2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

[goUMLgoBC]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

What exactly did you drop off with Bob and Chaz?

Did they mention something during the broadcast?

[Patman]

Did they mention something during the broadcast?

Yeah, they mentioned it during the third period... They were appreciative.

[bottomdweller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Here's a big problem we're all going to have if Lowell goes up and takes 3 or 4 points from UVM next weekend. We're all going to think that this team is poised for something a lot better next year, and our expectations will start to rise and we will then be saddend when it doesn't pan out, like usual. It will also mean that Blaise will 100% keep his job.

[leswp1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Um, are you saying you don't want them to finally get it together and play well ?

[bottomdweller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Um, are you saying you don't want them to finally get it together and play well ?

I'm saying that it's going to lead to the same cycle we've been in for the past 8 years. I obviously want them to play well, but would prefer they did it under a different coach.

[Patman]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

I'm saying that it's going to lead to the same cycle we've been in for the past 8 years. I obviously want them to play well, but would prefer they did it under a different coach.

I think hoping for losses is sort of futile... but I get your point... and I think it makes sense... people want to believe and they see momentum in the last few days.... maybe. I know Bob and Chaz were starting to take a positive shine to things after the game last night. Look, we beat a waning Providence team 7-2, good, fun. I think in it there are positive signs... but its the kinda hope that when you win a few in a row then you'll win more afterwards. Gamblers go on runs, hell, so do people flipping coins... flip long enough and you are going to believe you can call what's next.

That being said, at the end of the year one will need to step back and take in the whole picture. What do we lose? What do we have coming in? And what does keeping the coach and getting a new coach do for us and this program. Even if we win, we're something like 7-24-3... if we lose we're something like 5-26-3. Neither record is particularly good.

I don't think there's much worth worrying about the last few years... Blaise has had 10 years to establish his track record... unless they find a way to blow the doors off Vermont I don't think there's much more to learn this coming weekend. What is wrong or right about Blaise's tenure at Lowell is not going to differ much based on the last two games. One could take a counter argument "if they're playing this well now, then why did it take so long?" It also doesn't change some of the other issues we've seen with this team over the years.

----

Play hard to win two next weekend... that's all I want to see. If anybody takes the next two and says "I'm a believer" is fooling themselves. (Unless we win by like 10 both nights.)

[leswp1]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

One could take a counter argument "if they're playing this well now, then why did it take so long?" Well, leadership on the ice for one. The Soup is back and the demeanor of the team changed the last few games even tho he is obviously not at 100%. It should not hinge on one player but I seriously do not recall such an injury laden season. Seems like every time any sort of chemistry on a line occured someone on it went out with something busted up.

I am really not sure what would be best for the team. I have seen, fairly up close, 4 coaches. All have had different approaches. 2 I really was impressed with, 2 I wasn't. Desite my personal opinion, they all got results that made people mad and/or happy during their tenure. Don't feel like I know enough about coaching to make a judgement. I do have a really hard time with folks saying he has had 10 yrs to fix things. He has also had a number of things happen that most coaches do not have to deal with including the threat to the program's exsistence, a lack of support from admin, etc (see previous posts). The key players leaving is something all coaches have to deal with. I do think it is something that has much more impact on a program like Lowell's vs the big boys. Lowell has to work hard to get a gem, the big folks have so many they are expendable.

[John_Fuller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Here's a big problem we're all going to have if Lowell goes up and takes 3 or 4 points from UVM next weekend. We're all going to think that this team is poised for something a lot better next year, and our expectations will start to rise and we will then be saddened when it doesn't pan out, like usual.

It will also mean that Blaise will 100% keep his job. I'm saying that it's going to lead to the same cycle we've been in for the past 8 years. I obviously want them to play well, but would prefer they did it under a different coach.

Two separate issues..let's tackle the first part. This season is not over yet and the team has to finish strong and play well no matter what decisions may/may not transpire during the off-season. You're right if we do take three or four points from Vermont our expectations will naturally rise, but after one of the worst records in program history that's going to happen anyway. There should be no reason this can't be a .500 team next year, some will say less, others more. Your scenario could very well happen as this seemingly constant cycle of putting all of the eggs in one senior-laden basket with no home ice playoffs of NCAA appearances has to end, but to me seeing that from any UMass-Lowell coach is unacceptable.

Three years from now if he is still the coach and we go through the same cycle, I'm sure the "make change now" people that will say the school made a mistake. On the other hand, if he's retained and make NCAA tourneys in 2013 and 2014 with this freshman class, the supporters will be barking at the doubters, "See I told you so". No matter which side you are on, neither decision is 100% wrong or 100% right.

