Unverified Voracity Is The Only Dolphin In Upstate New York
Sponsor note. Well now you've gone and done it. You hugged a police horse after Jordan Poole's shot. The police horse enjoyed it. And now you have to extricate yourself from an uncomfortably long hug while a fairly upset policeman glares down upon you. We have all been there. (We have not. Just you, the guy who gets in situations with police horses.) On the bright side, now you have an idea for a company that sells a watch that periodically reminds you that you have been barred from approaching within 50 feet of any police horse in the state.
Well, have I got a lawyer for you.
![hoeglaw_thumb[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/hoeglaw_thumb[1]_thumb.jpg)
Richard Hoeg will help you incorporate, and get your contracts right, and get that small business up and running. He will also allow you to write ad copy that becomes a long-running saga of a man who just can't quit police horses. This latter probably won't come up if you engage him, but if it does you are going to be super happy that you picked Richard.
First weekend slice of life. The university has an extensive photo gallery with a lot of behind the scenes stuff from the first week of the tourney. They've apparently decided the David Turnley model is a good one to extend. Jaaron Simmons eats a potato!
Moe Wagner temporarily grows to extraordinary size!
And so forth and so on.
Spring game. It's at 7 PM again on April 14th. The time is unfortunate since there's a 50/50 chance that takes the weather from fine to Not Great, but at least its not on April 1st like a couple of Hoke spring games. Also it will be an actual competition, insofar as that is possible, and not a punting exhibition. It'll still draw a ton of people if Shea Patterson is declared eligible in the next few weeks here.
Various videos. While it's unfortunate that the replay feature is gone from MMOD, there is a small compensation from the NCAA's youtube page, which has various items of note, like oh I don't know, the last 90 seconds of the Houston game.
We'd be talking about that tip-in miss and MAAR going up with his right hand for a while if not for Poole's shot. There's also an every-make video from the Houston game…
…but not MSU-Syracuse, because that would require someone to make a basket. Also some Montana stuff if you've completely forgotten that game.
Some A&M scouting from the same source. If you'd like to get an idea of what a couple of A&M's prominent players are like, here's PF/C Tyler Davis:
And PG TJ Starks:
They left out eight turnovers between the two, because it's a highlight video. I've watched a couple of A&M games from earlier in the year and they are heavily dependent on Starks to create shots, thus explaining his usage and sky-high TO rate.
Beat all the A&Ms. LeMoyne, coached by one Patrick Beilein, takes on Mini A&M today in the D-II Elite Eight:
1pm today , Elite 8 game for the LeMoyne College Dolphins. Patrick's team vs West Texas A&M and his wife Kristen expecting their 1st child yesterday
— John Beilein (@JohnBeilein) March 20, 2018
Ironically we play Texas A&M Friday! Exciting time for LeMoyne , Michigan, + Beilein family . Carpe Diem ! #Gophins #GoBlue https://t.co/5VD7DDeW1Q
Almost cruel to nickname a college in upstate New York the "Dolphins."
Syracuse.com has a long profile on Patrick, who is likely to move up to D-1 after the season even if he's being a bit wishy-washy about it at the moment. He evidently takes after dad:
"For me, it was really simple," said Bassett, the athletic director at Le Moyne. "When you get into the process and you have to get into some details about salary range and things like that, Pat was interested in talking about other things. His comment at that point was he knew Le Moyne would be fair with what they could do, and he wasn't overly concerned with that.
"You never hear an answer like that."
If he succeeds at his (presumed) next stop he'll be in the conversation when Beilein decides to hang it up.
Slow vs fast. In the wake of That Upset, a lot of folks are wondering about whether slow teams like Virginia—and Michigan—are more vulnerable to upsets.
There is good reason to think that, all other things being equal, superior teams should play at a higher pace. Pomeroy quotes Roy Williams who puts the theory well: pic.twitter.com/YuW55Aqn5C
— Bart Trvik (@totally_t_bomb) March 20, 2018
Torvik then suggests that Virginia's glacial place is a way to conserve energy so they can go all out on defense. That's perfectly reasonable, and maybe that does help Virginia compete against better athletes.
