Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

[DaveStPaul]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Jack Parker kicked my dog.

 

[chickod]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Find me one BU poster who blamed the PWR for BU not getting in. I look forward to your response.

I didn't say they "blamed the PWR." I said that if we had won more games (Brown, Harvard, NU, etc) we would not even be worrying about it. What are you people so angry about? That even with all of your frenetic calculating every night after each game that we still didn't get in? And I find it hilarious that slurpees says I am "wrong." What am I wrong about?

From slurpees:We would NOT have had to win the HET had we defeated NU last Sunday

From ME: If we had taken care of business against Northeastern...we would be in the championship game now

Gee...sounds to me like we are both AGREEING that if we had beaten NU that would have been enough...

From FL: But no one ever said that RPI game single-handedly decided BU's season. That game was just being used as an EXAMPLE, meaning "one that is representative of a group as a whole." Obviously all of those games killed BU, but the RPI game was being used simply to show how close BU was despite all those downfalls.

From ME: What about a loss and a tie to BROWN? What about a loss to HARVARD? What about losing three of the last five to Northeastern

Yep...wrong again. So clearly, everything I said was wrong, as you asserted. But seeing that the season is OVER, I'll drop this if you stop berating me. And by the way, FL, I pay a lot of money to go to these games, so don't condescend to me. My opinion is just as valid as yours...

 

[Rover]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

.
fact - if bu went 2-0-0 vs bron instead of 0-1-1, they'd still be playing.

? - If BU had beaten LeBron James twice instead of a loss and a tie we'd still be playing? What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Rover]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Discuss other topics all you want. I'll be happy to chime in when I feel like it. I personally can't wait for another enthralling 20 page discussion about the BU ticket office's policies. Scarlet, why don't you kick that off again?

So what you were trying to do had absolutely nothing to do with the conversation about the fickleness of PWR, but you nevertheless chose to quote those posts and argue about the points contained therein, notwithstanding the fact that your conclusion was a total non-sequitor?

I thought you stopped drinking moonshine?

 

[BigRedTerrier]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Yes. We're splitting it up into top two lines, bottom two lines, defense and goaltending. Top two lines will be up Thursday.

Limey, do you do these report cards anymore?

 

[buoldtimer]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

i'd say make boyle the coach and kill two birds with one stone... but then, i don't think any of his lifts would be optional.

What the hell does "french kiss the deuce horse face" mean? Is it a movie, television or music reference?

 

[Agganis]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Took a week long break from USCHO and just read 12 pages in one sitting. That was a bad decision.

My only comment is in regards to discussing that the 08-09 team didn't even play 60 minutes every night (if I joined the PWR conversation I would blow my brains out). Give me a team, pro or college, that has ever showed up for every minute of every game. Whoever instilled the mindset to never give up, even if you haven't been playing your A game yet today, whether it be the exceptionally old coach, or the exceptionally old captain did well.

I lied, I have a second comment, well question actually. Not taking sides on the should he stay or should he go, but if Quinn and Sullivan are unavailable is anyone out there a step up from Parker? Given that whoever will be coach will have either played or coached at BU.

 

[limey]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Discuss other topics all you want. I'll be happy to chime in when I feel like it. I personally can't wait for another enthralling 20 page discussion about the BU ticket office's policies. Scarlet, why don't you kick that off again?

I thought you stopped drinking moonshine?

What a well-reasoned retort. Do you see the difference between your posts and, for example, the most recent one by Bantam75? His was intelligently constructed and made reasonable arguments regarding the issue being discussed. As a result, he caused me (and presumably others) to duly consider his counterpoints, which added to the overall discussion.

You, on the other hand, interjected yourself into the conversation, brought up a series of non-sequiturs, and then became indignant and resorted to childish insults when someone called you to task for doing so, including insulting well-respected posters.

Your utter lack of social grace does yourself no favors and, quite frankly, your failure to make an intelligent contribution brings down the whole discussion. Further, it an embarrassment to me, personally, to know that someone who lacks both common courtesy and critical reading skills attended the same undergraduate institution that I did. Indeed, they must nickname you "Mowgli" at dinner parties, should you ever be invited to one.

Hopefully, in the future, you can contribute to the discussion. Or, in the alternative, refrain from rudely interjecting yourself into it.

Limey, do you do these report cards anymore?

Truth be told, I only was able to see about 50% of the games this season and don't really believe that I can do it justice. If someone wants to collaborate with me, I can see what we can come up with.

