Fortress Invitational

[RichH]

Since anything beyond the first OT wasn't official, I think the tournament officials should have had more fun with it.  Maybe have them play broomball for an OT, and play with multiple pucks.  Live a little!

Go across the plaza and play a deck of Casino War. Makes as much sense as a shootout.

[blackwidow]

Cannot help but wonder how likely it is for Barron to go pro after this season.  I so badly want him to stay :/

[Trotsky]

Cannot help but wonder how likely it is for Barron to go pro after this season.  I so badly want him to stay :/

It only makes sense for him to stay if the Rangers have some super bottleneck and tell him to.

[ACM]

There were two tiers of talent in Las Vegas:

1. Jack Dugan and Morgan Barron
2. Other

I didn't see PU being superior in talent.

They are - but that's fine. The better comparison is Barron to Tyce Thompson. Thompson is a monster. Dugan is off by himself skill wise. Then you add in Parker Ford, a very skilled center who came off the plane from the World Juniors to play Saturday, and dominated the faceoff circle, and was tough to handle.

Cornell is deeper (this year) - and has a slightly better goalie.  These are two of the best teams in the country - mirror images to a large extent, at least coaching wise, and I hope to hell Cornell doesn't have to play them again in the NCAAs unless it's the championship game.

Usually we hold our own on faceoffs, but PU, and especially Ford, dominated us at the dot.  If we play them again we'll need to do better. I believe Andreev is pretty solid on faceoffs (I don't have time right now to look it up), so his absence may have really hurt us on Saturday.

Faceoff stats. Andreev is actually one of our weaker faceoff guys.

[Jim Hyla]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.

It was ironic to me that the two teams that play in a league without 3-on-3 overtime or shootouts ended up playing in such a situation for the tournament's championship. I will say that neither coach – Providence's Nate Leaman and Cornell's Mike Schafer – enjoyed the title game being decided in a shootout. Both said they would have preferred playing overtime until there was a winner.

And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

[redice]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.


And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

I must be the exception.   I don't find fighting OR shootouts to be thrilling!  Shootouts are an abomination to hockey.  This is a team game; shootouts are individual efforts.  It makes no sense!

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

Cannot help but wonder how likely it is for Barron to go pro after this season.  I so badly want him to stay :/

It only makes sense for him to stay if the Rangers have some super bottleneck and tell him to.

The story I got was he's of really mixed feelings.  But I'd be shocked if he stays.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.


And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

I must be the exception.   I don't find fighting OR shootouts to be thrilling!  Shootouts are an abomination to hockey.  This is a team game; shootouts are individual efforts.  It makes no sense!

+1

[Trotsky]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.


And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

I must be the exception.   I don't find fighting OR shootouts to be thrilling!  Shootouts are an abomination to hockey.  This is a team game; shootouts are individual efforts.  It makes no sense!

You are not the exception.  The few remaining fans who like fighting can DIAF and the people who like shootouts are either under 12 years old or football fans who wandered into the wrong venue.

[scoop85]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.

It was ironic to me that the two teams that play in a league without 3-on-3 overtime or shootouts ended up playing in such a situation for the tournament's championship. I will say that neither coach – Providence's Nate Leaman and Cornell's Mike Schafer – enjoyed the title game being decided in a shootout. Both said they would have preferred playing overtime until there was a winner.

And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

Which is why the championship game should be the 2nd game. Let them play to a winner.

[adamw]

Cannot help but wonder how likely it is for Barron to go pro after this season.  I so badly want him to stay :/

It only makes sense for him to stay if the Rangers have some super bottleneck and tell him to.

There is zero chance the Rangers tell him to. They wouldn't want to risk losing him to free agency. Barron could choose to (I doubt it), but the Rangers won't tell him to.

[Jim Hyla]

USCHO's TMQ Column with the following quote.


And this:

I agree with both Leaman and Schafer. Have the teams play until there's a winner during in-season tournament play. I know that fans find a shootout thrilling, but they find fighting thrilling, too, and no one is making an argument for more fighting in college hockey just to make the game more exciting to fans.

I must be the exception.   I don't find fighting OR shootouts to be thrilling!  Shootouts are an abomination to hockey.  This is a team game; shootouts are individual efforts.  It makes no sense!

I don't find fighting thrilling, nor any other positive feeling. However shootouts can be exciting, if not really thrilling. (I feel sad for those that get their "thrills" from fighting or shootouts. I prefer other thrills.)

But exciting or thrilling be damned, I agree shootouts make no sense. It's far better to end up with a tie in a midseason tourney, where the game went on for so long that both coaches agree that quitting and calling it a draw made more sense. That was exciting.

[upprdeck]

I was at the Canadians game sat night and it was pretty clear in that crowd that the majority wanted to see a shootout..
i think shootouts are fun and exciting but i dont want to see  tourney final  decided by one unless they played at least 1 period of real hockey.

[Dafatone]

I'm probably just anxious, but an endless overtime in a game that doesn't matter would just cause me to stress out about potential injuries.

[ugarte]

I'm probably just anxious, but an endless overtime in a game that doesn't matter would just cause me to stress out about potential injuries.

yes. this. if *all* games play to a conclusion, sure. but "Fortress Invitational" does not carry enough emotional weight with me to care if they get to skate a lap with the Pai Gow Chalice if the game is still tied after 65 minutes.