Cheese Head Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 Just noticed a lot of hand-wringing by the N-Dak faithful. The Sioux were just exposed a little bit by a young talented team. N-Dak is still a very good team! N-Dak Strengths: Forwards -- Parise & Murray are the real deal. It will be good to see Parise in the NHL next year. (if not sooner) Depth: Four solid lines. Keep the "money line" together. N-Dak Weaknesses: Yes, goaltending will no doubt be your achilles heel in the playoffs. Definitely start Jake Brandt. No-brainer in my opinion. A shorter bench with the defensemen will also help. Jones is a stud, but there seems to be a noticeable dropoff after the top 4. Smaby seems a little shaky at times, but a talented freshman. As far as last night's game. It appears many were not able to see the game, I can tell you ZP's "goal" was not a goal. He re-directed the puck into the net with his skate. The shots on goal differential was a result of style of play. The Badger's strengths are goaltending & defense with an opportunistic offense (Freshman Forwards). Bruckler simply made the first save with his defensemen taking care of the rest. Most N-Dak shots coming from outside the box where Bruckler had a clear view. You could see N-Dak's frustration rise as the game went on, with a lot extra stuff after the whistle. Anyway, hope to see you guys at the Final Five. We look forward to more battles by two evenly matched teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 The goal makes little difference, but the call was that it occurred after the buzzer by the AR's (which was wrong), not because of a skate redirection. I also make my observations on Wisco. If this is how you win, while being dominated for 60 full minutes, you've been fortunate. That bodes even worse for the playoffs than the Sioux goaltending, which, prior to this weekend, has been very good. If we meet again, Bruckler will have to be the difference again, because beyond his goaltending the two teams are hardly evenly matched. If lack of puck possession is Wisco's style of play, hoping that the opponent makes a couple mistakes and the puck goes in, you don't have a chance in the postseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese Head Posted February 8, 2004 Author Share Posted February 8, 2004 First, you are correct, the ref ruled it was not a goal because it came after time expired. I was just saying it wasn't a goal even if it had occurred while time was on the clock, because it was kicked in. Second, I haven't seen the word "domination" used by a team that was just swept before. Very interesting use of words to say the least. If you lose two games to your mother in H.O.R.S.E., did you "dominate"? Cliche of the Day: "Defense wins championships"" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 Thank you for letting us know how good you think Wisco is. Hopefully we'll see you again in the final five. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 UND did not dominate Wisconsin. UND deserved to lose both games. However, Wisconsin certainly did not come across as a Frozen 4 type team (but neither did the Sioux). Judging from this weekend, I don't think either team has a real good chance to do anything in the post season. However, UND has WAY more upside and potential to turn it around, elevate their game, and become a Frozen 4 team (whether they will is a mystery). I don't think Wisconsin could have possibly played any better than they did this weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobig6 Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 Cliche of the Day:Â "Defense wins championships"" This is not really true in the NCAAs. Think about how many strong defensive teams with little offense have won the National Championship lately. A team has to be balanced well with offense and defense with some timely goaltending. In a one loss and you are out tournament, if you defense or goaltending is bad once, you are out. Look at Cornell last year, or Michigan State the three years before. A balanced team with serviceable goaltending will go farther, an example my team, Minnesota the last two years, BC the year before that, UND (they had solid goaltending but were still well balanced). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 UND did not dominate Wisconsin. Obviously a contrary view. I have seen most Sioux games this year, and I've not seen one that the Sioux gave up almost no good scoring chances, while creating many of their own, until last night. That is what I called domination. If you factor in goaltending and final score, the result is much different, obviously. Which probably partially supports gobig's post. The Sioux defense was much better than Wisco's, yet they lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted February 8, 2004 Share Posted February 8, 2004 Obviously a contrary view. I have seen most Sioux games this year, and I've not seen one that the Sioux gave up almost no good scoring chances, while creating many of their own, until last night. That is what I called domination. If you factor in goaltending and final score, the result is much different, obviously. Which probably partially supports gobig's post. The Sioux defense was much better than Wisco's, yet they lost. I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment of the game. It's just that when you lose both games, I don't think "domination" is the best descriptive word to use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 Cheese Head...you're saying that Wisco TRIES to get outshot. I hardly doubt it. Defense doesn't necessarily win championships in hockey. Look at my sig line...you don't score, you don't win. Playing defensive hockey leaves little opportunities to score. Wisconsin has gotten lucky 17 times this year...Lady luck may not spread her legs for you very many more times. On the non-goal call...it sounds as though it was in before the buzzer, and I believe that the puck can be redirected off a skate...just not kicked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 On the non-goal call...it sounds as though it was in before the buzzer, and I believe that the puck can be redirected off a skate...just not kicked. A goal can be scored off a skate as long as the puck is not intentionally or deliberately deflected in. I didn't see a replay of Parise's waved-off goal, so I can't comment on how the puck got into the net. However, in post-game comments, Blais said the goal judge told him it was a good