82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I don't recall UND having played BU that season...can you refresh my memory? Fri, Dec 27 Boston University Grand Forks, N.D. 6 - 4 (W) Sat, Dec 28 Boston University Grand Forks, N.D. 2 - 2 (T) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 So is Boston College a "historic" contender? Basically yes. I know they aren't when I search the hockey encyclopedia. That's why Michigan no. BC yes. I forget anything after a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 No. Everything the same as its been. Just one game less of those titles. The same as it has been but no Broadmoors or MacNaughtons? So not really the same then, LOL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachdags Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Whole lot of Stupid in this thread.......Unbelievable Everyone's ice cream is too cold. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Fri, Dec 27 Boston University Grand Forks, N.D. 6 - 4 (W) Sat, Dec 28 Boston University Grand Forks, N.D. 2 - 2 (T) That Saturday game was some of the best goaltending I've ever seen. I believe the BU goaltender's name was like Laroque or something like that. Boy was he good in what was an absolute bee hive of an atmosphere. Makes me miss the old ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Basically yes. I know they aren't when I search the hockey encyclopedia. That's why Michigan no. BC yes. I forget anything after a decade. LOL...so despite being a doormat from essentially 1950-1997, Boston College is now a 'historic' program? If UMass-Lowell wins 5 of the next 10 titles, do they become 'historic' too? I respectfully disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 The Gophers - number 2 seed in the country got knocked out and they were in our bracket - we got beat by the 3 seed. Our old nemesis BC is out too. Quinpinnac, St. Cloud, and UMass Lowell is as good as it is going to get. Time to get it done! And just because you don't know anything about those teams doesn't mean that they are bad teams. Quinnipiac was number 1 and Lowell was number 3 in the Pairwise at the end of the season. St. Cloud won the WCHA. There were a lot of quality teams this year, and no super teams this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Whole lot of Stupid in this thread.......Unbelievable Everyone's ice cream is too cold. Easy solution - go read another thread. I think this discussion is interesting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 So is Boston College a "historic" contender? Modern history. I hear the gophers are historically good at football.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 The Gophers - number 2 seed in the country got knocked out and they were in our bracket - we got beat by the 3 seed. Our old nemesis BC is out too. Quinpinnac, St. Cloud, and UMass Lowell is as good as it is going to get. Time to get it done! Yale is only # 5 because they kicked our ass. I remember my first hockey game too. St Cloud smacked around UND in Grand Forks not that long ago, Quinnipiac absolutely embarrassed Union, who had just throttled BC, and UMass-Lowell took Wisconsin, another team that gave UND fits, out behind the woodshed. And you think that would have been a cake-walk to a title? Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Basically yes. I know they aren't when I search the hockey encyclopedia. That's why Michigan no. BC yes. I forget anything after a decade. So, according to your definition, neither UND nor Michigan nor Minnesota are great hockey programs. Minnesota won their last title a decade ago, and the others are longer ago. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted April 3, 2013 Author Share Posted April 3, 2013 From Huskier Mike Four Frozen Fours in nine years sounds pretty good, right? Pretty bad, according to some North Dakota fans. North Dakota hockey fans are kind of like Nebraska football fans. They showed their passion in overrunning Omaha in February for a series against UNO. They have high expectations, and when those high expectations aren't met, some are quick to look for something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Is the only way to be good "historically" is by having the good years a long time ago and not recently? Even if the number of good is the same as the number of bad? If Michigan had 6 championships in the 60s and BC only five in the 00s. Is Michigan historically the better team? I would say only in the "definition". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Modern history. I hear the gophers are historically good at football.. Sorry, Cratter, not a valid comparison at all. You know Gopher football has not been 'good' since the days of leather helmets and no pads. That's not a valid comparison at all... Side-note: you and LeftyZL coming back to the Hogg next year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Whole lot of Stupid in this thread.......Unbelievable Everyone's ice cream is too cold. And this makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 So, according to your definition, neither UND nor Michigan nor Minnesota are great hockey programs. Minnesota won their last title a decade ago, and the others are longer ago. Hey, 82SiouxGuy, is Ohio State a...nah...nevermind...LOL. Just