Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

[West Texas Wolverine]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Somebody please tell me the BTHC will not have shootouts for tie games! Does anyone know what the league policy will be?

 

[alfablue]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Anyone else a little concerned that your prized freshman Phil's OHL rights just got aquired by Red's new arch nemesis the Windsor Spitfires?
I see another defection coming...

Happens every year. And every year, we still play hockey. Go ahead and worry about it, if you want.

 

[JoeZ]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

And here's the Wolverine.com article about it- http://michigan.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1287316
Not sure what he did, but it sounded fairly bad, and they are taking it very seriously.

Red has always been a no-nonsense type. This is by far the longest suspension he has handed out so, yes, it is V-E-R-Y serious.

My GUESS is he will return to play in the GLI.

 

[wolverineTrumpet]

Somebody please tell me the BTHC will not have shootouts for tie games! Does anyone know what the league policy will be?

Lol. One of my first thoughts about BTHC. Sadly, I believe the Big Ten Network will think hockey shootouts are exciting and hope for them every game...while continuing to provide lousy announcers (and maybe even iterrupting live hockey for bouncyball pressers).

As for goalie commits, 3rd time's a charm? *fingers crossed*

For now though, there's this season and an interesting CCHA to deal with. I expect some hard-hitting, close score games against the Broncos.

 

[Alton]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Sadly, I believe the Big Ten Network will think hockey shootouts are exciting and hope for them every game...

Personally, I think that the BTN will keep out anything that might push the game outside of a 2.5-hour window. That's the problem with the shootout for TV--all of a sudden, the game starts creeping up to 2:45 or so, with all of the milling around on the ice that seems to happen between the end of overtime and the start of the shootout. It's very TV-unfriendly watching coaches choose their lineups and the refs remind everybody of the rules.

Personally, I never understood everybody's alleged opposition to the shootout. Sure, it's a coin flip, but why not? I think NCAA hockey is the only significant level of hockey anywhere in the world that still mostly rejects shootouts for regular-season games. I can't find any European league that doesn't have a shootout after a tied game, and I know all North American professional and semiprofessional leagues use them as well.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Personally, I never understood everybody's alleged opposition to the shootout. Sure, it's a coin flip, but why not? I think NCAA hockey is the only significant level of hockey anywhere in the world that still mostly rejects shootouts for regular-season games. I can't find any European league that doesn't have a shootout after a tied game, and I know all North American professional and semiprofessional leagues use them as well.

My opposition to it is entirely based on wanting the Pairwise or some similar objective system to continue to select the NCAA tournament at-large spots. How much is a shootout win and loss worth in the RPI/etc. compared to a regulation win? All those other leagues simply have a point system to determine postseason eligibility. NCAA hockey having that is impossible.

 

[streaker]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Personally, I think that the BTN will keep out anything that might push the game outside of a 2.5-hour window. That's the problem with the shootout for TV--all of a sudden, the game starts creeping up to 2:45 or so, with all of the milling around on the ice that seems to happen between the end of overtime and the start of the shootout. It's very TV-unfriendly watching coaches choose their lineups and the refs remind everybody of the rules.

Personally, I never understood everybody's alleged opposition to the shootout. Sure, it's a coin flip, but why not? I think NCAA hockey is the only significant level of hockey anywhere in the world that still mostly rejects shootouts for regular-season games. I can't find any European league that doesn't have a shootout after a tied game, and I know all North American professional and semiprofessional leagues use them as well.

My objection to the shootout is that.... we haven't been very good at it.

Actually, I don't like it because it is a glorified skills competition (like in soccer) that decides 65 minutes of blood sweat and tears. That's just wrong-what's wrong with a tie? Second, it hasn't been proven to artificially affect playoff positioning in conference, but I am sure as the sample size grows, it eventually can. Third, some lesser skilled teams will play for the chance to get to the shootout, making the OT a slumberfest in order to gain at least one point and possibly steal another. I have seen this in the NHL.

