UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

[HockeyRef]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Yes. AP was a First Team All-American after scoring 22 goals and 52 points as a sophomore in 2016. Had he stayed two more years (especially his JR year with TK) it’s a very real possibility he puts up two 60+ seasons and is the fourth Wildcat to crack 200 career points...

TK was a Second Team All-American in 2017 after finishing his senior season. He scored 42-46-63 in his last three seasons respectively and finished with 167 total points. He’s at least a top-50 all time scorer if I remember correctly.

The numbers these two put up with no help aside from each other (in one season playing together) were phenomenal. If UNH had an equal second line and better D/G these two would have played on much more successful teams and they’d be better remembered for their talents, instead there’s a real chance they get lost in the mess of some dismal seasons for the team as a whole...

Both easily keep up with the star forwards of the 90’s and 00’s, IMO. Just to name one example - Mark Mowers was an awesome talent, but also one who played with Krog, Bekar, Nolan, Bogey, Nicklaus and Souza in JUST his junior season. Neither AP or TK ever played with a single other player of this caliber (aside from each other) for their entire careers...

UNH used to have great ROSTERS. No they’re reduced to having the occasional great player. It’s why landing the occasional star recruit means nothing - AP, TK, Gildon, Stutzle - they’re not going to win you anything unless you can land more (many more) and then build around a core. Good recruiters don’t land a stud or two. Anyone can do that. Good recruiters land studs consistently. If Souza and company can’t do that then they’re just...treading water...

Really good points here Dan...from now on I will not wish for the big dog players nor feel badly if they do not pan out. I've always understood it's about the players around those players (and there are so many examples over the past few years that I've been a fan; Union, UMass, to name a couple) I mean, and I mean absolutely no disrespect to these teams that do land a bunch of 1st rounders (not a terrible problem to have) but if that was the 'forumula for success' you'd see those teams consistently win it all, all the time. Too simplistic I know. Takes a lot more than that. And it's going to take time at the U, that's all there is to it. How much? Who knows. Hopefully sooner than later. Go 'Cats!!!

Ps....I would not turn them away, just want to be clear on that
Pss...I just wanna go to the Garden, win a HE tournament, and get back to the NCAA's I don't think that's too much to ask for. All I want
is what I have coming to me; all I want, is my fair share! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyGHjxsr28o

 

[Darius]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Please folks, for the love of...

Do your part, whatever you feel that is, and take this somewhere else.

Go 'cats. Beat Army.

 

[Darius]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

I have a soft sport for Army Black Knights Athletics. Since I was a kid, for whatever reason, I liked their football team. The players are actually warriors in a game that evokes battle themes. This Christmas Eve, my cousin and I made a bucket list agreement to attend an Army/Navy football game. My fall Saturday schedule often has downtime that coincides with Army football on the CBS Sports Network so I watch at least a bit of most of their games. This year they rushed for 3863 yards, passed for 1066. Unfortunately they were 5 - 8. Last season they were 4062/1041, 11 - 2. Who else is all cloud of dust old school like that?

Having said that, I hope we kick their butts. If Army wins, it will be the easiest loss of the season to absorb.

Go 'cats!

 

[HockeyRef]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

I have a soft sport for Army Black Knights Athletics. Since I was a kid, for whatever reason, I liked their football team. The players are actually warriors in a game that evokes battle themes. This Christmas Eve, my cousin and I made a bucket list agreement to attend an Army/Navy football game. My fall Saturday schedule often has downtime that coincides with Army football on the CBS Sports Network so I watch at least a bit of most of their games. This year they rushed for 3863 yards, passed for 1066. Unfortunately they were 5 - 8. Last season they were 4062/1041, 11 - 2. Who else is all cloud of dust old school like that?

Having said that, I hope we kick their butts. If Army wins, it will be the easiest loss of the season to absorb.

Go 'cats!

Looking forward to the trip over the Fishkill bridge!! Noticed on their ticketing page they mention arriving early coz you gotta go through security. With a game time at 4, would you think arriving on campus by 2:30 give us enough time? And yes, let's kick some Black Knight butt!!

 

[Dan]

Looking forward to the trip over the Fishkill bridge!! Noticed on their ticketing page they mention arriving early coz you gotta go through security. With a game time at 4, would you think arriving on campus by 2:30 give us enough time? And yes, let's kick some Black Knight butt!!

I’ve done a game at Air Force and had to clear security - as someone who always gets there early enough for warm ups and added 30 mins for security concerns I breezed right through. I’d guess security really only backs up when the bulk of the fans arrive simultaneously. But, perhaps, better safe than sorry...

