Sioux erupt to sweep UMD with — or without — Stafford
As the old saying goes, you can watch 1,000 hockey games but there’s a good chance that at the next one you might see something you’ve never seen before. It happened when North Dakota played at Minnesota-Duluth in the first game of another of what is becoming a trend this season – a weird two-game series.
Drew Stafford played a major role in North DakotaÂ’s sweep, although not at all by design. He did it all in the 5-3 first game by getting a hat trick and an assist, and he left the second game early, almost as if to prove his suddenly explosive teammates could romp 7-4 without their hottest scorer.
StaffordÂ’s biggest role, in retrospect, may prove to be his part in the game-ending play of Game 1, a play that will make a great trivia quiz question: How can you score a goal without getting a shot on goal?
UMD was coming off an impressive tie and victory against Minnesota, while North Dakota was striving to break free of a three-game losing streak, having just dropped 4-2 and 4-1 games at home against Wisconsin. As in “underrated†Wisconsin, or “first-place†Wisconsin.
Stafford isnÂ’t likely to forget that first game. The junior winger scored in the first minute of the game, and when Ryan Duncan drilled a high-right corner shot on a 2-on-1 rush at 2:14 it was 2-0. UMD coach Scott Sandelin called an immediate time out, summoning goalie Isaac Reichmuth, the hero of the previous weekend against Minnesota, to join his teammates for a brief consultation at the bench.
“They came out jumping and we were flat,†said Sandelin. “There wasnÂ’t much I could say but to look up at the clock and tell them, ‘Well, weÂ’ve got 17:46 and two periods left.Â’ Ââ€
True, the fun had just begun. The Bulldogs settled down, and Tim StapletonÂ’s strong wrist shot beat Jordan Parise midway through the second period to cut UMDÂ’s deficit to 2-1. But five minutes later, Stafford pulled a power-play rebound free from a scrap at the net, spun and scored for a 3-1 Sioux lead.
In the third period, Stafford connected again with both teams short a man for a 4-1 lead. It was his seventh goal of the season, “and my first hat trick since I played at Shattuck,†he said, recalling his prep school days at Faribault, MN., his hometown.
That should have settled things, but Duluth rallied back when Jason Raymond scored on a UMD power play at 9:42, and when Sandelin pulled Reichmuth, Justin Williams scored with 1:31 remaining to thrust the Bulldogs to 4-3 proximity. When the game moved into its final minute, Reichmuth was pulled again and UMDÂ’s crowd was on its feet, urging the equalizer.
The Sioux defended firmly, then slick freshman T.J. Oshie got the puck out to center ice, and flipped a shot that was sliding slowly toward the unguarded UMD goal as the final seconds ticked off. Stafford was racing after it, and so was UMDÂ’s impressive freshman defenseman, Matt Niskanen. If Stafford could have gotten to the puck first, he could have converted his fourth goal of the night; if Niskanen could reach it, he could prevent an empty-net goal.
Everybody was watching the puck, as it slid toward the left post, but nobody could miss Niskanen – a former high school football star as well as hockey – take out Stafford with a pretty clean tackle. As the two slid to the end boards to the left of the goal, the puck did not go in, but struck the left pipe, and the ricochet trickled slowly into the crease.
Stafford and Niskanen, sprawled together at the end boards but still with distinctly differing motives, started to grapple. Referee Todd Anderson blew his whistle. After lengthy deliberation, he made what everybody in the press box agreed was a pretty unique decision.
He awarded a goal to Oshie, citing a rule that declares that when what appears to be an obvious goal at an empty net is prevented by a flagrant violation, a goal shall be awarded. So not only did Oshie get his fourth goal of the season at 19:58 of the third period, while Travis Zajac and Stafford were awarded assists on the awarded goal, and Niskanen and Stafford were penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct, still, confusion reigned in the press box.
To be accurate, the shot chart had to show Oshie’s shot hit the post and technically wasn’t a shot on goal. So you can award a goal, but can you award a shot on goal? The opinions wavered, but it was agreed that the best solution was to provide a trivia-quiz question – can you score a goal without a shot on goal?
Stafford wasnÂ’t upset that Niskanen had footballed him out of a chance for his fourth goal. Quite the contrary.
“Actually, I saw the puck sliding and I thought it was going to go in,†said Stafford. “So I hooked Niskanen, trying to hold him back, to let the puck go in.Ââ€
Very interesting. WeÂ’ll never know if Anderson missed StaffordÂ’s hook, or what that might have done to his subsequent call. What we do know is that the Fighting Sioux had snapped out of their scoring slump, led by the first line.
