I have been bothered by the comments of Red and Hobey Boy too.  But I
couldn't figure out why, until I saw Rick Pitino's (sp?) wonderful
comments after the NCAA basketball tournament, in praise of Arizona
and in praise of his own players who just lost.  His comments
contained more than just class, they showed how integrity and good
sportsmanship can supplement an already exciting game and tournament.
 
Obviously, best team won.  Michigan had the best individual players on
their team, but the best team often wins the championships, as North
Dakota proved this year.  This has often been a complaint of previous
Minnesota teams.  You can win 30 or 35 games a year but if you don't
win the final game of the NCAA Hockey season, you are not the
champions nor are you the best team.  I am sure Morrison will remember
that every time he looks at his Hobey statue.
 
----------
From:  Deron Treadwell[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:  Tuesday, April 01, 1997 11:29 AM
Subject:  "Best Team"
 
I've been watching this debate about the "best team" comments with
interest, and almost responded a couple times, but I think this is a
difficult issue to talk about because emotions run high.
 
I have no ties to any of these schools involved, so here is my take.
 
Michigan was the best team in the nation during the season.  Red
Berenson
is right.  Brendan Morrison is right.  The facts show that, they lost
but
four games and to only three other teams, while mauling many more.
 
Michigan doesn't need Berenson or Morrison to tell them how good they
are,
they know it.  We don't need them to tell us because anyone who has
seen
Michigan has seen how good they are.
 
But it is a fact of sports that the best team does not always win.
Michigan may have been the best team during the regular season, like
Kansas
in basketball.
 
But I take a slightly different angle.  What good is being the best
team in
the regular season if you don't win the championship?  Sure, in time
you
might look back and be at peace, and your fans will always remember
you,
but do you think those Michigan players would rather have lost 10
games and
been national champions, than been the best team in the regular
season?
 
These teams work all year to make the tournament, and once that's
happened
it doesn't really matter what you've done before, because the
tournament is
the great equalizer.  If there was an NCAA Regular Season title, it
would
belong to Michigan, and well deserved.  But part of being the best is
winning the games that really count.  That is the nature of the
beast.
 
Michigan did not do that, and while this should not take away from a
great
season it will because of Michigan's own expectations and
understandably
that of their fans.  However, calling your team the "best" now is a
slap at
North Dakota.  Once the tournament started, Michigan knew they
couldn't
lose another game, so did North Dakota, so did New Hampshire who got
knocked out in the first round.  These were the best 12 teams in the
nation
and to be the best, you had to beat these teams.  North Dakota did
that,
Michigan did not.
 
Talent-wise and on paper Michigan had the "best" team, but when the
games
were decided on the ice the best team is the one left standing when
the
dust settles -- North Dakota.
 
 
 
---
Deron Treadwell ([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.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.