Personally, though, I think the tempo thing is pretty overblown. The difference between Michigan's tempo and that of FSU, the fastest team left in the tournament, is 65 possessions versus 72. A ten percent increase in possessions doesn't seem like it's going to swing more games to the hypothetically better team. And Michigan fans are no doubt aware of what slow tempo implies: open shots and scanty turnovers on offense and a lack of transition on defense.
Virginia might be enough of an outlier that they are more vulnerable to upsets because of their tempo. They are dead last in the country at 60 possessions per game, three fewer than the next-slowest team. The difference between #330 Michigan and Virginia is the same as the difference between #121 Morehead State and M.
Starting to notice. Tom Izzo's brand of on-court football isn't helping anyone's draft prospects. ESPN's draft experts on Miles Bridges:
Bridges certainly hasn't made the jump scouts would have hoped when he elected to return for his sophomore season. …hasn't done much this season to convince teams that he belongs firmly ahead of positional peers Mikal Bridges and Kevin Knox.
And Jaren Jackson:
Plenty of questions have been raised about the decisions Izzo made down the stretch, as this is the third straight season in which the Hall of Famer has been unable to advance out of the first weekend of the tournament. From an NBA standpoint, most of those questions revolve around the outdated lineup configurations and overall style of basketball the Spartans played all season. Izzo's insistence on having six different centers on the roster and playing all of them (two at a time) in virtually every contest -- despite the obvious toll that took on the team's spacing, ball movement, shooting and aesthetic appeal -- makes it difficult to draw too many conclusions on Jackson's NBA outlook.
At 6-11 and 240 pounds, with a 7-5 wingspan, it is unlikely that Jackson will see much time at the power forward spot in the NBA like he did all season, certainly not next to a non-shooting center who lacks relative athleticism. How much better would Jackson have looked playing in a more up-tempo system at his natural position when surrounded by more skilled teammates? NBA decision-makers will have to decipher that on their own.
Looking forward: It is important to remember that Jackson is the youngest prospect in this class and was clearly not being utilized to his full potential.
Bridges dropped from a guy projected 6th last year to one projected 12th in ESPN's most recent mock draft. Ain't enough bag in the world to justify that.
FWIW, A&M C Robert Williams is also in the lottery:
Williams reminded everyone why he was such a highly touted prospect entering the season with a tremendous opening weekend in the NCAA tournament, helping Texas A&M reach the Sweet 16.
Despite playing out of position all season, he has shown that his game is tailor-made for the NBA as a rim-running, pick-and-roll-finishing, shot-blocker/offensive rebounder in the Clint Capela mold. With DeAndre Jordan in the final year of his contract, the Clippers could certainly look to Williams as a potential successor.
Wagner checks in at 49th, FWIW.
ENDORSE. 40 of these 42 ways to fix the NHL—and hockey in general—are excellent suggestions. I was standing and applauding by the end of this bravura section:
5) Leaving your feet to block a shot is a penalty. I hate when sports reward no-talent try-hards, and hockey rewards them more than any other sport. It boggles my mind when people get pumped about a fourth-line penalty killer sliding to block an Alex Ovechkin bomb from the face-off circle. Seriously? You don't want to see where that slapper was headed?
This would increase goals and reduce injuries. You can dive to take away the puck if you're in chase mode, but no more squaring up a shooter and sliding in front of the shot. Remember when John Tortorella took over the Canucks and people were excited about the Sedins blocking shots? The Sedins! Get out of here with this nonsense.
6) Bigger nets. Let's go three inches vertically and horizontally and see what happens. I've heard the argument against this idea because goalies would eat more blasts in the mask but whenever that happens, it's always by accident and it's always with the goalie on his knees well below the crossbar. If anything, creating more room around the goalie's skull would reduce those instances but really, shots to the mask are always accidental and wouldn't go anywhere either way. More goals, though. Let's get more goals.
