PDA

View Full Version : RPI 2009 - 2010 -- RIP Nathan Marsters



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

troyboy
10-25-2009, 04:09 PM
I agree that this is a trend that is going to continue. I was at a youth hockey coaching seminar yesterday and there is no question that the coaching that kids see today coming up is much much better than in the past. The number of select and elite programs - starting as young as age 7 almost matches the number of town teams it seems. Goalies are specializing and getting goalie coaching at age 9 and even sooner. As a result, the average player is better and the spread between the best and average is better and better. And... there are plenty of goalies out there that know what they are doing.

The gentleman running the seminar told us a story about how he had 3 goalies try out with him a few years back and had to cut one of them. They were all very good so he kept the seniors and cut the sophomore. But not before telling his father that his son was pretty good and it was a matter of numbers. That kid was Ricky Dipietro.

I also watched Merrimack take it to UVM on Friday. They are a pretty good team. There are not any walkovers out there these days. Which makes me wonder why I thought we would win by a combined score of 9-3 this weekend??:confused:Well said...much better than I put it...Spot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Red Cloud
10-25-2009, 04:34 PM
I forgot to include the list of junior programs some of their players came from :

Fort McMurray Oil Barons
CD Selects
Sioux City (USHL)
Cushing Acadamy
Notre Dame Hounds
New Hampshire Monarchs
NY Applecore
Georgetown Raiders
Greenbay Gamblers (USHL)
Hawkesbury Hawks
Dauphin Kings
Shattuck St.Marys

Any of them sound Familiar !!!!!!!!!!

Are you trying to say that every single player on every single one of those teams is loaded with talent?

My [CENSORED AT HUSKER'S REQUEST], you've just uncovered AIC as a legitimate national championship contender.

troyboy
10-25-2009, 06:30 PM
Are you trying to say that every single player on every single one of those teams is loaded with talent?

My [CENSORED AT HUSKER'S REQUEST], you've just uncovered AIC as a legitimate national championship contender.NO! I'm suggesting that they are not going out to the local frozen pond looking for kids that can skate and giving them a hockey stick to play hockey. Judging success against them by how many goals you beat beat them by is foolhardy

Red Cloud
10-25-2009, 07:25 PM
NO! I'm suggesting that they are not going out to the local frozen pond looking for kids that can skate and giving them a hockey stick to play hockey.

No one is saying that.

Beman
10-25-2009, 08:20 PM
Don't know how good or bad these two teams were or are goning to be but RPI should have closed the door on those bumblebees in the first period. AIC looked terrible. The lack of intensity on the Engineers part in the offensive end first period was bad. They should have scored 4 goals in the first 10 minutes. Game over start the bus.

FlagDUDE08
10-25-2009, 08:31 PM
Don't know how good or bad these two teams were or are goning to be but RPI should have closed the door on those bumblebees in the first period. AIC looked terrible. The lack of intensity on the Engineers part in the offensive end first period was bad. They should have scored 4 goals in the first 10 minutes. Game over start the bus.

They don't all go in. If you want that, watch a sport with no goaltender, like that weird "winter" one with the round orange thing that they don't even play during the winter olympics. Doesn't matter how many there are, just which number is higher when it says 00.0 in period 3. A win is a win is a win is a win.

All 58 teams are national championship contenders. Of course this is by design of the NCAA. Legitimacy, of course, is discovered as time goes on, but at this point, all 58 teams can win a national championship. Do you think we (or Union for that matter) were expected to go to the 2nd round of the playoffs? Heck no! That's why the games are played.

blocker
10-25-2009, 09:41 PM
Don't know how good or bad these two teams were or are goning to be but RPI should have closed the door on those bumblebees in the first period. AIC looked terrible. The lack of intensity on the Engineers part in the offensive end first period was bad. They should have scored 4 goals in the first 10 minutes. Game over start the bus.

good point B man

Beman
10-25-2009, 09:49 PM
They don't all go in. If you want that, watch a sport with no goaltender, like that weird "winter" one with the round orange thing that they don't even play during the winter olympics. Doesn't matter how many there are, just which number is higher when it says 00.0 in period 3. A win is a win is a win is a win.

All 58 teams are national championship contenders. Of course this is by design of the NCAA. Legitimacy, of course, is discovered as time goes on, but at this point, all 58 teams can win a national championship. Do you think we (or Union for that matter) were expected to go to the 2nd round of the playoffs? Heck no! That's why the games are played.

Have no clue what you are saying but RPI should have won that game in the First Period. They have much more talent. Just couldn't finish but real good teams finish.

FlagDUDE08
10-25-2009, 09:51 PM
Have no clue what you are saying but RPI should have won that game in the First Period. They have much more talent. Just couldn't finish but real good teams finish.

If they couldn't finish, the game would have ended in a tie or a loss. They finished the game. They won.

