Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

[SteveF]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

OK well that makes sense. Nothing was really expected of the first two. I think Lawrence had some expectations because of who he played with in the National Program. Was pretty disappointing until his great senior year (but I believe you guys have said many of those were tap ins as a result of Wilson)

Lawrence was highly touted by the bu spin machine because that was back when rogie or alex or whatever name he was posting under was trying to tell us that Lawrence was the straw that stirred Gerbe's drink (and probably Kessel too).

 

[BigRedTerrier]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying BC's resurgence is part of the reason BU hasn't been as successful as they were prior to the resurgence.

Oh I see...well, as you post above helps show, I don't think it has hurt them in recruiting. Granted those rankings don't mean much, but I think it does say that BU is getting quality players, as quality can be evaluated when the player is recuited.

I still think it has more to do with Parker be unable to get the most out of the quality players that he's recruited.

All of this being said, I still think BU is a top tier program with a top tier coach. It's just that the tier is top 10 and not top 5, where I think it could be

 

[Jofa]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I think people make the situation out to be more dire than it is because of how good BC has been. If BC only had one national title in the last 10 years, would there be as much talk about this?

Yes 1 FF in 14 years blows regardless of what BC is doing. I know you are from a newer era and maybe where I come from is unrealistic. My senior yr of HS as a future Terrier and devout follower, BU won the NC (1971), freshman year 1972 (NC), soph year marzo/buckton incident, followed by 4 straight FF's and ECAC banners, followed by a 30-2 season and another NC. Yeah, my standards are higher. The ice used to "tlit" when BU came on the ice. Miss that feeling.

 

[J.D.]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I still think it has more to do with Parker be unable to get the most out of the quality players that he's recruited.

I agree. And frankly, I don't think it's debatable.

 

[Jofa]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I still think it has more to do with Parker be unable to get the most out of the quality players that he's recruited.

All of this being said, I still think BU is a top tier program with a top tier coach. It's just that the tier is top 10 and not top 5, where I think it could be

Ok if Parker is a top tier Coach then why isnt he "getting the the most out of his quality" players. Contradiction

And how can you say BU has been a Top 10 program in the last 10-15 years. Maybe twice 2009, 2006(?). Three out of the last four (most likley) not even in the top 16.

 

[Jofa]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I agree. And frankly, I don't think it's debatable.

So FL's contention that BU is lined up to be one of the top programs in the next 5 to 10 years has holes all over it because of that very fact. Why arent fanboys getting this. Blinded by loyalty to a "legend".

 

[BigRedTerrier]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Ok if Parker is a top tier Coach then why isnt he "getting the the most out of his quality" players. Contradiction.

Not really...I think that being able to recruit great players is a huge factor in being a top tier coach. Also, I think it's obvious that any coach with 800 plus wins and 3 NCs, including one in the past few years is top tier. I'm just saying that I think there's untapped potential there for more. Its called making an argument with nuance to it.

And how can you say BU has been a Top 10 program in the last 10-15 years. Maybe twice 2009, 2006(?). Three out of the last four (most likely) not even in the top 16.

See J.D.'s post on the last page

 

[Federal League]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

So FL's contention that BU is lined up to be one of the top programs in the next 5 to 10 years has holes all over it because of that very fact. Why arent fanboys getting this. Blinded by loyalty to a "legend".

How many coaches are better at developing players than Parker? York. Berenson maybe (although the Kings certainly disagree). Who else? Are you assuming whoever comes in after Parker is going to be a better coach and better developer than Parker? I think it would be a HUGE mistake to make that assumption. Also, I'm pretty sure there have a been a lot of players who have progressed quite a bit under Parker. Yes, there have been some guys who have stagnated, but that happens at every school. Even BC and Michigan.

ETA: There's a reason pro teams are happy to have their prospects at BU. Two actually. Parker and Boyle. Which raises another interesting question. Does Boyle hang around after Parker leaves? Would the new coach let him keep full reign over training like Parker does?

 

[J.D.]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Not really...I think that being able to recruit great players is a huge factor in being a top tier coach.

I agree, BUT not if we're talking about places like BC, BU, UND, Michigan, etc. Those schools are always going to get talent. Now, maybe this is semantics, but what the challenge is at a BC/BU is assembling the right mix and then developing that mix.