To me it's a gimmick that suits the fans in attendance but does nothing for a viewing audience on tv.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

On a side note, I see all the Michigan/Western trash talk is on the CCHA blog, which explains why I hadn't noticed it until now. That whole "reading Paula's column" to get to that point doesn't usually seem to be worth it.

 

[JoeZ]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

My objection to the shootout is that.... we haven't been very good at it.

Actually, I don't like it because it is a glorified skills competition (like in soccer) that decides 65 minutes of blood sweat and tears. That's just wrong-what's wrong with a tie? Second, it hasn't been proven to artificially affect playoff positioning in conference, but I am sure as the sample size grows, it eventually can. Third, some lesser skilled teams will play for the chance to get to the shootout, making the OT a slumberfest in order to gain at least one point and possibly steal another. I have seen this in the NHL.

To me it's a gimmick that suits the fans in attendance but does nothing for a viewing audience on tv.

Jim
I could not have said it better myself!
I agree 1000% (three zeroes, no typo)

 

[JoeZ]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

My opposition to it is entirely based on wanting the Pairwise or some similar objective system to continue to select the NCAA tournament at-large spots. How much is a shootout win and loss worth in the RPI/etc. compared to a regulation win? All those other leagues simply have a point system to determine postseason eligibility. NCAA hockey having that is impossible.

I'm not completely sure, only 99%, but I do not think it counts in the PWR or RPI. Ties after the 5 minute overtime go into the official books as ties.

SOWs count only in league standings for playoff seeding purposes (and bragging rights) only.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

I'm not completely sure, only 99%, but I do not think it counts in the PWR or RPI. Ties after the 5 minute overtime go into the official books as ties.

SOWs count only in league standings for playoff seeding purposes (and bragging rights) only.

Yeah, but if it became a NCAA-wide initiative (because they're the only "major" league not to do so per Alton), I'd be afraid of them trying to quantify it in all games instead of just conference point standings.

 

[Alton]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Actually, I don't like it because it is a glorified skills competition (like in soccer) that decides 65 minutes of blood sweat and tears. That's just wrong-what's wrong with a tie?

If there's nothing wrong with a tie, why do we have overtime? Also--it's a sport, so the whole thing is a glorified skills competition from the opening faceoff to the final buzzer. Why not a slightly different glorified skills competition to determine a winner?

Actually, I have a better idea than the shootout, and it provides a guaranteed winner.
* Overtime is not 5-on-5 or 4-on-4, but 5-on-3.
* The first goal wins, and if neither team scores, the shorthanded team wins.
* The visiting team determines how long overtime will last and then the home team determines whether to go on the power play or the penalty kill.

Ending the game on a 5-on-3 equals guaranteed excitement--even more exciting than a shootout! I can't imagine that anybody will be sitting down when the power play team pulls its goalie for a 6-on-3 with 30 seconds or so left in the overtime.

Until the CCHA adopts the "Alton Overtime" for next season, though, Michigan will have to work on their shootout skills, especially since Western seems to like tie games almost as much as soccer teams do.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

On a side note, I see all the Michigan/Western trash talk is on the CCHA blog, which explains why I hadn't noticed it until now. That whole "reading Paula's column" to get to that point doesn't usually seem to be worth it.

Who are all of those people??? Spend time posting to complain about the blog (which I admit has a point), but not to join over here and start a real game thread.

hm.

Should be a good weekend of hockey. Western is back up playing good hockey, and has ALWAYS played well at Yost- typically way over their normal play. (the only time I remember otherwise was in the early to mid 90's.- and even then, I remember the game that needed a major penalty to tie the game)

I'm starting to think our offense is real. Still quite concerned about the defense, but Hunwick is doing a heck of a job bailing plays out. (not going to post more details than that, since for a regular reader, it would be very redundant- this for the red guy complaining about specifics)

 

[streaker]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

If there's nothing wrong with a tie, why do we have overtime? Also--it's a sport, so the whole thing is a glorified skills competition from the opening faceoff to the final buzzer. Why not a slightly different glorified skills competition to determine a winner?