Albertson Clover
10-25-2009, 10:49 PM
Legitimacy, of course, is discovered as time goes on, but at this point, all 58 teams can win a national championship.

The BSU Cinderella run last year seems to back you up, but what concerned me wasn't the fact that the margin of victory was slim. It was that they looked a little deflated against a team that wasn't playing particularly brilliant hockey either (except for Meisner). I think they'll be fine. There's no reason to sound the alarm until the first major losing streak. But what would these forums be without a little doom and gloom? :)

GreatLakerMohawk
10-26-2009, 12:42 AM
Have no clue what you are saying but RPI should have won that game in the First Period. They have much more talent. Just couldn't finish but real good teams finish.

Well they thought they had it won after getting up 2-0, then Seth Appert called a timeout to tear them a new one in the second because he saw they let up off the gas and started to screw around. Third period they had little to no intensity at all and AIC came out on fire.

Rome wasn't built in a day.

FlagDUDE08
10-26-2009, 07:26 AM
After hearing from a friend that e-mailed the coach, "32 Seconds" is team proprietary information. We are only left to give our best guesses.

Ralph Baer
10-26-2009, 07:31 AM
After hearing from a friend that e-mailed the coach, "32 Seconds" is team proprietary information. We are only left to give our best guesses.

I suspect that it has to do with shift length as has been suggested. It sounds short, but SA did mention 35 seconds in one of the interviews.

My worst guess OTOH is that SA is predicting 32 second place finishes. :D

DrDemento
10-26-2009, 08:31 AM
I suspect that it has to do with shift length as has been suggested. It sounds short, but SA did mention 35 seconds in one of the interviews.

My worst guess OTOH is that SA is predicting 32 second place finishes. :D

I am not too concerned about what 32 seconds means-let them use it as their mantra. What I do want to see though is improvement each week-something sorely lacking the past 3 years. We outscored the opposition 7-5 this past weekend ( I had said I would be happy with 8-4 so at least i am not miserably disappointed). This cooming week I want to see a little more in the way of offensive finsihing and would hope we go at least 8-4. This is asking a lot since Union is not a pushover and has shown that they can indeed put the puck in the net. I would be very satisfied with two games each ending 4-2 in our favor. :)

Ralph Baer
10-26-2009, 09:02 AM
I am not too concerned about what 32 seconds means-let them use it as their mantra. What I do want to see though is improvement each week-something sorely lacking the past 3 years. We outscored the opposition 7-5 this past weekend ( I had said I would be happy with 8-4 so at least i am not miserably disappointed). This cooming week I want to see a little more in the way of offensive finsihing and would hope we go at least 8-4. This is asking a lot since Union is not a pushover and has shown that they can indeed put the puck in the net. I would be very satisfied with two games each ending 4-2 in our favor. :)

Scoring has gone down ever since goalie pads were enlarged. I think that we will have to live with that. We did play a relatively consistent game, although it was not against a top-flight opponent.

engineerhockeyfan
10-26-2009, 09:24 AM
I suspect that it has to do with shift length as has been suggested. It sounds short, but SA did mention 35 seconds in one of the interviews.

My worst guess OTOH is that SA is predicting 32 second place finishes. :D

Don't even try to guess the meaning.
In my daughter's senior year on the swimming/diving team, the message on their t-shirt read "it's all about the ball".
I cannot give away the meaning, but it had nothing to do with swimming, diving, or the pool.
But it meant a lot to the team.

Rockchops
10-26-2009, 10:23 AM
Don't even try to guess the meaning.
In my daughter's senior year on the swimming/diving team, the message on their t-shirt read "it's all about the ball".
I cannot give away the meaning, but it had nothing to do with swimming, diving, or the pool.
But it meant a lot to the team.

Is this a common thing in sports that I'm just finding out about now? I don't understand the point of wearing a slogan on your shirt if the meaning behind the slogan is non-obvious and super sensitively secret. Is the point to tease? :confused:

Red Cloud
10-26-2009, 10:31 AM
Is this a common thing in sports that I'm just finding out about now? I don't understand the point of wearing a slogan on your shirt if the meaning behind the slogan is non-obvious and super sensitively secret. Is the point to tease? :confused:

Thought it was pretty obvious that it was a reminder to each other.

Red Cloud
10-26-2009, 10:33 AM
Have no clue what you are saying but RPI should have won that game in the First Period. They have much more talent. Just couldn't finish but real good teams finish.

Oh for the love of... :rolleyes:

engineerhockeyfan
10-26-2009, 11:01 AM
Is this a common thing in sports that I'm just finding out about now? I don't understand the point of wearing a slogan on your shirt if the meaning behind the slogan is non-obvious and super sensitively secret. Is the point to tease? :confused:

Its a team thing. It is only a secret if the team deems it to be.
I don't think that there is any effort to keep it secret, but if it is shared, it has to come from a team member.