by Todd Maternowski

Have an opinion? Repress it!

Top of the morning, hockey fans! Here's hoping the Stars' loss to the Phoenix Tippetts didn't drive you to an early grave; indeed, when the Stars surrendered a goal in the first and last minutes of the second period in that game, a wave of nostalgia for the Tippett Regime swept over me like a bunch of trains and skyscrapers, and I started crying -- although it may have been because I was chopping onions and listening to Morrissey records at the time. Ah, Tipp, we'll miss those competent-for-57-minutes games ... or will we?

Last week we delved deeply into the dark depths of depravity -- i.e., the NFL -- with my Unfounded 4th-and-99 Insanity Theory. This week, I was planning on railing incoherently on the Stars in all-caps (FIRE NEAL HE SUX), but in lieu of last night's impressive road victory over the surging Detroit Red Wings, it's come to many observers' attention that we may, finally, have every 600-level fan's dream. No, not a pay-per-view zero-G Ice Girls honey-wrestling battle royale (not yet), but the one thing that's eluded fans of all but a handful of teams over the past decade: a Goalie Controversy.

After Alex Auld stoned the once-potent Detroit attack (including ending their incredible run of 50% powerplay effectiveness in recent games) -- and considering Turco's lifelong troubles winning there -- it may be time to consider giving him a slight increase in ice time, somewhere in the range of 73-77 games' worth. To discuss this intelligently, I've brought a panel of professional experts -- Andy Moog, Eddie Belfour, Mike Ditka, Vladislav Tretiak, Ken Dryden, Stephen Hawking, and Darryl Reaugh -- to weigh the possibilities of a goalie change in net for the Dallas Stars.

Me: Gentlemen, thanks for coming.

Professional Experts: (everyone jibber-jabbers at once)

Me: So, gentlemen, do the Stars have a "goalie controversy?"

Professional Experts: Nope.

(three minutes of awkward silence)

(Ditka coughs)

Stephen Hawking: HEY, ARE YOU GOING TO EAT THAT?

Me: Security!!

So that's that then. More to the point, the sports world is all abuzz about something marginally related to hockey: New England Patriots Czar Bill Belichick's decision to "go for it" on 4th-and-2 from his own 28 yard line in the final minutes against the Colts. As some of you may have heard, the move backfired, the Colts got the ball and drove down easily for the game-winning touchdown. As some of the rest of you may have heard, a three-time Superbowl-winning coach is now the Schmuck of the Ages, the greatest moron since sliced bread, a hobo-lookalike dumber than a bag of dildos.

Ahhh, pundits ... is there anything they don't know? As I've railed incessantly since the beginning of this column 137 weeks ago, You Play to Win the Game. The media reaction to Baffled Bumpkin Belichick's Bupkus reminds me of my high school buddy Chris -- now a high-priced lawyer -- who had a fool-proof strategy when he played me in Axis & Allies. His plan was always the same: Pick the Axis, build up your forces until they're impregnable, and never attack. My strategy: Throw everything I had minus one infantry at him from turn 1. Guess who won 100% of the time? Clue: It was me and my idiotic strategy.

Point being, when you're playing a game, go for the win. There's no Special Prize for Who Keeps the Most Troops (although the Lady Byng Trophy is pretty much exactly that). Your offense had gained 450 yards up to that point, averaged 6.7 yards per play, and you need 2 yards -- two yards -- to win the game. Punt it to Peyton Manning, and depending on the punt return, he now has two full minutes to drive 60 yards. Manning just drove longer than that in less time -- do these pundits really think Manning is some sort of unknown commodity? The guy will win the game if given two full minutes and the ball. Period. Put some faith in your offense -- you know, the part of the game that you actually control -- and get two yards.

Of course, lining up five-wide with an empty backfield and throwing to the guy least likely to make the first down was another matter. But the decision to go for it was solid; punt there, and you avoid blame but lose the game.

Same mentality should be applied to the NHL: Play to win, don't play "not to lose." This is why Tippett is cleaning scorpions out of his skates every morning and Marc Crawford is coaching a Cup-caliber roster in one of hockey's big-revenue markets. Crawford, for all his faults, sends his guys in waves at the enemy gates, and would rather they score than hang back, play the prevent defense/trap and hope for the best. Pshaw. Hockey is a game: Go for the win! You've got nothing to lose but your career and your health!

That's it for this week's Visigoth-friendly Cupcheck. Tune in next week when we chastise Crawford for not pulling his goalie when he was up by two goals in the final minute of the Detroit game.

• Staff
• Verified User
• Anonymous

What do you think?