> I like it a lot, because you're always in it, right up until the end of
> the second game.
 
Or, you're not.  Good example: you lost game one 6-2 and at 17:30 of the
third period of game two you're winning, 5-4.  You're 3 goals down --
you're dead.  Under the best of 3, 3-point, or even the goddawful 2 game
plus mini-game formats, you're more than in it.  As you should be, I can't
resist adding... ;-)
 
 
 
>  A 5-10 minute spell of magic anytime can give you the overall win.
 
Then just have one game.  And is this a good thing, anyway?  If you want
magic, just have sudden death from the instant the puck is dropped.  That
would be really quite exciting, but I dunno what it has to do with hockey.
 
 
 
> I see why defensive types are not thrilled with it.  I can
> well remember a Women's Beanpot where the home coach went with as short a
> game as possible (15-18 minute periods), just so they didn't have to hold
> off the other superior team for too long.
 
So you're telling me that a 120 minute game would be preferable to a 60
minute game.  I assume then you would replace the WCHA weekend pairs with
120 minute games, eh?  ;-)
 
 
 
> OK, Greg - I know you're ready to throw me off the FleeceCenter - I'll
> stop.
 
With all the buildings and highways sandwiched so tight against the FC, I'm
not sure it would be possible to actually damage you by tossing you from
there.  Well, maybe if a Bruins goalie was the one to try to save you.
 
On a totally unrelated topic, could you meet me on the outdoor observation
deck at the top of the Customs Tower at noon tomorrow?  Wear something
streamlined...
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.