Okay, okay, so it took me a long time to get around to this. It is
Christmas weekend, and I'm lazy. Better late than never, right?
 
The weekend was very interesting, if not totally satisfying, for both
teams.
 
Friday night, Minnesota skated to a 3-1 win over the CC Tigers. This
was a typical Minnesota win--they played their style of hockey while
they kept CC from playing theirs. Good heads up defensive play, some
goal scoring, and some beautiful skating kept the Gophers in control
for nearly the entire game.
 
Minnesota nearly went into a defensive shell in the beginning of the
third, with a 3-1 lead. But Coach Woog, I hope, saw that this would
play into CC's powerful offense, and so got the boys back on track
and skating well, with both teams getting some good chances, despite
the fact that neither scored.
 
Going into the weekend, I had my doubts about Jeff Callinan in goal
for Minnesota. He gets the job done, as he currently owns a 10-1-1
record, and has posted some impressive stats for the year. But he
always seems shaky in goal, and I can thing of a number of soft
goals, and a few that were just plain his fault. But, I am happy to
say, he played very well in goal on Friday, possibly his best
performance of the year. He made some BIG saves, and carried
Minnesota along to the win.
 
The CC offense certainly struggled in this game. It was a game of
firsts for CC: the first loss at home (and at night, even), the first
time all season they have been held to one goal, and the first time
they lost after scoring first.
 
As others have pointed out, it is difficult to tell if it was poor
play on the Tiger's part or quality play from the Gophers that kept
CC's score so low. Perhaps the score of the second game may persuade
others, but I think it is a credit to Minnesota. One thing I noticed
from the game (that I did NOT notice in the rematch) was CC's pattern
of getting a man open in front of the goal, and sending a screaming
pass in front of him, as he would try to one-time it into the net. I
don't know if this is normal Tiger strategy, but it wasn't working in
this game, as the passes were inevitably too hard for the players to
handle, and Minnesota would get control of the puck.
 
All in all, a excellent night for Woog and the Gophers. They played
well, and insured at least a split.
 
And a split was all that they would get. A steaming mad CC came out
on Saturday, taking it to the Gophers, and winning 9-2 in a lopsided
contest.
 
 
They outplayed Minnesota in the first, and had a 2-0 lead going into
the locker room. Minnesota had a pathetic number of shots on goal,
around 4 or so, and looked like they were in for some trouble.
 
One question was why Coach Woog decided to go with Moen in goal,
especially after Callinan's unconscious performance the previous
night. I can understand it. After a big win, put in the weaker goalie
(this year) and hope your players stand up even bigger in front of
him. If he wins, he gets a big confidence boost, and all is right
with the world.
 
 
But he didn't win. It wasn't Moen's fault though. The first shot he
allowed in, he was screened pretty terribly, and the second was
simply a tremendous individual effort by Jay McNeill (we all thought
it was short handed, but it wasn't recorded that way--the penalty had
expired 2 seconds before he scored). The third goal (PPG) he could
have stopped, perhaps, but it wasn't soft by any means.
 
Then in comes Callinan to stop the bleeding. Once again, I can see
why Woog would choose to do this: Callinan had won the night before,
and the psychological factor for players on both teams would
hopefully give Minnesota the edge.
 
And this seemed to work, as Bell scored shortly after he entered, and
the Gophers had new found energy and momentum. The game clearly
wasn't over yet. So Minnesota fans and players alike took a breath of
relief, and turned the puck over to Geronazzo, who sent the puck to
Schmidt, who was happy to show that Callinan was human, and take some
of the wind of of Minnesota's sails.
 
But Minnesota didn't acknowledge too much weakness, as they scored
again before the period ended. The game was still winnable for either
team, and with the Gopher third period magic, we knew anything could
happen. But Minnesota had squandered lots of chances in the period.
They outshot CC 24-10, and pretty clearly dominated play, except for
the brief periods when the two goals were scored.
 
