PCM Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 (edited) Disclaimer: This is a summary of the weekly Fighting Sioux Coaches Show. It is NOT a verbatim transcript of the show. Comments by the show's hosts and the coaches are paraphrased to the best of the author's ability and are NOT direct quotes. This summary contains selected highlights from the show and is NOT a comprehensive account of all topics covered or discussed. This broadcast summary represents the interpretation of the author and is not associated in any manner with SiouxSports.com, the University of North Dakota or U.S. College Hockey Online. This summary MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED without the written permission of the author. From the Green Mill, Tim Hennessy is the host with Sioux hockey coach Dave Hakstol. TH: The Sioux will close out their regular season against Michigan Tech with nothing resolved in playoffs. You could be playing SCSU here or SCSU there or MS-Mankato here. DH: There Edited March 2, 2006 by PCM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 TH: George Gwozdecky was certainly entertaining on Friday night. What was that about? DH: I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Sioux-cia, what he meant was that the WCHA apologized on behalf of Todd Anderson to TH personally. Seriously, I don't understand it except it was true. Anyways, Thanks PCM as always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Hakstol was clear that the officials did not cost the Sioux the game on Saturday. He wasn't happy about a few of the calls down the stretch, but he said it is a rare occasion when an official costs a team a game. I'm not so sure I totally agree with that assessment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianvf Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 First off, thanks again, as always PCM. It is most appreciated! DH: Maybe if things are going badly for us on Friday, I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 First off, thanks again, as always PCM. It is most appreciated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 I said Gwoz act was to get his players motivated. That was certainly part of it. But he was also genuinely upset about Prpich's slash to Paukovich's nads that went uncalled. I thought it was interesting that Hennessy and Hakstol acted as if the reason for Gwozdecky's anger was a complete mystery to them. Maybe it was, but I find that rather difficult to believe. Sounds like Hak believes it was to get the refs on his side.I think that was the net effect, judging from the calls and non-calls on Saturday. Also sounds like he believes the refs won he game, not the Pios. Hak didn't actually say that. He said that because the Sioux took so many legitimate penalties (including Finley's checking from behind), they put themselves in a bad position to kill off the penalties they received late in the game. He said that was their own fault. I don't understand TH's comment. Because the league said the officiating wasn't that good, there'd be no consequences to Gwoz. What the hell?!? I'd interpret that as Greg Shepherd believing that Gwozdecky had good reason to be upset with the officiating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrkac Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Why would the pros want Stafford or Zajac next year? both of them have yet to consistantly take over games at the college level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okok Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Why would the pros want Stafford or Zajac next year? both of them have yet to consistantly take over games at the college level. conrtol of rights?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxTupa Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I think Hak has really gotten comfortable. Blatantly calling DU penalties "dives" does not happen often. His coaches shows, as a result, are much more informative and entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I'd interpret that as Greg Shepherd believing that Gwozdecky had good reason to be upset with the officiating. That's the way I took it. Amazing that Gwoz can throw a fit and get that kind of result from Shepherd and officials. Any other coach would probably get suspended for a few extra games. IMO, when the Sioux and fans complained excessively a couple years ago (by emails, etc) after the holding, tackling, and ride time by Denver and UAA in series at the Ralph, the following games were ridiculous in that the Sioux were called for a multitude of weanie penalties, many of them holding. Couldn't help but believe that Shepherd was trying to prove a point, "you guys hold, too". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 That was certainly part of it. But he was also genuinely upset about Prpich's slash to Paukovich's nads that went uncalled. I thought it was interesting that Hennessy and Hakstol acted as if the reason for Gwozdecky's anger was a complete mystery to them. Maybe it was, but I find that rather difficult to believe. I think that was the net effect, judging from the calls and non-calls on Saturday. Hak didn't actually say that. He said that because the Sioux took so many legitimate penalties (including Finley's checking from behind), they put themselves in a bad position to kill off the penalties they received late in the game. He said that was their own fault. I'd interpret that as Greg Shepherd believing that Gwozdecky had good reason to be upset with the officiating. Could be that Hennessy and Hakstol saw the tap to the cup the same way I do; happens more than once in every game. No reason to go ape $hit over it. Hak did say the Sioux put themselves in a bad position but he also said the the officiating didn't cost DU the game on Friday. I take that to mean that the officiating also had a part in our loss on Saturday. So if Shepard believes the officiating was bad, I wonder if he's going to do anything about it? Yeah right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I think Hak has really gotten comfortable. Blatantly calling DU penalties "dives" does not happen often. His coaches shows, as a result, are much more informative and entertaining.Yes, it's great to read/listen to Hak because we're getting a little bit more of the "unvarnished truth". (where is that guy, anyway?) TH: Some of the players were saying that Michigan Tech hasn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7 Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 What's even more concerning is that later in that period Punko tried to flat out hurt Oshie just because of the fact that Oshie out-worked him and stole the puck from him. Ramming him head-first into the boards and then slamming him down simply because he got outworked? The kid has a serious, serious problem. I predict that he will eventually seroiusly hurt someone someday. Prpch is just annoying. Pauko is a viscious player and has not place on the ice. His track record speaks for itself. The kid is a loser period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxnami Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Ramming him head-first into the boards I would say checking him from behind into the boards... Edit: Thanks PCM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7 Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I would say checking him from behind into the boards... Edit: Thanks PCM Well he had him in a headlock. Regardless he is a disgrace to the game. I truly believe he only wants to physically hurt people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxTupa Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 What's even more concerning is that later in that period Punko tried to flat out hurt Oshie just because of the fact that Oshie out-worked him and stole the puck from him. Ramming him head-first into the boards and then slamming him down simply because he got outworked? The kid has a serious, serious problem. I predict that he will eventually seroiusly hurt someone someday. Prpch is just annoying. Pauko is a viscious player and has not place on the ice. His track record speaks for itself. The kid is a loser period. Bold prediction... So his hit on Bina was just a tickle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fighting Sioux Fan Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Uhh, didn't he already seriously hurt someone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDLAW Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Last week's officiating was about par for WCHA officials. Admit their mistakes by make-ups later in the game/series. However, the 3rd period calls were 1/2 the Sioux and 1/2 officiating. Either way, we can't let it come down to the refs against Tech. Put as many shots on goal as possible against Tech and let our "better" players bang in the rebounds or otherwise capitalize on defensive mistakes and stay out of the box. I honestly believe that if we can limit our penalties to 10 minutes or less (with no 5 minute penalites), we WILL (not just CAN) beat anyone in the country even strength with the "talent" (i.e. potential shown thus far) on this team... 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.