Hockey can be weird.
UMD dominated the last 40 minutes of its Saturday game against Colorado College, but couldn’t find a way by goalie Kaidan Mbereko, who was stellar for the Tigers, in a game where UMD did a much better job generating net front traffic than it did on Friday. Mbereko survived multiple mad scrambles and long stretches of UMD puck possession in the CC zone.
So, naturally, it was Owen Gallatin’s innocent shot from the right corner that proved decisive in a 3-1 Bulldog win that gave UMD a series split Saturday in Colorado Springs. It wasn’t enough to cost Mbereko NCHC Goaltender of the Week honors, but it did get the Bulldogs three points.
Saturday was better from the hop for UMD, which lamented not being ready to play in Friday’s series opener. That’s an issue that the coaching staff and leadership will look to eliminate going forward, but it’s easier said than done as it isn’t like those entities weren’t trying to get the team ready to go in a game the Bulldogs ended up losing 5-0.
The league won’t stop turning, though, so the challenge now is being ready to go Friday night when Omaha visits.
8 THOUGHTS
1. UMD got off to a very good start. The Bulldogs thought they had the lead 75 seconds in, when Quinn Olson’s right point shot was tipped — probably by freshman Isaac Howard — by Mbereko. The goal line referee, however, had other ideas, immediately waving off the goal, citing a high stick.
Who played the puck with a high stick? No idea, since no one anywhere near the puck had a stick that was remotely close to being too high.
UMD challenged the call, because frankly it was a phantom high stick and this would easily get overturned. Except, as we had it relayed to us, none of the cameras in use were able to catch the point where the puck was tipped by anything. With no visual evidence to the contrary, the inexplicable call would inexplicably stand.
Luckily, UMD would win this game in regulation, because otherwise this one might have been talked about for a while.
2. While that was the only video replay hiccup Saturday in Colorado Springs, it’s become obvious the college hockey replay system is broken.
For those who might not know, the powers that be got together during the offseason and made significant alterations to the replay system, setting it up so that a number of events in a game — goalie interference, high stick goals, offsides entries, etc. — could only be reviewed via a coach’s challenge. Others — most notably head contact and other potential major penalties — can be reviewed by either officials’ discretion or a challenge from a coach.
The latter has already led to double challenges (we saw one in the UMD-Wisconsin women’s series and were one video review away from seeing a second), where each team challenges an aspect of a particular play. This is a thing because officials are charged with only looking at a play with respect to a specific challenge.
(In other words, if a coach challenges for head contact by the opposing team, that’s all the referees are supposed to check out. If there was potentially head contact by both teams, it’s up to the other coach to challenge that part of the play. Yes, it’s that convoluted, all in the name of simplicity.)
This was done with the goal of cutting back on the number of replay reviews in a game. A month or so into the season, the effect being had could potentially be the opposite. Just ask any of the 5,094 souls who paid money to be inside the Mayo Clinic Health System Event Center in Mankato Saturday night.
How was the flow of that game, you ask?
Tommies scored to make it 4-3 but of course there's another review. I think @Dudley7Kevin determined this is review No. 7 of the game.
— Jack Hittinger (@jackhitts) November 6, 2022
Oh.
The first period took almost an hour of real time. A normal 20-minute period would run you 35-40 minutes or so. But when you throw in a couple long video reviews, you get this as everyone’s idea of entertainment.
Sometimes, the best intentions have unintended consequences. When the NCAA put these new rules through over the summer, no one thought we would see the sheer number of challenges we’ve seen to this point.
3. Is there a way out? Probably not. I don’t see emergency rules changes being enacted during the season. The rules committee has been hesitant to address the length of time taken for video reviews, and we still have no real protocols that deal with these sometimes-lengthy delays. If the officials can wrap up a review in less than two minutes, most of us would be okay with that. But we’re getting way too many stoppages for replay that last in excess of two minutes.
Too many reviews, with most of them taking too long? Where do I sign up for the opposite of that?
4. Oh, and we aren’t done with offseason rules changes. The NCAA also needed to solve non-existent problems, so we have new points of emphasis on pregame and intermission protocols.
The pre-warmup protocols are a safety issue. There were instances of players walking on the (recently resurfaced) ice in shorts and flip-flops to stickhandle or play around with pucks. The NCHC dealt with this previously, but now it’s a national protocol that players are not allowed on the ice before the pregame warmup. Good call, frankly. A violation is not a penalty, instead it’s to be dealt with by the various conference offices.
The other changes prevent players from lingering on the ice after the warmup ends (23 minutes before game time), stops players who aren’t starting a period from skating onto the ice after intermission, and prevents players who weren’t on the ice from going onto the ice when a period ends.
These are considered delay of game protocol violations, and they are two-minute penalties. And it’s unbelievably silly.
What are we delaying? The period can’t start until the clock is ready, even if the teams are on the ice and lined up for the faceoff. There are TV considerations, after all. And the intermission resurfacing can’t happen until the home team has thrown a contestant or two or ten and an intermission host/intern on the ice for a contest or chuck-a-puck or whatever. A player gliding over to his/her goaltender to fist bump — as someone from UMD apparently did after the first period Saturday — is not delaying the intermission in any way.