 

[Darius]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Looking forward to the trip over the Fishkill bridge!! Noticed on their ticketing page they mention arriving early coz you gotta go through security. With a game time at 4, would you think arriving on campus by 2:30 give us enough time? And yes, let's kick some Black Knight butt!!

A season ticket holder who has been before told me one needs a driver's license (real ID?) or passport. My guess is the Army shames the TSA with security efficiency so 2:30 would be more than early, although spot on to check out the rink and environs and have a time buffer.

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Yes, because if we can agree that humans are causing the thing that causes climate change, then that's a start. But if your point is "we may not be able to change this," isn't the better and safer choice to try and change it, even if it ultimately is futile? Rather than saying "I'm not going to change until you can prove definitively that it will help?"

And I'm not even adderssing the Trumpism of "I'm actually going to reverse the steps just to **** off Obama" taht some here might love just because they get riled up at Obama and snowflakes (and 14 year old girls). That's a whole level of idiocy of cutting of the nose to spite the face. As my first google result showed, the level of objection correleates to the level of education in the field.

One limited observation … not sure citing a left-leaning search engine with its finger constantly on the scale would be at the top of my justifications, 'Watcher. Nor would I assume the UN IPCC is some apolitical bunch of science-first puritans, when their first solution is always to raid the US piggybank, and their leaders have a bad habit of giving away the (economic redistribution) game. Just sayin'.

For the record, still unanswered are (1) why were there higher temps for hundreds of years at a time WAY before mankind invented factories? and (2) if the current cycle is "man-made", how come the answers don't begin in China and India, the two biggest (by far) offenders contributing to current conditions?

Been through at least a half-dozen "existential" threats that never came to fruition over the course of my lifetime. Just one person's opinion, but the only one worth worrying about is proliferation of nuclear weapons, and their deployment if (or most likely when) they fall into the wrong hands. If you young'uns want to worry yourself sick over "climate", I think you're going to feel pretty silly 10 years from now.

Back to "over and out" status. Happy New Year, everyone!!

 

[TheRevengeance]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

See you next time you're done being out.

 

[Dan]

Lol, ‘left-leaning’ search engines...

 

[e.cat]

One limited observation … not sure citing a left-leaning search engine with its finger constantly on the scale would be at the top of my justifications, 'Watcher. Nor would I assume the UN IPCC is some apolitical bunch of science-first puritans, when their first solution is always to raid the US piggybank, and their leaders have a bad habit of giving away the (economic redistribution) game. Just sayin'.

For the record, still unanswered are (1) why were there higher temps for hundreds of years at a time WAY before mankind invented factories? and (2) if the current cycle is "man-made", how come the answers don't begin in China and India, the two biggest (by far) offenders contributing to current conditions?

Been through at least a half-dozen "existential" threats that never came to fruition over the course of my lifetime. Just one person's opinion, but the only one worth worrying about is proliferation of nuclear weapons, and their deployment if (or most likely when) they fall into the wrong hands. If you young'uns want to worry yourself sick over "climate", I think you're going to feel pretty silly 10 years from now.

Back to "over and out" status. Happy New Year, everyone!!

1 and 2 don't fit the narrative!

 

[HockeyRef]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Lol, ‘left-leaning’ search engines...

If there is such a thing please direct it my way, being a left leaning snowflake that I am. Thank God we are back to playing some hockey this weekend! At least the Bruins are back on their feet (for now). Go 'CATS!! On a positive note, is this the weekend we are going to see Jackson Pierson back in the line up????

 

[Snively65]

If there is such a thing please direct it my way, being a left leaning snowflake that I am. Thank God we are back to playing some hockey this weekend! At least the Bruins are back on their feet (for now). Go 'CATS!! On a positive note, is this the weekend we are going to see Jackson Pierson back in the line up????

If you have time, check out the "Beat Navy Tunnel," which takes pedestrians under one of the roads on campus. Navy holds the lead by a sizeable margin in the 120-year football history between the two, but unfortunately Navy still does not have a Div 1 hockey team, which would be a good fit to round up the AHC to 12 teams.

 

[Aerman]

Lol, ‘left-leaning’ search engines...

Dan - this seems an unusually naive response for you. It’s pretty much ‘settled science.’ (and yes, at this point I’m making fun of all of us )

Happy New Year all.

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Lol, ‘left-leaning’ search engines...

Yes, indeed. And quite naïve of you, BTW, according to a study from ultra-right Northwestern University.

https://lidblog.com/google-left-wing-bias/

FWIW I'll use Google for sports-related stuff, but on anything close to current events, there is Yahoo and Bing and a handful of others who don't put their thumbs on the scale like Google does.

