That's a good question. Duke was down, it was OT, but it was only the elite 8. This time the game was tied, but it was for the championship. Laettner just kind of put it up. This kid stepped into it with supreme confidence that it was going in. I don't know. I'm an unabashed Duke fan, but I think I'd go with this one. It was for the title.
I love hockey. It will always be my favorite. But, this is why there is no better sporting event than the NCAA Basketball Tournament. - buffalofan19
I still like the Stanley Cup Playoffs better. No team ranked less than 8 has ever won the NCAA championship since they moved to 64(or more) teams. So no team in the bottom half of the bracket has won. But a good number of teams in the bottom half of the bracket in the NHL have won. Only 12 teams ranked lower than 3 have even made it to the championship game since 1985 with only 4 winning.
I still like the Stanley Cup Playoffs better. No team ranked less than 8 has ever won the NCAA championship since they moved to 64(or more) teams. So no team in the bottom half of the bracket has won. But a good number of teams in the bottom half of the bracket in the NHL have won. Only 12 teams ranked lower than 3 have even made it to the championship game since 1985 with only 4 winning. - Wetbandit1
its the upsets in the first couple rounds that make it really exciting. But i agree. Nothing beats the NHL playoffs. Its like a different league. Its crazy to see how bad they want it. Its unlike any other playoffs IMO
Location: Wonderful things can happen when you sow seeds of distrust in a garden full of (bum)holes Joined: 07.01.2007
Apr 5 @ 12:07 AM ET
I still like the Stanley Cup Playoffs better. No team ranked less than 8 has ever won the NCAA championship since they moved to 64(or more) teams. So no team in the bottom half of the bracket has won. But a good number of teams in the bottom half of the bracket in the NHL have won. Only 12 teams ranked lower than 3 have even made it to the championship game since 1985 with only 4 winning. - Wetbandit1
Agreed, but the bottom line is, hockey as a sport doesn't give an ability for a finish like this. It just doesn't.
Location: Wonderful things can happen when you sow seeds of distrust in a garden full of (bum)holes Joined: 07.01.2007
Apr 5 @ 12:21 AM ET
The overtime game winner by Kane years back was a pretty epic finish imo - Smittyx36
The only thing that made it dramatic is that the camera lost the puck. That's it. Chicago was already up in the series. If that puck didn't go in, someone else would have finished. Tonight blows that out of the water.
The only thing that made it dramatic is that the camera lost the puck. That's it. Chicago was already up in the series. If that puck didn't go in, someone else would have finished. Tonight blows that out of the water. - buffalofan19
Hockey's best element as far as finishes are concerned (like time winding down) are the game tying goals like the drury goal against NYR or Briere's goal against OTT. But I agree the last shot of a game in b-ball is second to none. It has incredible build up, from the pass to the release and the second or so it's in the air feels like an eternity with everyone holding their breath. Something about possession too, the fact that there's a lot of scrambling at the end of hockey game vs basketball.
The only thing that made it dramatic is that the camera lost the puck. That's it. Chicago was already up in the series. If that puck didn't go in, someone else would have finished. Tonight blows that out of the water. - buffalofan19
Hull in '99 3OT, Arnott in '00 2OT, Kane '10 OT, Martinez '14 2OT. Those are just the Cup clinching OT goals since Hull. How about when Chicago scored twice in 17 seconds starting with 1:16 left in the 3rd to win the Cup against Boston? That was pretty damn exciting.
The NCAA is a great playoffs. It's still 2nd to the Stanley Cup playoffs to me, albeit a close 2nd, but it's still 2nd.
That's a good question. Duke was down, it was OT, but it was only the elite 8. This time the game was tied, but it was for the championship. Laettner just kind of put it up. This kid stepped into it with supreme confidence that it was going in. I don't know. I'm an unabashed Duke fan, but I think I'd go with this one. It was for the title. - Wetbandit1
I haven't been to a game in about 5 years, but it was really bad. What happened to the little clips from Slap Shot and Caddyshack during the game? Little poop like that to get some life in the crowd was just gone.
I actually like the broadcast. Although it suffers a little not having someone next to RJ in the booth. I understand Dan has been calling games for the radio with Peters, but just put him(Dan) next to RJ to act as the color guy with Ray chipping in like he did when Harry Neale was still here. I miss Harry Neale and his slap shots from 37 feet. Nothing feels forced between them and the shots they take at each other seem good natured if a bit odd at times, but they seem to have a genuine chemistry. - Wetbandit1
Jim Lorentz was the best IMO. I had a chance to meet him at an alumni lunch right when Pegula bought the team .......... I told him just that and walked away feeling really good I did. Wanted to do that for many years.
Jim Lorentz was the best IMO. I had a chance to meet him at an alumni lunch right when Pegula bought the team .......... I told him just that and walked away feeling really good I did. Wanted to do that for many years. - fastek
Speaking of announcers, I've always wondered with Sylvester lasted such a short time doing the play by play. Not that I thought he was great but it seemed at the time that's what he really wanted to do. Anyone have any insight ?
Location: Ice girls, please, NY Joined: 07.16.2011
Apr 5 @ 7:20 AM ET
Agreed, but the bottom line is, hockey as a sport doesn't give an ability for a finish like this. It just doesn't. - buffalofan19
Until NCAA teams (or NBA, MLB, NFL, whoever) have to battle for 2 months, playing nearly every other day while enduring inevitable (often serious) injuries and alternate-travel every other game, with games often lasting 4+ hours, in order to win a trophy...then another sport will match the intensity and drama of the Stanley Cup playoffs, to me at least.
My take on NCAA hoops=too many teams to keep track of to make an investment in, except for rooting for teams in my brackets.
Until NCAA teams (or NBA, MLB, NFL, whoever) have to battle for 2 months, playing nearly every other day while enduring inevitable (often serious) injuries and alternate-travel every other game, with games often lasting 4+ hours, in order to win a trophy...then another sport will match the intensity and drama of the Stanley Cup playoffs, to me at least.
My take on NCAA hoops=too many teams to keep track of to make an investment in, except for rooting for teams in my brackets. - LandlordTom
I agree with this. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but college basketball just doesn't excite me. I know a lot of people who couldn't name a player from any team and don't watch until the tournament. Then suddenly they're obsessed. I don't understand how you suddenly get excited about a sport that you haven't followed closely through the year.
Location: We are in 30th place. It's 2017 , NY Joined: 02.12.2012
Apr 5 @ 8:19 AM ET
Agreed, but the bottom line is, hockey as a sport doesn't give an ability for a finish like this. It just doesn't. - buffalofan19
Basketball also has the ability to have a 40 point blow out that's over by halftime, which was also featured in the final 4. You rarely see multi goal blow outs in playoff hockey.
That finish was an outlier for the championship game, not the normal
Who knows maybe we get some good karma for finishing out strong and we get a top 3 pick. This year's lottery nothing is guaranteed. I'm happy with how this team has played the 2nd half
