T1B

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:21 pm**

It was passing under his pad and popping out the other side. Damn Floridians trying to talk hockey.

Posted: **Mon Mar 29, 2010 8:53 pm**

It's always the case with controversial calls that the team that is wronged will re-visit it afterwords if they lose and point that as the excuse. I won't do that. The Wolverines dominated that first OT with the number of chances they got...credit to Knapp on coming up big when he needed to.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:39 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:It was passing under his pad and popping out the other side. Damn Floridians trying to talk hockey.

I'm a New Yorker dude.

The puck only came free from his pad when he turned his body. In the overhead replay you couldn't even see the puck until his body turned away from the goal line. That's when the Michigan player took the first poke to free the puck, then shot the puck in the net on the second attempt.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:47 pm**

MuchoBulls wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:It was passing under his pad and popping out the other side. Damn Floridians trying to talk hockey.
I'm a New Yorker dude.

The puck only came free from his pad when he turned his body. In the overhead replay you couldn't even see the puck until his body turned away from the goal line. That's when the Michigan player took the first poke to free the puck, then shot the puck in the net on the second attempt.

Not what I saw at all. I'll try to find a copy of the video. But it's all moot when Wisconsin hoists the trophy April 10.

Posted: **Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:05 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:Not what I saw at all. I'll try to find a copy of the video. But it's all moot when Wisconsin hoists the trophy April 10.

Conference loyalty be damned...I'm pulling for Brendan Smith and the Badgers in the Frozen Four. Can't root for Miami...I'm not an CCHA slappy. If it's not going to be Michigan, to hell with the rest of 'em.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:16 am**

Welcome aboard, Shoalzie. And just remember, when Wisconsin wins it all, you can point out that Michigan beat them back in November.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:20 am**

Too bad this isn't a double-elimination tournament. Wisconsin hasn't lost two games in a row all year.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:40 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:Too bad this isn't a double-elimination tournament. Wisconsin hasn't lost two games in a row all year.

What the fuck does that matter if you claim Wisky's gonna win it all? Have another drink you fucking lush.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:41 pm**

It doesn't matter at all. I just wanted to point out the fact that they're the only team in the country that hasn't lost two in a row at some point this year. Eat another dick, cum-junkie.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:42 pm**

So you felt it necessary to point out some irrelevant statistic? You trying to out Wonderlic Lord Tebow?

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:47 pm**

Screw_Michigan wrote:So you felt it necessary to point out some irrelevant statistic? You trying to out Wonderlic Lord Tebow?

It's not irrelevant, it's a measure of their excellence. Kind of the opposite of Kalamazoo Tech, which repeatedly loses two or three games in a row. Have they considered making hockey a club sport there? They probably should.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:56 pm**

Yes, it is irrelevant. It would be relevant if this was the first round of the WCHA playoffs where as you know it is a best of 3 series. Nobody cares now if Wisky hasn't lost two in a row all season because all it takes is one.

Pull your head out of your fucking ass for once. Christ almighty.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 2:10 pm**

Again, it’s not at all common for a team to go through an entire season without ever losing two games in a row. Just shut the fuck up and recognize the greatness that is Wisconsin hockey.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 2:32 pm**

You know I've been following college hockey for a long time (obviously not as long as you, grandpa) and I'm sure if it wasn't for you waving your wrinkled pin-dick around this board, I'm sure I'd never know Wisky was a traditional power. Of course we both remember when they were getting fucked on a regular basis in the 90s. I miss those days.

Go back to recruiting future DUI manslaughter convictees.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:03 pm**

Wisconsin has won 6 NCAA titles; their 7th this year will tie them for second place all-time with two other WCHA teams. During the 1990s, the Badgers won three WCHA titles, and one NCAA title. Yeah, I guess that’s a down period for us.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:25 pm**

You do realize most of Wisky's (and the WCHA's) national titles came during an era where the WCHA was recruiting overage professionals from Canada, right?

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 3:30 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:Big Ten? There is no Big Ten hockey conference.

I never said there was a Big Ten hockey conference. It was a comment on the relative disparity between the upstarts from Rochester and Wisconsin, which offers more full rides for competitive douching than RIT does period.

Their own dime? Or maybe a bunch of rich kids on daddy's dime.

Whatever, they still made the Frozen Four without offering a single athletic scholarship. And they did so only a few years after going D1. Rack the motherfucking Tigers!

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:12 pm**

You never said there was a Big Ten hockey conference, you just called a WCHA team a Big Ten team. This why you’re the Rodney Dangerfield of T1B (minus the sense of humor). You never can say “yeah, I misspoke”, you always backpedal and spin.

Yeah, I’d expect RIT to be able to get some decent players there. Hockey is not a poor kid’s sport, and it’s getting more expensive as a youth sport all of the time. A lot of rich kid’s play hockey. So yeah, it’s not surprising that some of the rich kid hockey players might wind up paying their own way at RIT. Or Yale.