7) Puck off the netting is in play. If there's one general thing I'd change about the NHL, I'd reduce the number of whistles during games. Hockey sells itself on flow and speed, but man can there be a lot of whistles. I don't understand why shots that hit the protective netting above the glass can't be played when they bounce back onto the ice. Everyone has had time to adjust to the netting over the years and everyone knows when a puck leaves a stick if it's headed toward the netting. When it bounces behind the goal line, go get it. Keep playing.
For the sake of fairness, anything off the netting and into the net off the goalie doesn't count.
8) No more offside. This also means no more offside reviews. Everyone is happy. Why do we even have offside? If I could go back in time, I'm killing Hitler and kidnapping the guy in 1898 or whenever who was so passionate about an offside line. It's not like the offside line makes the game safer; it's there to give the defense an advantage against oncoming opponents. Why?
Removing offside is another way to get some whistles out of the game and help with flow.
Yes. All of that. Beyonce picture dot gif.
Etc.: EMU drops four sports. Sean McDonough back! Lecturer salaries at Michigan currently 1) embarrassing, 2) being negotiated. Radio call of the buzzer-beater.
The dip was actually hidden somewhat by the B1G starting conference hockey play at the moment that historical powers Michigan, Michigan State, and Wisconsin were all enduring historic down periods that two of those programs are just coming out of.
Minnesota's been in trouble for years.
I've warmed up to Matt Shepherd. I think I'm ready for him to take the football PBP too. I KNOW I'm ready for Brandy to give that up.
I like Shep, not because he is especially pleasant to the ear, but because he does a great job accurately describing the action, which is the play by play guy's job.
Terry Mills is - not good. He really doesn't add much in my opinion. He says the same thing over and over again, and is really tough to listen to because of his droll disinterested delivery.
On occasion if I happen to be driving somewhere I will listen to MSU basketball on the radio... for about 30 seconds then I have to turn it off. WIll Tieman has got to be the worst play-by-play guy in American. His voice and delivery are incredibly annoying, but so are George Blaha's. Tiemen just doesn't describe the action AT ALL. You can listen to him for 5 minutes and not get a score or a time remaining. At least Blaha is obsessed with giving you the clock "Four and fifteen to go in the half"
Tieman is the worst.
March 21st, 2018 at 12:32 AM ^
i hadn't listened to a sparty hoops game on the radio in years (if ever) but got stuck in a car with a sparty fan on friday...during pregame, tieman said that cassius winston had "played himself into being one of the best point guards in america." dude. winston isn't the best point in the STATE.
Offsides is necessary. Brian, you're a soccer fan, so you can understand the reason the rule exists. Imagine if it didn't exist in soccer: scoring would explode because forwards could start their runs 3 seconds sooner whereas the defender would have an impossible choice between staying with the ball or chasing the running forward. The forward could then have the choice of several directions to run. Basically it would be chaos for any odd-man situation.
The same is true for hockey. Imagine a world without offsides. Obviously one's mind goes to cherry-picking, but that's not the real danger. The real danger is having two defensemen vs. three forwards who no longer have to try to time their skating such that they cross the blue line after the puck.
The only logical play in every single transition opportunity would be for the puck to cross later than other skaters. Example: 3-on-2, the puckhandler should always be crossing center ice while both wings skate past the defense (around the former-blue-line region) on the outside. The center then picks between three options: whichever winger is left open and streaking toward the net, or if both defenders stay with their men, then the center skates up the slot untouched.
Every single hockey game would play out this way until teams throw their hands up and leave a defender at center ice (or farther back) while on offense, electing to play shorthanded rather than give up easy transition goals. If you want teams to play Ron Mason-, MSU-style hockey, which we all know you don't, then offsides has a purpose.
I know you didn't write that article but yeah. That suggestion sucks ass.
And if we're trying to solve offsides review, get rid of it. I agree THAT rule sucks. Don't throw the logic out with the stupid-water.
entertaining as hell. Maybe you have an idea about this that I don't, but there is no offsides in basketball and there is no chaos, no problem. Sure, scoring would go up, maybe the typical game instead of being 3-2 would be 8-7: what exactly is bad about that?