“Oshie is really something,†said Stafford. “Travis [Zajac] and I are hard-pressed to keep up with him. TJ is so tenacious that even if a defenseman getrs a piece of him, heÂ’ll just blow past him.Ââ€
Obviously, with a crop of freshmen that includes first-round NHL picks like Oshie, Brian Lee and Joe Finley, and second rounders Taylor Chorney and Andrew Kozek, the Sioux are bristling with flashy freshmen. So Stafford up front and fellow-junior Matt Smaby, the only defenseman older than a sophomore, are needed for leadership.
So what happens in Game 2? Smaby was tossed for checking from behind at the 5:37 mark of the first period, and Stafford was ejected for the same infraction at 0:20 of the second period. At that point, UMD led 2-0 on first-period power-play goals by Tim Stapleton and Mason Raymond.
{IMG2}
The freshman-dominated Sioux chose that time to rally. Zajac scored on a rebound at 3:53, Rastislav Spirko scored a power-play goal at 5:11, and Zajac connected again at 9:24 for a sudden 3-2 Sioux lead. UMD countered when Josh Meyers scored on the power play for a 3-3 tie at 12:40, but the rest of the middle period belonged to the Sioux.
Toews scored a spectacular goal on a power-play rush when Oshie fed a quick pass to send Chris Porter flying into the zone on the right, and when he got in deep, Porter looked to shoot but passed instead, right across the crease, where Jonathan Toews had easy work to shovel the puck in behind Reichmuth.
Porter also made a neat play to Oshie on a later power play, and the pass was so slick it isolated the freshman from Warroad, MN., who had the poise to step out for a better angle, then snap a wrist shot into the upper right corner. That completed a five-goal second period for the Fighting Sioux, and all was going their way when Ryan Duncan opened the third period with a 35-foot slap shot that ticked a defensemanÂ’s stickblade and changed vectors to catch the lower left corner for a 6-3 bulge.
Stapleton gamely got his second goal of the game and third of the weekend to close it to 6-4, but Duncan broke free up the right side and jammed a shot through Reichmuth that trickled across the line under a sprawling Justin Williams in the closing minutes.
If the sweep proved anything, it proved several things. First, that North Dakota is for real, whether its veterans or its youthful exuberance leads the way; second, that the Bulldogs need to find some three-period consistency to keep winning; third, that the WCHA is wide-open and every series is likely to provide surprises. And, oh yes, it is possible to score a goal without a shot on goal.
Mazda6 Sport Wagon zoom-zooms ahead into 2006
The 2006 Mazda6 Sport Wagon felt a little different when I test drove one last week, but it also felt comfortably familiar in the most important ways. With so many great midsize cars available the best thing about the Mazda6 is that getting back into one reassures the opinion that it can equal all the best features of any competitor – and runs away from them all when you add in the fun-to-drive factor.
Equipped with 18-inch alloy wheels and all-season Michelin tires, the front-wheel-drive Mazda6 breezed through the first little snowfall that swept across the Upper Midwest in the past week, never losing its poise even on icy patches of highway.
The Mazda6 is not up for Car of the Year for 2006. ItÂ’s not even a candidate, since itÂ’s in its fourth year since being totally redesigned for the 2002 model year, and has undergone only the sort of minor tweaks common to a carÂ’s model cycle. Trouble is, the Mazda6 didnÂ’t win back in the 2002 competition either, partly because it came out so late in the 2001 calendar year that many jurors didnÂ’t get any time with it. I voted for it then, and IÂ’d do it again today, only by a greater margin.
I often look back to reflect on how well past Car of the Year winners have sustained their importance. The best way to evaluate a car might be to measure how long it continues to be significant in the marketplace, and it would be difficult to imagine a more significant car than the Mazda6 when you look at its staying power.
It remains arguably the best-looking, best-handling, and best-performing midsize car out there when you put all the important characteristics up for consideration. When a car goes up against the likes of the Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, Nissan Altima, Volkswagen Jetta, and maybe a dozen others of that popular midsize, it requires quickness, comfort, good stability, and good looks.
The Mazda6 had all of those things, and the companyÂ’s executives apologized when it was introduced, for having lost their way in the worldwide attempt to copy the Accord/Camry whirlwind of durability and success. Mazda, a company with the most engineers per employee of any auto company, had matched the durability factor, but nobody could match the sales success Camry and Accord rack up, year after year.
