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.

Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Williams, Cerretani and Norman made appearances on the ice tonight. Morris came into the game at the 9:48 mark in the second period. He is a little guy and played well. He and Ouellette each allowed a goal. It was fun watching 4 on 4 in OT. The UNB goal was clearly after the horn. Anyone know how Jon Swavely is?
 
Last edited:
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Are they doing 4 on 4 ot for all the games this year?
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Runsub5 said:
4 on 4 if both coaches agree in out of conference games only I believe.
Click to expand...

Why is the NCAA so stubborn to change on this? It makes for more exciting hockey.

Does it have something to do with concern for rankings?
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Some coaches have been trying to establish 4 on 4 hockey for the last few years. It's always up for discussion by the NCAA rules committee. Maine coach Whitehead has been a strong supporter of 4 on 4 in OT. The players love it and so do the fans. The main concern I have heard from those who oppose it, is that the team with the more skilled players has the advantage with 4 on 4. My point is, if a team is more skilled, then why is there a tie? I agree with you.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

So Marty and Morris combined for a .931 tonight..? I like it, even in an exhibition.

Maine is going to need 'tending like that all year long just avoid a sub-.500 season, IMO.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

One more observation about last night's game. After the UNB player committed the 5 minute major and game disqualification, Sweeney did not place another player in the penalty box. That occurred with approximately 1 minute left in the second period (I think). When the third period began, a UNB player was placed in the box.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

AMC said:
I would wager there are more UNH fans than Maine fans in the Berwicks.
Click to expand...
Yeah
more fans of Merrimack, BU, PC, Vermont, BC, UConn and every other HE school
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Runsub5 said:
One more observation about last night's game. After the UNB player committed the 5 minute major and game disqualification, Sweeney did not place another player in the penalty box. That occurred with approximately 1 minute left in the second period (I think). When the third period began, a UNB player was placed in the box.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too. Someone tried to explain to me that it didn't matter because there was only 1 minute left in the period but I had to explain to them that it did matter. With no one serving the penalty everyone on the bench can play which is not how it's supposed to be. Someone needs to serve so that the team is actually penalized.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Runsub5 said:
Some coaches have been trying to establish 4 on 4 hockey for the last few years. It's always up for discussion by the NCAA rules committee. Maine coach Whitehead has been a strong supporter of 4 on 4 in OT. The players love it and so do the fans. The main concern I have heard from those who oppose it, is that the team with the more skilled players has the advantage with 4 on 4. My point is, if a team is more skilled, then why is there a tie? I agree with you.
Click to expand...
I don't really agree with the statement that it helps the more skilled team. It helps the team that is more skilled in quickness, speed, and agility, but harms the team more skilled in player positioning and ability to play the body. I think it helps the more offensive-minded teams and hurts the more defensive-minded teams.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

Rob said:
Why is the NCAA so stubborn to change on this? It makes for more exciting hockey.

Does it have something to do with concern for rankings?
Click to expand...

I think it is because hockey is 5 on 5. Just as simple as that.

I do not understand why some leagues use the shoot out.. that is not "hockey" any more than a "shoot the puck in the cut out hole in plywood" between periods is.

If leagues are going to break ties using something other than hockey, then why don't the go to a random competition... spin wheel and pick any of:
basketball free throws
pin a tail on a donkey while blindfolded
texas hold em
dunk the AD by throwing a softball at a target.

none of those is any more "hockey" than a shoot out is.
and that is why i think the NCAA does not want to tweak the on ice strength of teams in OT
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

How about at least using the ice and hockey equipment, KIA. They could:

-Play 2 on 2 - goalies and a skater each, but the skaters have to stay between the blue lines.
-Move a goal to center ice and play with a short rink.
-Make positioning lacrosse-style: two skaters have to stay in the O zone, 2 in the D zone, and 1 can go end to end.
-Play 4-on-4: one guy playing goalie, but with regular equipment, and 3 skaters with goalie equipment.
-Full strength end to end, but they have to use the lower end of a broken stick.
-Connect their skates with a 12-inch rope to shorten their stride.
-Make lefties use a righty stick and vice-versa.

The point is, having different rules for overtime changes the game. Changes it, perhaps, in its very essence. And, as a coach, that change could be very disadvantageous. Of course, for others it will be very advantageous. Shoot-outs, for example, favor a team built on offensive prowess. It favors the team that concentrates on sleight-of-hand stickwork and fancy puck-handling over a team that concentrates on position defense, playing the body, strong checking skills. While breakaways are a part of the game, they are not the manner in which it is played.

