2021 NCAA Championship: No. 1 Northeastern Huskies vs. No. 2 Wisconsin Badgers

[FredsDeadFriend]

All true but I think even Gopher fans would agree that Minnesota’s goaltending would’ve very likely had them knocked out in the first game (assuming they would’ve started with Colgate).

No, we would NOT agree. Goaltending got UMn a tie and into OT in their last 2 regular season games vs Natl Champions Wisconsin, and that same goaltending gave us an easy sweep of Frozen Four team UMD, and that goaltending allowed us to outscore another Frozen Four team, OSU in total in our 6 games, keeping 3 of the 4 losses to 1 goal margins.

 

[robertearle]

I am not trying to besmirch her. Don't know her and she is probably very nice. I am just answering Robertearle's question with my opinion and some additional information that leads me in that direction. I cannot say one way or the other definitively.

- Yeah, you are.

- What "additional information"?

- "Nice play but not intentional" as you said earlier sure looks like you saying it "definitively" to me....

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

I certainly believe MN deserved to be in the tournament over UMD. I’m referring specifically to a scenario in which MN replaces UMD in the Colgate game. In that one game, Colgate played really well and only Soderberg saved UMD’s bacon. I think Colgate would have beaten MN.

According to what evidence? UMn swept UMD. UMD beat Colgate. Since that is the only evidence we can really base anything on, it seems clear to me UMn would have handled Colgate.

 

[Rightnut]

- Yeah, you are.

- What "additional information"?

- "Nice play but not intentional" as you said earlier sure looks like you saying it "definitively" to me....

Are you her dad? Why is this so important to you? Its an internet discussion that has no answer. People are giving opinions. You have yours. I have mine.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Why is this so important to you?

You're new to having a discussion with RE aren't you?

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Well at least everyone's getting their final opinions, jabs, insults or whatever in before most of us fade away into the offseason. I will miss it! LOL!

 

[robertearle]

Are you her dad? Why is this so important to you? Its an internet discussion that has no answer. People are giving opinions. You have yours. I have mine.

You didn't answer the question. You claim "additional information"; what "additional information"?

One needs a "reason" to rise to the defense of a person who is not in a position to defend herself from being called a liar?

 

[pgb-ohio]

Seriously? The difference between I was trying to pass it and got a lucky bounce versus I am so awesome that I saw this ridiculous play and was able to strategically bounce it off the defenders skate at precisely the perfect angle for it to bounce in for the championship winning goal.

Says the lifelong defenseman? It's not an easy shot, but it's certainly doable if the opportunity arises. Especially when the puck hits the opponent's body, as opposed to the skate. As happened in this case.

At the D-1 Level (either gender) the opportunity doesn't arise that much. The goalies & D are so good; the game is so fast. But think rec leagues, where the defense is sloppier so you get more opportunities. Over the course of decades, I scored a couple of bank shot goals -- at my lowly level. Trust me, no awesomeness is required. Just a willingness to try it.

 

[vicb]

According to what evidence? UMn swept UMD. UMD beat Colgate. Since that is the only evidence we can really base anything on, it seems clear to me UMn would have handled Colgate.

By your reasoning: (wink wink)
It was clear to everyone in 2014 that Minnesota would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 5 Minnesota 4 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2017 that Wisconsin would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 3 Wisconsin 0 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2018 that Wisconsin would beat Colgate. Colgate 4 Wisconsin 3. That was a fluke right.

Sometimes the clarity of ones opinion gets clouded by the reality of things. Just sayin. You have no clue in a one and done situation who will come out on top.

 

[TitleIXHockey]

By your reasoning: (wink wink)
It was clear to everyone in 2014 that Minnesota would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 5 Minnesota 4 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2017 that Wisconsin would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 3 Wisconsin 0 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2018 that Wisconsin would beat Colgate. Colgate 4 Wisconsin 3. That was a fluke right.

Sometimes the clarity of ones opinion gets clouded by the reality of things. Just sayin. You have no clue in a one and done situation who will come out on top.

I thought Minnesota and Wisconsin would win the first two, but I had Colgate over Wisconsin

 

[Hockeybuckeye]

Over the course of decades, I scored a couple of bank shot goals -- at my lowly level. Trust me, no awesomeness is required.

Now that you mention it I seem to recall you making one of those shots many years ago and you are right, it wasn't awesome! LOL! (Big Grin)

 

[Rightnut]

You didn't answer the question. You claim "additional information"; what "additional information"?

One needs a "reason" to rise to the defense of a person who is not in a position to defend herself from being called a liar?

You don't need a reason. You can "rise" to the defense of whomever you want. That is your prerogative. You should change your moniker to "Sir robertearle", white knight and protector of all on the internet. Sorry that a contrary opinion has put you into a tailspin.

