I haven't heard that term either. The only thing I can think of is that many teams cycle for the sake of cycling and never go to the net but seem to be playing keepaway. Maybe he is saying that the point of cycling is to go to the net.
One difference I see between teams like the Flames and the Coyotes is that the Flames seem to play keepaway while the Coyotes will only clycle once or twice and then change sides with a player going behind the net on the other side. Maybe that has something to do with it.
I would also like to know what it means.
Brian Gillam
if it means when they are looking for the weak side D man to come back door, then I get it. otherwise, when is the net not a point of reference ?.
Pops Ryan
My guess is that it means cycling behind the net as oppose to in the corner. Tom's alma mater, use the net as a shield as well as any US College team. I've spoken with coaches who give players five options when they are cycling up and reach the hash mark. 1. Take it to the net. 2. Pass to the point. 3. Bump to the corner (cycle) 4. Bump hard behind net. 5. Send hard behind net to other corner.
My guess is that he means throwing pucks down low either behind the net, or behind the net to the other corner.
4 posts :: Page 1 of 1
Tom and any other reader that can lend their advice...
Recently I heard a very interesting comment made about a particular team and how they cycle the puck down low in the OZ.
This person, a very astute and well respected hockey individual, said "they do a very good job of cycling with the net as their point of reference".
I have been coaching elite competitive hockey for over 20 years and I must admit...I have never heard this description before.
I have practically gone through my entire hockey library, all my online resources, and asked several other hockey "gurus" and I haev yet found a concise explanation or diagrammed example to illustrate the concept.
I have my suspicions as to what it means but want to hear from others on this.
I will leave this with you...