redwing77

Isn't it awesome on how one game can define a team's performance over a good deal of time? I mean, after we lost to Maine that Friday, it's pretty easy to determine that our team is overrated and isn't going to win more than 10 games this entire season. The MTU game proves that UAA is beatable and capable of having a bad game. Other than that, I wouldn't put it past any team to be able to beat any other team on any given day if the right circumstances exist. That happened against us last weekend. It happened to Minnesota a number of times last season. Please, let's try to look at the big picture not just a game here or there.

Um... the week off sounds too severe if that scenario would come true. A broken neck only equates to 1 month suspension so a bad call may only be a "Don't do it again" or a single game suspension... if that's available.

I agree.

Great article. I agree 2000%

First off, could we save the term "skippy" for non-fans who come on here with the serious intent of not being respectful? For example, State of Hockey has rarely come onto this board and posted anything respectful (unless you wish to point out the respect he's posted here towards the Gophers). Nor has posters like TC_Transplant (though he's been alright as of late). I don't agree with hockey1 on this and I agree with Sprig, Goon, Chris, Bruce Ciskie (the last two on different message boards/blogs). This was NOT a goal. Elliott was physically unable to make any attempt at a save because he was pushed in a direction the opposite of where the puck was going. And this is not just a Minnesota tactic. I've seen this done exactly three times, two of them last weekend. Friday UND vs UAA this happened to UND and the goal counted. The UW/UMN one was another. The first one I saw was actually in the winter olympics. I want to say it was in Nagano at the time? Anyways, it was Canada vs US. Yzerman made a shot from just center blue-line-ward of the faceoff circles on Mike Richter while a Canadian player ran into Richter and basically pulled Richter the opposite way of the shot. The goal counted and I turned off the game. I knew then and there the US lost and the officiating played at least a minor role in it. Now, the UND/UAA one played no role in the outcome of the game, IMO, but if it did, I'm POSITIVE it would be seen as just another case of the "Halos" up in arms. That being said, I'd like to think of the whole Minnesota conspiracy as not a conspiracy at all, but rather a fallacy provided by the officials' incapacity as quality on-ice officials. Let's face it, it happens all over the place. I like to say it is because of the gross incompetance displayed by nearly every official from the ARs up to Greg Shepherd. If they had competant leadership (at the very least) with real and strict accountability standards all the while following to the letter the intent of the front office (in this case the NCAA), I don't think we'd see as much crap as we usually see.

dagies and Hab_It just "took it to the House"

I hate Buffalo's 3rd jersey logo. I like the color scheme, but that logo has to go.

No. I predict we won't see much of Grieco when we play CC and UW. After that, though, we may see a little swapping here and there.

And not just on our team. In the mid 90s UAA had a 5'6" or 5'5" player that was simply unbelievably fast. I remember seeing him play (so it must have been between 1995 and 2000) where he started the puck out behind his own goaltender and skated the length of the ice and scored on us. Oh, and don't forget Nathan Gerbe, who did pretty darn good for himself in international competition and with BC thus far. The NHL has had several goaltenders at 5'7" tall (Vanbesbrouck, I thought was about that height) as well as one (brief) superstar in Theo Fleury. Lives to play hockey 06 would me more correct if the old NHL rules were still in play, but they're not. I think you'll see a LOT more skill players (regardless of size) in the NHL in the future. Not going to say that there are going to be tons of 5'6 or 5'7 players in the league, but no longer will they go with a guy solely by size.

I agree that the #1 position, though pretty much all but promised Phil to start the season, is now Phil's to lose. This is not saying that Phil could keep it. I have seen flashes of greatness in every game Grieco's played in by him (except for last Friday's game). He can only improve and if he does, Phil may have some worrying to do next season.

This thread rocks.