Mazda added something special, though. The company promoted it as “zoom-zoom,†insisting the Mazda6 was the car that would return the company to its long-standing mission of building the most fun-to-drive vehicle in its class. To anyone who drove all the top cars in that class, there could be no argument that Mazda met its objective, with a redesigned suspension that kept the car firmly planted while the body stayed flat during the hardest cornering.
Many sports cars fell short of its sportiness, and you’d have to spend enough for a BMW 3-Series to find a worthy competitor – which was fitting, because the BMW was the benchmark Mazda’s suspension engineers used, while proving that a well-designed front-wheel-drive car can snake through curves with the best rear-wheel-drivers. The Mazda6 continued to prove and reprove itself with each passing year, and it still seems new and fresh, for 2006.
The station wagon is a more recent addition, and the Sport Wagon is newer still. Its nose is new, a little more dramatic in the “V†of the grille, and with a larger opening under the bumper, sort of RX-8 style. The glassed-in light enclosures now house four bulbs each, with standard halogen lights, and xenon headlights. As wagons go, this one looks sporty, with a roofline that tapers just a bit at the rear, finished with a spoiler on the back edge of the roof.
Station wagons themselves sort of faded from the scene when minivans became very popular, and then SUVs swept to prominence, without really dislodging minivans, but stopping their growth in market share.
Interestingly, wagons never went out of popularity in Europe, where BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Volkswagen, Volvo and Saab all sell station wagons in great number. They also are making a bit of a comeback in the U.S., where all of the above models, plus several from Japan, have worked their way back into our consciousness, simply for the logic and utility they offer.
So if the Mazda6 is the sportiest midsize sedan this side of BMW, then the Mazda6 Sport Wagon is a strong but less-expensive challenger for the best sporty wagons around from the prestigious European companies. The outstanding suspension feels even better on the new Sport Wagon, probably gaining an assist from the specifally larger 19-inch wheels, and stabilizer bars front and rear help as well.
I liked the interior of the Mazda6 when it was redesigned, but the 2006 Sport Wagon makes some alterations. The large round gauges are ringed subtly with silver, and come alive with a bright red-orange numbers and needles. The center stack is black, just a nice, simple, basic, black. Somehow it adds a classier touch than the somewhat swoopy mixtures of bright chrome and two-tone trim that seem to be growing in popularity.
{IMG2}
The seats, too, are basic but firmly supportive, and they were winter-friendly with the leather surface heated. The back seat is roomy enough for adults, and the storage area behind the seats is large, and gets larger if you fold down the second-row seats. A seven-speaker Bose audio system has a subwoofer and spews 200 watts of sound, and has as six-CD player in the dash. Safety also is stressed from the ground up, with side airbags and side air curtains standard. The climate control system has rear seat ducts, another nice touch as December approaches.
From a performance standpoint, of course, whatÂ’s under the hood matters greatly. In the Mazda6 sedan, the choice is the very strong 2.3-liter Mazda four-cylinder or a reworked version of the Ford Duratec 3.0-liter V6. Reworked is not just a buzzword here; in some Ford products the overhead-camshaft 3.0 V6 is adequate, but unexciting. When Ford gives the 3.0 to Mazda, the Mazda engineers rework it with variable valve-timing, and the same somewhat stodgy engine comes alive.
In the Sport Wagon, the 3.0 V6 is the only available engine. It has 215 horsepoewr at 6,300 RPMs and 199 foot-pounds of torque at 5,000 RPMs, and it runs just fine on regular gas – a feature not to be trifled with now that we know $3-per-gallon is not out of the question. The test car came with a five-speed manual transmission – setting the car firmly in the sporty bracket, although a six-speed automatic is available.
Along with strong engine performance, the Sport Wagon has standard four-wheel disc brakes, with antilock standard, and electronic brake distribution the car stops promptly and surely. When you want to go, the engine comes to life quickly, and the power goes to work through traction control, which prevents wheelspin and assures that takeoffs are sure and true, even in a snowstorm.
The sticker price for the Sport Wagon is $27,910, which becomes $28,470 with destination costs. If the 2006 Mazda6 was all-new, and not just the nearly perfected version of a well-established car, it would be right up there in the running with the newest Car of the Year candidates, such as the Ford Fusion. That proves how good the Mazda6 is. Ford is the chief investor in Mazda, and it shares more than just engines with its affiliate. The Fusion is built on the newest version of the Mazda6 platform, with a larger body, but its base engine is the Mazda 2.3-liter four, and the optional upgrade is the 3.0-liter V6 – Ford’s own Duratec V6, but done up by Mazda’s reworked heads with variable valve-timing.
