yzerman19

No voting. The majority of the population is dumb.

Never said that the players can't make plays. Never said that at all. I said the most entertaining part of the game is watching players make plays. I said nothing about the ability or inability of players to make plays based on the equipment they are wearing. To infer the connection is broken logic. I think elite players could still make plays if they were playing in conquistador outfits. Also on the broken logic train, I would never protest or quit watching the sport I love based on equipment or rules changes. To support one position does not mean that you would protest if your position is not the one ultimately adopted. Just like in politics, right? I might disagree with the philosophy of the party in control, but I don't have to move to Canada as a result. I get where you are coming from too, and I support player safety. The issue is where do you draw the line at player safety vs excessive mandates? You could mandate sticks go back to wood too in order to slow down the shots and protect players that way. Are the safety risks of a half-shield so much greater than a cage that there should be a cage mandate? I haven't seen a fact support that. If they make any difference at all, it is marginal. If it is marginal, why make it a mandate? Seems to me that if the juice isn't worth the squeeze, why make rules?

I think the game is most entertaining when the players are making plays. I really can't comprehend this desire to madate certain equipment. I really don't care all that much- I don't know why others do either...it is the nany state approach. Same people who yell at me for riding my bike without a helmet. Same people who supported prohibition- better to take it away from the 90% of people who can handle it responsibly than to have 10% of the people have issues. You can't manage life like that. If it were me, given the choice, I would wear a half shield. I've worn both. I prefer the half shield. I would guess that 99% of players agree with me.

Growing up on the outdoor, you wore a stocking cap...that's it. Played hours and hours and hours of hockey...way more than any of us spent on indoor ice- probably until bantam. Never did I see anyone get a horrific injury. The pros have played without facial protection for years and years, and I have never seen a horrific injury that could've been avoided with a cage. Concussions- the cage might help a little, but not much. I agree with the poster who was talking about the danger of the 4 razors that guys have on their feet. That is the only real risk out there of something more than anything a couple stitches and beer couldn't take care of. The guys are bigger and stronger and faster, but the equipment IS better. You ever see one of those old Jofa helmets? Today's helmets offer way more protection. Hockey is a collision sport, the fastest of collision sports- there are risks when you play. Let the guys make their own decisions and live with the consequences. It is not up to anyone to nanny-state the game.

Shooting was never my issue- skating on the other hand...well, let's just say I can skate, but if speed and agility kills- I'm going to live forever!

breakdowns in coverage in the dzone or odd mans make a goalies save % suffer. If you play racehorse, you will give up odd-mans...on a 2-1 or a break away or a solid pp look the goalie has his hands full. I mean, realistically if you put me at the bottom of the face-off circle with a clean look and Ed Belfour in the pipes, I am going to score 20 percent of the time, a D1 forward will score 40 percent of the time, an elite player will score on 60+% of those looks...there just isn't much a goalie can do...too much net to cover.

Players and the game itself are about much more that stats. An excellent GAA and Win% is a reflection of team defense- something the Sioux pride themselves on. One of the key components of team defense is also likely to have a negative impact on save %- limiting opponents' shots on goal. The Sioux really limit the shots on goal from outside with their shot blocking and cycle play...it is tough for opponents to get shots when the Sioux are forechecking well and keeping the puck deep in the other zone. Another key aspect of save percentage is quality shots- this speaks poorly of team defense- or more appropriately speaks of defensive or mental breakdowns resulting is really good looks at the net from prime scoring areas. When I watch Dell, what I've seen is that more often than not (clearly everyone has an off night) he makes the first and usually the second save. When goals are scored on third or fourth attempts in a flurry, that is the whole team's fault and especially the d-men for not getting to their man or clearing out the puck...Brad Berry anyone? First save is about goalie positioning and seeing the puck, second save is about rebound control, third and subsequent are about the players who play outside the pipes.

Mac with the C Knight and Kristo with As

Well, the beloved Blaiser played for the Gophers...so anything is possible!

Looks like you answered your own question...only one fits all the requirements and is likely to take the job.

Once Richards releases Berry and gives him the old golden handshake, Brad will be behind the Sioux bench...no doubt in my mind.

I wonder if Berry's contract has a parachute...better to be fired than to quit...so he will take his buy-out and then come to GF?? Been known to happen that way

"For every season a player plays in the WHL, they receive a full year guaranteed Scholarship, including tuition, textbooks and compulsory fees, to a post-secondary institution of their choice. For example, players graduating from a four-year WHL career are eligible to receive four years of scholarship funding. The WHL Scholarship, combined with additional financial assistance from Universities in Western Canada, makes the WHL – Canada West Universities joint scholarship equivalent to any other offer available in North America today"

CHL might still have (used to have) a special deal with the NHL where a signed player of junior hockey age could not be assigned to the AHL or ECHL, but rather had to play in the CHL until they turned 21. I guess if you are elite and sure to be drafted in the first part of the first round, with a rookie max deal guaranteed, you might as well sign on draft day and invest your signing bonus immediately-

Pipe ceremony trumps all in this debate.

Congrats! I don't know what a BSPXW is...Bachelor Science _______ ___________ __________

Matt Greene if you're talking dmen

Brings back very sad memories for me as well...I was in college (at a neighboring/WCHA rival University) and when I came back to help and went into my old room (which was in the basement) and realized that all of those childhood items were gone- it was tragic. Although I didn't have a Hrkac stick...

ahhh...that makes sense

Please tell me it is one of his player's father...

Hak = Man with a Plan

So... Litke has never coached D1, has never coached NHL, and never played in the NHL ...his qualifications don't stack up with the others mentioned.

You don't quit your current job until all the details of the new job are finalized. You then tell your former employer you resign, and you tell your new employer to go ahead and make the announcement. If you're Hak, you also don't dismiss Eades until you have confidence that you're going to get the guy you want...

As myself and others have suggested, it looks like the job description was written for Brad Berry.

I read that as Brad Berry and the defensemen