SJHovey

Then your "point" was poorly communicated in your post. Your post said that "at this time in 1999, I didn't think we had a snowball's chance of winning it all." It said nothing about wins between selected dates in November and February. My "point" was that at this point in 1999 we were ranked #2 in the country and were 14-3-1, with the unstated point that such pessimism was probably unwarranted.

We were 14-3-1 and ranked #2 in the country at this point in 1999.

Nah. No money to be made betting on North Dakota. Much better payoff if you knock off North Dakota, then toss the championship game against Providence.

So now there is this stuff floating around USCHO and the twitterverse about a possible gambling scandal at BU, maybe even involving last year's Frozen Four. https://twitter.com/jeffcoxsports I guess my only question is, does that mean Hak gets to count the semi-final as a win, and does that change the mind of any of the haters around here?

Has anyone else considered the possibility that we might have three different goaltenders play 10 games this year? I mean, it's not outside the realm of possibility. Hrynkiw has already played 10. Johnson has played 3, and Tomek is supposed to be the guy when he's healthy. We're getting into the part of the schedule where we're playing some better teams. If Hrynkiw struggles, I suspect Johnson will see the ice again at least until Tomek has had a chance to get a feel for the college game. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see Tomek until the UAH game and the Under-18 exhibition, just to let him get up to game speed against lesser competition or in an exhibition game. I'm not sure I've ever heard of a college team who had three goaltenders who each played 10 games in a year, although it's probably happened.

Me

Trap game.

This seems a little overly dramatic. There is a reason that only about a fourth of the eligible voters actually voted the first time around, and probably fewer the next. There's a reason you can go online and for a few bucks buy a vote. There's a reason why no matter what name is selected, it will be fine with me. It doesn't really matter. It's a nickname. UND is going to do quite nicely no matter what name is selected. I think I can say with 100% certainty this will be the most insignificant vote(s) any of you will ever cast, outside of your vote for 7th grade class president.

Honestly, I think this sets up as a trap game for us this weekend, especially Friday. Wisconsin has nothing to lose. First time in a long time they'll play in front of anything resembling a decent crowd. I'm a little worried that our extraordinarily weak schedule to date has created a bit of a paper tiger. Our defensemen are going to have to be especially good, not only in their own zone, but offensively as well, methinks.

Hoff's dad played in the '88, '92 and '94 Olympics as well, according to Wiki.

So with Hoff, that makes 9 committed forwards looking to come in either next fall or the fall of 2017. By my calculation, we have four senior forwards and one junior forward. Either we're going to see some departures, or there are some kids not developing as hoped.

Someone else may have already posted this elsewhere, but I think this is kind of funny. UND has 6 wins and 2 ties thus far. In all 6 wins the final score has either been 5-2 or 2-0.

I fear this may say more about the quality of our competition than the quality of our goaltending. Obviously I have no complaints about the job Matt has done stepping in, but the teams we have played thus far are truly awful.

Exactly. Take our friend, Mr. Tambellini. He left here and then went and scored like a thousand goals in the Western league. Those kinds of numbers aren't going to be possible for someone in NCAA hockey. Will it benefit Adam, or Bracco? Possibly. As you get older you will get stronger. Your scoring gets you recognized and on you go to the AHL. Eventually you may make it to the NHL. But if you aren't one of the very talented players capable of playing for any length of time at the NHL level, it sure is nice to have a big chunk of that college degree out of the way.

This might all just be part of a long con by the administration. We just keep voting on this in an ever changing and more confusing manner, 8-10 years from now no will figure out we never did actually choose a new nickname.

It isn't skewing the percentages. The sample sizes are just different. Do you want me to go and look to see what the winning percentage was during the first 300 games at the old Ralph, so the sample sizes are identical? I attended games as a kid in the old, old barn, the crappy quonset hut that had a lot of character but candidly I have no interest in going back to. The old REA was loud (sometimes) but that was because we were essentially sitting in a 50 gallon oil drum. I get tired of hearing about the supposed advantage we gave up when we left the old REA. Pure fiction compared to what we have now.

I think you can and should lobby for RR, or whatever name you like best. I for one have no objection to that, even though I didn't vote for RR. It did bother me a little when we who voted for Nodaks were attacked/criticized, etc..., for our perceived motives or reasons for voting for that name. That I don't think is right. It is everyone's free choice.

You do realize our record at the new REA is better than the old, don't you? At the old arena it was something like .690, while at the new arena we are over .700, at least the last time I looked. Furthermore, if you ignore the very first year at the new arena, when candidly there was zero home ice advantage because the rink was new to the players and all the fans just walked around gawking, we have something like a .720 winning percentage at the new Ralph.

I don't know. 37% of the vote just saw their choice eliminated. That alone is more than Fighting Hawks received. Plus the week before the vote leaves more time for lobbying.

Or, some people are willing to listen to all arguments for and against a particular choice, then make an informed decision, rather than simply voting for the first candidate that gives you a woody.

I do think it's kind of funny you guys are all over Brad S. and his opinion regarding the name, or opinions he heard from other interested parties, but there were no objections when a few months ago the GF Herald came out and lobbied to save Roughriders as a name when the consultants recommended against it. http://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/featured-columnists/3798248-our-opinion-roughriders-dirty-word-or-strong-choice-und

Nah. I always think it's funny when these Minnesota kids start ripping on UND and North Dakota, yet apparently had to come to Grand Forks to get their education.

Not to start an argument, but I'm not sure this is necessarily true. I think I read somewhere that the name Rough Riders, which may have even originated in the press, referenced the old Wild Bill western show at the time which incorporated the name Rough Riders into it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_West_shows#/media/File:Buffalo_bill_wild_west_show_c1899.jpg It seems to me that the unit, made up originally of a bunch of cowboys from the SW part of the country, was given the name in press stories about the group, but I don't have a specific site I can link to on that. Another possible source of the name. https://books.google.com/books?id=4Xk7AQAAMAAJ&pg=PR14&lpg=PR14&dq=ORigin+of+roughriders+name&source=bl&ots=uf450gtpis&sig=0b_A529UoKdWJ440SpWYeToGQss&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBjgKahUKEwiNz8yHg9TIAhVJiw0KHYwlA1M#v=onepage&q=ORigin of roughriders name&f=false

As I mistakenly posted in the other thread, I'll go with RR over Nodaks in a run off, 52% to 48%.

Geez, I put my prediction in the wrong thread.