>John H. wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, it's becoming clear that a sincere opinion that
>> might be construed as anti-Gopher/WCHA is no longer welcome
>> in a public forum.  Following this message, I'll try to keep my
>> opinions private and/or local.
>
>I totally agree with John.  As a fan of UMD, any comment/observation I
>make that is at all implied as anti-Gopher, I am ripped to shreads on
>this discussion list.  Why isn't hockey-l just renamed "Pro-Gopher hockey
>discussion list - no other opinions welcome".  It seems this is indeed
>the case and it is too bad it has to be this way.  It really ruins what
>would otherwise be an enjoyable discussion group.
 
Speaking for myself (and, incidentally, I didn't comment on any of the
above) I think many Gopher fans (extrapolating from me) get a little
defensive about criticism because of the success-failure dichotomy the
gophers have.  Namely, a tremendous record of success over a long period of
time in terms of WCHA finished, NCAA appearences, etc, and still not having
won "the big one" in a while.
 
Personally, I get real defensive whenever the "big one" critique comes out
precisely because of the, in my opinion, amazingly consistant success the
Gophers have acheived over the last several years.
 
But this reaction, now a habitual one, does tend to be invoked by almost
any criticism of the Gophers, which is why I generally consider any
response before I make one, and then often don't (which was the case with
John's post...I did notice "the general consensus").
 
Anyway, I hope folks don't stop discussing the Gophs because of this
unfortunate tendency.  I personally like to see them discussed as much as
possible, whether it is positive or negative.
 
Thanks for listening,
 
Andrew W. Golla       <<[log in to unmask]>>  or
                      <<[log in to unmask]>>
 
home page:  http://www.winternet.com/~agolla/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.