HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

WHo will win the CCM HS NIT?

http://www.mnhockeyhub.com/page/show/31 ... ason=44088

Minnesota and Wisconsin Seniors are tied at 1 just underway in the 2nd period.

This game is being audio webcast by http://www.wisconsinprephockey.net

Game ended 5-3 Wisconsin.

Earlier, Michigan beat North Dakota 2-1.

Due to the format, the result of each team's first game is not very important. It is the next two games against the teams in their pool that determine their standing.

The Minnesota Seniors should have a good chance to win their pool against Mass and North Dakota. Wisconsin may have a fight on their hands in order to win their pool against the U-18's and Michigan.

Seems pretty clear that the MI, WI, MN-U18 pool contained the best three teams in the showdown. Too bad one of them could not have been in the other pool to create a real championship game. That's ok, still great hockey and the kids got amazing exposure per usual.

Perhaps they were 3 of the best 4 teams there. Seems that the Minnesota Seniors should be included, perhaps as #1, as they are ahead of the U-18's 3-0 after two periods in the championship.

JSR wrote:Seems pretty clear that the MI, WI, MN-U18 pool contained the best three teams in the showdown. Too bad one of them could not have been in the other pool to create a real championship game. That's ok, still great hockey and the kids got amazing exposure per usual.

Seems pretty clear the order of finish ended up being very close to how these teams actually stacked up:

1) MN Seniors (finished 1st)
2) MN 18 (finished 2nd)
3) Michigan (finished 3rd)
4) Wisconsin (finished 5th)
5) ND (finished 4th)
6) Mass, (finished sixth)

High Flyer wrote:

JSR wrote:Seems pretty clear that the MI, WI, MN-U18 pool contained the best three teams in the showdown. Too bad one of them could not have been in the other pool to create a real championship game. That's ok, still great hockey and the kids got amazing exposure per usual.

Seems pretty clear the order of finish ended up being very close to how these teams actually stacked up:

1) MN Seniors (finished 1st)
2) MN 18 (finished 2nd)
3) Michigan (finished 3rd)
4) Wisconsin (finished 5th)
5) ND (finished 4th)
6) Mass, (finished sixth)

I guess I was factoring in the fact that Team Wisconsin beat the MN Seniors 5-3 on Thursday night, and Team MI and the U18's beat ND and Mass on as well. In my estimation ND and Mass were a notch below the other four. Put ANY of the other four in a bracket with ND and Mass and they woudl have won their bracket and the championship game could have gone to any of them in a one game final as all four seemed pretty darn close with anyone being able to win on a given night.

JSR wrote:

High Flyer wrote:

JSR wrote:Seems pretty clear that the MI, WI, MN-U18 pool contained the best three teams in the showdown. Too bad one of them could not have been in the other pool to create a real championship game. That's ok, still great hockey and the kids got amazing exposure per usual.

Seems pretty clear the order of finish ended up being very close to how these teams actually stacked up:

1) MN Seniors (finished 1st)
2) MN 18 (finished 2nd)
3) Michigan (finished 3rd)
4) Wisconsin (finished 5th)
5) ND (finished 4th)
6) Mass, (finished sixth)

I guess I was factoring in the fact that Team Wisconsin beat the MN Seniors 5-3 on Thursday night, and Team MI and the U18's beat ND and Mass on as well. :? In my estimation ND and Mass were a notch below the other four. Put ANY of the other four in a bracket with ND and Mass and they woudl have won their bracket and the championship game could have gone to any of them in a one game final as all four seemed pretty darn close with anyone being able to win on a given night.

I think you are putting a little too much emphasis on the Thursday preliminary or what I would call exhibition/warm up games. Some teams just showed up when the games really counted.

High Flyer wrote:

JSR wrote:

High Flyer wrote: Seems pretty clear the order of finish ended up being very close to how these teams actually stacked up:

1) MN Seniors (finished 1st)
2) MN 18 (finished 2nd)
3) Michigan (finished 3rd)
4) Wisconsin (finished 5th)
5) ND (finished 4th)
6) Mass, (finished sixth)

I guess I was factoring in the fact that Team Wisconsin beat the MN Seniors 5-3 on Thursday night, and Team MI and the U18's beat ND and Mass on as well. In my estimation ND and Mass were a notch below the other four. Put ANY of the other four in a bracket with ND and Mass and they woudl have won their bracket and the championship game could have gone to any of them in a one game final as all four seemed pretty darn close with anyone being able to win on a given night.

I think you are putting a little too much emphasis on the Thursday preliminary or what I would call exhibition/warm up games. Some teams just showed up when the games really counted.

No I'm combining Thursdays games and Sunday's consolation games to come to the conclusion that the top four teams were very close adn the bottom two were not in the same category. Hence it would have been nice to see a little more balance in hindsight. Obviously you can't know ahead of time so it's no one fault, just is what it is. But with the assistance of hindsight it would have bee nice to see the top four split equally into separate brackets and the bottom two teams split up into separate brackets, that's all, the two MN teams may have still played eachother, you never know...... but again still a great tournament. I do think it's ridiculous to think that the teams didn't "try" on Thursday night though, competitive kids who work that hard to play at that level don't like to lose no matter what, same with the coaches, and the game still counts in their heads even if not in the standings, so I don't buy into that line of thinking at all.

was up in the cities for the meltdown, the team stayed in the same motel- great bunch a hockey players.