- Member for
- 5 years 5 days
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Scalping||
I haven't seen it mentioned on here, but I think the core of the issue is the difficulty in selling student tickets at this point. Back in the day if you woke up on a Saturday and decided you didn't want to go to the game all you had to do was walk over to the stadium and sell your ticket for whatever you could get out of it.
From what I understand you now have to "validate" the ticket (meaning allow the university to make extra $ on it as well as jump through a bunch of hoops), rather than just sell it to the guy on the corner. Plus there is the whole issue of student IDs, points, etc.
If I were a student I'd rather just eat the cost of the ticket instead of going through the hassle of all those steps, even though you'd prefer for the ticket to be used...
|1 year 44 weeks ago||That's fair||
I concur with that reasoning. He looked out of control after he got tied up in the guy at the end of the hit, but I think that might have just been the result of the guy collapsing around his feet and tripping Trouba. Still, I love the fact that the guy is on our team. I'm sure this won't be the last one of these he dishes out and we'll see if he's more Kronwall or just looking to kill people...
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Do you have to play the puck?||
Glad you are bringing your officiating perspective to the debate. I have to admit from the ref's vantage he probably does look a little out of control. I'm curious about what you mentioned in reference to playing the puck because it has been brought up multiple times. Is there part of the rule book that says you have to play the puck when you hit a guy? To me it seems hard (and contradictory) to do both at the same time and the rules you block quoted above didn't seem to mention it.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||And there's the rub...||
Don, I think you nailed it. I just don't like where the game is headed. Player safety is of the utmost importance, but with sport comes risk and I don't think the game is nearly as exciting when you eliminate the opportunity for plays like that. The whole hockey model is a mess - instead of worrying about the catastrophic play and keeping kids from hitting until far later in the game (now Bantam), they should allow contact from the beginning when kids can learn to deal with it safely and be taugh proper technique so they know enough not to come through center ice with their head down.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Puck or Man?||
I will agree with Justin that Trouba's purpose was not to play the puck and that maybe by rulebook definition that's wrong, but as a defenseman I have always heard - you take the man, your partner gets the puck. That's the case if you're skating backwards, angling a guy, or whatever else. Is it great to do both? Sure, but the primary responsibility of the D man in a 1 on 1 is to stop/slow the attacker enough so that your backcheckers can catch up to help. You'll notice in the video he puck drifts harmlessly to the stick of the other Michigan player and he has full posession of it to transition back up ice.
And Ben - not sure how Trouba's supposed to throw a hip check while skating forward at full speed. Are you suggesting he lead with his lower body, or do you mean a real hip check where he's skating backward and whips his lower body into the guy? I'm all for not scrambling the guy's brain, but I don't know that a hip check is possible there.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Stalling is not the same as hitting||
Corey - I think I understand what you're getting at with the stalling or angling, but I have to disagree that it has the exact same effect. People play totally different around Kronwall than they did around Lidstrom. Lidstrom was the best in the world, but what Kronwall is able to do changes the entire context of the game and he does it clean. They really are different things and causes your opponent to alter their style of play much more than non physical contact.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Then what should Trouba have done?||
Quiver - your sentiments are well reasoned and I totally agree that nobody wants the results, but since you've played at a high level what play should Trouba have made instead? As somebody who also played in college (Club while at Michigan), and more specifically as a defenseman, I don't see why Trouba should change his style of play because the guy is smaller or left himself vulnerable.
I keep getting negged, so perhaps people are thinking that I just want blood, but I was responding specifically to JeepInBen's first comment where he said it wasn't "good" or a "hockey play" and a 2nd comment that suggested a poke check is all the same as a devestating open ice hit.
The way I saw it Trouba wasn't targeting, he kept his elbows down and when he's already had the guy lined up while coming across the zone to make a play, how does he suddenly change his instincts at the end to make it safer? Serious question - if the kid is fine and pops up and skates off the ice is everything OK with the hit?
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Not a GOOD hit, a GREAT hit||
I don't know what your parameters are for "a good hit" or a "good hockey play" but whatever definition you're using seems to come straight out of the Gary Bettman version of hockey. Plain and simple Trouba drove his shoulder through the body of a guy stretching out to control a puck he'd lost.
Nobody wants to see somebody get injured or hurt, but the reason hockey is not soccer (outside of the ice) is the contact and players that don't whine about it.
The fact is, the opposing player had his head down and was reaching for the puck because it was too far out in front of him; by doing so he left himself exposed to punishment and Trouba delivered it, beautifully. You can try to give all sorts of excuses for the brutality of the hit, but the real onus lies with the guy that left himself exposed. Is it Scott Stevens' fault Lindros was looking at his laces coming through neutral ice?