Ok, assuming we can resolve our scoring issues, CC isn't all as scary as they used to be. Their defense isn't as strong as it once was and they have less scoring depth than we do (theoretically). The problem with CC that we'll have is that Matt Zaba is playing very very well right now. UW is tanking. This means we don't know what we're going to get when we face them. Either they'll turtle more and we'll take at least 2, if not 3 points. Or they will bounce back and they'll take 2 or more points. I'm more worried about the UW series than the CC series.

The Women's team has a Porter on it. We all now know why they suck too. Oh, and I'm sure Hakstol is giving Rivard advice, which probably further exascerbates the problem.

Shocked myself. Tis easier to throw under the bus than to wait for maturity and experience, though.

Why? Finley sucks. Throw him under the bus with Grieco, Porter, and Hakstol.

Good question. But I doubt 1.5 periods and 11 saves on 12 shots is a good indicator. Especially when it didn't matter which goaltender was playing, we couldn't bury the puck. And I believe we are talking about apples and oranges. Age and past teams do not necessarily speak to how good a goaltender is going to be at a certain level. Ask Josh Siembida. Practicing well doesn't necessarily equate to playing well either, but what else does the coach realistically have to draw upon? This is a question I have no answer to.

It doesn't work when a Gopher fan makes that call, ya doofus. And jloos is wrong. The whole reason why we got swept was because Hakstol refused to return my phone calls for the first time since he was hired.

I don't know. RIght now, if Phil's healthy, he plays. I have a question to all your armchair coaches on this website: In a coaching context, say you have Grieco on your team. You are very high on him and he's had his worst weekend of his life on the ice. How would you help him regain his confidence? Is there something the coaches can do during the week of practice that would help? I'm not sure Grieco's confidence is shot, but if I were in his place, I wouldn't exactly be feeling too good about myself right now. In fact, I am worried about the entire team's confidence. Saturday's game was a ton of not getting the bounces we needed. 3 posts, at least 3 other very close calls. A few inches over and we could have won that game 8-4! But, alas, it didn't happen. That HAS to affect a team's morale.

Lee has looked good, but I wonder why Lee couldn't stick with the USHL team he tried out for?

So I wonder. Is this the end of warrior_08 for the rest of the season? Or will he come back to predict we'll lose next week and the week after?

He's also 22 and had some great years in the NAHL and "paid his dues" whatever that means. I love the entitlement aspect to playing time. Oh, hell, Grieco had a better practice, but Walski is 22 and he's paid his dues so I think we'll start the North Dakota boy!

I agree, mksioux... that is, if Grieco and Finley and perhaps Lee and Lamoureux don't get thrown under the bus and into the river first. Seriously... It's ok to be critical, especially after horrible losses by a team that flat out outplayed us two nights in a row, but some of the stuff that's being said is downright unbelievable.

So are you going to start the Fire Hakstol thread or is that neo guy going to from Friday night? If Hakstol says Walski's not going to play, then I'll back Hakstol and to hell with everyone else. Grieco's the #2 guy and, unless Hakstol says otherwise, I'm going to go with that and really, not pay any attention to what anyone else has to say.

I agreed with Hak's postgame comments. We lost both games, sure, but look at Friday and then look at Saturday. We played MUCH MUCH better last night than we did Friday. And Vandevelde gets better and better every game he plays. He's not going to be a superstar, but as long as he keeps on improving, that's good for our depth. Though Hak has a point regarding Shepherd, we can't forget that Shepherd got UAA 3 straight times on what could have been weak calls as well. I disagree with him on the hooking call. Watkins definitely hooked the UAA player. Clark was not interfered with though. Overall our PK was better than Friday. We got marginally more shots to Lawson (though we really didn't get him moving all that much except for Duncan's first goal. We learned a lesson, I guess, tonight, but I thought that lesson was learned against Maine. It's still early and it is never a good feeling getting swept regardless of opponent (though the wrose the team is percieved that is sweeping you the worse you'll feel). We'll recover. I guess we will have to get used to the fact that the Sioux aren't an early season performer. I'd rather get my losing done now than the second half, that's for sure.