 

[Friend_of_BU_Hockey]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

My retrospective now that the season has been officially over for 3+ days:

THE FRESHMEN:
This team leaned too heavily on the Freshmen and got inconsistent results. I was pleased to see progress from Nieto, Noonan and Clendening as the season progressed, and am quite optimistic about them playing even bigger roles on next year's team. Coyle and Gill had great 1st halves, but lost steam as the season progressed. Coyle never got the "post-WJC surge" that many other Terriers have had following a strong WJC performance. Gill pulled a Pete MacArthur from his Freshman year - great 1st half, virtually invisible the 2nd half until late in the seasons. However, the coaching staff kept giving both of them ample ice time in key situations -- but perhaps it was born out of need...

THE SOPHOMORES:
With the exception of Chiasson, the key Sophomores (Megan, Nicastro, Escobedo) failed to make the "leap" that Chiasson did. While Rosen and Courtnall were pleasant surprises in fulfilling their 4th line role, I didn't see much, if any, improvement from Megan, Nicastro nor Escobedo.

LACK OF DEPTH:
Another overlooked factor that impacted this year's team is the limited depth at forward with Cisse's injury and Glass' dismissal. As a result, the team leaned too much on the top 6 forwards.

DEFENSE:
I think Warsofsky took a step back this year. I sensed at times he was on a different page than the rest of his teammates on the ice. As skilled as he is, I saw him on numerous occasions trying to force something and not trusting his teammates enough.

The "layered" D was a mess. It's too passive of a system that resulted in too many SOG allowed, too much time spent in their own zone, and not challenging opposing puck carriers enough. This system gave opponents too much time/space to create scoring opportunities. I often felt the system didn't allow players to react or play more instinctively b/c they were constantly thinking about positioning.

COACHING:
Amongst all the talk about Coach Parker and the future state of the program as long as he remains, one change I'd like to see is replacing Buddy Powers with a younger, more dynamic assistant coach. I feel Powers has added little/no value to the program from a recruiting, teaching, motivation and accountability standpoint. I feel he's just kinda "there" to fill up space behind the bench.

EFFORT:
The level and consistency of effort required for the team to improve and succeed wasn't there after October. To me this was perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the season. They couldn't put together consecutive strong games. They had a hard time even putting together 3 solid periods of play in many games.

BOTTOM LINE:
This team had opportunities to control its own destiny and didn't. The team wasn't as good as its overall record. Take October out of the picture and they were pretty much a .500 team (13-12-7 after November 1).

 

[Federal League]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

I lied, I have a second comment, well question actually. Not taking sides on the should he stay or should he go, but if Quinn and Sullivan are unavailable is anyone out there a step up from Parker? Given that whoever will be coach will have either played or coached at BU.

I'd put John Hynes on that level, too. After those three, though, I definitely see a drop-off to the next group of possible replacements.

 

[Friend_of_BU_Hockey]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

I'd put John Hynes on that level, too. After those three, though, I definitely see a drop-off to the next group of possible replacements.

Agreed. I think one decision that may have hurt the program over the past 2 years and may continue to hurt the program long-term is John Hynes turning down an offer to join Coach Parker & Bavis behind the BU bench after Quinn left. Not sure why he turned it down, but I think he could've and probably would've contributed a lot more than Buddy Powers has.

 

[J.D.]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Tried finding it, but no dice. I believe it was limey's report card from 2003-2004 that may have been the funniest thing I've ever read on here.

 

[BU Hammer]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

To your points:
Reading the game recaps over the past 5-6 years, one recurring theme i see that frustrates Parker, but he does not know how to deal with anymore (IMHO), is the team's inability to come ready to play 60 minutes (2009 aside). He used to be able to deal with that problem by taking ice time away from players, but that tactic does not seem to work for him anymore. Outside of the "Burn the Boats" ploy in 2009, I feel Parker is the one that is not motivated the way he used to be.

This, except for the last part about Parker not being motivated (not ready to go that far, though I'd be willing to hear the argument, I think).

I've been kind of following along to this but had sort of resisted weighing in.

Two things really, really stood out to me during my time covering the team that I think apply to this argument.

1. Parker's hockey acumen is off the charts, and he is still very engaged in the game and its evolution. I think FL mentioned this before, but it bears repeating: numerous times over the last two years, we'd sit down with him and he'd talk about, for instance, what he saw the Pittsburgh Penguins doing when they practiced at Agganis before a game with the Bruins. He took multiple drills that Dan Bylsma was running with the Pens and tried them with his squad, some to very pleasant results. When he adjusted his defensive system before this season, it was based on things he'd noticed at the NHL level. He does things like that all the time.