goal. He also said that Schmidt never consulted with the goal judge before overturning his initial ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagard Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 A goal can be scored off a skate as long as the puck is not intentionally or deliberately deflected in. I didn't see a replay of Parise's waved-off goal, so I can't comment on how the puck got into the net. I hate that rule. The refs have to make enough judgement calls, if they see it go off a skate and in, it should be no good. The players now are so slick, I won't ever believe that they "accidently" deflected it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 I think 9 times out of 10, the refs will wave off the goal if it went in off a skate, no matter what the circumstances. The only goal off a Sioux skate that I've ever seen and remember being counted was when Bochenski got one against BC early in the year. And the only reason that counted was because the ref thought it went in off an Eagle skate, not a Sioux skate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MinnesotaNorthStar Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 I like the NHL rule of it can't be a kicking motion, but a rediretction of it is fine. Either way...it needs to be cut and dry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uwbadgersfan Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 On the non-goal call...it sounds as though it was in before the buzzer "it sounds as though"...were they reffing blind man's hockey? I was at the game, on that side of the rink with a vantage point view of the goal and clock. it went AFTER the time had expired. the red goal light did not come on, and I believe that the light is deactivated after the timer counts down. so all this whinning about the "non-goal" is just that, whinning. they have this thing called 'instant replay' and they used it to show that the goal went in AFTER the clock reached 00:00. the goal judge only tells you if the goal went in or not. face it, you got beat. we may have played over our heads and you below yours, but the fact remains we swept. stop crying and get on with your lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jojordan23 Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 There is NO INSTANT REPLAY in the WCHA... plain and simple. Playoffs yes, but not in the regular season. Is it not the Referee's job to call goals? Schmidt pointed down, at the goal, which to me makes it a goal. Doesn't matter if he meant to move his hands out to the sides in a waving motion, that is not what he did! I didn't know that the ARs, the crowd, or the other team got to decide if it was a goal. I did not "see" the replays of this incident, as I was in a bar that was watching it on Dataflix, but WTF is going on with the refs this year? Let's see, we have seen games where the goalie is tripped up by an opposing player, but in addition to calling goalie interference, the ref also calls the goalie for diving?!? Was the goalie interfeared with or not? And yes, even UND gets away with them, as they did this weekend on the PP, when one of the guys took down a Badger player on his way in on a breakaway. The zebra's in this league are a joke... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese Head Posted February 9, 2004 Author Share Posted February 9, 2004 MinnesotaNorthStar: I suppose you are just trying to be deliberately obtuse to push my buttons, but no Eaves does not TRY to get outshot or TRY not to score. The Badgers are very young particularly at forward. Our strengths our goaltending and defense. That is what we hang our hat on. When the Badgers play a team like the the Sioux who are very strong at Forward we don't necessarily want to get into a run & gun game. Hence, we have to be opportunistic and make the most of our chances. When we got the lead on Saturday we often kept a winger back and set up our defense at the red line. The Sioux needed goals and the Badgers didn't. Simple as that. Now for the Poster who downplayed the importance of goaltending and defense in the playoffs in just plain nuts. The NCAA tournament is not a long haul. Two games max to get to the Frozen Four. Games get tight and often can be lower scoring. Who wouldn't want to ride a hot goaltender through the playoffs? Goal scoring can come and go (as the Sioux found out this weekend), but defense is more of a constant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 Now for the Poster who downplayed the importance of goaltending and defense in the playoffs in just plain nuts. The NCAA tournament is not a long haul. Two games max to get to the Frozen Four. Games get tight and often can be lower scoring. Who wouldn't want to ride a hot goaltender through the playoffs? Goal scoring can come and go (as the Sioux found out this weekend), but defense is more of a constant. Keep hoping, Wisco can't match the offensive/defensive combos of several teams in the WCHA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sioux7 Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 God I hope we meet your punks again this year. I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheese Head Posted February 9, 2004 Author Share Posted February 9, 2004 [Keep hoping, Wisco can't match the offensive/defensive combos of several teams in the WCHA. ] Hmmmmm.... obviously the exception would be the Sioux.... right? "Punks"? Yes... the Sioux are first class hockey fans. haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAR Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 I can accept some Gopher fans on this board but CHEESEHEADS must go!! Go eat some cheese and drink a few old mud's! Wisco will not finish in the top 3. The top 3 will be UND UMD and UOfM in that order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2Bad1 Posted February 9, 2004 Share Posted February 9, 2004 To say that a goal wasnt scored because the red light gets turned off after the clock reaches 0 is ridiculous. In order for you to believe this, you have to believe that the goal judge has super human powers and can push the button .000001 seconds after the puck crosses the goal line. Secondly, like someone said THERE IS NO REPLAY in regular season WCHA play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoggy Posted February 10, 2004 Share Posted February 10, 2004 The replay on TV showed it was in the net in time. The skate deflection is what should be debated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.