BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

[Gurtholfin]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

Haha, did you watch the game?

I got the same impression. You honestly think that you are 6 goals better than Miami? It was 3-1 with 14 minutes to go.

You guys look very good, but please.

[Wreckincrew]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

$10.00 CASH to anyone that can figure out a way to have them both lose.

[Mook Williams]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

Mook, you are just digging yourself a deeper hole here. What is this great difference in style of play in which your delusions lead you to think HE is superior? First of all you dare suggest a dive was committed in the 06 title game, a game which Wisconsin clearly dominated. Your goalie kept you in it.......as was the case in 90 at the Joe. Your conference has six titles in 27 years of play. If Wisconsin wins this game, the WCHA will have six titles in the last 9 yrs. Do you really want to debate conference superiority when armed with a squirt gun? We should be able to agree that Wisconsin has been hot through the tourney except for one period against Vermont (BTW We schooled your regular season champ twice this yr). Ask Barry Melrose if he has eyeballs. He sounded pretty convinced that Wisconsin looked unbeatable yesterday. With that said, anything can happen.

You have a serious credibility problem, IMO. WCHA play over the last few years, after being the dominant conference in the middle of the last decade, has lagged far behind the Hockey East and even the CCHA at times. WCHA no longer sits atop every one else, and the games themselves prove it. Tomorrow night will decisively end the argument, giving Hockey East 3 consecutive titles.

To deny that a dive was a pivotal play in the 2006 title game just isn't reasonable. Go watch it again.

LOL, you are now citing to BARRY MELROSE as a college hockey authority??????? NICE!

[RENCEB]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

Nope. BC was better than Miami yesterday, I'm not arguing that. They just weren't 6 goals better. They got that nice flurry (three goals in 1:35), which broke the game open. Good job, that isn't easy to do. However, if you played Miami again, do you honestly think you'd beat them by 6 again?

Wow, as someone stated, did you watch the game? In reality, it could have been 8 or 9 to 1! Reichard (spelling?) came in and made a couple of outstanding saves, although he did give up a softee on Carey's goal. BC thoroughly dominated every aspect of the game, from powerplays to penalty kill, offense, defense and goaltending. Miami laid a couple of big hits (great check at the blue line on Whitney IIRC), but other than their one goal, they didn't have any sustained control in the BC end. Perhaps another night, BC would not be 6 goals better, but last night they were that at the very least.

[thecomicbookguy]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

LOL, you are now citing to BARRY MELROSE as a college hockey authority??????? NICE!

Hey, maybe this is the one he'll get right?

It's bound to happen someday.

Right?

[Hincha]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

I was talking about the style of play between the conferences. You only need 2 eyeballs and a knowledge of hockey to witness that.

Here is your original post....

This one will not be competitive. Right now the Hockey East level of play, for a variety of reasons, is far superior to any other conference. You guys barely beat our 8th place team, for Pete's sake.

"Level" indicates performance/results, it does not have the same conotation as "style".

My conclusion in following your logic now is that BC will win by large margin because of "superior" "style" of play of Hockey East.... but it is not important that the rest of Hockey East is 1-2 in the tournament in support of this "superior" "style".

[Mook Williams]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

Hey, maybe this is the one he'll get right?

It's bound to happen someday.

Right?

The problem is that he switches his tune mid-game, depending on who looks better at the moment.

Did you see that awful selection show? It was probably the worst one yet.
The only thing it was missing was that Clay guy who is dreadfully wrong every time on his predictions.

[skeptic]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

You have a serious credibility problem, IMO. WCHA play over the last few years, after being the dominant conference in the middle of the last decade, has lagged far behind the Hockey East and even the CCHA at times. WCHA no longer sits atop every one else, and the games themselves prove it. Tomorrow night will decisively end the argument, giving Hockey East 3 consecutive titles.

To deny that a dive was a pivotal play in the 2006 title game just isn't reasonable. Go watch it again.

LOL, you are now citing to BARRY MELROSE as a college hockey authority??????? NICE!

Mook, to deny that Bucky wasn't BC's Daddy in that game is not reasonable. You were dominated. Your regular season champ couldn't have beaten Madison East High School when they visited Bucky this season. Lagged far behind? Have you seen the number of WCHA guys who left since 06 for the NHL? Do you wonder why, during the Gold Medal hockey game, you saw four ex Badgers on the ice at one time, not to mention the Sioux and Gopher players???? Did you notice the WJC tourney and it's WCHA flavor? Away with your piddly nonsense.

[RedFreak]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

Ever hear of the term "relevancy?"

How about the term "cherry picking"?

[Gurtholfin]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

How about the term "cherry picking"?

Sorta like bringing up one supposed bad call in a game 4 years ago.

We outplayed them in that game and should have won by more.

[thecomicbookguy]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

How about the term "cherry picking"?

How is it cherry picking to look at the successes of the players involved. As noted below, there is only one player, on either team, who played in 2006.

[Rand]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

How is it cherry picking to look at the successes of the players involved. As noted below, there is only one player, on either team, who played in 2006.

It wasn't about the players involved...MW convieniently picked "4 years" as his base for comparison, because picking 5 years would involve the smack down Bucky gave BC in 2006...

[RedFreak]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

How is it cherry picking to look at the successes of the players involved. As noted below, there is only one player, on either team, who played in 2006.

We hang all our championship banners at our arena. You?

[yankeefn01]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

BC seems to be hot at the right time of the year.

this seems to be too often of a trend...

[thecomicbookguy]

Re: BC vs Wisconsin...for All the Marbles

It wasn't about the players involved...MW convieniently picked "4 years" as his base for comparison, because picking 5 years would involve the smack down Bucky gave BC in 2006...

We hang all our championship banners at our arena. You?

And I'll ask, how is any of that relevant to this year's game?

You have ONE player with relevant experience, and, last I checked, you can't hang the banners from the crossbar to help defend the net.