HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Rita-Ann Monde <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 8 Apr 2006 00:06:57 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (182 lines)
Unfortunately the NC$$ anal retentiveness  results in bad ice because 
they have to take out the existing ice and remove the logos and add the 
NC$$ approved logos and remake-refreeze the ice. This usually isn't 
done until a few days before the tourney. Their were comments at the 
Green Bay regional regarding the ice, and I thought one of the players 
commented on it during the Wisconsin-Maine game last night.

Granted the ice is bad for both teams, but it is the playoffs- national 
championship and the ice should be at its best even if it means 
non-NC$$ approved ads on the ice.  However, the NC$$ won't see it that 
way. Even for basketball the NC$$ has the FF in venues (domes) that are 
much bigger than what most of the teams play in and have differently 
lighting, which sometimes results in poor shooting.


On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:48 PM, John Edwards wrote:

> Yes, that's it. Wisconsin's logo is there in that spot because they 
> are the
> host school. The ice markings and board "ads" followed the same 
> template in
> all the sites. For example, Michigan Tech's logo was in the same 
> location on
> the ice at the Midwest regional. It's the NC$$ being its usual anal
> retentive self.
>
> At the West Regional, I was amused to see that it was UND's school logo
> (which is the letters U, N and D with a flame inside the "D") rather 
> than
> the athletic logo (the Indian head) that was placed on the ice. 
> Perhaps they
> figured that the Indian head being displayed in the arena 15,000 times 
> was
> enough. ;-)
>
> John
>
> On 4/7/06, Mark Lewin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> I believe the Wisconsin logo was displayed because they are the 
>> sponsoring
>> school of the Frozen Four.  The fact that they are playing in it is 
>> purely
>> coincidental.  The RPI logo was on the ice of the Pepsi Arena since 
>> they
>> were sponsors of the Eastern Regional and I believe I saw BU's logo in
>> Worcester while watching on TV
>>
>> On 4/7/06, Sara M. Fagan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Something different - I enjoyed watching the games yesterday.  I was
>>> surprised to see the Wisconsin logo so prominently displayed on the
>> ice.  I
>>> was rooting for Wisc. but I must admit I didn't think it seemed very
>> nice.
>>>
>>> At the end of the Maine-Wisc. game it started to get a little
>> nasty.  What
>>> did people think of that?  Was it mostly Maine's frustration or was
>> there
>>> something else going on there?
>>>
>>> Sara
>>> SLU '77
>>> Let's go SAINTS!!!
>>> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>>> From: Mark Lewin <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> I'm the one who started complaining about this for this year. 
>>>> although
>>> I'm
>>>> sure someone else would have , if I hadn't.  This does not affect 
>>>> me.
>> I
>>> am
>>>> retired and had the luxury of watching the games on TV.  But it 
>>>> wasn't
>>> that
>>>> long ago that I was a working stiff and had to tape the afternoon
>> game.
>>>> Then, of course, when I got home, I either had to tape the second 
>>>> game
>>>> (because, of course, the announcers of the second game always
>> announced
>>> the
>>>> results of the first game), or, I had to watch the first game while
>>> taping
>>>> the second game (which, of course, assumes that one has two VCR's or
>>> DVR's
>>>> or whatever).
>>>>
>>>> As far as the Bob Hamilton's comment:  yes, we can create filters. 
>>>> In
>> my
>>>> case with Google mail, I would have to create a label,  create a
>> filter
>>> and
>>>> then auto archive the message. Otherwise the header shows.  But this
>> is
>>>> missing the whole point .
>>>>
>>>> I was not suggesting that we suppress someones constitutional right 
>>>> to
>>> free
>>>> speech or even the freedom of the press. I have no idea how many
>> people
>>> are
>>>> on the list that may have taped the game.  I have no idea how many 
>>>> are
>>> not
>>>> in a position to avoid looking at their email for a day or two while
>>> they
>>>> catch up on  watching games on tape.  And I have no idea how many
>> people
>>> are
>>>> "unsophisticated" users and may not have the knowledge about how to
>>> create
>>>> filters or folders  for their email accounts.
>>>>
>>>> The point is this. There is a  reason most of us are on this list as
>>> opposed
>>>> to joining the testosterone boys on the USCHO fan forum.  There are 
>>>> a
>>> whole
>>>> lot of good, knowledgeable people on the fan forums but I just get
>> sick
>>> and
>>>> tired of the know nothings who rant and rave and bully and act like
>>>> adolescents.  We don't have that on this list which is what makes it
>>>> special. The difference is courtesy; we're supposed to show it and 
>>>> we
>>> should
>>>> expect it in return. Rather than  forcing some unknown number of
>> people
>>> to
>>>> create folders and filters on their email during playoff time,
>> wouldn't
>>> it
>>>> be easier as well as more courteous to just adopt a convention that
>>> message
>>>> headers should not show scores or who wins or loses. The body of the
>>> message
>>>> can say anything it wants, it's just the header that ruins it for
>> some.
>>>> Would it be so difficult to do that just for the sake of your fellow
>>> list
>>>> viewers?
>>>>
>>>> On 4/7/06, Dr. Bob Hamilton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thought I would send this now to avoid having to spoil the fun in
>> the
>>>>> future.  And as a warning of the seriousness of this issue should a
>>>>> clairvoyant be a member of the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some straightforward options seem available for those wishing to
>>> easily
>>>>> resolve conflict among list membership.
>>>>> 1)  Have a Hockey L folder which does not have to be opened, as has
>>> just
>>>>> been mentioned..
>>>>> 2)  Use the convention of an information post, such as the 
>>>>> reporting
>>> of
>>>>> scores from Charlie Shub.  As I recall, the post subject contains 
>>>>> I:
>>> which
>>>>> can be used as a filter on incoming mail to send these to their own
>>>>> folder.
>>>>> Seems this was agreed by list participants at one time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob Hamilton
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> John Edwards
> I used to put quotes here.
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2