Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

    F ing stupid to bring a pop gun to an opening battle on the enemies frontline.
    a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.

    Comment


    • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

      Originally posted by brassbonanza View Post
      Freep sports columnists have been in a free fall for a long time. Apparently he also got the timing of Bonino's goal wrong. If that's his greatest sports moment of all time, you'd think he'd get that right.
      One thing to also consider is the talent level. While schools like BC and Denver who have been successful the past decade while BU has been a little bit less so, they've been churning out NHL-level talent. Aside from our '09 team (which had a glut of NHL talent), there's been a dearth of NHL-level talent (Ryan Whitney I think really was the only guy from teams in the past decade who became a NHL regular).
      Dog Lover: Terriers and Bulldogs
      Boston University '06/'08
      Yale University '13

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bothman View Post
        The article on Jack PArker is crap.

        You can't make the case to get rid of a BU icon like Jack Parker by simply lookin gat this year's results (losses to PC & HC).

        You need to make the case based on trends over a much longer period of time (ie, 1 Final Four in 14 yrs) and then compare it to other hockey powerhouses like BC, Denver, etc.

        In my opinion, the theme of the article is right on, but the author comes across as hollow. Good analytical data would have made this article much more compelling.

        All in all, very disappointing effort. I expected more from the Freep, particularly if they were going to take on such a dramatic subject.
        You are assuming he is actually a knowledgeable fan and not just a scorned fanboy angrily lashing out.

        The hat was a dead giveaway
        “Unless you’re Boston College, you don’t get here every year.”

        Pinhead Nation: "gone" but not forgotten

        Originally posted by shrader
        Admin, do you still hate BC? If not, will darin and MAV ever be freed? If you do still hate BC, why is SteveF allowed to post?
        Hockey East Champions: 1987, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012
        National Champions: 1949, 2001, 2008, 2010, 2012

        Comment


        • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

          Originally posted by SteveF View Post
          You are assuming he is actually a knowledgeable fan and not just a scorned fanboy angrily lashing out.

          The hat was a dead giveaway
          Same kid with the scarf you guys put up a picture of, no?

          Comment


          • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

            Originally posted by bothman View Post
            The article on Jack PArker is crap.

            You can't make the case to get rid of a BU icon like Jack Parker by simply lookin gat this year's results (losses to PC & HC).

            You need to make the case based on trends over a much longer period of time (ie, 1 Final Four in 14 yrs) and then compare it to other hockey powerhouses like BC, Denver, etc.

            In my opinion, the theme of the article is right on, but the author comes across as hollow. Good analytical data would have made this article much more compelling.

            All in all, very disappointing effort. I expected more from the Freep, particularly if they were going to take on such a dramatic subject.
            I agree. While I can relate to some of points he makes, the basis he uses to justify them are a little unfair to Parker.

            Comment


            • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

              Originally posted by bothman View Post
              You can't make the case to get rid of a BU icon like Jack Parker by simply lookin gat this year's results (losses to PC & HC).

              You need to make the case based on trends over a much longer period of time (ie, 1 Final Four in 14 yrs) and then compare it to other hockey powerhouses like BC, Denver, etc.

              ...Good analytical data would have made this article much more compelling.
              This is pretty much how I feel about it. I went on a nice long rant on twitter earlier about this article and won't regurgitate everything I said here, but you basically nailed it. There is certainly an argument to be made, and while the columnist did bring up some good points to support his position, he could've made a much stronger argument by looking at the last 13 years and not just this year or even the last two years. In fact, he could've simply read this thread to see some of the points many posters on here have made.

              As for the criticism of the Freep as a whole, I don't think it's fair. Obviously I'm very biased when it comes to the Freep (I was sports editor for one semester and a men's hockey beat writer for two years), but columnists have always had the freedom to express their opinions, and that should never change. The editor's job is to simply make sure nothing in the column is factually inaccurate or libelous. Nothing here was, except for the time of Bonino's goal, which is an unnecessary oversight, but not one that detracts from the overall point. You can question the timing of running it now as opposed to after the season or whatever, but that's the columnist's decision, not the editor's or the paper's.

