choyt3 Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I mean, in Hakstol's first year as the head coach, do you not think he'd do what he could to keep a Hobey candidate on the team if he could? Come on. All good points. I'm certainly not saying that Coach Hakstol has used poor judgement. Of course I hope he hasn't. That said, it is extremely difficult for me to come up with a scenario in which the Sioux coaches do not already know what Bochenski is going to do. For giving him a chance that other teams were not willing to three years ago, or so they say, he would appear to at the very least owe the UND hockey program that much respect to let them know his plans. At least I see it that way. At some point it will all come out. Not that we need to know or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 All good points. I'm certainly not saying that Coach Hakstol has used poor judgement. Of course I hope he hasn't. That said, it is extremely difficult for me to come up with a scenario in which the Sioux coaches do not already know what Bochenski is going to do. For giving him a chance that other teams were not willing to three years ago, or so they say, he would appear to at the very least owe the UND hockey program that much respect to let them know his plans. At least I see it that way. At some point it will all come out. Not that we need to know or anything. I hope UND fans can get some closure soon before this drags on too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green4ever Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I think UND losing bochenski will be very very bad. Bochenski is one of the greatest players to ever tie up a pair of skates at UND. If Bochenski stays i belive he will win the hobey and lead the fighting sioux onto another national championship Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Since we're dealing in hypotheticals (AGAIN), has anybody ever considered the possibility that there just might be a university and/or NCAA-imposed deadline for athletes to register for classes in order to be eligible for their scholarships for the upcoming year, and thus that could be the reason Bochenski does not have his scholarship? I'm just curious, since everybody seems so quick to pin this on Coach Hakstol's shoulders for some reason. It's funny how people with zero inside knowledge/information are already pointing fingers at a coach who - to paraphrase - is making mistakes before coaching a single game. How about we just wait for the situation to unfold before: A) Thanking Bochenski for three good years or B) Ripping him for being selfish or C) Ripping our coach for lord-knows-what-reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 A friend sent me an email tonite saying he heard this discussion on the radio this morning in GF. I'm only repeating what he passed on to me... He said that Bo told the coaching staff PRIOR to Blais' departure that he'd be signing a contract. At a certain point in time that scholarship money was allocated to other players. The reason given was that according to NCAA rules at that time the money needs to be allocated, or LOST. If that is indeed what happened, it's easy to see how this situation transpired, with no fault to anyone. IF it is accurate, Bo told the coaches he would not be in their plans. Bo didn't get the offer he hoped for, but the situation didn't resolve itself in time for UND to leave his $$ on the table for him. Therefore, Bo ends up stuck. It was also speculated that Bo might be able to play overseas for a year and come back a free agent. Like Canuck said, we'll see how it transpires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Would Bochenski maybe come back as a walk on? I doubt it but I'd have to guess if he does, he'll be the best walk on in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I don't think whether or not a scholarship is available would be the deciding factor in this situation. BB is obviously going to make some money playing professionally at some point and a years worth of student loans wouldn't break him. I think it comes down to whether or not he decides his offer is good enough. Though trying to become a free agent would make a lot more sense for him than Vanek, I don't know the rules so I'm not even sure that is feasible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USA Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Is there also a chance that Bo may not have kept his academics in place to maintain his scholarship? Again, I don't know, but it is plausible. I have not seen his report card, but Bo being academically inelligable is what I am being told. If it turns out to be true, it would explain everything. Sucks for Bo, sucks for Sioux hockey, sucks for Sioux hockey fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
schmidtdoggydog Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 The following are quotes from July 28, 2004, Fargo Forum: Hakstol said, "I wouldn't be surprised to see him back . . . (but) I certainly wouldn't count on it, I think our plans are in place whether or not Brandon's back." Bo said if he cannot work things out in Ottawa, he'll be excited to return to UND for one more season. "It's not a bad place to go back to." To me, these are not the type of statements that would be made by either party if academic eligibility was an issue. I would think that as the head coach of the hockey team DH would have a pretty good feel for who may or may not be academically eligible especially late in the summer. If BB was, in fact, ineligible, I don't believe DH would reference the possibility of a return. As for BB, his statements may simply be posturing directed at the Sens, but that doesn't make sense either. If he was posturing why not threaten to go overseas for a season, which could make free