PDA

View Full Version : Gophers 2013-14 B1G Things To Come!



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

Tiggsy
11-18-2013, 01:27 PM
I was wondering if Scooby would make a glass update, good to see.

93.1 seems fair, since they haven't really played anyone yet. :)

If they haven't played anyone yet, do they deserve #1 in the pohls? :cool:

Koho
11-18-2013, 02:30 PM
Just reading responses on GPL about proposed future alterations to Mariucci, which include reducing size of ice sheet. Of the few responses, most just seemed to accept, one even saying they should go down to NHL size ice. Wonder what others think? I love that a skating team like the Gophs plays on Olympic ice and wish it would stay that way. In fact, I think the biggest problem with watching NHL is that the rink is too small for such quick and well trained players. So few goals in NHL are breaks with nice skating and passing plays. Instead a lot of just bombing it from out front with a ton of bodies in front, or else just firing it in front for someone to whack in a rebound. Just not enough time and space for many beautiful plays to develop. I say keep the rink the same and hopefully the rest of hockey will eventually follow.

ScoobyDoo
11-18-2013, 02:33 PM
Just reading responses on GPL about proposed future alterations to Mariucci, which include reducing size of ice sheet. Of the few responses, most just seemed to accept, one even saying they should go down to NHL size ice. Wonder what others think? I love that a skating team like the Gophs plays on Olympic ice and wish it would stay that way. In fact, I think the biggest problem with watching NHL is that the rink is too small for such quick and well trained players. So few goals in NHL are breaks with nice skating and passing plays. Instead a lot of just bombing it from out front with a ton of bodies in front, or else just firing it in front for someone to whack in a rebound. Just not enough time and space for many beautiful plays to develop. I say keep the rink the same and hopefully the rest of hockey will eventually follow.

Much like the stupid Big 10 conference I gave up on this one. I agree completely but the ship has sailed.

Koho
11-18-2013, 02:37 PM
Much like the stupid Big 10 conference I gave up on this one. I agree completely but the ship has sailed.

You may be right, but isn't that part of the point of these boards, to ***** about things beyond our control, even after it is way too late?

And on another note, I can't believe Notre Dame cancelled their hockey program and that Northern Michigan left the WCHA!!!!

Driftryder
11-18-2013, 03:01 PM
Just reading responses on GPL about proposed future alterations to Mariucci, which include reducing size of ice sheet. Of the few responses, most just seemed to accept, one even saying they should go down to NHL size ice. Wonder what others think? I love that a skating team like the Gophs plays on Olympic ice and wish it would stay that way. In fact, I think the biggest problem with watching NHL is that the rink is too small for such quick and well trained players. So few goals in NHL are breaks with nice skating and passing plays. Instead a lot of just bombing it from out front with a ton of bodies in front, or else just firing it in front for someone to whack in a rebound. Just not enough time and space for many beautiful plays to develop. I say keep the rink the same and hopefully the rest of hockey will eventually follow.

I agree with you Koho. I love all the space of the Olympic size rink, the Gophers speed is fun to watch on that size sheet.

I also think the NHL is boring for all the reasons you stated, put them all on an Olympic size rink and watch the game open up a little.


...or go back to 1970's and 1980's size goalie pads. :)

goldy_331
11-18-2013, 03:28 PM
I also think the NHL is boring for all the reasons you stated, put them all on an Olympic size rink and watch the game open up a little.


...or go back to 1970's and 1980's size goalie pads. :)

Or both!

Koho
11-18-2013, 03:47 PM
Or both!

Yes. Big ice is essential to open up play IMO, but despite rule changes, so much of goaltending now seems to big just being in the right position with your huge pads, and less often is athleticism a part of the save.

Slap Shot
11-18-2013, 05:19 PM
Going to the NHL (or as close to it as possible) sheet is the right thing to do, and I say that as someone that was happy Mecca was built with the Olympic sheet. Times have changed and the game has left the larger sheet behind in just about every facet and at every level. Sad but true.

I still say ****** the shootout.

The Rube
11-18-2013, 07:44 PM
Going to the NHL (or as close to it as possible) sheet is the right thing to do, and I say that as someone that was happy Mecca was built with the Olympic sheet. Times have changed and the game has left the larger sheet behind in just about every facet and at every level. Sad but true.

I still say ****** the shootout.
This. With the college landscape changing as much as it has in the past few years (esp for powerhouse programs that have many a player leaving for the NHL), going with NHL ice is a good choice.

Koho
11-18-2013, 08:29 PM
This. With the college landscape changing as much as it has in the past few years (esp for powerhouse programs that have many a player leaving for the NHL), going with NHL ice is a good choice.

