Und Princess Posted August 4 Posted August 4 1 minute ago, brianvf said: Nice, good for Karl. He should do well for them! Good Luck to Karl!!! He should do FANTASTIC for the Tommies. 2 Quote
cberkas Posted August 5 Author Posted August 5 On 8/4/2025 at 6:42 AM, sioux rube said: Now official Quote
AlphaMikeFoxtrot Posted August 7 Posted August 7 McMahon's newsletter has info on McQueen's package and maybe some details on Spicer if anyone gets it. I should probably just subscribe, he's gotten away from his Merrimack and HE focus. Quote
atxsioux Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Below is the apparent NIL package. (Or it may be rev-share? McMahon says both terms so not 100% sure. Since Providence doesn't have a football team I wouldn't be shocked if they put most of their rev share money into basketball and hockey.) McQueen had been heavily pursued by multiple programs across the country. According to sources, his total NIL package is believed to be in the range of $100,000 to $150,000 — a figure that has become typical for players selected in the top half of the first round. 1 Quote
atxsioux Posted August 7 Posted August 7 With the Big 10 going to the new playoff format any thoughts on the NCHC doing the same? The travel is a little more spread out but personally I'd still rather the NCHC copy the Big 10. (9th and 10th place teams can kick rocks, play better) If you get eliminated on the Wednesday quarter final game it's at least close to losing a game on a Friday, throw in a bye week, then it's tourney time. (And if you play on Thursday to open the NCAAs it's almost exactly the same timing as a typical bye week during the season) ***For those that aren't caught up Big 10 is now doing below playoff format: Week 1 Quarter-finals Wednesday Semi-finals Saturday Week 2 Championship Friday/Saturday (Exact date I'm assuming that is up to the host school? not sure) Quote
Godsmack Posted August 7 Posted August 7 https://cctigers.com/news/2025/8/7/mens-ice-hockey-mayotte-announces-2025-26-incoming-class.aspx Quote
Big Green Posted August 8 Posted August 8 20 hours ago, atxsioux said: With the Big 10 going to the new playoff format any thoughts on the NCHC doing the same? The travel is a little more spread out but personally I'd still rather the NCHC copy the Big 10. (9th and 10th place teams can kick rocks, play better) If you get eliminated on the Wednesday quarter final game it's at least close to losing a game on a Friday, throw in a bye week, then it's tourney time. (And if you play on Thursday to open the NCAAs it's almost exactly the same timing as a typical bye week during the season) ***For those that aren't caught up Big 10 is now doing below playoff format: Week 1 Quarter-finals Wednesday Semi-finals Saturday Week 2 Championship Friday/Saturday (Exact date I'm assuming that is up to the host school? not sure) Not a big fan of Wednesday hockey, but better than having an extra week off or only playing 1 game the whole week. I would prefer: Week 1 -best of 3 Quarter-finals Week 2 -Semi-Finals Thursday -Championship Saturday. Oh and the 9th and 10th place teams. Grab the Golf clubs a week early 1 Quote
Und Princess Posted August 8 Posted August 8 1 minute ago, Big Green said: Not a big fan of Wednesday hockey, but better than having an extra week off or only playing 1 game the whole week. I would prefer: Week 1 -best of 3 Quarter-finals Week 2 -Semi-Finals Thursday -Championship Saturday. Oh and the 9th and 10th place teams. Grab the Golf clubs a week early I'm not a fan of Wednesday hockey because it's a school/work night for most folks. And usually people like to go out after the game. Quote
atxsioux Posted August 8 Posted August 8 10 minutes ago, Big Green said: Not a big fan of Wednesday hockey, but better than having an extra week off or only playing 1 game the whole week. I would prefer: Week 1 -best of 3 Quarter-finals Week 2 -Semi-Finals Thursday -Championship Saturday. Oh and the 9th and 10th place teams. Grab the Golf clubs a week early Unfortunately don't think they could make Thursday and Saturday work because they're too close together to book travel etc for the championship game on Saturday 1 Quote
Big Green Posted August 8 Posted August 8 2 hours ago, atxsioux said: Unfortunately don't think they could make Thursday and Saturday work because they're too close together to book travel etc for the championship game on Saturday I'm not buying that. If the Big Ten can get 4 teams to where they need to go with a Wednesday/Saturday game the NCHC can get 1 team where they need to go with Thursday/Saturday. If they need to do Wednesday/Saturday so be it, but I think Thursday/Saturday is plenty of time. Quote
