PDA

View Full Version : UNH Wildcats TD Garden and Beyond 2015



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Greg A
04-12-2015, 10:15 AM
Well, we came within 9 minutes...PC just badly outplayed us in the 3rd. I thought the inexperience that we said would catch up with us all year finally did. It was just shocking to see it happen after 40 games. Nothing you can say except congratulations to the Friars. I just hope Matt O'Connor does not let this define him. He is a great kid. He sat for 50 minutes after the game and answered question after question that was fired at him. The definition of class.

I guess because I'm "older" (let's leave it at that) that I have some perspective on life. The first thing I thought of was, "This is payback for the way we stole one in 2009." There IS symmetry in life..if you believe in that kind of stuff. But I'm happy that a Hockey East team won. Disappointed, but looking forward to the future.

Actually, for those of us with long memories, Providence's win was payback for the 1978 play-in game. For those who are not aware, back then the NCAA tournament was a four team affair, two from the west (WCHA), two from the east (ECAC). The teams selected were always the two which played in the final of their respective conference tournaments. That is until 1978 when Providence beat BU 4-1 in the ECAC semis and lost to BC in the final. The NCAA, for reasons never adequately explained, decreed that BU was entitled to a do over, a game between them and the Friars to determine who would be the second eastern team in the NCAA's. BU won that game and went on to win the championship over BC in, ironically, Providence. How I wish UNH could have a few do over games over the years.

FiveHole12
04-12-2015, 10:15 AM
ps..fanatic...I like the ring to that. Somehow, beats 'cheerleader' ;)
Fanatics don't have pom poms, cheerleaders do. If the shoe fits... ;)

chickod
04-12-2015, 10:22 AM
Actually, for those of us with long memories, Providence's win was payback for the 1978 play-in game. For those who are not aware, back then the NCAA tournament was a four team affair, two from the west (WCHA), two from the east (ECAC). The teams selected were always the two which played in the final of their respective conference tournaments. That is until 1978 when Providence beat BU 4-1 in the ECAC semis and lost to BC in the final. The NCAA, for reasons never adequately explained, decreed that BU was entitled to a do over, a game between them and the Friars to determine who would be the second eastern team in the NCAA's. BU won that game and went on to win the championship over BC in, ironically, Providence. How I wish UNH could have a few do over games over the years.

I was at that game. :)

Greg A
04-12-2015, 10:22 AM
WHY NOT US?? That's my mantra going forward for UNH. Four of the last five champions are first time winners, two of them fourth seeds in the tournament, both of whom (Yale and PC) were the last teams in. My contention is that there is not a lot that separates these teams anymore. UNH barely finished 8th, yet took 2 of 3 on the road against the eventual national champ. To get there, you do need a good goalie (as evidenced last night on both sides of the puck), a couple of decent defensive pairings, two solid lines, and good special teams. UNH had most of that at the end of this season. And while I do believe that they will get off to a slow start again next year, mostly due to a pedestrian senior class, I think that they will get better as the year goes along and at a faster rate than they did this year. IMO, there are no great teams anymore, just ones that jell at the right time of the year, the end.

Greg A
04-12-2015, 10:24 AM
I was at that game. :)

Do you have a rational defense as to why it was played?

Scott
04-12-2015, 10:28 AM
WHY NOT US?? That's my mantra going forward for UNH. Four of the last five champions are first time winners, two of them fourth seeds in the tournament, both of whom (Yale and PC) were the last teams in. My contention is that there is not a lot that separates these teams anymore. UNH barely finished 8th, yet took 2 of 3 on the road against the eventual national champ. To get there, you do need a good goalie (as evidenced last night on both sides of the puck), a couple of decent defensive pairings, two solid lines, and good special teams. UNH had most of that at the end of this season. And while I do believe that they will get off to a slow start again next year, mostly due to a pedestrian senior class, I think that they will get better as the year goes along and at a faster rate than they did this year. IMO, there are no great teams anymore, just ones that jell at the right time of the year, the end.

Hear, hear.

