Great thread of comments from Clay and Greg, in my opinion. Although I
have not seen nearly the number of UNH games as Greg over the past 35
years, it has seemed to me that the Cats have attracted the speedy albeit
smaller players to Durham, and not just since the opening of the Whitt in
1995. However, I am not convinced by the regular and post-season games
that I have watched over the years that these players perform much
differently on big and small sheets. I and many others were hoping that
Eddie Caron could provide a more physical presence for the Cats during his
two stints over the last three years, but his game never seemed to mesh
well with the speedy smaller skaters. Just my two cents.

Thom Davis, UNH 72  Go Cats!


--- Greg Ambrose <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> First, on your last point. The fact that UNH plays in an Olympic size
rink
> has not, I repeat, not been a disadvantage when it comes to their
> post-season play. Since the Whittemore Center opened in 1995-96 (I can't
> believe it's in the 10th year already), UNH has made the NCAA tournament
in
> all but two years ('96, '01). In the eight years they made it, they have
> advanced to the FF four times, reaching the final twice. You would have
to
> assume that to achieve that type of success, they would have to win some
> games along the way that were not played on Olympic size sheets. And
they
> have, starting with Albany in '98, the Worcester Centrum in '99, '02 &
'03,
> and the Fleet Center in '02 and '03. Overall, their record on 200 x 85
> sheets in those post-season years is 14-10. As a close observer of the
UNH
> scene, their failures in the post-season have had a lot more to do with
> talent gaps than the size of the sheet they are playing on. BTW, one of
> their most distressing NCAA losses was to Niagara in 2000 at 200 x 100
> Mariucci.

You see a lot more of UNH than I do.  I'm just wondering if that "talent
gap" is more of a "style"
difference  -- that the type of players who UNH recruits and the type of
player that wants to go
to UNH are the type that plays better on the big ice.  Sean Collins, for
example, I remember from
high school; superb open ice player, but relatively small.  I could see
him being really attracted
to a team with a big ice surface.

Also,if the "big ice" theory is right, one would expect that there is a
lot less clutching and
grabbing on the games played on 200 x 100 rinks.  Is that your
observation?

>
> As to the larger point, the size of hockey rinks has not really changed
much
> since the NHL began over 80 years ago. What has changed is the size,
speed,
> and skill level of the players, and also the sophistication of the
equipment
> they play with. While changing the size of the rink won't cure all the
ills
> of ice hockey, it would go a long way in bringing back an emphasis on
the
> skill parts of the game - skating, stickhandling, passing. Some may
disagree
> with me, but I would rather watch some smooth skating and precision
passing
> up through center ice than the clutching, grabbing and trapping that
passes
> for good hockey in the NHL today. . .

Well, I don't know anyone who disagrees with you, least of all me.  I just
don't take it as a
given that going to the larger rink will automatically seriously reduce
the amount of clutching
and grabbing.  Making the rink wider does not increase the slot area,
which is where a lot of the
clutching and grabbing goes on.  With regard to players now being bigger
and faster, the most
logical suggestion I've heard is to go to four on four full time.  That
would ensure more open
ice, even in the slot,and therefore skating and stickhandling would be
more important over the
whole ice, not just on the perimeter.

Clay





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com