The third period was a mess. Both teams came out and played hard, but
the back was broken about a quarter of the way through the frame, as
CC went up 5-2. The Minnesota players seemed to give up then, as goal
after goal went in the net. Moen was put back in net, effectively
destroying both goalie's confidence, and Moen may be permanently
scarred, as he allowed 6 goals, Callinan 3. Effectively the Minnesota
defense was gone, and even though CC put in a lackluster effort
towards the end of the period, every shot they put on net seemed to
go in.
 
This, then, was a night of firsts for Minnesota: the first time this
season they lost a game by more than a goal, the first time they
allowed an opponent to score more than four goals in a game, the
first time they were dominated in the third period, (and giving up
more than one goal in the frame).
 
An ugly game, marred by a terrible third period, not just of bad
hockey, but of bad sportsmanship. Minnesota got frustrated, and
inappropriately turned to a violent edge to try and sort things out.
I hated to watch the team, as they degenerated into pushing and
shoving matches, and Bell deserved to be thrown out after taking a
fight into the penalty box. A simple embarrassment for Minnesota
fans. It is not often the Gophers get blown out (the last game I
remember was an 8-4 drubbing by St. Cloud at the end of last season),
but when they do, they get very chippy and very ugly. I wish I could
apologize for the behavior of my team.
 
That said, I would like to make a comment or two about the "bounty"
put on Geranazzo.
 
I can easily believe that Woog told Don Lucia there would be a
"bounty" on Peter Geranazzo when the Tigers come to Mariucci in
January. Before the readers of this list gasp in shock and amazement,
though, hear me out.
 
First of all, Geranazzo deserves some sort of punishment, or at least
some "attention" from the Minnesota bench. He did check the goalie in
two consecutive games. Friday night, when he checked Callinan, the
5-minute major was accidentally given to the wrong player. Saturday,
Charlie Shub claims:
 
> Yes, he did collide with the goalies, but I'm utterly convinced by
> what I saw saturday (I was immediately behind the end boards and
> had a view invisible from the cameras) that he was playing the puck
> and ran out of real estate.  I believe the referees felt the same
> way, hence the minor instead of the major.
 
Still, the minor was given for checking the goalie, and there was no
doubt Moen was in the crease, and the last I checked, checking the
goalie in the crease was a five minute penalty offense. Besides, I
saw the game on TV (I wish I had been there to see the games in
person, believe me), and I saw the play several times, from several
angles, and Geranazzo COULD HAVE avoided the collision.
 
Now, I am not endorsing full scale violence here. But when a player
checks your goalie twice in a weekend, possibly endangering him, the
players need to step up and do something to protect him, and show the
player he cannot get away with this.
 
I have never seen this policy as effective as when used by last
year's enforcer, Chris McAlpine. He viewed all the players on the
team as little brothers, and if someone did something that was out of
line, he would be a big brother and play some physical hockey with
the offender. Most of the time, this meant hard, clean checks,
although I certainly won't claim McAlpine never ended up in the
penalty box. I don't lie. :-)
 
So the problem, as I see it, comes down to the definition of
"bounty". I don't think Woog was saying to Lucia "Your kid Geranazzo
will be lucky to leave Minnesota with no broken bones", but rather
"We saw what Geranazzo did on the ice, and don't think we will forget
it." Perhaps if he had actually said this, it would be a little more
classy, but let's remember, we don't have any proof anybody said
anything.
 
Besides, Woog is always the coach, and I think he may have been using
this situation as a psychological one: to make sure the Tigers don't
go into Minnesota in January remembering a 9-2 win, but instead
looking over their shoulders to see how and when the Gophers will
respond. I simply don't believe Doug Woog to be the kind of man that
would order the on-ice assassination of an opposing player. I don't
buy it.
 
So overall, it seemed a fitting weekend: one game Minnesota style,
one game CC style, and a fitting split of the series. But the January
series between these two teams looms even larger now, especially with
the bad blood from these pair of games. There is no doubt, the games
will have an impact on the WCHA, and should be good games, to boot.
 
                                                Lee-nerd
                                                [log in to unmask]
 
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent." --Isaac Asimov