UML '09/'10 Season Thread

[boblav1]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

For the folks looking to watch some college hockey today.

- #10 UMass Amherst will be at #9 Quinnipiac on NESN at 3:00 pm.
- UNH will be at Merrimack for a 4:00 pm game.

[Patman]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

- #10 UMass Amherst will be at #9 Quinnipiac on NESN at 3:00 pm.

I'd sooner clear my bowel system with drano.

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

It maybe early, but the last two were very winnable games. This year is about wins if they hope to make the NCAA tourney. Losing a hard fought game is one thing but last night was a complete no show. I feel bad for the 4,700 who showed up to watch it.

Next weekend will tell us a lot about this team.

What concerns me most about this past week is isn't this about the same point in the season last year where the team went into a funk and couldn't put the puck in the net? For quite some time (basically until the HE tourney)?

I'm still looking for a Blaise-led team to finish a regular season strong, i.e. have a second-half that's as good, or better, than the first half. HOPEFULLY this year will be the one.

[ScottK]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

I'm still looking for a Blaise-led team to finish a regular season strong, i.e. have a second-half that's as good, or better, than the first half. HOPEFULLY this year will be the one.

Did you miss the entire 2nd half of last season and the playoffs?

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

- #10 UMass Amherst will be at #9 Quinnipiac on NESN at 3:00 pm.

good opportunity to see the team that will pummel lowell in seven days

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

Did you miss the entire 2nd half of last season and the playoffs?

If I didn't indicate, I meant REGULAR season in my original post. Certainly the playoffs rocked and surprised lots but I found the second half of last season disappointing given the first half and the talent on that team. An occurrence that IN MY OPINION has happened too often in Blaise's tenure....

(I specifically wrote "in my opinion" as I fully understand that there are two vrey disparate camps who either love or hate Blaise as coach. To each his own opinion).

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

Lowell is 1 game above .500 in league play .... UVM is at .500 in league play ....

So you agree with what I said...

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

If I didn't indicate, I meant REGULAR season in my original post. Certainly the playoffs rocked and surprised lots but I found the second half of last season disappointing given the first half and the talent on that team.

okay so Lowell went 9-4-2 in its last 15 REGULAR season games after going 11-8-0 in the first 19. a win percentage of .667 in the second half after .579 in the first.

things can't be "IN YOUR OPINION" if they're verifiably wrong. for a "wiseman" you sure don't know a god**** thing.

[Patman]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

If I didn't indicate, I meant REGULAR season in my original post. Certainly the playoffs rocked and surprised lots but I found the second half of last season disappointing given the first half and the talent on that team. An occurrence that IN MY OPINION has happened too often in Blaise's tenure....

(I specifically wrote "in my opinion" as I fully understand that there are two vrey disparate camps who either love or hate Blaise as coach. To each his own opinion).

Last year:

Before break: 8-8-0
After:9-7-2
Playoffs: 3-1-0
Combined: 12-8-2

Up to losing streak: 8-11-0
After: 9-4-2
Playoffs: 3-1-0
Combined: 12-5-2

Bottom line is (going by impressions) is that the players aren't playing with the crispness and attention that they need to. It isn't that teams are finding the net... its that we aren't playing nearly as adept as we can be.

My problem with the 05-06 team is as good as they could be they didn't seem to have the aptitude to make the right play or the right sequence of plays. This is what we seemed to have in spades during last year's playoff run. The teams we played down the playoff stretch were by and large (excepting BU) equal to us but it was that aptitude and the effort that made the difference.

I'd like to think that the players are at the point where they are taking it for granted that they can go out and do things because while those attitudes means that we're taking it easy out there it also means that we can be good. Regardless, the team goes as far as it takes itself. Other teams may win but that's no excuse to come out flat. Coaches can definitely have an impact on how players come to play but its the players responsibility to play the best game they can every night.

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

okay so Lowell went 9-4-2 in its last 15 REGULAR season games after going 11-8-0 in the first 19. a win percentage of .667 in the second half.

things can't be "IN YOUR OPINION" if they're verifiably wrong. for a "wiseman" you sure don't know a god**** thing.

They were also 4-8 including a losing stretch of 6 from around this time year (when they couldn't put the puck in the net) until late January. All I am saying is that I expected a lot more after seeing them in early in the year. Regardless of outcome, to me last season was similar to what I've seen this year. Lots and lots of optimism and promise through Thansksgiving and then a stretch where they seemed not be able to get out of their own way (including some games where they actually did win). Going into Thanksgiving last year, I thought that team showed me enough promise to be a lock for home-ice in the HE tourney and a potential tourney bid.

Look, I'm willing to admit I'm an idiot if fortunes can change over the next handful of games but can you tell me you're happy with the way the team has looked the last couple? Especially after the way they have looked up until now?

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

Coaches can definitely have an impact on how players come to play but its the players responsibility to play the best game they can every night.

Excellent point Patman. Coaches get too much blame when teams lose and too much credit when teams win. Although I wonder if in college sports a fan can't depend completely on the student-athlete to understand your point about responsibility?

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

They were also 4-8 including a losing stretch of 6 from around this time year (when they couldn't put the puck in the net) until late January.

you are aware that we are still six games out from it being the end of the first half, right? this is not the second half. you were talking about the second half. this is not that.

