2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

[sterlippo1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

There was a strong rumor going around last night that the Saturday game is close to being sold out ... so for those that don't have tickets, be warned, get there early.

wow, then the place is going to be half full of Maroon and Gold?

 

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

wow, then the place is going to be half full of Maroon and Gold?

I don't doubt there'll be a large BC contingent, but most of the people there will be rooting for Lowell. For some reason, BC and BU draw well at the Tsongas ... seems like the local citizenry likes to come and root against those teams.

 

[leswp1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I don't doubt there'll be a large BC contingent, but most of the people there will be rooting for Lowell. For some reason, BC and BU draw well at the Tsongas ... seems like the local citizenry likes to come and root against those teams.

I wonder why that is It may be maschocism...or maybe not.

 

[mwade]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Just curious - why are there no recycling bins at Tsongas? Just noticed that last night and found it strange.

 

[Gainzo]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I don't doubt there'll be a large BC contingent, but most of the people there will be rooting for Lowell. For some reason, BC and BU draw well at the Tsongas ... seems like the local citizenry likes to come and root against those teams.

Most of the BC contigent at Tsongas range in age from 60-75. I think it was last season when one of the senior citizen BC fans stood up and started screaming at the refs. The student section replied with the pefect chant: "Sit down old man."

Even my girlfriend, who went to Colorado State and knows nothing about hockey, got in on the fun as she was yelling at the 20 BC students who showed up to shut the F up! I love BC games. So much fun.

 

[sterlippo1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Most of the BC contigent at Tsongas range in age from 60-75. I think it was last season when one of the senior citizen BC fans stood up and started screaming at the refs. The student section replied with the pefect chant: "Sit down old man."

Even my girlfriend, who went to Colorado State and knows nothing about hockey, got in on the fun as she was yelling at the 20 BC students who showed up to shut the F up! I love BC games. So much fun.

well, we'll try to accommodate you and provide good theater........

 

[bottomdweller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Last I saw (posted on FB by UML) was that there are less than 200 tickets left for the game.

 

[Gainzo]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

well, we'll try to accommodate you and provide good theater........

Thanks mate. It has been a horrible season for Lowell but some good banter in the stands on Saturday should be fun.

 

[Patronick]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Jasmine's outfit definitely made me smile!

Massie gets to play (and I hate to say it) because it was a meaningless game. And he got NO help from his Defense.

We could and should have scored more.

I posted this earlier via my phone, seems to have not gone through:

I get WHY Massie started. But why the hell did Blaise keep him in there? Was everyone else unavailable? The offense was on last night and they dominated for long stretches. But the defense wasn't playing great (although I don't think they were as bad as some seem to), and Massie was AWFUL. Flat out awful. He went 12 rounds with the puck and lost on every card. At least half a dozen times he whiffed with the glove and let the puck bounce dangerously out in front. This was a game the team needed to win; yes they're not going anywhere this season, but they just came off two strong games and are finally gaining some momentum. So why erase all that work and risk a loss with a goalie who couldn't stop a beach ball? It boggles my mind and has me questioning the faith I have remaining in Blaise.

 

[Gainzo]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I posted this earlier via my phone, seems to have not gone through:

I get WHY Massie started. But why the hell did Blaise keep him in there? Was everyone else unavailable? The offense was on last night and they dominated for long stretches. But the defense wasn't playing great (although I don't think they were as bad as some seem to), and Massie was AWFUL. Flat out awful. He went 12 rounds with the puck and lost on every card. At least half a dozen times he whiffed with the glove and let the puck bounce dangerously out in front. This was a game the team needed to win; yes they're not going anywhere this season, but they just came off two strong games and are finally gaining some momentum. So why erase all that work and risk a loss with a goalie who couldn't stop a beach ball? It boggles my mind and has me questioning the faith I have remaining in Blaise.

Massie was horrible but it was a game with Bentley so who gives a fark. Will Carr start on Saturday?

As much as we have sucked this year we will be up for BC on Saturday.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Massie was horrible but it was a game with Bentley so who gives a fark.

If we lost, what would the attitude around here be?

 

[Patronick]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Massie was horrible but it was a game with Bentley so who gives a fark. Will Carr start on Saturday?

As much as we have sucked this year we will be up for BC on Saturday.

The team does and the fans should. This team has finally gotten some bounces to go their way and they have the defending champs coming in this weekend. Why blow a game you can win because the coach won't pull a goalie who is flat out embarrassing himself out there? Why derail everything you've built over the past week?

