I'm not crazy about the new OT rule in the NFL

By Chad Garner

Fan Fanatic Sports Staff

I gave it a day or so, but I'm still not a fan of the new overtime rule in the NFL.

Maybe I'm a traditionalist and I like the game how it is now? I don't know.

But what I do know is that this new rule is going to take me some time to get used to.

The new OT rule eliminates sudden death out of the equation, at least on the first possession when the team that gets the ball first in OT. If that teams kicks a field goal, they DO NOT win the game.

The opposing team gets a shot to score, and if they score a TD the game is over. If they kick a field goal, sudden death -- the team that scores first wins -- then takes effect.

So basically, the goal is to score a TD and the game is over.

Maybe the team that gets the ball first will be a tad more aggressive on its opening drive to put the game away right away? Or maybe the other team that trails by a field goal in OT will go for the home run and hit paydirt on a winning TD score? I'm thinking that coaching in OT will take on a whole new strategy, too.

Mind you, this rule is currently only for the postseason. Now does that really make any sense at all? Of course not. The NFL better vote this new rule in for the entire season. I mean, it's going to take all of us an entire 16-game schedule to learn this anyway. Probably the players, too.

Either way, what was really the matter with the OT rules how they were before?

Whoever scores first -- TD or field goal -- wins, no questions asked. Seemed pretty simple and cut and dry to me. And don't tell me the team that gets the ball first always wins. The stats that I've seen show the team that gets the ball first in OT only won 59 percent of the time.

I guess I can sit here and complain all I want, but it's not like I'm going to stop watching the NFL because of this new rule. I'll deal with it just like everyone else. The NFL is the best product out there, so maybe this new rule will be great for everyone?

I'm just not buying it right now.

Here's my OT plan: Each team gets the ball at their own 30-yard line (yes, they have to drive 70 yards for a TD) and they can either kick a FG, score a TD or turn the ball over on downs. Every 10 yards equals a first down. The other team gets the same shot -- starts at their own 30 -- and they must go for the 2-point conversion if they score a TD. Sort of like the college rules, only it's a lot further field to drive down and score.

Now that, to me, would be excitement.

But I still like the old way better.

Guess I'm a traditionalist.

Hockey East teams face rough roads to Frozen Four

By Chris Maza
Fan Fanatic Sports Staff

The Hockey East conference has had a representative in the national championship game in 16 of the last 20 seasons and each of the last four. Can one of the three teams in this year's field make it? The paths of each team are not easy, but if there's one thing a couple of them have, it's history on their side.

But before we get into that, let's just take the time to go over some general Hockey East history within the tournament and let's see if you can make an argument it being the toughest conference in college hockey. All of these facts are according to Hockey East.

• At least two Hockey East teams have qualified for the Frozen Four 13 times since the league formed in the 1984-85 season. The second-highest number of times that has happened for a conference in that span is five (WCHA, CCHA).
• Since 1993, 17 of the 34 teams that have advanced to the national championship game have been Hockey East teams and twice both teams vying for the title were from the conference. Since the formation of Hockey East, only one other conference has been able to do it once (WCHA).
• Over the last 12 seasons, Hockey East has dominated in terms of Frozen Four qualifiers with 20. The WCHA is second with 14.
  

We'll let those facts just speak for themselves. But with that said, are any of the teams in this year's field at all strong enough to make it to Ford Field for this year's Frozen Four?

Boston College: Northeast Regional (DCU Center - Worcester, Mass.)

History: BC holds an impressive 31-20 (.608) record in what we'll call from here on out at the Hockey East Era (1985-Present). No team in the conference has made more tournament appearances and only one Hockey East team has made more Frozen Four appearances than the Eagles, who sit at 18 and 10, respectively. The Eagles have gone to six title games in that time and have won two of them. They are the only Hockey East team to win more than one national championship in the 2000's. BC won the whole thing in its last tournament appearance in 2008 before missing the tourney altogether last year.

This year: Boston College has the shortest trip to its regional game, needing to just drive down the Pike about 30 minutes to Worcester. But that just might be the easiest part of the whole trip. Boston College is ranked third in the USCHO Poll and also in their bracket are No. 4 North Dakota, No. 8 Yale. It's the only bracket that has more than one team that received first-place votes in the poll.