At a certain point it's up to the player to keep his head up. You're taught that from day one in hockey. Thankfully, if you forget there are guys like Trouba and Kronwall that are more than happy to remind you.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||There's a reason...||
...the reason to hit a guy that hard is that the next time down the ice he'll dump it into the zone instead of trying to carry it through center ice and make a play. It also will cause everyone on the other team to think twice about what they're doing when Trouba is on the ice, thus giving Michigan more opportunity to gain easy turnovers.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||We Don't Matter||
Keep in mind the premise - if you're not a former player, staff member, or major donor you ultimately don't matter. You exist only to buy tickets, merchandise, or perhaps in your case, pay tuition.
The people of influence are the ones that need to be on board and appeased. As stated previously, it is possible, the decision was not done ONLY for Lloyd Carr, but for the whole of Schembechler Hall.
It is also possible that Lloyd has some very legitimate reasons for discord with Les and that his opinion on character is valid. However, that does not necessarily mean that it should trump the true goal of finding the very best football coach to win football games.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||We Are Powerless||
The blog is very useful for sharing opinions and coming to terms with things, however, everything that's written here has zero influence on what actually happens with the Michigan football program. Unless your name is Al Glick, Dave Brandon, Mary Sue Coleman or you are possibly a former player you have no ability to impact the program.
People need to come to terms with a few concepts:
1. Dave Brandon has a boss - Mary Sue Colemnan. It is possible that his entire coaching search was framed by her opinion. It is possible that opinion was that Harbaugh was not a good fit for the University of Michigan because she saw him as a character risk and uncontrollable. Perhaps Brandon agreed.
2. Les Miles did not end up @ U of M the first time around for far more than poaching J'ai Eugene from Lloyd Carr. It is possible that resentment lingered between the two men because of interpersonal dynamics from when they were on staff together.
3. It is possible the decision to hire Hoke was ultimately made not to heal the fanbase, but to heal the divide within Schembechler Hall. If Lloyd Carr was unwilling to be involved with the program under Rich Rodriguez as were many former players, it is possible that Brady Hoke was hired not for coaching ability but for his capacity to restore harmony.
These things are all possible. All you can do is hope it works out. We are powerless.
|3 years 43 weeks ago||Clarify Please||
Are you looking only for recognized journalists or just people involved in media on any level (production, editors, etc.)? Is it limited to on-air talent in TV/Radio or print as well?
|4 years 14 weeks ago||$ is nice but what about winning?||
I understand that $, status and Big Ten stability are all key pieces in this puzzle, but I'm shocked at how little people seem to be concerned with the actual football side of things. Obviously our football team has fallen on its' worst time in history, but what I ultimately still care about is winning championships. If/when we return to glory I would far prefer to see a situation where we only have to deal with teams on par with what we've owned in the past in order to make it to the national title game. I think Nebraska falls into that category and Notre Dame and whatever other Big East school would as well, however, when you start talking about adding the likes of Oklahoma or Texas after running the gauntlet of a conference schedule that would likely include OSU, MSU, ND, PSU and a few weaklings, I just don't see the benefit for U of M. Do you really want to play Texas or OU after that AND THEN go for the title against Florida, LSU or 'Bama? If we got one every 25 years I'd be thrilled (okay, I'd be thrilled with that now, too).
One of the major complaints a lot of the new guard had with Lloyd and the old school was the inevitable one non-conference loss and one slip up against a sub-par Big Ten opponent. Sure, we'd still win the Big Ten title by beating OSU, but it was never playing for the national championship with the obvious exception. Rich Rod was supposed to change all that and well, let's just hope better days are ahead, but if we ever get there I sure don't want to have to deal with two super-powers after running the conference table.
|4 years 17 weeks ago||Agreed and the answer...||
Ha, ha - you got me with the MoDo thing. I'm awake now...should've been more specific, but he's obviously not going to be on the Wings' NHL roster next year.
I agree with most everything you wrote. The ideal mold for a player in the Red Wing organization is Dan Cleary - they got him cheap, he's responsible at both ends of the ice and performs when counted on, for the most part. I'm sure they're hoping the same for Eaves.
I actually got the lowdown on why Leino was shipped from a friend of mine who is a reliable source. He told me that it was a numbers game when everybody finally got healthy and they had to get rid of somebody. They picked Leino because he was a little older than some of the other prospects and his cap hit was bigger due to a more inflated salary. The thinking of the Wings was that they had comparable guys that were younger and cheaper and at least they got something out of the trade rather than him simply being claimed on the waiver wire. It all makes sense that way.
And I truly do understand where you guys are coming from on the defensive aspect. The Wings place a premium on taking care of things in their own end (ironically their inability to execute this philosophy was the reason for their exit this year), so guys like Eaves and Miller have value. However, my point remains that they might have gotten taken in the deal if Leino ever does put it together because it's a lot easier to teach a guy defense than it is offense.
The first goal of the PHI/MTL series was the direct result of Leino and CBC even singled him out after the game as having a major impact. Obviously he's a different player now than he was with the Wings and I don't think it's going to turn into an Oates/Federko situation, I just wish they could've kept him a while longer, but that's life under the cap...
