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] ____________________________________________