The Eagles, who are the first seed in the Northeast Regional, will take on Alaska, who scooted in as the last at-large team. But make no mistake, the Nanooks are not to be looked past. Boston College is third in the nation in goals per game, but Alaska has done a pretty good job of keeping the puck out of the net, ranking ninth overall. Some think the travel might have an adverse affect on the Alaska squad, but seeing as the team has to travel to Michigan, Ohio and Indiana just to play a lot of its league games, it shouldn't be much more of a problem than any regular-season game. The problem for the Nanooks will be the fact that they have had difficulty scoring this season and the tandem of Parker Milner and John Muse has been one of the best in the nation behind a terrific defense.

Should the Eagles get past Alaska in the first round, either North Dakota or Yale will stand between them and the Frozen Four.

The Boston College-North Dakota history in the tournament has been well-documented. The two teams met in the 2000 and 2001 NCAA championships, each taking one apiece. Since then, the Sioux and the Eagles have met up in the tournament four times, all in consecutive seasons from 2005 to 2008. In 2005, North Dakota topped the BC in the quarterfinals, but the Eagles have had the last laugh(s), beating the Sioux for a spot in the title game the next three years. And, of course, we can't forget the regular season game in 2007 in which the ice at Conte Arena started to melt after a power outage and the game was called after two periods because there was too much fog. This year, North Dakota comes into the tournament as one of the hottest teams in the nation, winning 12 of their last 13 games, including the WCHA Final Five (beating the nation's 11th, 1st and 6th-ranked teams consecutively). Goalie Brad Eidsness is eighth in the nation in terms of goals against average with an impressive 2.09 mark over nearly 2,330 minutes this season.

Should the Eagles take on Yale, they will be facing oneof the most dynamic scorers in the nation in Broc Little. In fact, Yale is the top-scoring team in college hockey overall, averaging more than four goals per game. Especially impressive is Yale's power play, which converts on nearly one quarter of all of its opportunities. The Bulldogs are missing their best play in Sean Backman, which has to be a major concern, but the rest of the team has proven itself to have more than enough firepower to compete. On top of that, the Bulldogs live up to their name with physical play, which could come into play against a smaller team like Boston College.

New Hampshire: East Regional (Times Union Center - Albany, NY)

History: UNH has made 16 appearances, including the second-longest active streak in college hockey with nine consecutive tournament bids. Honestly, it could be said that this team more than any other has squandered its chances in the tournament with an unimpressive 11-15 mark in the playoffs, but they have been to four Frozen Fours and two title games. Last year very easily could have been another appearance for the 'Cats, who outplayed Boston University for most of the game, only to have a puck go off the Jerry Pollastrone's glove as he attempted to stop a shot and into the net in a game even BU coach Jack Parker said his team was "very, very fortunate" to have won.


This year: In Albany, New Hampshire may face two teams that will hold distinct home ice advantages in RIT and Cornell. And let's not forget No. 2 overall Denver, who at several points this season held the top spot.

Cornell will be the Wildcats' first-round opponent in a battle of two contrasting styles. Cornell is defensive-minded all the way and it shows in their stats. They boast what some consider the best goalie in the nation in Ben Scrivens, whose 1.78 GAA is tops in the country. As a result, Cornell is tied with top-ranked Miami for first in the Division I in team defense (1.85 goals/game). UNH, on the other end of the spectrum, relies on outgunning opponents, ranking 11th in the nation in team scoring, led by Hobey Baker hopeful Bobby Butler, who is second in the country in goals scored.

Should the 'Cats move on to play Denver, they run into a team that still feels like it has something to prove after losing two WCHA tournament games. Denver is a very ballanced team with good offense and a better defense. Bruins draft pick Joe Colborne is the man to watch with the game on the line as he is tied for first with eight game-winning goals this year. It would also be an interesting storyline of two Florida Panthers draft picks between the pipes in Brian Foster and Marc Cheverie. Cheverie is second in the nation in winning percentage behind BC's Parker Milner, but keep in mind Cheverie has played 32 games (24-5-3) to Milner's 13 (10-2-1).

