Keep going Lou

O-townClown · Post by **O-townClown** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 6:53 pm

Your knowledge about today's HS landscape is impressive, your historical perspective unmatched. Your passion for hockey at all levels is unrivaled.

Thanks for sharing your opinions, for that is why you are there. Nearly 50 years and no sign of slowing.

Bravo.

gfhockey · Post by **gfhockey** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:19 pm

Phil just reminds me of like a mafia type of guy lol. Thats a compliment in the way he knows everything about everyone and is old school. He has seen it all in his time.

Mr.DudeGuy · Post by **Mr.DudeGuy** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:46 pm

gfhockey wrote:Phil just reminds me of like a mafia type of guy lol. Thats a compliment in the way he knows everything about everyone and is old school. He has seen it all in his time.

Lou?

gfhockey · Post by **gfhockey** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:47 pm

Yeah sorry. I ment Lou

WB6162 · Post by **WB6162** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:51 pm

O-townClown wrote:Your knowledge about today's HS landscape is impressive, your historical perspective unmatched. Your passion for hockey at all levels is unrivaled.

Thanks for sharing your opinions, for that is why you are there. Nearly 50 years and no sign of slowing.

Bravo.

Lou is a state treasure. I totally agree.

Mr.DudeGuy · Post by **Mr.DudeGuy** » Thu Mar 08, 2012 8:03 pm

gfhockey wrote:Yeah sorry. I ment Lou

That makes a lot more sense to me

CRS · Post by **CRS** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:29 am

I thought he did well today.

MrBoDangles · Post by **MrBoDangles** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 10:24 am

Very impressed he was able to see the high sticks and great saves when nobody else could until the replays. Sharp as a tack!

blueliner2day · Post by **blueliner2day** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 10:36 am

MrBoDangles wrote:Very impressed he was able to see the high sticks and great saves when nobody else could until the replays. Sharp as a tack!

I don't know about the tack part but the "there's no way Lakeville South beats Duluth East" comment has me more on the bowling ball sharpness side of things. Game commentary is more his style.

urban iceman · Post by **urban iceman** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:27 pm

Wonder if the big eraser came out for the "will" after last nights game?

Stealth · Post by **Stealth** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:56 pm

Someday Lou will not be there. Then you will go what a treasure. Good or bad. Just old school classic!

The other classic treasure is Sid Hartman, wow at his age he sure tries hard to have the story.

GordonBombay99 · Post by **GordonBombay99** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:03 pm

Lou makes the Class AA tourney that much better with his commentary, the longer he does what he does the better. He is what Minnesota hockey is all about and its a treat to be able to listen to him, hes a Minnesota hockey legend.

stpaul · Post by **stpaul** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 3:42 pm

Love Lou. He is the modern day Godfather of Minnesota Hockey. The Tournament on TV would not be the same without him.

Master Recruiter · Post by **Master Recruiter** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 3:45 pm

if we could just trade Wally Shaver for Clay it would be awesome

PuckU126 · Post by **PuckU126** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 3:46 pm

Master Recruiter wrote:if we could just trade Wally Shaver for Clay it would be awesome

YES

I still want Bob Costas and Erin Andrews though...

puck81 · Post by **puck81** » Fri Mar 09, 2012 3:55 pm

Lou Nanne has been a great ambassador for the game of hockey in this state for decades. I remember in the 70's Louie would go out to the different youth orginizations and pose with the various teams for pictures and he was just a class act all the way. The guy had two grandsons on the Edina team so if he was a bit partial for Edina last night well imagine that! Actually my friend who watched at home thought Louie was very fair to both BSM aand Edina throughout the telecast. Thank you Lou Nanne for all that you have done for hockey in Minnesota.

Murray Chadwick · Post by **Murray Chadwick** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 2:42 am

Master Recruiter wrote:if we could just trade Wally Shaver for Clay it would be awesome

Yeah, not sure why Wally Shaver was ever let go in the first place. I'd take Wally back in a heartbeat over Matvick!

hockeygirl2 · Post by **hockeygirl2** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 7:51 am

You could not find a nicer man who will NEVER say no to having his picture taken with the kids. He truly is a class act.

SPUDNUT · Post by **SPUDNUT** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 2:23 pm

Murray Chadwick wrote:
Master Recruiter wrote:if we could just trade Wally Shaver for Clay it would be awesome
Yeah, not sure why Wally Shaver was ever let go in the first place. I'd take Wally back in a heartbeat over Matvick!

