fightingsioux4life

Before August 5th, 2005, we had developed a reputation for success in NCAA Division I Men's Hockey.

You are 100% dead wrong about that. A strong, successful and vibrant athletic program is a tremendous marketing tool for colleges and universities. Want proof? How many people would know where Gonzaga is if their basketball team hadn't knocked off some big-time programs in March in the late 1990's? How many people now know where NDSU is after they won the FCS Football title in January of 2012? How many people know about UND because of the success of our hockey program at a national level? This isn't Europe, where you don't have organized college sports. And it isn't Canada, where college sports is really for participation and nothing more. College athletics are an important part of the college experience in the United States. Sometimes it's for the better, sometimes it's for the worse, but it's an undeniable fact. And destroying the athletic department at UND would have a negative impact on everything else.

First off, I want to make it clear that I do not blame this kid for making this decision. So you can hold back the "You just can't blame the kid for doing what he thinks is best for him" comments. My blame goes to the adults in his life and the deceptive tactics of Major Junior hockey. This is what I have been talking about in other threads. These young kids are very impressionable and are easily influenced by others. I imagine that these Major Junior suits promised him the moon and told him that if he went the college route, nobody would give him the time of day when it came to draft positioning and signing a professional contract (yeah, the college route really hurt Jason Blake and others ). If he had stuck with high school and kept improving as a player and maturing as a person, he would have even more leverage with Major Juniors and U.S. Colleges. But he chose instead to drink the Kool-Aid and flush any other options down the toilet. I believe that College Hockey, Inc. has done good things in Canada educating kids on their real options (not the lies and distortions the Don Cherry types will dish out), but it looks like they need to shore up our defenses at home. This is war and the future of NCAA hockey hinges on whether we win or lose it.

I am afraid the answer to that question is yes.

What you have to understand about the nickname-at-all-costs crowd is that anything and everything that happens as a result of keeping the name and logo is "a small price to pay": -No conference home in the Big Sky? A small price to pay. -A growing list of schools that will not play us in any sport? A small price to pay. -No home playoff games? A small price to pay. -Forfeiting playoff games to make a point? A small price to pay. -Losing recruits because of the sanctions? A small price to pay. There is no telling what other garbage they will come up with; I honestly don't want to think about it. If all these things come to pass and UND athletics are destroyed for at least a generation, their answer will be the same: "It's a small price to pay to keep the Fighting Sioux name and logo!". Now back to Planet Earth where the rest of us reside.

There is zero chance the NCAA would ban the general public from wearing Fighting Sioux clothing. The reason is simple: $$$$$. If there is one thing these people care more about than "cultural diversity" and "sensitivity to minorities", it's the Almighty Dollar. Banning the general public from wearing Fighting Sioux clothing would hurt their bottom line because people would simply refuse to attend under those circumstances. I know I sure as heck wouldn't buy tickets under those conditions.

No problem, that's pretty good.

And I stupidly gave up that game to watch the UND Women's Basketball team lose the North Central Regional Tournament Championship to the NDSU Bison at the Bison Sports Arena. I still regret that decision. But on the bright side, I watched us win the Final Five at the Target Center and the NCAA West Regional game vs. Niagara in Mariucci. So it all balances out. Great Memories.

The NCAA can't stop college kids from signing professional contracts. At least not yet.

They suck because they had poor front office management for years and they also had a coach who taught pre-NHL lock-out systems that just don't work anymore. If you couldn't shoot it in the ocean, but could backcheck for 60 minutes, you had a job with the Wild. It's going to take years for them to recover from all that baloney.

I am with Dave on this one. I also did not pick us to win it all. Of course, my picks for both hockey and basketball still sucked, but not from lack of trying.