Basketball is much, much less about transition play than hockey. I would estimate hockey to be 50-50 between fast, back-and-forth, transition play and the equivalent of "half-court offense" in bball, whereas the very highest transition percentage in college bball this year was around [edit: 41%, but the highest team with relevance was Oklahoma at 31%; median around 20%, you get the picture] (according to Hoop-Math.com). In basketball you inbound the ball after a score, and the scoring team has time to jog all 5 guys back and set up on defense. That situation literally never happens in hockey.
Another point: any team using olympic ice would be immediately at a huge advantage.
Read the end carefully. He's not saying that hockey would become a series of exciting odd-man rushes. He's saying that there would be a brief flurry of odd-man rushes until teams adapted by keeping a defender further back to defend against this while on offense, resulting in 4-on-5 offensive sets.
Which is to say, the game would become really boring because not only would there be no transition but there'd be far less opportunity for offense as well.
I'm not sure that he's exactly correct, but eliminating offsides could certainly have serious unintended consequences we can't fully recognize yet, and you'd need quite a bit of time with the new rules for coaches to adapt to see the full effects of the change.
You delineated your points very well, and your breakdown of various scenarios & options was enlightening.
I'm still in favor of getting rid of offsides in both games.
I love defense in football, basketball & baseball.
In soccer & hockey, the game is too tilted towards scoring prevention. Offsides should go!
I'm all in favor of many of the suggestions in that article that promote scoring. Eliminate offsides review: absolutely. Widen the nets and/or limit goalie equipment size: sure. Don't allow people to slide to block shots: I guess that's fine too. Allow kicked-puck goals: heck yeah. Eliminate the trapezoid: definitely. Start period in offensive zone if on powerplay: never thought of that, but great idea.
No more offsides? Absolutely not. The game would be fundamentally changed and it would have negative consequences that stifle the game rather than open it up.
I can't stand the trapezoid. But I disagree with the author about the puck-playing ability of NHL goalies. At that level, most of them are competent or understand their limitations. If they give away goals on crappy puck-handling, they'll be in the AHL tomorrow. The fix is far less complicated and will never happen:
Goalies are live.
That's it. You can hit a goalie possessing the puck, just like anybody else on the ice. Don't want to get hit? Stay in your net. The trapezoid kind of worked, in that it stopped goalies from roaming to the corners, but they still stop pucks behind their net and turn their back to forecheckers with impunity because there's nothing a skater can do but try to motor around a moving pick. It's dumb. If that dude comes out plays the puck, hit him.
Problem solved.
"Awwww you can't do that! Goalies will get hurt!"
Not if they stay in the crease.
"But they don't wear the same shoulder protection as skaters to protect them from body checking!"
Stay in the crease. You're protected in the crease. You want to come out of your crease and act like the 3rd defenseman and initiate breakouts or clear pucks around the glass? Then brace yourself. And that would end that problem.
I've been wanting goalies to be live outside the crease for like the last 25 years. I mean, c'mon.
I love about half the changes in that article and in fact have been saying puck off the netting should be in play ever since about two seconds after they introduced the netting.
Offsides should stay because cherry-picking is dumb. But, you know how the puck isn't in the zone until it crosses the line completely, and then isn't out of the zone until it crosses the line completely? I would have two blue lines that act basically like one big-ass blue line. The puck isn't in the zone until it crosses the one closer to the net and isn't out until it crosses the one further away.
Finally, I would reverse the rules for ending power plays on a goal. It should end when the shorthanded team scores and keep going when the power play team scores, not the other way around. You get scored on during your own power play, you suck and you lose the power play.
Why would that type of blue line work any differently or better than the current one? Just for visual purposes? I seem to recall from my playing days (although I can't find a picture online) that some arenas had blue and red lines that were unpainted in the center so they were more like two parallel lines, but I might be wrong. Either way I think refs are trained to see it the way it's painted now. I just don't think it really needs to be effed with. They took away the two-line pass which was a great thing, but there's a reason offside remains.
