HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

The U.S.A. olympic women's hockey team is coming down to Rochester next Friday to take on Century. I know it doesn't count toward records, but what are your thoughts on this game.

clutterbuck22 wrote:The U.S.A. olympic women's hockey team is coming down to Rochester next Friday to take on Century. I know it doesn't count toward records, but what are your thoughts on this game.

Actually it does count on a teams overall record, check out Eagan and Hopkins.

HappyHockeyFan wrote:

clutterbuck22 wrote:The U.S.A. olympic women's hockey team is coming down to Rochester next Friday to take on Century. I know it doesn't count toward records, but what are your thoughts on this game.

Actually it does count on a teams overall record, check out Eagan and Hopkins.

Didn't know that. I thought it was just an exhibition game. It isn't listed as a game on MSHSL for century.

HappyHockeyFan wrote:

clutterbuck22 wrote:The U.S.A. olympic women's hockey team is coming down to Rochester next Friday to take on Century. I know it doesn't count toward records, but what are your thoughts on this game.

Actually it does count on a teams overall record, check out Eagan and Hopkins.

I'm not 100% positive, but I think I remember reading that this one was going to an exhibition, whereas the Hopkins and Eagan games were official games that counted toward their overall records.

Is checking allowed in this game?

MNHockeyFan wrote:

HappyHockeyFan wrote:

clutterbuck22 wrote:The U.S.A. olympic women's hockey team is coming down to Rochester next Friday to take on Century. I know it doesn't count toward records, but what are your thoughts on this game.

Actually it does count on a teams overall record, check out Eagan and Hopkins.

I'm not 100% positive, but I think I remember reading that this one was going to an exhibition, whereas the Hopkins and Eagan games were official games that counted toward their overall records.

That's actually stupid. How could a game against a non-high school, non-MSHSL, non-checking, FEMALE, nationally recruited team count for the records?

HockeyMN1 wrote:

MNHockeyFan wrote:

HappyHockeyFan wrote:Actually it does count on a teams overall record, check out Eagan and Hopkins.

I'm not 100% positive, but I think I remember reading that this one was going to an exhibition, whereas the Hopkins and Eagan games were official games that counted toward their overall records.

That's actually stupid. How could a game against a non-high school, non-MSHSL, non-checking, FEMALE, nationally recruited team count for the records?

Well it did! But I agree.

Why does USA keep playing mediocre high school teams? I'd like to see how they match up against a team like Tonka or Edina. I don't think this one will even be close, USA 6-1.

Roseauverrated wrote:Why does USA keep playing mediocre high school teams? I'd like to see how they match up against a team like Tonka or Edina. I don't think this one will even be close, USA 6-1.

Um... because the women's national team doesn't want to get overly embarrassed. Canada does the same thing and plays canadian midget teams.

Roseauverrated wrote:Why does USA keep playing mediocre high school teams? I'd like to see how they match up against a team like Tonka or Edina. I don't think this one will even be close, USA 6-1.

I'd agree that Century and Hopkins are pretty average teams this year, but Eagan is 10-1-1 with their only loss coming against the Womens Olympic Team. They have wins over both Lakeville's and Jefferson, and is ranked No. 8AA according to LPH. They are certainly not "mediorcre" by any stretch.

Team USA is also playing the Edina Lakers Junior A team on Saturday at Richfield at 12:00. Not a high school team.

Sorry, but I dont think Century has a chance. Without checking and the boys being used to checking it is big difference for them to play that game. Eagan was down 4 - 0 going into the 3rd before they seemed to adjust to the no checking style of play and outscored the women 3 - 1 for a 5 - 3 loss. The womens team works so well as a team skating and passing it was amazing to watch. I say Us Women 7 Century 2.

HappyHockeyFan wrote:Without checking and the boys being used to checking it is big difference for them to play that game.

Not to compare high schoolers to the pros, but the NHL'ers seem to adjust pretty easily to no checking when they play their All Star Game every year. A typical score would be 12-10. Of course the skill level that these players have is incredible, and they excel even more when not having to worry about getting slammed. I'm sure most of the high schoolers have played a lot of pond hockey throughout their years so you would think they wouldn't have much trouble making the adjustment.

I wonder how a good high school boys basketball team would do against the USA Womens BB Team, since basketball is more of a non-contact sport to begin with? I'm guessing that any decent D1 college mens team would beat them by 40 points, but I'm not sure how a good high school team would fare...

MNHockeyFan wrote:

HappyHockeyFan wrote:Without checking and the boys being used to checking it is big difference for them to play that game.

Not to compare high schoolers to the pros, but the NHL'ers seem to adjust pretty easily to no checking when they play their All Star Game every year. A typical score would be 12-10. Of course the skill level that these players have is incredible, and they excel even more when not having to worry about getting slammed. I'm sure most of the high schoolers have played a lot of pond hockey throughout their years so you would think they wouldn't have much trouble making the adjustment.