 

[robertearle]

You don't need a reason. You can "rise" to the defense of whomever you want. That is your prerogative. You should change your moniker to "Sir robertearle", white knight and protector of all on the internet. Sorry that a contrary opinion has put you into a tailspin.

You still didn't answer the question: what "additional information"?

 

[Offsides Guy]

According to what evidence? UMn swept UMD. UMD beat Colgate. Since that is the only evidence we can really base anything on, it seems clear to me UMn would have handled Colgate.

I don’t know if this is considered evidence or not but the gophers were definitely trending in the wrong direction going 3-7-1 (with 2 of those wins being against the mightily struggling Beavers) in their last 11 games. Listening to Gopher fans on the forum, the criticism was mainly focused on the defense and goaltending. Certainly some of those 7 losses were low scoring affairs but, regardless, the gophers lost. Hence I’m comfortable saying the gophers would’ve lost a close game to Colgate.

 

[Rightnut]

You still didn't answer the question: what "additional information"?

Keep asking and I will tell you.

 

[vicb]

....... but I had Colgate over Wisconsin

Ok so everyone minus 1 on that one. LOL

 

[Timothy A]

And it was clear to everyone in 2018 that Wisconsin would beat Colgate. Colgate 4 Wisconsin 3. That was a fluke right.

In 2018 WI was missing Pankowski and Clark due to the Olympics and it was somehow a minor miracle that they did as well as they did missing so much offense and had questions in goal with ARD gone. That year I was downplaying WI the whole year. I was not surprised by that result. Sad, but not surprised.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

By your reasoning: (wink wink)
It was clear to everyone in 2014 that Minnesota would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 5 Minnesota 4 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2017 that Wisconsin would beat Clarkson. Clarkson 3 Wisconsin 0 That was a fluke right.
And it was clear to everyone in 2018 that Wisconsin would beat Colgate. Colgate 4 Wisconsin 3. That was a fluke right.

Sometimes the clarity of ones opinion gets clouded by the reality of things. Just sayin. You have no clue in a one and done situation who will come out on top.

Well yeah sure, in a one and done tournament anything can happen, but that is just a weak deflection from the point that what DID happen in the tournament with the teams that DID get in, was a team that UMn easily swept, beat Colgate. No one could predict Clarkson's win over the Gophers in 2014, as even with a roster chock full of Canadians, the Gophers of that time period were almost unbeatable. BUT... despite Minnesota being so "almost" unbeatable, 7 other teams were given the chance to beat them, and out of the 35 teams from 2012-2016 who were given a chance to beat the Gophers, ONE of those teams, a team chock full of almost nothing but Canadians, were able to beat them by a single goal. My point? This year's Gopher squad should have been given one of those 8 chances to win the Title, or one of those 7 chances to beat the almost undefeated and #1 ranked Northeastern team. And this is America, so sure, of course you have your right to your opinion. But so do I. And when I express my opinions, I try as much as possible to include FACTS and STATS and evidence to support my opinion, something more substantial than, "well anything can happen and I think X would have happened". I mean, you DID try to present evidence, in the form of some Gopher women's hockey fans opinions, opinions based on the fact that most of those fans are SPOILED. They see a close loss to a conf competitor and they feel they have to blame something or someone. With an offense that had been able to outscore the Buckeyes in their first 2 series' which they split, getting swept, even in 2 close 1 goal losses, must have been the goalie's fault, right? Not the offense who failed to score on an equal par with their earlier games vs OSU, that couldn't have been the problem, it had to be the goalie's fault, lol.

 

[FredsDeadFriend]

I don’t know if this is considered evidence or not but the gophers were definitely trending in the wrong direction going 3-7-1 (with 2 of those wins being against the mightily struggling Beavers) in their last 11 games. Listening to Gopher fans on the forum, the criticism was mainly focused on the defense and goaltending. Certainly some of those 7 losses were low scoring affairs but, regardless, the gophers lost. Hence I’m comfortable saying the gophers would’ve lost a close game to Colgate.

According to whom? Gopher fans who have been spoiled by watching their team dominate the sport from 2012-2016?

They weren't trending in the wrong direction, they simply played the vast majority of their Top 4 ranked opponents during those last 11 games. They played back to back to back to back series' vs Wisc, then OSU, then Wisc, then OSU. EIGHT STRAIGHT GAMES vs Top 4 rated teams. And if anything, the GOAL TENDING was trending UP, it was their goal SCORING that may have trended down, as they scored 8 goals against OSU back in January but only 3 goals in their February meetings, likewise they allowed 7 goals in the January games and only 5 in the February games. In their January games vs UW, the Badgers scored 11 goals vs the Gophers, but in their February games they only scored 6 goals against the Gophers. As for the mightily struggling Beavers, those Beavers were able to get a split against UMD just a month earlier, and the Gophers scored 15 vs them the weekend after the Badgers only scored 11 against them.

 

[robertearle]

Keep asking and I will tell you.

This is #4, maybe? How many does it take?

What "additional information"?