Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

[ericredaxe]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Parker's contract runs through 2014-15.

Thats correct... I guess I meant that at most, the end of the season, the year after next would begin the post Parker era...

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Absolutely, positively, 100% disagree with "modifying our goals". For 400 bucks a year in season tix, the goal d @mn well better be national championships. It makes zero sense that Quinnipiac can sport a #1 team and we finish last in a 4 team tournament in our backyard. Nothing about the school makes it harder to win, in fact given all the school does is play hockey it ought to be easier as there's less drain on resources. Get a good younger coach in here (we all know the names) and take it from there.

I knew that would arouse a few comments...what I meant is that I don't think we can expect the level of dominance that we demonstrated in the 70s - 90s period. Whether anyone wants to accept it or not, the opinion that BU is "in in the middle of one of the more interesting cities in the country" is subjective. And whether or not that's true doesn't change the fact that it is NOT a sports school. If YOU were visiting schools and went to a game at Agganis and saw 2719 people sitting on their hands (except when it's against BC), how impressed would you be? (and that has NOTHING to do with their record - it was like that in 2009). It was embarrassing to go to the HE tourney and be outnumbered when we're three miles up the road. Go to a game in Wisconsin, or Michigan, or Notre Dame, or anywhere OUTSIDE the snobby, condescending, cynical East and you should understand what I mean. I said years ago on this board that although I love hockey and I love BU (because I graduated from there) I HATE the lack of enthusiasm of the fans. I know that people here are too "sophisticated" to actually exert themselves beyond a polite little clap. How many high schools in Massachusetts have male cheerleaders? How many have large, great high school bands? You know why? Because they are LAUGHED at. Band members are called band "fa*s." The entire arrogant, elitist culture here makes me sick. Even Tom Brady has to "lecture" the fans to make noise for a big game. Yeah, they "yell" for about a half second then go back to sitting and criticizing. You know, just check your attitude at the door, go have a good time and CHEER! Most people in this area think sports are stupid (unless, of course, they're "European" sports like soccer...because that's a CIVILIZED game). And before you laugh too hard, don't be surprised when they get high school football banned because of violence. They already filed a bill in the Rhode Island legislature to do just that. So recruiting is not as much of a slam dunk as you think.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Parker's contract runs through 2014-15.

two more ****ing years of this ****?!?!?! c'mon!!

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Duke is "elite" every year. Other programs such as UNC, Kentucky and others are "elite" more often than not.... no reason UCLA couldn't be. I suppose some of that depends on how you define "elite".

Paging mookie.

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

I suppose some of that depends on how you define "elite".

Teams that have won the NCAA Division 1 Basketball Championship More Than Once

UCLA 11
Kentucky 8
Indiana 5
North Carolina 5
Duke 4
Connecticut 3
Kansas 3
Cincinnati 2
Florida 2
Louisville 2
Michigan State 2
North Carolina St 2
Oklahoma State 2
San Francisco 2

# of Division 1 NCAA Hockey Championships
Michigan 9
Denver 7
North Dakota 7
Wisconsin 6
Boston University 5
Boston College 5
Minnesota 5

This means that SEVEN schools have as many or more championships in hockey than all but TWO schools do in basketball. There may be more basketball "talent" to choose from, but there's a finite number of elite persons in any field of endeavor. It's not a straight-line function. The numbers don't scale like that. If that were true, than there would be 100 Einsteins and Galileos because there are 100 times as many people on the earth as there were 300 years ago.

Now explain to me again how "terrible" UCLA's program is....only two schools in HISTORY have won more basketball championships than we have won hockey championships. And they've been playing the NCAA tournament since 1939 (when Oregon won). Before that, the NIT was actually the "elite" tournament before an NCAA tournament was even conceived of. So they've been playing basketball for 74 years and NCAA Hockey for 63.

My only point was that I don't think the analogy is comparable. Hockey is still a "niche" and a "regional" sport. Just because you put an NHL team someplace doesn't mean that a majority of kids will play that sport (as they do in areas where the weather is more conducive to playing "unorganized"). Unorganized play is where you develop your skills, because the time you get on the ice (or court, or field, or whatever) is essentially limited only by your ambition. I don't think the kids in Phoenix skate on the ponds there, last time I checked. There are at least double the number of schools playing Division 1 hockey than there were 15 years ago and you can't tell me that the number of elite players in the NCAA is also double. Well, you can, but I would disagree with you.

 

[ericredaxe]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Teams that have won the NCAA Division 1 Basketball Championship More Than Once

UCLA 11
Kentucky 8
Indiana 5
North Carolina 5
Duke 4
Connecticut 3
Kansas 3
Cincinnati 2
Florida 2
Louisville 2
Michigan State 2
North Carolina St 2
Oklahoma State 2
San Francisco 2

# of Division 1 NCAA Hockey Championships
Michigan 9
Denver 7
North Dakota 7
Wisconsin 6
Boston University 5
Boston College 5
Minnesota 5

This means that SEVEN schools have as many or more championships in hockey than all but TWO schools do in basketball. There may be more basketball "talent" to choose from, but there's a finite number of elite persons in any field of endeavor. It's not a straight-line function. The numbers don't scale like that. If that were true, than there would be 100 Einsteins and Galileos because there are 100 times as many people on the earth as there were 300 years ago.