I am getting a little sick and tired of having my loyalty questioned. Let me clarify this for you: This isn't a choice between good and bad, it's a choice between crappy and less crappy. Giving up the name and logo is crappy, but it's less crappy than crippling the athletic department. I have been a fan since I was 6 years old and I love the name and logo. I have a Fighting Sioux shower curtain in the bathroom right now. I own a bunch of jerseys. And I will continue to wear them whether the anti-nickname people like it or not. But if we don't move on as a state and as an institution, UND athletics as we know them will cease to exist. We should hope and pray that the Spirit Lake lawsuit in Federal Court is successful and we should support that effort 100%. But all these petitions and statewide votes will do no good and possibly will do a great deal of harm. But I guess if you don't get that now, you never will.

In Hak's case, it's "Cycling in the offensive zone kills".

When the injuries are life-threatening, you don't keep fighting, you plan a strategic retreat and live to fight another day. The Imperial Japanese believed in victory thru death; I don't think we should follow that example.

Sorry, but this is another cop-out. Based on this line of thinking, the WCHA would NEVER win NCAA titles. But since UND has last won a national title, Minnesota (puke) has won two, Denver (puke) has won two and Wisconsin and Duluth have each won one. And don't forget the CCHA with Michigan State winning one. The East Coast is NOT the end-all and be-all of college hockey recruiting. Players are being produced all over the United States now and we still get some good ones out of Canada (despite the sleazeball tactics of Major Juniors). The fact is, our program will fall off the radar screen if we don't start closing the deal with some of our better teams. No one cares who finishes second or who gets to the Frozen Four and loses in the semifinals. Maybe it isn't fair, maybe it's myopic thinking, but it's how the media and the public views it. I like the comment about not filling your roster with can't miss NHL players so that you don't lose too many of them early. Not to "live in the past", but that is how Blais kept those powerhouse teams in the 1990's together. He had a bunch of players that worked hard and worked together and had plenty of skill and speed, but weren't on the radar screen of the NHL Central Scouting Bureau. As a result, most of them stayed all four years or at least three years. That looks like the forumula they are using in Chestnut Hill, MA and I think it's time we get back to that formula in Grand Forks, ND. People can disagree all they want, but I care WAY more about NCAA titles than having a bunch of former UND players in the NHL. That is a trade-off I can definitely live with.

Be careful Sic or else the "In Hak We Trust" crowd will string you up in the town square.

Uhhhhhh, for the common-sense impaired........ Keeping the name and logo at all costs is not "a small price to pay"!!!!

Okay, that is fair. I was responding to someone else with that comment, not you.

First of all, why can't our program minimize our losses the way Boston College does? What more do you want than what we have? The best arena in North America, maybe the WORLD, with every amenity you could think of. A long line of NHL-calibre blue-chip players that have come through here since The Ralph opened. A total institutional committment to the program you don't have at every school. A rabid and passionate fan and alumni base. Short of paying players under the table, we have it all. Second of all, I will agree that all teams have bad luck in the playoffs from time to time. But when you get to the Frozen Four 5 out of 8 years and you lose in the semifinals 4 of those years, you simply cannot blame it all on "bad luck". Our performances in the 2006 and 2007 Frozen Fours were absolutely awful and are totally legitimate targets for criticism. Didn't Ralph Engelstad believe that "The harder I work, the luckier I get"? I think that phrase is on a plaque hanging in the entrance of The Ralph right now. And I think it is especially relevant to this topic. Thirdly, I agree that the talent level of college hockey is off the charts and is getting better and better with no real significant increase in the number of teams sponsoring the sport. That being said, if the "landscape of college hockey" makes it "almost impossible" to win an NCAA title anymore, why does Boston College win the national title every other year? Why don't they run into "hot goalies" in the NCAA tournament? Why don't we have a different champion every year? If it's sooooo competitive, we really should have a different champion almost every single year. The fact is (and I don't like it any more than anyone else on this forum), Jerry York and Boston College get it done when they have the team to get it done and our program no longer does. I am a season-ticket holder and I have followed this team since I was 6 years old and I will continue to follow this team through thick and thin, but I simply have to call it like I see it. The bottom line is, I don't want our program to become like those NCAA basketball programs who can only hope for conference championships and maybe one or two wins in the NCAA tournament. The landscape of college hockey is changing, with the Big Ten Conference and the NCHC coming online in a couple of years, and I don't want UND to get left behind. Winning NCAA titles is one sure-fire way to keep an edge on some of these so-called "big time" schools like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and so on. Otherwise, we'll become known as a once-great program that just doesn't have the goods to win big anymore. And that would be a sad, sad day.

