BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

[brassbonanza]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

No offense, but when you are outshot by nearly 3x, the refs don't seem like the primary problem.

College refereeing is what it is. There were bad calls both ways and Harvard should also have been called for a Too Many Men penalty in the 3rd period. McAvoy also likely should have gotten a major for his hit on Kerfoot given that that kind of hit can end seasons.

BU lost because they played like garbage, not because of officiating.

That said, the officials were a disaster. The Harvard guy bats the puck out of Oettinger's jersey to score the first goal, not even reviewed. Yet they reviewed other goals that weren't nearly as controversial. Harvard's third goal as well was questionable - the H guy was nudged into the crease but then made absolutely no effort to leave and made contact with Oettinger's stick. A former NCAA ref I follow on Twitter who had the benefit of replay said it should'v been waived off, though I'll agree that one was a more difficult decision. McAvoy's hit was absolutely not a major, he caught the guy from the side as he was already going down. Two minutes because that's how they call it in college, not a major. Then Hickey is boarded THE EXACT SAME WAY, no call. You mentioned the too many men that wasn't called that a screenshot of has been floating around Twitter. Clear as day six guys are on the ice and not making any attempt to change/get off the ice. They did a horrible job calling the game.

 

[Harry Cleverly]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

BU lost because they played like garbage, not because of officiating.

That said, the officials were a disaster. The Harvard guy bats the puck out of Oettinger's jersey to score the first goal, not even reviewed. Yet they reviewed other goals that weren't nearly as controversial. Harvard's third goal as well was questionable - the H guy was nudged into the crease but then made absolutely no effort to leave and made contact with Oettinger's stick. A former NCAA ref I follow on Twitter who had the benefit of replay said it should'v been waived off, though I'll agree that one was a more difficult decision. McAvoy's hit was absolutely not a major, he caught the guy from the side as he was already going down. Two minutes because that's how they call it in college, not a major. Then Hickey is boarded THE EXACT SAME WAY, no call. You mentioned the too many men that wasn't called that a screenshot of has been floating around Twitter. Clear as day six guys are on the ice and not making any attempt to change/get off the ice. They did a horrible job calling the game.

Exactly on both accounts.

The officiating was bad, but BU was even worse. And Harvard had a lot to do with it.

 

[BU Fan 84]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

No offense, but when you are outshot by nearly 3x, the refs don't seem like the primary problem.

College refereeing is what it is. There were bad calls both ways and Harvard should also have been called for a Too Many Men penalty in the 3rd period. McAvoy also likely should have gotten a major for his hit on Kerfoot given that that kind of hit can end seasons.

Did you read what I said? Because I started by saying the only thing worse than the refs was how BU played. Doesn't that suggest that the refs weren't the primary problem?

 

[BU Fan 84]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

BU lost because they played like garbage, not because of officiating.

That said, the officials were a disaster. The Harvard guy bats the puck out of Oettinger's jersey to score the first goal, not even reviewed. Yet they reviewed other goals that weren't nearly as controversial. Harvard's third goal as well was questionable - the H guy was nudged into the crease but then made absolutely no effort to leave and made contact with Oettinger's stick. A former NCAA ref I follow on Twitter who had the benefit of replay said it should'v been waived off, though I'll agree that one was a more difficult decision. McAvoy's hit was absolutely not a major, he caught the guy from the side as he was already going down. Two minutes because that's how they call it in college, not a major. Then Hickey is boarded THE EXACT SAME WAY, no call. You mentioned the too many men that wasn't called that a screenshot of has been floating around Twitter. Clear as day six guys are on the ice and not making any attempt to change/get off the ice. They did a horrible job calling the game.

I forgot the too many men missed call. I think he was referring to McAvoy's tripping penalty as the one that should've been a major. I disagree with that, he was skating hard one way and the Harvard player was coming at him, and his leg took out the Harvard player's leg. While an ugly play, there was no intent so a minor is more appropriate.

 

[BU Fan 84]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

If it isn't effort and it isn't coaching then I guess they just aren't any good...my god they just got outshot 48-17 by Harvard...but I guess they just psyche themselves out...guess there is nothing to be done but just pat them on the back and send them out there...what is this PeeWee hockey and guess what there are quite a few players on this team that suck compared to there supposed level of talent too

... but it IS coaching ....

 

[Nick Papagiorgio]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

Clear as day six guys are on the ice and not making any attempt to change/get off the ice. They did a horrible job calling the game.

Remember one year when BC and NU were playing in NU's zone 5x5 and then Kevin Roy just suddenly jumped off the bench and someone hit him for a breakaway and the donkeys in stripes still didn't call a penalty? Would have been hilarious if he scored.

 

[BU Fan 84]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

Fair retort but we will have to agree to disagree. As most coaching setups the asst coaches do 90% of the recruiting and the head coach signs off on offers when it gets to that point so they deserve a bulk of the credit in my opinion. In terms of players playing for themselves rather than the team I fully stand by that. Looking at the roster and how many of the current BU players will stay for 4 years...its a small percentage. Therefore they arent fully invested in the team nor the university. Its just another team they are on for the short team until they move onto the next uniform. Thats not how it is for other programs where kids play for 4 years and are fully invested. Do you think Kentucky basketball players are fully invested in their team success or are they focused on self improvement moreso as they move onto the NBA...hint they care way more about individual stats than team stats.