Does every new gadget or idea he tries to plug in work perfectly? Hell no, but that's always the case in sports and life. Do I think Parker was wrong to install a "let the players play" power-play system and stick with it when it clearly wasn't working? Yup. Do I think it was a really stupid idea? Not at all. Why try to force a very talented –– and more importantly, very young –– group of power-play guys to learn an intricate system on the fly when they could possibly generate a very good power play on inventiveness alone? I get the thinking there, and I don't think it's unreasonable at all. When it became clear the system wasn't working, he obviously should've made a change, but that can be a tough thing to do midseason. Main point being, I don't think you can point to the team's PP struggles this year and say, "Hey, look! Parker don't know poo about hockey!" (I know you weren't doing that, defkit).

2. There's definitely something to the "disconnect with younger players," idea, though I don't think that's a fireable offense, at least not if things are structured correctly.

I can't tell you how many times (20? 30? 40?) we'd go into a post-game press conference, and Parker would come in and say something –– anything –– about the most recent game only to have his players come in two minutes later and blatantly contradict him. It was a running joke until we got tired of making it. At times, I think that can be drawn up to Parker's willingness to be honest with the press compared to his players, who might be hesitant to say something like, "Yeah, our defensemen stunk," or something. I get that, but this went well beyond that.

Now, here's where I differ from a lot of people. I'm not sure Parker ever really was "connected" with his players (I'm totally supposing now, by the way. I've followed the team for only four years, so I'm ready to be told I'm wrong here). His old-school style, the "scream first and ask questions later" mentality, you really think kids ever felt "connected" with then? You don't think some guys made fun of him behind his back for being that way? I get that hockey players are different today than they were in the 70s and 80s, but college kids are college kids, and they're going to be resistant to authority at times. That's inevitable, and if Parker was as intense as people tell me he was, I promise there was never any greater "connection" back then than there is now. If there was, I'd wager it was minimal at best.

I think Parker may just be a coach who needs his assistants to be in-tune with the players, and I don't think that's a rarity for coaches at any level (Herb Brooks needing Craig Patrick is the one that comes to mind).

Which brings me to my ultimate point: BU needs to find another Quinn.

Now, did I need 600 words to say that? Debatable.

May the Fanboy accusations and and general "you're wrong-ery" begin!

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

What a well-reasoned retort. Do you see the difference between your posts and, for example, the most recent one by Bantam75? His was intelligently constructed and made reasonable arguments regarding the issue being discussed. As a result, he caused me (and presumably others) to duly consider his counterpoints, which added to the overall discussion.

You, on the other hand, interjected yourself into the conversation, brought up a series of non-sequiturs, and then became indignant and resorted to childish insults when someone called you to task for doing so, including insulting well-respected posters.

Your utter lack of social grace does yourself no favors and, quite frankly, your failure to make an intelligent contribution brings down the whole discussion. Further, it an embarrassment to me, personally, to know that someone who lacks both common courtesy and critical reading skills attended the same undergraduate institution that I did. Indeed, they must nickname you "Mowgli" at dinner parties, should you ever be invited to one.

Hopefully, in the future, you can contribute to the discussion. Or, in the alternative, refrain from rudely interjecting yourself into it.

Wow, if there was ever a twilight zone post on a BU thread, this would be it.

 

[Rover]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

What a well-reasoned retort. Do you see the difference between your posts and, for example, the most recent one by Bantam75? His was intelligently constructed and made reasonable arguments regarding the issue being discussed. As a result, he caused me (and presumably others) to duly consider his counterpoints, which added to the overall discussion.

You, on the other hand, interjected yourself into the conversation, brought up a series of non-sequiturs, and then became indignant and resorted to childish insults when someone called you to task for doing so, including insulting well-respected posters.

Your utter lack of social grace does yourself no favors and, quite frankly, your failure to make an intelligent contribution brings down the whole discussion. Further, it an embarrassment to me, personally, to know that someone who lacks both common courtesy and critical reading skills attended the same undergraduate institution that I did. Indeed, they must nickname you "Mowgli" at dinner parties, should you ever be invited to one.

Hopefully, in the future, you can contribute to the discussion. Or, in the alternative, refrain from rudely interjecting yourself into it.


