Some observations of last weekend's Northeastern/Maine series:
 
FRIDAY NIGHT'S GAME:
     Historically, Maine head coach Shawn Walsh has stressed the
importance of endurance to his teams and they have responded well,
establishing themselves as one of the best third-period teams in
college hockey. Friday night's game was no different, as Maine
scored three unanswered goals to pull away from Northeastern.
     However, after scoring the third goal of the third period, the
Black Bears took the rest of the night off offensively and
concentrated on defense. Although Maine had a four-goal lead, there
were still more than eight minutes remaining in the game. No team
can afford to let-up and take the rest of the night off
offensively. The better teams will take advantage of this come
tournament time.
 
SATURDAY NIGHT'S GAME:
     After Saturday night's 3-3 tie, Walsh said on the radio that
he was pleased with the way Maine played. He said Maine had
attempted more than 80 shots during the game while Northeastern
attempted about 40 shots. "That's hockey," he said, referring to
Maine's shots not finding holes.
     From my vantage point beside the Northeastern goal for the
first and third periods, looking down the red line, Maine did not
play too well. Most fans in my section were disappointed in Maine's
play. I was, too. The offense just wasn't there. Northeastern
played a very good defensive game, keeping Maine away from the
center of the ice and away from the goal. The first period did see
a lot of close shots by Maine, but during the third period there
just wasn't any spark in Maine's forwards and Maine's shots were
weak, save for three shots that were deflected into the upper deck.
     Successful passing is key to setting up scoring chances. Maine
had a sloppy passing game, especially during power plays. A few
times Maine passes got away and had to be chased down in the
neutral zone, wasting time.
     Northeastern's offensive game didn't play too well, either.
 
THE SHOOTOUT:
     Saturday night's game was the first time I've seen a shootout
in person. I was not impressed, and that had nothing to do with
Northeastern's outshooting Maine to "earn" the extra point. Neither
team deserved to walk away from the game with more points than the
other. While waiting for the two-minute intermission after overtime
to end, I thought to myself that if Maine were to win the shootout
it still wouldn't be that big of a deal.
     Awarding the winner of a shootout an extra point is awarding
a false sense of accomplishment and poses a threat in the standings
to stronger teams.
     Although the shootout kept people in their seats, I didn't
sense any excitement. Sure, when Maine's Dave MacIsaac scored the
fans went wild, but that was it.
     The shootout is a bad idea, plain and simple. It places no
value on the skills of either team, nor even on the players. What
skill is there for the skater who speeds up to the puck at center-
ice and skates in alone? Nobody's in his face, nobody's poking at
the puck, forcing him to be a little creative. Likewise, the
goaltender just sits there, thinking: Will the shooter go left,
right, slap it, stuff it, finesse it, wrist-it? It's a guessing
game more than reflexes.
     The shootout, simply put, proves absolutely nothing and leaves
open the possibility that a weaker team may be able to surpass a
better team in the standings, and that has the potential of
affecting the playoffs.
_____________________________________________________________________
Ryan Robbins               "Nothing in fine print is ever good news."
University of Maine                                  -- Andy Rooney
_____________________________________________________________________
[log in to unmask] ____________________________________________