UND @ CC -- Friday Gameday

[gfhockey]

What would you rather have 200 wins or three or four titles?

[Hawkster]

2 minutes ago, gfhockey said:

What would you rather have 200 wins or three or four titles?

Yes

[gfhockey]

8 minutes ago, Hawkster said:

Yes

Do we hang banners for that?

 

i think the teams goals are to win nattys pal

[fightingsioux4life]

49 minutes ago, gfhockey said:

What would you rather have 200 wins or three or four titles?

That is a false choice. When Boston College won 3 titles in 5 years (2008-2012), they did not have mediocre regular seasons during their title years. That being said, there were people on here who argued it was better to have our Frozen Four appearances than those 3 titles because BC failed to make the tournament the other two years (2009 and 2011). Which I felt was a preposterous argument and the height of homerism and sugar-coating failure.

Bottom line: Successful regular seasons make it easier to win nattys. And nattys are what people remember and are what builds a program's national reputation. Is that a good thing or even a healthy thing? I don't know. But it's an undeniable fact and we can't ignore it and tell ourselves it doesn't matter. We are falling behind in the natty race and we need to take the sport by the neck like we used to.

[gfhockey]

8 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

That is a false choice. When Boston College won 3 titles in 5 years (2008-2012), they did not have mediocre regular seasons during their title years. That being said, there were people on here who argued it was better to have our Frozen Four appearances than those 3 titles because BC failed to make the tournament the other two years (2009 and 2011). Which I felt was a preposterous argument and the height of homerism and sugar-coating failure.

Bottom line: Successful regular seasons make it easier to win nattys. And nattys are what people remember and are what builds a program's national reputation. Is that a good thing or even a healthy thing? I don't know. But it's an undeniable fact and we can't ignore it and tell ourselves it doesn't matter. We are falling behind in the natty race and we need to take the sport by the neck like we used to.

It seems here people are content just winning regular season games and ok with missing playoffs or one and dine

[fightingsioux4life]

Just now, gfhockey said:

It seems here people are content just winning regular season games and ok with missing playoffs or one and dine

Exactly. You and I obviously are not in that camp.

[brianvf]

1 minute ago, gfhockey said:

It seems here people are content just winning regular season games and ok with missing playoffs or one and dine

Ah yes, the mythical fans that people always talk about that seem content with losing...yet we never see these supposed fans.

[Goon]

20 minutes ago, brianvf said:

Ah yes, the mythical fans that people always talk about that seem content with losing...yet we never see these supposed fans.

I don’t think anyone is content with losing. UND is 20-8-2; that’s not a losing record, and the season isn't over; there's still a lot of hockey to be played. However, it appears some are moving the goalposts around or are just here to troll and get a rise out of people. Winning the NCHC isn’t easy, sometimes I wonder if winning the Penrose comes with a cost. The teams that some have pointed to have also missed the NCAA playoffs, DU and UMD both have, recently. In fact, the Bulldogs are on the cusp of missing for a second year in a row. If Sandy was the coach here he would’ve been run out of town before he ever got to the point of winning an NCAA title. 

[Godsmack]

I will be at the Friday night CC/UNO game at Baxter Arena. It’ll be interesting to see how Omaha game plans against CC. It’ll also be interesting to see if CC has any sort of emotional let down against the Mavs. Something tells me that, win or lose, Mayotte’s going to have his boys prepared and will continue to play well. They’re now in the hunt for the Penrose, not to mention, cannot afford to risk losses down the stretch as they’re still in that danger zone Pairwise speaking. 

[fightingsioux4life]

1 minute ago, Goon said:

I don’t think anyone is content with losing. UND is 20-8-2, that’s not a losing record. However, it appears some are moving the goalposts around or are just here to troll and get a rise out of people. Winning the NCHC isn’t easy, sometimes I wonder if winning the Penrose comes with a cost. The teams that some have pointed to have also missed the NCAA playoffs DU and UMD both have. In fact the Bulldogs are on the cusp of missing for a second year in a row. If Sandy was the coach here he would’ve been run out of town before he ever got to the point of winning an NCAA title. 

The goalposts are the same for me all the time: Win the Penrose, do the best you can at the Frozen Faceoff and win the natty. Obviously no team will do all of those things every year, but we have one NCAA win since 2016 (AIC in 2021) and we struggled the last two periods of that game after building a lead. That is what has people restless and I am one of them. Recruiting has picked up and we have a good pipeline for the next couple of years. But at some point, we have to cash in. If this team pulls a disappearing act like the 2022 team (which had a lot less talent than this team), it will be the most disappointing team in recent memory. The next 6 games will determine which trajectory this team will take.

[Sioux>Bison]

On 2/17/2024 at 7:50 PM, burd said:

tired bit

We are a tired fanbase, some of you are getting soft

[Sioux>Bison]

6 hours ago, Goon said:

I am confused reading the comments on the fan message board. I’ve determined that the UND coaching staff is average at best. Keep in mind, the head coach just surpassed the 200 win mark. He's 200-100-33 (.656) as a head coach. That’s absolutely brutal. Why hasn’t he been fired yet? 
 

