redwing77

Stafford isn't on the bench. Yuck. Doesn't look good. And what's with calling the ice the "deck"? Sorry, I guess I am just not used to ship-born hockey.

Duncan gets a logo killer on a 2 on 1. Ouch, that hurts.

All Mavs right now.

5-hole which means WHOOOOOPSSIES. I hate 5 hole goals. Totally weak.

1-1 Tie Backes scores.

Add an assist to Chorney. Zajac from Spirko and Chorney.

Stafford?

ZAJAC FROM SPIRKO!!!!!!! 1-0!!!!

JPar saves the bacon again. Jones draws a penalty. 4x4 for 43 seconds.

Penalty on Prpich. Oy. This is not a good time to come into the game

And, in the same breath, with us 700,000 in the hole this year, why do Bison fans keep thinking we are just dragging our feet when it comes to going DI?

Mavsfan- Right now the Sioux are in a precarious position according to USCHO's braketology reports. It suggests that if the Mavs win the series, or if the Sioux sweep the series, it is bad for the Sioux. I think this is the perspective we are taking regarding the Final Five. We have to make it and we have to win at least one game. I don't think we'll take it all.

Ok, I was wondering when we stopped talking about the Bo trade and started talking about Chris Fournier?

I heard the 'L' in 'LFSPRO' means "Lilliputian"

Matt Jones moved up on the depth chart to the 4th best prospect (2nd best defensive prospect behind Ballard) in the organization according to Hockeysfuture.com

True, but I think it would be downright preposterous to see the Gophers shipped somewhere else in the event that the Sioux are any seed BUT a #4 seed (or perhaps a #1 seed but that doesn't seem possible to attain unless the Committee REALLY cooks the books). Sure, I'd love to see a Regional in which CCHA, ECAC, and AHA/CHA teams make up the other 3/4ths of the regional for the Sioux, but it isn't in the best interests of the NCAA. If for some reason the Gophers are moved to Green Bay or out east, then surely Wisconsin will take their place. And even THAT scenario seems utterly ridiculous to even consider!

Why? I'm sure if he loses it, he can just borrow Franklin's copy.

No, I wouldn't call it funny, per se. I'd call it maybe 'surprising' or more likely 'uncharacteristic.' Spirko is a typical European player. Very skating-oriented. He's feisty, but not so much feisty in the physical sence. I think the logical choices to replace Prpich's playing style rest in Rylan Kaip or MAYBE Matt Watkins. I think Watkins' offensive upside is bigger than Prpich's. He's also a faster skater. If Kaip can contribute more in the offensive zone, even if it is only a little more than he is now, I think Kaip will definitely become the next Prpich. He has a very similar playing style. He's just struggling in the offensive zone, which is not something that he displayed while in juniors.

A very good point.

He was signed by San Antonio (the Coyote AHL affiliate) earlier in the year. I wasn't aware that Karl actually signed with the Coyotes.

I wouldn't expect you to have. Whether we like to admit it or not, there are people out there who are respectfully against the nickname. I may not respect GK as he has come across on this board, but to characterize every opponent to the nickname issue in the "handout" category is akin to the way GK labelled us as racists. It doesn't fly. I support the nickname. The members of the UNDIA evidentally don't (at least a majority of them do not as I am not sure the resolution passed unanimously nor did they need a unanimous vote for it to pass). If there weren't opposing sides to this debate, then it wouldn't be a debate. My "problem" with this whole debate on this board doesn't have to do with whether you are for or against the name. It is the assumptions people are using to characterize the supporters of either side. GK thinks of us as racists therefore he treats us as such. Members of the other side of the aisle think of Native Americans as leeches on American society so they treat Native Americans as such. There is no respect towards either side on this board at least from some of the posters on both sides. THAT is my problem with the issue. No, I don't think GK could change my mind about the issue, nor can anyone even if they did come forward with respect for my perspective. However, if GK would have come forward with respect from the onset, I doubt I'd have him on ignore and I doubt there would be such heated feelings towards his side of the aisle even if we don't believe as he does.

It means whatever they need it to mean depending upon the situation they find themselves in. It's a loosely based legal term that is easily manipulated and not very quantifiable.

Well, I'd feel less guilty letting Tyler rot away in the minors than Bochenski. Wouldn't you?

Actually, I can think of three reasons: 1. Immediate impact. He'd get a TON of playing time as a freshman. I think every player would find promises of immediate playing time pretty enticing. 2. 2006 scholarship as opposed to a 2007 scholarship. He might want to go right to college from high school and not waste away in a town even if it is playing hockey and maybe a part time job. I have read in spots that life in juniors isn't exactly sipping champagne and eating bonbons wearing an ascot and slippers next to a comfy fire in the old palatial manor.... 3. Taking the 2006 scholarship is much more a "sure thing" than deferring for a year. What if Minnesota, UW, or UND loses interest or whatnot? There may be a "take it an run with it" mentality here we're not factoring in.