PDA

View Full Version : Kendall Classic, Michigan,Mercyhurst,UA_, Uaa



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

alfablue
10-11-2009, 12:44 PM
I'm not trying to be "smart" but out of curiosity, why did many of you think that UAF would have struggled and UAA would have done well against UM??

Not that you Seawolves should be all that bummed- it IS early in the season afterall. But it's interesting that many of the predictions were exactly backwards. You are ALL more familiar with both programs, so I'm just looking for more insight.

Playing UA every year- I know they give us a very strong game every time, and if UM is *barely* off the offensive game, it's basically over at the face off. I guess I'm curious to find out what didn't happen that you expected to happen for UAA. It *sounds* like they just came out flat, other than that, no major problems.

Good luck for all teams for the rest of the season! I'm looking forward to hearing wT's stories of the games. And of Anchorage.

Suze
10-11-2009, 02:18 PM
I'm not trying to be "smart" but out of curiosity, why did many of you think that UAF would have struggled and UAA would have done well against UM??

Not that you Seawolves should be all that bummed- it IS early in the season afterall. But it's interesting that many of the predictions were exactly backwards. You are ALL more familiar with both programs, so I'm just looking for more insight.

Playing UA every year- I know they give us a very strong game every time, and if UM is *barely* off the offensive game, it's basically over at the face off. I guess I'm curious to find out what didn't happen that you expected to happen for UAA. It *sounds* like they just came out flat, other than that, no major problems.

Good luck for all teams for the rest of the season! I'm looking forward to hearing wT's stories of the games. And of Anchorage.

UAA did come out flat, and Michigan was a more physical team. Too many times UAA went after the player rather than the puck. They got beat to lose pucks and lost the battles in the corners. Bryce is normally excellent with the puck, but the game went sour right from the start when he mishandled the puck and it ended up in his net.

Passes were terrible, and Michigan was always there clogging the lanes. I watched most of the UA_ and Michigan game on Friday, and I honestly thought that Michigan was much better, they outshot the Nanooks by a large margin, but gave up two soft goals. Greenham was the difference maker.

I believe UAA has the talent, and I think they will give the Nanooks a run for the cup this season. They need to learn from their loss last night, put it behind them, and refocus. From what I saw last night, they didn't play very inspirational hockey.

alfablue
10-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Thanks, Suze.

Suze
10-11-2009, 07:28 PM
I didn't want to let this thread die without mentioning the positive changes we saw this weekend. The music was great, and entertainment between periods was fun and different.

The folks at Kendall should be thanked for the great job they did as well! I love the UAA pull out banners! The Kendall keychains in velvet boxes was a classy touch. Thanks Kendall Motors.

Thanks also to the boosters and all their hard work, the bagged caramel corn that you let us take from the booster rooms was great. I do have one suggestion, can you switch the booster rooms? The line for food in the Kendall room was soooo long, it was packed! There was not enough room for everyone in there, way too crowded. It seems like it would be better suited to switch the booster rooms. Just a suggestion.

Tundra
10-11-2009, 09:05 PM
I'm not trying to be "smart" but out of curiosity, why did many of you think that UAF would have struggled and UAA would have done well against UM??

Not that you Seawolves should be all that bummed- it IS early in the season afterall. But it's interesting that many of the predictions were exactly backwards. You are ALL more familiar with both programs, so I'm just looking for more insight.


I didn't :D ... expected UM to defeat both Alaska teams. Everyone thought UAF had too many question marks with goalie, scoring etc..unlike us returning most of our key players, But after UAF defeated UM I actually thought Seawolves had a good chance. Because:

Seawolves h2h against Nanooks have been very good for several years and if Seawolves can defeat Nanooks defeats Wolverine = ergo Seawolves might defeat Wolverine. I'm not sure this will be true this year, it seems like team speed has increased for nanooks. I think the problem might have been the flow and not enough hitting but UM is bigger and more skilled on the PP than UAF so that option really wasn't there.

I'm not sure if UM came out flat friday against UAF but they were evenly matched, team speed, transition (o2defense2offense), didn't really see any difference. offense based on speed was neutralized maybe 1 oddman rush. And UM never had quality scoring chances except on the powerplay.
Wolverine reminds me of the Gophers except your D actually play defense.

1/2 nook
10-12-2009, 12:01 AM
I'm not trying to be "smart" but out of curiosity, why did many of you think that UAF would have struggled and UAA would have done well against UM??

Not that you Seawolves should be all that bummed- it IS early in the season afterall. But it's interesting that many of the predictions were exactly backwards. You are ALL more familiar with both programs, so I'm just looking for more insight.

Playing UA every year- I know they give us a very strong game every time, and if UM is *barely* off the offensive game, it's basically over at the face off. I guess I'm curious to find out what didn't happen that you expected to happen for UAA. It *sounds* like they just came out flat, other than that, no major problems.

Good luck for all teams for the rest of the season! I'm looking forward to hearing wT's stories of the games. And of Anchorage.

I think what sums up the UAa-UM game is one play I saw where the UM forward with the puck pulled away from the d-man.

Rms123
10-12-2009, 12:16 AM
I was just concerned with an "un-tested" (although good) goalie, and the lack of scoring last year for UAF. UAA returned most of their offense, and I thought they would match UM physically, which I thought would be the key to UAA winning (and exceptional net minding). So far so good for the Nooks! Some questions appear to have been answered. As far as UM completely out playing UAF................not true. UM took the first, they split the second, and UAF took the third. It was an evenly matched game from my point of view, and apparently many others. I know itís tough for a wolves fan to do, but give a little credit.

wolverineTrumpet
10-12-2009, 10:54 AM
UAA did come out flat, and Michigan was a more physical team. Too many times UAA went after the player rather than the puck.

My friend noticed this too. In fact his comment was, "we're just letting them hit us, which takes them out of the play and then we take the puck" It happened a few times.