What's new
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

I think this video pretty much sums up our season and more appropiately, the ending.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI4otTziYjk

There's really nothing else to say. This was a game Lowell had to win but couldn't close escrow on the what I counted to be at least five pipes tonight, including the power play at the end of regulation. Sad too, because this one the rare oppotunities I had to throw the chicken after the first goal and suffered the first loss. Before tonight, the Hawks were 3-0.

Reality set in tonight for the larger than expected of 4,806 that the season will end on March 5th even though officially it won't happen until next week.

I was hoping to go to Merrimack tomorrow night but the game is now sold out in advance. When was the last time that happened for a Merrimack game??!!

I hope most of the fans would have realized a long time ago that this team was done.

This season is a complete and total failure. An unmitigated disaster. And that about sums up Blaise's tenure at Lowell. A total inability to achieve even the slightest hockey related goal. We're all proud of how UML players do in the classroom, but we're talking on-ice results. In short, there are none.

Since 2002, the only two teams that have never had home ice are Lowell and Providence, assuming that Merrimack holds on this season.

What.

A.

Joke.

We waited patiently for the classes to even out. It never happened.

We waited patiently for the young classes to grow and mature and contend when they became seniors. Those seasons ended up colossal failures.

I don't see the University ending the contract before it runs out next season. But if they school doesn't go in another direction then we're going to be doomed to another decade of futility.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Time for change at Lowell, maybe next weekend MacDonald and Whithead can spend some time together and discuss what they should do in the future, besides trying to coach a hockey team. Just a thought but how about they sell cookies and coffee at the games. Lowell Hockey:

Fire Blaise

I hope most of the fans would have realized a long time ago that this team was done.

This season is a complete and total failure. An unmitigated disaster. And that about sums up Blaise's tenure at Lowell. A total inability to achieve even the slightest hockey related goal. We're all proud of how UML players do in the classroom, but we're talking on-ice results. In short, there are none.

Since 2002, the only two teams that have never had home ice are Lowell and Providence, assuming that Merrimack holds on this season.

What.

A.

Joke.

We waited patiently for the classes to even out. It never happened.

We waited patiently for the young classes to grow and mature and contend when they became seniors. Those seasons ended up colossal failures.

I don't see the University ending the contract before it runs out next season. But if they school doesn't go in another direction then we're going to be doomed to another decade of futility.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

We waited patiently for the classes to even out. It never happened.

Once upon a time I threw out the idea that he was going class heavy on purpose and I was soundly disagreed with for it... i was just throwing it out there as a possibility... this many years later, the issue still remains. Evening the classes is an EASY thing to do... you just lay off the recruiting in the big years. I just wonder if there's something about the process that is arrested when you have lumpy classes like we've had.

Last year's team still bothers me the most... what a disappointment.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Once upon a time I threw out the idea that he was going class heavy on purpose and I was soundly disagreed with for it... i was just throwing it out there as a possibility... this many years later, the issue still remains. Last year's team still bothers me the most... what a disappointment.

I hope most of the fans would have realized a long time ago that this team was done.

This season is a complete and total failure. An unmitigated disaster. And that about sums up Blaise's tenure at Lowell. A total inability to achieve even the slightest hockey related goal. I don't see the University ending the contract before it runs out next season. But if they school doesn't go in another direction then we're going to be doomed to another decade of futility.

To Patman's post, I'll be honest here and admint that was one of those people. I now have to agree with him that class heavy size was partially intentional. The performance this season only magnifies the debacle from the previous season and a lot of people (put me here too) still haven't forgotten.

To Patronick's post, there really isn't anything there to dispute. I will offer this clarification...most people realized before this season started that the team was going to struggle this year and getting to the Hockey East Playoffs was the goal. However, I can't say anyone would have predicted this nightmare with all of the scenarios that have taken place. Having Scott Campbell out of the lineup did cost the River Hawks games this year. Surely, we woudn't have probably won games aganist UNH, BC, or, BU. But to get swept by Northeastern and UMass plus gift-wrap a home game to Merrimack, that's just unacceptable in a weak league.

