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.

tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Legit non-fluke goals:
Click to expand...

A goal is a goal. Fancy, fluke, whatever. The object of this particular game is to score more goals, that is when the puck crosses a line into the opposing teams net. UMD scored more goals than its rival this eve and was the victor. Perhaps if you want to argue you can take it up with the NCAA rules comittee and make your "Legit" goals worth 3 points, and a "fluke" goal 1 point?

Or we can play and not keep score, at the end of the game a judging panel will rank each team on a scale of 1 to 10 based on athleticism, speed, strength, and artistic merit. The bottom and top score will be dropped, of course, and then the scores averaged. The higher of these scores will be declared the winner.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

InebriatedMike said:
A goal is a goal. Fancy, fluke, whatever. The object of this particular game is to score more goals, that is when the puck crosses a line into the opposing teams net. UMD scored more goals than its rival this eve and was the victor. Perhaps if you want to argue you can take it up with the NCAA rules comittee and make your "Legit" goals worth 3 points, and a "fluke" goal 1 point?

Or we can play and not keep score, at the end of the game a judging panel will rank each team on a scale of 1 to 10 based on athleticism, speed, strength, and artistic merit. The bottom and top score will be dropped, of course, and then the scores averaged. The higher of these scores will be declared the winner.
Click to expand...
That would work just fine and dandy until the Russians pay off the French Judges to vote with them. :rolleyes:
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

InebriatedMike said:
A goal is a goal. Fancy, fluke, whatever. The object of this particular game is to score more goals, that is when the puck crosses a line into the opposing teams net. UMD scored more goals than its rival this eve and was the victor. Perhaps if you want to argue you can take it up with the NCAA rules comittee and make your "Legit" goals worth 3 points, and a "fluke" goal 1 point?

Or we can play and not keep score, at the end of the game a judging panel will rank each team on a scale of 1 to 10 based on athleticism, speed, strength, and artistic merit. The bottom and top score will be dropped, of course, and then the scores averaged. The higher of these scores will be declared the winner.
Click to expand...

A penchant for the dramatic, eh?

As was stated in the full context of my ranting and raving, you play out the game tonight 10 times, MN will win 8. Why? Because of fluke goals. It happens. I wish MN had the luck tUMD did tonight. I think I could legitimately add 2-3 wins this season (tonight included).

Are they goals in the final score? Yes. But do they paint a true picture of the game tonight? No. Hence, the "fluke" designation. As the saying goes: "Better lucky than good." I'm not saying tUMD is bad, because they are not. But tonight, they were indeed more lucky than good.

And before you ask, I'd trade a win for the "dishonor" or whatever of being more lucky than good. :cool:
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Brenthoven said:
And before you ask, I'd trade a win for the "dishonor" or whatever of being more lucky than good. :cool:
Click to expand...
You know, if you wear one of those fancy shmancy figure skating outfits with the sequins, sparklers, shear lycra, and ruffles, it just might change UMTC's luck for the good.



Then again, you in an outfit that hideous might just cause a Gopher or 3 to look up at you in the stands, be blinded by the light, and then be out 4 to 8 weeks because they then crashed into something while blinded by the light. ;) EARWIG!
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Brenthoven said:
Edit: vf: Harley posted something, Dirty quoted to respond, Harley deleted post, then a couple minutes later (if that) Jock posted the exact same thing word for word. Lengthy post too, and it was quick enough to not be a C&P job.
Click to expand...

And when did this take place? Again if I can get more information that will help. I have sent an email to the administrator to inquire about it. Believe what you want, it's really not that significant to me, but I am checking into it.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Not sure if you have to fire tDon, but alumni and fans have to let him expand his recruiting radius. He took the job and had the smarts to see how the all Minny thing had not worked for Woog. He brought in non Minnys such as Vanek GPotulny and I believe Briggs and won two titles. He continued to recruit non Minn and brought in Little Potulny, Kessel, Chucko etc. But then I think he was told to restore the purity and the end result is missing the NCAAs and moral victories.