If the 'Cats next opponents be RIT, they would be facing a true Cinderella story. RIT was ranked 25th in the PairWise Rankings and was a far cry from an at-large bid, but won the AHA, so none of that mattered. The Tigers are in the first national tournament in the school's history and carry with them a 10-game winning streak. Should they be able to beat No. 2 Denver, the momentum would definitely be on their side. RIT has been a pretty explosive offensive team and their team defense has been subperb with Jared DeMichael (2.00 GAA) between the pipes. Granted, some stats might be skewed a bit by the fact they play in a weak conference, but the fact of the matter is RIT is a balanced team, something UNH has had some difficulty with this season.

Vermont: West Regional (Xcel Energy Center - St. Paul, Minn.)

History: Vermont has only been a part of Hockey East since the 2005-06 season, but have already become a viable threat as part of the league, going to the Frozen Four last year in its first appearance as a Hockey East team. They beat Yale, then Air Force in a double-overtime game and then were victimized by a tough-luck goal in a loss to BU after outplaying the Terriers pretty much all game, preventing them from moving on to the title game. The Catamounts, who were part of the ECAC before joining Hockey East, have been to five tournaments altogether and have made it to the frozen four in two of them.

This year: As the No. 4 seed in the West, Vermont takes on maybe the softest of the top seeds in Wisconsin. The Badgers are certainly a great team, but some consider North Dakota or even Cornell to be better squads. Wisonsin lost to St. Cloud State in the Frozen Five, but salvaged the tournament with a win over Denver, otherwise the Badgers surely would have lost a No. 1 seeding. If there's one thing Wisconsin knows how to do, it's score. In a year when the WCHA has been very tough, the Badgers ranked first in the league and second in the nation in scoring offense. Scoring has been a problem for Vermont this year, ranking in the bottom half of th3 country in that respect, so the Catamounts may end up relying heavily on Rob Madore, who has had a habit of coming up with big perfomances in the postseason.

Should the Catamounts advance, it could be the team that beat the Badgers in the Final Five that they face next. St. Cloud State has been in the top-10 in the polls for the better part of the season. While not an elite team in any area, St. Cloud is proficient in all of them and has hung with what might be the most difficult conference schedule this year. The one place where St. Cloud is deficient is on the penalty kill, but likewise, Vermont is one of the worst in the country in that department.

Northern Michigan is another team that isn't overly impressive in any area, but gave itself a major boost by making it to the CCHA final. What would make this matchup interesting is in making it to the final, the Wildcats knocked Ferris State out of tournament consideration in the process and was one of the reasons UVM ended up in the tournament at all. As one of the better defensive teams in the nation, Northern Michigan could prove a challenge to a UVM team that just plain doesn't score many goals. Even a couple of goals could end up in a win and a ticket to the Frozen Four for the Wildcats.

College hockey needs better selection system

By Chris Maza
Fan Fanatic Sports Staff

No doubt about it, college hockey needs a new system to figure out who, in fact, makes the tournament and how those teams are placed after the field is selected.

A total of 16 teams make the national tournament with six conferences receiving automatic bids for winning their respective conference tournaments. The remaining 10 slots are filled by at large teams, which are determined by a computer calculated system that weighs several factors in its process of deciding which teams will compete for the national title.

I have absolutely no problem with the NCAA using a computer system in its decision-making process. Computers don’t have biases. They don’t pick favorites and don’t have short memories.
The problem I have is with the specific system used. The biggest problem with the current system is it treats every game equally, whether it be in-conference, out-of-conference, or a conference tournament.

If the college hockey season was longer and had more out-of-conference games on the schedule, this type of system would work. However, a team plays usually around 36 games in a college hockey season and in a league like Hockey East, for example, 27 of those games are league games. And those number don't include conference tournaments.

So in a sport that has its teams play 75 percent or more of their games in-conference, then why are those conference games not worth more? New Hampshire, for example, won the Hockey East regular-season crown, but largely because it had a rough start in games against quality opponents like Wisconsin, Miami (both No. 1 seeds in their respective brackets) and Cornell, it needed help from the favorites in other conference tournaments and the AHA in order to get in.

