Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

[brookyone]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

I wish BC was on the Gophers schedule this season...any season.

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

You can only play who's on your schedule.

Exactly.

But you say the WCHA is "incredibly weak" this year? Overall the record for WCHA teams against non-conference opponents is 24-8-1. So not too weak.

I'll admit BC has a good team this year, and anything can happen in March. I've been around hockey a long time and I know that. But if you're going to debate, at least throw in a few facts once in a while, instead of just opinions and grand proclamations!

P.S. Here's a little example of what I'm talking about. In BC's only series against a WCHA opponent this year, they split. Not a huge accomplishment for the Eagles, as that team is in the bottom half of our league. And that team IS down quite a bit from most previous years, so what does that tell you?

 

[DC78-82]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

But if you're going to debate, at least throw in a few facts once in a while, instead of just opinions and grand proclamations! [/B]

Why? Carl Rove didn't, nor did Dick Morris and their predictions were....oh, wait, never mind.

 

[joehockey]

Exactly.

But you say the WCHA is "incredibly weak" this year? Overall the record for WCHA teams against non-conference opponents is 24-8-1. So not too weak.

Lindenwood is in that hope number of wins right.....WCHA needs to play more than the bottom or new D1 Teams.

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

Lindenwood is in that hope number of wins right.....WCHA needs to play more than the bottom or new D1 Teams.

Shhhh! You weren't supposed to notice that, Joe!

But then again, the East has its fair share of "bottom" teams that the others build up their records on also...

 

[ARM]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

But then again, the East has its fair share of "bottom" teams that the others build up their records on also...

... but enough about BC.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Exactly.

But you say the WCHA is "incredibly weak" this year? Overall the record for WCHA teams against non-conference opponents is 24-8-1. So not too weak.

I'll admit BC has a good team this year, and anything can happen in March. I've been around hockey a long time and I know that. But if you're going to debate, at least throw in a few facts once in a while, instead of just opinions and grand proclamations!

P.S. Here's a little example of what I'm talking about. In BC's only series against a WCHA opponent this year, they split. Not a huge accomplishment for the Eagles, as that team is in the bottom half of our league. And that team IS down quite a bit from most previous years, so what does that tell you?

Okay there Mr. "Let's stop throwing around opinions and grand proclamations." Why do your opinions and grand proclamations carry so much weight and mine mean nothing? More of that classic midwestern elitism Joe and I noticed when we first started posting here.

Honestly any time someone suggests that maybe your teams aren't as good as they seem, it's all aboard the WHAAAAAMBULANCE. Look, congrats on those big wins against the dregs of college hockey, but I just don't see it. Playing a horribly weak schedule does not a #1 team make.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Lindenwood is in that hope number of wins right.....WCHA needs to play more than the bottom or new D1 Teams.

THANK YOU. How great must it feel to beat up on terrible teams every week? Play in a tough league top to bottom like Hockey East where there are NO breaks and parity freaking ABOUNDS and you wouldn't be so high and mighty with that record you have against awful teams.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Shhhh! You weren't supposed to notice that, Joe!

But then again, the East has its fair share of "bottom" teams that the others build up their records on also...

That's just ridiculous, where are you getting this nonsense from? Oh that's right, your typical MIDWESTERN ELETEISM where if they are west of Lake Huron they must be somehow SUPER T3H AWESOMEZ because of where they are on a map.

What, do you think there's some kind of tear in space time that improves female hockey players west of a certain longitude?

Well, let me tell you something buddy, I was a MATH MAJOR and a PHILOSOPHY MINOR from an elite school so I know what I'm talking about, and there us no such rip or ripple in space time. It is exactly the same wherever you are in this country. The Founding Fathers knew that when they wrote "All Men Are Created Equal" into our great Constitution and no matter how much you listen to the mainstream AKA LAMESTREAM media, that isn't going to change.

So just think about that and tell me what you think.

Play some tougher competition to better manage the expectations of your team. Otherwise you're in for a hell of a rude awakening in March for those of you who can't take off the Goldy Glasses. The rest of you enlightened few can clearly see it coming like the rest of us.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

(And sorry for the lack of multi-quote, I'm on my phone.)

 

[joegrav]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

It won't even be DIFFICULT. #playrealteamsthenwewilltalk

Your predictive powers are astounding

 

[joehockey]

Okay there Mr. "Let's stop throwing around opinions and grand proclamations." Why do your opinions and grand proclamations carry so much weight and mine mean nothing? More of that classic midwestern elitism Joe and I noticed when we first started posting here.