In a sport where we’re finding excuses to disallow goals at an alarming rate, it seems beyond ridiculous that we’re worried about a player being on the ice 22:59 before faceoff, or someone trying to congratulate their goalie on a job well done.
As I said Saturday, what the hell are we doing in this sport?
5. UMD was much stronger in front of both nets Saturday. I lamented the Bulldogs’ net front coverage and net front offense after Friday. I felt like UMD made things way too difficult on Zach Stejskal and Matthew Thiessen at one end, and way too easy on Mbereko at the other.
Was Saturday perfect? No. But the Bulldogs got to the front of the net and tried to affect Mbereko. They shot from all angles and used screens and tried to tip shots. There was a determination Saturday that wasn’t necessarily there Friday.
Thiessen started in goal for UMD and was sharp, but he got help. There weren’t many hairy sequences where UMD skaters couldn’t get a zone exit, and the Bulldogs were generally much more on their toes Saturday, which made Thiessen’s life much easier than it was during his 40-plus minute stint Friday.
6. Here comes Omaha. The Mavericks had a good night Saturday at home, bouncing back from a Friday loss to North Dakota with a 3-3 tie and shootout win at Baxter Arena.
This Omaha team is going to be a challenge for UMD because of its size and hard, heavy style. The Mavericks will hit, and do it a lot. Their power play is always dangerous. Jack Randl has four power play goals among his 11 goals in ten games. For perspective, Ben Steeves leads UMD with four goals.
Neither team scores a ton, especially at five on five, so this may be a series won by special teams. UMD’s penalty kill has run hot and cold, while the power play continues to be a work in progress that looks good here and there (injuries and suspensions have hurt the continuity there).
7pm Friday, 6pm Saturday, with a special night in store Saturday. More on that later this week.
7. The UMD women had a tough one Saturday, falling behind 2-0 in the opening minute of a 5-3 loss to Minnesota. Yes, the Bulldogs just went 1-5 against the Gophers, Wisconsin, and Ohio State over three straight weekends. No, that isn’t ideal, it’s just four of a possible 18 WCHA standings points.
But four of the five losses were by one goal, with two of them requiring overtime. The Bulldogs are right there, and while I’m sure it’s frustrating that the results weren’t necessarily what anyone wanted them to be over this stretch, there has to be some confidence that these games were mostly close and competitive, with another shot at each team before the regular season ends (first up will be Dec. 2-3 at home against Ohio State).
Stay the course. UMD is at St. Cloud State this weekend.
8. An update on Mitchell Miller after the postgame rant Friday (thought No. 8 there as well). Sunday night, the Boston Bruins announced they were cutting ties with Miller, effective immediately, citing “new information,” even though nothing about Miller’s story has really changed.
Well, there was one new development. After the signing, the victim’s mother was open with her thoughts about the move, making it clear that the family was not contacted by the Bruins, and Miller’s attempt at an apology towards the victim was through a direct message on Instagram. Where he lied. Yes, really.
Miller didn’t personally apologize to Meyer-Crothers in 2016. He didn’t in 2020. He hadn’t last summer. And he hadn’t until, it seems, his conversations with the Bruins had started. Joni Meyer-Crothers told Guy Flaming of The Pipeline Show that Miller reached out to her son on Instagram recently to apologize while telling him that it “had nothing to do with hockey.”
Miller had already been in talks with the Bruins, who made it clear he needed to apologize to the victim. The team probably would have preferred he tell the truth, instead of saying his apology had nothing to do with hockey when it really did.
Is this why the Bruins rescinded Miller’s entry level deal? No, let’s not be silly. They rescinded it because of their fanbase’s immediate, visceral reaction to the move, along with the fact NHL commissioner Gary Bettman came out Saturday and said Miller wasn’t going to be eligible to play for the Bruins or anyone else in the league anytime soon.
The “new information” was just an out for Boston. Team president Cam Neely tried to say the right things during a conference call Monday morning, but the damage was already done. The players hated the move, the fans hated the move, the victim’s family hated the move.
So what happens to Miller? The inconvenient truth here is that — while his choices were abhorrent and inexcusable and will never be justified or defended in this space — Mitchell Miller has been failed throughout his life by people who were supposed to help him. He’s only 21 years old, and shouldn’t be thrown off to the side under these circumstances. But he has to face what he did head-on, which apparently has not happened, and he needs to surround himself with people who 1) want to help him, 2) know how to help him, and 3) don’t just look at him as a meal ticket because he’s a highly-skilled defenseman who can play in the NHL some day.
My sincere best wishes to the young victim here. I can only imagine the struggles through years of abuse like what he incurred. And to have to relive this now because the perpetrator of this behavior happens to be a talented athlete? Ugh. There are no words. His health and well-being should be absolutely paramount, and I hope for nothing but the best for him and his family going forward.
Just a sad and equally infuriating story all around.
Back Thursday to preview the upcoming weekend.
Comments