HockeyRef
04-12-2015, 11:46 AM
WHY NOT US?? That's my mantra going forward for UNH. Four of the last five champions are first time winners, two of them fourth seeds in the tournament, both of whom (Yale and PC) were the last teams in. My contention is that there is not a lot that separates these teams anymore. UNH barely finished 8th, yet took 2 of 3 on the road against the eventual national champ. To get there, you do need a good goalie (as evidenced last night on both sides of the puck), a couple of decent defensive pairings, two solid lines, and good special teams. UNH had most of that at the end of this season. And while I do believe that they will get off to a slow start again next year, mostly due to a pedestrian senior class, I think that they will get better as the year goes along and at a faster rate than they did this year. IMO, there are no great teams anymore, just ones that jell at the right time of the year, the end.

Dang straight Greg, dang straight...Why Not Us...and Why Not Now! I believe the team really got that message this season...hard work, no excuses...eyes on the prize!! Go 'Cats!!!

HockeyRef
04-12-2015, 11:48 AM
Fanatics don't have pom poms, cheerleaders do. If the shoe fits... ;)

Hey! Give me some credit...I know what a blue line is now. That has to account for something...ha! :D

ps...and I wouldn't trade my pom pom (only have one) for a PINK HAT...any day.

Snively65
04-12-2015, 12:41 PM
If you've read this board (and I suspect you have) there are so many deserving teams, and fans, who feel the same way (UNH teams and fans, that is). PC proved once again that anyone with the right chemistry, the right actions, and a few lucky bounces, can win it all. It isn't going to be necessarily about how many Hobey Baker winners are on your team, or NHL draft picks. So much more than that. Here's hoping...on any given day...

ps..fanatic...I like the ring to that. Somehow, beats 'cheerleader' ;)

Speaking of which, have there been other Hobey winners between Krog and Eichel whose teams have lost in the TG?

C-H-C
04-12-2015, 01:21 PM
WHY NOT US?? That's my mantra going forward for UNH. Four of the last five champions are first time winners, two of them fourth seeds in the tournament, both of whom (Yale and PC) were the last teams in. My contention is that there is not a lot that separates these teams anymore. UNH barely finished 8th, yet took 2 of 3 on the road against the eventual national champ. To get there, you do need a good goalie (as evidenced last night on both sides of the puck), a couple of decent defensive pairings, two solid lines, and good special teams. UNH had most of that at the end of this season. And while I do believe that they will get off to a slow start again next year, mostly due to a pedestrian senior class, I think that they will get better as the year goes along and at a faster rate than they did this year. IMO, there are no great teams anymore, just ones that jell at the right time of the year, the end.

I think two short years ago was one of those "Why Not Us" times for UNH. In the opening round of the NCAA Northeast Regional, UNH decisively beat Denver 5-2. Unfortunately, their #1 scorer Kevin Goumas (10G, 32A) and #2 scorer Grayson Downing (15G, 16A) went down in the Denver game and couldn't play the next day against Lowell. How often has a team lost it's #1 and #3 scorers on the eve of a game for a trip to the Frozen Four? Maybe about as often as a top goalie drops a puck and has it squirt between his legs for the game-tying goal? If UNH had made it to the 2013 Frozen Four, it would have joined Yale, Quinnipiac, and St. Cloud. Their chances of winning it all could have been just as good as the others.

HockeyRef
04-12-2015, 03:33 PM
I think two short years ago was one of those "Why Not Us" times for UNH. In the opening round of the NCAA Northeast Regional, UNH decisively beat Denver 5-2. Unfortunately, their #1 scorer Kevin Goumas (10G, 32A) and #2 scorer Grayson Downing (15G, 16A) went down in the Denver game and couldn't play the next day against Lowell. How often has a team lost it's #1 and #3 scorers on the eve of a game for a trip to the Frozen Four? Maybe about as often as a top goalie drops a puck and has it squirt between his legs for the game-tying goal? If UNH had made it to the 2013 Frozen Four, it would have joined Yale, Quinnipiac, and St. Cloud. Their chances of winning it all could have been just as good as the others.