The Fusion has a legitimate chance to win Car of the Year, and if it does, it will be a tribute to the Mazda6. Regardless, the 2006 Mazda6 commands complete respect on its own.
Jeep Commander rises beyond Cherokee territory
Writing about new cars for more than three decades has generated a fiar number of questions from readers, and discussing new cars on WCCO radio with Charlie Boone at 7 oÂ’clock every Saturday morning has generated hundreds of new contacts by email. One of the better questions was: Will the new Jeep Grand Cherokee have a third-row of seating?
I couldn’t be certain, because the trend seems to be to introduce a model and then introduce various spinoff versions, and with the Grand Cherokee being all-new a year ago, it might take some time for word to come down from Mercedes, to Chrysler, to Jeep, and then to get applied. My hunch wasnÂ’t bad. I was wrong about a new version on the Grand Cherokee, but I was right about JeepÂ’s intention to add a third-row seating arrangement. But instead of merely squeezing ianother row of seats into the cargo hold of a Grand Cherokee, Jeep went over the top.
The 2006 Jeep Commander is an entirely new vehicle that takes fully into account the demands of traditional Jeep buyers, but also expands into that segment that insists on seven-passenger, three-row seating. With SUVs expanded beyond a million and, optimistically maybe, headed for two million, and 50 percent of prospective buyers wanting a third-row of seats, it would be foolish to overlook that gang.
Big, bold, and perfectly suited to taking large numbers of people on their appointed rounds with startling, Hemi quickness, the Commander meets or exceeds any on-road requirements anybody could have for a large SUV, and previous testing at the vehicleÂ’s introduction indicates that off-road ventures are easily acoomplished.
Entirely new, from stem to stern, the Commander sits on the same platform and wheelbase of the new Grand Cherokee, but itÂ’s two inches longer, and considerably larger, in every dimension. Parked next to a Grand Cherokee, the Commander is taller, which helps house the seats of Jeep’s first three-row-seat vehicle. If Jeep wanted to simply build a three-row-seat SUV, I think it may have overshot its aim; the Commander will take on a lot of luxury SUVs, costing much more.
The look is striking, if not ultramodern, which also is by design. The Commander makes an attempt to recapture the image of the old Jeep Grand Wagoneer from decades past. That was a squarish, but luxurious, sport-utility vehicle that was very popular, although my personal opinion of it was that it seemed like a lot of spare parts somehow fastened together – and not always solidly.
Instead of a steeply-raked windshield, the Commander has a blocky but readily identifiable grille and front end, and from the side it has wheelwell openings outlined with bulletproof molding, which has neat little allen-screw-looking indentations that seem intent on convincing bystanders that somebody took their new vehicle to an after-market shop to be reinforced. Actually, the illusion is a counter-illusion, because the flares are replaceable.
The test vehicle is “Trail Rated,†which is Jeepspeak that means you could go crashing and careening off-road, through the underbrush, and where roads may not necessarily lead. The inherent ruggedness is countered by the Commander’s luxury appointments. The $42,225 as-tested sticker might be an indicator, although I was surprised it was that low, with a $38,205 base price, because I’ve driven a lot of over-$40,000 SUVs recently.
On snow or ice, or congested traffic, the Commander I test drove was smooth and very managable, but always potentially overpowering. ThatÂ’s because it has a Hemi. Yup, just like the commercial might say. that thing has a Hemi in it. The 5.7-liter hemispherical-head V8 churns out 330 horsepower at 5,000 RPMs and 375 foot-pounds of torque at 4,000 RPMs.
So even though the Commander weighs in at 5,169 pounds, it can accelerate with sports-sedan quickness, and carries itself extremely well. It handles with what my wife, Joan, called sports-car-like precision, considerably better than most other large SUVs weÂ’ve driven, in her view.
As impressive as the Hemi power is, the Commander also benefits from the cylinder-deactivation system that effectively cuts out half the cylinders at cruising speed, moving it up from gas-hungry to reasonable in fuel efficiency. WeÂ’re talking a vehicle that would be impressive if it got 14 miles per gallon, and improving it to the 17-18 neighborhood.
{IMG2}
Opening the door reveals more luxury than you might be prepared for. The test truck was jet black, which was more stunning as we encountered a couple of midweek snowstorms hit. Inside, what is called “Saddle Brown Yuma Leather†greets you from all the seats, and with three rows-worth, that’s a lot of seats, arranged in what they call stadium seating. Movie theaters do it, putting the seats on risers so everyone can easily see over the bushy-haired giant sitting a row ahead. In the Commander, occupants in the second row can see over the front row, and third-row sitters can see over the second row. The taller body means more side glass, and a more, uh, commanding view.
