Supertrex

This is what happens when you play your last four games against Western Michigan and Colorado College. No matter what, you end up playing down a level and then get blasted when you play a real team again.

We took the amtrack to Milwaukee for the Frozen Four once. Got there at 1:00 and everything went off without a hitch. By the sound of your experience and the 6.7 percent "on time" rating, I should have bought a lottery ticket. I would have been able to take my private jet there instead.

Exactly... P.S. I get the joke..

This post disposes of the issue. The rule doesn't say to use your common sense...it says you must clearly see it cross the line to be a goal on replay...in addition, they are to use the overhead camera only...on that view, you cannot meet the standard...I think it's the puck but I cannot be sure...therefore ....no goal.

I didn't initially see it, but if you look at the replay, I think that might be the puck between the goalie's skate blades...there's a roundish black spot on the slow motion replay...then he moves his skates outward. When you see the puck coming back out and trace its line, it goes right to that spot. That might be what they are seeing...just my thoughts and I'm not saying I'm right...but that's what I see on the replay...they looked at it for 10 minutes so they must have seen something and finally concluded that it was the puck... In the meantime, CC is wiping up the ice with BC...go CC...

Normie sold the Fireside to the people that own, among other things, Zorbas. The Fireside always closes in the winter and opens around Mother's day. The problem with Suite 49 is that is was doomed from the start. They had a major identity crisis going, trying to be everything to everyone. The first time I went there (during the WJC's) you could see that people were there mostly to pay zero to park instead of $1,100 (it was later switched to $10 to park and get a $10 voucher to spend on beer - a really profitable strategy). I'm pretty sure (but I don't know for a fact) that the Brown's were trying to get that part of the Englestad complex kicked off and had hoped their investment would attract others to invest too. And that is what community builders do and I give them credit for trying. But, these guys apparently didn't think it through. People would get there at 5:00 and nurse a beer until fifteen minutes before game time and they leave and maybe have one after the game since there car was parked there and they had a free beer coming, etc. In a restaurant, you have to be hot (meaning you can't be someone else), you have to have a decent location and you have to turn tables. Bar food in an obscure location away from traffic (except for Sioux hockey traffic) turning one table per night four nights per month, six months a year is not going to pay for the totally upscale fixtures, etc. No way in hell. People in GF will drive downtown to Sanders and the Toasted Frog. They have upscale dining and are places people want to go to be seen out on the town. Switch to upscale dining (I question whether GF can have another but it's the only real alternative) and make it the primary reason to be there, eliminate hockey parking (thereby eliminating that as the primary reason to go there), and make it a place to be seen and it'll run. That's what Normie was able to do in Fargo at a failed, but expensive location. That won't satisfy the people who want to park for free and have a few beers before or after the game, but we've already seen that concept fail here and it won't keep it going. There are all kinds of other $2 beer joints where they can ride the fun bus.

I agree with you here. VV can go early, but he'll be seeing the country from a charter bus just like Danny Erman and some other college stars that went a bit too early. And VV wasn't really a star on this team and actually underperformed relative to his prior season efforts. He may have ended up with better numbers, etc. but he isn't a markedly better hockey player than he was last year...He's not small so he won't benefit from the elimination of the WCHA clutch-and-grab style like Parise did (and No, I'm not trying to compare his ability to Z.Par's)...Upside-wise, he's not even close to where Towes was when Towes finished his freshman year and Towes came back. And for an even better comparison, he's nowhere near where Bochenski was at this point in his career and look at where Bo is??? (Where is Bo???)

The only thing I wanted from Joe Finley was to play his position correctly when the game was on the line...

Just wanted to add that expecting to win five faceoffs in a row is alot. In reality, winning 55 percent of them is considered pretty good. So the sioux win 4 out of five but lose the most critical. It's what happened after that that bothers me... where the hell was Joe Finley when the shot from the point was taken? Only Genoway was at the net...why did Joe pursue the puck to the side board with under five seconds to go? Why wasn't he in front of the net. Did he forget what he should do in this situation? Did Hakstal go over it with him? Hopefully these are viewed as constructive questions because there is really no excuse to leave only one guy in front of the net with a six on five with five seconds remaining. Nobody helped. Block a shot. Do something. They just stood there and watched Chay dive from one end of the net to the other...tie game...