So remember that game (and the hit on KG) as that Regional was only the second time I had EVER I had seen them play, with of course, ZERO knowledge of the past, little insight into the game etc. What I did bring out of that was how much different the team played in the Final that day as opposed to the night before, with the loss of those two players. How deafening the roar of the UML crowd on the second goal, and how disappointed the team was skating off.

UML has had our "number" ever since. Maybe this season...any given day. Interesting to ponder what might have happened for UNH that year; considering they were the #1 team in the Nation the first half, finishing 10th when the tourney started. (Lost to PC in the HE qtrs. too).

Snively65
04-12-2015, 05:00 PM
I actually liked the way the NCAAs began in 2010 better than 2012, as I thought that after we upset Cornell, and RIT upset DU in Albany, a return to the F4 for the Cats was imminent.

chickod
04-12-2015, 06:06 PM
Do you have a rational defense as to why it was played?

Yes. The winner of the ECAC tournament got the only "automatic" bid. The second team to represent the East (remember, they went right to the Final Four, as it was called then) was ALWAYS selected by a committee. It's just that they almost always selected the team that lost the championship game. In this particular scenario, BU was far and away the best team in the country and everyone knew it. They played a stinker and lost in the semifinals. The committee felt that they wanted to send the two teams with the best chance of winning (remember, the East/West thing was insanely fierce at that time - I'm sure you remember the year before when UHN lost on a shot off the face-off, I believe). They couldn't just say, "Sorry, Providence, you made the finals but we're not letting you go. So they set up this "playoff" (which, according to the ticket, was officially called an "NCAA Qualifier Game") at Schneider Arena. I have to say that there weren't a lot of PC fans there and BU won rather easily. You can argue all day about whether it was "fair," but it WAS within the rules. The committee could have just selected BU outright and there would have been outrage in Providence. But NOBODY could argue that PC was better than BU. And as long as that "window" was open, the committee exercised the option. Obviously, as a BU fan, I agreed with the decision. Also, they proved that they were the best and got the committee off the hook by coming through, beating Wisconsin and then BC (in Providence, ironically enough). That was the Wisconsin team with Mike Eaves..they brought 4000 fans to the Providence Civic Center and their full band, all wearing the red cowboy hats with the white "W" on the front. That BU team had Craig, O'Callahan, Silk and Bethel. It was one of the best teams in BU history. One could say, "Yeah, but they didn't win when they had to." Well, not really. If there were a Pairwise then, they would have been a #1 seed. Sort of like this year, where they were the only team that didn't HAVE to win the Hockey East tournament to get to the NCAAs. It brings up the whole concept of the "conference tournament." Which is another discussion for another time. But look at it this way...it's like the B1G conference getting 201 teams into the NCAA basketball tournament when the Patriot league gets one (and if the regular season winner doesn't win their conference tournament, too bad). So not selecting BU that year was basically saying, "Why do we even play the season? Let's just have the tournament - two semi-finals. Why even have the final? The two teams that win the semi-finals go to the NCAAs. You may think this is cynical, but I don't at all. BU proved over the body of work of the long season that they were far and away the best team, and they were given the opportunity to prove it. And they did.

