Re: Hockey East: Anyones Tournament
There you go again with the post season record somehow making a difference.
Yea, it's just a coincidence that BC keeps winning in the postseason. I'm sure there's no reason to explain that pattern. Explain BC's lack of RS titles compared to trips to the FF and HE tourney titles in the York era. This ought to be something. I'm sure it's just coincidence as well. Or maybe BC just runs into chumps like Air Force and Yale every postseason to pump up their numbers
Then again, you did say earlier this year that games in October mean just as much as games in April and March, didn't you? So it makes sense that the postseason games don't make a difference to you (except for your constant yapping about beating Yale and Air Force).
How did that post season record help you out last year???
Even in a terrible year BC was still 2-1 in the postseason last year, all as the underdog (both on paper and in reality). Turns out the RS wasn't good enough. Maybe they would have had a nice run in the NCAAs if they didn't screw around in the RS for so long. I mean, EVEN UVM MADE THE FROZEN FOUR!!!!! Anything was possible last year.
No try reading again. I know you BC folk have trouble with this reading thing.....
BC has been consistently good ( a period denote the end of the statement)
A ****tty team ( note , there was nothing about this year or any other year in this statement) will not be good just because past teams have done well in the playoffs. I.E. BC's post season doesn't mean squat other then they have had past success.
First of all, your post about "****ty" teams was in response to my quote inferring that BC will continue to own UVM in the playoffs. And for good reason (which your tiny brain cannot figure out). Thus when you said it was laughable that I think "that somehow a ****ty team is going to win come playoff time just because it's the playoffs" you should (I put should because you're just too retarded to be considered normal) be referring to BC as the ****ty team. Regardless, I never said that in the first place so your whole cute little rant goes right down the tubes. The truth is, talent/coaching wins out in the end and BC has both and the results make sense. And part of that coaching is getting a team to peak at the right time - which BC does just about every year like clockwork.
Past success doesn't indicate future performance (like the stock market) but the results keep coming out the same almost every time for a reason. BC knows when to peak (again, see the question I referred to up at the top). They underperform all RS and then turn it up when the hardware is on the line.
BC's strategy is a lot better than UVM's strategy of "let's drop some acid, hope we make the NCAAs and pray we get chumps like Yale and Air Force!".