And the same is true with 4-on-4. It does happen in the course of the game, but it is not how the game is played. As I said in a previous post, it helps the team built on speed and quickness and hurts the team of bruisers. If you've got a team of mini-mite speedsters and you're going to play a team of brutes (BC vs. 'Hack?), do you want to play the game on a small, short, narrow rink or on an Olympic rink? On the Olympic sheet, of course - your guys will have more room to maneuver and avoid the bruisers who would rather clog the lanes and have a body in the way at all times. So that same speedy team should be in favor of 4-on-4 OT, since the basic change to the game gives them an advantage.

We could argue the benefits and drawbacks to speedster-focused versus bruiser-focused hockey. You and I may prefer one style to the other, but both are valid styles of playing the game and I don't think it is fair to fundamentally change the game in OT, thereby giving one style an advantage.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

UncleRay said:
How about at least using the ice and hockey equipment, KIA. They could:

-Play 2 on 2 - goalies and a skater each, but the skaters have to stay between the blue lines.
-Move a goal to center ice and play with a short rink.
-Make positioning lacrosse-style: two skaters have to stay in the O zone, 2 in the D zone, and 1 can go end to end.
-Play 4-on-4: one guy playing goalie, but with regular equipment, and 3 skaters with goalie equipment.
-Full strength end to end, but they have to use the lower end of a broken stick.
-Connect their skates with a 12-inch rope to shorten their stride.
-Make lefties use a righty stick and vice-versa.

The point is, having different rules for overtime changes the game. Changes it, perhaps, in its very essence. And, as a coach, that change could be very disadvantageous. Of course, for others it will be very advantageous. Shoot-outs, for example, favor a team built on offensive prowess. It favors the team that concentrates on sleight-of-hand stickwork and fancy puck-handling over a team that concentrates on position defense, playing the body, strong checking skills. While breakaways are a part of the game, they are not the manner in which it is played.

And the same is true with 4-on-4. It does happen in the course of the game, but it is not how the game is played. As I said in a previous post, it helps the team built on speed and quickness and hurts the team of bruisers. If you've got a team of mini-mite speedsters and you're going to play a team of brutes (BC vs. 'Hack?), do you want to play the game on a small, short, narrow rink or on an Olympic rink? On the Olympic sheet, of course - your guys will have more room to maneuver and avoid the bruisers who would rather clog the lanes and have a body in the way at all times. So that same speedy team should be in favor of 4-on-4 OT, since the basic change to the game gives them an advantage.

We could argue the benefits and drawbacks to speedster-focused versus bruiser-focused hockey. You and I may prefer one style to the other, but both are valid styles of playing the game and I don't think it is fair to fundamentally change the game in OT, thereby giving one style an advantage.
Click to expand...

Liked the 4-4...even when we had the SH situation....made it exciting....and I am a traditionalist still call them sweaters and not jerseys... only wish we had gotten there the night before...not sure I want to go to shoot out though

marty and Morris looked good overall...Marty played big , morris played athletic and quick all good... PP needs work, but will come in short order. ,Cornell seems to get puck off quick and on net, we need bodies there.. Pryor can skate, but is too on the edge at the moment. On D, Rutt didn't have a great weekend, Nemec finally looked like he realised he was a big guy out there, and a mature player, Hutton is going to get burned soon, as he learns, but some talent there...Norman....well.....his brother plays pro....maybe that's the link...looked scared out there.....

Anthoine needs to step up, Beattie too, too much talent not too score early and often, Joe's hit wasn't egregious and maybe speaking to the refs before the games will help, but he has to learn that he doesn't get a second chance....leadership is a funny thing that way
, Liked Shore, Ceratani's speed, Higgins/Shemmy/Anthoine could do some damage over the year....Liedermark seems to be in decent shape and that can only help, Swavelys looked like they worked hard until Sr got drilled in knee..Merchant may be the sleeper.........Even Riley upfront was encouraging......2 down , 38 to go...hang to your toques.........:)
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

It works in the NHL because there are 82 games and you get an OTL point. College has half the games and no extra point; I don't know how difficult it would be to incorporate that extra point into RPI and PWR.

I saw something once that said even without OTL points most years there's no change to the NHL playoff field. I'm not entirely sure that'd be the case in the NCAAs so in my opinion I think that's why you won't see it.
 
Re: Maine 2012 - The Good, the Bad, or the Ugly??

I know Orono is a heck of a long way from Kansas City, but, is there any organized contingent of Maine fans coming to Kansas City this weekend? At a cursory glance, I didn't even see any mention of the Icebreaker in this thread, even.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top