brianvf Posted August 9 Posted August 9 I feel that UNO can go one of two ways this season. Either all those USports kids work out ok (which might cause other NCAA schools to follow their lead), or it's gonna blow up in their faces. I feel like it'll be one of those two...no in between. But to say that UNO defense compares to UND's this year...that might be a bit of a reach. 1 Quote
cberkas Posted August 9 Author Posted August 9 2 minutes ago, brianvf said: I feel that UNO can go one of two ways this season. Either all those USports kids work out ok (which might cause other NCAA schools to follow their lead), or it's gonna blow up in their faces. I feel like it'll be one of those two...no in between. But to say that UNO defense compares to UND's this year...that might be a bit of a reach. I'm not very high on Omaha this year, most years they play like the 4-5th best team. This USports move feel like when they didn't do a coaching search because they allegedly didn't have them money to hire Hastings (who wanted the job). Quote
hockeytherapy13 Posted August 11 Posted August 11 On 8/9/2025 at 3:38 PM, cberkas said: I'm not very high on Omaha this year, most years they play like the 4-5th best team. This USports move feel like when they didn't do a coaching search because they allegedly didn't have them money to hire Hastings (who wanted the job). I think they are going to be better than last year. They essentially are grabbing the best players from those teams and will have all older guys that know how to play hard and structured. They are also all going to have some form of chip on their shoulder to prove that they can play US NCAA D1. I don't care for Omaha because I think their fans are whiny. I think Stu is a smart coach and seems to get good production out of what he has. But in my opinion he's a bit of a poor sport and seems to like a little gamesmanship but idk if that's in my head or not. 4 Quote
siouxforce19 Posted August 11 Posted August 11 On 8/9/2025 at 3:32 PM, brianvf said: I feel that UNO can go one of two ways this season. Either all those USports kids work out ok (which might cause other NCAA schools to follow their lead), or it's gonna blow up in their faces. I feel like it'll be one of those two...no in between. But to say that UNO defense compares to UND's this year...that might be a bit of a reach. I had to look up who was even on their D after I saw this. Quote
cberkas Posted August 13 Author Posted August 13 Quote Face mask penalty Adjustments to the face mask rule's penalty structure include: A minor penalty for intentionally placing the hand on the mask and pushing the face mask of an opponent. A minor penalty for moving an open hand back and forth across an opponent's face mask (previously a major penalty). Major penalty and either a game misconduct or game disqualification at the referee's discretion for a player grasping and pulling or twisting to control an opponent's face mask. Major penalty review options When the on-ice officials are planning to enforce a major penalty, a replay review must be conducted in games that have instant replay. The panel approved adjusting the rule regarding video reviews of major penalties. After the review, on-ice officials will have three options: Confirm a major penalty. Reduce the major penalty to a minor penalty. Remove the penalty completely, if warranted by the video review. Teams are not permitted to challenge the result of the review. High-sticking the puck The panel approved clarifying the rule on high-sticking the puck by separating the scoring of a goal (puck may not be played higher than 4 feet, which is the height of the crossbar) and all other plays (puck may not be played higher than above a player's shoulder, which is defined as that player's normal standing height). This is an adjustment from last season, when the rule did not include the "player's normal standing height." 1 Quote
atxsioux Posted August 13 Posted August 13 38 minutes ago, cberkas said: Wait so they changed the high stick rule for goals back down to the crossbar height? (shoulder height seemed alot easier for everyone + the refs to determine IMO) Quote
Popular Post brianvf Posted August 14 Popular Post Posted August 14 It might just be because I don't really care about Denver, but those seem to look exactly like their old jerseys. 5 Quote
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.