IMHO, and I'm not sure whether it's deliberate, but you repeatedly mischaracterize the debate on the PC thread to the point where even an objective reader such as myself, who checks-in periodically only as a fan of Rhode Island hockey in general, becomes annoyed.
Let me say first that where an individual (player, coach or someone else) has been attacked on a personal level, a defense like yours (above) may be appropriate. However, in this instance no one has been personally attacked. Performances are being critiqued. If you disagree with a critique, then offer your own, but don't paint the critique as a personal attack in order to feign offense and avoid answering it.
Further, who gives a **** that the players played hard. Not them -- they came to Providence to develop and win. Not Coach Army, either -- he came to Providence to develop players and young men and win. "But they played hard" has no place in Hockey East and with good reason because everybody plays hard. Every player in the league, every coach in the league, everybody. The team's goals include playing with maximum intensity for sixty minutes, executing a gameplan, outworking the opponent, working better together every day, winning, and growing as people off the ice. Additionally, the coaching staff has critical goals in recruiting. When any one of these goals is not being attained, a negative critique is needed. Could you give an example of what goal you saw being attained on Saturday night? The critique posed is that on Friday night, while giving up five goals in the first period to Merrimack on Senior Night after falling into last place in the league, no goals were being attained (literal or figurative). It's not personal Sonny