agency a possibility, which would mean the Sens could lose his rights. It just doesn't add up. At this point, the only thing that makes sense is what dagies heard from a friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAR Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 This whole situation has taken on a life of it's own. The sooner this situation is resolved the better for the team. Losing Parise and Bochenski, by far the two best forwards on last year's team to early departures is a tough pill to swallow. Hakstol would not dare pull Bo's scholarship money and allocate it to another player without being 100% sure he was going to sign. I seem to remember a quote from him some weeks back that said he would not be surprised if he signed but also would not be surprised to see him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I'm not saying this is what happened, but what if Bochenski told Hakstol to use his scholarship money because he didn't expect to be back? Also, other than rumors posted on Pride On Ice, I've heard nothing about Bochenski being academically ineligible. The last I heard, he was doing well in school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 From a practical perspective, a seventh round choice, drafted by a club that really wasn't looking too weak at forward, doesn't have alot of clout, especially when every club has its eyes on the CBA expiring next month. Moreover, Ottawa has been reasonably active in the off-season. I bet Ottawa views Money as a "nice to have", rather than a "must have" especially with the next season in flux. I speculate that Money, and his "family advisor", have overplayed their hands with regard to signing, on both ends. He doesn't have the clout of a ZParise, PMart, etc. If Money does sign, it will probably be for a pittance, or he goes MJ for a year, again for a pittance. The problem with being in MJ or playing overseas, is that there's no guarantee any NHL club will ever watch you again. All speculation of course, this being the off-season, but I would love to see Money back for one more season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basil Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 From a practical perspective, a seventh round choice, drafted by a club that really wasn't looking too weak at forward, doesn't have alot of clout, especially when every club has its eyes on the CBA expiring next month. Moreover, Ottawa has been reasonably active in the off-season. I bet Ottawa views Money as a "nice to have", rather than a "must have" especially with the next season in flux. I speculate that Money, and his "family advisor", have overplayed their hands with regard to signing, on both ends. He doesn't have the clout of a ZParise, PMart, etc. If Money does sign, it will probably be for a pittance, or he goes MJ for a year, again for a pittance. The problem with being in MJ or playing overseas, is that there's no guarantee any NHL club will ever watch you again. All speculation of course, this being the off-season, but I would love to see Money back for one more season. ...just a bit too old for Major Junior Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WPoS Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I'm not saying this is what happened, but what if Bochenski told Hakstol to use his scholarship money because he didn't expect to be back? Also, other than rumors posted on Pride On Ice, I've heard nothing about Bochenski being academically ineligible. The last I heard, he was doing well in school. I think anytime there is an issue with a player about them returning there is going to be rumors of acedemics, unfortunately because a large percent of the time it ends up being true (I'm not saying so in BB's case here). If there was a football or bouncy ball player, there would be rumors of an impending jail sentance. I'd take the acedemic rumor for a hockey player over a murdur charge any day. WPoS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jk Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Scott, He's way too old for MJ, so I guess it would be Europe or the minors if it's not UND. Some open correspondence: ---------------- Dear Brandon, If Ottawa comes up with a good offer, take it, enjoy the fruits of your past efforts, and make the most of a great opportunity. If Ottawa doesn't get there, please consider that a Hobey year at UND could really help next year's negotiations. Having a great year at UND would clear up the question from non-observer commentators about whether your past success derived from playing with Parise. By the way, it looks like Murray and Zajac can both pass the puck, so you would probably have plenty of opportunities to demonstrate that special finishing talent (playmaking is nice, but someone has to put it in the net). If there are any issues with the coaches (I really have no idea, but there is all this internet buzz) please patch them up for your own good (see above paragraph). Admittedly, it would also be for my own good, as a fan. I had a great view of your burning of Ballard, then Briggs three seconds later, in St. Paul, and I'd like to see more of that. Thanks and good luck. --------------------- Dear Coach Hakstol, See above. If there are issues with how Brandon handled his potential departure (and again, I have no idea), please patch them up for your own good. Make it a learning experience for Brandon. Thanks and good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVCL Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 PCM, While I applaud your efforts for starting this by writing the bit for puckmag. AND I very much respect and appreciate your involvement on this board. I have one question... If you throw a bunch of angry cats in a pillowcase what do you suppose will happen? My point: For not talking about much