Nice finish guys...

Sure, sure...but Finley could have played his position in front of the net instead of expecting Genoway to play both sides...let's see, under five seconds left - just be in front of the net...

UND finally on...Duncan score...

Let's have the interview and the awards ceremony too...c'mon you've already ruined the game...

Why the f@@@ do they have to put the flood coverage on the sports channel. If I want to listen to Joel H second guess law enforcement all day, I'll turn it to KFGO...

Right now it would take prozac...

You have to admit, it's a man's game. You'd never get away with hacking away at guys with your sticks in hockey because you'd get your lights punched out quickly. Based on watching this game it goes like this: Throw the ball in a circle and if someone gets too close, hit him as hard as you can with your stick or wicket or what ever the F*** they call it...then, every two minutes take a mandatory time-out...fun game. Very fan friendly..

after six overtimes, they switch to axes...so it will be over soon...

How can you score 18 goal in regulation and then go to triple overtime...LOL

Let's just say that if you look at the crowd out there right now, there's less than 1500...looks like a kids soccer crowd...

I sent a complaint to ESPN...not that it will help...what a joke. Three people in Virginia and two in Maryland are probably watching and care. the rest of us want the ND - NH game...

This is why they shouldn't give out awards until after the season is over. Coach of the year??? Sure doesn't look like it today. This team has zero motivation...

I flip on the TV after the first. They are talking about how the sioux are playing their game. I figure maybe they'll pick it up for the rest of the season. but no..Same crap as last night is all I have seen...even worse actually. There's no excuse for this crap...BE wake up already...

I think that if you watch the sioux on the PP, they tend to really pick their shots and that is frustrating to watch as a fan but makes sense from a coaching standpoint. With the exception of Duncan on the top of the right circle, they generally try for open shots more down the middle and look for straight-on rebounds. Trouble is, UMD, along with our screeners, clogged the center area and when the puck was to the outside, they were very aggressive on it and played very tight to the player with the puck, knowing that one or two of their teammates would cover the shots down the middle. They were effective. I noticed how often they were right in the sioux player's face when the puck was to the outside in their zone. they gave very little space away and that's why I think that they had such a great PK. When the sioux take more shots from the top-right or top-left and put shots to the opposite sides, they come up with more loose deflections to fight over and score more dirty ones (like the dog's second goal, although that was on a giveaway and should have been stopped - BE didn't cover the inside of the post). There didn't appear to many good looks down the middle, so only a few were taken. There's no sense just shooting away at blockers. You have to take angled shots to the opposite side to get deflections to the sticks of the weak side wings. They didn't get many opportunities like that... I also noted that several times, the weak side player was in too close to the net on the angled shots so that when they were deflected, they came out behind him and the puck ended up going all the way to the boards and often time out of the zone...That's also good goaltending - deflecting the shot behind the players instead of onto his stick. The sioux had their chances and I counted at least two open net chances and one puck the went behind the UMD goalie.

BE was to blame for the first goal. He came out, stopped the puck and left it on the far side of the net (left side as you face the net) as he skated away from the puck and the play, returning to the goal mouth on the right side...in short, he took the long route around the net (from the pucks position) and it cost him. Had he simply moved the puck along a bit and then let it sit on the right side, the Dog would not have had a shot since BE would have beat him to the net. It was for sure BE's fault on the first one...he didn't see the Dog player because he was facing away from the puck and thus the play - a Cardinal sin...

Yes...you're right. But one UMD got up 2, the trap was in...after that, the style of their play changed. but you are still right. We had plenty of scoring chances and UMD made plenty of mistakes in the first two periods...more than enough to bury at least one and make it riskier for UMD to sit back...