tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

[Runninwiththedogs]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Not good: passing was again atrocious. Decision making was slow, and cost them (credit to UMD on that, the Bulldogs played very high-pressure all game and gave the Gophers no time to get comfortable in the offensive end).

This was painfully obvious. The Gophers could have killed us if they had been quicker to make plays.

[The Rube]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Applause! Applause! This is my exact feeling.

Other examples of fluke goals: Wes Walz getting checked into the net with the puck in his breezers. Or an own goal on a delayed penalty or something. Something where your team is not generating offense. If a team is in front of the net putting the puck toward the goalie, it's nothing to be dismissed.

Just because the goalie is fooled or not expecting something (i.e. the David Fischer Special) doesn't make it a fluke. It doesn't have to be a perfect pretty bang-bang-bang goal for me to acknowledge it. If we all waited for perfect goals, we'd be waiting a long long time... and we hate it when our teams are trying to get "too cute" or "too fancy with the puck" or waste time waiting for the perfect highlight reel setup.

Brent did consider the 2nd goal to be a fluke, I should mention that. And then he admitted based on that it should be a tie.

And I'm not looking for the bang-bang play. But I just dismiss Fisher specials (that was a textbook fluke goal, IMO). Now, say it was shot from the circle, and it goes off a stick/shoulder/leg/whatever of a d-man in front of the net (like we've seen so many times), well, that just happens. Is that semantics? Sure, if you want to call it that, it is.

And thank you for backing me up on that MN 2nd goal thing, RWD.

[Stauber1]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

UMD played far better in the overtime aside from 45 seconds at about the 3 min mark.

You mean they had the better of the play while on the man advantage?

I think last night was a very even game, probably the most even I've seen all year. Could have gone either way.
As far as the Gophers, there were some real good things and some real bad things. I thought the effort was very good. Despite what was said in the above post, I thought they showed some great grit and willingness to get their noses dirty in front of the net in the offensive end.
Not good: passing was again atrocious. Decision making was slow, and cost them (credit to UMD on that, the Bulldogs played very high-pressure all game and gave the Gophers no time to get comfortable in the offensive end). Defensively looked pretty weak (looking at Fischer, he was directly involved/at fault for 3 of the UMD goals). And that 4th goal....you just can't let that kind of play occur, especially with 12 seconds left in overtime.
Honestly, this Gopher team is not far off. But they need to stop bleeding points and not put themselves in too deep a hole. I really was hoping to come into tonight without it feeling like a must win....c'est la vie.

[Runninwiththedogs]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

lol, come on, 2-3 more wins this season if they were luckier? I do not subsribe to "fluke goal theory." Goals like the ones UMD scored last night are the norm in hockey, not the exception. Guys clog the front, go hard to the net, throw shots on goal, put things in motion and hope for a deflection, screen, or rebound. A fluke goal is Bina's 190 footer. A fluke goal is a bounce off the boards and then off the back of the goalie's head into the net. Should MN's 2nd goal be a fluke because it was deflected and trickled in the far side?

Applause! Applause! This is my exact feeling.

Other examples of fluke goals: Wes Walz getting checked into the net with the puck in his breezers. Or an own goal on a delayed penalty or something. Something where your team is not generating offense. If a team is in front of the net putting the puck toward the goalie, it's nothing to be dismissed.

Just because the goalie is fooled or not expecting something (i.e. the David Fischer Special) doesn't make it a fluke. It doesn't have to be a perfect pretty bang-bang-bang goal for me to acknowledge it. If we all waited for perfect goals, we'd be waiting a long long time... and we hate it when our teams are trying to get "too cute" or "too fancy with the puck" or waste time waiting for the perfect highlight reel setup.

Brent did consider the 2nd goal to be a fluke, I should mention that. And then he admitted based on that it should be a tie.

[The Rube]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

First off, I've already said MN's 2nd goal was a fluke.

However, I do not attribute 2-3 more wins to just "fluke" goals. I'm talking about overall play. If MN got just a couple bounces their way (yes, I know that's part of hockey, so don't patronize me on that one) in the games they played like they played last night, I could add those wins in without even thinking about it.

Let's put it this way:

If both teams play tonight like they did last night, write down a MN win. If fUMD steps it up a bit and plays like they are capable of, then I'd be worried.

[gordwiser]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

A penchant for the dramatic, eh?

As was stated in the full context of my ranting and raving, you play out the game tonight 10 times, MN will win 8. Why? Because of fluke goals. It happens. I wish MN had the luck tUMD did tonight. I think I could legitimately add 2-3 wins this season (tonight included).