Chuck Murray
04-12-2015, 11:13 PM
Yes. The winner of the ECAC tournament got the only "automatic" bid. The second team to represent the East (remember, they went right to the Final Four, as it was called then) was ALWAYS selected by a committee. It's just that they almost always selected the team that lost the championship game. In this particular scenario, BU was far and away the best team in the country and everyone knew it. They played a stinker and lost in the semifinals. The committee felt that they wanted to send the two teams with the best chance of winning (remember, the East/West thing was insanely fierce at that time - I'm sure you remember the year before when UHN lost on a shot off the face-off, I believe). They couldn't just say, "Sorry, Providence, you made the finals but we're not letting you go. So they set up this "playoff" (which, according to the ticket, was officially called an "NCAA Qualifier Game") at Schneider Arena. I have to say that there weren't a lot of PC fans there and BU won rather easily. You can argue all day about whether it was "fair," but it WAS within the rules. The committee could have just selected BU outright and there would have been outrage in Providence. But NOBODY could argue that PC was better than BU. And as long as that "window" was open, the committee exercised the option. Obviously, as a BU fan, I agreed with the decision. Also, they proved that they were the best and got the committee off the hook by coming through, beating Wisconsin and then BC (in Providence, ironically enough). That was the Wisconsin team with Mike Eaves..they brought 4000 fans to the Providence Civic Center and their full band, all wearing the red cowboy hats with the white "W" on the front. That BU team had Craig, O'Callahan, Silk and Bethel. It was one of the best teams in BU history. One could say, "Yeah, but they didn't win when they had to." Well, not really. If there were a Pairwise then, they would have been a #1 seed. Sort of like this year, where they were the only team that didn't HAVE to win the Hockey East tournament to get to the NCAAs. It brings up the whole concept of the "conference tournament." Which is another discussion for another time. But look at it this way...it's like the B1G conference getting 201 teams into the NCAA basketball tournament when the Patriot league gets one (and if the regular season winner doesn't win their conference tournament, too bad). So not selecting BU that year was basically saying, "Why do we even play the season? Let's just have the tournament - two semi-finals. Why even have the final? The two teams that win the semi-finals go to the NCAAs. You may think this is cynical, but I don't at all. BU proved over the body of work of the long season that they were far and away the best team, and they were given the opportunity to prove it. And they did.

I'm 100% with you on this one, chickod. Remember watching BU beat BC on TV in the Finals. Good times. :)

I can't let the events of the weekend go by without sharing some thoughts ... anyway, I just read through the following item recapping O'Connor's post-game comments, and would love to get some thoughts from our other posters:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/04/12/goalie-matt-connor-miscue-proves-costly/swZvbC7EauX0hYTvEwUgUN/story.html

I'm going to give the interviewer who asked O'Connor about the incredibly misplayed Thursday night goal a lot of credit for speaking to the so-called "elephant in the room". I can't comment on O'Connor's entire season, but I do remember him giving up a softie against our beloved UNH early in the HE Semis to give the 'Cats a 1-0 ;lead. Maybe isolated, that's no big deal, as everyone has a bad moment now and then ... but then in the FF semis, the 2nd NoDak goal was at least the equal of the mess he created in the Finals. :eek:

I've seen O'Connor credited for standing up to the questioning, which was admittedly a tough thing for anyone to do given what he'd just gone through. But I'm somewhat uncomfortable with some of his comments, including "I think I deserved :confused: to play a little bit better in the third in that game" ... or “I felt great on all shots, getting my spots, great rebound control and it was just a really weird and indecisive moment that cost us the national championship, I guess you could say.’’ And when asked if he had a flashback to the third period of Thursday night’s semis, when he allowed a shorthanded goal after misplaying a puck off the boards ... “Definitely not,’’ O’Connor said. “I thought it was completely different. That one, it hit the boards, bounced off over my stick and was a definitely a different situation completely." :confused: :confused:

I'll just say this ... not all players can handle the pressure of playing in the biggest games under the brightest of spotlights. Some players rise to the occasion - and clearly, once a glorious opportunity presented itself and there was "blood in the water", PC stormed through and took advantage. Bravo to them. Others do not OR cannot rise to the occasion. None of us see what's going on inside a kid's head, but sometimes you can deduce how someone might be shrinking under the admittedly-intense pressure of a game like last night (or even Thursday night's semi) when you see what are a series of awful plays when a game hangs in the balance.

I do feel badly for O'Connor, as going through something like his two critical gaffes in the FF will likely (sadly) define his career. This was the exposure of a classic "Achilles' heel" for the college hockey world (and beyond) to see. It will be interesting to see if he returns to BU next season (I believe he's a junior?) or turns pro. You have to think his pro outlook took a beating this past weekend. :(

I feel badly for Coach Quinn, who had to have seen these things happening from time to time, and would probably be lying if he said he hadn't taken notice earlier. But you dance with the goalie who's gotten you through this far - even with the warts - and you hope like heck what did happen last night just doesn't happen. Coach Quinn will likely get another chance ... O'Connor, I'm not so sure.

