SJHovey

If that's true, and I honestly don't know what their strategy is, it would appear to be a change in their thinking. They have actually been pretty good about letting their college commitments keep their commitment, and even stay in school for a number of years. Most of those guys weren't top 20 draft picks, but it's always appeared to me that they are willing to let their lower draft picks develop in school. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00005316.html

That may be true, but he is also 19 years old (or will be Friday). All I know is that when he first committed, he was identified as a possible 2014 or 2015 kid. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AoPLTHefMmmTdGt1bWNTcUNqRm1SaUNZbG5jMi1PS2c&gid=1 I'm not knocking him. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy we got him, and anxious to see what he can add to the team. You simply can't teach the type of speed he supposedly has. But given his size, it's not surprising if he struggles when he makes a big move up in competition, and I expect that to happen here. I figure by January of his sophomore season we could start to see some legitimate contribution from him, assuming he has what it takes to play college hockey.

Boeser has to be counted on to be the primary contributor, along, obviously, with Tomek. Probably either Shaw or Wolanin as the next top frosh contributor. Beyond that I wouldn't expect much. Before everyone starts going crazy over Wilkie or Gersich, we need to remember that both struggled with taking the step up to the USHL, and were probably held back a year from what was initially expected in terms of coming to campus. I don't expect to see major contributions from either until probably their late sophomore or early junior seasons.

I don't see any way that Buffalo let's Eichel stay in school. Not unless there is some sort of money angle to it of which we're all unaware. The reason Eichel responds the way he does is all due to timing. The draft hasn't actually occurred yet. We all assume he's going to Buffalo, and he almost certainly is. But think of it from Eichel's perspective. He announces that he's leaving BU to .........? It's not like the NBA where undergrads have to "declare their eligibility". It's a bit presumptuous of Eichel to just announce he's turning pro when he hasn't even been drafted, let alone presented with a contract offer. As soon as the draft occurs, an offer will be made. Shortly after that he'll announce.

I think a more interesting question, assuming Shaw does get the job, is the "coach's kid" effect. I don't think we've ever really had to handle anything like that at UND. Probably the closest situation is Poolman. Those are always delicate situations, I don't care how good a player the kid is or how good a coach the father is. I think it helps that Shaw won't be the head coach, but it's something to watch. We're in pretty good shape in that Hayden Shaw will be walking into a situation where there are five really good, proven defensemen ahead of him. But issues of playing time between him and Wolanin, time on the power play at the expense of guys like Thompson or Poolman, or similar issues are sure to surface at some point.

Shaw looks like an interesting addition. A lot of pretty good experience, working with good coaches. Did a pretty solid job developing young players with the Houston Aeros. Quite a few former UND players have also played for him, including Russ Romaniuk, Curtis Murphy, Travis Roche, Brad Williamson, Bryan Lundbohm, Aaron Schneekloth and Travis Zajac. Perhaps most impressive of all, it looks like he was on the roster of the juggernaut U.S. International team that came into Grand Forks and thumped the Hrkac Circus in the 1986-87 season.

I don't suppose this is the same Meg Brown from Ames who wrote the letter. http://www.peoplebyname.com/people/Brown/Meg/Ames/IA Seems like she might have issues "closer to home".

It's strange, especially the 12 years coaching experience (a strange number, why not 10 for instance), and the 5 years of NHL experience. Not sure a lot of UND alum fit in with those requirements, other than Patrick who seems secure in Dallas. One name that popped into my head was Tony Granato. Likely out with Babcock being gone from Detroit. He was in charge of Detroit's defense. Rumored to go to places like San Jose. No connection to UND or Berry at all, that I can see, other than they were contemporaries. During Berry's three seasons here, Granato was at Wisconsin. I agree with the idea that the description very much looks tailored to one individual.

Can disregard all those won as a player or assistant. As we've learned here on ss.com, the only thing that matters is the head coaches pedigree in determining the likelihood, or lack thereof, in his team winning a future championship.

Exactly.

Exactly. And none of the fire Hak posters on this board will ever acknowledge how this hiring has exposed them.

And cute NDSU coeds.

Going through the interview process would only be appropriate if you're not comfortable hiring Berry. Why open it up, only to come back to Berry? To see if someone "better" comes along?