How many coaches are better at developing players than Parker? York. Berenson maybe (although the Kings certainly disagree). Who else? Are you assuming whoever comes in after Parker is going to be a better coach and better developer than Parker? I think it would be a HUGE mistake to make that assumption. Also, I'm pretty sure there have a been a lot of players who have progressed quite a bit under Parker. Yes, there have been some guys who have stagnated, but that happens at every school. Even BC and Michigan.

ETA: There's a reason pro teams are happy to have their prospects at BU. Two actually. Parker and Boyle. Which raises another interesting question. Does Boyle hang around after Parker leaves? Would the new coach let him keep full reign over training like Parker does?

One distinction that needs to be made is developing players who turn out to be good pros vs. doing what your actual job is--developing players so that it leads to success on the ice for your school. Over the past 10+ years, you'd have to say that's been an issue at BU. Now, if you're saying Parker is still good at developing players/teams, what has been the problem?

 

[mpereira]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Parker isn't getting the most out of his players? Colin Wilson did ok a few years ago. Coyle hasn't been outstanding but still could win HE rookie of the year with some points down the stretch. Chiasson has become quite a player as a sophomore too. I think he develops guys just fine.

 

[Jofa]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

How many coaches are better at developing players than Parker? York. B

Well I respect your opinion and your game night blogging is tremendous but honestly his teams have under performed for years esp. in the NCAA's so he's not doing something right. Things wont turn for the better until he's gone and I hope we find out soon. Now I'll shut up about it until next year. Good luck to you in your career you will be very successfull I know I am right about that much.

 

[J.D.]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Parker isn't getting the most out of his players? Colin Wilson did ok a few years ago. Coyle hasn't been outstanding but still could win HE rookie of the year with some points down the stretch. Chiasson has become quite a player as a sophomore too. I think he develops guys just fine.

You just named three players when we've been talking about a stretch covering 10+ years.

 

[Jofa]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I agree, BUT not if we're talking about places like BC, BU, UND, Michigan, etc. Those schools are always going to get talent. Now, maybe this is semantics, but what the challenge is at a BC/BU is assembling the right mix and then developing that mix.

One distinction that needs to be made is developing players who turn out to be good pros vs. doing what your actual job is--developing players so that it leads to success on the ice for your school. Over the past 10+ years, you'd have to say that's been an issue at BU. Now, if you're saying Parker is still good at developing players/teams, what has been the problem?

I am just going stay out of it, you articulate my argument better then me . And I know we both have the same motivation at heart, to make BU better!

 

[Federal League]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

You just named three players when we've been talking about a stretch covering 10+ years.

Bonino, Gilroy, McCarthy, Higgins, MacArthur, Ewing, Strait, Connolly, Pereira, Gryba. I think those guys all got/have gotten significantly better during their time at BU. The list keeps going, too. Megan improved from last year to this. Noonan and Clendening have both shown marked improvement as this year has gone on. It's not just three guys...

 

[limey]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

You just named three players when we've been talking about a stretch covering 10+ years.

I'm quite confident that was far from an exclusive list. That Gilroy kid seemed to play ok for starters.

As I noted in the post before, the early part of the decade was really marred by the '03 and '04 classes, and the '00 - '02 classes still were on the cusp of FF apprerances. The '05 - '07 seasons were very respectable. The '08 season was an admitted disappointment. The '09 season was great and last year was an understandable down year after losing so many good players to both graduation and early departure.

I still don't see where this precipitous drop in quality is being seen other than the fact that there is a lot more parity overall in this era.

 

[dmjossel]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Not sure what year to start at, but here are some numbers from the top programs since the 1997-1998 season (BC's resurgence--is that the biggest reason?):

Nah, it's the quarterfinal loss to Merrimack that did it

Look at Northeastern. 1988 Beanpot champ, Hockey East champ. Lost to Merrimack in the NCAAs quarterfinals at the end of that season. Season after they were over .500, but then nothing til the NCAAs again in '94. No Beanpots since. No HE championships since, regular season or playoff.

BU in 1998. Merrimack upsets the #1 seed in the quarterfinals before falling to eventual champ BC.

That season, BU finished with a .763 winning percentage.

In '99 it had dropped to .419, their worst finish in ten years, and a streak of five straight frozen four appearances and nine straight NCAA appearances was broken. 2000 was only an okay year, and 2001 was again .419 and no NCAAs. For two full recruiting cycles BU did nothing but reload and repeat, but it came to a crashing halt in 1999.