I’ll drop this here. 

Winning 2/3 of your games might be good enough for some programs it isn’t here. We barely have made a playoff run in the last decade. That’s not good by Sioux standards……

Maybe the 3rd best coach in the NCHC

[Sioux>Bison]

2 hours ago, gfhockey said:

What would you rather have 200 wins or three or four titles?

I’d take 2 titles over 200 wins. Heck I’d trade every Penrose and 200 wins for another natty

[Hawkster]

2 hours ago, gfhockey said:

Do we hang banners for that?

 

i think the teams goals are to win nattys pal

I want both.  You asked about one or the other, I said YES.

[Sioux>Bison]

6 hours ago, Goon said:

I am confused reading the comments on the fan message board. I’ve determined that the UND coaching staff is average at best. Keep in mind, the head coach just surpassed the 200 win mark. He's 200-100-33 (.656) as a head coach. That’s absolutely brutal. Why hasn’t he been fired yet? 
 

I’ll drop this here. 

Winning 2/3 of your games is pretty good and the expectation if you are UND football. That not good enough for the hockey team. Making the tournament should be the bare minimum every year. Making a deep run is always expected. This coaching staff has under performed and it is remarkable all the people who come on this board to make excuses for them. We might as well shift funding to football if we can’t see any results!

[fightingsioux4life]

39 minutes ago, Hawkster said:

I want both.  You asked about one or the other, I said YES.

That is where I am as well.

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

53 minutes ago, Sioux>Bison said:

Winning 2/3 of your games is pretty good and the expectation if you are UND football. That not good enough for the hockey team. Making the tournament should be the bare minimum every year. Making a deep run is always expected. This coaching staff has under performed and it is remarkable all the people who come on this board to make excuses for them. We might as well shift funding to football if we can’t see any results!

Comparing hockey and football is silly, especially in the NCAA. Much harder for the lesser team to manage an upset in football than hockey.

Question for everybody, what % of hockey games does the better team win? I can think of some games this year where UND was not the better team, but found a way to win.

[90siouxfan]

1 hour ago, Sioux>Bison said:

We are a tired fanbase, some of you are getting soft

Nah, you're just an arse and look down your nose at everyone else.

[Big A HG]

5 hours ago, Goon said:

Berry was in charge of recruiting under Hakstol. 

 

I've said this before and I'll say it again since it's an easy out but does very little to justify your point.  Berry, Dane, Karl, Cary, etc....any of the assistants past or present all go on the recruiting trail.  They are often the first point of contact and ultimately the main point of contact until on campus.  But, ultimately, the head coach is one of the many key reasons a player will choose a program.  They aren't choosing it for a particular assistant coach or because Berry is recruiting them.  Do you think Berry is going to the recruits home and saying "boy, I sure want you to be here, but I'm not sure Dave Hakstol does...want to play for UND?"  No.  Just like a football player would have wanted to go to Alabama to play under Saban, despite Saban not being the one to necessarily recruit that player.  The player is still going there to play under Saban and increase his chances to make the next level.  The more important the player, the more the head coach will be involved in that recruiting, but it's largely the assistants at any program doing said recruiting.  It's still Hak's recruit because he's the head of household in which that player wants to go play for.  Did Berry play a part?  Sure.  But, the players committed to the program to play for Hakstol who was highly-regarded at all levels of hockey for his coaching.  You don't hear that about Berry and you certainly don't see the same level of recruits coming in anymore either. 

 

If Berry was such a master recruiter, why did Hakstol do so well recruiting before Cary left and he arrived?  If Berry is such a master recruiter, why are Berry's commitments not to the level of his own recruiting while Hakstol was coach?  Answer:  2015-16 was ultimately Hakstol's recruits whether or not Berry was the one recruiting.

[Big A HG]

40 minutes ago, AlphaMikeFoxtrot said:

Question for everybody, what % of hockey games does the better team win? I can think of some games this year where UND was not the better team, but found a way to win.

 

Regular season is too hard to judge who is good and who is not when looking at first half games, which makes it an overall too difficult of a question to answer.  So...
 

What's Berry's record as the favorite and what's his record as the underdog in post-season play in one-and-done games?  

 

2016:  6-1 as favorite (1-1 NCHC, 4-0 NCAA) // no underdog games
2017:  no games as favorite // 1-2 as underdog (1-1 NCHC, 0-1 NCAA)
2018:  no games as favorite // 0-1 as underdog (0-1 NCHC, missed NCAA)
2019:  none (missed both NCHC and NCAA tournaments)
2020:  none (covid)
2021:  3-1 as favorite (2-0 NCHC, 1-1 NCAA) // no underdog games
2022:  0-2 as favorite (0-1 NCHC, 0-1 NCAA) // no underdog games
2023:  no games as favorite // 0-1 as underdog (0-1 NCHC, missed NCAA)

*Third place NCHC games not counted

 

So, Berry is 9-4 as the favorite and 1-4 as the underdog.  Keep in mind, the more you win, the more games you get, so naturally there will be more games recorded on the win side if you string some wins together.  

