NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

[Happy]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

I know it would be too much work, but I would like to see how adding in the number of All-American and Hobey winners would look. I assume they would mirror the ranking almost exactly, anyway.

And, of course, give teams that had to use over-age Canadians a large demerit.

[GopherBigGuy911]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Ha! I forgot about handi-CAPABLE.

Glad you got the joke
But seriously who here would of been OK with it if after the fall of the Wall if MN was able to convince Viacheslav Fetisov or asked Vladislav Tretiak to come out of retirement and come get a free education while playing hockey?????

[Dirty]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Glad you got the joke
But seriously who here would of been OK with it if after the fall of the Wall if MN was able to convince Viacheslav Fetisov or asked Vladislav Tretiak to come out of retirement and come get a free education while playing hockey?????

I don't think Moscow as within the Wooger's recruiting area, so I'd have been shocked if he offered. He'd probably would've made them walk-on. In which case, I'd be all for it.

[GopherBigGuy911]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

I don't think Moscow as within the Wooger's recruiting area, so I'd have been shocked if he offered. He'd probably would've made them walk-on. In which case, I'd be all for it.

Shoot Duluth was out of his recruiting area for many years

[Dirty]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Shoot Duluth was out of his recruiting area for many years

For good reason too. He breaks from the philosophy and gets Dave Spehar. What a disaster!

[Gurtholfin]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Again, I said I partially conceded the point above. I wasn't implying that using the players we did was a handicap, and I am not intending to diminish the accomplishments of teams who won championships with all variety of players. The championships themselves should count the same.

What I am saying is, these accomplishments are unique to college hockey, and were important to USA Hockey and Minnesota Hockey. An NHL commissioner (forget whom) called Minnesota's championship in 1974 at the time "arguably the most important thing to happen to USA Hockey".

These things showed American kids it wasn't just Canada's game. That US kids could compete with and beat teams with rosters heavy on Canadians.

Sincerely, I'm not trying to toot Minnesota's horn here. I know people here hate provincialism and I know I have a tendancy to be very provincial. I just don't know how else to explain what really are truths.

By recruiting primarily Minnesotans at the University of Minnesota, John Mariucci gave more opportunities to play at the next level to Minnesota kids.

During Mariucci's tenure, high school hockey programs in Minnesota grew ten fold. Thus more and more Minnesotans began to play the game.

Minnesotans comprised over half the 1960 and 1980 US Olympic Hockey rosters. These Gold Medal teams gave inspiration to play to many other kids around the country.

It's why John Mariucci is not just in the US Hockey Hall of Fame, but in THE Hockey Hall of Fame as a builder. How many other college hockey coaches are in both Halls as a builder?

The impact of Minnesota's recruiting practices WERE significant to the growth of hockey in this country. All I'm saying is that would be a factor of mine when determining Minnesota's "greatness" as a program.

6>5

[GopherBigGuy911]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

For good reason too. He breaks from the philosophy and gets Dave Spehar. What a disaster!

Yeah he was pretty much a wet fart after his Sophomore year

[JDUBBS1280]

6>5

I wrote:

"I wasn't implying that using the players we did was a handicap, and I am not intending to diminish the accomplishments of teams who won championships with all variety of players. The championships themselves should count the same."

[burd]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

I wrote:

"I wasn't implying that using the players we did was a handicap, and I am not intending to diminish the accomplishments of teams who won championships with all variety of players. The championships themselves should count the same."

It's settled then: 6>5. Or, to put it another way, 5<6.

Ergo 7>>5 and, of course 5<<7.

And logically then Fido Purpur >John Mariucci and Bob Johnson > John Mariucci.

Most likely Fido Purpur = Bob Johnson

Most important, UMinn tradition of winning fewer championships > lot of schools

[JDUBBS1280]

6>5

I also said:


What I am saying is, these accomplishments are unique to college hockey, and were important to USA Hockey and Minnesota Hockey. An NHL commissioner (forget whom) called Minnesota's championship in 1974 at the time "arguably the most important thing to happen to USA Hockey".

These things showed American kids it wasn't just Canada's game. That US kids could compete with and beat teams with rosters heavy on Canadians.

Sincerely, I'm not trying to toot Minnesota's horn here. I know people here hate provincialism and I know I have a tendancy to be very provincial. I just don't know how else to explain what really are truths.

By recruiting primarily Minnesotans at the University of Minnesota, John Mariucci gave more opportunities to play at the next level to Minnesota kids.