I love the idea that a powerplay ends when the shorthanded team scores. I do not love unreleasable penalties for everything unless you shorten it from 2 minutes.
I think what he's talking about with the blue line is to make it much wider, like several feet or more wide.
The big-ass blue line (or his double-line idea) simultaneously makes a bigger offensive zone and a bigger neutral zone by expanding the boundries of the blue line on both ends. If you make the neutral zone bigger, the offensive zone shrinks and vice versa -- unless you make the blue line 5 feet wide.
I don't know if this matters as much with the two-line pass gone. I think that's the point of the parallel lines idea. Is that the one where they removed the center stripe? Bigger zones probably wouldn't hurt, I guess.
And yeah, clever idea with the penalty ending on a SHG.
The big-ass blue line (or his double-line idea) simultaneously makes a bigger offensive zone and a bigger neutral zone by expanding the boundries of the blue line on both ends. If you make the neutral zone bigger, the offensive zone shrinks and vice versa -- unless you make the blue line 5 feet wide.
Yup, my thinking exactly. I think it would allow rushes to build more speed before hitting the blue line and make dump-and-chase less of a thing. And at the same time, more freedom of movement in the offensive zone.
Stop comparing soccer to hockey. yes they are both played with nets to score in at each end of the playing surface. Similarities almost end there (more in a minute). World class soccer produces 10 to 15 reasonable scoring chances a game. World class hockey...60 plus reasonable scoring chances. Everything on the ice happens way faster and creates way more excitement. For those that need a 15 to 13 game. I don't know...stick with volleyball.
The one similarity that hockey does share with hockey is typically very close games. And, really, what is more exciting than a one goal game? Still there is a difference in that hockey will have a one goal game that has 20 to 30 chances to tie and 20 to 30 chances to increase the lead where soccer has but a handfull of scoring chances for an entire game.
Because the one complaint everyone has about soccer is "too much scoring".
I don't think slow pace of play automatically makes a team more vulnerable to upsets. And Roy Williams is only correct if both teams are playing at the same speed. In other words, if to increase possessions, UNC is taking a bunch of quick shots, but their opponent is settling in on each possession and getting the best shot it can, UNC's talent advantage may be negated by taking less quality shots over the course of the game than its opponent. But if UNC gets its opponent into a track meet, where both teams are taking quick shots, UNC will certainly have an advantage.
I think Virginia's problem is that the slow pace of play isn't a result of their offensive goals, but rather is the goal. Michigan plays relatively slowly because it is searching for a great shot on every possession, and will turn down a not-great shot early in the possession with the expectation that something better will come along. Virginia strikes me as something different, they don't run 30 seconds of good offense to get the best look whenever that may be, it almost feels like they actively try not to take a shot in the first 20 seconds of the shot clock and sort of hope that the last 10 seconds yields the best shot of the possession.
Totally agree. I was confident that if M made the F4 and faced UVa, we'd beat them. Beilein's offense might not have beaten Bennett's D in prior years, but with our D now functioning at a near-UVa level, our O would outlast them and take better shots. Maybe we'll see in the next B1G-ACC Challenge? Do the conference tournament champs face each other, or would they face the reg season champ? (who dat again?)
And as for your first point -
Princeton vs Georgetown, anyone?!
you need to combine it with points/possession. UNC is usually one of the better offensive rebounding teams in the country each year. So yeah, maybe there are some possessions where the shot isn't that great but if they get an offensive rebound and a basket off a put back, they are still scoring. When you combine a high amount of possessions per game with a solid points/possession, you are probably going to win a lot of games.
If you have have a high number of possessions per game and a low point/possession then you are probably taking bad shots and not getting too many offensive rebounds. In this scenario, you probably need to do some soul searching to see if the strategy being employed is what is best for your team.