Also worth checking is this item on how African countries feel about efforts to curb their use of coal, etc.

https://townhall.com/columnists/pau...-alarmist-banks-go-carboncolonialist-n2558607

 

[Dan]

Yes, indeed. And quite naïve of you, BTW, according to a study from ultra-right Northwestern University.

https://lidblog.com/google-left-wing-bias/

FWIW I'll use Google for sports-related stuff, but on anything close to current events, there is Yahoo and Bing and a handful of others who don't put their thumbs on the scale like Google does.

Also worth checking is this item on how African countries feel about efforts to curb their use of coal, etc.

https://townhall.com/columnists/pau...-alarmist-banks-go-carboncolonialist-n2558607

Lol, I’m not going to get sucked into another argument with a guy who has his head buried so deep in R talking points he no longer knows which way is up. I will take a brief moment to point out how fraudulent your last post was though, Chuck...

First of all, why you didn’t post the actual study? Or even the original article? Did you settle for posting a review of the first article because they manipulate the quotes, data and story to fit their narrative (Hey, just like you always do!)?

If you read the initial study it says nothing about liberal google bias - it claims that google gets a large percentage of its links from the it’s top ten sources (including Fox). You just don’t like a lot of those sites so to you that means proven liberal bias, but that’s not at all what the study concludes.

As for the article you linked, it flat out fabricates the quote from the study’s author. The bolded part (which is the home run for you) about quantitatively proving a liberal bias is NOT in the original article or part of the quote lifted for the review. It is entirely made up. It’s fake news, yet, it was added to the end of the real quote for desired effect and based in the understanding that the target audience wouldn’t ‘ask the right questions’...

I’ve never heard of The Lid - but I can only imagine what kind of source it actually is. Here’s what I found when I can checked the ‘about’ section...

“accuracy is important; therefore each news fact contains links to the original source, report or video or if unavailable identifies the source. The only exception is news personally covered by owner/editor Jeff Dunetz...”

Quick, I’ll give you three guesses who wrote the article you linked!

So your source on the subject is an article that deliberately misrepresents a quote and is written by a guy who says on his own website everything is factual except for what he writes personally. But I’m the naive one...

Did you mean to be so disingenuous about the study you cited Chuck? Or did you just jump on the first source that agreed with you? Cause this was an embarrassing effort even for you.

—-

Additionally, the study really says nothing about the political leanings Google or the sites often linked. It only claims that articles from the NYT, WaPo and CNN are more often shared by left-leaning readers (and only 60-40). I’m sure that has nothing to do with the fact that you’re party has told you not to read those sites, but OK the only answer is liberal bias because that’s the best answer...

I mean you only search out news you agree with or supports your side so everyone else must be doing this too!

The original study touches on a number of factors that you ignored, including SEO, a google focus on stories from the past 24 hours, etc. but don’t let the actual study you cite get in the way of the point you wish to make, which is that every site not overtly conservative is liberal trash...

Without even getting into the content of news sources - the ones you enjoy and often cite are not only right leaning but were founded EXPRESSLY to be ‘conservative’. Brietbart/the Federalist and CNN/NYT (for all their faults) are not the same and shouldn’t be treated as such by any search engine. Unless the goal is misinformation and dumbing down a population...

For reference, here is a current front page movie review teaser from The Federalist on Chuck’s favorite flick of the summer...

“It goes against every piety of liberal elites to portray the hippies as evil, but QT points out that the new liberation spawned a murderous cult.”

A. Movie. Review. It honestly says it all - regarding the difference between actual bias, actual agendas and perceived bias. And any news org or search engine that cuts through the crap instead of playing both sides is OK with me. If Chuck gets offended by this, too, so be it (all the better actually)...

Bottom line is Chuck knows what’s true and what’s not true. He knows where he gets his news. He knows why he goes to those sites for news. To rationalize that behavior he needs to project. And that’s where his liberal bias arguments originate...

 

[Dan]

And if Chuck actually wants to continue this argument - he knows he can do so posting in the Cafe link I posted above. He won’t do that because he could read what way the wind was blowing. If he does respond he’ll do it here in his safe space undoubtedly...

—-

Stutzle with two assists in two games for Germany who beat the Czechs this morning (but lost to team USA yesterday)...

 

[HockeyRef]

If you have time, check out the "Beat Navy Tunnel," which takes pedestrians under one of the roads on campus. Navy holds the lead by a sizeable margin in the 120-year football history between the two, but unfortunately Navy still does not have a Div 1 hockey team, which would be a good fit to round up the AHC to 12 teams.

Will do!! The 'Cats are back on the ice tomorrow woooo!!

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

And if Chuck actually wants to continue this argument - he knows he can do so posting in the Cafe link I posted above. He won’t do that because he could read what way the wind was blowing. If he does respond he’ll do it here in his safe space undoubtedly...