During Mariucci's tenure, high school hockey programs in Minnesota grew ten fold. Thus more and more Minnesotans began to play the game.

Minnesotans comprised over half the 1960 and 1980 US Olympic Hockey rosters. These Gold Medal teams gave inspiration to play to many other kids around the country.

It's why John Mariucci is not just in the US Hockey Hall of Fame, but in THE Hockey Hall of Fame as a builder. How many other college hockey coaches are in both Halls as a builder?

The impact of Minnesota's recruiting practices WERE significant to the growth of hockey in this country. All I'm saying is that would be a factor of mine when determining Minnesota's "greatness" as a program.

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

"The University of Minnesota Winning the National Championship with an all-American team was the biggest accomplishment for USA Hockey" - Clarence Campbell, Commissioner of the NHL (1946-1977).

[burd]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

I also said:


What I am saying is, these accomplishments are unique to college hockey, and were important to USA Hockey and Minnesota Hockey. An NHL commissioner (forget whom) called Minnesota's championship in 1974 at the time "arguably the most important thing to happen to USA Hockey".

These things showed American kids it wasn't just Canada's game. That US kids could compete with and beat teams with rosters heavy on Canadians.

Sincerely, I'm not trying to toot Minnesota's horn here. I know people here hate provincialism and I know I have a tendancy to be very provincial. I just don't know how else to explain what really are truths.

By recruiting primarily Minnesotans at the University of Minnesota, John Mariucci gave more opportunities to play at the next level to Minnesota kids.

During Mariucci's tenure, high school hockey programs in Minnesota grew ten fold. Thus more and more Minnesotans began to play the game.

Minnesotans comprised over half the 1960 and 1980 US Olympic Hockey rosters. These Gold Medal teams gave inspiration to play to many other kids around the country.

It's why John Mariucci is not just in the US Hockey Hall of Fame, but in THE Hockey Hall of Fame as a builder. How many other college hockey coaches are in both Halls as a builder?

The impact of Minnesota's recruiting practices WERE significant to the growth of hockey in this country. All I'm saying is that would be a factor of mine when determining Minnesota's "greatness" as a program.

Yeah, well, Fido had a zamboni lead his funeral procession, and that trumps all.

Sorry.

[JDUBBS1280]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Full Quote:

"Clarence Campbell, the learned and colorful commissioner of the National Hockey League, had been invited to be the guest speaker [at US Hockey Hall of Fame game]. Campbell was well attuned to the scarcity of U.S. players in pro hockey, and he blamed U.S. colleges for failing to develop U.S. players."

"American sports of all kinds are associated with institutions, and they offer a great deal to be commended for, such as discipline, good facilities, and coaching," said Campbell. "Regrettably, from what I've seen, a high percentage of college players were not Americans. They were young men recruited from Canada, which means U.S. college hockey has limited the development of American Hockey".

Mr. Campbell went on to say, "The Midwest Junior Hockey League and the University of Minnesota winning the NCAA championship with an all-American team were the biggest accomplishments for U.S. hockey".

Link to Read Quote

[burd]

Re: NCAA era Program rankings-accomplishments only

Full Quote:

"Clarence Campbell, the learned and colorful commissioner of the National Hockey League, had been invited to be the guest speaker [at US Hockey Hall of Fame game]. Campbell was well attuned to the scarcity of U.S. players in pro hockey, and he blamed U.S. colleges for failing to develop U.S. players."

"American sports of all kinds are associated with institutions, and they offer a great deal to be commended for, such as discipline, good facilities, and coaching," said Campbell. "Regrettably, from what I've seen, a high percentage of college players were not Americans. They were young men recruited from Canada, which means U.S. college hockey has limited the development of American Hockey".

Mr. Campbell went on to say, "The Midwest Junior Hockey League and the University of Minnesota winning the NCAA championship with an all-American team were the biggest accomplishments for U.S. hockey".

Link to Read Quote

Did you know that many of those Canadians were not chaste?

[JDUBBS1280]

Did you know that many of those Canadians were not chaste?

I've supported my statements with facts and testimony, you've supported yours with sarcasm and immaturity. Yet I'm the one who gets criticized.

I'll repeat that I have the utmost respect for what other programs have been able to accomplish, and I don't want to diminish their achievements in any way. But if I were to rate the "greatness" of the college hockey programs, I would certainly include things like their effect on hockey in this country.

Just my two cents.