The roof is stepped, so itÂ’s higher to accommodate the rear seat, although the step itself is physically obscured by the well-positioned roof rack. The seating and all the appointments are nothing if not totally luxurious. The rearmost row of seats fold down independently, making a flat carpeted stowage surface. ThatÂ’s a good idea, too, because while everybodyÂ’s market research says that SUV buyers are adamant about wanting a third-row seat, it is even more dramatic in pointing out how rarely those third-row seats are used to sit in.
The second row is used frequently, though, and on the Commander the stock formation is a 40/20/40 split that can fold up to separate the outer seats if youÂ’re hauling four instead of five. Or seven. If there are only two of you, and a lot of stuff to haul, you can fold both the second and third rows down flat into the floor. On a trip, you could probably find room to sleep back there, which would mean SUVs have finally figured out how to capture some of the best assets of vans.
“Instead of thinking outside the box,†said Jeep spokesman Don Renkert, “we made a better box.Ââ€
I don’t like fake wood trim, but the woodgrain inside the Commander, which I’m sure is “genuine simulated wood,” is as attractive as any I’ve seen. The instrument panel is well laid out, as are center stack controls, right on down to the console, which has the shift lever for the five-speed automatic transmission, and a little grasp-handle if you want to lock the beast into low range to creep down some steep off-road decline.
An oversized sunroof fits because of the straight-up walls, and can be augmented by fixed-window skylights over the rear, which further brightens the luxury concept.
Going through the snow is a breeze, no matter which type of four-wheel drive you choose. Jeep has enough systems to satisfy the most demanding buyer, with QuadraTrac, QuadraTrac II, Quadra-Drive II, and then thereÂ’s the two-wheel rear-drive version.
You get the Hemi, and you get the Quadra-Drive II, which has electronically controlled shifting of torque to assure that the wheel with the most traction gets the most power. It even can send 100 percent of available power to just one wheel, and when youÂ’re talking Hemi power, you obviously can still get where you intend to go with one wheel doing the work.
Side-curtain airbags shield all three rows, augmenting the normal airbag-equipped safety stuff, which starts from structural safety with solid rear frame rails designed to take off-road boulder hits, which pretty much mean anything on the road should be easy.
The rear end has a solid-axle build with five-link suspension, again designed to handle the most rugged use. All Commanders get that treatment, whether you choose the 3.7-liter V6, the 4.7-liter V8, or the 5.7-liter Hemi. If you choose the top Limited model, the base is $38,205, and it drops off to $36,280 for the Limited, $29,985 for the basic 4×4, and $27,985 for the 4×2.
Impressive as the Commander Limited 4×4 Hemi is for charging through snow, ice, traffic congestion, to say nothing of dry pavement, it seems to me that anyone who would buy such a vehicle would want the 4×4. I mentioned that to Michael Berube, one of the Jeep officials at the CommanderÂ’s launch.
“Twenty-five percent of Jeep buyers buy them in 4×2 form,†Berube insisted. “But thatÂ’s in the sunbelt. In the snow belt, especially in places like Minnesota, 4x2s are bought byÂ…almost zero percent.Ââ€
Sanity, as they say, prevails. Sometimes.
Schaublin near invincible in UMD sweep of Harvard
Minnesota-Duluth was prepared for a pair of traditional highlight games against Harvard last weekend, but instead the Bulldogs steamrolled the Crimson for a pair of 6-1 triumphs. The sweep lifted UMD to the nationÂ’s No. 2 rank behind St. Lawrence, plus a sweep of the WCHA player of the week honors, with Noemie Marin offensive player of the week, Rachel Drazen defensive player of the week, and Michaela Lanzl freshman of the week.
What about Riitta Schaublin?
Riitta Schaublin is UMDÂ’s goaltender, a self-made standout often overlooked next to her free-wheeling teammates, despite dominant performances in goal. She doesnÂ’t seem to mind, but she would like to figure out how to get some of the shutouts she deserves.
Schaublin, who admits to being 5-foot-11 but looks much larger in her goaltending gear,leads the WCHA womenÂ’s goaltending statistics with a superb 1.28 goals-against mark, and with an equally-impressive .948 save percentage for the 12-2 Bulldogs, who lead the WCHA at 10-2 with losses only during splits at Wisconsin and at Minnesota.