              I've been thinking all day about how I would've handled it if a columnist submitted this exact same column during the semester I was editor (ignoring the fact it would've been super-dumb because that was the semester they won the national title). Ultimately, the answer's pretty easy- I would've ran it. I would've spent a lot more time going over it with the columnist than I normally would. Usually the associate editor is the one goes over columns with the columnist, but in this case I would've done it myself. But I wouldn't have made him change too much in terms of what argument he was making or what he used to support that argument. I might've suggested a couple things he didn't mention, but ultimately it's his call as to what direction the column goes. Once an editor starts changing things around too much, it becomes the editor's column and not the columnist's, and that's never good.
              Places I've seen a college hockey game: Agganis Arena, Alfond Arena, Bright Center, Consol Energy Center, Conte Forum, DCU Center, Fenway Park, Gutterson Fieldhouse, Houston Field House, Lawler Arena, Madison Square Garden, Matthews Arena, Mullins Center, Schneider Arena, Scottrade Center, Sears Centre, Tampa Bay Times Forum, TD Bank Sports Center, TD Garden, Tsongas Center, Tully Forum, Verizon Center, Verizon Wireless Arena, Walter Brown Arena, Wells Fargo Center, Whittemore Center

              Comment


              • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                Enough of this hockey talk. Does Agganis change the pizza every year??? Could have sworn I saw bacon as a topping. You don't see that everyday at a sporting event...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Brian Gentry View Post
                  Same kid with the scarf you guys put up a picture of, no?
                  Hahaha wow. It absolutely is.


                  *****http://photos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v2401/146/40/1810199/n1810199_38436996_2861.jpg?dl=1******


                  I hope this looks better than it does on my phone
                  “Unless you’re Boston College, you don’t get here every year.”

                  Pinhead Nation: "gone" but not forgotten

                  Originally posted by shrader
                  Admin, do you still hate BC? If not, will darin and MAV ever be freed? If you do still hate BC, why is SteveF allowed to post?
                  Hockey East Champions: 1987, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012
                  National Champions: 1949, 2001, 2008, 2010, 2012

                  Comment


                  • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                    Originally posted by Federal League View Post
                    This is pretty much how I feel about it. I went on a nice long rant on twitter earlier about this article and won't regurgitate everything I said here, but you basically nailed it. There is certainly an argument to be made, and while the columnist did bring up some good points to support his position, he could've made a much stronger argument by looking at the last 13 years and not just this year or even the last two years. In fact, he could've simply read this thread to see some of the points many posters on here have made.

                    As for the criticism of the Freep as a whole, I don't think it's fair. Obviously I'm very biased when it comes to the Freep (I was sports editor for one semester and a men's hockey beat writer for two years), but columnists have always had the freedom to express their opinions, and that should never change. The editor's job is to simply make sure nothing in the column is factually inaccurate or libelous. Nothing here was, except for the time of Bonino's goal, which is an unnecessary oversight, but not one that detracts from the overall point. You can question the timing of running it now as opposed to after the season or whatever, but that's the columnist's decision, not the editor's or the paper's.

                    I've been thinking all day about how I would've handled it if a columnist submitted this exact same column during the semester I was editor (ignoring the fact it would've been super-dumb because that was the semester they won the national title). Ultimately, the answer's pretty easy- I would've ran it. I would've spent a lot more time going over it with the columnist than I normally would. Usually the associate editor is the one goes over columns with the columnist, but in this case I would've done it myself. But I wouldn't have made him change too much in terms of what argument he was making or what he used to support that argument. I might've suggested a couple things he didn't mention, but ultimately it's his call as to what direction the column goes. Once an editor starts changing things around too much, it becomes the editor's column and not the columnist's, and that's never good.
                    I should say, my comments about the Freep columnists is not a reflection on the sports staff as a whole, I actually have found the coverage in recent years to be far superior to years prior. My comments are specifically about the columnists, both from the perspective of their choice of topics, their level of knowledge of those topics, a general lack of depth to their articles, rehashing of beaten to death topics, and even a lack of caring about the topics. These attributes don't apply to all of the recent columnists, some would be applicable to certain columnists. Some have been good, some have been very poor. I won't name names, but if you look at the quality of some of the articles, some being purely for humorous purposes, and using both bad grammar, hazy facts, and poorly substantiated arguments, it adds up to a lot of columns that were just terrible to read. I also know that in recent times, the sports staff has had a general shortage of columnists applying for the position in general, so they may have had to take on some people that perhaps weren't completely up to par.