I don't think what the NHL does should dictate what college hockey does. And from the looks of this year's freshman class, I don't think the large sheet has hurt Gopher recruiting. The game is more fun to watch on bigger ice. Period. If there were a way to keep it that way, that is what I would want to see from college up. The NHL talks about shrinking goalie pads a couple inches, about tighter rules, even tossing around the idea of a bigger net (not seriously) to get more scoring. But more scoring by hacking in a puck with 6 bodies crammed in front of the net is only marginally more interesting. Goals set up by great skating, great stickhandling and passing plays are what make the game more interesting, and there are more of those on big ice with how fast the game is. I've always found olympic games (that are actually on the correct size rink) as the most entertaining hockey to watch. And I think having slightly different sized and shaped rinks in college to add to the game, much like fields vary greatly in baseball.

And yes, I hate the shootout. Even the NHL is talking about extending overtime to get more games settled with teams playing hockey.

The Rube
11-18-2013, 10:06 PM
I don't think what the NHL does should dictate what college hockey does. And from the looks of this year's freshman class, I don't think the large sheet has hurt Gopher recruiting. The game is more fun to watch on bigger ice. Period. If there were a way to keep it that way, that is what I would want to see from college up. The NHL talks about shrinking goalie pads a couple inches, about tighter rules, even tossing around the idea of a bigger net (not seriously) to get more scoring. But more scoring by hacking in a puck with 6 bodies crammed in front of the net is only marginally more interesting. Goals set up by great skating, great stickhandling and passing plays are what make the game more interesting, and there are more of those on big ice with how fast the game is. I've always found olympic games (that are actually on the correct size rink) as the most entertaining hockey to watch. And I think having slightly different sized and shaped rinks in college to add to the game, much like fields vary greatly in baseball.

And yes, I hate the shootout. Even the NHL is talking about extending overtime to get more games settled with teams playing hockey.

My point, as of right now, colleges are becoming NHL stepping stones, moreso than in the past. So, to recruit, it would make sense to conform to whatever the NHL is doing. Sometimes it sucks (shootouts), sometimes it's good (similar ice-size, for experience on said ice sheet). That's my only point.

Hammy
11-18-2013, 11:00 PM
Saying what size rink equates to a better game is an opinion, not a fact. So there is no "period" about it. It's like blond vs. brunette. It is a matter of taste.

While I have never had anything major against the Olympic sheet, I'd argue that the puck movement can actually be slowed down by that size ice sheet because players feel they can lug the puck around more because of the extra time/space they have as opposed to moving the puck more quickly to an open teammate. Personally, I enjoy the playmaking that tends to develop from quick puck movement than I do when guys think they can dangle it around more on their own. To me, this is a major difference between college and pro. Players move the puck more quickly to the open man in the pros because they know they can't waste a lot of time. Things happen faster. Turnovers, etc.

One of the things Lucia always used to remark on when we would be preparing to play at the old DECC (which was even smaller than the standard 200x85 NHL rink) is how quick you have to move the puck and how quickly things can happen if/when you have a break down.

Making remarks on it based on how the NHL looks is misleading because the NHL places far more emphasis on big, physical players that are meant to clog things up. Even then, I'd argue that what has held back scoring in the NHL has more to do with more athletic goalies (and the ridiculous size of the gear they wear).

The Olympic rink is more the exception than the rule with most young players. Most of them spent their youthful development on normal size rinks. I have no problem with them shrinking it to a 200x90 size, etc.

Stauber1
11-19-2013, 12:02 AM
Saying what size rink equates to a better game is an opinion, not a fact. So there is no "period" about it. It's like blond vs. brunette. It is a matter of taste.

While I have never had anything major against the Olympic sheet, I'd argue that the puck movement can actually be slowed down by that size ice sheet because players feel they can lug the puck around more because of the extra time/space they have as opposed to moving the puck more quickly to an open teammate. Personally, I enjoy the playmaking that tends to develop from quick puck movement than I do when guys think they can dangle it around more on their own. To me, this is a major difference between college and pro. Players move the puck more quickly to the open man in the pros because they know they can't waste a lot of time. Things happen faster. Turnovers, etc.

One of the things Lucia always used to remark on when we would be preparing to play at the old DECC (which was even smaller than the standard 200x85 NHL rink) is how quick you have to move the puck and how quickly things can happen if/when you have a break down.

Making remarks on it based on how the NHL looks is misleading because the NHL places far more emphasis on big, physical players that are meant to clog things up. Even then, I'd argue that what has held back scoring in the NHL has more to do with more athletic goalies (and the ridiculous size of the gear they wear).

The Olympic rink is more the exception than the rule with most young players. Most of them spent their youthful development on normal size rinks. I have no problem with them shrinking it to a 200x90 size, etc.

Koho said the game is more fun to watch on Olympic ice, so I'm pretty sure he was clear about expressing opinion.