I feel badly for the rest of the BU kids. They played well enough to be ahead late in the game, and watching their goalie turn a routine play into the ugliest goal I've probably ever seen (or at least in the 48 hours since the semis) will suck the life out of even the best and/or most experienced team, guaranteed (and BU was only the best talent-wise last night). There are goals that just should not and cannot happen, and BU narrowly dodged a bullet in the semis, only to see it happen to them again at the most critical point of the season. Your reaction as a player is then probably to overcompensate by playing beyond your usual system or abilities, just so you don't let the game get decided by your "weakest link", who's just been exposed. And in doing so, you mess up instead, lose inside contain on a routine faceoff ... and then before you know it, you're collecting your NCAA Finalists medals.

The D-1 title was decided by a human being who in a very human moment, let the circumstances of the game overwhelm him. It was painful to watch, and to be honest it is admittedly awkward to write this, as the overriding emotion is empathy or sympathy, and likewise for the BU kids to want to close ranks and share the blame, and say how "it wasn't the winning goal" in the end (and of course statistically it wasn't). But the elephant in the room states the obvious ... and it was the 3rd PC goal that was the deciding goal, as it had the impact of "blood in the water" on both teams. The bedrock trust the BU players needed to believe in their goalie was lost with PC's 3rd goal, as O'Connor's teammates had seen it before 48 hours earlier, and had no reason to think it couldn't/wouldn't happen again.

One can only imagine the implications had this happened to a Coach Umile-led team in the postseason ... :eek: :eek: :eek:

Snively65
04-12-2015, 11:58 PM
Speaking of which, have there been other Hobey winners between Krog and Eichel whose teams have lost in the TG?

Snively65, the answer, of course, is yes. Blake Geoffrion won the Hobey when Wisco lost to BC in 2010, and Mike Mottau won the Hobey when BC lost to Nodak in 2000.

The nearest that I can come to an answer to your question at the end of your recent post, Chuck, would be the two goals by Pete Metcalf in the St Paul semi, as both of those goals that were pretty much identical about two minutes apart early in the second seemed stoppable, as Ayers was not screened on either one. From that point on, despite only being down 3-2, UNH seemed out of synch, and then completely unraveled in the third.

chickod
04-13-2015, 10:37 AM
One can only imagine the implications had this happened to a Coach Umile-led team in the postseason ... :eek: :eek: :eek:

Very insightful, Chuck. Thanks for taking the time and I'll try my best to give my "interpretation." A bunch of us were sitting behind the BU bench "debating" about "do you pull him?" The consensus was, if this happened in the first period, maybe. The problem is, you had ONE goalie who had essentially played most of the minutes all year. It's not as if there was even a semblance of "sharing" the load. LaCouvee barely played all year, and it would have been completely unfair to throw him into the National Championship game, and NO chance of doing so with 8 minutes to go in a game where you have just melted down. Why do I bring this up? I think it helps explain the reaction. What could Quinn do or say? Taking O'Connor out was not an option, so they HAD to take the attitude that "it's one of those things...let's try to put it behind us and focus on the next five minutes." Even though you and I both know that could most likely not happen. The coach is trying to settle his team and have them approach it as if it was just a "bump" along the way. Did we see this coming? Of course. It wasn't just the semi-final game, either. It was four games. He had a gaffe against Yale in Manchester, and then that goal against Minnesota-Duluth where he reached up, the puck ticked off his glove and fell behind him and before he even knew where it was, it had trickled into the net. I would not have wanted to be Quinn...he had no options. To see the person who was one of the backbones for your team all year melt down in the four biggest games of the year had to be excruciating. But by that time, it was too late to do anything. I think part of the reason that they imploded so badly was almost because they knew in the back of their minds that this had happened in the previous THREE games (not just 48 hours before), and they're probably thinking, "We can't keep surviving this. Eventually it's going to bite us." I can't imagine being more demoralized. You know, it's not like he "misplayed" the puck. And, although there was probably some "rationalization" to his responses, he is partially right. It WAS a "different" set of circumstances. But the bottom line is that all of these gaffes were most likely the result of indecision. It was right in front of me, and no matter how he describes it, he clearly started to drop the puck to keep the play going (it WAS a power play, after all... who wants to take a face off in their own end?), but then he had second thoughts and pulled it back in. Then he started this moving the glove back and forth like he was "faking" dropping it because the fore checker was coming in. I think he should have just held the thing. When he was moving the glove back and forth seems to be when he "lost control" of it and then he didn't know where it was. What was inexplicable was why, at that moment, he decided to turn his glove over and open it up. Then it dropped to the ice and the rest is history. The point is that he does this a million times instinctively without thinking. So why, this time, all the histrionics? One reason. Nerves. We all do things under pressure that we don't do when we're calm. It's human nature. As you said, some people step up, some can't. It happened to me on my high school golf team. One down on the last hole...tie match. Both teams have everyone standing around the green watching us come in. I have a six-iron to the green and top it about 50 feet. Match over...game over. I've never done that before or since. Pressure does funny things (that's why Billy Joel wrote a song about it). There's really nothing you can say.

