. It was a small store, but had a ton of good college stuff including hats, jerseys, sweatshirts, etc... Very sad when that store closed.

IIRC, from '90-'95 (not exactly the glory years of UND hockey), we had seven players participate. From '97-'00, maybe four of the most dominant years of UND hockey, we had exactly zero participants. We had a bunch of players go in the early '80's, when the team had success in the NCAA's. We had a bunch of players go during the first handful of Hak's years at the helm of the team and our lack of success at the end of the season caused many to argue in favor of the coach's dismissal. I don't view participation, or lack thereof, in the world juniors as a bellweather for the health of the program.

North Dakota is a +210 underdog at the Orleans

As a edit, it opened on December 10, 2009, in what was then called the imperial Palace.

Of course Ralph didn't own the building when it was called the Linq. But Hash House a Go Go was there long before it was rebranded "the Linq".

I have stayed multiple times at the Imperial Palace, the Quad, and the Linq. Yes it's been renovated since Ralph sold it, but it's the same basic footprint and location. Hash House A Go GO is in the Linq, which is the old Imperial Palace. All they did is rename them. Here is the website for the restaurant. Pretty sure it doesn't say "Harrahs." https://www.hashhouseagogo.com/location/las-vegas-nevada-the-linq

If you're talking about the Nine Fine Irishmen, it is, or at least it was a few months ago when we were out there.