If tUMD limited their recruiting radius they would have missed out on some of their better players...Fontaine, Sharp, Raymond, MConnolly. Sure they have had star Minny players...tStalock, JConnolly, Meyers, Niskanen, and now Bordson, but a mixture is crucial.

Like my financial advisor says, a diverse portfolio provides the best opportunity for maximum performance.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Brenthoven said:
Way to take part of my post, Jockstrap, I mean Harley.

Take away the what-ifs. We still outplayed 'em, still score more non-fluke goals, and should have won using those facts.
Click to expand...

You win when you put more pucks in the net than the other guys.

Fact. Science.

I don't usually hang around WCHA threads, but I got to watch this game last night. Do you usually whine and complain when your team looses, or is this a special occasion?

Try to lose with some dignity, crybaby.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Bakunin said:
To be clear, you're referring to the 2nd half of last season.

The Gophers' first half of last season was very good.
Click to expand...

Sure, absolutely. Since the start of the second half last year this team has sucked. Royally.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

My how the mighty have fallen when their fans start counting up "fluke" vs "non-fluke" goals, then stating that their team "won" in the "non-fluke" goal category. Congratulations - I'm sure you were smiling as widely as tDon was on the post-game interview.

That being said, tDogs played poorly last night. I look for a better perfomance tonight.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

HarleyMC said:
And when did this take place? Again if I can get more information that will help. I have sent an email to the administrator to inquire about it. Believe what you want, it's really not that significant to me, but I am checking into it.
Click to expand...


If it's so insignificant, then why bother the admins? :p


Patronick said:
You win when you put more pucks in the net than the other guys.
Click to expand...

Sweet. Then MN won last night 4-3, since Fisher (MN) put in a goal himself. Too bad it was in his own net.....but I'm just using your reasoning.

Other than that, bugger off.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

beersong said:
My how the mighty have fallen when their fans start counting up "fluke" vs "non-fluke" goals, then stating that their team "won" in the "non-fluke" goal category. Congratulations - I'm sure you were smiling as widely as tDon was on the post-game interview.

That being said, tDogs played poorly last night. I look for a better perfomance tonight.
Click to expand...

Sorry, beersong, but I gotta chuckle a little here, since you seem to agree with me on one aspect (bolding/italics are mine):

Originally posted by beersong on GPL:
After the first 10 minutes or so it was one of the worst games I've seen the Bulldogs play this season. 1-6 on the powerplay and two of the goals last night were flukey garbage goals. Didn't deserve to win the game, but somehow they did and have at least 2 points to bring back home.
Click to expand...

That's all I've been saying, and breaking down film when asked, etc. :cool:
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

beersong said:
And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.
Click to expand...

I'm not satisfied with Fisher. I'm satisfied with how the rest of the team played overall, though.

It's not like they lost to UAA or anything. They lost to fUMD. fUMD is a pretty good team. ;)
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

beersong said:
And all I'm saying is it's really something to see UMTC fans satisfied with that performance last night.
Click to expand...

I don't think Gopher fans are satisfied with the performance last night since it ended with a loss. Yes they played pretty good during stretches last night but couldn't hold on to or extend a 2-0 lead or hold on to a tie with 11 seconds left in OT.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

What I saw last night was 2 teams that have some good players but looked a little panicky at times when the going got tough. I've watched a good bit of both teams live or on TV this year and neither team played great but I liked the pace of the game that they tried to play at. They both played like they have a lot of young guys (which they do). As for fluke goals, both had 1. Hansen's shot is going 3-5 feet wide and somehow Reiter cuffs it and redirects it in. Danberg's is obviously flukey but why are a couple of Gophers just standing around. Reiter was shaky, but his D bailed him out (he overplayed every shot). Both teams are "middle of the road WCHA,fighting for an NCAA berth" teams at this point but both have a chance to improve and I think both will.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Let's face facts:
1. gophers are just not that good.
2. NHL draft picks are overrated.
3. too many prima donnas.
4. They don't get any of these top high school recruits to do a year of juniors, so they just can't play with the big boys.
5. Lou Chia is past his glory years. The only teams he won with were guys that the previous coaches recruited. Maybe he was never a good coach.
6. Bulldogs have more skill, more heart, as do most of the other WCHA teams.
7. Their fans are mostly bandwagon types, not true hockey fans
8. In line for a 7th place finish.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

Brenthoven said:
A penchant for the dramatic, eh?

