Re: Michigan Wolverines 2011-2012 hockey thread
And the moment I type that I recall that we wore blue against red-clad Wisconsin two years ago, though they wore red pants. My guess? The teams decided Maize contrasted better. The look does add to the non-home feel of the game for OSU, though; lots of Michigan fans present, Michigan clearly more comfortable in the outdoor environment, wearing home unis... I can't believe we got away with this.
Thought provoking post, as always. Good to have you back on the board.
The Frozen Diamond Classic was a great event to be part of, regardless of the final score. But you're saying that we "overpaid" for the chance to play outdoors. Several reactions:
1. I can honestly that this never occurred to me until reading your posts. It's a good, challenging thought. But even with 20-20 hindsight I don't feel cheated.
2. As for the jersey colors, I think you nailed it in your follow-up post when you said it was a good looking game. My take is that the powers-that-be settled on an arrangement that was favorable for all concerned. I highly doubt that the score would have been any different had Michigan been wearing either Blue or White. It was just a one-time, photogenic thing to do.
3. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? No question that Michigan had a greater comfort level on the big stage, and that this had an impact on the outcome. But how is a rising program going to develop that same comfort level if they refuse to play in such games?
4. Given the current CCHA standings, giving up a home game does appear to be a negative. But remember that this event wasn't scheduled during the last couple of weeks. Back when the relevant decisions were made, the potential cost probably didn't seem as high. Put another way, only the very most optimistic observers would have predicted the results enjoyed by the Buckeyes during the first half of the season. Since we actually are in the middle of a chase for the regular season title, maybe the timing was poor. But again, who woulda thunk? For my part, the focus should be on the program's earlier than expected progress, not the arguably unfortunate timing of one off-campus game.
5. I have no inside knowledge on this, but I was under the impression that Progressive Field Snow Days was sponsored by the Cleveland Indians. In other words, Ohio State wasn't issuing invitations, it accepted an invitation. As such, the event wasn't a Buckeye creation as much as it was an Indians creation. Note that the outdoor rink has been up and running for a while, and hosted other games prior to the Ohio State/Michigan match-up. If all of that's accurate, it puts your comments in a slightly different light.
6. Should Ohio State be invited to host another game at Progressive Field, I'd allow that I'd prefer a different opponent next time. Michigan State? Notre Dame? Perhaps Penn State, a couple of years down the line? Any of the above would be appealing. But be all that as it may, it was appropriate to have the Wolverines be a part of Cleveland's first outdoor game.
My two cents, FWIW.