Of course, a lot of schools that don’t hand out D1 athletic scholarships do hand out scholarships based on financial need. I wonder how many RIT players are on such scholarships. That’s just a way around a rule that I believe is still in place that says if you aren’t D1 in all of your sports, you can’t hand out athletic scholarships.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:13 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:That’s just a way around a rule that I believe is still in place that says if you aren’t D1 in all of your sports, you can’t hand out athletic scholarships.

That's just flat out wrong and ignorant. Count how many teams in your own fucking league aren't D-1 in all sports and do the same for the CCHA, Hockey East and ECAC.

Thanks for exposing yourself as just another Badger blowing white trash fucktard who really doesn't know shit about college hockey other than what's going on in Madison. Then get fucked, dick.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:18 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:You never said there was a Big Ten hockey conference, you just called a WCHA team a Big Ten team.

Wisconsin is a Big 10 University.

http://www.bigten.org/schools/wisc/big1 ... -body.html

Note that Big 10 website has a feature article on a Wisconsin hockey player.

http://www.bigten.org/genrel/122909aaa.html

Now all know that Wisconsin is aligned with a bunch of no-name schools who also happen to play hockey because it is impossible to teach Iowans how to skate. That fact does not stop their coffers from being full thanks to their Big 10 affiliations in every other sport nor does it hamper their visibility during recruiting. They are a Big 10 University, and the more time you spend denying it, the stupider you look.

This why you’re the Rodney Dangerfield of T1B (minus the sense of humor). You never can say “yeah, I misspoke”, you always backpedal and spin.

As opposed to you being the Barney Fife of T1B always shooting yourself in the foot?

Yeah, I’d expect RIT to be able to get some decent players there. Hockey is not a poor kid’s sport, and it’s getting more expensive as a youth sport all of the time. A lot of rich kid’s play hockey. So yeah, it’s not surprising that some of the rich kid hockey players might wind up paying their own way at RIT. Or Yale.

Of course, a lot of schools that don’t hand out D1 athletic scholarships do hand out scholarships based on financial need. I wonder how many RIT players are on such scholarships. That’s just a way around a rule that I believe is still in place that says if you aren’t D1 in all of your sports, you can’t hand out athletic scholarships.

Don't know or care. All I know is that this game is a no lose proposition for the Tigers. Lose, and that is just what they were expected to do. Win, and the Badgers will take their place right next to the 1980 Soviets and the 1983 Nebraska Cornhuskers.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:29 pm**

Screw_Michigan wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:That’s just a way around a rule that I believe is still in place that says if you aren’t D1 in all of your sports, you can’t hand out athletic scholarships.
That's just flat out wrong and ignorant. Count how many teams in your own fucking league aren't D-1 in all sports and do the same for the CCHA, Hockey East and ECAC.

Sorry, I misspoke. To clarify, RIT is Division III in all other sports and as such, could not offer athletic scholarships unless they moved all athletic programs to at least Division II. The point still stands that RIT could easily be offering non-athletic scholarships to their hockey players, assuming any of them actually needed the help.

Screwball, I've forgotten more about college hockey than you'll ever know. Which probably explains the above fuckup.

Brian, Wisconsin is a Big 10 university with a WCHA hockey team. You referred to them as a Big 10 team. But thanks for just reinforcing my point. Wisconsin's coffers are full because of their Big 10 affiliation, yes, but that has little to do with hockey, which is an INCOME sport for Wisconsin. It more than pays its own way.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:43 pm**

Wrong again, dicklick. Clarkson, RPI, Union and St. Lawrence are all scholarship awarding D-1 hockey universities with others sports participating in D-III.

Seriously, you're embarrassing yourself more than MVSCAL in a political forecasting thread. Do us all a favor and jump off the Empire State Building.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:49 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:Brian, Wisconsin is a Big 10 university with a WCHA hockey team. You referred to them as a Big 10 team. But thanks for just reinforcing my point. Wisconsin's coffers are full because of their Big 10 affiliation, yes, but that has little to do with hockey, which is an INCOME sport for Wisconsin. It more than pays its own way.

Very true. I hear they draw 15,000 to the Kohl Center to see them play. And meanwhile RIT plays in front of 2,100 at tiny Ritter Ice Arena. Anything else you would like to offer to counter my point that Wisconsin is Goliath to RIT's David?

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:49 pm**

Screw_Michigan wrote:Wrong again, dicklick. Clarkson, RPI, Union and St. Lawrence are all scholarship awarding D-1 hockey universities with others sports participating in D-III.
.

You forgot Colorado College, slapnuts.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 5:51 pm**

Thanks for cementing my point that you don't have a fucking clue. Please excuse yourself from any future college hockey related discussion from now on and then get fucked.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:15 pm**

Screw_Michigan wrote:Thanks for cementing my point that you don't have a fucking clue.

Are you disputing that point about CC?

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:16 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:Brian, Wisconsin is a Big 10 university with a WCHA hockey team. You referred to them as a Big 10 team. But thanks for just reinforcing my point. Wisconsin's coffers are full because of their Big 10 affiliation, yes, but that has little to do with hockey, which is an INCOME sport for Wisconsin. It more than pays its own way.
Very true. I hear they draw 15,000 to the Kohl Center to see them play. And meanwhile RIT plays in front of 2,100 at tiny Ritter Ice Arena. Anything else you would like to offer to counter my point that Wisconsin is Goliath to RIT's David?

