OETKB Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 I'd like to know how much confidence UND fans have going into the 2002-3 season. What do you believe this team can accomplish? It sounds like nobody is bashing Dean Blais or the talent level of Soph's who are returning. Also, no one on this board is overplaying the abilities of Parise or Greene. These are all positive things. One thing that should boost wins is the number of NC games. UND fared very well, even last season, vs non-conference opponents. The big question marks are goaltending and whether we will see a significant jump in scoring from the large soph class, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 I'd like to know how much confidence UND fans have going into the 2002-3 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted July 5, 2002 Share Posted July 5, 2002 I'm not going to try to predict the number of games we'll win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OETKB Posted July 8, 2002 Author Share Posted July 8, 2002 I agree that the team needs to take one game at a time, but that should not be a problem after last season. Also, I don't even like the word "predictions," because it implies that one can know in advance what will happen, which is impossible. Mostly, I wanted this to be a measure of the confidence level of UND fans. So far, the results are very positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted July 8, 2002 Share Posted July 8, 2002 Mostly, I wanted this to be a measure of the confidence level of UND fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSiouxFan Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 By UND's standards, UND had a disappointing season and was still tied for 6th place in the league, not to shabby for alot of freshman and goaltending trouble. My prediction is UND will move up a couple slots to 3rd or 4th, host first game of Final Five and then who knows Dean always works his magic at that time of the season, otherwise we still get to watch some good hockey and future stars develop. Next year the opposing teams may take UND lightly, unlike last year right after our back-to-back Championship games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 (I'm might be about to make myself very unpopular) Well, Coach does work his magic at play-off time, but not with dominant teams (see 1998, 1999). But he sure is awesome with very good but not dominant teams (See 1997, 2000, 2001). I don't buy the mystique that Dean "won't allow" a team to underperform as some fans have stated over the years. I'm sure it is just a phrase people use, but something about it always bugs me. Dean is as human as anyone (see 2001-02). But that is not to take anything away from his ability to get the best out of what he has to work with. We had been spoiled with past "rebuilding" years which, IMO, were a blend of luck, underappreciation for the returning talent, AND Dean's coaching acumen. For an example I would point to Jason Ulmer. Who knew he would have the senior season that he did? Did Blais pull that rabbit out of his hat or was Jason just overshadowed by the players before him (Blake, Murphy, etc), or was it just luck? What I am saying is that I don't think we should look at teams like 2000 and say that Blais, through his own coaching abilities, willed that team to a title. I think there was more talent available than we gave the team credit for, AS WELL AS DEAN TURNING IN A CHAMPIONSHIP CALIBER COACHING JOB. In 2001-02 we knew Coach had a young team but many people expected the Blais mystique would somehow compensate for that. I'll be honest, the team struggled more than I expected them to. I think the year was rough, even for Coach, but we were getting a taste of who they could be by the end of the year. And I think Coach put on display one of his better coaching efforts, regardless of the final record. I think he stressed and busted his butt to try and show improvement by the end of the year, and to an extent it paid off. This next year's success will be a result of a combination of some players maturing and stepping up to the plate, as well as continued strong coaching effort by Blais. But he can't make them win. If you think I am dissing Blais, read closer. I would rather have Blais than ANY coach in hockey. I think he is in the top 3 with Lucia and Berenson, IMO. But every human has their limits and it's best we don't build someone into a person they can't live up to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I'm going to say what I've wanted to say for quite a while: Too many people expected too much from the 2001-2002 team. Period. The 2000-2001 team ran well because of Jeff Panzer, Bryan Lundbohm, Travis Roche, and Karl Goehring. That team was four D, a pair of penalty killers (Spie and Notes), KG, and an offensive line and a half (Panzer/Lundbohm/Bayda plus some support by senior Wes Dorey). How much of that returned? A pair of D (who greatly underperformed in 2001-2002) and Spie and Notes. And does anyone else remember Mary Beth Blais' problems? The 2000-2001 team was playing its guts out for Coach Blais. I'll say it: The 2000-2001 team overachieved. Now look at 2001-2002. A new arena. Distraction? Can you say "Uh huh!" How many new faces in The Room? 12? 13? (Freshmen plus transfers.) How many freshmen dressed each night? 10? 