I wonder how a good high school boys basketball team would do against the USA Womens BB Team, since basketball is more of a non-contact sport to begin with? I'm guessing that any decent D1 college mens team would beat them by 40 points, but I'm not sure how a good high school team would fare...

Sorry but you cannot compare to NHLers because both teams are in the same predicament in that they are not used to playing that way and in the ALL Star game it is mostly just for fun and showing off. You also cannot compare pond hockey to playing under the lights with a highly skilled and very fast Womens Olympic team. These girls in my opinion were faster AND more skilled than the Eagan boys, or maybe it just appeared that way because they played so incredibly well as a team. The team chemistry was amazing to see. And usually when a boys team meets another boys team like that they use the physical game to slow that team down and in this case they couldnt.

I don't know much about this particular game but back in 2006 Warroad played the girls team and ended up winning that game. It's funny because that was the last time Warroad didn't make the state tournament. I've never been overly impressed when I've watched the girls U.S. team play a boys high school team. They've obviously played better than the high school team but not as good as I would expect. But nontheless, I'm hoping Gigi Marvin will have a hat trick just for good measure

Zamman wrote:Team USA is also playing the Edina Lakers Junior A team on Saturday at Richfield at 12:00. Not a high school team.

This game(Edina Lakers Junior A vs Team USA) will be broadcast on MSBN. Both Audio and Video. Puck drops at 12:30.

HappyHockeyFan wrote:Sorry but you cannot compare to NHLers because both teams are in the same predicament in that they are not used to playing that way and in the ALL Star game it is mostly just for fun and showing off. You also cannot compare pond hockey to playing under the lights with a highly skilled and very fast Womens Olympic team. These girls in my opinion were faster AND more skilled than the Eagan boys, or maybe it just appeared that way because they played so incredibly well as a team. The team chemistry was amazing to see. And usually when a boys team meets another boys team like that they use the physical game to slow that team down and in this case they couldnt.

I didn't see the Eagan game but I did watch them play Hopkins which was very close and easily could have gone either way. Overall I thought the boys were faster skaters, and they had a couple of very fast players who the women let get away several times on breakaways, but the boys couldn't convert their chances. The womens team was definitely more organized as a team and for the most part they passed better and played better position hockey (which is what you'd expect because they had been together a lot longer than Hopkins). The boys were usually able to muscle them off the puck in the corners but often there would be another USA player right there to take it away again and then make something happen.

Maybe the Eagan game was different (the women might have played better?) but that's what I saw in one against Hopkins. It was interesting because each team brought different things to the table. I do think if Hopkins had just a little better puck handling and shooting accuracy, they would have beat them. That's the main thing I was trying to get across - in a game like this you shouldn't have to resort to body checking in order to score more goals than your opponent, as long as you have more skill than they do.

MNHockeyFan wrote:

HappyHockeyFan wrote:Sorry but you cannot compare to NHLers because both teams are in the same predicament in that they are not used to playing that way and in the ALL Star game it is mostly just for fun and showing off. You also cannot compare pond hockey to playing under the lights with a highly skilled and very fast Womens Olympic team. These girls in my opinion were faster AND more skilled than the Eagan boys, or maybe it just appeared that way because they played so incredibly well as a team. The team chemistry was amazing to see. And usually when a boys team meets another boys team like that they use the physical game to slow that team down and in this case they couldnt.

I didn't see the Eagan game but I did watch them play Hopkins which was very close and easily could have gone either way. Overall I thought the boys were faster skaters, and they had a couple of very fast players who the women let get away several times on breakaways, but the boys couldn't convert their chances. The womens team was definitely more organized as a team and for the most part they passed better and played better position hockey (which is what you'd expect because they had been together a lot longer than Hopkins). The boys were usually able to muscle them off the puck in the corners but often there would be another USA player right there to take it away again and then make something happen.

Maybe the Eagan game was different (the women might have played better?) but that's what I saw in one against Hopkins. It was interesting because each team brought different things to the table. I do think if Hopkins had just a little better puck handling and shooting accuracy, they would have beat them. That's the main thing I was trying to get across - in a game like this you shouldn't have to resort to body checking in order to score more goals than your opponent, as long as you have more skill than they do.

Maybe not to score more goals but to defend against more goals...also Eagan played their backup goalie the whole game, the only game that I know of that he has played at the varsity level. Not to pin the loss on him but he is the backup for a reason.

who watches womens hockey?

Ryno
who watches womens hockey?

It may help Hibbing hockey, we all know how bad they are this year.

ryno44 wrote:who watches womens hockey?

Who reads your posts?????

wtbearlk1111 wrote:Ryno
who watches womens hockey?

It may help Hibbing hockey, we all know how bad they are this year.

You can't have a good team every year!