                    That said, moving to this article, I would've ran it too. It's a point that's worth discussing, and clearly based on the lengthy discussions here, it's on the minds of the fans, thus it's a very relevant topic. Of course, the factual mistake on Bonino's goal is a fairly big oversight that should've been caught, but I'll ignore that for the sake of this post.

                    I agree with almost everything you said about what the author should've done here. He makes a far too big generalization in saying "The problem at hand is motivation." Sure, that's a big issue, but it's not the only one plaguing this program over the past three seasons. He follows up that point by placing the blame fully on the coaching staff, namely Parker. Again, part of that blame is placed on Parker's shoulders, but at some level, the players have to be able to motivate themselves also.

                    His point about recruiting is 100% bogus. We recruit players that are frequently drafted by NHL teams (so does every other big program!) and it's the coach's job to recruit those players aren't looking ahead to the NHL. Well, there's virtually no objective way to tell how a 16 year old will feel about his professional career. You can't tell a kid when recruiting him "If you're drafted, you're not allowed to care about that at all when you're playing for BU." Sure, it's one thing to have one foot out the door, and I give the author some credit here because this has been an issue with some recent teams, and something Parker addressed before the 08-09 season, but it's another to tell the kid his future is irrelevant.

                    Finally, his criticism of a specific instance of X's and O's with not showing game tape before the PC game is absurd. If there's one area where Parker deserves absolutely no criticism, it's his understanding of the game from a technical standpoint. He's in a lose-lose situation playing against a team with a new coach in his first game, any coach will tell you that's one of the most difficult situations to prepare your team for. Showing the team tape of Union would only go to show very generally the types of schemes he used to use there. But it could also serve to confuse the team, as Leaman may very well adjust those schemes with new players. Showing tape of PC last year would only go to show that these players do things a certain way, but again, could go to confuse the players because under a new coach, those players likely will not play the same, and now you've got two different images in the players' heads of the coaching and players that may be completely inaccurate. I'm going to take a guess as to Parker's approach to preparing for PC, knowing that he did not show tape of the opposition, he likely focused on prepping his team on how THEY were going to play. His thought process likely was, our players are better than theirs, if we show up and play our game at our best, we'll win no matter what hokey scheme the new coach comes up with. So I'm going to prepare my team to impose their will and their superior talent on the game, and get the W that way. This is a perfectly reasonable, and I would argue the best, approach to that game. Arguing X's and O's against Parker is a terrible, terrible idea, and that was really the worst part of the article.
                    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                    Comment


                    • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                      Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                      Enough of this hockey talk. Does Agganis change the pizza every year??? Could have sworn I saw bacon as a topping. You don't see that everyday at a sporting event...
                      Hey, come on now, this has been the most objective, sensible, and on the point discussion we've had on this thread in years.
                      ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                      Comment


                      • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                        Originally posted by SteveF View Post
                        Hahaha wow. It absolutely is.


                        *****http://photos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v2401/146/40/1810199/n1810199_38436996_2861.jpg?dl=1******


                        I hope this looks better than it does on my phone
                        The hat could be worse than a man with a scarf...