of anything of substance, this post has downward spiraled into one of the worst conjectures of nonsense. Y'all shouldn't get your panties in such a bunch. Nay sayers. I like to read/post/speculate as much as the next guy but the fickle masses here have created a stir so unpositive and unfounded it's hard to comprehend. DH at fault? Bo at fault? We'll be sub .500? Scholarship revoked/lost? You all said those things. Not PCM or his source. Remember that one person (DB) stated that Bo will be gone. I respect that DB has his opinion as we all do, and that his is a more informed opinion. Is is such a stretch to assume that the signing of Bo has been a decision they (Bo/Agent/Family/NHL) have been mudling over for awhile now? Continue the tirade after we get a bit more info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 If you throw a bunch of angry cats in a pillowcase what do you suppose will happen? You end up on the Six O'Clock news? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green4ever Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I'm not saying this is what happened, but what if Bochenski told Hakstol to use his scholarship money because he didn't expect to be back? Also, other than rumors posted on Pride On Ice, I've heard nothing about Bochenski being academically ineligible. The last I heard, he was doing well in school. PCM you hit it right!!!! Brandon did let the coaches know he might not be coming back in plenty of time so the money would not be lost! Way to go Brandon! Brandon was in a gifted and talented program before college, he a very intelligent young man. He did not become academically ineligible. I live in his home town my info is not hear-say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Is is such a stretch to assume that the signing of Bo has been a decision they (Bo/Agent/Family/NHL) have been mudling over for awhile now? No, it's not. When I talked to Hakstol on July 9, the day he was named head coach, he said there was a possibility that one or two players might turn pro before the season started. But he also said that he expected any signings that might happen to occur within the next month. We're well beyond that now and we still don't know for certain whether Bochenski will be back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm567b27 Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Continue the tirade after we get a bit more info. I think I stated exactly this ohhh about three weeks ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Though trying to become a free agent would make a lot more sense for him than Vanek... Not trying to flame here, just wondering what your rationale for this is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 (edited) Not trying to flame here, just wondering what your rationale for this is? I think it makes sense, but is highly unlikely. Bo is too old for MJ. The rationale is that, if Bo became a free agent, the highest bidder would get his services. Services, mind you, that have been far better than projected when he was drafted by the Sens. Therefore, it is possible for him to get much more money than what would normally be allotted for a seventh rounder. Edit: As for Vanek, sagard is right. Bo would benefit more from becoming a free agent than Vanek would because of Bo's performance. Bo was expected to perform like a developmental player befitting a seventh rounder. He has, IMO, exceeded those expectations greatly. Vanek had a great freshman campaign, but his sophomore performance was, at best, lack luster. His stock, if it has moved at all, has probably fallen a little bit. Though the "decline" is very gradual and not too alarming for either party, a decline is still a decline. Bo's stock is rising. Vanek's is stagnating or maybe declining somewhat. For that reason, it is more beneficial for Vanek to either stay in the Twin Cities or jet off to Europe rather than become a free agent. Likewise, Bo's stock is rising, so it would be more beneficial for him to, somehow, become a free agent. Edited August 19, 2004 by redwing77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Not trying to flame here, just wondering what your rationale for this is? My main thought (though it is not original) is that in the past the NHL has allowed players to enter the league under the CBA of which they were drafted. For Vanek, becoming a free agent would likely mean entering the league under the new CBA. Not a good thing for him as I'm sure there will be limits placed on rookie free agents. With BB, he is a 7th round pick and basically has to take what he is offered. If he were to become a free agent he could probably get a much larger first contract even under the new CBA. BB has clearly shown a lot more potential than most 7th rounders and wants to be paid accordingly. Ottawa obviously wants him to take low round draft pick money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamStrait Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 ...in the past the NHL has allowed players to enter the league under the CBA of which they were drafted... Interesting. I did not know this. I just assumed they were signed under the CBA in force at the time of signing, not at the time they were drafted. I suppose this may be a point of emphasis for the owners to get this changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted August 25, 2004 Share Posted August 25, 2004 This was posted by Clayton Hoyt on the Ziggy thread but wanted to bring this quote over to this thread. Bo Gone "We basically knew he wouldn't be back, so we've planned for him not returning. He's been a good soldier who has had some good success. That's a credit to Brandon and to the program." For those who think Brandon left the team in a bad spot....... 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.