FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[DuffMan]

I'm not even going to bother - sctimes.com - gone    Sorry Frank
I'll rely on this board to get my info. 

My thoughts, exactly.  I'm not gonna constantly clear my cookies just so I can continue reading the SC Times.  I'll read the paper version when I visit my folks, but that's it. 

[BDB]

From the latest issue of Sports Illustrated (with Jeremy Lin on the cover):

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1195162/index.htm

Hmmm... I'm torn.  What a hard topic to discuss, particularly in a forum where someone personally involved in the tragedy may discover the thread.

Mum is unhappy, rightly so, that a boy she personally knew was injured so grievously in a dubious, if unintentional, check from the back.   Conversely, hockey is a full contact sport where the removal of contact fundamentally changes the nature of the sport.  And lastly, I don't believe the check was illegal, as the rules have since been changed.

So my thought is that there is danger in the world and that bad things happen to good people.  If the argument is that the game is too dangerous for her family participate in, then OK.  If the argument is that the game is too dangerous for anyone to participate in, then the sample size of consequence (despite the overwhelming magnitude of the consequence) is too small for such a conclusion.

I believe that serious and concerned people have considered the event, adjusted rules in order to reduce undue danger without changing the nature of the sport, and the game should go on.

Now I know that the article is presented more as an outpouring of grief rather than a call for action, but this is Sports Illustrated and not the parish newsletter.  The forum itself calls for action.  And in debating action, I believe that tragedy is horrible, I hope it happens to no one, but it does and life must go on.  If the rules of the game are unwise then change them, but this incident, unfathomably tragic though it is, does not justify diminishing the game itself.

My son is 13 and in 7th grade is just completing his 9th year of youth hockey. He's a Bantam which means playing against 8th and 9th graders mostly and the size difference can be significant.

I don't worry about him getting hurt on the ice playing hockey. They still checked at the Pee Wee level when he played at that level and those kids learned to keep the heads up and be aware of the players around them before the sizes got too different. That's the debate that took place before USA Hockey moved the start of checking to the Bantam level.

I'm more concerned about his safety when we are driving to the rink and so many other drivers are swerving around texting as they motor down the road. 

[GoldandBlueBU]

From the latest issue of Sports Illustrated (with Jeremy Lin on the cover):

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1195162/index.htm

Hmmm... I'm torn.  What a hard topic to discuss, particularly in a forum where someone personally involved in the tragedy may discover the thread.

Mum is unhappy, rightly so, that a boy she personally knew was injured so grievously in a dubious, if unintentional, check from the back.   Conversely, hockey is a full contact sport where the removal of contact fundamentally changes the nature of the sport.  And lastly, I don't believe the check was illegal, as the rules have since been changed.

So my thought is that there is danger in the world and that bad things happen to good people.  If the argument is that the game is too dangerous for her family participate in, then OK.  If the argument is that the game is too dangerous for anyone to participate in, then the sample size of consequence (despite the overwhelming magnitude of the consequence) is too small for such a conclusion.

I believe that serious and concerned people have considered the event, adjusted rules in order to reduce undue danger without changing the nature of the sport, and the game should go on.

Now I know that the article is presented more as an outpouring of grief rather than a call for action, but this is Sports Illustrated and not the parish newsletter.  The forum itself calls for action.  And in debating action, I believe that tragedy is horrible, I hope it happens to no one, but it does and life must go on.  If the rules of the game are unwise then change them, but this incident, unfathomably tragic though it is, does not justify diminishing the game itself.

Well said, Oz. The Jablonski family has said all along that what happened was the result of good, hard play within the rules. I've read/heard that Jack had his coach contact the kid who checked him and have him visit Jack-- who consoled the kid telling him  "you did nothing wrong." He sounds like an incredible, tough and resilient kid.

I echo that sentiment.  Some of the quotes that he's given indicate that he has a maturity well beyond his years.  I have doubts as to weather I could handle that injury with as much poise being ten years older than him, let alone how poorly I would've reacted when I was his age.  I hope and pray the best for him.  I've often thought about him recently when encountering an annoying circumstance in my own life.  It gives me pause and causes me to count my blessings.