And yet, her statistics should be still better – which sounds outrageous, considering the junior from Basel, Switzerland, and the Bulldogs have only yielded four goals in their last seven games. Since losing 4-1 at Minnesota a month ago, Schaublin shut out the Gophers 6-0 – the first time they ever been blanked at Ridder Arena – then won 6-1, 3-0 at North Dakota, 3-0, 5-1 back home against Bemidji State, then 6-1, 6-1 against Harvard.
Those seven games show four games with one goal against and three shutouts amid a seven-game goal differential of 35-4, but Schaublin only has credit for two shutouts so far all season. Not that it has had any effect on her focus, which is crystallizing UMD’s championship hopes.
That includes the fact that she will not be leaving the University of Minnesota-Duluth womenÂ’s hockey team to play in the upcoming Winter Olympics in Italy. ThatÂ’s good news for UMD, bad news for UMDÂ’s WCHA opponents, and not exactly good news for Switzrland.
Schaublin proves the benefit of UMD having such diverse international players in a sort of backhanded way. While the Bulldogs have developed star players for the U.S., Canada, Sweden, Finland, and Russia, in recent national and Olympic competition, they also got standout goaltending from Patricia Sautter, who will return to her native Switzerland for the Olympics. Schaublin also came from Switzerland, and has proven, by her development last season and this one, that she would be a valid member of the Swiss team.
“I gave Riitta her choice,†said UMD coach Shannon Miller. “I told her I was behind her 100 percent if she wanted to join SwitzerlandÂ’s team for the Olympics, itÂ’s just that I had to know, last summer, what she intended to do, because I would recruit another goaltender if she was going to go. She decided to stay with us, rather than be backup to Patricia at the Olympics.Ââ€
Minnesota-Duluth staked its claim to women’s hockey excellence by recruiting an international roster of players from the start of its program. That was a key reason why UMD won the first-ever WCHA season title, then strung together NCAA tournament championships the next three years – the first three women’s NCAA hockey tournaments ever held.
The international flavor makes sense, based on coach Shannon MillerÂ’s long-standing status of coaching CanadaÂ’s National and Olympic teams, and it continues to pay dividends this season. The Bulldogs, currently ranked No. 3 in the nation, have Schaublin from Switzerland, defenseman Suvi Vacker and winger Mari Pehkonen from Finland, winger Michaela Lanzl from Germany, French-Canadians Noemi Marin, Karine Demeule, Melissa Roy and defenseman Myriam Trepanier, Canadians Sara OÂ’Toole, Juliane Jubinville, Krista McArthur and Jill Sales, and U.S. skaters Jessica Koizumi from California and defenseman Ashly Waggoner from Alaska, plus Minnesotans Allison Lehrke, Samantha Hough, Larissa Luther, Tawni Mattila, defensemen Rachael Drazen and Kirsti Hakala, and backup goaltenders Danielle Ciarletta and Annie Meyer, plus support players Erin Holznagel and Becky Salyards. Hakala is from nearby Cloquet, while freshman center Mattila and Salyards are from Duluth.
The Bulldogs will miss Marin, the nationÂ’s leading scorer, this weekend when a rejuvenated Minnesota State-Mankato comes to the DECC for a series. Marin is not only a gifted goal-scorer, she is a star shortstop on CanadaÂ’s national softball team, which is conducting tryouts. At Olympic time, the Bulldogs will lose Lanzl, a spectacular breakaway threat who not only is UMDÂ’s most exciting player but also is GermanyÂ’s best player.
Meanwhile, if a fluctuating lineup can be bailed out by great goaltending, Schaublin is ready for the challenge. Against Harvard, she was invincible in the first game, while Marin, Vacker and Mattila staked UMD to a 3-0 lead in the first period, and MarinÂ’s second-period goal, plus a pair by Lanzl in the third, made it 6-0 with six minutes remaining. A careless penalty with three minutes to go proved costly, and HarvardÂ’s Jennifer Raimondi scored on a power-play rebound with only 1:38 to go to ruin SchaublinÂ’s shutout.
{IMG2}
The next night, Schaublin was again unbeatable, as Marin scored in the first period, and Drazen, Lanzl, Koizumi, Pehkonen and Marin made it 6-0 at the second intermission. But again, the shutout went away in the third period when HarvardÂ’s Laura Brady broke in to score.
That wasnÂ’t nearly as exasperating as the Bemidji State series when Schaublin gave up no goals in two games, but came away without credit for a shutout, and with only one victory. In the first game, Schaublin discovered one skate had been sharpened incorrectly during pre-game warm-ups, and trying to adjust it made it worse, she discovered during game introductions. She skated to the bench after the National Anthem, and told Miller she would have to come off at the first whistle. That occurred at 0:11, when Pehkonen was called for a penalty. Miller said she thought Schaublin would come to the bench for a little fine-tuning, but instead she went right to the dressing room to get her old skates.
