ELynah Forum

General Category => Hockey => Topic started by: mike k on October 29, 2005, 10:08:05 AM

Title: could be
Post by: mike k on October 29, 2005, 10:08:05 AM
Number one in the nation with a win tonight as MU lost. Actually def would be. I know some of you guys think its just a target on your back but the players look at it, they know, and you play with alot more confidence as you expect to win every game. Its great to be rnaked high I think it helps alot.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: DisplacedCornellian on October 29, 2005, 10:12:57 AM
Did you get "maked high" just before you typed that? ::nut::
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Beeeej on October 29, 2005, 10:16:20 AM
Expecting to win every game can be a very, very bad thing for a hockey team, hockeykid - particularly when they're playing teams they really should beat with no difficulty.

Like, say, Sacred Heart.  Or Quinnipiac.  Or Army.

I'll say no more.

Beeeej
Title: Re: could be
Post by: mike k on October 29, 2005, 10:25:38 AM
[Q]DisplacedCornellian Wrote:

 Did you get "maked high" just before you typed that?  [/q]

Dont get it. w/e its alot better to play with confidence then it is to play with a lack of. Beej.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Will on October 29, 2005, 10:32:05 AM
[Q]mike k Wrote:

Dont get it. w/e its alot better to play with confidence then it is to play with a lack of. Beej.[/q]

Confidence is good. Overconfidence is bad.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Mike k on October 29, 2005, 10:38:07 AM
Will you are 100% correct. Im not worried about cornell getting overconfident because schafer will not allow them to. when they had the great team with murray baby and the others they never once got overconfident. From what i saw last night this team could be better then the one we saw make the frozen four.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: DeltaOne81 on October 29, 2005, 10:45:41 AM
We've probably been overconfident before. But it's okay cause those games didn't happen :`(

Don't pretend we're immune to something that is a natural human trait. That said, we have another game tonight, and so does UM. Now, we're playing a better team than UAF, but I'm not taking anything for granted yet. IF we win, yes, we're likely to be #1 - although there's always a chance CC or Maine could sneak in there if they win again tonight.

Whether that's a good thing or not is another story.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Will on October 29, 2005, 10:48:52 AM
As always, it must be stated: The polls don't matter.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: DeltaOne81 on October 29, 2005, 10:54:44 AM
Goes without saying... literally ;-)
Title: Re: could be
Post by: KeithK on October 29, 2005, 01:48:46 PM
You have to go to the rink expecting to win the game that night.  You can't be intimidated by anyone, can't use excuses for why you might lose that game (e.g. injuries).  That's confidence.  It's different from expecting to finish undefeated - that's overconfidence.  

Edit: To clarify, there's a fine line between confidence and arrogance when you're playing lower level teams.  The attitude I was describing above is more relevant to games against top teams.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: calgARI '07 on October 29, 2005, 01:49:53 PM
[Q]Beeeej Wrote:

 Expecting to win every game can be a very, very bad thing for a hockey team, hockeykid - particularly when they're playing teams they really should beat with no difficulty.

Like, say, Sacred Heart.  Or Quinnipiac.  Or Army.

I'll say no more.

Beeeej[/q]

See the Soviet National Team in 1980.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Ack on October 29, 2005, 02:55:19 PM
One of those few times I wish I were old (read: wise and respected) enough to see that era.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Robb on October 29, 2005, 04:54:34 PM
[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
See the Soviet National Team in 1980.[/q]
Exactly what I was thinking - I'll always remember the interview with Tretiak.  He said that it just never even occurred to him to head for the bench, because he just "knew" that they were going to score (to tie the game)...

Title: Re: could be
Post by: RichH on October 29, 2005, 05:02:23 PM
[Q]Robb Wrote:

 [Q2]calgARI '07 Wrote:
See the Soviet National Team in 1980.[/Q]
Exactly what I was thinking - I'll always remember the interview with Tretiak.  He said that it just never even occurred to him to head for the bench, because he just "knew" that they were going to score (to tie the game)...

[/q]

Tretiak wasn't playing after the 1st period vs. the US.  Viktor Tikhonov replaced Tretiak with Myshkin following Mark Johnson's last second goal in the 1st.
Title: Re: could be
Post by: Robb on October 29, 2005, 05:10:03 PM
Aargh.  With the number of time's I've watched the HBO special and Miracle, I'm very embarassed by that mistake.  ::pissed::