Page 7 of 50 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 992

Thread: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

  1. #121
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Rumford, RI
    Posts
    319

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Hutter View Post
    You make a good point about opposing teams. When scheduling games to start at other than the typical 7pm times of ECAC games, does the opposing team have any input?
    As I understand it, the home team must request contractual agreement by the visiting team before a time other than the standard 7:00 p.m. start can be finalized.
    LET'S GO BRUNO!

  2. #122
    Ever True since '92
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Some New England rink or another
    Posts
    2,624

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkEagleUSA View Post
    I say let her drop the puck, grab a seat behind the bench, and support the team. She can have her inauguration after the game!
    Hear, hear!

  3. #123
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    685

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    While we've been discussing the Brown incoming class, we may not have been paying enough attention to some significant rules changes. With full credit to Greg Johnson, of NCAA.org:


    "OVERTIME OPTION

    After a thorough discussion, the committee recommended giving conferences and institutions the option of playing four-on-four, five-minute overtime periods in the regular season beginning with the 2012-13 season. That is the system used in the NHL.

    The goalies would still be required to switch ends of the ice, which causes teams to make long line changes, leading to additional scoring opportunities.

    The proposed rule is not a mandate. If teams playing in a nonconference game can’t agree on which way overtime will be played, it will default to a five-on-five, five-minute extra period where the goalies will switch ends of the ice.

    The format for NCAA tournament games has not changed (five-on-five until a winner is decided).

    “There was some support in the membership for four-on-four overtime, and it is an exciting brand of hockey,” McLaughlin said. “We also wanted to respect the membership views that it might not be the best for all levels of hockey right now. Providing an option for everyone is the right step for us.”

    The committee will monitor the overtime formats for the next two years to see if any other changes should be made.

    “When we made the change two years ago for the goalies to change ends going into overtime, it lessened the number of ties in the sport,” McLaughlin said. “We think making another option available will allow for more data to be collected and to review the impact on our game.”


    HAND PASSES MADE ILLEGAL

    Committee members proposed that all hand passes be made illegal, including in the defensive zone.

    The referee will stop play on any hand pass, and the faceoff will be in the offending team’s defensive zone. Additionally, if the team commits the violation in its defensive zone, that team will not be able to change its players before the ensuing faceoff.

    “This is a way to promote scoring and create more chances on offense,” McLaughlin said. “Not being able to make a line change can have a pretty big impact, and this takes away a rule that gave the defensive team an advantage.”


    NET DISLODGEMENT CHANGE
    The committee also adjusted its rules dealing with the goal cage becoming dislodged. The committee essentially moved to the NHL rule in this area, which allows some displacement of the goal as long as the posts remain in contact with the pegs or pins.

    “Our rules currently don’t allow for much leeway, and we believe we have disallowed too many goals that really should count,” McLaughlin said. “The NHL rules have been used effectively, and we believe this is a positive change.”

    To award a goal in these situations, the goal post must have been displaced by the actions of a defending player. To award a goal, the referee must determine that the puck would have entered the net between the normal position of the goal posts.


    DISTINCT KICKING MOTION

    Another proposed change by the committee is intended to enhance scoring and also make its rules more consistent. The committee approved a change that will allow most goals off of attacking player’s skates, with the exception of a distinct kicking motion. In recent years, the committee has attempted a variety of interpretations in this area.

    “We ultimately believe bringing some clarity to this rule is important and allowing goals that are directed into the goal with a skate will be a positive move,” McLaughlin said. “It seems like the hockey community is comfortable with the concept of a distinct kicking motion, so we hope this brings some clarity to this rule as well.”


    OFFICIATING SYSTEM

    Effective with the 2013-14 season, the committee voted to make the two-referee, two-linesman system mandatory for men’s ice hockey. Feedback from the women’s ice hockey community indicated that the two-referee, one-linesman system should remain as an option for the foreseeable future. All four NCAA championships used the two-referee, two-linesman system in 2012.

    Additionally, goal judges are no longer required for NCAA games and will only be recommended.

