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