What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

'09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Derek Dunning said:
You're right that I doubt any team in the tournament would get outshot by 30.

GAC plays a very puck possession style of offense and they throw EVERYTHING on net when they are in the offensive zone.

Most teams that beat them usually employ a counter-attacking style.
Click to expand...

Say What??? Shots Gustavus 41 River Falls 16. Not quite a 30 shot difference but 25 is pretty good. So much for counter attacking also. Looks like the better team won this one. The NCHA may be a stronger league than the MIAC overall but Gustavus is CHAMPIONS of both leagues. Congrats to the Final Four Teams. Should be an interesting Championship!
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Say What? said:
Say What??? Shots Gustavus 41 River Falls 16. Not quite a 30 shot difference but 25 is pretty good. So much for counter attacking also. Looks like the better team won this one. The NCHA may be a stronger league than the MIAC overall but Gustavus is CHAMPIONS of both leagues. Congrats to the Final Four Teams. Should be an interesting Championship!
Click to expand...

River Falls had more than 16 shots. Another Don Roberts conundrum...you get 1 SOG for every 2 or 3 you take. I saw River Falls have 2 or 3 shots at goal and would see 1 go up on the board. On the other hand if Campbell touched the puck it was a SOG even if it wasn't likely to go in if she wasn't there. The 2nd and 3rd period were much closer than the SOG indicate
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

gojackets said:
River Falls had more than 16 shots. Another Don Roberts conundrum...you get 1 SOG for every 2 or 3 you take. I saw River Falls have 2 or 3 shots at goal and would see 1 go up on the board. On the other hand if Campbell touched the puck it was a SOG even if it wasn't likely to go in if she wasn't there. The 2nd and 3rd period were much closer than the SOG indicate
Click to expand...

The official scorers (NOT the guy sitting at the scoreboard controls) said 16 SOG, so it was 16 SOG. You're absolutely right about the scoreboard though, they miss a lot of shots and tend to guess when they're screened.

The 2nd and 3rd were close, just because RF got a few GREAT looks at the net when they managed to get into the offensive zone. Most of these great looks resulted in wide shots, however. Thats why the SOG doesn't look right to you. Missing on a clear shot doesn't make it a SOG...
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

MNChamp said:
The official scorers (NOT the guy sitting at the scoreboard controls) said 16 SOG, so it was 16 SOG. You're absolutely right about the scoreboard though, they miss a lot of shots and tend to guess when they're screened.

The 2nd and 3rd were close, just because RF got a few GREAT looks at the net when they managed to get into the offensive zone. Most of these great looks resulted in wide shots, however. Thats why the SOG doesn't look right to you. Missing on a clear shot doesn't make it a SOG...
Click to expand...

I"m pretty sure the scoreboard at the end of the game said 16 on it for RF. I know what a SOG is buddy
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

gojackets said:
I"m pretty sure the scoreboard at the end of the game said 16 on it for RF. I know what a SOG is buddy
Click to expand...

It may have, I don't remember. All I'm saying is I trust what the box score says... Almost the entire game was played in the River Falls zone so it doesn't seem too farfetched that they only had 16, does it?
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

MNChamp said:
Thats why the SOG doesn't look right to you. Missing on a clear shot doesn't make it a SOG...
Click to expand...

Neither is a dump into the zone, but i saw quite a few shots go up for the gusties on those..don't get me wrong though i'm not in any way, shape, or form saying RF deserved to win that game, they weren't on their game at all. Congrats to them, now represent the west!
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

PondHock123 said:
Neither is a dump into the zone, but i saw quite a few shots go up for the gusties on those..don't get me wrong though i'm not in any way, shape, or form saying RF deserved to win that game, they weren't on their game at all. Congrats to them, now represent the west!
Click to expand...

Yeah the guy that runs the scoreboard seems to put anything up if it goes within reach of the goaltender. Probably goes by the "if the goalie wasn't there, it would have gone in" classification of a SOG. Thats why I tend to go with what the box score released by the stats people says.
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

MNChamp said:
Yeah the guy that runs the scoreboard seems to put anything up if it goes within reach of the goaltender. Probably goes by the "if the goalie wasn't there, it would have gone in" classification of a SOG. Thats why I tend to go with what the box score released by the stats people says.
Click to expand...

yeah, i also noticed that at least two times there were 2 SOG's added per actual SOG
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Say What??? I do believe Carville and Matalin and a few of their close personal friends are blogging again!!!! Look fast as they make a quick exit from their vacation in Wisconsin Whine Country!!!!:D
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Let's just put these comments into perspective here.

Assuming that the scorekeepers, for some strange reason, posted two shots on net for each shot GA actually made, GA would still have taken in excess of 25 percent more shots on net than RF did.

Does anyone posting these comments think these posts will change the way people who watched the game perceived it? Of course not? So what purpose do they serve but to make themselves look foolishly biased, whiny, and envious?

From what I have seen of western and eastern teams this year, either team would have represented the west well. However Gustavus clearly dominated this game and seems to be the better representative. As I have mentioned in a post earlier in this thread or elsewhere, GA is 20-1-0 in its last 21 games which is better than any other DIII team, east or west. They clearly seem to be on a roll and improving along the way.

I am looking forward to the final four and am just sorry I won't be able to get out to St. Peter to attend the games in person.

I think it is going to be a great finish to a very good season overall.
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

Too bad the Finals couldn't be on Saturday in St Pete with the National Collegiate Women's Frozen Four right at Ridder on Friday and Sunday.
 
Re: '09-'10 D-III Bracketology

nbound said:
Any word on what times the games are this week end?
Click to expand...


This was on the NCAA website, but, of course is subject to change.

The national semifinals will start at 3:30 and 7 p.m. local time Friday, March 19. The host team will play in the second game.

The third-place and championship games will start at 3:30 and 7 p.m. local time
Saturday, March 20. Time and sequence of games are tentative and may be changed by the NCAA Division III Women’s Ice Hockey Committee.


Which would leave Elmira and Norwich in the early game and Gustavus and Amherst for the late one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top