You sure are fixated on my earning power. You must be a girl looking to get knocked up so you can collect child support since you clearly show no evidence of intelligence or anything else related to actually making a living for yourself that doesn't involve whoring/pan handling.
Why don't you just steal the pull-tabs like one of your team's former goalies did once upon a time?
Just as soon as the train on your wife is over...![]()
Ah, you're in high school. Now it all makes sense. Good luck in your home ec class.I'm actually just posting for your mom.
Now you've apparently got me mixed up with Dirty. For shame.She wants you to move out of the basement and get a real job!![]()
ahahahaha what a loser. Now, if we could only find out if that's a USCHO poster.
Hak with more class:
![]()
I hate to be the one to steer the conversation back to hockey, but I do have to say that while it seems like the obvious prima facie interpretation, the notion that Michigan was outplayed and was bailed out by a few bounces and a hot goalie sells a great game short. Sure, starting in the second period when Michigan adopted a defensive posture UND started to dominate puck possession. It wasn't only Hunwick, though, who was responsible for the fact that UND couldn't translate that possession time into anything more substantive. Not to take anything away from the kid—a 40 save shutout is a 40 save shutout—but Michigan won the chess match with letter perfect team defense. Many of those 40 shots came from the perimeter because Michigan successfully contained the offensive threat by shutting down passing lanes and taking away quality opportunities.
I'm not usually a big fan of the protect-the-lead approach, but Michigan pulled it off beautifully tonight, and the glib storyline in which they were outplayed but saved by Hunwick's heroics glosses over what was, in fact, a hard fought and strategically interesting game.
Anyway, as a disinterested observer, that's my piece.
I saw a LOT of individual battles won by the Sioux players. This more than anything usually determines the outcome of a game, but not tonight. The vast majority of board battles were won by the Sioux and Michigan seemed a step slow, even before they took the lead.
I hate to be the one to steer the conversation back to hockey, but I do have to say that while it seems like the obvious prima facie interpretation, the notion that Michigan was outplayed and was bailed out by a few bounces and a hot goalie sells a great game short. Sure, starting in the second period when Michigan adopted a defensive posture UND started to dominate puck possession. It wasn't only Hunwick, though, who was responsible for the fact that UND couldn't translate that possession time into anything more substantive. Not to take anything away from the kid—a 40 save shutout is a 40 save shutout—but Michigan won the chess match with letter perfect team defense. Many of those 40 shots came from the perimeter because Michigan successfully contained the offensive threat by shutting down passing lanes and taking away quality opportunities.
I'm not usually a big fan of the protect-the-lead approach, but Michigan pulled it off beautifully tonight, and the glib storyline in which they were outplayed but saved by Hunwick's heroics glosses over what was, in fact, a hard fought and strategically interesting game.
Anyway, as a disinterested observer, that's my piece.
I saw a LOT of individual battles won by the Sioux players. This more than anything usually determines the outcome of a game, but not tonight. The vast majority of board battles were won by the Sioux and Michigan seemed a step slow, even before they took the lead.
That game could have easily been 5-1 Sioux.
But give Michigan credit for hanging in there and getting the "W". In the end, that's all that matters.
It is a bummer you lost but really do you need to be this mad? It is just a game.
![]()
That's one of the reasons I found this to be such an interesting game. I entirely agree that in the one-on-one scrums UND usually came out with the puck. But they came out with the puck and no options, which is a testament to Michigan's positional play. UND won the puck possession game, but they lost the game away from the puck. That's not an easy feat to pull off, and Michigan deserves some credit for doing it so well.
If the Sioux would have gotten a lead, Michigan would have opened things up and gotten more than one goal.