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.

Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

mnstate0fhockey said:
1. At least you're getting TV coverage (your program isn't exactly blessed here)

2. I live in Milwaukee and get to see the absolutely atrocious coverage you do get, and if that's your Gold standard for quality than that's comical.

3. Tell the BTN your gripes. Let's see who they listen to more.
Click to expand...

I'm sort-of with both you and MadCityRich. Our TV coverage is atrocious as a rule. It's picked up the 2nd half of the year thanks to NBCSN and BTN..and FSW too. Kelly and Clymer are good sometimes, to me it depends on the game (maybe just based on the day I had or my mood) but I think Kelly and Andringa are a better duo.

I do like Paul Braun..I know these days he mails it in sometimes or maybe he's just doing the best he can right now, and I admit it's a generational thing to me. That said, Brian Posick is fantastic.
 
TUSCHWI said:
I'm sort-of with both you and MadCityRich. Our TV coverage is atrocious as a rule. It's picked up the 2nd half of the year thanks to NBCSN and BTN..and FSW too. Kelly and Clymer are good sometimes, to me it depends on the game (maybe just based on the day I had or my mood) but I think Kelly and Andringa are a better duo.

I do like Paul Braun..I know these days he mails it in sometimes or maybe he's just doing the best he can right now, and I admit it's a generational thing to me. That said, Brian Posick is fantastic.
Click to expand...

You gotta remember, Andringa has been doing this longer than Clymer has. I think Ben has done a good job and is getting better.

Like Wes said, BTN's coverage isn't perfect, but they are improving. And it's hard to complain too much when they are putting so much effort into the coverage and have been seeking feedback. It will continue to get better I think.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

Go4PuckFan2.0 said:
A well thought, lucid analysis.

And non of it will matter when the puck drops.
Click to expand...

Here, I can help you with that..."none".;) As it turned out it DID matter, as a few keys for the Gophers that I mentioned in the Gopher/Badger preview post had a direct bearing on the outcome of the game.

I mentioned the PP would play a key role and it did for both teams. Wisconsin was 1/10 in their 4 previous games (10% is pathetic), but buried the lone PPG which trickled through Wilcox's pads to give them the lead. The Gophers had scored 7 PPGs in the last 5 games and went 0/4 last night. That played a HUGE role in the Gopher's overall failure to bury their best chances throughout the game.

I also mentioned that the Gophers would need to plant big bodies, like Fasching and Ambroz, in front of Rumpel for cleanup. In recent games the Gophers have been repeatedly successful near the crease and unfortunately it never happened last night. Arguably that was partially due to the Badger D doing a fairly good job last night of plugging up lanes in front of Rumpel. But I did not see enough sustained effort around the paint from the Gophers. IIRC Kloos led all shooters with 5 SOG and Rau was a close second, and both were in Rumpel's face "at times". But overall the Gophers had a lot of Grade A shots but didn't produce rebounds which typically happen with screens in front like the Gophers have often done this season, and its paid big dividends thus far. Most of Ambroz's 11 team leading goals and many of Fasching's recent tallies have been launched from the edge of the paint.

I mentioned the need to match the Badgers physicality and the Gophers did, but with one costly exception that left McCabe moving freely in space and untouched to position himself for the GWG. If you look at the replay, Travis Boyd was 5 feet away and could have/should have poke checked the puck off McCabe's stick. Maybe Boyd was out of gas at that point...it happens, but he made a very lame attempt to block it.

I thought the Gopher transition game was excellent, and led to odd man rushes and scoring opps. I thought the Gopher D was very animated, poised and alert, blocking shots, playing the walls well in transition, and demonstrated very good puck control throughout the game. But if you look at the shot chart, very few shots around the paint which is where most goals will be scored in a defensive game like last night and especially on a big goalie like Rumpel whose 6'3" frame and long wing span can cover the entire net effectively and quickly. I think we'll see more bodies in front tonight.:cool:
 
Last edited:
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

TUSCHWI said:
I'm sort-of with both you and MadCityRich. Our TV coverage is atrocious as a rule. It's picked up the 2nd half of the year thanks to NBCSN and BTN..and FSW too. Kelly and Clymer are good sometimes, to me it depends on the game (maybe just based on the day I had or my mood) but I think Kelly and Andringa are a better duo.