kidding. Nice to have you on my side of a discussion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 The Gophers - number 2 seed in the country got knocked out and they were in our bracket - we got beat by the 4 seed. Our old nemesis BC is out too. Quinpinnac, St. Cloud, and UMass Lowell is as good as it is going to get. Time to get it done! Yale is only # 5 because they kicked our ass. I'm pretty sure that beating the number 2 team overall helped their ranking quite a bit. So did all of the other games they won. They were at 5 or 6 in the Pairwise before the final weekend of conference tournaments, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Is the only way to be good "historically" is by having the good years a long time ago and not recently? Even if the number of good is the same as the number of bad? If Michigan had 6 championships in the 60s and BC only five in the 00s. Is Michigan historically the better team? I would say only in the "definition". So the fact that Michigan made the national tournament 22 years in a row before missing out this year doesn't help make them a power in college hockey? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Is the only way to be good "historically" is by having the good years a long time ago and not recently? I'd say North Dakota is a perfect example of a 'historically' top-notch program...plenty of conference, playoff, and national titles spanning almost every decade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Hey, 82SiouxGuy, is Ohio State a...nah...nevermind...LOL. Just kidding. Nice to have you on my side of a discussion... Is Ohio State a rich athletic department? Yes, they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 I remember my first hockey game too. St Cloud smacked around UND in Grand Forks not that long ago, Quinnipiac absolutely embarrassed Union, who had just throttled BC, and UMass-Lowell took Wisconsin, another team that gave UND fits, out behind the woodshed. And you think that would have been a cake-walk to a title? Wow. Not saying a cakewalk - just saying that my big concern was Minnesota, not the number 4 seed. Once the Gophs choked I thought there is no way we wouldn't get in. That we couldn't hold a lead in the 3rd against the # 4 seed is sad. The four is never easy, but look at the past lineups and this certainly isn't the strongest field ever. We would have had a better chance than the last 5 times. I really thought that like so many say repeatedly on here, we"ll get one when we don't expect it and the floodgates will open. Still waiting. As to the strength of the final four, I really don't think this is anyware close to the strongest field this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 So the fact that Michigan made the national tournament 22 years in a row before missing out this year doesn't help make them a power in college hockey? It makes them also rans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 So, according to your definition, neither UND nor Michigan nor Minnesota are great hockey programs. Minnesota won their last title a decade ago, and the others are longer ago. It was tongue in cheek. I personally put more stock in modern history. BC is a great hockey program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Not saying a cakewalk - just saying that my big concern was Minnesota, not the number 4 seed. Once the Gophs choked I thought there is no way we wouldn't get in. That we couldn't hold a lead in the 3rd against the # 4 seed is sad. The four is never easy, but look at the past lineups and this certainly isn't the strongest field ever. We would have had a better chance than the last 5 times. I really thought that like so many say repeatedly on here, we"ll get one when we don't expect it and the floodgates will open. Still waiting. As to the strength of the final four, I really don't think this is anyware close to the strongest field this year. The final 4 probably isn't as strong as a lot of years. But the entire field of the tournament was probably closer than ever before. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 3, 2013 Share Posted April 3, 2013 Not saying a cakewalk - just saying that my big concern was Minnesota, not the number 4 seed. Once the Gophs choked I thought there is no way we wouldn't get in. That we couldn't hold a lead in the 3rd against the # 4 seed is sad. The four is never easy, but look at the past lineups and this certainly isn't the strongest field ever. We would have had a better chance than the last 5 times. I really thought that like so many say repeatedly on here, we"ll get one when we don't expect it and the floodgates will open. Still waiting. As to the strength of the final four, I really don't think this is anyware close to the strongest field this year. Seeding means absolutely nothing...if it mattered, we'd just stick four #1's in Pittsburgh and skip everything else... I totally disagree on the strength of this final four too. You're basing your opinion on sexiness of name only. If it was UND, MN, BU, and BC, you would be calling it the best line-up ever but because it's 3 schools you never heard of and St Cloud State, it apparently sucks? This Frozen Four may be the best field in recent memory. This is absolutely ANYONE'S to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts