Week #4....The Devils and Vegas....

[Sioux>Bison]

3 hours ago, farce poobah said:

(Trying to make lemonade from lemons here …)

this game was a fabulous sales pitch from the NCHC to Arizona State U hockey.   As far as hockey support goes, “the big time” means NCHC.  As far as championships go, that also means NCHC.  
 

quick math … adding ASU to NCHC would almost double total enrollment of the conference. 

Good defense won us a title in 2016, we seem to have forgotten how to play defense this year…..

[Sweethockey]

26 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

The 2016 title team was explosive on offense. It was built by Hak and coached by Berry. So I think the answer is more complicated than that.

The 2016 title team had finishers and not just one or two. I remember wanting to beat my head into a wall watching Hakstol's team play before Christmas. The New Year would roll around and everything would be right in the world of hockey.

[TheFlop]

33 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

The 2016 title team was explosive on offense. It was built by Hak and coached by Berry. So I think the answer is more complicated than that.

In all fairness, Hak couldn't win with Hak guys so it'd kind of unfair to ding Berry on that argument alone. 

[Green Banner]

1 hour ago, TheFlop said:

In all fairness, Hak couldn't win with Hak guys so it'd kind of unfair to ding Berry on that argument alone. 

Exactly, let's go find the Fire Hak thread. The whole Berry won with Haks guys argument is kinda lame too. Hak has final say but all the coach's recruit and have input. 

[SKondrashkin]

3 hours ago, fightingsioux4life said:

The 2016 title team was explosive on offense. It was built by Hak and coached by Berry. So I think the answer is more complicated than that.

  

The 2016 team had 1 line who could score on any regular basis; the CSB trio.   The remaining key forwards were essentially grinders who could only score 20-25 pts in their best season (Chyzyk, Johnson, Gardner, Poganski, Sanderson).

The core of that championship team was the insanely deep D-core.  I mean they made Cam Johnson look like Patrick Roy that season.   

[SIOUXFAN97]

6 hours ago, 90siouxfan said:

I've been wondering if our scoring woes are tied to both Berry and Hakstol being defensemen and the emphasis on defensive responsibilities that is required in the NHL.  Could this have slowly dampened high end scorers that thrive on creativity from coming here?

yes.

[hockeytherapy13]

4 hours ago, TheFlop said:

In all fairness, Hak couldn't win with Hak guys so it'd kind of unfair to ding Berry on that argument alone. 

Hak made it to 7 frozen fours in 11 years. Hak's teams never missed the NCAA tourney, not once. Also during the 11 years at the helm no D-1 team won more games than we did. We have 1 NCAA win since our natty (although we probably would have won somewhere between 1-4 in 2020 that got cancelled). We rarely if ever got swept at home under Hak. I'm not a Berry hater, nor am I saying we should fire him. But Hak's track record for making and having success in the tourney was better. Keep in mind we had a few NCAA frozen four games where we were the much better team and lost because hockey is hockey.

Some of the games we've seen lately have included us getting fewer than 20 shots in regulation in 3 straight games. That's a problem. I still think we get better because we are too good on paper to not come along but the coaches need to make some huge changes.

[SIOUXELEVENS]

We looked worn out , tired compared to other teams. Does this team not do drills anymore , up and backs etc. 

[scpa0305]

58 minutes ago, hockeytherapy13 said:

Hak made it to 7 frozen fours in 11 years. Hak's teams never missed the NCAA tourney, not once. Also during the 11 years at the helm no D-1 team won more games than we did. We have 1 NCAA win since our natty (although we probably would have won somewhere between 1-4 in 2020 that got cancelled). We rarely if ever got swept at home under Hak. I'm not a Berry hater, nor am I saying we should fire him. But Hak's track record for making and having success in the tourney was better. Keep in mind we had a few NCAA frozen four games where we were the much better team and lost because hockey is hockey.

Some of the games we've seen lately have included us getting fewer than 20 shots in regulation in 3 straight games. That's a problem. I still think we get better because we are too good on paper to not come along but the coaches need to make some huge changes.

You’re comparing Berry to one of the very best Und coaches though, at least from an accolades standpoint. That’s a tough draw.

I still believe it’s early and he does have a natty (even if it was Hak’s squad…you still have to win which Hak never did).

If we don’t make the tourney or we get bounced round 1…then we can start questioning what’s going on. 2016 is getting fairly dated conserving the only win since then was a 1 vs 16 seed (I believe).

[UNDBIZ]

On 10/31/2022 at 8:04 AM, The Sicatoka said:

Unpopular take, but here it is: 

No more destination games. 

It's too much about the destination and not enough about the game. 

Team wants to play somewhere nice?  Make the Frozen Four.

[UNDBIZ]

On 10/29/2022 at 11:32 PM, Oxbow6 said:

Cue the Boo Berry cereal post? Or too soon?

On 10/29/2022 at 11:38 PM, Oxbow6 said:

[brianvf]

1 hour ago, UNDBIZ said:

Team wants to play somewhere nice?  Make the Frozen Four.

I like it. 
New destination game format for the team.  Make the F4, go to that destination to play a game or two (hopefully two).

[siouxkid12]

On 10/31/2022 at 1:39 PM, Siouxperman8 said:

I know this is an..... 'I heard it from a guy who heard it from a guy' but I was told about a week ago that we are headed there eventually.  I'm not a fan of that but its what I heard. 

The guy that told me is very well connected with the hockey program and he wouldn't say who it was that told him but only said the source is very high up.   whatever that means. 

I imagine that the $$$ would be the draw. Within a few years each fully participating B1G school will get around $100M annually from their new TV contract.   I assume we'd be hockey only and get a small sliver but even that could be a relatively big number.  

Not happening. As an affiliate member we MIGHT get a very small percent of money but that would have to be negotiated before joining, otherwise we get jack. Also, we would have to play by B10 rules when it comes to conference play. I don't know about you but I don't want Thursday night or Sunday afternoon games because of football. 

[siouxkid12]

19 hours ago, hockeytherapy13 said:

Hak made it to 7 frozen fours in 11 years. Hak's teams never missed the NCAA tourney, not once. Also during the 11 years at the helm no D-1 team won more games than we did. We have 1 NCAA win since our natty (although we probably would have won somewhere between 1-4 in 2020 that got cancelled). We rarely if ever got swept at home under Hak. I'm not a Berry hater, nor am I saying we should fire him. But Hak's track record for making and having success in the tourney was better. Keep in mind we had a few NCAA frozen four games where we were the much better team and lost because hockey is hockey.

Some of the games we've seen lately have included us getting fewer than 20 shots in regulation in 3 straight games. That's a problem. I still think we get better because we are too good on paper to not come along but the coaches need to make some huge changes.

This notion that we would have won had the 2020 season not gotten cancelled needs to stop. Were we the best team in the regular season for college hockey that year? Yes we were but that's all we can say is that. As you all know the NCAA tournament is never a sure thing and we could've easily lost in the first round.

I am not a huge Berry fan but who do you think recruited those kids that played on the 2016 team? Also, if we get rid of Berry, who do we get? Dane? Karl? Sorry, but those two don't seem like head coaching material to me.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

19 hours ago, hockeytherapy13 said:

Hak made it to 7 frozen fours in 11 years. Hak's teams never missed the NCAA tourney, not once. Also during the 11 years at the helm no D-1 team won more games than we did. We have 1 NCAA win since our natty (although we probably would have won somewhere between 1-4 in 2020 that got cancelled). We rarely if ever got swept at home under Hak. I'm not a Berry hater, nor am I saying we should fire him. But Hak's track record for making and having success in the tourney was better. Keep in mind we had a few NCAA frozen four games where we were the much better team and lost because hockey is hockey.

Some of the games we've seen lately have included us getting fewer than 20 shots in regulation in 3 straight games. That's a problem. I still think we get better because we are too good on paper to not come along but the coaches need to make some huge changes.

The funny thing is the posters on this site wanted Hak fired and used these exact same statistics but in a negative way.  We've come full circle.  

