Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

[MadCityRich]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

These guys ****ing suck. Defense is ****ing horrible and Lebedeff is a "Playskool Plastic Hammer". **** that Finnish Hammer ****.

I think it was the 3rd goal (I lose track) Inamoto was just standing next to the guy on the back door and never touched him. That guy should've been on his ****ing back looking up at the lights and the little birdies circling his head.

To Mr. C.Caufield....you're in last place, down a couple, stuff in a puck, then hush the crowd? Up where you're going, try that! You'll be out of commission for a while.

I would THOROUGHLY enjoy seeing Johan Blomqvist shut out Meatchicken the rest of the way. He has truly paid his dues.

How frustrating.

[MadCityRich]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

How do you measure Granato screwing the pooch? And what "hard questions" would help in putting together that article? (Q: "So you guys really screwed the pooch this year, eh?" A: "yeah, this whole season is fuскеd") Just putting out a flimsy slam piece on the coach because it feels right doesn't seem like his style.

What do you expect him to be able to put together that would both satisfy you and actually be a coherent, insightful article based on facts (something that wouldn't be rejected by any professor/TA on campus)? Is there some deep, dark secret for someone to uncover? Or were you just looking at previous rosters, comparing them to this year's roster, looking at the winning percentages, and feeling that it's absurdly disappointing? Because that's a tweet, not an article. Every game recap shows these results.

I'd ask him,
"Why, with all this talent, is this team so bad? The kids were successful where they were."

"Why is this team so bad defensively?"

"Why can't you recruit a Tier 1 or Blue Chipper Goaltender?"

I know this is college and not the NHL, but all the fans that pay the bills are wondering, so why wouldn't a "journalist" ask the tough questions?

I understand Todd's position; the old rock-and-a-hard place. But where is Bucky's 5th Qtr or other independent local sports hacks?

[srkbadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Penalty kill is like keystone cops.

[srkbadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Inamoto must be -10. I guess he can’t since we’ve only let in 8. Inamoto seems to be on the ice for many of the goals.

[srkbadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Mercifully it ends at 8-4. Who will Tony send out to defend this on the radio post game?

[WiscTJK]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Ugly ugly ugly!

[digitalbooya]

Mercifully it ends at 8-4. Who will Tony send out to defend this on the radio post game?

Osiecki: “We played well!”

Lmao.

[srkbadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

I guess I’m blind. Osiecki and Posick think they played well and didn’t get the breaks at some critical times. I just didn’t see it for the most part.

[UCBadger]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

My son, who played Lacrosse in high school (and wore #22) and graduated from Syracuse a few years ago, sent me this link about the history of #22 in Syracuse Lacrosse history.

I found the side story of how Syracuse Lacrosse as fallen from the top of college lacrosse eerily similar to the hockey fortunes of Wisconsin.

https://dailyorange.com/2020/02/shad...cuse-lacrosse/

toward the end the article notes:

In the last decade, four new teams won a national championship, and Syracuse made just one Final Four. The Orange’s recruiting power waned as a result.

“For a very, very, very long time, if you wanted to win a national championship, you went to Syracuse,” Jamieson said.



Edit...sorry if link does not work. The address is:

dailyorange.com/2020/02/shadow-of-greatness-history-of-22-syracuse-lacrosse/

[WiscTJK]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Osiecki: “We played well!”

Lmao.

You gave up 8 goals. You didn't play well.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Through 2 in Michigan. Lebedeff has to be pulled again giving up 4 in the 2nd. I’ve said it before, and likely say it again, this team is bad. Defense plays like traffic cones, and while that’s not helpful to Lebedeff, he doesn’t often bail them out. Defensive “insufficiencies” says Posick in his between period analysis.

I think pulling goalie with 15 seconds in the game is unacceptable. It's not his fault he gave up 5. The 5th goal is questionable. I watched in slowmo, he was on the angle, it did not change directions but he didn't see it as he never reacted to it, it was a pretty close in shot. What is the point of yanking him with 15 seconds left? Is he not going to start tomorrow or is Blomquist? Leave him in there, let him rally and get the guys back into the game. All this yoying goalies is just destroying confidence. It's not sparking the team at all. It hasn't all season. Just another tactic that isn't working like everything else.

Goal 1 was the same PP UM ran last week and he had a tough chance on the back door there, he almost got there. UW continually leaves the back door open on the pp. You MUST not let the pass get through the crease. UM obviously watched the film of UM's pp last week. Didn't UW watch the UM pp film last week? Goal 2 Inamoto just does nothing to impede the shooter. NOTHING. Goal 3 Kalynuk does not close on the shooter, he just tries to get in the way. Goal 4 Inamoto again does nothing. All these goals are inside the dot shots. Cujo, Cary, Derksen, Ritcher, Anderson, Valley, Goody, Dauber, Petersen, Rumps ect are going to have a hard time stopping shots when they are practically on top of you. Also goal 8 Inamoto does not tie up the stick on the deflector. If Inamoto plays tomorrow these coaches have no balls.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

I guess I’m blind. Osiecki and Posick think they played well and didn’t get the breaks at some critical times. I just didn’t see it for the most part.

I think they are lamenting Cole's shot off the crossbar in the 2nd, the botched Douhgie/Baker break down low in the 2nd and the goaltending, which is not the primary problem.

[solovsfett]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Didn’t listen to nor watch a minute. Exactly what was Osiecki 🍸 my or huffing that he thinks UW played well when they lose 4-8???
If they were 20-4-4 and lost 8-4 I can see an ooops type game here but....now? Fire them. All of them. And now.

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey 2019-20 Part II: Civil War

Didn’t listen to nor watch a minute. Exactly what was Osiecki 🍸 my or huffing that he thinks UW played well when they lose 4-8???
If they were 20-4-4 and lost 8-4 I can see an ooops type game here but....now? Fire them. All of them. And now.

They looked good at times, but 7 times they looked bad and UM buried every chance. On goal 7 I think it was Zimmer did pretty much all he could do there he had the guy on his knees with is back to the crease and the guy kicked it towards the net, it glanced off his stick and went in.

[druzy192]

How do you measure Granato screwing the pooch? And what "hard questions" would help in putting together that article? (Q: "So you guys really screwed the pooch this year, eh?" A: "yeah, this whole season is fuскеd") Just putting out a flimsy slam piece on the coach because it feels right doesn't seem like his style.

What do you expect him to be able to put together that would both satisfy you and actually be a coherent, insightful article based on facts (something that wouldn't be rejected by any professor/TA on campus)? Is there some deep, dark secret for someone to uncover? Or were you just looking at previous rosters, comparing them to this year's roster, looking at the winning percentages, and feeling that it's absurdly disappointing? Because that's a tweet, not an article. Every game recap shows these results.

If theres no outside pressure than Granato wont be fired this year. If theres no articles about it in the paper than there wont be any pressure on Alvarez to make the change. Alvarez doesn't come on here and check to see what we think. He needs to know that there are questions and people are ****ed.

Questions that should be asked: "why do you think, after 4 years of not making the NCAA's, should you continue to be the coach of the badgers? Why do you think, after being the coach with the worst winning percentage in program history, that you deserve to continue to be the coach? Fans are wondering why, after 4 years and all the resources you have at the UW, why you should continue to be the coach after you have finished in last place and had the best recruiting class in the nation"

Those are legitimate questions. Not a hit piece. Obviously.

And WISCDC (AKA "Princess") if you think those questions are too tough for Granato... Milewski can preface them all with "Fans may be thinking"... or "some are suggesting" to soften the blow so Granatos feeling aren't hurt.