    “Our rules truly require two referees, and the committee strongly believes the four-person system is the best overall,” McLaughlin said. “We believe providing a grace period will allow institutions time to adjust and plan.”

    The NCAA adjusted officiating fees in the 2012 Division III championships (men’s and women’s) to make the change immediately and reduced travel costs by not using a back-up official.


    POSTGAME REVIEW OF DISQUALIFICATIONS

    The committee voted to allow a postgame review of disqualification penalties by the on-ice officials. The group requested conference feedback on how best to implement a procedure and guidelines for the concept, but the belief is a disqualification penalty, with the help of video evidence, is an important determination and should be reviewed. The calling official will have the final decision on any review."


    The full article can be found at: https://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/...r+face+shields

  4. #124
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    79

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by Brown09 View Post
    Time to hear from Grillo's biggest (only?) supporter, Brunofan...
    Nothing new to report on that subject. I'll wait a few years till you start slamming on Brendan. I had to protect the 'garbage' players recently....it's tough being the sole protector or the program around here but someone has to do it.

  5. #125
    Ever True since '92
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Some New England rink or another
    Posts
    2,624

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by Brunofan View Post
    Nothing new to report on that subject. I'll wait a few years till you start slamming on Brendan. I had to protect the 'garbage' players recently....it's tough being the sole protector or the program around here but someone has to do it.
    Oh, please. I already agreed with you that garbage was an inappropriate term for me to have used, and rephrased in a manner which should not have upset anyone. Get over it.

    And for the record, men aged 18-24 years old do not need to be "protected." There are Brown players older than NHLers for heaven's sake. If there's nothing wrong with ridiculing a 19-year-old Tyler Seguin while he's slumping for the Boston Bruins, why is it so wrong to criticize the poor play of Brown's team? No, they're not professionals, but there's no reason to treat them like Peewees. I doubt they'd appreciate that.

    It's not like I'm a fan of a rival program coming in here and taunting the Brown faithful; I've had season tickets for nearly 20 years, and I reserve the right to critique my team based on the quality of its performances.

  6. #126
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    290

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by Euler18 View Post


    "OVERTIME OPTION

    After a thorough discussion, the committee recommended giving conferences and institutions the option of playing four-on-four, five-minute overtime periods in the regular season beginning with the 2012-13 season. That is the system used in the NHL.

    The goalies would still be required to switch ends of the ice, which causes teams to make long line changes, leading to additional scoring opportunities.

    The proposed rule is not a mandate. If teams playing in a nonconference game can’t agree on which way overtime will be played, it will default to a five-on-five, five-minute extra period where the goalies will switch ends of the ice.
    I kind of like this tweak. I am not certain if the ECAC Hockey schools will switch sides or play four-on-four. As I recall, getting replay across the league was a complicated proposition to begin with, so my guess is that anything that drastic probably won't happen. The switching of sides, I believe, already occurs. I may be wrong on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euler18 View Post
    HAND PASSES MADE ILLEGAL

    Committee members proposed that all hand passes be made illegal, including in the defensive zone.

    The referee will stop play on any hand pass, and the faceoff will be in the offending team’s defensive zone. Additionally, if the team commits the violation in its defensive zone, that team will not be able to change its players before the ensuing faceoff.
    This could be tough... for some teams that are gassed, the tossing of the puck while sprawled across the ice is the best defensive move. I can think of multiple cases where tossing the puck out of the zone (by hand) was the play of choice. I suppose this is an adjustment to which the players will easily adapt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euler18 View Post
    NET DISLODGEMENT CHANGE
    The committee also adjusted its rules dealing with the goal cage becoming dislodged. The committee essentially moved to the NHL rule in this area, which allows some displacement of the goal as long as the posts remain in contact with the pegs or pins.


    To award a goal in these situations, the goal post must have been displaced by the actions of a defending player. To award a goal, the referee must determine that the puck would have entered the net between the normal position of the goal posts.
    Ugh. This presumes that the referee(s) and goal judge can make an adequate determination - and that all goals (or non-goals) could thus be reviewable. Right now, I believe those called dead are not reviewable by rule. Anything that gives the referee more opportunity for subjective judgment is a little scary in my humble opinion.

