Adam: You absolutely heard correctly. The NCAA Final game was indeed called an appetizer for the main course. I in fact commented on it to the people we were watching the game with. I recall saying that I felt it was an insult to all the college hockey fans watching their "SuperBowl". Try saying that about NCAA basketball - phones would be ringing off the hook!!! In article <[log in to unmask]>, MR ADAM C WODON <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > -- [ From: Adam Wodon * EMC.Ver #2.10P ] -- > > I held off saying anything about this because I was clearly rooting for > Vermont with all my heart, and didn't want to seem bitter about it ... > but Mike M. has opened the door, as he so often does so well. > > I agree with Mike 100 percent. Everything he says is on the money. > > I watched the game at home, taped the game, and watched the ending > (painfully) a few times. By Dedective Reasoning and the Laws of > Physics it is clear to me that no Vermont player touched the puck from > the time McNeil hit it with his hand and Remackel banged it in. > > I think the idea of the puck hitting Thomas on the leg after McNeil > hit it is indisputably false if you've seen the tape. Thomas hit it > after Remackel did. The only question is whether Hallman tipped the > puck before Remackel did. I think from Reasoning, angle and physics, > he most likely didn't. > > Of course, it doesn't matter now, but it is a shame it ended like > that. > > BTW, I think it was Jeff Anbinder who talked about Keith Olbermann > being interested in hockey from his Cornell days -- Well, I think > Olbermann is proof that not every Cornell student gives a crap about > hockey, or knows a damn thing about it. > I HATE his pretentious attitude, but it's even worse when he's > dead wrong. > Olbermann said about the Vermont goal ... "..as we know, play > should have stopped as soon as the player hit it with his hand." He > then raised his eyebrow, as if to condescend. > Well, as WE know, play doesn't automatically stop when the puck is > hand passed, unless a teammate touches it. > So, while I BELIEVE it to have been a hand pass, Olbermann was, in > his way, putting down the whole thing because it was "so clear to him" > play should have been stopped immediately. I hate him. > > Speaking of ESPN -- who was that awful studio host? Where was John > Saunders, Steve Levy or Bill Pidto??? The guy knew nothing, couldn't > read or speak, and at one point I think I heard him say.... > "This is just the appetizer for tonight's main course, the Final > Four" He was talking about basketball. Did anyone else hear this? > How can you call the NCAA hockey Final an appetizer to the basketball > semifinals, to a hockey audience??? > > Finally, I think Bob Norton did a tremendous job. I've had this > image of him as a pure Boston guy (which he is), who only talks up > Boston players, and can't pronounce anyone else's name. > I no longer believe this, having paid great attention to him for 3 > games. I think his play diagramming was very insightful, and his > constant playing up of where players are from, could get tiring, but > since you never hear about it with hockey players, it's actually pretty > refreshing. > And how can you hate a guy who says, "I wouldn't know if a > basketball was blown up or stuffed." That's the kind of thing people > usually say in reverse. > > As for Mees, yeah he's bad --> But as someone else said, for the > longest time he carried the torch at ESPN for hockey, all alone. I > give him credit for that. > > AW > > 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.