Actually, I have a better idea than the shootout, and it provides a guaranteed winner.
* Overtime is not 5-on-5 or 4-on-4, but 5-on-3.
* The first goal wins, and if neither team scores, the shorthanded team wins.
* The visiting team determines how long overtime will last and then the home team determines whether to go on the power play or the penalty kill.

Ending the game on a 5-on-3 equals guaranteed excitement--even more exciting than a shootout! I can't imagine that anybody will be sitting down when the power play team pulls its goalie for a 6-on-3 with 30 seconds or so left in the overtime.

Until the CCHA adopts the "Alton Overtime" for next season, though, Michigan will have to work on their shootout skills, especially since Western seems to like tie games almost as much as soccer teams do.

Sarcasm/

Ties are fine with me, especially for Christmas.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Who are all of those people??? Spend time posting to complain about the blog (which I admit has a point), but not to join over here and start a real game thread.

hm.

Should be a good weekend of hockey. Western is back up playing good hockey, and has ALWAYS played well at Yost- typically way over their normal play. (the only time I remember otherwise was in the early to mid 90's.- and even then, I remember the game that needed a major penalty to tie the game)

I'm starting to think our offense is real. Still quite concerned about the defense, but Hunwick is doing a heck of a job bailing plays out. (not going to post more details than that, since for a regular reader, it would be very redundant- this for the red guy complaining about specifics)

Mlive? If so, I kinda hope they stay there. The silver lining about being a chitty team for something like 9 of the 13 years I've followed them is that there aren't hordes of D-bag fans with "Bronco" in their name.

I'm pretty interested in seeing how Western hangs this weekend, and how they deal with an actual hostile crowd. As far as *always* bringing their A game, I think you're forgetting the 10-3 game in the early-mid 2000's that I was going to until I got sick that was 7-0 Michigan after the first quart...period. I thanked the fever I had for a few days after that one.

The enjoyable thing is that when the team isn't an 8-10 win squad, these games don't become the be-all and end-all to a season with nothing left to play for. As long as they're not blown off the ice, I'll feel about as good about this season as I do now.

 

[BII]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Fun game to watch.

 

[Eaglefan06]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

EDIT: well, I am an idiot. Wrong thread.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Entertaining game, and both coaches likely have plenty to tell their teams to work on. Quite a bit of derpy goaltending on both sides, though. Knock the puck in yourself on one side, dive for a call and watch them roof the puck on you on the other, couple of tricklers on top of that.

 

[alnike]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Entertaining game, and both coaches likely have plenty to tell their teams to work on. Quite a bit of derpy goaltending on both sides, though. Knock the puck in yourself on one side, dive for a call and watch them roof the puck on you on the other, couple of tricklers on top of that.

Nice road win for WMU. They took over the last 10 minutes of the game and Michigan knocked the puck into its own net for the second time of the game. Tough way to lose.

Speaking on the five goals, many were of the sloppy variety. Thought WMU's first goal was the only clean goal of the game as WMU won the physical battles in front of the net and Slater roofed it.

On the second, Hunwick makes the initial stop, but closed his pads and knocks it in.

On M's first goal, Kevin Clare scores into an empty net after Pisellini timbers when his own player highsticks him. No embellishment call either for letting go of his stick.

Mac Bennett squeaks in the second goal along the ice under his pad and M is lucky to be tied at 2.

On the gamewinner, Walters knocks the puck sideways away from the goal, but it deflects off Bennett's backhand and trickles towards Hunwick. Hunwick tries to gather it in, but sweeps it in the net with the paddle of his goal stick.

Will Saturday have another dramatic finish at Yost?

 

[alfablue]

Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread

Western played really well last night keeping the creativity of the o to very few chances. I can only remember a few coulda shoulda moments- the one glaring one being what could have been a go ahead goal in the third. So many save, so few really hard. Just a great job by the WMU defensive scheme.

Hope for another good game, although with fewer dives.