Interesting thing I noticed while watching that "Last 90 seconds" video: when Devin Davis hit both free throws to give Houston a 1 point edge at 62-61, he actually should have been called for a lane violation on both shots. The first one was really bad and it looked like the ref at the bottom walked up and said something to him about it. The second free throw was really close, and I can understand it not being called live, but he did enter the lane before the ball hit the rim.
Free Throw 1
2nd Free Throw
He actually did it again on the next four free throws he shot.
Similarly, his teammate next to Wagner definitely enters the lane before the ball is released, every single time. He times it up and isn't even close (in a relative sense). Is that common? I'm sure the ref doesn't care in real time unless it's more obvious.
March 21st, 2018 at 12:40 AM ^
I remember thinking that live but I was at a bar so couldn't rewind it and then after The Shot, my memory went blank as far as anything that happened before The Shot.
taller definitely but also wider. An extra foot wide and 6 inches tall would up the goals and the extra width would minimize pucks to the head on the goalie from higher shots.
I have watched over 1,000 hockey games from mites to NHL. I can recall 10 to 15 times that a goalie took a hard shot to the noggin. None of which required him/her to leave the game. While I respect the idea of protecting players, this is a non-starter in that the only times they get hit in the noggin by a puck is by accident/deflection and the headwear they have today is suffcient to keep them safe. Head injuries to goalies, for the most part, are casued from irresponisble and wreckless players crashing the net.
is awesome. I love seeing these fan reaction and other call videos. They're a lot of fun
I've rewatched the end of that game a dozen times, and it still gives me chills every time.
March 21st, 2018 at 12:42 AM ^
watches behind everyone else.
Watching it live was the biggest rush I have had in a while, though I have watched the replay many times as well.
I went instinctively into a Dick Vitale primal yell that last at least 15 seconds at the top of my lung power.
I would like to see olympic size rink in the NHL to allow the most skilled players flourish and not clutch and grabed all the time. Think of the 90s Red Wings
Agree fully. NHL players are way too big, skilled, and fast to not play on the olympic, aka european rink. that, in and of itself, would solve many of the percieved problems in the NHL.
Bigger rink cannot fix the review silliness, but the game would be much more fun to watch.
It was formerly known as West Texas State, and the football team produced a metric s-ton of professional wrestlers, including: Terry Funk, Dory Funk Jr, Dusty Rhodes, Ted DiBiase, Bruiser Brody, Stan Hansen, Tito Santana, Tully Blanchard, Barry Windham, and Bobby Duncam Sr. Dick Murdoch did not actually attend West Texas State, but bluffed his way into playing in alumni games. Actual future all pro football players Mercury Morris and Duane Thomas also starred there.
Baby Beilein better be ready for a steel folding chair to the back, is what I'm saying
March 21st, 2018 at 12:45 AM ^
with Kathy Ireland as a kicker. What a team.
I can't fathom the thought that Brian doesn't have the critical thinking ability/knowlege that off sides is a rule to prevent cherry picking/what the guy above described. cumong, man. then again, someone with a brain presumably convinced someone else with a brain that reviewing for OFF FUCKING SIDES in HOCKEY was a good idea. In general, review has gone too far is every sport except maybe football and even then more than 60s to review should be auto confirmation of the call on the field.
if you've ever played any pick up street/floor/pond hockey you know why off sides exists. to prevent cheap goals where the puck dribbles out to a guy who has numbers and then the other team is just playing "chase" and is in a constant state of no man's land. that would be the game. no organized D, guys playing on the other side of the red line to hope for that long outlet pass ASAP.
The goal should not be to increase scoring, it should be to increase legit scoring opportunities (exception being increasing the goal size- or severely limiting goalie equip size and field of play*). Stop the blocked shots in the "half court." Encourage possession of the puck, not dump & chase.