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Time will tell...||
OK, to clarify, it's not about any particular stat that you can single out, whether it's PPG, Goals, Assists or whatever category you want to pick - it's about all of them in combination. Right now he's playing like a top 6 forward. I asked a simple question which was for somebody to shed light on why they dumped him so quickly and for so little? Your answer seems to be that is was because he sucks and always will. That's not really insight to me - it's an opinion and one that I believe is becoming unrealistic.
Look, it's not like we're bringing about a solution for world peace here. It's a debate about a former Wings player. He's not going to win the Conn Smythe, but I'll be happy to remind you if he establishes himself as a top 6 player in Philly. You go ahead and "wake me up" when Ole-Kristian Tollefsen is anywhere but the AHL or their 5th round choice from next year sees icetime with the Wings before 2015.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||It's not about the PPG||
It's about performance. And by your logic then Cammalleri is just pedestrian because he only had 50 points for Montreal during the regular season. Shouldn't matter what he's doing in the playoffs, right? He's merely an average player.
Who cares about the regular season? Do you want Franzen from the regular season or Franzen from the playoffs? They are two entirely different animals.
Leino may have done nothing in Detroit during the regular season, but my original question remains the same - if they brought him in to be a top 6 forward and he's now playing like one, did they let him go for too little or too early?
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Leino averaging .88 points per game||
Yes, I too am glad that Holland is the GM of the Wings and not me, which was the exact reason for my post.
Since being put into the lineup halfway through the first round he has put up 7 points in only 8 games (2G, 5A) and a +3. The one valid criticism from the replies above was that with the Wings he might not have been willing to "get his hands dirty" but he certainly seems to be paying the price in the playoffs.
I get it that Eaves and Miller are better defensive players. I wasn't even trying to pick on them specifically. However, to quote Babcock directly, "He (Leino) was the most talented player that had ever been sent back to the minors." (by Babcock) Yes, they wanted Brunnstrom instead, but the ceiling on Leino is far above the other guys mentioned and he finally seems to be paying off. The fact is that in hockey you can sometimes teach offensive players to be responsible defensively, but scoring ability isn't something a grinder is suddenly going to acquire. The Wings demand defensive play first and if he wasn't buying in then cool, there's the explanation, but all I was really asking is why they gave up on him so quickly; if you've got some facts and insight other than the obvious then I'd love to know about it, but don't trash me for simply asking if anybody knew if there was a deeper reason on why they gave up on him for a minimal return when he seems to be prospering now.
You're right that Holland did the classy thing to ship him off and give him an opportunity for PT. And yes, clearly he has some flaws in his game otherwise he wouldn't have been a healthy scratch in the first round. If you want to make the argument that the Wings value defensive responsibility far more than offensive potential, fine, I can live with that. I just think that from the way he has been performing lately they may have given up on him a little early or not gotten enough in return. Holland is a genius, no doubt about it. However, it's still a valid question because even if Leino is one dimensional, Eaves and Miller are equally one dimensional, just on the other end of the ice and from my perspective it's a lot easier to find a mucker than a sniper.
Lastly, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this - you are also right that they got something for nothing since they signed Leino as a FA...in retrospect it feels like they might have gotten a lot more "something" if he keeps this up.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||Gag for sure...||
But there are a couple of other things about it that intrigue me. First, there was another OT posting from today in relation to the Simmons article on LeBron. I think there are some similarities between the character traits he mentions in the article and Chara. Zdeno is huge, but he isn't ruthless. Ovie owned him in the Olympics (was more physical) and he just doesn't have that nasty streak that a guy like Pronger does; I'm not sure that any team with him as their top defenseman is going to make a run all the way to the Cup.
The other thing that I couldn't stop wondering about was why Ville Leino got dealt to the Flyers for only a 5th round pick and some journeyman Norwegian defenseman? I barely even remember the deal, but the Wings obviously knew he had ridiculous potential. Why ship him instead of a guy like Miller or Eaves who have relatively little upside by comparison? Was it purely a cap move? Anybody with some insight on that I'd love to know about it...
|4 years 41 weeks ago||25 Scholarships||
Unfortunately, despite the sarcasm, the 25 scholarships is worth noting. It's not common knowledge, but only the Big Ten & Pac 10 handicap their schools by allowing a max of 25 per year, plus 2 contingent. Other conferences like the SEC are allowed to fill as many spots as they need to make up for attrition (thus Alabama's 32 a couple of years ago). Brian has covered the 'Bama side of it in depth, but one of the major challenges Rich Rod is facing is enduring the 14 dead scholarships that have come as a result of the transition. Were U of M not in the Big 10 he could make up for the lack of #'s and talent much more quickly. Just another reason the conference is now far back from the dominant forces in college football; we have to wait 4 years for everything to cycle back through, while the SEC can accomplish it in 1 year.