Shouldn’t that be Goliath vs Cinderella? Hopefully Goliath takes Cinderella’s glass slipper and stuffs it up her cunt.

All kidding aside, I don’t take RIT lightly. They haven’t beaten a ton of top notch competition, but since an 0-5 start, they are 28-6-1. They have a very hot goalie; they’ve given up 16 goals in their last 12 games. Interesting matchup going against one of the top scoring teams in the country.

They won their last 12 games, but against suspect competition. Yes, they beat Denver but Denver struggled down the stretch, and lost their last three games of the season. And RIT also beat a mediocre New Hampshire team. The rest of the wins were over the likes of Army, Air Force and Canisius.

On paper the game should not be close. But college hockey fans know that tournament hockey is less likely to follow to form than most other sports. Hopefully the Badgers take care of business and send the bandwagon RIT fans back to where they came from. Wisconsin-Miami could be an exceptional title game. I just wish we didn’t have to wait the extra week for it.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:33 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:
Screw_Michigan wrote:Thanks for cementing my point that you don't have a fucking clue.
Are you disputing that point about CC?

Nice dodge, fucktard. I forgot about CC, so I got the rest and missed one. Eat shit.

Posted: **Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:42 pm**

I’m not dodging anything, you semen-binging blowhard. I mentioned that your list did not include CC, you suggested that proved that I didn’t have a clue. So I questioned if you knew that CC belonged in the group. Get a grip, slappy.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:19 pm**

Less than 3 hours to game time. Hopefully the Badgers show up ready to take care of business and leave RIT looking like Screwball after the fleet’s been in port. Used, confused and abused. Regardless of the outcome, Wisconsin-Miami should be an awesome matchup.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:41 pm**

Why don't you expound on your take that D-III schools with D-I hockey programs can't give out schollys for hockey?

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:44 pm**

I thought we already covered that, you wet-brained fucktard.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:17 pm**

Here's a story for you, Gobbles: This coach played at Kalamazoo Tech.

JESENICE, Slovenia (AP) -- Six Slovenian ice hockey players who beat up their American coach after winning a league title were released by the team Thursday.

Mike Posma, a former American Hockey League player who took over as coach last year, was beaten up by his players Saturday following Acroni Jesenice's celebrations for winning the title. The 42-year-old New Jersey native was cut and bruised but not seriously injured.

The team denounced the incident Thursday and announced the end of the players' contracts. Club president Slavko Kanalec said the team was "shocked" and "strongly condemns" the incident.

The team said it also suspended further contract talks with Posma, who reportedly left Slovenia for the United States earlier Thursday.

Slovenian media say that both the six players and Posma were drunk while celebrating the team's third consecutive national league title.

The six players were reportedly angry at Posma because he allegedly told a 19-year-old backup goaltender to drive a car -- even though he knew the man was drunk. The goaltender subsequently crashed the car.

The six then turned on the coach, reportedly beating him with wooden traffic signs that they found by the side of the road.

Earlier this week, five of the six players denied that they attacked Posma, claiming they attempted to convince the coach to go to the police and take the blame for the goaltender's accident.

The Slovenian public and team's fans warmly welcomed Posma when he took over as coach last November. He had previously coached rival Olimpija Ljubljana.

On Friday, Acroni Jesenice beat Olimpija to win its eighth Slovenian league title since the country's independence in 1991. Olimpija has won 11.

Posma played defense for the Utica Devils in the 1990-91 AHL season and later spent several seasons playing professional hockey in Switzerland and Germany.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:51 pm**

42 years old and he’s out getting drunk with a 19-year-old, and then convinces him to drive drunk. Typical Kalamazoo loser. Thanks for a truly uplifting story, Screwball.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:04 pm**

I never said he was a good dude, you cum-drunk fuckstick.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:45 pm**

I didn't suggest that you did, you malodorous dicksleeve. I just pointed out that he's a typical Kalamazoo tard. ESL class. Now.

I'm off to watch hockey in a tavern. Hopefully I can gloat in about 3 hours.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:14 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote:I didn't suggest that you did, you malodorous dicksleeve. I just pointed out that he's a typical Kalamazoo tard. ESL class. Now.

I'm off to watch hockey in a tavern. Hopefully I can gloat in about 3 hours.

Looks like you're on your way. The Badgers look like they are faster and stronger in every facet of the game. 4-0 after 25 minutes of play is looking pretty insurmountable.

Posted: **Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:48 pm**

RACK the Badgers for coming out and taking care of business. Awfully nice of them not to bury R.I.P. 17-1. Screwball biting hard on his pillow at this point.

Posted: **Fri Apr 09, 2010 4:15 am**

Nice to see the CCHA representing.

Posted: **Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:20 pm**

Those two games were unwatchable...hopefully the championship will be entertaining.

Go Brendan Smith!

T1B

2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament

Re: 2010 NCAA hockey tournament