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.

Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

I guess that's what we wanted out of tonight's game. Only 9 saves needed for the shutout, and 5 scored in the attacking end.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

WiscTJK said:
Probably the $4 Badgermax pH miracle water. It will save lives according to the label:)
Click to expand...

It's slightly basic! That makes it better! I remember at a women's game this year, telling the goalie to drink the Badger Max (she had her own gatorade bottle). After the Badgers scored, she did drink from the Badger Max bottle. The Badgers scored again. There was probably just water in both bottles. If it was just water, I have no idea if it was Badger Max water.

I did buy a bottle of that at one of the super-hot football games this year out of desperation. It was water, but more importantly on that day, it was a bottle of it.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

9098 in attendance according to box sheet. On TV the sides seemed fairly full, ends were a but lighter as were upper levels, and students are on break.

Good win Bucky. Go after it again tomorrow.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

UWisco said:
9098 in attendance according to box sheet. On TV the sides seemed fairly full, ends were a but lighter as were upper levels, and students are on break.

Good win Bucky. Go after it again tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Not too bad compared to the games we've already had with less than 8000 as the official attendance figure. Obviously, most of the students account for plenty of eaten tickets, but at least there were more other people who bought single-game tickets for this one. I didn't get to watch, so it's hard to compare visually to the other <9K games (to try and guess the difference between paid and actual attendance), and it's way below UW standards, but they weren't setting low records. It's hockey season!

Edit: Any curious eyeballs on TV at least saw fairly full sides. Neat.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Chuck, do you think we have any chance of seeing McGuire or Davison tomorrow? Would be nice to see them get playing time.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

UWisco said:
Chuck, do you think we have any chance of seeing McGuire or Davison tomorrow? Would be nice to see them get playing time.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about Adam Miller getting some time at the end of either game this weekend. I forgot about both those guys. I'd like to know too.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

It was a memorable men's game for sure (UW women's fans are used to seeing this type of a lopsided game).....0 shots on goal in the first period for UAH; under 10 for the game; in the first period there was a UW pp that spent the whole 2:00 in the O zone; 55 sog for UW.

The PP still isn't creating great scoring chances, though @ even strength (that's debatable!), it's great to see all 4 lines scoring.

I have to think Petersen's in goal tonight. His stat line could use a s/o.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Alright, let's get the Power Play back on track tonight. Despite controlling the puck on the PP last night, I didn't think it looked very good at all.


Let's Go Red!!
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Ugly win. That's all I have to say.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

I just looked at the Alaska-Anchorage hockey schedule. They're different from before.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Timothy A said:
The PP still isn't creating great scoring chances, though @ even strength (that's debatable!), it's great to see all 4 lines scoring.

I have to think Petersen's in goal tonight. His stat line could use a s/o.
Click to expand...

I apologize to Petersen for jinxing him, though I blame the ref for that aweful call that gave them the 5-3.

The pp scheme is terrible. I think the coaches need to watch some film of other teams doing it right, they seem to have no clue on how to make it work. At some point the puck needs to go through the box for back door chances.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

Timothy A said:
The pp scheme is terrible. I think the coaches need to watch some film of other teams doing it right, they seem to have no clue on how to make it work. At some point the puck needs to go through the box for back door chances.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's time to start trying to decline penalties again.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

The power play has been really dissappointing after what we were treated to on opening night.
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

You can't score on a pass and even the perfect shooting lane is only so effective...
 
Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXVIII: This could be a banner year, but how would we know?

We had much closer seats on Friday than I normally do and my two not so ground-breaking observations are that McCabe and LaBate are a lot bigger than I thought they were and Dahl is a lot smaller than I thought he was.

It's amazing how much perspective you gain on that when you're along the glass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top