siouxfan512

Very disappointing if true. Though at least we seem to have some depth and talent at O-Line. Still a big loss though.

Absolutely, Rudy didn't help him out at all. JJ just never showed the flash that someone like Oliveira did, and I'll only compare those two because they were the heavier bruiser type backs. Oliveira seemed to have more speed and could drive forward with contact. I always felt like JJ was to vertical when he ran and couldn't get any leverage on guys. A guy that size you be pretty automatic in 3rd or 4th and 1 situation and just wasn't overly impressed. But to your point, he (along with the majority of that offense) was never utilized well.

Yeah, I think that was the one. I was pretty excited about him, but if I recall he didn't do much, did he?

Not at all! Unless they have been a proven commodity somewhere else, I think transfers in general are a crap shoot. Not saying I don't want to bring some in when needed. They clearly fill a need. Sometimes its depth, sometimes you are rolling the dice and taking a chance. Sometimes you hit a home run. I'm just not ready to say that a transfer that a RB who ran the ball 13 times in 3 games for 90 yards last year would be a monster get. Now if the coaches feel he fits the style and is our best available option, then by all means, lets get him on campus and I hope he dominates. I would never call a kid a bust before he gets a chance to prove it, but I'm also not going to assume that a transfer will step in and dominate until we see it happen. Heading into last season I was assuming that after losing Otis that Isaiah Smith was going to be the lead guy, well Hoosman stepped in an did a hell of a job, I don't think anyone was expecting that. As for anyone on an FBS roster, I think history has shown there are plenty of FBS dropdowns that never make an impact at the FCS level. There is a reason many of them are dropping down. Not saying this is a rule, but if I've learned anything over the years of following the program it is to temper expectations with the FBS dropdowns and transfers in general. You may get lucky with a guy like Braden Hanson or Alex Tillman, even McNaboe, but they don't all turn out that way. Oscar Nevermann never turned into a major impact play. James Johannessen wasn't bad but certainly didn't live up to the hype. Can't recall the guys name, but there was a defensive lineman (I think) who transferred from the Gophers who never did much either. Like I said, I'm not opposed to it as long as it isn't the Petrino approach. I'd just prefer to temper expectations until they get into practice and show how they work with the team and the system. I'd be absolutely pumped if Julius Davis happend to commit and then came in like Hoosman did; who wouldn't !?!?

Would it? Sure the guy is coming from Wisconsin, but when I tried to pull up the depth chart I didn't see him on it. I get it is Wisconsin and he is probably sitting behind some decent players but still. Looking at his career stats, I don't see anything that jumps out at me here. FBS dropdowns can be hit or miss like any other transfer. Obviously it would be great if he committed and it worked out and maybe it will, but there is nothing that makes me think this would be a guy to fill Hoosman's shoes. The Northern Michigan kid seemed to have proven more, and that would have been a bit more exciting to me. But who know, sometimes it is just the right kid, in the right place with the right offense.

I like those numbers. Fingers crossed! What are his faceoff stats?

I'd only argue its probably (mostly) the same group of people constantly calling for the coach's job. I never called for Hak to be fired, always liked watching his teams compete. He seemed to be able to get more with less at time. Seemed to also get some high end recruits. Berry has also been able to get some high end recruits, though his pipeline seems a little less consistent. I'm not one to call for Berry's job, but I would definitely like to see a little more consistency with him and some more tourney appearances/success.

With all of the conversations on here about football vs hockey. Football needing more attention, funding, fans, etc. Not enough can be said about what these guys do for the football program. Listening to these podcasts always gets me pumped up for watching some UND football. Wish we didn't have to wait so long for it to start, but this was great. Looking forward to seeing if we can land a few more impact players soon. Then it will be great to get some of the summer camp reports. Hate wishing away my summer, but am always excited for football to get started. For someone who is a big football and hockey fan, I definitely get way more into following the recruiting and scouting for football. I usually don't know much about the new guys coming in for hockey, just high level comments, but UND football 360 really does a great job of keeping everyone informed and excited.

Its not even just banners or pairwise rankings that get to me. Its great to win the NCHC and its always nice to be ranked. For me, the best part of the Hak regime what that making the NCAA tourney was almost a forgone conclusion. He certainly had some close calls, but he always found a way to get there. Then there was the first round which also seemed like it was almost a guaranteed win, and the number of Frozen Four appearances made it so much fun. Sure BC had his number, but still. At least we were watching hockey right at the end.

If the weather feels like October outside, can we just start the next hockey season?

This did remind me that I had a dream last night about UND football and we were absolutely smoking the Bison. While I don't anticipate us smoking them, it is time to get that W. It should have happened in 2021; can't miss out this year.

Correct, I was refencing Minnesota. I agree, I would love nothing more than to have UND football in the same conversation as NDSU.