Good luck to Hak. Wish him all the luck in the world. Enjoying the unspoken nervousness around here of some, the "uh oh, we got what we wanted, now what" feeling. Has to be pretty nice when someone, in a position to hand out one of the jobs to the 30 best hockey coaches in the world, thinks you deserve a shot at one of them.

I did watch it again. First, Rau doesn't even get the pass until he's at our blue line, so there isn't going to be any walking of Jordan at the red line. Second, the blocked shot was perfect. In fact, if Pattyn had been back checking like he was supposed to, or if the puck had caromed a slightly different angle, all we would talk about is the great stick block.

Seriously? Jordan played that rush perfectly. In fact, it was his stick that blocked the initial shot, made possible by being in the right position, that lead to the fluke bounce, and ultimately the goal. Go back and take a look at the video.

I disagree with this. Any number of posters have complained about Schmaltz' play, suggesting he plays without passion, takes shifts off, etc... Part of it is his game. He is not, and is never going to be, a Stecher or Genoway type of player who goes on these mad rushes up the ice. And because of his height/size, he's one of those guys who never really looks like he's skating. He never delivered the booming hits. In other words, he never did the things that fans get a kick out of, but which may not necessarily be what is required for playing his position. He was always played perfect position defense. You never had to worry about him when the opposing team rushed the puck because his spacing was impeccable. I think UND fans have terribly underestimated the quality of Jordan's play while at UND.

The ECAC actually had 17 teams in 1981-82. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/ecac19671982.html Strangely enough the WCHA was the small league that year, with only 6 teams. The CCHA had 11. Then there were a handful of independents that I recall (Alaska schools?, Northern Arizona University, maybe Air Force and Army, US international? )

By my count, Minnesota has "hosted" six regionals in that span, and Michigan two. BC has never hosted a regional in the 16 team format.

By my count, and if you include BSU and Minnesota as both being "west of the Mississippi", there are 11 of the 59 teams west of the Mississippi, and 11 of the 52 regional games have been played west of the Mississippi, again counting the Twin Cities. We, out west, have to remember the big geographical differences between east and west. There have been 26 eastern regionals and 26 western regionals under the 16 team format. The east has done a better(?) job of putting them in just a couple of locations. This probably has more to do with the availability of large arenas out east than anything else. East Worchester - 7 Manchester - 6 Albany - 4 Bridgeport - 4 Providence - 3 Rochester - 1 Amherst - 1 That's basically 5 different arenas that host out east. West Grand Rapids - 5 Minneapolis - 3 St. Paul - 3 Green Bay - 3 Colorado Springs - 2 Ann Arbor, Grand Forks, Denver, Madison, Fort Wayne, St. Louis, Toledo, Cincinnati, Fargo and South Bend, once each.

The NCAA went to a 16 team format for the 2002-03 season. If, at that point, we had let the 4 top seeds host a four team regional in their home rink, here are the schools who would have hosted, and the number of times they would have hosted: Minnesota - 7 BC - 6 UND - 5 Miami - 4 3 times UNH BU Michigan DU Wisconsin Notre Dame 2 times Union CC 1 time Cornell Maine Mich. St. Clarkson Yale Quinnipiac Mass-Lowell Mankato Knowing that, I'm not surprised by the vote. There would have been 52 total host site regionals. 40 of them hosted by just 10 schools.

I'm one of those fans that actually goes to the regional games and doesn't whine that the NCAA isn't it making it more convenient for me to do so.

Smells like a ploy to negotiate a better "education" package out of Everett, or some other Canadian team.

Meh. I find it hard to get too worked up over this subject. In the last two decades the NCAA, over virtually no opposition from the coaches or schools, moved towards the non-campus regionals and the single game elimination. As a result, it gave the "overwhelming majority" of the schools, the ones that realistically year in and year out aren't likely to compete for the championship, a "punchers chance" on that one year they do make it. Going to be hard to get them to give that up. I really don't know why fans cry about empty regionals. Frankly, I've always found it a plus. Good, cheap seats are plentiful for last minute decisions to go. No problem getting hotel rooms. There is the "no atmosphere" that tv and other media complain about, but so what.

IMHO the chances of Matthews landing here are probably less than 5%. Gotta be at least a 70% chance he heads north. If he does go the college route I suspect all his discussions with Eichel will have included comments about Eichel's time in Boston, so BU and BC are probably college frontrunners. Michigan probably has a slight advantage over us in that Ann Arbor is a known quantity to Matthews.