As was stated in the full context of my ranting and raving, you play out the game tonight 10 times, MN will win 8. Why? Because of fluke goals. It happens. I wish MN had the luck tUMD did tonight. I think I could legitimately add 2-3 wins this season (tonight included).

Are they goals in the final score? Yes. But do they paint a true picture of the game tonight? No. Hence, the "fluke" designation. As the saying goes: "Better lucky than good." I'm not saying tUMD is bad, because they are not. But tonight, they were indeed more lucky than good.

And before you ask, I'd trade a win for the "dishonor" or whatever of being more lucky than good. :cool:
Click to expand...

lol, come on, 2-3 more wins this season if they were luckier? I do not subsribe to "fluke goal theory." Goals like the ones UMD scored last night are the norm in hockey, not the exception. Guys clog the front, go hard to the net, throw shots on goal, put things in motion and hope for a deflection, screen, or rebound. A fluke goal is Bina's 190 footer. A fluke goal is a bounce off the boards and then off the back of the goalie's head into the net. Should MN's 2nd goal be a fluke because it was deflected and trickled in the far side?

The outcome of that game is very representative of how it was played. Neither team dominated, and UMD played far better in the overtime aside from 45 seconds at about the 3 min mark. MN got physically demolished in the first period skating down the middle of the ice. Until MN straps on a set and gets strong in front of the net, on both ends, they are going to lose more games than they win based on so-called "fluke" goals. They simple don't do enough to get the same kind of bounces that other teams are taking advantage of to score.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

First off, I've already said MN's 2nd goal was a fluke.

However, I do not attribute 2-3 more wins to just "fluke" goals. I'm talking about overall play. If MN got just a couple bounces their way (yes, I know that's part of hockey, so don't patronize me on that one) in the games they played like they played last night, I could add those wins in without even thinking about it.

Let's put it this way:

If both teams play tonight like they did last night, write down a MN win. If fUMD steps it up a bit and plays like they are capable of, then I'd be worried.
 
Re: tUMD @ UMTC : The in-state rivalry revisited!

gordwiser said:
lol, come on, 2-3 more wins this season if they were luckier? I do not subsribe to "fluke goal theory." Goals like the ones UMD scored last night are the norm in hockey, not the exception. Guys clog the front, go hard to the net, throw shots on goal, put things in motion and hope for a deflection, screen, or rebound. A fluke goal is Bina's 190 footer. A fluke goal is a bounce off the boards and then off the back of the goalie's head into the net. Should MN's 2nd goal be a fluke because it was deflected and trickled in the far side?
Click to expand...

Applause! Applause! This is my exact feeling.

Other examples of fluke goals: Wes Walz getting checked into the net with the puck in his breezers. Or an own goal on a delayed penalty or something. Something where your team is not generating offense. If a team is in front of the net putting the puck toward the goalie, it's nothing to be dismissed.

Just because the goalie is fooled or not expecting something (i.e. the David Fischer Special) doesn't make it a fluke. It doesn't have to be a perfect pretty bang-bang-bang goal for me to acknowledge it. If we all waited for perfect goals, we'd be waiting a long long time... and we hate it when our teams are trying to get "too cute" or "too fancy with the puck" or waste time waiting for the perfect highlight reel setup.

Brent did consider the 2nd goal to be a fluke, I should mention that. And then he admitted based on that it should be a tie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top