The final six games (playoffs are secondary) may be a qualification test for the current coaching staff for next season. If the River Hawks go 4-2, 5-1 against the company in the bottom half (depending on what Maine/UVM) does tonight, most likely they will be back in the fall. On the other side of the coin if the team flops, especially if they are elminated next Friday night and goes 0-6 or 1-5, there really is no telling what may or may not happen.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Once upon a time I threw out the idea that he was going class heavy on purpose and I was soundly disagreed with for it... i was just throwing it out there as a possibility... this many years later, the issue still remains. Evening the classes is an EASY thing to do... you just lay off the recruiting in the big years. I just wonder if there's something about the process that is arrested when you have lumpy classes like we've had.

Last year's team still bothers me the most... what a disappointment.
THis makes no sense. It is not easy. Look at what happened this year. Freshmen are skating when they shouldn't be because there are no other bodies due to injury. Should we just not have brought them in. Once you get in this situation it isn't easy to level it out.

Not defending the coaching (because I know enough to know I don't know enough) but it seems to me there are very short memories about what happened a few yrs ago. We had ZERO admin support before Meehan. We almost lost our program and that is something that will reverberate in these classes that we are seeing now. Haven't I also noticed people complaining about lack of budget? I would imagine all that would have affected what we can recruit as far as class size, etc. Nothing is simple.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

THis makes no sense. It is not easy. Look at what happened this year. Freshmen are skating when they shouldn't be because there are no other bodies due to injury. Should we just not have brought them in. Once you get in this situation it isn't easy to level it out.

Look, i know you don't want to just "pass" on players because you are trying to just reduce numbers... but if even-ing the classes is the goal then that's what you need to do to some degree... maybe not on the skill guys but maybe you pass on a role player. The question then is "is that really a goal in the first place". For that matter, I'm sure players look at a large loss of talent as an opportunity to play in some cases... making it an incentive to join in the year after a large class... so you are incentivized by taking on all that talent you wouldn't see in the lighter years... but, imo, that's the problem... its not so much the numbers but a lack of talent balance. I also figure there's an arrested development of leadership because of class rotation... but i don't want to hash that out again. We would certainly risk body count issues in years we would cut back... but the thing is, the alternative, bringing in too many and making cuts, or bringing into many in the first place is not an easy thing to do... and cutting players for non-discipline reasons is difficult.

BTW, les, its not like Merrimack has been the epitome of stable programs in the last 10 years. I know the whole UMass system crap cost us players and will cost us players by rumor mongering by opposing coaches. On the other hand, what explains last year... sure, we lost (at least) a player in the immediate aftermath of the latest go around with the UMass system but 2 years ago we saw enough to indicate what kind of team we should have had last year.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I hope most of the fans would have realized a long time ago that this team was done.

This season is a complete and total failure. An unmitigated disaster. And that about sums up Blaise's tenure at Lowell. A total inability to achieve even the slightest hockey related goal. We're all proud of how UML players do in the classroom, but we're talking on-ice results. In short, there are none.

Since 2002, the only two teams that have never had home ice are Lowell and Providence, assuming that Merrimack holds on this season.

What.

A.

Joke.

We waited patiently for the classes to even out. It never happened.

We waited patiently for the young classes to grow and mature and contend when they became seniors. Those seasons ended up colossal failures.

I don't see the University ending the contract before it runs out next season. But if they school doesn't go in another direction then we're going to be doomed to another decade of futility.

POST OF THE YEAR - if you don't agree with 100% of what Patronick points out in this post - you haven't been watching Lowell Hockey "led" by Blaise.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

...it seems to me there are very short memories about what happened a few yrs ago. We had ZERO admin support before Meehan. We almost lost our program and that is something that will reverberate in these classes that we are seeing now. Haven't I also noticed people complaining about lack of budget? I would imagine all that would have affected what we can recruit as far as class size, etc. Nothing is simple.

Les, you are absolutely right, nothing is ever simple. I will agree with you that saying
balancing the class size is an easy task is oversimplification in my view. Patman does have a point though. The graduation of a 10+ been a problem since 1998 and is the primary reason why Lowell struggles to find consistency on a year to year basis.