Vermont got in by virtue of a strong out-of conference schedule even thought they ended up eighth in the conference. Granted, they also beat UNH in the best-of-three quarterfinal with UNH before losing in the semis to eventual champion Boston College. But what about Boston University and Maine? While neither did stupendous against OOC foes, they had a better stretch over the long haul and finished third and fourth in the conference. BU made it just as far in the conference tournament and Maine took BC to overtime in a 7-6 loss in the conference championship game. Shouldn’t that count for something?

The real contradiction lies in the practice of having conference tournament games count the same as regular-season games - the fact that six conferences get automatic bids for winning the tournament. Basically, it’s like saying that all the games in the season (regular or postseason) are worth the same, except for one. The glaring example is Alabama-Huntsville, which won 12 games all season, but won a four-team conference tournament, so they got in.

If conference games and non-conference games count the same and all other tournament games are worth the same, why should one more be any more valuable? If you want to have conference championships worth a shot at the whole shebang, shouldn’t the games that lead up to that game hold at least a little extra clout?

But even if the computer system currently in place remains the system in the future, should the selection committee not follow the data the computer relays to the members when they are seeding the tournament?

While the committee claims it uses a computer system to keep the integrity of the tournament, this tournament layout suggests the committee cares less about integrity and more about selling tickets.

Take the Midwest Regional, for example. Fort Wayne, IN has had a terrible time selling tickets. So, in order to boost ticket sales, the committee compromised the integrity of the bracket by stacking it with Midwest teams. Miami was sure to either go to the Midwest or the West in St. Paul, MN, but being the top seed, got placed in the Midwest to draw a crowd. They will play the last-seeded Alabama-Huntsville and No. 8 Bemidji State is also on that bracket, which is fine, but No. 12 Michigan also being in that bracket makes little sense other than making sure to keep local recognizable teams in the Midwest to boost interest. It also helps that Michigan is one of the hottest teams in college hockey right now.

The Northeast could be the bracket of death. No. 4 Boston College, No. 5 North Dakota, No. 9 Yale and No. 13 Alaska are all in the same bracket. The NCAA loves seeing BC and North Dakota as favorites in games that if won would pit the two against each other. Every time the Sioux and the Eagles share the same ice in the tournament (and it’s happened five times since 2000) it is memorable.

The Sioux won a 4-2 affair to capture the national title in 2000, but the following year, BC got even with a 3-2 overtime win. In 2005, North Dakota knocked off BC in the regional, 6-3. In 2006, the Eagles won a 6-5 national semifinal, a game that shouldn’t have been as close as it was with the Sioux scoring twice (one shorthanded goal and one with 12 second left) in the last five minutes of the game to make it interesting. BC again downed North Dakota in another tight game the following year, 6-4. Both years they ended up losing in the finals to Wisconsin and Michigan State, respectively. In 2008, BC finally got over the hump and won the national championship, and again had to go through North Dakota to make it happen, beating the Sioux handily, 6-1, in the semifinals.

But Yale is the Ivy League school everyone is forgetting about after Barry Melrose spent 10 minutes slobbering all over Cornell and its goalkeeper. Having Yale in that bracket may make some sense in terms of rankings, but obviously is favorable for the NCAA in terms of selling tickets, as folks are sure to come up from Connecticut to Worcester to see a potential BC-Yale showdown.

Denver, who lost not one, but two WCHA tournament games, also faces a difficult field in the East Regional in Albany and could play two upstate New York schools (RIT and Cornell, should the Badgers and Cornell both advance past the first roud) that are bound to bring in some serious gate and give those teams a severe home-ice feel and UNH fans also travel well.

But again, the NCAA can rely on some history here in order to sell tickets. UNH and Cornell have some history, playing a pair of epic games in the early 2000’s, including a Frozen Four tilt won by UNH. There is also sure to be a news article or two about how UNH is looking for revenge in the Big Red’s back yard after Cornell beat the Wildcats, 5-2, at the Whit early this year.

Check back a little bit later and I'll further break down each of the three Hockey East teams' road to the Frozen Four.