And in case anyone is wondering... j/k.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

You just named three players when we've been talking about a stretch covering 10+ years.

that awful 06 freshman class developed ok. yip has been a constant playing in the nhl. mccarthy and gilroy have played there too. they won at this level. that's development.

bonino was a suspect skater coming in according to reports. played in the nhl. that required development.

go back 10 years.... freddy meyer isn't the biggest dman, but he's played quite a number of games. ryan whitney was stuck with a challenged team, but has gone on to success. vandergulik has played parts of a couple seasons up. john curry developed nicely, no? the aforementioned number of players from the past three seasons have made it (wilson, mccarthy, gilroy, yip, shattenkirk).

we went over this a couple weeks ago. the players that he has had the past decade more than stand up to what jerry has helped develop and move onward in their progression.

 

[limey]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

Nah, it's the quarterfinal loss to Merrimack that did it

Look at Northeastern. 1988 Beanpot champ, Hockey East champ. Lost to Merrimack in the NCAAs quarterfinals at the end of that season. Season after they were over .500, but then nothing til the NCAAs again in '94. No Beanpots since. No HE championships since, regular season or playoff.

BU in 1998. Merrimack upsets the #1 seed in the quarterfinals before falling to eventual champ BC.

That season, BU finished with a .763 winning percentage.

In '99 it had dropped to .419, their worst finish in ten years, and a streak of five straight frozen four appearances and nine straight NCAA appearances was broken. 2000 was only an okay year, and 2001 was again .419 and no NCAAs. For two full recruiting cycles BU did nothing but reload and repeat, but it came to a crashing halt in 1999.

And in case anyone is wondering... j/k.

The '99 class was Larocque, O'Connell, King, Travis Roy, Ronan, and Brendan Walsh. The 3 that remained with the team were very good, but when you lose half a senior class it is hardly surprising that a team that plays sub-optimally.

 

[dmjossel]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

No great revelation here, but things turned around the day, BC hired Jerry York and York hired Mike Cavanaugh. For years, Jack Kelley and Jack Parker coached rings around Snooks Kelley, Len Ceglarski and Steve Cedorchuk.

Cedorchuk, sure, but Ceglarski? How do you figure?

In Hockey East, from '85 to '92, Ceglarski's Eagles went to the frozen four twice and appeared in the NCAAs six times. They finished first in Hockey East six times. They won playoff championships in Hockey East twice.

In Hockey East, from '85 to '92, Parker's Terriers went to the NCAA four times, the frozen four twice, and won two Hockey East playoff championships and zero regular season championships.

That is, at best, parity, and at worst, a slight advantage to Ceglarski. It is hardly Jack Parker "coaching rings around Len Ceglarski". If you want to see Parker coaching rings around Ceglarski, you have to go back to '73-'79 in the ECAC, where Parker did have five straight frozen four appearances and one national championship, bracketed by 2 years prior and five years following of zero NCAA appearances. Which just goes to show that these droughts happen, they can and do happen to programs and coaches, and the fact that a coach or program is in one doesn't necessarily require a change or mean that things will never improve.

Jerry York is a fantastic coach, and his program is enjoying some well-earned success right now. Jack Parker is also a fantastic coach, and his program has enjoyed some well-earned success in the past, and likely will some time again in the future. Both programs have ebbed and flowed since 1947.

Ceglarski's assistant Cedorchuk was not equipped to take the reins of that program, and stayed only two mediocre years.

I'm sure fans of every team who has seen their club go to the Frozen Four more often than not would like to see them go every year, and some are outright disappointed when they don't. What if they got their wish? What would anybody else play for? What's the point of striving towards a goal that makes the world less interesting? Why set up a situation in which success is so taken for granted that it can't be enjoyed, only missed when it is gone?

 

[J.D.]

Re: Boston University 2010-11 Part III - Is That So Much To Ask?

I am just going stay out of it, you articulate my argument better then me . And I know we both have the same motivation at heart, to make BU better!

Haha, making BU better is certainly not my motivation, but thanks for the compliment. Anyway, the post you replied to is what I'm falling back on here. It's about developing players for COLLEGE success as a team, not just the individual improvement.

we went over this a couple weeks ago. the players that he has had the past decade more than stand up to what jerry has helped develop and move onward in their progression.

I'm not talking about individual progression. More about the team's success. What has been the problem?