In full disclosure I was raised a Midwest guy, WCHAer and raised our kids in MN. My posts have been more on lets encourage great competition between all of the top leagues - it will be good for the game. My view of the future says the WCHA for women will implode like it did on the Men's side.

Good luck to all.

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

Play some tougher competition to better manage the expectations of your team. Otherwise you're in for a hell of a rude awakening in March for those of you who can't take off the Goldy Glasses.

Head-to-head competition:
vs. UNH:
BC is 1-1-1. Total goals for/against: 12-7
MN went 2-0. Total goals for/against: 14-2

vs. UMD
BC went 1-1. Total goals for/against: 5-5
MN went 2-0. Total goals for/against: 8-1

(The Gophers played both series away from home, while BC was at home for 3 of their games)

P.S. Still waiting for some facts from the math major! But now knowing that you also studied philosophy, I do understand your penchant for making grand proclaimations, the latest being, "The rest of you enlightened few can clearly see it coming like the rest of us." Eastern elitism at its finest!

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

My view of the future says the WCHA for women will implode like it did on the Men's side.

joe, off topic, but I assume here you were referring to the realignment of the conferences that will take place next year, not the quality of the teams.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

Head-to-head competition:
vs. UNH:
BC is 1-1-1. Total goals for/against: 12-7
MN went 2-0. Total goals for/against: 14-2

vs. UMD
BC went 1-1. Total goals for/against: 5-5
MN went 2-0. Total goals for/against: 8-1

(The Gophers played both series away from home, while BC was at home for 3 of their games)

P.S. Still waiting for some facts from the math major! But now knowing that you also studied philosophy, I do understand your penchant for making grand proclaimations, the latest being, "The rest of you enlightened few can clearly see it coming like the rest of us." Eastern elitism at its finest!

Holy small sample size, Batman... Geez in a world of stat cherry pickers, you are the king of all stat cherry pickers.

I'm pretty sure you're just trolling at this point, so I can't even believe I'm doing this, but let's see:

Hockey East #1 vs. WCHA #1: Boston College vs. Minnesota -- Those of us who can take off the gold glasses can see that at BEST this is a tie in terms of talent... but we'll give you Gophers the benefit of the doubt. TIE

Hockey East #2 vs. WCHA #2: Boston University vs. Ohio State -- Despite what I like to say about the scum of Comm Ave, they're actually a half decent team, managing to have a miraculous 1-1-1 record against us this year. This is not even close. BU IN A LANDSLIDE

Hockey East #3 vs. WCHA #3: Providence vs. North Dakota -- PC is having a bit of a down year, and despite the Fightin [Redacted]'s decent record against horrible competition, we have to give NoDak the edge. ND WITH THE EDGE

Hockey East #4 vs. WCHA #4: Northeastern vs. Wisconsin -- Holy horrible season, Wisconsin. Not exactly St. Cloud but clearly NU gets the edge in this battle. NU, EASILY

Hockey East #5 vs. WCHA #5: Vermont vs. Minnesota-Duluth -- Another horrible down year for a "perennial power" (pardon me while I vomit). Vermont is having a reasonable season. The result is probably too close to call. TIE

Hockey East #6 vs. WCHA #6: New Hampshire vs. Minnesota State -- LOL Minnesota State. UNH, AND IT'S NOT CLOSE

Hockey East #7 vs. WCHA #7: Connecticut vs. Bemidji State -- Both teams with terrible records. UConn at least has to play in the tougher conference so honestly we have to give them the edge, but barely. UCONN BY A NOSE

Hockey East #8 vs. WCHA #8: St. Cloud State vs. Maine -- Perennial laughing stock of women's hockey versus a bad team that, like UConn, holds its own and loses a few tough battles to better competition in a better conference. MAINE IS SLIGHTLY LESS TERRIBLE

Hockey East takes this one in a complete landslide, 5-1-2. Nate Silver would call this one with 1% of the precincts in. EVEN IF YOU ALLOW for the WCHA to flip one of the ties or something, that still hands it to the east without any trouble.

I don't really see how this is an argument. I probably just went through all that to persuade someone who's just trolling me but whatever. Take it from a math major, bro, there is no argument here. BC plays in a far tougher conference where you can't "take a game off here and there" like the Gophers who play in what might be the weakest conference outside of the AHA men. It's not even top heavy, it's a "decent" team at the top feeding off the dregs of the sport.

This is such a ridiculous argument; I can't even believe I have to spell this out for you.