So Miller put freshman Danielle Ciarletta in at 0:11, and she played for just over four minutes, without facing a shot No hots, no saves. Meanwhile, Lanzl broke loose and scored at the other end at 1:15 for a 1-0 UMD lead. By the time UMD had drawn two more penalties, Schaublin was ready to go with her backup skates on, and returned to the ice at 4:23 with UMD two skaters short. She survived, and went on to block all nine Bemidji shots in the first period, and all 19 Bemidji shots for the game. When Lanzl scored again in the second period, and Marin hit an empty net at the end, UMD had earned a 3-0 victory. Schaublin, the teamÂ’s career shutout leader, had notched another. Or had she?
Nope. The rules say that when more than one goaltender is used, whichever one is in the game when the winning goal is scored gets credit for the victory. So Ciarletta, without making a save in her four-minute stint, got the victory, and Schaublin, who stopped 19 of 19 shots, got nothing. Not the shutout, nor the victory.
“Ridiculous,†said Miller, although Schaublin shrugged it all off.
The next night, Bemidji State attacked much harder, but again UMDÂ’s offense was too much. Lanzl and OÂ’Toole scored in the first period, and Jubinville scored twice in the second for a 4-0 lead. Schaublin, of course, had allowed nothing, stopping all 16 Beaver shots. Miller decided to let Ciarletta get some experience in the third period, and she gave up a goal to Allison Johanson midway through the period while making nine saves, before Krista McArthur connected later to complete a 5-1 victory. Once again, Schaublin missed a chance for a shutout, but at least she got to win the game. Incredibly, had Bemidji rallied for four goals against Ciarletta, then she, and not Schaublin, would have gotten credit for the win.
Oh, and back when UMD shut out Minnesota 6-0 at Minnesota, Schaublin was not voted one of the gameÂ’s three stars, because even though she made 22 saves and some Ridder Arena history, UMDÂ’s first forward line swept the honors. At least that week, when the WCHA panel looked over the significant happenings in the league, Schaublin was justifiably named defensive player of the week for the league — if not the game.
Stifling Harvard twice, while stopping 53 of 55 shots, was a major achievement for Schaublin. But bigger things are coming, first with Minnesota State-Mankato coming to the DECC this weekend, and then Wisconsin coming to the DECC for a series that might decide the WCHA title, the No. 1 spot in the nation, and league goaltending honors.
Passat grows into, and fulfills, large car role for VW
Having gotten over the surprise at how much Volkswagen had altered the appearance of the 2006 Jetta, it was easier to accept the 2006 Passat. Picture the new Jetta being pulled, stretched and elongated by almost nine inches, and, if you squint just a little, you can visualize the Passat.
While the Jetta remains VWÂ’s bread-and-butter midsize sedan, the Passat is its full-size sedan. While the Jetta has good front, rear and trunk space, the Passat has significantly more front, rear and trunk space. Personally, I like the look of the new Jetta, although I thought the outgoing 2005 model was almost precision-cut perfect in understated but Germanic styling. So IÂ’m surprised to read some magazine critics saying the Passat looks so much better than the Jetta, because they are quite similar.
Both cars have the new pronounced nose, with the large “U†shape to the grille, made more prominent by liberal use of chrome in the outline, which traces the bumper as its bottom segment. Critics have said the Jetta rear and taillight layout is Toyota-like, and there is a great similarity with the rear image of the Corolla, but the Passat has very similar taillights.
The difference is that the sweeping, smooth lines of the silhouette seem to be better proportioned on the bigger Passat, which has grown by three inches, than on the chopped-off Jetta.
I attended the introduction of the new Jetta, and the separate intro for its hot-rod GTI version. That one was my favorite, coming with AudiÂ’s fantastic direct-injection 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine, brought to life by an engine management system that parlays a low-pressure turbocharger to attain maximum torque almost as soon as you start up, and carries it all the way into the midst of the horsepower peak region.
That 2.0 turbo got my full attention when I first attained 34.5 miles per gallon in an Audi A4 FrontTrak, and again when I unintentionally screeched the tires of an Audi A3 all the way across an intersection.
But I missed the Passat introduction in September because, ironically, I was over in Germany, viewing the same new PassatÂ’s worldwide unveiling, among other things, at the Frankfurt Auto Show.
