Re: Quinnipiac Bobcats 2016-17 - It's 873 miles to Chicago...
Disagree. You guys came off a tough game last night, ran up against a hot goalie and, quite frankly, faced a better team in UVM than it's been given credit for. No shame in that.
Re: Quinnipiac Bobcats 2016-17 - It's 873 miles to Chicago...
Definitely not our best effort. Shortridge was shaky but had little help. Offense was not sharp. Lekkas was a stud. Losing C. Clifton was huge but not the difference in this one. They did seem a step behind UVM all game long. Gonna be a long trip home with another tough weekend ahead.
Last edited by MarkEagleUSA; 11-27-2016, 04:31 PM.
QuinnipiacBobcats 2023 National Champions ECAC Regular Season Champions: 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 ECAC Tournament Champions: 2016 East Regional: 2013 (Champions), 2014, 2016 (Champions), 2023 (Champions), 2024 Northeast Regional: West Regional: 2015, 2021 Midwest Regional: 2019, 2022 Frozen Four: 2013, 2016, 2023 (Champions) Pass complete. Lipkin has a man in front! Shot... SCORE!!!
Re: Quinnipiac Bobcats 2016-17 - It's 873 miles to Chicago...
Taken to the wood shed. Not sure starting Shortridge was the right option. This game meant something for the pairwise. Start the better goaltender in my opinion. Shortridge could have played Friday against RPI.
QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY BOBCATS
ECAC Regular Season Champions
2013, 2015, 2016, 2019
Disagree. You guys came off a tough game last night, ran up against a hot goalie and, quite frankly, faced a better team in UVM than it's been given credit for. No shame in that.
I agree with this, but I also kind of agree with Nosmo. We're not the No. 3 team in the country right now. We might turn out to be in April, but I do think we're being rated because of past performance. We're probably closer to 10-15 at the moment. And Vermont should definitely be better than No. 20. They're really good. Excellent defensive performance from them -- QU had 41 SOG tonight, but Vermont did a great job keeping the Bobcats to the outside. Really impressive. And yes, that goalie is very good.
Taken to the wood shed. Not sure starting Shortridge was the right option. This game meant something for the pairwise. Start the better goaltender in my opinion. Shortridge could have played Friday against RPI.
I don't think Shortridge had anything to do with the final result, though. Maybe Truehl makes one or two of those stops, but the way Vermont was getting to the net -- this game was lost by the defense and won by the opposing netminder.
I agree with this, but I also kind of agree with Nosmo. We're not the No. 3 team in the country right now. We might turn out to be in April, but I do think we're being rated because of past performance. We're probably closer to 10-15 at the moment. And Vermont should definitely be better than No. 20. They're really good. Excellent defensive performance from them -- QU had 41 SOG tonight, but Vermont did a great job keeping the Bobcats to the outside. Really impressive. And yes, that goalie is very good.
Actually, I kinda agree with Nosmo too, but didn't want y'all to think UVM fans were d-bags. I think your range is probably about right. Good luck the rest of the way.
Definitely not our best effort. Shortridge was shaky but had little help. Offense was not sharp. Laakas was a stud. Losing C. Clifton was huge but not the difference in this one. They did seem a step behind UVM all game long. Gonna be a long trip home with another tough weekend ahead.
As I mentioned in the lodge, I've gotta wonder if last night's game didn't take a bit more out of SLU and QU. Quite an intense, physical game, a little less rest compared to the HE teams... both seemed just a bit off their usual performance.
I also feel that UVM should trend towards a tourney bubble team (probably in that 10-20 range), and I think QU and SLU are in that mix as well.
Very enjoyable tournament here in Belfast, I would absolutely recommend it should any of our teams get invited again in the future.
Am I the only one questioning this play? This is ridiculous -- that was not this bad of a hit, I'm not even sure it was a major. I thought it was full-body, it wasn't blindside, the puck was there, the player was leaning down to play the puck, and it sure didn't look like the head was the principle point of contact. Am I missing something?
Am I the only one questioning this play? This is ridiculous -- that was not this bad of a hit, I'm not even sure it was a major. I thought it was full-body, it wasn't blindside, the puck was there, the player was leaning down to play the puck, and it sure didn't look like the head was the principle point of contact. Am I missing something?
Am I the only one questioning this play? This is ridiculous -- that was not this bad of a hit, I'm not even sure it was a major. I thought it was full-body, it wasn't blindside, the puck was there, the player was leaning down to play the puck, and it sure didn't look like the head was the principle point of contact. Am I missing something?
I agree with you on this. Thought it was a ridiculous call. The player played with his head down and Clifton's should nailed him into the head.
QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY BOBCATS
ECAC Regular Season Champions
2013, 2015, 2016, 2019
Comment