Now explain to me again how "terrible" UCLA's program is....only two schools in HISTORY have won more basketball championships than we have won hockey championships. And they've been playing the NCAA tournament since 1939 (when Oregon won). Before that, the NIT was actually the "elite" tournament before an NCAA tournament was even conceived of. So they've been playing basketball for 74 years and NCAA Hockey for 63.

My only point was that I don't think the analogy is comparable. Hockey is still a "niche" and a "regional" sport. Just because you put an NHL team someplace doesn't mean that a majority of kids will play that sport (as they do in areas where the weather is more conducive to playing "unorganized"). Unorganized play is where you develop your skills, because the time you get on the ice (or court, or field, or whatever) is essentially limited only by your ambition. I don't think the kids in Phoenix skate on the ponds there, last time I checked. There are at least double the number of schools playing Division 1 hockey than there were 15 years ago and you can't tell me that the number of elite players in the NCAA is also double. Well, you can, but I would disagree with you.

How are you defining "elite" then? Do you agree that Duke is "elite" pretty much every year?

My point is that I don't believe it is any easier to maintain a hockey program at an elite level than it is a basketball program.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Paging mookie.

sorry... mookie was wondering how chickrod manages to survive in f'burf

elite isn't a 'sometime' affair. you either are, or you are not.

bu, in spite of themselves, continue to get top 10 recruiting classes (as mookie demonstrated a couple days ago).
they continue to throw money/resources/etc at the program.
we (sometimes) make the post season tournament.
we have (recently) won national titles - again, only two different teams have won a title since we did 4 years ago.

perception has a big role in whether you are elite or not. again, in spite of ourselves, bu is still in that category.

for how much longer?? your guess is as good as mine when you look at how things are continuing to progress.

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

My point is that I don't believe it is any easier to maintain a hockey program at an elite level than it is a basketball program.

I would agree with this 100%.

 

[DaveStPaul]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Any BU-Harvard video highlights from last night anywhere? I tried BHB, HockeyEastOnline, nesn -- nothing.

but seriously, why would anyone (besides us) care?

Well, if "how many people care" was a barrier to getting something posted on the internet, we'd have a very different world, wouldn't we. How many people cared about Lowell-Merrimack on Feb 1? Those highlights are online.

Since I've been able to find video for just about every other game, I figured either I was cluelessly missing where they were for this game, or NESN is stingier with their video -- which someone on here in media might know, and could inform me, and I'd stop searching the interwebs.

There is one set of highlights, on Harvard's YouTube page, but they only show H's goals. (Plus they've got some amazing bad music accompanying it. What does Harvard do, outsource the making of these to local 14 yr olds? Don't they have a communications department over there? )

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

NESN didn't televise this game so they probably didn't have much video of it. If BU and Harvard don't make clips of it you won't find them.

 

[SteveF]

again, only two different teams have won a title since we did 4 years ago.

You are welcome for that

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

How are you defining "elite" then? Do you agree that Duke is "elite" pretty much every year? My point is that I don't believe it is any easier to maintain a hockey program at an elite level than it is a basketball program.

My point is you don't have to win a large percentage of NCs to be elite. That's why I showed the numbers...we all agree that Duke is an elite program, right? They've won 4 NCs, which equates to something like once every 20 years. How about Kansas? Wow! Kansas, fantastic program, right? They've won THREE. Michigan State (remember the "fab five"?) has won MORE hockey championships than basketball championships. The problem is the PERCEPTION because of the distribution of when they were won. In other words, most schools became elite in the first place because they won a BUNCH of national championships all in one "run." Again, look at UCLA - they won a ridiculous seven years in a row and ten out of twelve. They have won exactly TWO in the 38 years since then. My point is that when BU won three times in the 70s, the expectations went up. We have won TWO in the 35 years since then. So if you agree that the basketball analogy is a good one, then you are saying our success rate is essentially the same as UCLA's in the last 35 years (a program you just said was [I can't go back to the previous page while I'm typing this] "sad" or something to that effect). So which is it? My point is that it SEEMS worse than it is right now because we are in the midst of a horrible season, so everything is magnified. We're all disappointed, but the ship can be righted. But I'm saying that it WON'T be as "easy" as it was in the 70s and 80s because there are more schools playing, and pure numbers tell you that it will be harder to go all the way. By the way, something I didn't mention also was that back "then," it was easier to make the national tournament as well. You had one big league in the East, the ECAC, and most of the teams were not great. In fact, when we won in 1978 we didn't even WIN the tournament - we lost in the championship game to Providence and were SELECTED by a committee after REPLAYING Providence again in a special NCAA "qualifier game" (probably because, as I mentioned a few days ago, there was such a dearth of champions from the East that they knew it would be like handing the tournament to the West if Providence was allowed to go to the NCAAs just because we played an "off" game - no insult to Providence intended - but BU was clearly the best team in the country that year, as they subsequently proved. But still, by today's rules, they would have been OUT.

