TNF

Here is the summary of key talking points to anyone fighting this; 1). Financials- the "buck" stops here. UND needed to cut $1.3 million and women's hockey loses more than $2 million a year if you apply their share of REA expenses. With having to maintain 16 teams I'm not sure cutting any other combination of programs would have made the numbers work especially if they want to invest more in some of the remaining programs. Financials are as black and white as it gets but IF you aren't a numbers person here are a few more; 2) Support- Attendance simply is not there despite being a fixture in the national polls. The lack of support for good teams points to a limited market that will consume this product at the present time. Even if attendance is increased dramatically it won't raise much revenue because kids get in free, champions club members get in free, and many weekends tickets are $5 or less for everyone else. 3) Chance at a natty- As I said above they are a bit of a long shot between perrieniel powers out west, how scheduling/pairwise works, etc. Please note this item is in the #3 spot behind financials and support Sure other UND programs are long shots or no shots but they arent losing $2M a year either and have better attendance. Then there are counter arguments mainly olympians. How often when the twins are on national tv like on the Today Show do they mention UND once? It just doesn't come up in interviews. And sure they mention where they play during the tournament which attracts more future olympians to UND But even with all of these olympians coming through the program the financials still do not work and people are still not going to the games. U of M has had tremendous success in women's hockey and their team loses just as much money as ours. We could justify keeping women's hockey as long as we had the money to support it but those days have come and gone unfortanetly. Full disclosure the fact that any programs were cut is sad and I feel aweful for those impacted. But if people step off their social media soapboxes and research this move not only does it make the most sense it might have been the only option to make the numbers work. End of story. And we are still Title IX compliant and hiring the consultant is one of the things UND did right IMHO

I've seen a few posts pointing to a good chance they could have won a natty in the near future. I would argue evaluating their chances of winning a natty could have led to the opposite conclusion. With perineal powers Minnesota and Wisconsin in the west and how the scheduling/pairwise works (or doesn't) for women's hockey it was a bit of a long shot. Several times UND was arguably the 3rd or 4th best team in the country and didn't even make the tourney. Unless they could find the magic bullet to all of a sudden beat those schools consistently going forward, making the tourney was far from a given. And women's hockey is not like the men's side in which any team that makes the tourney has a chance. It is 2 or 3 schools that have a legitimate shot year in and year out with perhaps one senior heavy team sprinkled in.

You're right. I read a story when Brock signed that talked about them being only a few months apart in age. But I just doubled checked and they are over a year a part in age.

Tyson Jost's Family Advisor - 1 UND's PR Team - 0 Bury the lead of being a one and done by signing on the day other massive news breaks which will eat up local media. PR 101 right there. Congrats to Tyson. I suspect he was originally planning to be here two years but since we were loaded at forward during our run to #8 he stayed in Penticton an extra year. In that regard we are lucky he honored his commitment. Better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all.

The circus started around the time the name was retired. Sadly at this point we are simply watching more and more clowns climb out of the car.

There is also the hypocrisy to deal with late in games. Refs historically put their whistles away midway through the 3rd period. Some of the infractions that are typically let go involve obstruction\interference in front of the net which directly take away quality scoring opportunities. This is all done under the mantra "let the players decide the game on the ice". I'm fine with this up until we stop the game for 7 minutes and review a play frame by frame looking for any evidence to overturn it which is the opposite of "let the players decide the game on the ice". So either we should put the whistles away and shelf the replays with it or keep the replays but have the refs continue to call a consistent game. Best option...no automatic replays. Each team gets 1 video challenge and if they win it they get a second challenge. Barring technical difficulties all video replays must be conducted within a 3 minute timeframe. The call stands unless there is indisputable evidence (which should be made public post game) to overturn it or the 3 minutes time limit is met.

Know when to say when...friends don't let friends rehash the same argument for multiple pages. What rules would you like to see the NCHC look at modifying? I threw a few ideas out there related to diving, faceoffs, matching minors, etc. Other ideas???

Here are a few ideas some of which have been discussed on this forum lately; 1) Diving- a 3 strikes rule should be instituted. Strike one is 2 minutes for diving and a 2 minute misconduct penalty (yes I believe trying to deceive an official is worse than the original infraction). Strike 2 is 2 minutes for the dive and a 10 minute misconduct. Strike 3 is a 2 minute penalty and a game misconduct. Any additional offenses are 2 games each. 2) Faceoffs- I don't have the answer but they aren't consistent with throwing people out and often times they are the ones delaying the game. 3) Matching Minors- this should be a last resort for officials since it doesn't punish a team and most likely won't change behavior. Examples- If team A crashes the goalie after a shot, illegally makes contact, and then a scrum breaks out everyone should be matched up with an additional 2 minutes going to team A for the initial penalty. If team A crashes the net legally and a scrum is started by team B then everyone should be matched up and team B should get the extra 2 for instigating. 4) I like the idea of a coaches challenge or two throughout the game to cut down on everything being reviewed.

