MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

[goldy_331]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

So what's your point?

That for two games at the Ralph, the Gophs didn't play like ****, as they have the past couple years.

 

[thebrain]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

so anyways... can you drink up at that new rink in bemidji?? will be heading there this weekend to get some beavers

Molson Canadian, Coors Light, Bud Light are on tap, there may be more. The "Beers from Around the World" stand has Bud Light, Grain Belt Premium, and other beers made in the U.S., not one was an import. Stay away from the hot dogs, get a Stittsworth Brat. It's a wild rice brat with cheese that's locally made. I just looked at Stittsworth Meats Facebook page, they don't have it at the Sanford Center, but they make a Leinenkugel Honey Weiss brat that I'm now interested in trying.

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Sorry, I'm too distracted by beavers to make coherent arguments these days.

Kinda slow this year. Unofficially only the 2nd beaver joke of the thread.

 

[Driftryder]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!


Barriball has practiced all week and looks like he'll play.


Serratore talks about playing against his uncle.

 

[Tiggsy]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Its called obsession. Why would you expect a team to enjoy their own successes when they can troll a BSU/UM thread and trash talk the Gophers?

My guess it's because this is as close as most sue fans will ever get to a beaver.

 

[Dirty]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

My guess it's because this is as close as most sue fans will ever get to a beaver.

So why don't you and the rest of your Gopher friends get out of this thread? You're just trolling in an attempt to keep us all away from beaver.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Where's the Minnesota/BSU thread?

 

[gopher wes]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Where's the Minnesota/BSU thread?

I was about to send out a call: Scooby Scooby Doo, where are you?

You have been absent until Thursday which is tooooo long....

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Wow. A sudden thrust in beaver jokes.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

That pretty much implies the Gophers will make the Frozen 4 this year because of the home ice since they only do well on home ice. Thanks for that.

You would think so, but last year I watched the West Regional and there was no Gopher team to be found. Sorry.

Congratulations on your clever use of UND selection bias and statistical masturbation. How many WCHA teams in the last 30 years have won both the MacNaughton and an NCAA championship (including shared honors, but not including the Broadmoor)? I believe the number is 8 (three shared). How many in the last decade? The number is 1 (shared). How many NCs were won in the three seasons UND won the MacNaughton during the last decade? Zero. Does that sound like a statistical pattern of blessing or curse to you?

Most avid college hockey fans would likely agree that the MacNaughton Cup has inherently retained an iconic status and significance over the years as a symbolic representation of the WCHA and college hockey's storied history. However, some fans would argue that it has somewhat lost its prominence and popularity in the wake of the fan favorite playoff frenzy of the Broadmoor Trophy, which incidentally has been statistically more constant and symbiotic to the acquisition of an NC over the same 30 years (approximately 30%).

In the last three decades WCHA teams that won both the Mac and NC has dropped 89%. Based upon the negative correlation of the Mac and NC, we could assume that winning the Mac may 1) have a phenomenological beguiling effect upon a team's efforts towards winning an NC, and 2) is not indicative of a team’s playoff ability and readiness to win an NC. Realistically, capturing an NCAA D1 Men's Hockey National Championship is the only thing fans (and players, coaches and ADs) remember as the ultimate measure of success...period.

Realistically, winning regular season trophies prove nothing, other than the team that won that trophy was the best in the regular season. Look at how many times the best team in any sport in the regular season actually won the playoffs. It just doesn't happen very often. The reason why teams that have won the Broadmoor tend to have better success in the NCAA Tournament is because usually the team that wins the Broadmoor is playing their best hockey in March, and the NCAA Tournament follows the next week. It would make sense for the team playing its best hockey in March does well in March, and the team that played its best hockey sometime between October and February doesn't fair quite as well. It would also make sense that if a team that played very well between October and February, and then backs that up with playing very well in March, would continue that through the NCAA Tournament. That is why, when you combine the MacNaughton plus the Broadmoor, you have a team that should be very scary come NCAA Tournament time.

Saying all that, statistics do not prove anything. Anything can happen in any future tournament. Michigan Tech COULD win the NCAA Title this year. They probably won't, but they could. What the last few years has taught us, is that ANY team that makes the NCAA Tournament can win it all. What I was showing was North Dakota's success when they win different trophies. I don't care about any other team.

 

[Tiggsy]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

I don't care about any other team.

I would think if that was true you wouldn't waste your time trolling around an unrelated thread.

 

[gopher wes]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

i would think if that was true you wouldn't waste your time trolling around an unrelated thread.

this!

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

I would think if that was true you wouldn't waste your time trolling around an unrelated thread.