                        Comment


                        • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                          Originally posted by brassbonanza View Post
                          Finally, his criticism of a specific instance of X's and O's with not showing game tape before the PC game is absurd. If there's one area where Parker deserves absolutely no criticism, it's his understanding of the game from a technical standpoint. He's in a lose-lose situation playing against a team with a new coach in his first game, any coach will tell you that's one of the most difficult situations to prepare your team for. Showing the team tape of Union would only go to show very generally the types of schemes he used to use there. But it could also serve to confuse the team, as Leaman may very well adjust those schemes with new players. Showing tape of PC last year would only go to show that these players do things a certain way, but again, could go to confuse the players because under a new coach, those players likely will not play the same, and now you've got two different images in the players' heads of the coaching and players that may be completely inaccurate. I'm going to take a guess as to Parker's approach to preparing for PC, knowing that he did not show tape of the opposition, he likely focused on prepping his team on how THEY were going to play. His thought process likely was, our players are better than theirs, if we show up and play our game at our best, we'll win no matter what hokey scheme the new coach comes up with. So I'm going to prepare my team to impose their will and their superior talent on the game, and get the W that way. This is a perfectly reasonable, and I would argue the best, approach to that game. Arguing X's and O's against Parker is a terrible, terrible idea, and that was really the worst part of the article.
                          I think everything in this post is fair, and I agree with this last part. X's and O's would be one of the last things I'd question about Parker. Maybe you can question the PP the last couple seasons if you want, but even that's pretty irrelevant in the bigger argument of whether or not he should go.
                          Places I've seen a college hockey game: Agganis Arena, Alfond Arena, Bright Center, Consol Energy Center, Conte Forum, DCU Center, Fenway Park, Gutterson Fieldhouse, Houston Field House, Lawler Arena, Madison Square Garden, Matthews Arena, Mullins Center, Schneider Arena, Scottrade Center, Sears Centre, Tampa Bay Times Forum, TD Bank Sports Center, TD Garden, Tsongas Center, Tully Forum, Verizon Center, Verizon Wireless Arena, Walter Brown Arena, Wells Fargo Center, Whittemore Center

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                            The hat could be worse than a man with a scarf...
                            He's cornering the market on stupid hats
                            “Unless you’re Boston College, you don’t get here every year.”

                            Pinhead Nation: "gone" but not forgotten

                            Originally posted by shrader
                            Admin, do you still hate BC? If not, will darin and MAV ever be freed? If you do still hate BC, why is SteveF allowed to post?
                            Hockey East Champions: 1987, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012
                            National Champions: 1949, 2001, 2008, 2010, 2012

                            Comment


                            • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                              Let me pose this, what's the bigger issue, recruiting or player development? I feel like many of you will absolutely say player development--and that's probably the right answer. If you answer player development, isn't Xs and Os part of that? If you feel like BU has recruited on par with BC, certainly there's more to BC's success than just "being ready to play".

                              Comment


                              • Re: BU 2011-2012 Season: The bar is low, boys!

                                Originally posted by J.D. View Post
                                Let me pose this, what's the bigger issue, recruiting or player development? I feel like many of you will absolutely say player development--and that's probably the right answer. If you answer player development, isn't Xs and Os part of that? If you feel like BU has recruited on par with BC, certainly there's more to BC's success than just "being ready to play".
                                To me, they are both a far second and third to motivation. However, development is linked to motivation, so of the two, that would be my choice as a bigger issue. The challenge after have the player development argument for the last 15 years is that we can all point to players that have developed and others that haven't.

                                Is it possible that his ability to develop has slipped with the motivation? Very possibly. An unmotivated player is less likely to develop well. There were very few people complaining about player development when guys like Doug Friedman, Mike Grier and Matt Radoslovich made names for themselves without high expectations. There have been examples of guys who have had both good and bad development in their careers (Chris Dyment and Pat Aufiero both were great as Sophomores, horrible as Juniors, and pretty good as seniors.). When I look at a guy like Ryan Whitney, my thought is less about player development and more about poorly using his talents.

                                In general, once the arena was built, recruiting has not been an issue, at least as far as talent. I have concerns with the lack of academic excellence over the past decade, but I honestly can't say if that is a big change from the 90's, as I didn't follow that aspect of the "game" back then.
                                BU Hockey: The trophy case is once again growing

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X