If you prefer a game that lends itself to trapping styles, then a smaller ice sheet is what you are looking for. If you prefer a game that lends itself to big and physical players rather than small and elusive, then a smaller sheet is what you want. If you prefer a game played more in the corners and along the walls, then again the smaller sheet is what you want. And if you want a game with more dumping than carrying the puck into the zone and setting up...you know where this is going.

I agree with Koho (in case that hasn't become clear :p). For my money, the most entertaining brand of hockey tends to be on a larger surface. Otherwise it's too much about systems, positioning, systems, positioning, systems; and not as much freewheeling, letting-it-hang-out hockey. So I'll be pretty bummed if they change the size at Mariucci. I don't believe the current sheet is or ever will be preventing high-caliber players from coming to MN and developing.

Hammy
11-19-2013, 12:36 AM
If you prefer a game that lends itself to trapping styles, then a smaller ice sheet is what you are looking for. If you prefer a game that lends itself to big and physical players rather than small and elusive, then a smaller sheet is what you want. If you prefer a game played more in the corners and along the walls, then again the smaller sheet is what you want. And if you want a game with more dumping than carrying the puck into the zone and setting up...you know where this is going.

I kind of laugh at the assertion that the smaller sheet tends to negate smaller, skill players in favor of the big boys. You might want to tell that to talented average size (or smaller) players of recent years that played on the regulation (or close to regulation) size rinks. What about a kid like Jack Connolly at UMD (or a few of his linemates)? Or some of the better players that UND has had over the years (Parise, Toews, Oshie, etc. were hardly players that got by due to their size)? Or how about that NCAA program named Boston College? They sure have sucked over the last 10+ years, right? Often times their program has been relying on smaller guys to be major contributors playing their home games on a 200x87 sheet. Sorry fellas... but reality isn't exactly backing you up here with these assertions. Especially considering BC is very much respected for its skill play and that is what we are trending toward in our current situation here.

And as I said... the vast majority of these kids grew up playing on small rinks and learning how to be creative on them. It's hardly the hindrance you guys act like.

My feeling is some people have become too caught up in what poisoned the NHL for many years in the 90s and first half of the last decade. Which was stifling defense revolving around a lot of obstruction. It wasn't due to rink size. Not sure how old some people here are but I don't recall fast skating and creativity to be much of a problem on NHL size rinks when I was a kid/teen when I grew up watching some of the greatest offensive players that ever lived do their magic on an NHL size sheet.

Stauber1
11-19-2013, 01:09 AM
I kind of laugh at the assertion that the smaller sheet tends to negate smaller, skill players in favor of the big boys. You might want to tell that to talented average size (or smaller) players of recent years that played on the regulation (or close to regulation) size rinks. What about a kid like Jack Connolly at UMD (or a few of his linemates)? Or some of the better players that UND has had over the years (Parise, Toews, Oshie, etc. were hardly players that got by due to their size)? Or how about that NCAA program named Boston College? They sure have sucked over the last 10+ years, right? Often times their program has been relying on smaller guys to be major contributors playing their home games on a 200x87 sheet. Sorry fellas... but reality isn't exactly backing you up here with these assertions. Especially considering BC is very much respected for its skill play and that is what we are trending toward in our current situation here.

And as I said... the vast majority of these kids grew up playing on small rinks and learning how to be creative on them. It's hardly the hindrance you guys act like.

My feeling is some people have become too caught up in what poisoned the NHL for many years in the 90s and first half of the last decade. Which was stifling defense revolving around a lot of obstruction. It wasn't due to rink size. Not sure how old some people here are but I don't recall fast skating and creativity to be much of a problem on NHL size rinks when I was a kid/teen when I grew up watching some of the greatest offensive players that ever lived do their magic on an NHL size sheet.

Eh, you were the one who said the NHL trended toward bigger and more physical players to clog things up, and that making remarks based on how the NHL looks isn't exactly apples-to-apples. I think that cuts both ways. Guys like Parise, Toews and Oshie were pretty decent sized for the college game (5'11", 6'2", 5'11" and built like a brick ****house, respectively). Beyond that, they were/are some incredibly talented individuals and that has allowed them to translate their game to the NHL environment. I find it hard to believe you can say with a straight face that a larger ice surface doesn't negate some of the advantages of size and reach in favor of speed and agility. I think most people see that to be the case. And I think that lends to a more attractive style. At least, more attractive from where I sit. And more exciting.

As for the argument that these guys grow up on 200x85 sized sheets, that is a bit of a non sequitur for me. If I may exaggerate to make a point: if you put a bunch of 7-year-olds on an NHL rink it will seem like they have a ton of space. As guys get bigger and faster, that space starts to shrink.

