Crevec

I think that something like this could be very effective and have it more like the NBA system for flops: 1st time is a warning 2nd time then could be like a period in the next game (the player would have to spend the time in the penalty box until the end of the first period or be a healthy scratch for the entire game, this could be the coaches decision) 3rd = 2 periods just like before 4th = 1 game 5th = 2 games 6th = 3 games etc.

I was watching on DVR and went back and forth on that play and he likely would have gotten a hooking call if he had skated through the play. MacWilliam's stick was around the Wis player's waist and still went down like he was tripped. That probably led to the ref deciding that the Wis player dove.

According to CHN, Tech wins 2-1 over UNO in OT. And Denver up 4-3 over Duluth now with 4 min. left.

Well this particular one should probably only have a one day half life since half the teams would be out today and half more out tomorrow (yeah i know that's not how half-lives work but it is a tournament). I still appreciate the effort that you and all of the other members of SS.com put in to supporting the Sioux!

Which is why I have my DVR set to record on both HD and SD tomorrow. Unfortunately because of circumstances I won't be able to watch the game live and don't want to miss watching it because I recorded the "wrong" channel. And I agree it would be a bad decision for WDAZ or any ABC station to show the game in SD only but I think it is great that ND (and SD and MN) are able to watch it as well!

Probably not adding this to my list of Sioux wallpapers but it is amazing to know that there are fans out there who care so much about being accurate in their work! Keep doing everything that you are doing!

All I hope is that WDAZ is showing the game in HD. Either way I have my DVR set up to record the game on the HD and standard def channel so that I can rewatch the game!

Oh I agree 100%. The problem is that the rule states (at least I believe) that there must be conclusive video evidence showing that the puck crossed the line. I don't think that this is available and so it should have been called a no goal based on the on-ice call of no goal. If they had said goal on the ice but no video showing it definitely crossed the line then it would be a goal. Very similar to the NFL in that the call on the field/ice stands, no conclusive evidence showing otherwise.

But the problem is that it is ALREADY a controversial goal. I think that I agree with you that I know deep down as a hockey fan that the puck crossed the line completely and was a goal. BUT when you go to the video replay you must have conclusive evidence to show that it was a goal. I understand that to mean that you are not supposed to assume that it was across or say that there was no way it was still on the line or anything like that. Basically that you have to say "Look at this screen shot right here, there is a piece of white between the puck and the goal line." The problem is that I don't think that is available.

On a different site they said that all games are being broadcast in HD. I still feel the same way about it as before, which is that was a goal against UNO just based on what everything that happened. BUT there is no video evidence showing that it was completely across the line. The part where it is under his skate, where is the front edge of the puck? The far camera, how do you know that it was too far to pick up if it really crossed the line? In that case the original call stands just like in the NFL, no goal.

That was one of the worst dives I have seen in a long time! He jumped into the wall, hit the ice, then looked up at the ref for a penalty and put his head down again.

This would be true for most games but this happened during the Robert Morris game that took place when school wasn't in session. So in this case all of the seats were sold as reserved seats. Also any general admission tickets that are sold for the games are for any seat in the student section or at least they were in the past. That may have changed in the past couple of years though. And in case you were wondering I did have a post earlier in the thread describing the person that did come to the arena dressed in that manner.

I agree with you to an extent. I believe that the REA as a private facility does have the authority to remove people from the premises that they feel will not be a good guest at the facility but at the same time I also think that the First Amendment of the Constitution gives every person the right to say and dress however they feel appropriate. I will say that when I saw him walking around the concourse I felt very offended that he was wearing that at the Ralph. I was hoping that he would have realized very quickly that this wasn't a common theme for fans and stopped wearing it more quickly. I can also tell you that he was shown on the cameras and the scoreboards so some of the camera people also didn't see a problem with it.

Yes I can verify that this did happen. I don't remember exactly what section it was in but you are very close to where it happened (I think it was 310). It was during the Saturday night Robert Morris game. I was sitting right next to the guy that was wearing the headdress but did not know him in any way. But from what I got was that it was a large group of a young Canadian hockey team that was visiting Grand Forks or somewhere in the area for a tournament. It looked like they might have been from Saskatchewan because the drum that they were using had Saskatchewan Rough Rider stickers on the outside. Granted I don't think that gives the person a pass as to what they did but I don't think they had the complete history that this was not an appropriate way to dress at UND games. There are other schools that have similar monikers that he may have seen and thought it would work well at the game but was mistaken. I did see that he put it away very early in the first period and didn't take it out anymore after that point and even when some of the kids tried to wear it he took it away, so maybe he learned that this wasn't something that goes on. This was the FIRST time in my entire life that I had seen anything like this person at a UND game. The only other poor remarks or actions I have heard in regards to the name have always come from opponent fans. I truly believe that every Sioux athlete, coach and fan holds the name in the utmost regard and it is only the people who have something against UND that say or do things to try and damage the name.