I think Hoff was probably offside but I want the NC$$ to provide the UNDISPUTABLE proof. Not the tv replay that ESPN keeps showing where the puck is stopped already in the zone.

Rule 86 - Offside 86.1 Offside - Players of an attacking team must not precede the puck into the attacking zone. A player is offside when both skates are completely over the outer edge of the blue line involved in the play at the instant the puck completely crosses the outer edge of that line. The position of the player’s skates and not that of the stick shall be the determining factor in all instances deciding an offside. A player is onside when either of the skates is in contact with or on the player’s own side of the line at the instant the puck completely crosses the outer edge of that line. A player in full control of the puck who crosses the blue line ahead of the puck shall not be considered offside. While the position of the player’s skates is what determines whether a player is offside, the question of offside never arises until the puck completely has crossed the outer edge of the line. If a player legally carries or passes the puck back into his or her own defending zone while a player of the opposing team is in that defending zone, the offside shall be ignored and play permitted to continue. If the puck is intercepted cleanly by a member of the defending team and is carried or passed by the player’s team into the neutral zone, the offside shall be ignored and play permitted to continue, even if a member of the attacking

I also enjoyed CM stating "they have been on the PP for the majority of the period". I was told there would be no math but I'm pretty sure 4 minutes of PP is not the majority of the period especially since BU got one too.

It is definitely not wrong to provide a timely T. Poolman update.

You can drink an adult rum snow cone (aka a daiquiri) in your seat however just not a rum and cola. But we digress.

They also granted a waiver for the Men's and Women's College World Series. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ncaa.com/amp/news/baseball/article/2016-01-20/di-board-approves-waiver-alcohol-sales-baseball-softball

The NCAA is starting to allow alcohol at some championship events. I saw fans holding beer at the FCS championship football game this year on the ESPN broadcast. I also saw it at some of the FBS bowl games. I'm not sure how they are determining which championships or venues can serve it however. I also don't understand why it is okay to sell beer literally outside the front door in Tampa but it is not okay inside. But if you try to apply logic in relation to the NCAA's line of thinking you are better off finding a wall to bang your head against.

This isn't tee ball and the opposing coach refused to let the <insert stereotype here> kid bat because the game was close. This is division I athletics. I'd prefer to let Bubs and Co do the talking instead of all of us fans emailing their coach asking why they were mean to us. If any emails fly it should be to Don Adam demanding an explanation as to why Pionck was allowed to finish the game because it is absolutely contrary to "the league's continued focus on player safety". And with a national audience watching on CBS Sports (and Bucci essentially live tweeting a video of the play) the officials watched the tape, gave him a 5 minute major, but didn't kick him out. And if the league agrees that he should have been disqualified then appropriate disciplinary action should be taken against the official(s) involved.

I 100% agree and was just going to type the same thing. The Poolman hit should be a 2 min for the arm wrapped around the body but I don't see the malicious intent others see. I have seen far worse this year get 2 or less. The run of Cam is a different story however. Not only did he not let up he finished the check on a goalie that was not able to protect himself. No doubt he should have been kicked out.

Can their 5 original fans in attendance teach us new fans a few cheers?

I believe we are more likely to beat UMD rather than the Pios in the tournament. Yes our style matches better with Denver but the NCAAs usually comes down to "who wants it more". Denver being less than a minute from the championship game last year wants revenge by knocking us out this year. After going 0-5 and losing in a dirty game at the TC I think we have a strong desire to serve UMD some humble pie.

One of my biggest pet peeves is how scrums are called after the whistle most often resulting in matching minors. In order to prevent the same thing from reoccurring you have to provide some sort of deterant. Here is my take; 1) If you hit the goalie or someone else unprovoked after the whistle everything is matched up but you give the offensive player an extra 2 for instigating the scrum 2) If you protect your goalie and the offensive player did nothing wrong you match them and give the defensive player an extra two 3) The only way you assign 100% matching penaties is each team deserves it (i.e. offensive player slashes the goalie then the defensive player punched him in the head followed by no additional activities). The other thing that would help is calling a "contact to the head" major when a player defends their goalie from a non-existent slash with a cross check to the chin. To me that is far worse than a mostly shoulder to shoulder hit that inadvertently results in head contact as part of a normal hockey play

UMD is really selling penalties in the 3rd.

They will figure it out eventually. My guess is around Oct. 27, 2018.

So to recap a few hours ago you thought this was the game that was going to cause us to lose all of our potential recruits and now you think we are marching to #9. I have whiplash from that change in direction.

You are right, what young kid would want to play for a program that has seen 20 guys play at least one game in the pros this year, is coming off a national title, plays in one of the top hockey venues in the world, is within a sniff of having the most NCAA titles ever...but lost a conference semi-final to another perineal power. Happy trolling.

This a great illustration of the need for context.