Look, I'm willing to admit I'm an idiot if fortunes can change over the next handful of games but can you tell me you're happy with the way the team has looked the last couple? Especially after the way they have looked up until now?

of course not. don't be stupid. but you're also changing what was originally an asinine and wrongheaded argument into one on which no one will or could disagree with you.

it's two games, it's november. let's not drum blaise out of town just yet.

[WisemanFromUmass-Lowell]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

you are aware that we are still six games out from it being the end of the first half, right? this is not the second half. you were talking about the second half. this is not that.
...
of course not. don't be stupid. but you're also changing what was originally an asinine and wrongheaded argument into one on which no one will or could disagree with you.

Right you are. I used data that wasn't entirely accurate to try and make the point of being frustrated by a team that doesn't continue to consistently improve over the course of a season.

it's two games, it's november. let's not drum blaise out of town just yet.

Deal. Let's wait a couple of weeks and reconvene.... :-)

[John_Fuller]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

Try to make the point of being frustrated by a team that doesn't continue to consistently improve over the course of a season.

I'll make a supposition to this...it's not that Lowell doesn't continue to consistently improve over the course of a season it's that Lowell always seems to consistently find the most inopportune times to go into a slump that has cost them either a good ranking, home ice, or a NCAA berth

The point that Wiseman is trying to make is that we've (and by we've I'm talking about the long time Lowell supporters) have seen this story unfold before over the past decade...just when you think Lowell is going to make a leap into the big time, it blows up. For a five to six games stretch in "good" years, Lowell takes a vacation and goes into a nosedive. They then go on a tear, make things interesting and everyone gets excited again. It happen last year around the same time, with games against New Hampshire and BU and got swept, following by the Chicago debacle, and losing seven of eight games from 'December to mid-January. It cost them an NCAA berth. It happened in 2001-2002 when they were #3 for a week, then proceeded to lose five in on a row; 1-8-2 over an eleven game stretch and cost them an NCAA berth. The 2005-2006 season where high expectations were over when the season began in Colgate on a very sour note.

Unfortunately for River Hawks fans over the long haul, the bad coffee after this week's games is starting to brew once again. I'm actually not surprised that some people have raised a yellow flag, this team can't afford to lose five or six in a row and expect to make the NCAA's on an at-large bid. While it's true the players on the ice are responsible for their actions, the coaching staff are just as culpable; regardless of your affinity or them or not. I do agree with Wiseman to a point...it does start to make you wonder.

However, let's look at the numerous positives...

• 1. Polls in November are crap...for people on here that know me both personally and on the board, you know what stock I give polls. In some ways, I think it is good that the River Hawks will drop dramatically (five or more spots) in Monday's poll.
  

• 2. We are still four full games above .500
  

• 3. There are four HE pts up for grabs next week..they still have a chance to get to 13 league points in ten games...65% of your league points ain't bad and they still have 17 more HE games to play after next weekend.
  

• 4. There are four more games before the holiday break and three of those games are at home. (FYI, I'm considering the January games to be part of the second half due to the long layoff)
  

• 5. Even without the services of Barry Goers for one month, this team still has won games.
  

The game @ Providence will happen to any team during the year; they simply laid an egg. The game vs. Maine I have concerns about, especially since this was the only visit (in the regular season) that Maine will have this season. We all know their track record in Maine over the past decade, so I'll leave that be. Lowell was a team that had something else on my mind on Friday night. Ugly as those games were, Lowell scored the opening goal in both. Here's my point...Lowell still controls its own destiny.

**If** Barry Goers returns to the lineup next week, which I ***hope*** will come true, it will go a long way in settling this team. Notice that this statement has been intentionally highlighted as a hypothetical. I have no reservations about next week if Goers can return to this team.

While I would love for the River Hawks to take pts from Moo-N-H, Saturday's game against Amherst is much more important. We'll see what kind of team Lowell is made of by this time next Saturday night.

One last thought:

Lowell 2008-2009 Record to Date: 5-3-0 = 10 pts ; 8-5-0
Lowell 2009-2010 Record to Date: 4-3-1 = 9 pts ; 8-4-1

Had they not blown that two-goal lead in VT, they would have the same exact record as last year. Spooky, isn't it.

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML '09/'10 Season Thread

It happen last year around the same time, with games against New Hampshire and BU and got swept, following by the Chicago debacle, and losing seven of eight games from 'December to mid-January. It cost them an NCAA berth. It happened in 2001-2002 when they were #3 for a week, then proceeded to lose five in on a row; 1-8-2 over an eleven game stretch and cost them an NCAA berth. The 2005-2006 season where high expectations were over when the season began in Colgate on a very sour note.

oversimplification on all counts.

last year, the loss of hutton-then-hamilton plus roebothan hurt the team significantly. and we all know that. this was the least-egregious of the examples, and again they did exactly what should have been expected of them.

01-02, you don't think the loss of three of the team's four best players to the olympics had anything to do with the problems? the frenchmen were gone from mid-January to mid-February and missed seven games. lowell's record with them: 21-9-1; without them: 1-4-2. there's your answer on that one.

05-06 the team lost a hobey baker candidate who had scored 20 percent of the team's goals the season prior a week before classes started and was replaced with no one.. well, technically it was roebothan but you think you're gonna count on him to replicate benny walter's production? (plus no one liked peter vetri and the team had no desire to play in front of him. that too.)

did i slip into a coma and wake up in a world where no one thinks about the things they post?