Steve Phillips states:
>                Now, if we want to talk about the CCHA playoffs, I think
>the thing here is that LSSU has simply had Michigan's number.  Last year's
>close-checking game, the 3-1 "Madeley-standing-on-his-head" game the year
>before, and the Beddoes OT goal the year before that don't make for
>'abysmal' records, just a record devoid of championships.  That word
>might apply better to a team who hasn't made it past the first round for
>several years. I think winning the regular-season title twice in three
.years isn't too shabby (Not to mention six straight GLI titles --
>non-league tournament action, although not post-season)...
>There's always some luck involved in winning titles, and perhaps this year
>Michigan will be luckier than the other teams involved.  We shall see.
>-Steve.
>U-M '92
 
   I wasn't trying to imply that Red's postseason record was completely
devoid of success.  I was simply pointing out that, given the high talent
level of his teams the last few years, failing to win anything in the post-
season indicates a problem of some sort.  If they had had little talent, then
perhaps making the Phinal Phour a few times would not be considered a failure.
But a team with the talent of Michigan should have achieved at least a CCHA
championship.  It is possibly attributable to bad luck, but I think that other
factors must have some sway.  Nobody is that unlucky, except the Boston Red
Sox.
                                              -- Steve Moerland
                                                MSU '92, UK '95