Yes, the attempt to shut us down four years ago is about 25% of the reason why this team has the record it does. We did lose a handful of recruits and rostered players during that time. That was four years ago and we have to look forward. Unless a miracle bestows itself on Post Office Square (now known as the Tsongas Center), it's going to be at least another two years before Lowell has a legitimate shot of making it back to the Garden, let alone NCAA's. Economics and politics is part of the deal, Meehan is doing his part on that end.

We are not a BC, BU, UNH, Maine, North Dakota type team where the New England schools have full D-I resources. North Dakota is D-II, but we all know that Sioux hockey in North Dakota is the flagship sport. We complete for recruits and positioning against the NU, PC, UMA, UVM and Merrimack order. Personally, I think there is some Lowell envy that Merrimack has gotten it together. Let face it, 2011 is their version of our 1996. It's also a Catch-22. As a fan of college hockey, it's great that the smallest school in D-I will have it's best year in their D-I history. Unless hell freezes over based on their schedule, Merrimack also make its return to the NCAA's in 23 years. For sake of argument, what's that going to feel like walking into Volpe next year and perhaps seeing at the very least, a 2011 NCAA banner. If it is more, which team you do think they will try to raise that banner(s) against. I guarantee you it will be their rival, UMass Lowell. As a fan of Lowell, their success scares the crap out of me. We can't afford to be second rate to any of the non big-four schools over the long haul or allow Merrimack be the #1 school in the Valley.

Lowell had NCAA caliber teams in 2002, 2006, (2009), and 2010. We seen some very good, quality players come through this program during Blaise's tenure. For a lot of the key players, one can easily argue that you haven't seen these players take that step up to next level. Name one forward during this time to make that progression and stay all four years. I can't because Ed McGrane was a Whitehead recruit, Ben Walter left before his senior year, Andrew Martin got hurt, and Jason Tejchma's stats were skewed because of the last freshmen laden team. The rest are all defense men or goalies...Collar, Goers, Dehner; Hutton. We wonder why we can't score goals or
more accurately, the "big goal". I hate to harp on Merrimack again but last night they lose their star player the night before on a chippy play, go up 2-0 at home the following night, blow the lead to UNH on penalties, and still find a way to win. How did they win...a freshmen defensemen makes a fantastic keep, skates north, throws a harmless wrist shot on the net with forwards crashing. The screen shot blocked the view and beats DiGiorlamo like a rented mule. Never heard Volpe that loud.

The theme I have interpreted by the posters who want Blaise out is time. I think the biggest fear is that we will be put under review again if wins and tournament appearances don't come in the next five or so years. I have to agree with them, the time is now and a luxury we don't have. Within two years, this team need to be above .500, regardless on whom may be the coach of this team during that period.

The University has a very difficult choice at the end of the season and will decide if a change needs to be made now If not, this decision will be postponed for a year. No matter when or where the decision may come, the outcome will be a huge gamble.

I'll tell you one thing, that's a decision I'm glad I don't have to make.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

There aren't many people arguing this.
I can't say I agree with everything in the post. I think it is as John said an oversimplification of things. If we win the people jump on the train and if we don't they jump off. I think the reality is probably somewhere in the middle.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Unfortunately, this is the human nature of organized sports. There is no changing this.
This is why there is no point in arguing whether someone should be gone or here. I used to be much more of an idealist. I have been cured. Seems like every time the program gets going we have a setback. Having watched lack of admin support/downright undermining of the program by admin, the admin run Riley out of town (which was like watching a witch hunt), almost losing the program a few times, losing recruits each time, losing a few coaches (some were a blessing to lose, others not), having issues with venues, having UMA take all our $ when we merged in so they could get the Mullins and we could get squat while Hogan just bent over, years where the injuries were cripplingenough to making any sort of chemistry obsolete (this might be the worst yr but there were some other yrs that were pretty bad). Now I am much more pragmatic. Plans are what people do so God can laugh at them.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Unfortunately, this is the human nature of organized sports. There is no changing this.

