What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

boblav1 said:
The Lowell PP was brutal tonight. BC gave them plenty of chances but they could do nothing with the PP. No surprise that Boulanger got the start after last weekend, and he played well. That second goal was a tough one. Is there anything wrong with Carr? He wasn't dressed tonight, Massie was the only back up. A great crowd tonight, I just wished they had more to cheer about.
Click to expand...
Carr was sick I believe. And saying the power play was brutal is unfair to the word brutal.
Gainzo said:
Boulanger did all he could tonight and I agree that the Lowell PP was awful. A big FU to the BC fans in section 114 or 115. Your #1 or #2 team are playing the last placed team in Hockey East, and one of the worst teams in the Country, and you do the "Low, lower, lowest, Lowell" chant? Eat a bag of dicks you clowns.
Click to expand...
The sad part is that they couldn't even come up with their own chant, that's something NU's been doing for a while. Apparently $45k a year doesn't buy you creativity. ;)
John_Fuller said:
What is mindboggling is how you can play an exciting, upbeat tempo in the first, go to the locker room, then lay an egg for the final two periods in front of 6,488 which I'm sure is in the top five in Tsongas Arena history.
Click to expand...
Let's be honest, regardless of the crowd, we've seen many times this season where this team has come out flat way too often from the locker room.
Patronick said:
Which student section are you talking about, because you just described Lowell's to a T. The only cheers the current student section know are U-M-L and Let's Go Lowell. Well, unless you add in that fat idiot sitting near the glass who took it upon himself to start a "bulls**t" chant every time a penalty was called on Lowell, even when it was an obvious one. The school should hand out rule books to some of these idiots, they're embarrassing to have in the building. I would rather have a half empty student section than one filled with yeah kid!, natty ice bro!, hawkey is awesome dood!, know nothing morons.
Click to expand...
Our student section is pathetic. Other than a small group that actually cares, the rest has no idea what's going on. And it was sad to look around and see pretty full sections everywhere, except in the student section. I hate doing the "when I was young" thing, but the student section actually used to be creative. Now it does nothing.
boblav1 said:
I agree, the first period was great for Lowell. They were getting pucks to the net and putting pressure on the BC defense which was causing turn overs. The BC defense looked very suspect at times. After that it seemed like one bad PP after another.

Lowell also needs to get more physical. How many times did a BC player skate through center ice right between a couple of UML players without being touched. Lowell tried that and Arnold almost had his head taken off.
Click to expand...
Not just that, but in the first period, BC was so sloppy with the puck coming out of their zone ... and Lowell did nothing with it. 4 or 5 times last night in the first period alone, BC would try from behind the net, or close to send the puck out of their zone and Lowell would pick off the pass on the blue line or even closer to the net ... and then do nothing with it. Frustrating.
Onion Man said:
Unimpressed with an opponent who came into your sold-out building and beat you by four goals? Yikes.
Click to expand...
Ah yes ... you can always tell about a game by looking at the score and not having actually seen the game.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Onion Man said:
Unimpressed with an opponent who came into your sold-out building and beat you by four goals? Yikes.
Click to expand...
Some of the games my kids Bantam team would give the team a challenge. BC wasn't as impressive as other teams that we have seen. If a D or goalie puts it right on the bad guys tape and the bad guy slams it home you see 4 goals. There were maybe 2 goals in the game that were highlight reel. The rest were garbage goals. Not saying they aren't good. It just wasn't an impressive game to watch. Not the finesse that everyone had been posting about. They took penalties like crazy and there were a boatload of turnovers- not all by UML. We just can't hit the side of a barn with a truck never mind the net.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Patronick said:
Which student section are you talking about, because you just described Lowell's to a T. The only cheers the current student section know are U-M-L and Let's Go Lowell. Well, unless you add in that fat idiot sitting near the glass who took it upon himself to start a "bulls**t" chant every time a penalty was called on Lowell, even when it was an obvious one. The school should hand out rule books to some of these idiots, they're embarrassing to have in the building. I would rather have a half empty student section than one filled with yeah kid!, natty ice bro!, hawkey is awesome dood!, know nothing morons.
Click to expand...
Just read a stat that UML is in the top 5 of the country when looking at mid career income after getting a degree from the school. BC wasn't on the list above them. The reply should have been something to do with expensive, expensiver, expensivest. (excellent grammar and spelling) :p Seriously- I don't care that they say that stuff. All the schools chant that at each other. It was just the repetition of the same few things and then congratulating themselves that they successfully did the chant. Reminded me of when a baby does something simple and parents repeatedly pretend shock that they did it again. I can't hear our students so I have no idea what they are like. I miss the old days when the guy used to dress like a Chief and go shirtless. Now that was a good time. (They also cleaned up crates of nip bottles when they swept the stands.)
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

leswp1 said:
Some of the games my kids Bantam team would give the team a challenge. BC wasn't as impressive as other teams that we have seen. If a D or goalie puts it right on the bad guys tape and the bad guy slams it home you see 4 goals. There were maybe 2 goals in the game that were highlight reel. The rest were garbage goals. Not saying they aren't good. It just wasn't an impressive game to watch. Not the finesse that everyone had been posting about. They took penalties like crazy and there were a boatload of turnovers- not all by UML. We just can't hit the side of a barn with a truck never mind the net.
Click to expand...

