Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II
But relatively speaking, being better than just about everyone else isn't good enough if it isn't better than BC..
I don't think that's a fair statement. Let me tell you why, at least for me, it's not. And I feel that is "masking" the real issue.
It is not BC's fault that there is lack of discipline on this team. When one makes the same mistakes over and over, one can draw only one of two conclusions: a. They don't have good enough talent, or b. They're not well-coached.
Last time I checked, BC didn't cause us to blow big leads.
Last time I checked, BC didn't raise the ticket prices when the team is "underperforming" and the product is less than satisfactory.
Last time I checked, BC didn't cause the food at Agganis to be lousy.
Last time I checked, BC didn't cause certain players to take runs at players after the whistle for no reason game after game without any repercussions.
Last time I checked, BC didn't cause players to quit on their teammates in the middle of the season, something which seems to have become a pattern.
It doesn't seem to me as though there is a dramatic lack of talent. It's not about NOT WINNING NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS (which everyone on this thread who supports the status quo seems to throw in our face EVERY DAY). It's about the LOUSY attitude, the seeming lack of incentive, enthusiasm, whatever you want to call it. The players seemed detached from the program, as if the only reason they're here is to take the next step to the pros and the *ell with the team. Gee, is that because that is how they're recruited in the first place?? It's about losing to teams with INFERIOR talent on a regular basis. It's about sleepwalking through most of a game and then only "turning it on" when their backs are against the wall. The Patriots haven't won the "ultimate" prize now for nine years, but I don't hear any complaining about the lack of effort or a breakdown in the organization. They put a quality product out there year after year which is engaging for the fans and where the players give tremendous effort on a consistent basis. Does anyone think that Tom Brady or Vince Wilfork or Wes Welker is "mailing it in," just because they're not perfect and they don't win EVERY year? Does anyone think that Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce don't give it everything they have every night even if the team is not a top-level NBA team currently? (Now I"m going to get the "But they're JUST COLLEGE KIDS, you CAN'T compare them to pros!!!!!!!!! baloney). I can't? Let's see...if I go to BU it costs me $50k / year. That's a $200k outlay. It costs them 0. Seems to me that's the same thing as making a $50k salary for four years. But that's just me, of course. What do I know?
You know, a person may not like their current job (or situation), but the only way to rectify that is to perform as best you can in the hope that someone will recognize your commitment and "promote" you to the next level, whatever that may mean in one's particular field of endeavor. "Mailing it in" doesn't accomplish anything for ANYBODY.
Let me ask any of you this: if you had invested in season tickets to the symphony, and every time you attended there were wrong notes, players who didn't care, a conductor who went through the motions and an uninspiring performance, how long would you continue to attend? Yes, as someone on here said a couple of days ago, I'm OLD
compared to most of you. So I guess I don't like to accept situations where a product I pay for is mediocre and/or the participants don't appear to be giving their best effort EVERY NIGHT. Am I old-fashioned? Yeah, so what if I am? Seems to me that ethic was what made this country great. Better than the attitude of many today, which is "It's no big deal." Or, "whatever." Maybe these guys think they have no responsibility to a program which has given them a FREE education - I don't know. Maybe hockey is getting like football, where all the players think they're entitled. Since hockey has spread into more areas, the old "lunch pail" ethic that was exemplified by many of the players from the iron range or Canada or Charlestown or Southie isn't the same anymore as it pertains to everyone. As someone said, "It's not just BU." True. It's not. But many of those schools don't have the legacy that BU does. If this means we are going to have to "accept" that there can't be "elite" (or "signature"
) programs anymore, fine. Then we don't need an "elite" coach, do we? So what is everyone so afraid of? What's wrong with making a change? It's not as though we have "everything to lose" and nothing to gain, because it seems to me that we already have lost most of what was special about the program. I think some people are looking through scarlet-colored (not the person) glasses and romanticizing about something which no longer exists.
The reality is this program is NOT special anymore, and to me, that takes a lot of the lustre away. It's not about being a "bandwagon jumper" as someone (I think a UMass fan) suggested. By the way, how many titles (of ANY kind) does UMass hockey have? This is about BU - so comments from people who didn't go there aren't really relevant. If you want to call us "elitist" or "spoiled" or anything else, I don't really care. I don't go on your threads and make comments about your program.
The economy is lousy and I choose to prioritize how I spend my money. One would think that at the very least, the school would be sensitive to the times and at least take a LOOK at how the product on and off the ice is being PERCEIVED by those of us who have supported it all these years. The "look the other way" (and don't give me the thing last summer about the "investigation" which was just lip-service) attitude makes me think that they are not, not to mention that it smacks of a certain arrogance which discourages me even more.