Truth be told, I only was able to see about 50% of the games this season and don't really believe that I can do it justice. If someone wants to collaborate with me, I can see what we can come up with.

Oh settle down you drunk bahstid. The day I accept advice about social graces from a guy who's hockey game attire reeked of spilled booze for all 6 years of his undergraduate career is the same day I start worshiping Boston College. While I expect overly sensitive responses from the young 'uns out here for which the internet has replaced all actual social interaction, you're a little too old to qualify for that free pass.

 

[BU Hammer]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Agreed. I think one decision that may have hurt the program over the past 2 years and may continue to hurt the program long-term is John Hynes turning down an offer to join Coach Parker & Bavis behind the BU bench after Quinn left. Not sure why he turned it down, but I think he could've and probably would've contributed a lot more than Buddy Powers has.

Looks like somebody beat me to my point by 2 posts. And did it wayyyyy more succinctly...

 

[Federal League]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

What a well-reasoned retort. Do you see the difference between your posts and, for example, the most recent one by Bantam75? His was intelligently constructed and made reasonable arguments regarding the issue being discussed. As a result, he caused me (and presumably others) to duly consider his counterpoints, which added to the overall discussion.

You, on the other hand, interjected yourself into the conversation, brought up a series of non-sequiturs, and then became indignant and resorted to childish insults when someone called you to task for doing so, including insulting well-respected posters.

Your utter lack of social grace does yourself no favors and, quite frankly, your failure to make an intelligent contribution brings down the whole discussion. Further, it an embarrassment to me, personally, to know that someone who lacks both common courtesy and critical reading skills attended the same undergraduate institution that I did. Indeed, they must nickname you "Mowgli" at dinner parties, should you ever be invited to one.

Hopefully, in the future, you can contribute to the discussion. Or, in the alternative, refrain from rudely interjecting yourself into it.

This made me laugh. Thumbs up.

 

[Rover]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Now, here's where I differ from a lot of people. I'm not sure Parker ever really was "connected" with his players (I'm totally supposing now, by the way. I've followed the team for only four years, so I'm ready to be told I'm wrong here). His old-school style, the "scream first and ask questions later" mentality, you really think kids ever felt "connected" with then? You don't think some guys made fun of him behind his back for being that way? I get that hockey players are different today than they were in the 70s and 80s, but college kids are college kids, and they're going to be resistant to authority at times. That's inevitable, and if Parker was as intense as people tell me he was, I promise there was never any greater "connection" back then than there is now. If there was, I'd wager it was minimal at best.

I think Parker may just be a coach who needs his assistants to be in-tune with the players, and I don't think that's a rarity for coaches at any level (Herb Brooks needing Craig Patrick is the one that comes to mind).

Not only are you wrong, but you're probably ugly too!

Just kidding, in fact this is a great point. I was always of the idea that Parker was stuck in the 70's and 80's mentality of coaches/management having an adversarial relationship with players. It could very well be that he never made that connection, but other circumstances (good assistants, less competition, better recruits) made the difference between then and now.

What I wonder about is if you can expect that out of assistants anymore, since they seem to have a lot of opportunities to move on after a few years (be in other college jobs, minor league hockey, juniors, etc). If somebody's dropping in, working a few years and then taking off and you're back to hiring a new assistant would that help explain some of BU's problems? Not sure but an interesting theory.

 

[BigRedTerrier]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Tried finding it, but no dice. I believe it was limey's report card from 2003-2004 that may have been the funniest thing I've ever read on here.

2007 wasn't so bad...my personal fav:

Jason Lawrence (D): Ah, the highly touted next Chris Drury of the bunch. He’s as useless as t!ts on a bull. He can’t shoot. He can’t pass. He can’t hit. He can’t fart and chew gum at the same time. I have a feeling that Jason Lawrence is a cruel joke that Jerry York is playing on Parker. I can see Jerry scheming, “I’ll get that wascally Parker by getting him to we-cwuit someone that skates like a weetard trying to hump a doorknob.” You win this one, Jerry.

 

[limey]

Re: Boston University Part IV: Off-Season or New Season?

Oh settle down you drunk bahstid. The day I accept advice about social graces from a guy who's hockey game attire reeked of spilled booze for all 6 years of his undergraduate career is the same day I start worshiping Boston College. While I expect overly sensitive responses from the young 'uns out here for which the internet has replaced all actual social interaction, you're a little too old to qualify for that free pass.

So more boorish personal insults? I wish I was surprised.