You don't have to cheer for the gophers, which I agree does make me a little nauseous. Instead you should cheer for bulldog misfortune. And it doesn't matter which kind, Yale or Duluth, because I would like to see them both lose.

Well this might be true for players that are at least 21 because they would not be doing anything illegal. In Danny's case he is still about 5 months away from turning 21 and thus would be a team violation as was shown by his previous suspension from the minor he received. I would say that not violating any team rules at this point for him is a good sign that it does not involve alcohol.

Well I am sorry if I misread your previous posts but many of them have just seem to run together at this point. There have been other posters in the past who seem to think that it is just the fact that you are playing an FBS team that we should be getting a win. As was pointed out a couple of posts ago, I think that the D2, D3, NAIA teams should be reserved only as a last resort, i.e. we only have 3-4 home games with less than a year to schedule someone else for the year and the other team has an open date. I think that it is most important to schedule a team that can get us closer to FCS playoff eligibility, and anything less than a D1 team doesn't do that. And you are right that the team does have to start getting better. I think that the players, coaches and FANS (myself included) need to be better to the team. How many of us have decided against going to a game because they were playing a "poor" team. Along those lines have you not gone to a game because of the team being "bad?" Unfortunately I have to say yes to both of those. I think like many other people out there, fans like to see winners and right now that is not the Fighting Sioux football team. All we can do as fans really is to show up on gameday, cheer like we are the best team in the country and hope that the coaches and the decisions they make are the best possible for the team.

OK I am tired of hearing about the wins that regional schools have won against FBS and that the Sioux should be up there right with them. Would I like to see the Sioux win against a regional FBS team? You can bet just about anything that I would! But the fact of the matter is that it isn't as easy as some posters make it out to being to beat a FBS opponent! And this point emphasizes that more than any other I have seen. You say that FBS and FCS are basically the same, by using that logic EWU should be playing who exactly, Auburn or Oregon, I guess it would be Auburn since they are #1 in the BCS? I mean the scholarships don't matter and FBS and FCS are the same right? As far as winning against FBS opposition, it takes a lot for an FCS team to actually beat an FBS team. And by a lot, I mean a lot of skill... and a lot of luck! I mean look at a game earlier this year, UMass lost to the University of Michigan (yes, that U of M) by only 7 points. Are you really saying that UMass is just a bit worse than the UMich? I say no. And last year the darling FCS team of Appalachian St. went to the Univ. of Florida and lost 48-10. That was the best FCS vs. one of the best FBS teams! It is just that as a fanbase of a school playing at the FCS level we only look at the results of several games that have turned out favorably for some of our peer schools and easily ignore the losses of those same teams. I really wish I could easily find the record of the two divisions records against the other but I am unable to at this point. From memory there are only about 5 victories that I can think of for FCS teams out of the numerous games that were played. So please, to all Sioux fans, don't use the FBS victory mark as a measuring stick for the program!

Oh I know that Roe is a pretty good member of the Diving team as well but according to Goon (? or someone else on this board) it was a close race for the Greg Louganis award last year in the WCHA between Roe and Cepis. Even with Cepis only having a half year in the league. Although I would have to maybe include Zucker in that group after his game at the Ralph this year where I am about 99.9% sure it was the first time that I have seen a diving call without a opponent penalty as well!

You honestly think it would take 3 with a guy like him? He would probably just fall down about a half second before the first one landed and then lay on the ice til the ref's arm went in the air!

Did they win anything this weekend then? Cause they also lost their football game, which likely means the end of the line for Brewster from what I've heard. Just looked on their athletic website and they lost in volleyball and didn't do the best in men's and women's cross country either. Not a good weekend to be a Gopher (but really is there ever a good time to be one?)

Sioux women get their first ever win over U of Mn. The score ends up 4-3. Great job girls and keep it up going forward!