i agree with just about everything you said here. BC didnt play particularly well and i dont recall ANY "highlight reel" goals. they were sloppy for a lot of the game and the penalties? it's getting old, we can't stay out of the box, yet . what you can take from last night is that they haven't hit it on all cylinders .............yet and "yet" is the operative word, again ..............and to the poster above, tuition is >$50k, but who's counting?
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

sterlippo1 said:
i agree with just about everything you said here. BC didnt play particularly well and i dont recall ANY "highlight reel" goals. they were sloppy for a lot of the game and the penalties? it's getting old, we can't stay out of the box, yet . what you can take from last night is that they haven't hit it on all cylinders .............yet and "yet" is the operative word, again ..............and to the poster above, tuition is >$50k, but who's counting?
Click to expand...
Not me. :D
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

leswp1 said:
Not as impressed with bc as ithought I should be. If this is loaded for bear then the bear shouldn't be too scared
Click to expand...

leswp1 said:
Sloppy. that is how they looked. After seeing that they were the next coming splashed everywhere, I expected more. Some junk goals. Esp the one where our goalie passed it to thier guy who slammed it home.
Click to expand...

Seriously? You're basing all of this on ONE road game in which BC still won 5-1? Get a clue.

Gainzo said:
F Off. BC fans have no class.
Click to expand...

LOL

leswp1 said:
BC wasn't as impressive as other teams that we have seen.
Click to expand...

Who impressed you more? At worst, BC is the 2nd best team in Hockey East.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

UML said:
BC didn't impress me either Saturday night but in my opinion BC is the best team in HE if not the country.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That's pretty much what I was getting at...

The best teams have a way of not impressing and still coming away with a 5-1 win.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

leswp1 said:
Some of the games my kids Bantam team would give the team a challenge. BC wasn't as impressive as other teams that we have seen. If a D or goalie puts it right on the bad guys tape and the bad guy slams it home you see 4 goals. There were maybe 2 goals in the game that were highlight reel. The rest were garbage goals. Not saying they aren't good. It just wasn't an impressive game to watch. Not the finesse that everyone had been posting about. They took penalties like crazy and there were a boatload of turnovers- not all by UML. We just can't hit the side of a barn with a truck never mind the net.
Click to expand...

Gotta love it when BC comes into your barn, puts up 43 shots, beats you by 4 and you find a way to put them down. Good times. Don't worry, you'll see the BC finesse when they start playing legit teams in March/April. No reason to show all their stuff vs. the Hockey East JVs.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

J.D. said:
Thanks. That's pretty much what I was getting at...

The best teams have a way of not impressing and still coming away with a 5-1 win.
Click to expand...
At times, it felt like BC was lolly-gagging around, just a little bit of work here and a little bit there ... just enough to walk away with the win. Then you'd see them just carry play for a couple of minutes and stare in wonder at their passing, their speed, and their ability to basically do what they want.

I still think Lowell gave them a pretty good game, and am pretty proud of the kids for giving their best and at least making it relatively competitive for about 57 minutes.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Lowell usually gives BC a battle, year in and year out. Boulanger looks like a keeper in net for them. It's too bad Melchiori boned you guys because he could have been a good one.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Slasher7 said:
Lowell usually gives BC a battle, year in and year out.
Click to expand...

Ya, it's certainly felt that way post Gionta brothers era. And I don't care who you're playing, when you play a league opponent on the road...I never expect an easy win.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

j.d. said:
ya, it's certainly felt that way post gionta brothers era. And i don't care who you're playing, when you play a league opponent on the road...i never expect an easy win..unless they are playing at agganis.
Click to expand...

fyp :)
 
Slasher7 said:
Lowell usually gives BC a battle, year in and year out. Boulanger looks like a keeper in net for them. It's too bad Melchiori boned you guys because he could have been a good one.
Click to expand...

Nothing new here, we always get boned but that's how it is. I'm thinking Boulanger will only get better and Carr will be as good if not better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top