You're last line is interesting. I just don't see how (and I have seen people on these threads bashing Quinn about letting Eichel take the faceoff, etc) you can blame the coach. At some point you have to trust the players. You know how it works...if you win the coach is a genius, if you lose he "can't get his players to execute." Like he's the one out there making the plays. If Umile wins one (and I really hope he does...I really do, and so does my sister who is big UNH fan and my uncle who is a graduate who maybe will live long enough to see it - he's 89), I can tell you exactly what will be said. "He finally got that break...a perennial top-notch program led by a classy, hard-nosed coach that has been snake-bitten." There won't be any of "the guy never wins the big one." Because all of that stuff is frustration talking. Saturday was a good lesson for all of us. We "rediscovered" how difficult it is to win this thing. Even with the "best" talent (and I don't know anyone who is arguing that Providence had the talent that BU did), it takes the intangibles to win it. Providence had more experience, and it showed. We were sitting there before Providence took and lead and agreeing that they were going to tie this game up anyway, fluke goal or not. You could just see it. They were coming in waves and we were scared and unable to counter. That's nerves. Period. This is a team that has stepped up all year when they have had to. And this isn't the first time this stuff has happened with O'Connor. We were also discussing how we felt he played better last year when McGuire was challenging him for the starting job. This year he seems to have had long "lapses" where he just played poorly. The scary thing was that these "swoons" would last several games. Then he would get red hot and everyone would forget about the bad games. But it was always lurking there. What's troublesome about that is that you knew that it could rear its ugly head at any time, and I can't speak for anyone else, but it was always in the back of my mind and when we got to the FF all I was thinking was "I hope it's not a one-goal game because I can see this coming." And if I felt that way, the team must have had it in the back of their heads, too. But you have to dance with the girl you brought.

I wish the kid the best. I have no idea if he comes back or not. And I don't think it's a good idea for him to make that decision immediately anyway.

Sorry for rambling on...it was tough to watch. But my lasting impression is this: after we all felt sorry for ourselves and got it out of our systems, I keep seeing this image burning in my head of the BU players sprawled on the ice, some of them unable to even stand up for a full minute. That told me all I needed to know (not that I doubted it) about the commitment these players have made to the program. And that told me all I needed to know about the coach. This program is back to stay.