I'd also rather see Wally than Clay, but the old man (Al Shaver) would put 'em both to shame ! Most people on here probably don't know who I'm talking about (they're not old enough).

Govie · Post by **Govie** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:19 am

LOVE Lou. Pure class all the way through and always enjoy his voice/commentary and display of love for Minnesota high school stick.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:08 am

Lou is an institution. The tourney will never be the same when he decides to hang it up.

politicalpuck · Post by **politicalpuck** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:33 pm

My only criticism of Lou's commentary during the AA championship game was the repeated references to spinal cord injuries.

Please know that I wish no one would ever have to suffer from such an injury, and my heart and admiration goes out to people who live impaired lives. But with the Jablonski boy, Lou's focus on the assistant coach who suffered a spine injury while playing several years ago, and Lou's reference to another hockey player who became paralyzed after losing his balance when he crashed into the boards after some idiot threw a coin on the ice, it became too much.

Anyone new or fairly new to hockey tuning in to the championship game might come away from the game thinking that the game is way too dangerous to play, especially if they are thinking of letting their kids play hockey. I know that was not Mr. Nanne's intent to blacken the game with his references to spine injuries.

Maybe others noticed the repeated references to paralysis in that game. And perhaps I am way too sensitive to the public perception of hockey.

Govie · Post by **Govie** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:11 pm

politicalpuck wrote:My only criticism of Lou's commentary during the AA championship game was the repeated references to spinal cord injuries.

Please know that I wish no one would ever have to suffer from such an injury, and my heart and admiration goes out to people who live impaired lives. But with the Jablonski boy, Lou's focus on the assistant coach who suffered a spine injury while playing several years ago, and Lou's reference to another hockey player who became paralyzed after losing his balance when he crashed into the boards after some idiot threw a coin on the ice, it became too much.

Anyone new or fairly new to hockey tuning in to the championship game might come away from the game thinking that the game is way too dangerous to play, especially if they are thinking of letting their kids play hockey. I know that was not Mr. Nanne's intent to blacken the game with his references to spine injuries.

Maybe others noticed the repeated references to paralysis in that game. And perhaps I am way too sensitive to the public perception of hockey.

It's not just you. I think the Jablonski thing has gone really over board, with all due respect to him and his family and all the suffering. I distinctly remember a couple kids that got paralyzed in the metro area back in the 90s and the coverage of those instances were nil. Seriously. For some reason the Jablonski warranted this attention when there have been numerous such instances in the past?

Our society has become soft. I just found out yesterday they have now banned checking in pee-wees. And their contention was that it would make the game "safer." I was shocked.

Anyone who has grown up in the state playing knows the biggest jump is from pee-wees to bantams. My jump from pee wees to bantams was the first year I was cut, and a lot of it was a lot of kids went through puberty and were absolutely huger than me. And the powers that be some how think that just jumping into bantams not having some background in checking etiquette in pee wees and throwing them into the bantams somehow makes them safer? Fooey. Total manure.

Anyway, that is just a total rant on my behalf and better kept for a thread on the issue.

My contention is that society is paranoid, hypersensitive, politically correct...soft. I don't fault Lou for talking about it since it is THE topic this year.

SPUDNUT · Post by **SPUDNUT** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:43 pm

politicalpuck wrote:My only criticism of Lou's commentary during the AA championship game was the repeated references to spinal cord injuries.

Please know that I wish no one would ever have to suffer from such an injury, and my heart and admiration goes out to people who live impaired lives. But with the Jablonski boy, Lou's focus on the assistant coach who suffered a spine injury while playing several years ago, and Lou's reference to another hockey player who became paralyzed after losing his balance when he crashed into the boards after some idiot threw a coin on the ice, it became too much.

Anyone new or fairly new to hockey tuning in to the championship game might come away from the game thinking that the game is way too dangerous to play, especially if they are thinking of letting their kids play hockey. I know that was not Mr. Nanne's intent to blacken the game with his references to spine injuries.

Maybe others noticed the repeated references to paralysis in that game. And perhaps I am way too sensitive to the public perception of hockey.

Some of us aren't too old to read the small print !

Reggie · Post by **Reggie** » Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:16 pm

just like all the soft rule changes, theres no old school anymore, Its time for a change. BYE BYE lou!

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Keep going Lou

Keep going Lou

Re: Keep going Lou

Lou Nanne

Too Many Mentions of An Unmentionable Topic

Re: Too Many Mentions of An Unmentionable Topic

Re: Too Many Mentions of An Unmentionable Topic