You can stay less than four years and still be fully invested in the team. If you think Matt O'Connor wasn't fully invested, then you are nuts. You can stay one year and still be fully invested in the team. You can have plans to play in the NHL in the near future but still be fully invested in the team. These guys are invested. They are trying; they care. It can still be a struggle to figure out how to play when you are 18 to 20 years old. That is where the coaching staff is supposed to come in and ease the struggle. In this case, I think Quinn is struggling to create a cohesive team with an effective offensive strategy and he's failed to adjust the game plan as other teams have found ways to beat his schemes.

Outshot 42-17. Enough said. Blaming refs for anything is weak sauce. If anything the refs missed a too many men which happens and they went lightly on McAvoy for his blatant dangerous trip.

I don't know how you can be responding to my posts and then say I am blaming the refs.

 

[Friend_of_BU_Hockey]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

BU laid an egg in the Beanpot final. Pure and simple. Anything else is pure conjecture.

Agreed. It's not that they lost, but (with all due respect to an excellent Harvard team) how they lost.

How BU performs the next 2 weekends will be a bellwether for its potential of postseason success.

A parting thought...There's quite the disconnect between BU's skill level and offensive output. 2.83 GPG over its last 24 games is not what I expected. There's very little secondary and tertiary scoring. JFK had his streak last month, (as already mentioned) Greenway and Harper have fallen off, a player of Bellows' ability should have more than 5 goals, and Cloonan is on a 50-game goalless drought dating back to November 2015.

The offensive outbursts in October appear - albeit against inferior talent - seem very much like outliers as the season has progressed.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

Based on what you guys are saying, will it be up to keller to carry the team like eichel?

unpossible

 

[Lemonade]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

You can stay less than four years and still be fully invested in the team. If you think Matt O'Connor wasn't fully invested, then you are nuts. You can stay one year and still be fully invested in the team. You can have plans to play in the NHL in the near future but still be fully invested in the team. These guys are invested. They are trying; they care. It can still be a struggle to figure out how to play when you are 18 to 20 years old. That is where the coaching staff is supposed to come in and ease the struggle. In this case, I think Quinn is struggling to create a cohesive team with an effective offensive strategy and he's failed to adjust the game plan as other teams have found ways to beat his schemes.



I don't know how you can be responding to my posts and then say I am blaming the refs.

Players that plan on staying 4 years are more invested. Plain and simple. The risk of recruiting such talent is the rapid turnover (see BC this season). Vesey was more invested in Harvard than Eichel was invested in BU. As far as the McAvoy hit - that was 1000% blatant and dangerous. He angled leg and picked it up. Should have been an intent to injure.

 

[chickod]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

Players that plan on staying 4 years are more invested. Plain and simple. The risk of recruiting such talent is the rapid turnover (see BC this season).

So that begs the question. Is this the way it's going to be from now on? Because I, for one, have no interest in watching an NHL farm team. I have been going to BU hockey games since 1971. I get it that "things have changed," but why can't he also recruit some "middle tier" talent who will not go to the NHL and provide some continuity for the program as well as leadership when they progress to upperclassmen? It doesn't have to be "all or nothing." And if that is what it is going to be, then you are going to have a hard time convincing me that Quinn WANTS to be anything more than a "developer" of NHL players. As an alumnus, I would have thought he would want to maintain (I won't say "restore" because that will make some of you apoplectic) the status of this storied program. Understand...I am not making absolute statements. I am ASKING. Is this an anomaly? I would like to watch a team where a good percentage of the players stay more than one year. Because you will NEVER develop a cohesive unit with this much turnover. And if that is what it is going to continue to be, I'm not interested.

 

[brassbonanza]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

but why can't he also recruit some "middle tier" talent who will not go to the NHL and provide some continuity for the program as well as leadership when they progress to upperclassmen?

Have you missed the contributions from Curry and Chabot this year as well as Nik Olsson, John MacLeod, and Chase Phelps? You can also make a strong case for Harper to be in this category as well, he's a long way off from the NHL. I agree with you a championship level team needs strong experienced leadership guys as well as the high-talent players, but to argue BU has none of the former is factually wrong.

 

[chickod]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

You can stay less than four years and still be fully invested in the team. .

Well, yes you "can," but it still makes it difficult for a team to play cohesively. And I see a lot of individual plays. For example, how do you skate over the line and straight to the boards and allow yourself to get trapped on a power play? It happens time and time again. It's like they have to skate to a "spot" to set it up. You have the man advantage, if you MOVE the puck quickly enough the defense will have to retreat or else they will be caught out of position. THEN you run your play. It doesn't have to be choreographed. If a defender is moving towards you, then someone is open. Get it to them. So what if it takes 30 seconds to get "set up." Everyone is trying to make plays all by themselves. And they don't spread out so it's easy to cover them. So again, you can't have it both ways. If they're not "selfish," then either they're not as talented as we think or it's the coaching. Something has to be accountable.