Well I guess that solves the subject at hand by MPLSBison then. I didn't know that they had covered that part in the settlement and I also didn't know if the settlement was available to the public. Although there is one other sport that could be affected as well and that is women's volleyball and even then the host site goes to the highest rated teams in the tournament. So yes those are the only sports that would be affected and that is the only way the entire athletic program would be as well. Thank you Hammersmith for clarifying this situation for me, although I am sure that there will still be some conspiracy theories posted about how the NCAA will just change their rules to ban UND from even being able to grant degrees in the near future or something else along those lines.

I also see that you at least somewhat agree with me as well by admitting that it is not really a reasonable option to play in the Alerus or anywhere but REA. And for the statement after that, it is something that would have to be decided by people much better versed in the specifics of the lawsuit and settlement and would most likely need a clarification by a judge and ALL parties' lawyers. It may have been assumed that REA was a party in the lawsuit when they are a privately held company that allows UND athletics to use the facility. It would have been no different if the Alerus Center was named in the lawsuit and not allowed to give it's opinion on the matter. That facility is owned by the city of Grand Forks and also rents to the UND football team. And as far as the BCS/NCAA thing I don't really feel that this is the place to argue too much over how involved the NCAA is with it but to say that it is completely devoid of the NCAA is ridiculous. Even on the BCS website there are multiple references to the NCAA and how they abide by their eligibility rulings and other qualifications for play in their games. And furthermore it wouldn't be too difficult for congress to mandate a playoff if they truly wanted to, they would just have to do something similar to what they did for national highway funding or are planning on doing to control internet piracy. For the highway situation they stated that in order to receive federal funds for highways the state had to pass the legal limit while driving for alcohol to be 0.08. The states weren't forced to change but there was no way any state would have been able to maintain the highways and interstates if they didn't pass the law, so now it is the same across the US. Similarly there is a push to force colleges to take measures to reduce internet piracy on campus networks and the stipulation is that if they don't follow the demands then the school will not receive any federal loans for students. There are no schools that would even consider not having federal assistance for a large majority of their students and students likewise would likely not choose a certain school if they couldn't receive the federal money. Again maybe some would be able to afford the school of their choice but not as many as the school would want attending. So Congress could just tie some stipulation that if you are a member of the NCAA at the Division I FBS level you must vote for a college football playoff or risk losing federal loans or grants from federal institutions.

I don't think that the REA would ever do anything to negatively impact the hockey team. If it ever came to a point where the NCAA banned the team from playing in the national tournament I think that is the point where the REA would start doing everything they needed to allow the team the chance to keep winning. But that is where the NCAA would run into it's biggest problem, if they banned the team from the national tournament it would put them in a precarious position of being labeled as a monopoly. They are already having a lot of problems with the BCS and football. If they added this to their profile it could push public opinion even further negatively about the organization. Especially if it crossed over to other sports as well. And I don't believe anywhere in my response did I say that the REA was "critical" to team success and winning championships. Critical would mean that is the one thing that is holding the team at the level they are at. It would be ignorant and incorrect to say that is the one thing that allows the team to play as well as they have. What I said was that those facilities, not just the playing in the arena's ice but also the training facilities, Olympic sized practice ice sheet and other amenities are an important factor in trying to recruit the top level players. Granted, even if the team did NOT play in the REA they would still be able to get some top level recruits based on the history of the program, quality of coaches and possibility of future success, they would lose out on some of those recruits as well. Almost every recruit has positive statements about the arena and atmosphere that the REA allows and it is just another piece of the recruiting puzzle. I wouldn't want the team to lose that piece just because you believe that the NCAA should punish the entire school even more than what is currently allowed in the settlement agreement. One area that is difficult to judge what is and and what is not allowed by the settlement as far as punishment if the REA does not follow the agreed upon deadlines in the settlement. That is because they were never a party in the litigation process and thus may not have to follow the settlement. That is the position that the REA is taking and it remains to be seen how that will end for all parties involved including REA, UND and the NCAA. And I don't really want to argue how much the game has changed in 10 years, that is a difficult task to quantify in any sport. But even before that there were times that UND went multiple years without a championship, just as they have had some bad luck along the way as well. But to say that they have had no success as a team during their time in the REA is absolutely false. The team has gone to the NCAA tournament for 8 straight years (only Michigan and New Hampshire have a longer streak), four straight Frozen Four berths with one of those ending up as the runner-up, and winning the conference regular season and post-season title twice each. The team has only had one sub-.500 team while in the arena. As far as I am concerned that is pretty good. Of course any fan would much rather have a national title to add to that list but there is only one team each year that gets that distinction and UND has almost always had a chance at getting one.