One could take a counter argument "if they're playing this well now, then why did it take so long?" Well, leadership on the ice for one. The Soup is back and the demeanor of the team changed the last few games even tho he is obviously not at 100%. It should not hinge on one player but I seriously do not recall such an injury laden season. Seems like every time any sort of chemistry on a line occurred someone on it went out with something busted up.

I've mentioned this before but don't underestimate having an injured Scott Campbell for 80% of the season didn't have a profound impact on this freshman-laden team. Make no mistake, we are in the playoffs, or at the very least, in contention for the playoffs. Unfortunately, small schools usually have talent issues where if their star player goes down, it will be difficult for them to overcome. See Ben Walter from 2006 if you need a good recent example. You can't replace leadership qualities of a captain, plain and simple. Even with an 80% Scott Campbell, they looked like a different team at home than we've seen all season long.

I am really not sure what would be best for the team. I have seen, fairly up close, 4 coaches. All have had different approaches. 2 I really was impressed with, 2 I wasn't. Despite my personal opinion, they all got results that made people mad and/or happy during their tenure. Don't feel like I know enough about coaching to make a judgment. I do have a really hard time with folks saying he has had 10 yrs to fix things. He has also had a number of things happen that most coaches do not have to deal with including the threat to the program's existence, a lack of support from admin, etc (see previous posts). The key players leaving is something all coaches have to deal with. I do think it is something that has much more impact on a program like Lowell's vs the big boys. Lowell has to work hard to get a gem, the big folks have so many they are expendable.

Different people have expressed their opinions about the future of this team. I'll admit I'm one of those people that are on board to make a change now to keep us competitive. There's also the viewpoint that you have to wait and see how this year's freshmen pan out in another three years and give him the chance. We may not agree with each other because both viewpoints are fair to make. While Coach has had some miserable failures, some beyond his control in both personal and professional circles, he has had many more positive successes, again both personally and professionally. Lowell does have to work hard and have found a gem or two in the past ten years. For a variety of reasons, it just hasn't yielded any long term on-ice success.

There are only two or three people that will make the decision over the next 12-15 months on the future of this team in keeping the current head coach or looking elsewhere. I'm sure this issue will be discussed a lot during the off-season. This weekend at the very least, I'm hoping for at least a split in Burlington.

[jrobes01]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Saturday's game was terrific, I don't care if it was Providence.. they played outstanding. Wish they had played like that all year.

Looking at the standings... A Lowell sweep of UVM and a sweep of Providence by Merrimack would put Lowell and PC tied for points with the tiebreaker going to Lowell for 9th place. At least there's that to hope for. Doubtful it'll happen though.

I think if this were Blaise's last year of his contract the consensus among the fans and university administration would be to let him go.. There's no denying that this year was an abysmal failure on top of a tenure that has not brought us to the NCAAs even once. Meanwhile, Merrimack is looking at home ice and being a very highly seeded team in whatever region they end up in. But Blaise is lucky enough to have another year on the contract and we'll have to wait and see what happens with that remaining year. If the players he's bringing in next year contribute big time right away and the returning players have some huge years with no injury bugs biting, who knows?

Off topic, Lowell plays at Stonehill tonight in the NE-10 Men's Basketball Playoffs. Should be a good one. It was nice to see them dismantle Merrimack in the second half on Saturday. :-)

[bottomdweller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Val named player of the week. Think this is only the 2nd weekly honor for the team this year.

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

Val named player of the week. Think this is only the 2nd weekly honor for the team this year.

Third...

Monday's announcement marks the third time this season UMass Lowell has been honored by the conference office. Freshman Chad Ruhwedel (San Diego, Calif.) was named the Rookie of the Week on Oct. 25, 2010 and Patrick Cey (Saskatoon, Sask.) received the Player of the Week honor on Jan. 24, 2011.

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

So far, the Stonehill game is going the opposite of the Merrimack game ... UML leads 42-30 at the half at Stonehill.

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

#6 seed UML wins the Northeast 10 quarterfinal matchup at #3 Stonehill 79-69. Lowell's record is 20-8 now, and will now play #7 Adelphi who upset #2 Saint Anselm's on Thursday night. Lowell will get to host the semifinal, I'd assume, since they're the higher seed.

#1 seed Bentley won at home tonight, one of only two NE10 high seeds to win their playoff game. They'll host #4 Saint Rose on Thursday.

[UMLFan]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

If you didn't see it, a great half-court shot by UML's Robbie Walton to end the first half of the game yesterday.

[John_Fuller]

Re: 2010/2011 UML In-Season Thread II

If you didn't see it, a great half-court shot by UML's Robbie Walton to end the first half of the game yesterday.

Note the qualifer but only if we could get a *ice* hockey team to do the equilvalent, we may have something.

Insert shotgun blast, oh's, or ha ha laugh sound clip here