Are they goals in the final score? Yes. But do they paint a true picture of the game tonight? No. Hence, the "fluke" designation. As the saying goes: "Better lucky than good." I'm not saying tUMD is bad, because they are not. But tonight, they were indeed more lucky than good.

And before you ask, I'd trade a win for the "dishonor" or whatever of being more lucky than good.

lol, come on, 2-3 more wins this season if they were luckier? I do not subsribe to "fluke goal theory." Goals like the ones UMD scored last night are the norm in hockey, not the exception. Guys clog the front, go hard to the net, throw shots on goal, put things in motion and hope for a deflection, screen, or rebound. A fluke goal is Bina's 190 footer. A fluke goal is a bounce off the boards and then off the back of the goalie's head into the net. Should MN's 2nd goal be a fluke because it was deflected and trickled in the far side?

The outcome of that game is very representative of how it was played. Neither team dominated, and UMD played far better in the overtime aside from 45 seconds at about the 3 min mark. MN got physically demolished in the first period skating down the middle of the ice. Until MN straps on a set and gets strong in front of the net, on both ends, they are going to lose more games than they win based on so-called "fluke" goals. They simple don't do enough to get the same kind of bounces that other teams are taking advantage of to score.

[Skeeterman]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Let's face facts:
1. gophers are just not that good.
2. NHL draft picks are overrated.
3. too many prima donnas.
4. They don't get any of these top high school recruits to do a year of juniors, so they just can't play with the big boys.
5. Lou Chia is past his glory years. The only teams he won with were guys that the previous coaches recruited. Maybe he was never a good coach.
6. Bulldogs have more skill, more heart, as do most of the other WCHA teams.
7. Their fans are mostly bandwagon types, not true hockey fans
8. In line for a 7th place finish.

[proman]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

What I saw last night was 2 teams that have some good players but looked a little panicky at times when the going got tough. I've watched a good bit of both teams live or on TV this year and neither team played great but I liked the pace of the game that they tried to play at. They both played like they have a lot of young guys (which they do). As for fluke goals, both had 1. Hansen's shot is going 3-5 feet wide and somehow Reiter cuffs it and redirects it in. Danberg's is obviously flukey but why are a couple of Gophers just standing around. Reiter was shaky, but his D bailed him out (he overplayed every shot). Both teams are "middle of the road WCHA,fighting for an NCAA berth" teams at this point but both have a chance to improve and I think both will.

[Driftryder]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.

I don't think Gopher fans are satisfied with the performance last night since it ended with a loss. Yes they played pretty good during stretches last night but couldn't hold on to or extend a 2-0 lead or hold on to a tie with 11 seconds left in OT.

[The Rube]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.

I'm not satisfied with Fisher. I'm satisfied with how the rest of the team played overall, though.

It's not like they lost to UAA or anything. They lost to fUMD. fUMD is a pretty good team.

[beersong]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.

[The Rube]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

My how the mighty have fallen when their fans start counting up "fluke" vs "non-fluke" goals, then stating that their team "won" in the "non-fluke" goal category. Congratulations - I'm sure you were smiling as widely as tDon was on the post-game interview.

That being said, tDogs played poorly last night. I look for a better perfomance tonight.

Sorry, beersong, but I gotta chuckle a little here, since you seem to agree with me on one aspect (bolding/italics are mine):

Originally posted by beersong on GPL:
After the first 10 minutes or so it was one of the worst games I've seen the Bulldogs play this season. 1-6 on the powerplay and two of the goals last night were flukey garbage goals. Didn't deserve to win the game, but somehow they did and have at least 2 points to bring back home.

That's all I've been saying, and breaking down film when asked, etc.

[The Rube]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

And when did this take place? Again if I can get more information that will help. I have sent an email to the administrator to inquire about it. Believe what you want, it's really not that significant to me, but I am checking into it.

If it's so insignificant, then why bother the admins?

You win when you put more pucks in the net than the other guys.

Sweet. Then MN won last night 4-3, since Fisher (MN) put in a goal himself. Too bad it was in his own net.....but I'm just using your reasoning.

Other than that, bugger off.

[beersong]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

My how the mighty have fallen when their fans start counting up "fluke" vs "non-fluke" goals, then stating that their team "won" in the "non-fluke" goal category. Congratulations - I'm sure you were smiling as widely as tDon was on the post-game interview.

That being said, tDogs played poorly last night. I look for a better perfomance tonight.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

To be clear, you're referring to the 2nd half of last season.

The Gophers' first half of last season was very good.

Sure, absolutely. Since the start of the second half last year this team has sucked. Royally.