Finally, this past week, I got my paws on a Passat test-fleet car. The car can be obtained in various versions, with the top two being powered by a 3.5-liter V6 with 280 horsepower, and the same model with 4Motion all-wheel drive. The model I tested came equipped with the base Passat engine, which is – trumpets please – my favorite 2.0-liter, dual-overhead-camshaft, four-valve-per-cylinder four, with variable valve timing and that low-pressure turbocharger.
While I havenÂ’t yet driven the much-acclaimed 3.6 V6, the test-car with its 2.0 four had 200 horsepower at a plateaud peak range from 5,100-6,000 RPMs, and 207 foot-pounds of torque that peaks at a mere 1,800 RPMs and holds that output all the way to 5,000 RPMs. The direct-injection trick means that a computer controls the precise dosage of air-fuel mixture, including its pressure and temperature, and feeds it independently into each of the four cylinder to attain optimum burning, and, therefore, efficiency.
If you donÂ’t get any more technical the putting fuel in the tank, all you need to know is that the power comes on quickly and the six-speed Tiptronic transmission, which runs just fine as an automatic, or can be hand shifted to your own liking, transforms that power to smooth acceleration. Sure enough, EPA estimates are 22miles-per-gallon city, 31 highway, and I got 27 in combined city-highway driving.
Seats are comfortable and supportive, and the PassatÂ’s handling is exemplary, for a large sedan or a runabout. A greatly stiffened chassis and well-tuned shock absorbers leave a little bit of body-leaning in the most severe cornering, but confidence-inspiring flatness in general attitude.
The satin-finished trim on the console is bright – surprisingly bright for the usually dour Passat – with heat/air controls on the center stack, below a navigation/information screen that accommodates the audio controls.
The Passat sticker price starts at $23,900, which is a distinct bargain for what comes standard. The list is long, and it includes the wonderful engine, electro-mechanical power steering, the strut-front/multilink rear suspension, electronic stabilization program, anti-slip regulation, electronic differential lock, and antilock brake system on the four-wheel disc brakes, Michelin all-season tires that stuck well on some brief icy spots, front/side/side-curtain airbags, side-protection door beams, tire-pressure monitoring system, split folding rear seats, reading lights front and rear, remote gas filler door, central locking, keyless entry, 16-inch alloy wheels, in-dash CD player with MP3 format, and an antitheft alarm with immobilizer.
{IMG2}
You could go a long way, in front-wheel-drive winter security, with that package. The test car, however, listed for $31,565, but its appointments were opulent. The beige leather seats were part of a package that includes power sunroof, a multiple CD changer, satellite XM radio, leather steering wheel and shift knob covers, and five-stage heated driver and passenger front seats. The six-speed tiptronic shift, with premium sound-system upgrade with surround sound, and rear side airbags are other options.
The blue-numbered gauges with bright red-orange needles are impressive, and quite Audi-like. The black, padded steering wheel has remote controls at thumbÂ’s reach, and all controls have a solid, German, ergonomic placement.
From the outside, the rear is stylishly tapered inward as it rises, with a neat spoiler lip on the upper edge, all of which covers a spacious trunk. The rear doors end with a nicely tapered chrome outline coming off the roofline. There’s that stylish silhouette, andthen we’re back up front, where the glassed-in headlight enclosure has a little scalloped underline where the main headlight shines. Then you have that large, “U†ahaped grille with the angled sides, and the large, very large, “VW†in the middle.
It looks good, if quite Jetta-like from a distance. If bystanders mistake the two, so much the better for Jetta-buyers. But for those who spend the extra money to get the Passat, the extra room and the well-proportioned lines are worth the difference. Especially with that potent but surprisingly economical 2.0-liter engine.
Volkswagen may have taken a misstep and was soundly criticized when it brought out the still-large and more costly Phaeton. The new Passat doesn’t get VW off the hook. In fact, it’s luxurious enough to prove the critics right about the Phaeton. Who needs it?
About the Author
John Gilbert is a lifetime Minnesotan and career journalist, specializing in cars and sports during and since spending 30 years at the Minneapolis Tribune, now the Star Tribune. More recently, he has continued translating the high-tech world of autos and sharing his passionate insights as a freelance writer/photographer/broadcaster. A member of the prestigious North American Car and Truck of the Year jury since 1993. John can be heard Monday-Friday from 9-11am on 610 KDAL(www.kdal610.com) on the "John Gilbert Show," and writes a column in the Duluth Reader.
For those who want to keep up with John Gilbert's view of sports, mainly hockey with a Minnesota slant, click on the following:
Click here for sports