There is no saying "it's just Bentley" anymore, or any traditional bottom feeder for that matter. Because Lowell IS the bottom feeder. Teams are saying that ABOUT Lowell. You realize that, right? Lowell is the game being circled as the easy win, as we used to do to Bentley and Merrimack. This team needs every win they can get, regardless of who they're playing.

 

[leswp1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I posted this earlier via my phone, seems to have not gone through:

I get WHY Massie started. But why the hell did Blaise keep him in there? Was everyone else unavailable? The offense was on last night and they dominated for long stretches. But the defense wasn't playing great (although I don't think they were as bad as some seem to), and Massie was AWFUL. Flat out awful. He went 12 rounds with the puck and lost on every card. At least half a dozen times he whiffed with the glove and let the puck bounce dangerously out in front. This was a game the team needed to win; yes they're not going anywhere this season, but they just came off two strong games and are finally gaining some momentum. So why erase all that work and risk a loss with a goalie who couldn't stop a beach ball? It boggles my mind and has me questioning the faith I have remaining in Blaise.

Maybe it was a science experiment?

 

[John_Fuller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

The team does and the fans should. This team has finally gotten some bounces to go their way and they have the defending champs coming in this weekend. Why blow a game you can win because the coach won't pull a goalie who is flat out embarrassing himself out there? Why derail everything you've built over the past week?

There is no saying "it's just Bentley" anymore, or any traditional bottom feeder for that matter. Because Lowell IS the bottom feeder. Teams are saying that ABOUT Lowell. You realize that, right? Lowell is the game being circled as the easy win, as we used to do to Bentley and Merrimack. This team needs every win they can get, regardless of who they're playing.

There is no disputing these statements; they are accurate almost to a fault. Lowell (no matter how bad they may be) can't afford to lose a home game to a team like Bentley in both the short and long term for a myriad of reasons that have been discussed.

Massie had a night to forget and in my mind, should not have been out for the third period. That's the type of move that can be perceived as throwing in the towel and just letting the boys play out the rest of the season. As stated, BC is coming into town on Saturday and the worst thing that could have happened is Bentley coming into your barn and stealing one four days beforehand. The good news is that we are not the bottom feeder anymore, we are a bottom feeder, now 54th out of 58th, still an but better than .

 

[John_Fuller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

If we lost, what would the attitude around here be?

People on this board would have been going head-hunting.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

People on this board would have been going head-hunting.

but I thought nobody would give a fark?

I hate to do that... but if we lost to Bentley we'd be rather upset with this team... it wasn't a meaningless game.

 

[UML]

Last I saw (posted on FB by UML) was that there are less than 200 tickets left for the game.

I'm going to get some tickets in the morning. Is the less than 200 tickets actual seats? Just wondering because I thought if there are no seats they sell SRO. Not that I think it will be completely sold out.

 

[sterlippo1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I'm going to get some tickets in the morning. Is the less than 200 tickets actual seats? Just wondering because I thought if there are no seats they sell SRO. Not that I think it will be completely sold out.

brilliant marketing technique and i took the bait this morning.question.........what the heck is up with the UML site? i clicked athletics, clicked tickets and you get this nice page advertising the game and it tells you to "click to buy tickets", great! but there was no live link. anything you clicked on did nothing. i tried mozilla and internet explorer to get there and same thing. so, brilliantly i went to the tsongas arena site and got to a live link on the arena's site, not the UML site. yes, i know you bought the arena but , i could not buy tickets off the UML site...........funny thing was they told me as i clicked to buy that there was busy traffic buying tickets so it may take a couple of minutes. um, at 5:30 AM a lot of traffic buying tickets? i dont think so......... another successful marketing ploy

 

[Gainzo]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

The team does and the fans should. This team has finally gotten some bounces to go their way and they have the defending champs coming in this weekend. Why blow a game you can win because the coach won't pull a goalie who is flat out embarrassing himself out there? Why derail everything you've built over the past week?

There is no saying "it's just Bentley" anymore, or any traditional bottom feeder for that matter. Because Lowell IS the bottom feeder. Teams are saying that ABOUT Lowell. You realize that, right? Lowell is the game being circled as the easy win, as we used to do to Bentley and Merrimack. This team needs every win they can get, regardless of who they're playing.

I understand all that but were you at the game? There was no atmosphere at all. I have been to High School games that were better than what I saw on Tuesday night.

 

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I understand all that but were you at the game? There was no atmosphere at all. I have been to High School games that were better than what I saw on Tuesday night.

He was at the game. I heard him.