[SIOUXELEVENS]

I have said this before but I believe Berry is just too nice of a guy to be head coach, perfect assistant because he can be the players friend but as head coach he needs to make tough calls which he doesn’t seem to want to rock the boat. Example when Rhett Gardner was here terrible penalties and poor play yet he stayed top six till the very end of the year when he finally got sat for one game. 

[Kab]

So how does this team start playing with more flow and get shots on the net

why can teams clog us up

or don’t we have play makers 

asking for myself cause I don’t know much about hockey 

[The Sicatoka]

Can we finally start worrying about Omaha? 

[stoneySIOUX]

1 hour ago, SIOUXELEVENS said:

I have said this before but I believe Berry is just too nice of a guy to be head coach, perfect assistant because he can be the players friend but as head coach he needs to make tough calls which he doesn’t seem to want to rock the boat. Example when Rhett Gardner was here terrible penalties and poor play yet he stayed top six till the very end of the year when he finally got sat for one game. 

So, your example was a single one from 4 seasons ago?

Some around here don't recognize that that the tough guy mentality isn't prevalent in coaching anymore. Bubbs is always juggling line combos and trying new guys in new places, so I am not sure where this "tough calls" discussion is coming from. We're 7 games into the season. What "tough call" does he need make at this point? Sitting Judd? Or, maybe you roll with a guy you're sure about even if he's struggling. Try and build his confidence since he's a leader on the team?

Yet again, our fanbase wants our coach fired. And 7 games into the season in which we're 3-3-1, no less. In the same season where we've split (yes, I understand the QU Friday game) against two top 5 teams. 

[The Sicatoka]

43 minutes ago, stoneySIOUX said:

Yet again, our fanbase wants our coach fired. 

If a coach is let go it'd better be for clear, concise reasons. 

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

The major issue this year (conceding leads) is on the players, especially the leadership. 

[scpa0305]

3 hours ago, siouxkid12 said:

This notion that we would have won had the 2020 season not gotten cancelled needs to stop. Were we the best team in the regular season for college hockey that year? Yes we were but that's all we can say is that. As you all know the NCAA tournament is never a sure thing and we could've easily lost in the first round.

I am not a huge Berry fan but who do you think recruited those kids that played on the 2016 team? Also, if we get rid of Berry, who do we get? Dane? Karl? Sorry, but those two don't seem like head coaching material to me.

We brought everyone back in 2021 and still lost.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

1 hour ago, stoneySIOUX said:

So, your example was a single one from 4 seasons ago?

Some around here don't recognize that that the tough guy mentality isn't prevalent in coaching anymore. Bubbs is always juggling line combos and trying new guys in new places, so I am not sure where this "tough calls" discussion is coming from. We're 7 games into the season. What "tough call" does he need make at this point? Sitting Judd? Or, maybe you roll with a guy you're sure about even if he's struggling. Try and build his confidence since he's a leader on the team?

Yet again, our fanbase wants our coach fired. And 7 games into the season in which we're 3-3-1, no less. In the same season where we've split (yes, I understand the QU Friday game) against two top 5 teams. 

It's this board's default every time there's any sort of bump in the road and it's so played out and tired.  Back-to-Back-to-Back Conference Champs in what is definitively the toughest conference in college hockey, Bubs is not going anywhere soon. 

[stoneySIOUX]

18 minutes ago, InHeavenThereIsNoBeer said:

It's this board's default every time there's any sort of bump in the road and it's so played out and tired.  Back-to-Back-to-Back Conference Champs in what is definitively the toughest conference in college hockey, Bubs is not going anywhere soon. 

Nor should he.

[SIOUXELEVENS]

So we are all ok with crappy play, no hustle , getting out worked in most games , sorry this falls on Berry. I don’t think he should be fired but at lest look in the mirror and do some self reflection. He worked for Blais and Hkstol and played for Gino he should be able to change thinks not just keep the status quo. How about a current example Frisch and Kleven are struggling but yet they are still together and first set of D , why ? If it doesn’t work figure it out Berry and staff.