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

You disappoint once more, Grant. All opinion and conjecture, not based on any factual information whatsoever. I could go down the same list of teams and argue the opposite, and my opinions would be just as valid. How could that be, you might ask? Because either way it's just personal opinion, with nothing to back it up!

Take a look at actual results of games pitting WCHA teams against Hockey East teams. As a math major you should understand that the numbers don't lie!

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

You disappoint once more, Grant. All opinion and conjecture, not based on any factual information whatsoever. I could go down the same list of teams and argue the opposite, and my opinions would be just as valid. How could that be, you might ask? Because either way it's just personal opinion, with nothing to back it up!

Take a look at actual results of games pitting WCHA teams against Hockey East teams. As a math major you should understand that the numbers don't lie!

Well of course, whenever *I* say something, it's all opinion and conjecture. When *you* say something OHHHHH FACTTTTTTS OHHHH NUMBERS WHAT I'M SAYING IS UNIMPEACHABLE.

You're ridiculous. Just because you say it doesn't make it fact and just because I say something doesn't make it opinion. I don't think anyone would debate my conference rundown above. Why? Because it's factual, line by line evidence of which team is better than the other. Based on fact. Just because you disagree doesn't make it so. NO ONE DENIES THIS.

 

[D2D]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

Tony, if you want to take a stab at some objectivity for a change, try using some ACTUAL GAME RESULTS to prove your point. That's what I've done all along. All you've been able to come up with is "my team is better than your team, and my conference is better than your conference, because I SAY SO!"

P.S. Your favorite team, Boston University, managed a tie against UMD today. By your estimation above, BU SHOULD have won in a LANDSLIDE. But once again ACTUAL GAME RESULTS prove your opinion to be incorrect.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

Tony, if you want to take a stab at some objectivity for a change, try using some ACTUAL GAME RESULTS to prove your point. That's what I've done all along. All you've been able to come up with is "my team is better than your team, and my conference is better than your conference, because I SAY SO!"

P.S. Your favorite team, Boston University, managed a tie against UMD today. By your estimation above, BU SHOULD have won in a LANDSLIDE. But once again ACTUAL GAME RESULTS prove your opinion to be incorrect.

1) You have not used game results in your argument. All you keep saying is "USE GAME RESULTS IN YOUR ARGUMENT! You aren't using game results in your argument but I *WOULD* use game results in *MY* argument and therefore you are wrong!" While, obviously, NOT using game results.

2) My favorite team. Hilarious.

3) See, now you FINALLY break out a game result. Have you ever heard of small sample sizes? Wow, one game, and not even a win, but a *TIE*. Really? I'm guessing you weren't a math major like me so you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about. I can play that game too.

Honestly your argument is pretty weak when your retort is "Hey I see the perfectly understandable facts you're presenting me with but NO YOU'RE WRONG!"

 

[Blackbeard]

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey - 2012-2013 Season Thread

=TonyTheTiger20;5570859]What, do you think there's some kind of tear in space time that improves female hockey players west of a certain longitude?

I knew there had to be a reason. Thanks Tony.

Some good laughs here. Kind of reminds me of the early days of the infamous Brown thread.

The Founding Fathers knew that when they wrote "All Men Are Created Equal" into our great Constitution and no matter how much you listen to the mainstream AKA LAMESTREAM media, that isn't going to change.

Would that be the same great Constitution that your successive administrations, regardless of stripe, just ignore for their political convenience without much clamouring from the sheeple? Or is there another one that I'm not aware of...sort of like, two sets of books?

Anyway, your comment brought back a fond high school memory that has revisited me many times. We had an English Lit teacher in grade 12...below his station I always thought...a large rotund man very much in the vein of the classical "Philosopher" type whose style and mannerisms were very much suited to philosophical pontificating but I mean that in a very complimentary way...he really did try to expand his students' consciousness...very little Eng lit was taught/discussed as I recall.

Although I can't recall the topic, one day while he was attempting to expose the class to some higher forms of thought than it was normally used to he made a comment to which I objected by raising my hand from the back of the room and asking quite confidently, "but Mr. "***", isn't it true that all men are created equal?"

As the rest of my classmates turned to look at me as if in anticipation of a confrontation that I had been stupid enough to ask for by even questioning anything that he said, since he was way above our intellectual pay grade, he gazed steadily at me while allowing a pregnant pause to fill the room amid the silence of anticipation while he collected his thoughts, very surprised that anyone had been paying attention and had actually challenged him. Finally, and very slowly and deliberately, while maintaining constant eye contact with me he said "yes, it IS true that all men are created equal. It's just that, SOME, are a little more EQUAL than others."