AA Rankings for 1/20/13

[East Side Pioneer Guy]

Why?[/quote

First of its a great event and should continue. The reason it should be an exhibition is clear. The conditions at hand I.e warm weather bad ice or what we saw yesterday completely change the way the game is normally played. Two years ago in Moorhead they might as well have played boot hockey in the slush. Not to mention potential injuries. Yesterday while extremely fun had snow of 1/2 to an inch build up on the down wind side of the rink. Plus no side glass.. These items all favor one team or the other and also can take a lot of skill out of the game.

Both teams played equal durations in each direction (they switched halfway through the 3rd, and OT in the case of BSM/Rapids). I could definitely see your point if one team had an advantage (outside of hometown advantage) over the other, but since all teams played equal times in both directions with equal conditions I see absolutely no reason why the results shouldn't count.

Bad ice or other poor conditions level the playing field and are an advantage to the lesser skilled team. Thus, the outcome often bares little resemblance to what the outcome would be if the game were played under normal conditions.

Two years ago in Moorhead rather than risk injuring a player, Lechner should have pulled his team of the ice. Well off the puddle any way.

[elliott70]

Both teams played equal durations in each direction (they switched halfway through the 3rd, and OT in the case of BSM/Rapids). I could definitely see your point if one team had an advantage (outside of hometown advantage) over the other, but since all teams played equal times in both directions with equal conditions I see absolutely no reason why the results shouldn't count.

Bad ice or other poor conditions level the playing field and are an advantage to the lesser skilled team. Thus, the outcome often bares little resemblance to what the outcome would be if the game were played under normal conditions.

Two years ago in Moorhead rather than risk injuring a player, Lechner should have pulled his team of the ice. Well off the puddle any way.

Do you not think that the coaches, AD's, trainers, and those running the program that day did not consider the safety of those players?

[MTStringer]

Both teams played equal durations in each direction (they switched halfway through the 3rd, and OT in the case of BSM/Rapids). I could definitely see your point if one team had an advantage (outside of hometown advantage) over the other, but since all teams played equal times in both directions with equal conditions I see absolutely no reason why the results shouldn't count.

Bad ice or other poor conditions level the playing field and are an advantage to the lesser skilled team. Thus, the outcome often bares little resemblance to what the outcome would be if the game were played under normal conditions.

Two years ago in Moorhead rather than risk injuring a player, Lechner should have pulled his team of the ice. Well off the puddle any way.

I think your comments trivialize why both teams have to play the game, and possibly take and give credit at the expense of the players on the ice. Nobody knows for sure what will or won't happen on any sheet of ice. If they did, why even play the game?

Besides, last time I looked, GR had a couple of pretty decent players on their team too; one Gopher commit, another most likely will play D1, a pretty good goalie and other solid players that put out maximum effort within the framework of playing good team hockey. Just like all other "good teams". Like others have said, each team had their chances. Maybe the "lesser skilled" team took better advantage of their opportunities, which possibly makes them just as skilled in other facets of the game???