I do like Paul Braun..I know these days he mails it in sometimes or maybe he's just doing the best he can right now, and I admit it's a generational thing to me. That said, Brian Posick is fantastic.
Click to expand...
I think we could go back and forth on the Andringa/Clymer thing. I know Gopher fans hated having a BADger in the booth(not me personally) and I'm assuming BADger fans don't like having a Gopher in the booth. LOL! If the gripe is about him being a Gopher, I'd say "get over it" or "grow up". I think as B1G hockey progresses they will be able to represent more teams in terms of color guys. Until then we will have to stick with what they give us, I guess.

I honestly wouldn't be mad if they put Andringa in the booth tonight and moved Clymer down to the ice. Not sure what they have in the works...
 
gopher wes said:
I think we could go back and forth on the Andringa/Clymer thing. I know Gopher fans hated having a BADger in the booth(not me personally) and I'm assuming BADger fans don't like having a Gopher in the booth. LOL! If the gripe is about him being a Gopher, I'd say "get over it" or "grow up". I think as B1G hockey progresses they will be able to represent more teams in terms of color guys. Until then we will have to stick with what they give us, I guess.

I honestly wouldn't be mad if they put Andringa in the booth tonight and moved Clymer down to the ice. Not sure what they have in the works...
Click to expand...

I think both Andringa and Clymer have done a good job. Both have been fairly good at staying impartial. I'd be fine with either. If you want homer coverage, listen to the radio broadcasts.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

I thought Clymer was okay. My issue with him wasn't bias (I thought Kelly was worse in that respect and sometimes seemed to be goading Clymer to be more biased), but rather with his penchant for long-winded, slow-moving stories that bled over the action (insert joke about Badger offense here).
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

mnstate0fhockey said:
1. At least you're getting TV coverage (your program isn't exactly blessed here)

2. I live in Milwaukee and get to see the absolutely atrocious coverage you do get, and if that's your Gold standard for quality than that's comical.

3. Tell the BTN your gripes. Let's see who they listen to more.
Click to expand...

mnstate0fhockey said:
You gotta remember, Andringa has been doing this longer than Clymer has. I think Ben has done a good job and is getting better.

Like Wes said, BTN's coverage isn't perfect, but they are improving. And it's hard to complain too much when they are putting so much effort into the coverage and have been seeking feedback. It will continue to get better I think.
Click to expand...

Good point about Clymer - I actually like his Gopher coverage better and agree he is getting better, as is BTN in general. As someone noted earlier, the women's field hockey announcer ESPNU used earlier this season set the bar very low :-)
 
TUSCHWI said:
Good point about Clymer - I actually like his Gopher coverage better and agree he is getting better, as is BTN in general. As someone noted earlier, the women's field hockey announcer ESPNU used earlier this season set the bar very low :-)
Click to expand...

Yeah, that ESPN play-by-play guy was brutal.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

HarleyMC said:
Here, I can help you with that..."none".;) As it turned out it DID matter, as a few keys for the Gophers that I mentioned in the Gopher/Badger preview post had a direct bearing on the outcome of the game.

I mentioned the PP would play a key role and it did for both teams. Wisconsin was 1/10 in their 4 previous games (10% is pathetic), but buried the lone PPG which trickled through Wilcox's pads to give them the lead. The Gophers had scored 7 PPGs in the last 5 games and went 0/4 last night. That played a HUGE role in the Gopher's overall failure to bury their best chances throughout the game.