[SagatagSam]

I'm not even going to bother - sctimes.com - gone    Sorry Frank
I'll rely on this board to get my info. 

My thoughts, exactly.  I'm not gonna constantly clear my cookies just so I can continue reading the SC Times.  I'll read the paper version when I visit my folks, but that's it.

I'll put a sixer of the beer of your choice on the subscription feature being gone by the end of March.
No one will subscribe, and for that reason they'll eventually take it down.

[DuffMan]

Sam:  Deal!

[OzJohnnie]

My bet is they go the premium content route.  Blogs, opinion pages and front page stories free, inside the paper content for a subscription.

I also bet they put some web only content behind the subscription service.  Player profiles, stats, etc.

EDIT: and it will be a two beers for the price of one deal.  Sam will be drinking Duff's beer inside 30 days, but Duff will be drinking Sam's beer a little later when the more appropriate subscription service is launched.

(And a second prediction: like these boards the Times will avoid the "clear my cache" workaround and maintain state data (ie, where you have been and what you have looked at) on the server while the browser's cookie will only maintain an unique ID which is refreshed upon login.)

[SagatagSam]

My bet is they go the premium content route.  Blogs, opinion pages and front page stories free, inside the paper content for a subscription.

I also bet they put some web only content behind the subscription service.  Player profiles, stats, etc.

EDIT: and it will be a two beers for the price of one deal.  Sam will be drinking Duff's beer inside 30 days, but Duff will be drinking Sam's beer a little later when the more appropriate subscription service is launched.

(And a second prediction: like these boards the Times will avoid the "clear my cache" workaround and maintain state data (ie, where you have been and what you have looked at) on the server while the browser's cookie will only maintain an unique ID which is refreshed upon login.)

The SC Times is going to have to start producing some "premium content" before they can start charging for it.

[Robert Zimmerman]

I believe all Gannett papers except the USA Today went to this format so I think it could be beyond the control of the Times.

[SagatagSam]

Well, I if true, I think that kind of "one size fits all" approach is one that will kill off small papers like the SC Times.

It may work for the Detroit Free Press, Indianapolis Star, or Cincinnati Enquirer, but I think it will most definitely destroy Gannett's small market holdings.

[OzJohnnie]

I believe all Gannett papers except the USA Today went to this format so I think it could be beyond the control of the Times.

Duff wins.  Buy the beer now, Sam.  I think he likes Surly.  Or turdy packs.  Whichever.

[sjusection105]

Also, when was the last time we had a SC Times Player of the Year come to SJU?

Maybe Nick Schneider- current RB from ROCORI? Otherwise the last one I remember was a lineman from Sartell in the Freshman class of 1999 

[SagatagSam]

Also, when was the last time we had a SC Times Player of the Year come to SJU?

Maybe Nick Schneider- current RB from ROCORI? Otherwise the last one I remember was a lineman from Sartell in the Freshman class of 1999 

I did some checking with some people far more versed on all things sports information. The last St. Cloud Area POY that came straight from H.S. to SJU was Craig Luberts in 2003. Rob Voshell spent a year at University of Sioux Falls (D-II) before transferring to SJU.

[SagatagSam]

I believe all Gannett papers except the USA Today went to this format so I think it could be beyond the control of the Times.

Duff wins.  Buy the beer now, Sam.  I think he likes Surly.  Or turdy packs.  Whichever.

Easy there, Oz. Let's wait until all the delegates are counted before declaring me out of the race. I don't want some Newt Gingrich-esque declaration of victory after a meaningless primary months before the convention.

[DuffMan]

The last St. Cloud Area POY that came straight from H.S. to SJU was Craig Luberts in 2003.

That ended well 

[OzJohnnie]

Now I'm self-centered and elitist.  Some may even say arrogant.  But like Newt?  I bleed.