11? That's half and that half was even spread among the forwards (6), defense (3), and goaltending (1) on the average night. There was no strong, experienced suit to fall back on. Nothing to fall back on? Yup. Nothin'. The previously mentioned underperforming defensemen were met in underperformance by only an underperforming senior goaltender. The closest thing to a strong suit was a first line made up of Ryan Bayda, an overachieving Tim Skarperud, and a freshman (Bochenski). But one line is not enough. Spie and Notes didn't step up to make up for the lack of seniors like Skarp did. Luckily, Spie and Notes get another chance. Will they take it? I hope so. I had big hopes in 2001-2002 for the Hale boys too, except the worst happened: their mother passed away just as the team was getting back to school in the fall. I'm pretty sure that slowed those two, who I expected to see step up, through at least the first half. And I'll say it here because I heard Tim Hennessy mention it on the air: David Hale was not well (non-hockey medical) for a good deal of last season. (That's all I'll choose to say here.) Let's see, three of your four returning defensemen are underperforming or have outside issues, and the fourth can't break the lineup past three freshmen. Good luck. Forwards? How about a team where if you put every forward with D-I experience on the ice (Skarp, Bayda, Spie, Notes, Hale, Lundbohm, Palmiscno, and transfer Brendan Connelly) and you don't have a senior and you still have to put a minimum of four freshmen out? Sound like a formula for success? Putting high expectations on a team that half of it was in junior leagues the year before is unrealistic. Yet, too many did it. I expected that team to take some lumps in 2001-2002. That's why I preached "patience" a lot last year. But I've seen the glimmers of hope for the future. Rory McMahon and Chris Fournier started to assert themselves in the last weeks of last season and it was fun to watch. Bochenski proved he can score even when he is the focus of the other team. Ryan Hale realized that he can make havoc and dominate games. The young defense started to figure out how to handle the speed and motion of the college game. I still wonder about goaltending, but Siembida and Brandt's numbers behind a young defense weren't terrible. Guys need to come in this fall and show some character and establish themselves in the roles it takes to be a winner. They have the talent, they need to finish the intangibles: leadership, desire, teamwork, role playing. That'll take a period of adjustment. The schedule to start the season is reasonably friendly in that regard. Let's hope people step in and step up to the roles. I'm going to preach "patience" until December 1. If they don't have it figured out by then, the schedule will eat them alive. http://www.uscho.com/schedul....ender=m I think the team took all of its lumps at once (reloading talent, following up a group of overachievers, and new arena blues). I think this team will mature into something that will remember all the lumps they took as freshmen and return them. I don't expect it all to happen next season, but the lumps of 2001-2002 will be returned to the rest of the league before this group is through. That's my $0.02. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 After four straight successfull years, it was hard not to have high expectations, in spite of the large freshmen class. Then, when the team sweeps CC, the team picked to win the WCHA, the first weekend of the season in the REA (seemed like a home ice advantage then), seemed the Sioux were ready to go all the way again. The inability to put away teams in the third period made the difference between a top 4 finish and the year it turned out to be. It was obvious fans of other teams had similar feelings about the Sioux. For instance, both UAA and Mankato fans developed very high expectations after beating the Sioux in the REA. In fact, in reading uscho posts, seemed that beating the Sioux was the biggest event for all teams during the season, not suprising after the previous four years. Hope payback comes soon, would be hard to take another season like the last. The road trip after Christmas, which doesn't appear to end for the remainder of the season, will be tough. Need lots of W's before that starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 dagies, I agree with much of what you were saying, but I disagree with the "not able to do it with the dominant teams" statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Rick, my point about the dominant teams was that (in agreement with you) these teams dominated in the regular season but did not have the post season success you would expect from those teams. It was mainly a response to TheSiouxFan who said "Dean always works his magic at that time of the season". Not ripping the TSF because many of us have said similar things at times. I just wanted to respond to that point. As for Lucia, I felt even before this season that his national championship was only a question of when, and not if. No doubt he doesn't have the facts on his resume, but I personally think he's one heck of a coach. On results he probably doesn't rank. But I think he is that good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 dagies: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I'm sure you are basing this on Lucia's 3 WCHA Championship at CC and this years Gopher team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 I think Rick's point is this: The core of Lucia's CC teams were recruited by his predecessor (Buetow). The core of Lucia's Minnesota teams were recruited by his predecessor (Woog). He can coach talent, but have we seen an entirely "Lucia team" (recruits and coaching) yet? (I'm not entirely sure if I want to or not.