I also mentioned that the Gophers would need to plant big bodies, like Fasching and Ambroz, in front of Rumpel for cleanup. In recent games the Gophers have been repeatedly successful near the crease and unfortunately it never happened last night. Arguably that was partially due to the Badger D doing a fairly good job last night of plugging up lanes in front of Rumpel. But I did not see enough sustained effort around the paint from the Gophers. IIRC Kloos led all shooters with 5 SOG and Rau was a close second, and both were in Rumpel's face "at times". But overall the Gophers had a lot of Grade A shots but didn't produce rebounds which typically happen with screens in front like the Gophers have often done this season, and its paid big dividends thus far. Most of Ambroz's 11 team leading goals and many of Fasching's recent tallies have been launched from the edge of the paint.

I mentioned the need to match the Badgers physicality and the Gophers did, but with one costly exception that left McCabe moving freely in space and untouched to position himself for the GWG. If you look at the replay, Travis Boyd was 5 feet away and could have/should have poke checked the puck off McCabe's stick. Maybe Boyd was out of gas at that point...it happens, but he made a very lame attempt to block it.
Click to expand...

So let's see...Good PP/PK play, plant bodies in front of the net to screen and play rebounds, play physically...that sounds like a good formula for [insert Team A] to play against [insert Team B].

Way to go out on a limb with your preview. Careful that you don't strain something patting yourself on the back.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

As far as the BTN color guys go, I would like more strategy info as far as the point/counterpoint to breakouts. On a somewhat related comment, we sat behind the Duluth bench a few weeks ago on at women's game in Madison and it was really cool to see the F bombing UMD coach draw up a new breakout on the grease board, then watch the dawgette players execute it. Then I noticed UW counterpointed it after a period of time.

The play by play guy did end up being too pro rodent by the end of the game.

I think the rodents simply didn't finish/have a little puck luck on some open nets that was the difference in the game. But after losing a game like that to OSU a few weeks ago where UW just didn't connect, it was good to steal one.

If Eaves breaks up Zengerlee/Kerdiles after Barnes get back he should be fired. There's no way any sane person could break that combo up. They, along with Barnes last year carried UW to the ncaas; them, Mr. Rumpel and the D scoring like they are now.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

Any critique of BTN coverage needs to take into account that it's still a wide reaching coverage, which is always good.

Any defense of the BTN coverage should take Ito account that they can- and should- strive to be MUCH better than they are.

Very excited for the conclusion tonight. I expect another good game, and a fired up crowd.
 
ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Any critique of BTN coverage needs to take into account that it's still a wide reaching coverage, which is always good.

Any defense of the BTN coverage should take Ito account that they can- and should- strive to be MUCH better than they are.

Very excited for the conclusion tonight. I expect another good game, and a fired up crowd.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It hasn't been perfect, but at least they are putting in the effort.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

gopher wes said:
I didn't notice that. It might have seemed that way because was seriously tilted for the better part of the 3rd period...?
Click to expand...

He kept talking them up and not just doing the play by play. I kinda miss Wooger doing the color.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

mnstate0fhockey said:
Completely agree SOH and Wes. I have been more upset after some of ours wins this season. We've played a few we probably could have lost because of poor play, but managed to win. I have no problems with the way the Gophers played last night. Hope to see more tonight.
Click to expand...

This x 2. That was a fun game to watch.
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

KaMiGo said:
So let's see...Good PP/PK play, plant bodies in front of the net to screen and play rebounds, play physically...that sounds like a good formula for [insert Team A] to play against [insert Team B].

Way to go out on a limb with your preview. Careful that you don't strain something patting yourself on the back.
Click to expand...

Well, where's your preview, so we can grade it. I supose it was something like "trap, trap, trap some more, get lucky, then trap."
 
Re: Minnesota @ Wisconsin: 2/6 & 2/7

Happy said:
Well, where's your preview, so we can grade it. I supose it was something like "trap, trap, trap some more, get lucky, then trap."
Click to expand...


"Whine about style of play, whine, whine some more, lose a game coz your team can't impose their style successfully enough, then whine some more about style of play."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top