Best team?  Can we all simply agree that "best team" is
very subjective?  I hope we can all agree that North Dakota
are the national champs.  And, I think at least 99% of us
would rather be national champs than the best team, whether
you consider the two synonymous or not.
 
Charlie Shub writes...
 
>2)  i feel (and I'm probably in a minority) that team partisanship
>    has no place during the Hobey ceremony.  That award is to a
>    PLAYER, not to a team.
 
I have to disagree with this one.  I thought that having the
entire team there was very classy on Michigan's part.
There truly is no "I" in team at Michigan.  Players that feel
there is (see Robb Gordon) don't stick around Ann Arbor
very long.  Brendan accepted the award on behalf of the
university and was quick to praise his teammates.  I know
that it would be difficult if the winner's team wasn't in the
phinal phour, but I'd like to see more teams show up for
the ceremony.  Two thumbs up.
 
Likewise, Coach Berenson said on his radio show that he would
like to have stayed for the 50th anniversary announcement,
but felt it important to return home on the charter with the team.
 
As I've already stated, I wish that Coach was there on
Saturday to receive the applause.  A friend of mine pointed
out that he would liked to have seen Tony Amonte, Chris
Chelios and Paul Kariya as well.  All were in Chicago on
Friday night and none had a game on Saturday.
 
As for Red making the team, he did tally three goals in
the 1962 phinal phour.  He's widely regarded as one of
the greatest collegians of all-time.  I don't think for a second
that he was undeserving of being on the anniversary squad.
 
>5)  I thought 3 of the 4 coaches appropriately praised their
>    opponents, win or lose
 
As expected, Red and the UM players had plenty of good
things to say about BU and NoDak on the radio this week.
I wish I could tell you why they didn't say them in Milwaukee,
but I don't know why.  It's too bad that only the UM fans
were able to hear these comments, though.
 
To a man, the players were all very humble and none of the
seniors had regrets about returning for their fourth season,
despite the disappointing ending.  Several mentioned that
the loss to BU would be an important step in their careers and
that, in the end, they would learn from it and become better
players/persons.
 
Greg Berge writes...
 
>p.s.   Driving along the eastern coast of Lake Michigan coming down Grand
>Rapids, Anne and I saw an Actual ceramic dalmatian (for some reason I
>thought they were apocraphal, like Jesse Helms Lawn Jockeys) in a driveway
>next to a car plastered with "my other car is a Zamboni" etc.  bumper
>stickers.  Anybody out there wanna own up?  :-)  (I'll admit my first
>thought was I'd found John Hausseler's house...)
 
Sorry, I can't claim this one.  Maybe it was Bill Wilkinson's place. :-)
I will admit that the house I grew up in had blue carpeting with a
big yellow "M" cut into it in my bedroom.  And, I will admit that I
had an artist draw and color the Edmonton Oiler logo on the
living room ceiling of my house.  It's small...and it looks like just
another knot in the wood if you don't look closely...but it's there. :-)
 
Amber Uyesato writes...
 
>One thing has been bothering me. Yes I agree Maine was a great team. But
>can we keep giving kudos to them after being put on probation for so long?
>Other teams won without violating NCAA rules (whether or not these rules
>are lame). Should we give so much credit to a team that did not comply
>with these same rules?
 
Someone please pinch me, for I believe I'm about to defend
Maine in a public forum. :-)
 
I understand Amber comments, but you can't take away what that
team did on the ice.  The violations surrounding Cal Ingraham
were cheesy...an honest mistake that could happen anywhere.
I'm more skeptical about the violations concerning Mike Dunham,
but they don't involve his (a) recruitment to Maine or (b) his on ice
performance at Maine.
 
Most of us will never look at Shawn Walsh in the same light.  Many
will be skeptical about the program for years to come.  (IMO, the
former being more deserved than the latter.)  But the 1992-93
Black Bears were a dominant team from beginning to end.
They were the "best team" that year AND the national champs.
I see no reason not to recognize them as such.  IMO, they're
the "best" college hockey team I've ever seen.
 
Fwiw...I'm not willing to say that the 1996-97 Wolverines were the
second "best" team I've ever seen, but they were the second
most dominant team in a given season that I've seen.  Given
that they *didn't* win the NCAA title, the previous sentence matters
very little to non-Michigan fans....and I have no problem with that.
Most fans remember who won the NCAA title and how their
favorite team did.  Ten years from now I won't remember that
Denver was an OT goal away from going to Milwaukee in 1997
...but I'm sure that DU fans will.  (Probably BU fans, too.)  But,
I'll forever remember the joys the 1996-97 Wolverines brought
me.  I can sit down twenty years from now and have a great
conversation with another diehard UM fan about this particular
team...and that's the way it should be.
 
 
John Haeussler
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.