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Boy Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I'll never understand the loss against BC in '99. I was at the Dane, and it seemed like from the first drop of the puck that the game was not going to go the Sioux's way. It was eerie in that arena. Very quiet except for a few screaming BC fans. At times it had the feel of a slow scrimmage. And then, that bench minor in the third. Ugh! I get sick just thinking about it. Then, I remember 2000, and I'm all better. The 01 overtime loss was not nearly as disappointing. The Sioux were outmatched by a heavily loaded BC team. They played like champions with hearts the size of North Dakota. I was never more proud of and happy for those kids then when they popped in that second goal to send it into OT. A slick move by an NHL'er was the difference. No shame there. Last year's performance was so frustrating. Some amazing overtime wins, lot's of heartbreakers with the big teams, and several stinkfest blowouts that will go down in history as some of the worst displays of hockey on NoDak ice. Don't spend too much time doing post mortem on that season. Just set it aside as perfect timing-- the Ralph stole the show last year. What's this thread about? Oh yeah. The Sioux will get around 24 wins and be in the top 5. Home ice for the WCHA playoffs will be nice. Beating the Gophs at the 'Shrine will be very nice. Sweet payback doesn't come until 03 when Lucia brings his boys to play in the well-seasoned Ralph. That will be the year the Sioux start their climb to national prominence. Another NCAA banner is less than 4 years away. taz digs payback Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDHockey Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I think what I read on here by a few fans on Don Lucia is a little bit questionable in my book. That remark may not make me popular among Sioux followers but how anybody can consider that guy as not being among the top couple of coaches in college hockey is a head scratcher. In fact, it sort of makes me question if some people's Sioux loving (and Gopher hating) heart is talking rather than their head. I mean, did anybody question Blaiser's coaching when he won the title in his 3rd year and that wasn't a team of all of his own players? If anything, the one thing that you rarely see Lucia criticized for is not having an eye for talent or not being able to recruit top players. When looking at what the man has done in recruiting (his next incoming class for example), he has to be rated among the best in that area. So if you say that he has accomplished a lot with some talent recruited by other people, that says to me that he is a top coach. Besides, far over half of that national title winner was his players. If the man is a very good coach (almost a 70% win percentage) and he has also shown to be a very good recruiter, I don't really see how you can't rate him among the best with Blaiser, Berenson and Parker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OETKB Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 The big question with Lucia is whether he can do it again. It's all very well to step into a good situation and, with tons of drive and energy, get that first championship. However, it takes much more to sustain that energy and do it multiple times. Personally, I dislike Lucia because he dislikes ND. Not only did he vote against Panzer, but at the Hall of Fame Game last season, he could not bring himself to say anything good about the arena. Everyone else was raving - Lucia said something to the effect that it was "okay." What was this thread about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I tend to have a great deal of respect for Lucia. He gets alot out of his players on and off the ice, much like Blais. My guess is that if Lucia had any neutral comments about the new REA it was mainly to keep himself focused on his job, unlike some of our guys. I think Lucia will do well at Minnesota, probably winning another Title or two, before he goes to the pros or some other level of hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I think its funny the amount of Gopher fans that have jumped on the band wagon and come out of the wood work. Living in Grand Forks and working part time in East Grand Forks I have never seen so many Gopher hats in this area in my life, I have lived here 9 years. I ask people all of the time if they bought that hat before or after the Goofers won it all. I am also sure they probablyn all have UND hats at home to wear when UND wins it all again soon. I hear all of the time how these closet bandwagon newby fans think that UofM is sure thing to repeat, they are going to be more awesome next year. I am not sure how a team can get better by subtraction. The biggest question is UofM goaltending. The present tenders make Hauser look great. I think predicting a repeat is one of the more arrogant things I have heard in some time considering who the Gophers lost from last years team. Apparently some think Vanek is the second coming of Christ and that he is going to be the best player on the ice. Sioux fans, think back to the past 5 or 6 years and we all can tell other fans how hard it is to repeat, there is a reason it hasn't happened since 1972. B.U. was the last team to do it. Most of us Sioux fans know why. !