I was at the Pepsi and watched both games also. My take is slightly
different.
I thought the Harvard-Maine game was entertaining and , as the score
indicates, was wide open.

Despite the mismatch on paper, I though Harvard dominated much of the
first two periods. Not having seen Maine before last night, I don't know
whether they were off, were believing their own press reports or just
got outskated. They certainly turned it up in the 3rd period, but to me
it looked more like Harvard just ran out of steam. Harvard's earlier
success was largely due to them sending forwards in deep and
forechecking, forechecking,forechecking. Unfortunately, that takes its
toll physically, and Harvard ran out of steam and Maine ran all over
them
The Harvard goalie may take the brunt of letting in 4 goals but most of
them were the results of the Harvard defense hanging him out to dry.

Game two was just the opposite. I've watched college hockey for 30+
years and I enjoy a 1-0 game as much, if not more than 6-5. I don't
think that was Nick's point. This game had no flow to it. I don't
remember the last time I heard so many whistles in one game. There were
so many pucks frozen on the boards, icing calls and offsides calls that
I was concerned that I wouldn't make it home for breakfast. Maybe it's
differing points of view, but I was just bored. I was ecstatic when
Wisconsin scored the gamewinner because I just wanted to go home.

As far as the ice is concerned, I felt it was warm there (I sat
upstairs) but not nearly as warm as last weekend for the ECAC's. I
didn't see nearly as many bad bounces or skaters reacting to bad ice
this week as last week .

Complain as we will, I don't know how easy it is to have two teams warm
up, play a game, have two other teams warm up, play a second game and
expect the ice to hold up the entire period. In addition, it did reach
the mid-sixties outside which certainly didn't help the ambient air.

Could the ice have been better? Of course. But I thought they kept it
much better yesterday than last week.