He's 5-2 as an NCAA tournament favorite, 0-1 as an underdog.  But, also keep in mind, four of those five wins were in a single tournament, 2016, when the title was won, which leaves him with a 1-2 record as a favorite since.  UND has only played four more total NCAA games under Berry's following 6 seasons (not counting 2020 as a season in that regard).  

[Big A HG]

3 hours ago, gfhockey said:

It seems here people are content just winning regular season games and ok with missing playoffs or one and dine

Not all of us.

"In combat, complacency kills people.  In business, it kills companies."  -Mike Ettore

UND hockey is combat on ice, or a hockey business.  Justifying our stagnation by defending what Berry has done with the program is what will ultimately fail it beyond what it already has.  Complacency breeds failure.  The New England Patriots have won two Super Bowls since UND last won the national championship.  Bill Belichick has four other Patriot Super Bowl victories before that.  Yet, only a handful of seasons later, Robert Kraft said enough is enough when the program started underperforming consistently.  How can Brad Berry have a longer leash than Bill Belichick?

[fightingsioux4life]

10 hours ago, Big A HG said:

 

I've said this before and I'll say it again since it's an easy out but does very little to justify your point.  Berry, Dane, Karl, Cary, etc....any of the assistants past or present all go on the recruiting trail.  They are often the first point of contact and ultimately the main point of contact until on campus.  But, ultimately, the head coach is one of the many key reasons a player will choose a program.  They aren't choosing it for a particular assistant coach or because Berry is recruiting them.  Do you think Berry is going to the recruits home and saying "boy, I sure want you to be here, but I'm not sure Dave Hakstol does...want to play for UND?"  No.  Just like a football player would have wanted to go to Alabama to play under Saban, despite Saban not being the one to necessarily recruit that player.  The player is still going there to play under Saban and increase his chances to make the next level.  The more important the player, the more the head coach will be involved in that recruiting, but it's largely the assistants at any program doing said recruiting.  It's still Hak's recruit because he's the head of household in which that player wants to go play for.  Did Berry play a part?  Sure.  But, the players committed to the program to play for Hakstol who was highly-regarded at all levels of hockey for his coaching.  You don't hear that about Berry and you certainly don't see the same level of recruits coming in anymore either. 

 

If Berry was such a master recruiter, why did Hakstol do so well recruiting before Cary left and he arrived?  If Berry is such a master recruiter, why are Berry's commitments not to the level of his own recruiting while Hakstol was coach?  Answer:  2015-16 was ultimately Hakstol's recruits whether or not Berry was the one recruiting.

I agree with your post except the bolded part above. Our recruiting has picked up the last couple of years. We have some nice players in the pipeline for the next couple of years and this year's team is the most talented since 2016. My concern now is that we will gradually fade down the stretch and have our season end in March instead of April.

[Big A HG]

13 minutes ago, fightingsioux4life said:

I agree with your post except the bolded part above. Our recruiting has picked up the last couple of years. We have some nice players in the pipeline for the next couple of years and this year's team is the most talented since 2016. My concern now is that we will gradually fade down the stretch and have our season end in March instead of April.

I don't discount that things have slightly improved, but why the sudden drop-off after our title?  You'd think that Berry would have pulled in a number of much better recruits in a shorter period of time.  And, as talented as this team is, it's really no comparison to the 2016 title team.  It only seems better because of how poor some recent rosters have been.  That 2016 team would blown the doors off of what this team is capable of IMO.  We were loaded on both offense and defense and our starting five in the championship all went on to play in the NHL.  How many NHLers are we watching on this year's team?  In the past it was never a question of if any of the guys were going to play decent NHL careers, not just get a couple of short-term call-ups...it was a question of how many. 

[fightingsioux4life]

3 hours ago, Big A HG said:

I don't discount that things have slightly improved, but why the sudden drop-off after our title?  You'd think that Berry would have pulled in a number of much better recruits in a shorter period of time.  And, as talented as this team is, it's really no comparison to the 2016 title team.  It only seems better because of how poor some recent rosters have been.  That 2016 team would blown the doors off of what this team is capable of IMO.  We were loaded on both offense and defense and our starting five in the championship all went on to play in the NHL.  How many NHLers are we watching on this year's team?  In the past it was never a question of if any of the guys were going to play decent NHL careers, not just get a couple of short-term call-ups...it was a question of how many. 

The 2016 team would blow the doors off of every team of the past 20 years or so (minus the 2011 and 2020 COVID teams). But this year's team is the best since 2020. What we look like next season and beyond will depend in part on how many guys sign early.

Edited February 20 by fightingsioux4life
Forgot 2019-2020 team.

[krustyklown]

1 hour ago, fightingsioux4life said:

The 2016 team would blow the doors off of every team of the past 20 years or so (minus the 2011 team). But this year's team is the best since 2016. What we look like next season and beyond will depend in part on how many guys sign early.

ring-ala-ding; 2020-2021 team on line 1...