So when I say "lower expectations," I don't mean we should suck. I mean that it is unlikely to win NCs at the rate we once did. And I GET IT...everyone is comparing us to BC so this whole thing is exacerbated right now. Let me ask you, before Jerry York, how many National Championships had BC won? What? I can't hear you ("how many passes are we going to make before we shoot?" "FOUR!!!!!!!!!!!" - Gene Hackman in Hoosiers)....what's that? ONE????? How many years between titles? What was that? FIFTY-TWO??????????????????????????????? Is BC an elite program? Were they from 1949 - 2000? I don't know...but do you see my point??

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Well, if "how many people care" was a barrier to getting something posted on the internet, we'd have a very different world, wouldn't we. )

I was being sarcastic (I live in Massachusetts, remember?)

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

sorry... mookie was wondering how chickrod manages to survive in f'burf

Grew up here...housing prices were cheaper and we live .8 miles from the highway for easy commuting access to anywhere. My wife wanted to move to a "suburb" (quiet, small town), but I didn't want to pay 40% more for a house. Of course, now mine is worth 40% less. This proves that women are smarter than men...

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Anyone bringing up UCLA basketball as a comp is full of it. The reason Wooden won all those titles (besides having NBA great big men) was the fact that his players were semi professional. It was the worst kept secret in sports that Wooden ran a very dirty program. He just let Sam Gilbert buy players.

Please do not compare UCLA basketball to BU hockey. Once UCLA couldn't cheat anymore, they fell apart. They didn't make it to the Final Four for 15 years after they were forced to disassociate from Gilbert. Then, they won the title in 1995 and again got caught cheating with a dirty coach. They haven't won a title since.

The reason BU isn't an elite program now is because of Jack Parker. He needs to retire. I want to be able to say he can retire whenever he wants and that he's earned it, but really, he just needs to retire now and ride off into the sunset. Let both assistants go and bring in Quinn or Sullivan and let them rebuild the program.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

By the way, something I didn't mention also was that back "then," it was easier to make the national tournament as well. You had one big league in the East, the ECAC, and most of the teams were not great. In fact, when we won in 1978 we didn't even WIN the tournament - we lost in the championship game to Providence and were SELECTED by a committee after REPLAYING Providence again in a special NCAA "qualifier game" (probably because, as I mentioned a few days ago, there was such a dearth of champions from the East that they knew it would be like handing the tournament to the West if Providence was allowed to go to the NCAAs just because we played an "off" game - no insult to Providence intended - but BU was clearly the best team in the country that year, as they subsequently proved. But still, by today's rules, they would have been OUT....

this whole chain of events always makes me laugh... could this EVER be pulled off today? (of course not, no... but still)

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Plus there's just something ridiculous to me about driving ten miles to pick up a gallon of milk when I can basically walk or ride my bike. I enjoy the amenities of the city and put up with the problems...we're fortunate to live on 3 acres with a long driveway (350 from the street) and a 212 acre city park behind us where nobody will ever build...

 

[brassbonanza]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Now explain to me again how "terrible" UCLA's program is....only two schools in HISTORY have won more basketball championships than we have won hockey championships. And they've been playing the NCAA tournament since 1939 (when Oregon won). Before that, the NIT was actually the "elite" tournament before an NCAA tournament was even conceived of. So they've been playing basketball for 74 years and NCAA Hockey for 63.

College basketball and college hockey are apples and oranges. Basketball players are trying out for the pros, as they're undrafted, and have that added motivation whereas in hockey they're usually already drafted and the motivating factor is far less. Plus, there's no other comparable level of play for them than the NCAA, whereas in hockey, there are numerous other (supposedly) comparable leagues.

That said, UCLA is a bit of an odd case to use. Sure, their overall profile is enormous, but it's largely because Wooden's run there makes Jerry York look like a second-rate chump. From the fall of 1963 through the spring of 1975, they only didn't win the national title twice. But, outside of that run, they have only one title and aren't much more than an above average program overall. Thing is, that run in the '60s and '70s was so far beyond what anybody else in major college sports has done, that you can't simply dismiss it and only pay attention to what happened around it. In the Ben Howland era, aside from a three year run in the mid 2000s, they've had multiple abysmal years of sub .500 teams and multiple missed NCAA tournaments, so the results parallel is there between BU and UCLA. But really, the comparisons don't extend beyond that.

 

[brassbonanza]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

NESN didn't televise this game so they probably didn't have much video of it. If BU and Harvard don't make clips of it you won't find them.

The Garden wasn't even using the normal TV camera booth to show the game on the jumbotron, they were using some camera on a tripod somewhere off to the side and showing that feed, so I doubt there's any highlights that exist anywhere.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: Boston University 2012-13 Season Thread -- Part II

Plus there's just something ridiculous to me about driving ten miles to pick up a gallon of milk when I can basically walk or ride my bike. I enjoy the amenities of the city and put up with the problems...we're fortunate to live on 3 acres with a long driveway (350 from the street) and a 212 acre city park behind us where nobody will ever build...

no need to apologize! mookie does his golfing in f'burg