You're missing the point. If you want football to help grow the university, fine. But football gets in its own way with its consistency and on field performance. UND and Grand Forks include a ton of hockey fans (and football fans). You seem to want football only fans. Good luck changing everyone's minds. Again, Football's success or failures have nothing to do with hockey. Sure, football could use some more fund. They could also be more successful and generate more income. Maybe I'm wrong, but after seeing so many of your posts, you come across as bitter that hockey does so well ... that's what happens when you recruit, win and build a sustainable program. Now I absolutely love UND football too, and I'd like to see them have the same level of success as UND hockey or as what we have seen built in Fargo, but one sport has nothing to do with the other. Comparing to the U is also ridiculous give the difference in money, attendance, location, tv deals, donors, etc.

So walk on's are ok, so long as they are from outside of GF? Is Thompson ok? Fargo? What's the approved distance for a walk on?

I don't think location is a criteria for a scholly in any sport.

Why are you so butt hurt over GF being a hockey town? Football can still be huge in a hockey town. Minnesota is the "State of Hockey" and I think the Vikings are doing just fine. Different situations, I know! Hockey may get more funding, but they also generate more income. Maybe I'm in the minority, but football's biggest holdback is football, not hockey. If football becomes dominant and still can't get some more traction, you may have a point, but I doubt that will be the case. You want more fans and more support from the community, Win! Its that simple.

So if Strathmann doesn't come in next year, who is left out there that would be a worthy target?

Again, you're ignoring the fact that you are in Grand Forks, which is a big time hockey town. Unless you're going to persuade the majority of the town to think the way you do, that is just a fact. Now I'd love to see both football and hockey have the same level of passion and following, and if UND could make a multi year deep playoff run or win a few championships, you may very well start seeing that type of following for football. Not sure why you are always so hell bent on it having to be one or the other; like the success of football is directly related to a decline in hockey. Why not both? Hockey fans will always be hockey fans; There will always be some people where that is there priority. Same the other way. And there are enough people in GF and surrounding areas to support both, even if game times do overlap. The hockey following comes from "mostly" sustained success over a long period of time. Football hasn't been able to replicate that sustained success or generate the same type of following. If the following is there, I could care less if the games overlap, it just mean I have to lug a second tv into the living room so I can watch both at the same time.

lmao, you bet. who needs beer or whiskey if there is some peach schnapps around

I also loved the double headers when I was in school. Not being in GF, I don't have to worry about the ticket issue, its more a matter of dancing around kids activities. I always enjoyed the 7/7:30 starts because I could get kids to bed and pretty much relax and enjoy the games in peach and quiet. Now my son is hooked on watching hockey (any team, any level, any time) so the 6 pm games are definitely nice so he can stay up and watch them.

But aren't they also reacting to what they have to work with? They can certainly close the gap between games (lets put tv schedules aside for the moment); but they would only be hurting themselves and attendance for football. You don't want hockey to impact football, but football can impact hockey? Bottom line, schools with multiple sports are going to impact each other. You have to try your best to accommodate both. I really don't see a major issue with a 12pm game, it may not be ideal, but is a 2 hour difference the end of the world? No! Reading between the lines, it sounds like you just want more hardcore football fans, more football donors, and ultimately for football to have the exact same level of support that hockey does. That would be awesome and all, but wanting it isn't going to make it happen. For what its worth, I think you could easily do the football game at 1 or 1:30 and the hockey game at 7 or 7:30. That being said, I'm not in charge of schedules and I'm guessing there are some other factors that play into this. I'm a fan of both, so I really don't have one I want to see get preference over the other. As long as I can watch both games and they both win, its a good day!

Anything less than sweeps are unacceptable! ... but seriously, it wouldn't be a bad thing to really stick it to some Big 10 schools early in the season.

I have to say that I really like the addition of size to our line up. I don't know enough about Pyke but I like that both Zmolek and Johannes seem to be physical players. I'm not for gooning it up or playing cheap, but player hard and physical and making opponents actually think about going into the corners with you is a good thing. Hard not to be a bit skeptical after the way this year ended (though there was plenty of promise at the end with the way they were playing), but I do like the potential in some of these transfers. Who knows, maybe some of them click right away and become a solid unit. Hopefully a few of the freshman can understand what will be needed of them and step right into their roles. I never considered Moore to be dominant, but I wish we could have kept him around. That being said, maybe getting a whole new unit that can grow together won't be a bad thing. Hopefully they can gel quickly.

The league would give him a major just for announcing his commitment.

Open ended question (Not looking to be combative or argumentative): I don't follow our hockey recruiting close enough, but are we just not offering enough guys or getting enough commitments in general? I know there were issues a few years back about Wisconsin offering endless guys and getting endless commitments and that they wouldn't be able to pull them all in. From a numbers standpoint, are we offering as many as other schools? Are we getting a similar number of commitments as other schools? Are we getting the commitments, but just from guys that are not developing as hoped? Something definitely feels different, but I'm not sure what it is. I know there are conversations around the B10 taking over, but schools like Denver have been consistently pulling in high end talent. Western has had a pretty nice run. SCSU and Duluth have certainly had strong teams (Duluth obviously with a down year, but they have some nice players coming in). I miss the days of connections to strong programs where we would get a string of recruits that already played together and had chemistry. Shattuck was great to this program for a while. Then Penticton provided a nice string of players too.