You guys are great at putting words into my mouth. I have NEVER been in the "Fire Hakstol" camp. All I have ever said is that it is totally fair to criticize some of our performances in the Frozen Four during Hak's tenure. Some people on here think that is inappropriate. I must respectfully disagree. When you make as much money as Hakstol and his staff does, you should expect a certain level of criticism and scrutiny. But it's gotten to the point on this forum that unless you stick with the "In Hak We Trust" motto at all times, you get raked over the hot coals. It's either sign the "duckies and bunnies" pledge or get ripped as a bad fan. It is really sad how soft our fan base has gotten over the past 10 years. And I am sorry if you think I am complaining too much, but those are the standards at UND (it's been that way since Gino built his dynasty in the 1980s) and I like having those standards. Otherwise, you will never achieve greatness. We as fans should not have to apologize for having high expectations. Without those expectations, we might as well start hanging banners for NCAA tournament appearances and Frozen Four appearances.

I never, ever said that NCAA titles are the end all and be all of anything. But the idea that they are not at all important (like the Hobey Baker award) is just plain wrong and not consistent with the standards that have been set for this program for the past 50 years or so. And I agree, Hakstol isn't going anywhere, especially after the job he and his staff did this season. By the way, Boston College has had players leave early and it doesn't seem to affect them all that much.

Gino had 3 titles in 8 years from 1980 to 1987 and it could have been 4 in 9 years (we finished Runner-Up to the Rodents in 1979). And I think we made it to the Frozen Four in 1984 and 1985. Blais took us to three Frozen Fours (1997, 2000 and 2001) and won two of them (1997 and 2000) with a Runner-Up finish in 2001. The 1998 and 1999 teams were one win short of the Frozen Four. Irish is right; we used to cash in on our chances at the Frozen Four. Now "just getting there" is all that matters to most of us, which is a shame. Hakstol did a great job with this year's team; now it's time to cash in the next time we "get there" and have the horses to get it done (we just didn't have enough pieces this year). A couple of questions for everyone who thinks "just being there" is good enough: If we had ZERO NCAA titles right now, would our program still be considered "great" and "storied"? Another question, if Jerry York and Boston College were still looking for their first NCAA title since 1949, would they still be considered a "great" program? My answer to both is a big, resounding NO. If your answer is yes, you must be a Buffalo Bills fan.

I don't think a kid has to go straight to the NHL right out of college to justify leaving early, but I think they should be close enough to the big leagues so that they get called up once or twice during their first AHL season. That keeps you on the radar of the organization and you won't get pushed aside by prospects that are coming after you that look more NHL ready and get the call-ups you could have gotten. I think Bochenski leaving early was a mistake; he has been up and down (mostly down) in his career and hasn't stuck with any NHL club for long. These kids have a short window to get called up and establish themselves in the NHL and once they get "too old", they will be pushed aside by front offices and be stuck in the minors until they retire. And that really is a shame. As for this argument that it's good to leave early because you get more games against better players and will develop quicker, that really sounds like an argument for the Major Junior route and not an argument for leaving after one or two years of college hockey. If kids don't like the idea of playing fewer games for no money, they shouldn't have chosen the college route in the first place. UND has a proven track record for developing talent for the next level and I think Nelson would have benefited from at least one more year of that. And I do think it will be harder than he and some of the posters on here think it will be. But, that aside, I do wish him well.