@$! Bag teams (Mankato, UMD, UAA, MTU) are now going to come into Marriucci and play their best games against the Gophers (they are bringing their "A" game), because they want to beat the defending national title. Even better, sh!tty goalies are going to stand on their heads, playing the game of their lives because they want to look good against the UofM Gophers. The gophers are going to have a huge bulls eyes on the back of their jerseys, and they better be ready to play every night. I am actually glad that UND is gotten that focus off of their back sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I've also wondered why Eastsiders are so conflicted in their college hockey loyalties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speez Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 It's only July, but we're getting closer to the season. Can't wait. Very interesting thread. 95% of the players are in town, working @ the Sioux hockey camps & working out on there own for the season. Occasional informal scrimmages will take place, if your fortunate to stop in @ the Ralph at the right time. Many good points brought up, but a consensus opinion is the underachievement of last season as compared to the usual Sioux season. A major distraction that was brought up was the opening of the new REA. The players definately realized what was happening & the commercialism(sp) was a distraction. Too many flashy,noisy things going on constantly. They will get used to it & the Ralph will again be where the Sioux dominate the 3rd. period. The recruits last year were expected to step right in & carry on as if half the team didn't change. Most of these guys came from winning programs & losing didn't sit well with them.The players learned some valuable lessons last year & I think the fans will have a great time this year watching some sweet revenge. We all saw the worst & best of the team in the Play-offs vs the Goofs. Expect to see the better side of the Sioux this year. I agree with Goon on one point, everybody will take the Sioux lightly this year & be gunning for the Goofs. I predict the Sioux battling for one of the top spots in the WCHA, but looking to peak for the FF(Frozen Four) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 I golfing Perry Nachonechy from the 1987 team (sp and I have no way how to spell it) during a scramble last tuesday night for mens night. One of the guys had a gopher hat on (by the way he did bring up the fact that he had 3 Sioux ones at home, I suppose they come out in case of a UND championship) and we were going back and forth in a fun way about different things. I still can't believe the band wagon fans in this area. I think it is funny. You didn't see many UofM hats around here when UND was winning. To cut to the chase, I told the guys that not to take anything away from the UofM title, hey that is great if you are a gopher fan but I said all you have to remember is 7 > 4 end of argument. (7 is more than 4 even to begining math students in Minnesota) This is not to take away from the UofM Gophers accomplishments (they proved that if you out score the opponents goal tending doesn't matter). I think Speez has something here though UofM is going to be a marked team. I wish them good luck. I would bet the farm and take the field that UofM doesn't win it all next season. With Vanek or with out Vanek... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDHockey Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 I don't suspect that the Gophers will be national title winners again next year either. Unfortunately, I do think they will be better than our guys so I am not sure that saying they won't repeat really means much to me in that sense. On the topic of having a bullseye on their back, it would seem like the Gophers have that every year no matter what. I mean, will teams like the Sioux, SCSU, UMD, Mankato, etc. really get keyed up any higher than they already do to play the Gophers? I kind of doubt it. I mean, even when they were down in their last few years under Woog, the Sioux still got really jacked up to kill them because they are such a big rival. So I sort of doubt they will be unprepared for teams aiming for them considering they deal with that pretty much everywhere they go. I think the Sioux will be improved next year but I still think there are a few too many question marks for me to feel like they will do anything special. Hopefully they will prove me wrong but I feel like they should aim for home ice and have an improving club when the playoffs hit and see what they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSiouxFan Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 "............really get keyed up any higher than they already do to play the Gophers?" Yes they will. Now that there the national champs you can multiply the intensity when they play them now, because the team and fans (gophers) will be that much more confident/cocky. Which is why they aren't widely liked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Perry Nachonechy from the 1987 team (sp and I have no way how to spell it) And Lou Nanne couldn't say it during the FF broadcast. To add to the problem he played on a line with Grant Paranica, I believe. Nanne still doesn't have all the knots out of his tongue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.