and if we were 3 points within striking distance of a regular season league title we'd have evidence otherwise... we have to evaluate on something. Blaise may be a good man, but its hard not to look 10 miles down the road and say "why not us".

edit: have injuries been that much worse for us? what does that say about conditioning, if so?
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

There will always be bad years, all teams have that. Also what happened in the past is over.What matters is the future. If the powers to be are satisfied with the direction the program is headed, so be it. If they don't like it or believe there is change needed, it will be the coaching staff and not the players who will go elsewhere.Sometimes change is good, othertimes not so good. Only those with crystal balls know that answer. As I have said in previous quotes, that Lowell spirit is missing in this team, making it not a pleasant experience for many longtime fans at games this year. So what it comes down to is the choice of do I continue after this year to renew my tickets for next or not. I'm leaning towards not, if things stay status quo. I'll wait until the end and maybe time will heal before next season, to change my mind.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

and if we were 3 points within striking distance of a regular season league title we'd have evidence otherwise... we have to evaluate on something. Blaise may be a good man, but its hard not to look 10 miles down the road and say "why not us".

edit: have injuries been that much worse for us? what does that say about conditioning, if so?
I asked that question. Blowing out a knee is not conditioning. The injuries are not the kind that would be affected by conditioning.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

edit: have injuries been that much worse for us? what does that say about conditioning, if so?

Whose injury would you say was is conditioning related?
All of the people who have missed time, ruhwedel, butler, caveney, soup, budd, cey, scheu, its absured to think that any of these injuries could have been avoided seeing as they all happened as a result of some form of hockey play. If anything you have to give praise to the training staff for getting people back on the ice in the manner that they have.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

I hope most of the fans would have realized a long time ago that this team was done.

This season is a complete and total failure. An unmitigated disaster. And that about sums up Blaise's tenure at Lowell. A total inability to achieve even the slightest hockey related goal. We're all proud of how UML players do in the classroom, but we're talking on-ice results. In short, there are none.

Since 2002, the only two teams that have never had home ice are Lowell and Providence, assuming that Merrimack holds on this season.

What.

A.

Joke.

We waited patiently for the classes to even out. It never happened.

We waited patiently for the young classes to grow and mature and contend when they became seniors. Those seasons ended up colossal failures.

I don't see the University ending the contract before it runs out next season. But if they school doesn't go in another direction then we're going to be doomed to another decade of futility.

I thought UML hosted the quarters in 2009. Obviously not, but I was surprised to learn that.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

Blaise may be a good man, but its hard not to look 10 miles down the road and say "why not us".
And that's the part that's plaguing me. Merrimack went into this season with actually lower expectations than we went into last season, yet we spit the bit ... while they seem to be getting stronger as this year progresses. What's the difference in the two situations (and no, I'm not getting into the "who's more talented" argument at this point)?

One team is blowing away expectations that for them were high to begin with. One didn't.
 
Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread

And that's the part that's plaguing me. Merrimack went into this season with actually lower expectations than we went into last season, yet we spit the bit ... while they seem to be getting stronger as this year progresses. What's the difference in the two situations (and no, I'm not getting into the "who's more talented" argument at this point)?

One team is blowing away expectations that for them were high to begin with. One didn't.

Ditto. Conditioning has nothing to do with the injuries...in fact, I think amongst the HE teams, we are around the top of the list.

What's disappointing is that when people do get injured, our team historically hasn't done well. The injuries from this year would affect any team because of the magnitude. However, let's revisit 2009 for a second when Robo got hurt. We went 0-6 during that stretch. Win three of those games and we would have been in the tournament. When Dehner got hurt last year we had a critical three game HE losing streak to NU, BU, and Merrimack which in the end, cost us home ice. Sure, they are go-to and key players but one player should not cost you multiple games because that means depth and in some ways, leadership are issues.

I think what we are realizing and commenting is that Lowell is starting to act like a D-I hockey school. When things go well, the coach gets all of the praise and when things go bad, he gets the heat.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top