Greg A
04-13-2015, 10:38 AM
Yes. The winner of the ECAC tournament got the only "automatic" bid. The second team to represent the East (remember, they went right to the Final Four, as it was called then) was ALWAYS selected by a committee. It's just that they almost always selected the team that lost the championship game. In this particular scenario, BU was far and away the best team in the country and everyone knew it. They played a stinker and lost in the semifinals. The committee felt that they wanted to send the two teams with the best chance of winning (remember, the East/West thing was insanely fierce at that time - I'm sure you remember the year before when UHN lost on a shot off the face-off, I believe). They couldn't just say, "Sorry, Providence, you made the finals but we're not letting you go. So they set up this "playoff" (which, according to the ticket, was officially called an "NCAA Qualifier Game") at Schneider Arena. I have to say that there weren't a lot of PC fans there and BU won rather easily. You can argue all day about whether it was "fair," but it WAS within the rules. The committee could have just selected BU outright and there would have been outrage in Providence. But NOBODY could argue that PC was better than BU. And as long as that "window" was open, the committee exercised the option. Obviously, as a BU fan, I agreed with the decision. Also, they proved that they were the best and got the committee off the hook by coming through, beating Wisconsin and then BC (in Providence, ironically enough). That was the Wisconsin team with Mike Eaves..they brought 4000 fans to the Providence Civic Center and their full band, all wearing the red cowboy hats with the white "W" on the front. That BU team had Craig, O'Callahan, Silk and Bethel. It was one of the best teams in BU history. One could say, "Yeah, but they didn't win when they had to." Well, not really. If there were a Pairwise then, they would have been a #1 seed. Sort of like this year, where they were the only team that didn't HAVE to win the Hockey East tournament to get to the NCAAs. It brings up the whole concept of the "conference tournament." Which is another discussion for another time. But look at it this way...it's like the B1G conference getting 201 teams into the NCAA basketball tournament when the Patriot league gets one (and if the regular season winner doesn't win their conference tournament, too bad). So not selecting BU that year was basically saying, "Why do we even play the season? Let's just have the tournament - two semi-finals. Why even have the final? The two teams that win the semi-finals go to the NCAAs. You may think this is cynical, but I don't at all. BU proved over the body of work of the long season that they were far and away the best team, and they were given the opportunity to prove it. And they did.

That's a lot of verbiage to excuse what happened. I'll start off by saying that UNH lost the NCAA semifinals to Wisconsin in overtime on the face off play (by Mike Eaves btw) so whatever argument you were making there has not relevance. But to say that the ECAC "almost always" selected the runnerup is incorrect. They "always" selected the runnerup. The only time the runner up didn't go was Clarkson, I think in the late 60's but that was their choice not the ECAC's. I sat with a bunch of BU fans at JW Hills before the Friday regionals in Manchester. They brought up the issue of what they called "the min-game", not me. They went on about how BU deserved to go in 1978 because they were better than PC and proved it by winning it all. My rejoinder was to ask them about the 1974 UNH team, which entered the ECAC playoffs #1 in the country. Of course they had no memory of that team but I reminded them that it wound up losing in OT to RPI, mostly because their All-American goalie Cap Raeder was injured and barely played in the game. I don't recall the ECAC saying, well UNH is clearly better than this team or that team, let's have them play a play-in game. Well, that's different, they said. Sure was. One team was BU, the other was UNH. You know, I wasn't rooting against BU on Saturday night. I was glad that it was a HE final. But I wasn't sad when they lost either. Just a bit down because PC got their title before UNH, that's all.

Greg A
04-13-2015, 10:45 AM
Not to make this a BU thread but one sequence in the game that I have not seen discussed is how PC scored off a BU timeout. At the time, I thought Quinn's decision to call a TO was wise. His kids were reeling after the O'Connor gaffe, the crowd was vocal, and their was a face-off in his own end. Great draw by Rooney (whose father scored the OT winner vs. BC in the Terreri game 30 years ago). But what got me when I watched the replay is how BU did not adjust to the PC overload on the slot side of the face off circle. Those adjustments are made countless times in a game whether it's the first of the season or the championship final. I'm not going to blame this on Quinn but his players certainly didn't execute when it counted.