I have to ask you, Dan … who is it you're speaking to when you respond like you do above, or in other posts? You realize what you're doing is the walking, talking definition of grandstanding, no?? Or do you lack even that modicum of self-awareness???

Me? I'm speaking with you, right here. I'm not posting links to websites or webpages with directions for you to go speak to folks who would upset your left-leaning talking points. And you still haven't even attempted to provide any real answers to the simple questions I've outlined for you. You just dodge questions and smear any disagreeing sources. You lack intellectual curiosity.

For what it's worth … I was a registered Independent until after W's first term. I also voted on more than one occasion for a D governor (Lynch) because he was the last D who seemed genuinely open to making bipartisan government work locally. He was also a frequent attendee at UNH home games on the QT, and I'd go shake his hand if I saw him there. His like are missed, and badly needed.

Now, back to Google bias. Try this experiment. Enter "Sergey Brin after 2016 election" into YouTube search (owned by Google), and tell me how far you have to go down - past a lot of totally unrelated items BTW - until you get to this on-point item, which is pretty self-explanatory on the issue of clear bias, coming straight from the mouth of a (whining) immigrant-turned-billionaire, and the echo chamber of sycophants surrounding him at Google:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRf9UxsM-NE

 

[scoreboard]

Lol, I’m not going to get sucked into another argument with a guy who has his head buried so deep in R talking points he no longer knows which way is up. I will take a brief moment to point out how fraudulent your last post was though, Chuck...

First of all, why you didn’t post the actual study? Or even the original article? Did you settle for posting a review of the first article because they manipulate the quotes, data and story to fit their narrative (Hey, just like you always do!)?

If you read the initial study it says nothing about liberal google bias - it claims that google gets a large percentage of its links from the it’s top ten sources (including Fox). You just don’t like a lot of those sites so to you that means proven liberal bias, but that’s not at all what the study concludes.

As for the article you linked, it flat out fabricates the quote from the study’s author. The bolded part (which is the home run for you) about quantitatively proving a liberal bias is NOT in the original article or part of the quote lifted for the review. It is entirely made up. It’s fake news, yet, it was added to the end of the real quote for desired effect and based in the understanding that the target audience wouldn’t ‘ask the right questions’...

I’ve never heard of The Lid - but I can only imagine what kind of source it actually is. Here’s what I found when I can checked the ‘about’ section...

“accuracy is important; therefore each news fact contains links to the original source, report or video or if unavailable identifies the source. The only exception is news personally covered by owner/editor Jeff Dunetz...”

Quick, I’ll give you three guesses who wrote the article you linked!

So your source on the subject is an article that deliberately misrepresents a quote and is written by a guy who says on his own website everything is factual except for what he writes personally. But I’m the naive one...

Did you mean to be so disingenuous about the study you cited Chuck? Or did you just jump on the first source that agreed with you? Cause this was an embarrassing effort even for you.

—-

Additionally, the study really says nothing about the political leanings Google or the sites often linked. It only claims that articles from the NYT, WaPo and CNN are more often shared by left-leaning readers (and only 60-40). I’m sure that has nothing to do with the fact that you’re party has told you not to read those sites, but OK the only answer is liberal bias because that’s the best answer...

I mean you only search out news you agree with or supports your side so everyone else must be doing this too!

The original study touches on a number of factors that you ignored, including SEO, a google focus on stories from the past 24 hours, etc. but don’t let the actual study you cite get in the way of the point you wish to make, which is that every site not overtly conservative is liberal trash...

Without even getting into the content of news sources - the ones you enjoy and often cite are not only right leaning but were founded EXPRESSLY to be ‘conservative’. Brietbart/the Federalist and CNN/NYT (for all their faults) are not the same and shouldn’t be treated as such by any search engine. Unless the goal is misinformation and dumbing down a population...

For reference, here is a current front page movie review teaser from The Federalist on Chuck’s favorite flick of the summer...

“It goes against every piety of liberal elites to portray the hippies as evil, but QT points out that the new liberation spawned a murderous cult.”

A. Movie. Review. It honestly says it all - regarding the difference between actual bias, actual agendas and perceived bias. And any news org or search engine that cuts through the crap instead of playing both sides is OK with me. If Chuck gets offended by this, too, so be it (all the better actually)...

Bottom line is Chuck knows what’s true and what’s not true. He knows where he gets his news. He knows why he goes to those sites for news. To rationalize that behavior he needs to project. And that’s where his liberal bias arguments originate...

Kind of a long diatribe coming from someone who wrote he was going to stop commenting on this subject a few days ago. No surprise...

 

[Dan]

Kind of a long diatribe coming from someone who wrote he was going to stop commenting on this subject a few days ago. No surprise...

Lol, happy to see my posts still get the best of you. You said you ignore me but you keep responding angrily. No surprise...