*I also think most sports at the pro level (maybe D1 college as well) should increase the size of the field of play. hockey is better on an olympic sheet. Naismith couldn't image a human the size of shaq/Garnet/Lebron who can dunk from the free throw line and be so athletic that 3 steps at full speed is literally 1/3 of the court. Expand the paint and the dimensions of the court by 5-10%, maybe even consider making the hoop 10'6'' - 11' (extreme but not as extreme or consequential as removing offsides in hockey FFS). Football could expand by 10% (the Canadians do it!). it spreads out the D, provides more space for the offense to run and puts speed/quickness ahead of "being in a phone booth" brutality
Hooray!!
Will miss Joe Tess.
Would be cool if Jay Bilas could team up with McDonough in football as well. Those two are a funny tandem.
Syracuse and Michigan State play boring basketball. That game last Sunday was awful to watch. I wish zone defence was banned from college hoops.
The Big German needs to stay. Not consistent.
Nick Ward's mind set reminds me of one Kevin Duckworth.
Izzo could have had a monster this year. But he blew it.
One difference between Michigan and Virginia is the Wolverines play good half court offense.
I dislike neutral arenas. House's are most of time with many empty seats. It would be nice if higher seeds hosted these tournament game's. Crisler would be crazy this Thursday.
If the boy's regain their shooting stroke with that defense. Oh baby. Come on fellas you put it in the bucket.
March 21st, 2018 at 12:47 AM ^
are usually packed. Staples certainly will be packed. The reason it often seems kind of quiet, at least for the regional semifinal games, is that the crowd is split more or less four ways.
If you are advocating eliminating offsides and allowing the puck to be played off the netting, then you lose all credibility for endorsing other, potentially reasonable changes like the size of the goal (a bad idea, but reasonable) or banning going down to block shots (meh)
Offsides is necessary for such obvious reasons that... I don't even know, man. And if you allow play off the net, it immediately would be used strategically to dump the puck into the corner and have it just sit there to chase. Just terrible, awful, stupid ideas.
I don't understand the obsession with eliminating replay altogether because it slows the game down sometimes. It is horribly implemented in college hoops, but that doesn't mean it's inherently evil, it's just executed poorly (as many other things in college basketball are). The goal HAS to be to get the call right, and reply is a great tool to do that, if handled properly.
hockey has plenty of offense, what with 30+ shots per team per game...or, in other words, more than one offensive event per game minute. Most games have even more. Goals scored does not define how much offense a game had. A game with skilled goalies can be very offensive, and extremely exciting and yet net only a small handful of goals.
The proposed changes are absurd, except for the larger goal. The ONLY reason the netting is up behind nets is to protect spectators (and rightfully, since at least one person died from her injuries). Take away the blue line offsides and you fundamentally change the game into a cherry picking mess that nobody wants to see. The "no blocked shots from someone not on their feet rule" is the most absurd of them all. How many players on defense do you think will get pushed, hooked, tripped, etc...especially on the PK in order to make them useless. I did not look into the proposed change, but what happens if a prone player blocks a shot?? Another penalty??
I would rather go back to the bench clearing brawls...Get off my lawn....unless you are a purest.
Watch hockey and tell me lacrosse wouldn't be better on ice skates
Watch MMA and tell me boxing wouldn't be more fun with choke holds.
Watch football and tell me rugby wouldn't be better with helmets
Watch the Tour de France and tell me the Boston Marathon wouldn't be better on bikes.
etc.
etc.
etc.
I saw this from Brian:
"Also it will be an actual competition, insofar as that is possible, and not a punting exhibition. It'll still draw a ton of people if Shea Patterson is declared eligible in the next few weeks here."
So not quite sure what Brian meant there; perhaps just that news of Patterson's fall eligibility could drive general football interest... and not any notion that Patterson can't play if he is not yet declared one way or another by the NCAA.
UMBig set me straight on whether Shea Patterson could play in spring football (countable practices, and Spring Game) if he is not-yet eligible for 2018, and the answer -- more unsurprising it is the more you think about it -- is yes, he can play in the Spring Game.
And so I presume that big news about an eligibility waiver for the Ole Miss transferees, driving general news and interest, is what Brian was talking about it. I am planning on seeing Shea Patterson for the first time in person on the 14th, no matter what.
Comments