Hammy
11-19-2013, 02:03 AM
Size plays a role in the NHL because those guys draft so much of it because the style is more physical. It's clogged up by the nature of their style. But that's not the rink size at fault. As I said, I watched some of the greatest hockey players ever show tremendous skill and creativity on that size sheet. A lot of it comes down to what the refs/rules allow. Cut down on interference, the game opens up for everybody.

The rink size cuts down some open space but the question is more about whether that has a significant impact. I don't think cutting down on 10 feet of width has that dramatic of an impact on their ability to be successful nor do I think it dramatically hurts the flow of skill play. And let's be honest... we know the brand of hockey Coach Lucia wants to emphasize. Do you really think he'd want to do something that was going to HURT that brand of hockey he wants to play? Something tells me his hockey mind knows better.

By your account of things, you'd think any college team that plays on an NHL type rink would avoid recruiting any of the smaller guys on the college level because they just want to clog, trap, etc. as that is what you think they benefit from on their size rink. But that's not backed up by reality and I gave you examples that prove to the contrary. In particular, BC completely wipes out that rationale. BC has been the most successful college program of the past decade and they have had a number of highly skilled small guys that played big roles in their success. UMD's title team had a top scoring line built on two guys under 5'9" and another guy that was 5'11 and not a big bruiser (and JT Brown at 5'10).

I'll give you an example of how rink size sometimes plays into incorrect assumptions. Last off-season, I saw some guy making comments that Cammy and Kloos wouldn't be as effective in college because he felt much of their offensive success in the USHL was based on the fact they played on an Olympic sheet at Waterloo (close to it via 200x98 sheet). So I decided to look into their USHL stats last year to see if that opinion had merit. What did I find? I found that both players were very close to a 50/50 split in their offensive stats based on home rink (big sheet) vs. away rinks (I believe there is only one other Olympic sheet in the USHL and the rest are regulation or smaller). Considering players tend to have better home stats than road stats, I found that close to even split to be pretty darn good. In other words, his remarks on rink size having a negative impact on their game wasn't validated (at least it wasn't based on statistical production).

As I said, I have no major problem with the Olympic sheet. It's not like I would be upset either way. But I do think some people have opinion based on gut feelings more than what reality actually tends to show.

As for your bottom statement... the point is most of these guys are coming in from having played many of their games in the prior year or two on regulation rinks. They are generally more accustomed to doing their thing on that size rink than they are on a rink that is more of an outlier.

SanTropez
11-19-2013, 08:50 AM
Not sure how old some people here are but I don't recall fast skating and creativity to be much of a problem on NHL size rinks when I was a kid/teen when I grew up watching some of the greatest offensive players that ever lived do their magic on an NHL size sheet.

I watched the North Stars "back in the day"

Have you ever watched one of those old late 70's early 80's NHL games when they replay them once in a while? The players and pads aren't even close to the size of what is out there today, they had tons of free wheeling space on the standard size rink because of that fact alone. The pads on players and goalies are ridiculous in today's game.

Sorry but I would rather not watch the Wisconsin Badger type style of clogging boring play, give me Gopher wide open "pond Hockey" any day.

mnstate0fhockey
11-19-2013, 10:44 AM
I'm not going to get in the middle of the debate on ice size, because I can see both sides, but one thing I do know will help recruiting is the upgrades to the locker rooms, team rooms, etc.... I've seen/heard about the new facilities at Notre Dame and Penn State (among others) and they look/sound pretty impressive. Really happy and excited to see the updates they make at Mariucci. Sounds like these areas will be completely redone and should be top notch. That will certainly help with recruiting (not that we needed a ton of help) :)

CollegeHockeyRinkReport
11-19-2013, 11:05 AM
Minnesota- North Dakota running away with poll so far for best college hockey rivalry

http://www.sbncollegehockey.com/2013/11/19/5120410/union-rpi-rivalry-heats-up-ecac-hockey-rick-bennett-seth-appert-shayne-gostisbehere

Hammy
11-19-2013, 12:00 PM
I watched the North Stars "back in the day"

Have you ever watched one of those old late 70's early 80's NHL games when they replay them once in a while? The players and pads aren't even close to the size of what is out there today, they had tons of free wheeling space on the standard size rink because of that fact alone. The pads on players and goalies are ridiculous in today's game.

Sorry but I would rather not watch the Wisconsin Badger type style of clogging boring play, give me Gopher wide open "pond Hockey" any day.

Do you read any other points? Just because you have a regulation rink doesn't mean you are doomed to play like UW. How can you explain BCs style of play and success with it if what you seem to be assuming were true? BC plays on a 200x87.

I agree pads are ridiculous size but are you trying to tell me that's what creates less space? Lol... A few inches here or there of extra pads?

As for player size, it is a factor but it's mainly because the NHL allowed the game to turn into more of a slug fest and less about skill play. The rink size isn't at fault for that.