 

[chickod]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

I agree with you a championship level team needs strong experienced leadership guys as well as the high-talent players, but to argue BU has none of the former is factually wrong.

I didn't say "none." What I am contemplating is that if you extrapolate out this current "philosophy" over the next few years, the ratio is seemingly going to swing towards more and more NHL level players and the players you are speaking about will be even fewer.

 

[J.D.]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

I loled at HC claiming the "trip" by mcaviy was more of a dive...what a joke of a take.

 

[brassbonanza]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

I loled at HC claiming the "trip" by mcaviy was more of a dive...what a joke of a take.

The officials got a lot wrong last night - that wasn't one of them. He's lucky he didn't overtly stick his leg out into the H guy more than he did or it'd have been an easy kneeing major. As it was, it looked like the primary point of contact was the ankle or shin. Either way a penalty and a dirty play.

 

[ericredaxe]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

I think Harry is correct. BU stunk out the joint last night and now everyone is overreacting.

To suggest we should actively recruit less talented kids to increase the odds that they stay for 4 years is honestly ridiculous. Unless you truly have an Eichel level prospect, there really is no telling how long kids may or may not stay. They will develop at different rates and leave at different times, and only hindsight can be 20/20 on that.

 

[Agganis]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

why can't he also recruit some "middle tier" talent who will not go to the NHL and provide some continuity for the program as well as leadership when they progress to upperclassmen?

Have you missed the contributions from Curry and Chabot this year as well as Nik Olsson, John MacLeod, and Chase Phelps? You can also make a strong case for Harper to be in this category as well, he's a long way off from the NHL. I agree with you a championship level team needs strong experienced leadership guys as well as the high-talent players, but to argue BU has none of the former is factually wrong.

I didn't say "none." What I am contemplating is that if you extrapolate out this current "philosophy" over the next few years, the ratio is seemingly going to swing towards more and more NHL level players and the players you are speaking about will be even fewer.

You did say BU wasn't getting "some" which I believe means "none".

Each of the 4 complete recruiting classes under Quinn (counting next year) had 3 undrafted freshmen (then Andren was added mid year). If this trend continues BU under Quinn should always have about 12 undrafted skaters and about 10 drafted skaters. Is this a good ratio to you? What is the ideal ratio?

 

[chickod]

Re: BU 2017 Season Thread II: Terriers rising

I don't know what I would prefer as a fan...teams you can get to know and really enjoy watching develop (while they win of course ) or teams that have great players that are in and out in 1-2 years.

I can only speak for myself here. And I realize fans from other threads are probably rolling their eyes and saying "What are they complaining about?" But here goes...I want to see a team that improves throughout the year, plays hard every night and doesn't underachieve. I don't think that's asking too much. (Personally, I prefer your description of 'teams you can get to know and really enjoy watching develop' but I get it that those days are probably gone). What was great about '09 was that you had four senior leaders who put this team on their back and carried them to a National Championship. But we had watched these guys play for four years and almost felt as though we knew them (and we DID know the parents, many of whom sat in the stands with us for four years). As they say in pro sports when players get traded, "We hardly knew ya!" I can't help when I was born. Perhaps it was a more "idyllic" time...I don't know. There was more stability. Now I just feel as though we're watching a bunch of mercenaries. I'm not going to argue with the people who say that they "are vested." We can't get inside their heads. But it just doesn't seem that way. As they say, take the "eyeball" test. What do your eyes tell you? What they tell ME is that we have a high percentage of (at least in their minds) high-end talent, many of whom seem distracted and thinking about the next level, which leads to inconsistent play at best and selfish play at worst. That's my opinion. I can't help it. That's what I see.

 

[Lemonade]

I can only speak for myself here. And I realize fans from other threads are probably rolling their eyes and saying "What are they complaining about?" But here goes...I want to see a team that improves throughout the year, plays hard every night and doesn't underachieve. I don't think that's asking too much. (Personally, I prefer your description of 'teams you can get to know and really enjoy watching develop' but I get it that those days are probably gone). What was great about '09 was that you had four senior leaders who put this team on their back and carried them to a National Championship. But we had watched these guys play for four years and almost felt as though we knew them (and we DID know the parents, many of whom sat in the stands with us for four years). As they say in pro sports when players get traded, "We hardly knew ya!" I can't help when I was born. Perhaps it was a more "idyllic" time...I don't know. There was more stability. Now I just feel as though we're watching a bunch of mercenaries. I'm not going to argue with the people who say that they "are vested." We can't get inside their heads. But it just doesn't seem that way. As they say, take the "eyeball" test. What do your eyes tell you? What they tell ME is that we have a high percentage of (at least in their minds) high-end talent, many of whom seem distracted and thinking about the next level, which leads to inconsistent play at best and selfish play at worst. That's my opinion. I can't help it. That's what I see.

very well put.