chickod
04-13-2015, 11:01 AM
That's a lot of verbiage to excuse what happened. I'll start off by saying that UNH lost the NCAA semifinals to Wisconsin in overtime on the face off play (by Mike Eaves btw) so whatever argument you were making there has not relevance. But to say that the ECAC "almost always" selected the runnerup is incorrect. They "always" selected the runnerup. The only time the runner up didn't go was Clarkson, I think in the late 60's but that was their choice not the ECAC's. I sat with a bunch of BU fans at JW Hills before the Friday regionals in Manchester. They brought up the issue of what they called "the min-game", not me. They went on about how BU deserved to go in 1978 because they were better than PC and proved it by winning it all. My rejoinder was to ask them about the 1974 UNH team, which entered the ECAC playoffs #1 in the country. Of course they had no memory of that team but I reminded them that it wound up losing in OT to RPI, mostly because their All-American goalie Cap Raeder was injured and barely played in the game. I don't recall the ECAC saying, well UNH is clearly better than this team or that team, let's have them play a play-in game. Well, that's different, they said. Sure was. One team was BU, the other was UNH. You know, I wasn't rooting against BU on Saturday night. I was glad that it was a HE final. But I wasn't sad when they lost either. Just a bit down because PC got their title before UNH, that's all.

Well, that's fair. I'm not going to argue about it. (the faceoff play was the year before - I wasn't using it as part of any argument - I was just saying that we understand there has been a lot of heartbreak. That same night was the game when the ref skated over to Parker before he pulled the goalie one down against Michigan and said "You better not leave the bench early." As soon as Parker pulled the goalie he called too many men on the ice - talk about pre-meditated).

I get the animosity towards BU. I have a hard time with it sometimes, but I understand. Personally, if there is any team I would like to see win the whole thing (if it isn't us) is UNH. I was just basically explaining the scenario for those who weren't aware of the process at that time. IMO, the committee choosing BU in '78 wasn't "wrong" - they had that option. The fact that they were probably wrong in '74 doesn't have any bearing on what happened four years later, but I get it. I know people hate it when someone says "I know how you feel," so I won't say that.

So, in closing, it wasn't a lot of verbiage to "excuse" what happened, because they didn't need an excuse. It was within the rules. Was the committee's "authority" inconsistently wielded? Yes. And that's probably ultimately why the whole pairwise thing evolved, to take ALL of the subjectivity out of it. I don't want to harp on this and I'm not trying to be antagonistic (I've done plenty of that on other threads). I was just trying to answer his question.

I feel like the Patriots fans in 2000 who said that they finally got "payback" for Ben Dreith and the roughing the passer call against the Raiders. I know a lot of people out there are happy that BU blew this. Whatever. I can't control what others think. It is what it is. Personally I don't revel in other people's disappointment or failures. Resentment is a very negative emotion and usually doesn't result in much good. I'm not speaking directly to you...just to the incredible display of euphoria by all the BU haters. It's a little over the top to me. I'm sorry, but I was surrounded by North Dakota, Lowell, Cornell, Harvard and BC fans. They were NOT cheering FOR Providence. They were cheering AGAINST BU. So if I sound defensive, after 45 years of going to these games, it takes its toll. :)

chickod
04-13-2015, 11:06 AM
Not to make this a BU thread but one sequence in the game that I have not seen discussed is how PC scored off a BU timeout. At the time, I thought Quinn's decision to call a TO was wise. His kids were reeling after the O'Connor gaffe, the crowd was vocal, and their was a face-off in his own end. Great draw by Rooney (whose father scored the OT winner vs. BC in the Terreri game 30 years ago). But what got me when I watched the replay is how BU did not adjust to the PC overload on the slot side of the face off circle. Those adjustments are made countless times in a game <b><I>whether it's the first of the season or the championship final</i></b>. I'm not going to blame this on Quinn but his players certainly didn't execute when it counted.

Correct. Nerves. They didn't react to almost anything the rest of the game because they were still in shock. The bigger question mark is why Eichel even TOOK the draw. He had lost every draw in the period up to that point (and it's not one of his strong points anyway). And after he lost it he didn't even go after the man. He just froze. They all froze. They were done after that previous goal and we all knew it. And in reference to the bolded words above, it's NOT the same. It just isn't. You can't compare the two.

So my response would be that Quinn did what most coaches do...he reverts back to what he has the most confidence in. You try to keep things as familiar as possible in pressure situations. As he said after the game (and I paraphrase) "The one thing we needed in that situation was the one thing we didn't have - experience." You can't teach experience in anything in life. You have to live it. And it's a good thing, too, because if that were not the case, a lot of us that are my age (over 30 :D) wouldn't have jobs.