I'm a fan of college hockey, but only care about one team. I, apparently, "troll" in all kinds of threads.

 

[Driftryder]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

I'm a fan of college hockey, but only care about one team. I, apparently, "troll" in all kinds of threads.

"Troll" away, the more the merrier.

 

[Dirty]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

If you didn't have us here, this thread would be like Yale fans. Boring as hell.

 

[4four4]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

I thought this was a BSU vs. MN thread?

 

[ex_goldy]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

It is funny how the sioux trolls show up. It makes it a blog spot though, if there's no controversy what are we going to chat about?
The usual flow with them is.... statistics... national championships...holy cross.....Lucia.....

The gophers have really stepped up their play since Patterson took over in net. You can't compare this team to the first half of the year. Goals from all lines. Barriball back this weekend, hope he doesn't get hurt again. We need him for the post season run.

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

You would think so, but last year I watched the West Regional and there was no Gopher team to be found. Sorry.



Realistically, winning regular season trophies prove nothing, other than the team that won that trophy was the best in the regular season. Look at how many times the best team in any sport in the regular season actually won the playoffs. It just doesn't happen very often. The reason why teams that have won the Broadmoor tend to have better success in the NCAA Tournament is because usually the team that wins the Broadmoor is playing their best hockey in March, and the NCAA Tournament follows the next week. It would make sense for the team playing its best hockey in March does well in March, and the team that played its best hockey sometime between October and February doesn't fair quite as well. It would also make sense that if a team that played very well between October and February, and then backs that up with playing very well in March, would continue that through the NCAA Tournament. That is why, when you combine the MacNaughton plus the Broadmoor, you have a team that should be very scary come NCAA Tournament time.

Saying all that, statistics do not prove anything. Anything can happen in any future tournament. Michigan Tech COULD win the NCAA Title this year. They probably won't, but they could. What the last few years has taught us, is that ANY team that makes the NCAA Tournament can win it all. What I was showing was North Dakota's success when they win different trophies. I don't care about any other team.

While it's obvious winning the BM is an indication of as team's playoff readiness and ability, that doesn't explain why winning both the Mac and NC has diminished over the last 30 years and all but vanished over the last decade leading some to believe it's a distraction (a curse) which incidentally is what the original discussion was about.

By the way, winning the Mac, BM and NC (triple crown) has also regressed from 3 teams (UW '90, NMU '91, UND '97) in the 90s to one team (DU '05) in the last 13 years, the longest drought since the BM was first awarded in 1960. Since winning the BM and NC has remained a constant independent variable (3 teams/decade over the last 30 years), winning the Mac is again negatively correlated with winning a NC. It's interesting to note that from a quantitative research perspective, this essentially establishes triangulation and further validates the curse theory. Like I said, good luck with the MacNaughton curse.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

While it's obvious winning the BM is an indication of as team's playoff readiness and ability, that doesn't explain why winning both the Mac and NC has diminished over the last 30 years and all but vanished over the last decade leading some to believe it's a distraction (a curse) which incidentally is what the original discussion was about.

By the way, winning the Mac, BM and NC (triple crown) has also regressed from 3 teams (UW '90, NMU '91, UND '97) in the 90s to one team (DU '05) in the last 13 years. Since winning the BM and NC has remained a constant independent variable (3 teams/decade over the last 30 years), winning the Mac is again negatively correlated with winning a NC. It's interesting to note that from a quantitative research perspective, this essentially establishes triangulation and further validates the curse theory.

Sounds like it's about time for a team to win the triple crown again?

In the 60s, 7 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 4 actually won it.
In the 70s, 7 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 1 actually won it.
In the 80s, 6 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 2 actually won it.
In the 90s, 3 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 3 actually won it.
In the 00s, 3 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 1 actually won it.

There doesn't seem to be much of a pattern there. I don't buy any rediculous "curse" talk.

 

[HarleyMC]

Re: MN @ BSU: Wide-eyed Rookies Vs. Grisled Veterans!

Sounds like it's about time for a team to win the triple crown again?

In the 60s, 7 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 4 actually won it.
In the 70s, 7 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 1 actually won it.
In the 80s, 6 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 2 actually won it.
In the 90s, 3 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 3 actually won it.
In the 00s, 3 teams had a chance for the triple crown, 1 actually won it.

There doesn't seem to be much of a pattern there. I don't buy any rediculous "curse" talk.

The current triple crown drought is the longest since the BM was first awarded in 1960. That's significant. Secondly, you're not showing any of the coefficient correlations I previously mentioned, so the data you're displaying is essentially meaningless in terms of causality. That's why you just looked at it and said there's no pattern. This is too funny. That's what you get for trolling.