    DISTINCT KICKING MOTION

    Another proposed change by the committee is intended to enhance scoring and also make its rules more consistent. The committee approved a change that will allow most goals off of attacking player’s skates, with the exception of a distinct kicking motion. In recent years, the committee has attempted a variety of interpretations in this area.

    “We ultimately believe bringing some clarity to this rule is important and allowing goals that are directed into the goal with a skate will be a positive move,” McLaughlin said. “It seems like the hockey community is comfortable with the concept of a distinct kicking motion, so we hope this brings some clarity to this rule as well.”


    Quote Originally Posted by Euler18 View Post
    OFFICIATING SYSTEM

    Effective with the 2013-14 season, the committee voted to make the two-referee, two-linesman system mandatory for men’s ice hockey. Feedback from the women’s ice hockey community indicated that the two-referee, one-linesman system should remain as an option for the foreseeable future. All four NCAA championships used the two-referee, two-linesman system in 2012.

    Additionally, goal judges are no longer required for NCAA games and will only be recommended.
    To that end, I surely hope that the powers-that-be are continuing to actually address the shortcomings of officials and evaluate them realistically and objectively, while providing suitable training for new officials coming through the ranks. US Soccer has an outstanding program whereby they identify officials at lower levels and slowly assign them to different and more pervasive roles at higher-level games. Basketball may have the same, but the soccer program is truly comprehensive. If putting four folks on the ice, including two linesmen who can't get out of the way of the puck, does not actually improve the game and its management, I would much prefer the three-man system.

    I cannot think of anyone who could say, universally, that the quality of officiating across the board last year was adequate. Individual periods, for sure. Entire games, possibly. But an entire solid weekend or schedule, even while accounting for a bad call or even period here or there, was hardly the case.


    Euler, thanks for posting the rule proposals.

    I have completely stayed out of the conversation re: the new recruits and their potential, but share Euler's excitement. This senior class, which is small in number, has had to watch younger players take their share of playing time, which should (emphasis on SHOULD) pay dividends as the younger players - with their share of experience - evolve into the leaders of this team (see: Robertson, Dennis).

    That said, consistency and depth have been the main lackings of the Brown Bears. Matt Wahl went down last year with a concussion, and defensively the team was not the same, period, especially as Coach Whittet struggled to find pairings between Joey D, Wolff, and Quick that worked - it was almost like trying to find which guy would be "on" for a certain night and if the wrong guy were picked, he wouldn't get on the ice. Offensively, the team has some bright lights ahead of them. Very impressed with Lorito and Jacobson and their development, and a year or two of prospects behind them should (again, emphasis on SHOULD) mean that anything less than a home ice series is a profound disappointment.

    All of that said, it would be nice for a guy like Zaires to have a breakout-type season. It would be nice for three lines to contribute offensively. It would be nice to find five or six D-men that can load up from the point and lock down inside the hash marks. But my cynicism will refrain from anointing anyone until the pucks drop.

  7. #127
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    685

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by BrunoFan00 View Post
    I have completely stayed out of the conversation re: the new recruits and their potential, but share Euler's excitement. This senior class, which is small in number, has had to watch younger players take their share of playing time, which should (emphasis on SHOULD) pay dividends as the younger players - with their share of experience - evolve into the leaders of this team (see: Robertson, Dennis).

    That said, consistency and depth have been the main lackings of the Brown Bears. Matt Wahl went down last year with a concussion, and defensively the team was not the same, period, especially as Coach Whittet struggled to find pairings between Joey D, Wolff, and Quick that worked - it was almost like trying to find which guy would be "on" for a certain night and if the wrong guy were picked, he wouldn't get on the ice.
    No disagreement here. Depth has been a problem, especially at defense. Marc-Antoine Carrier's departure in November 2011 left a big gap at defense. Carrier was our most mobile defenseman, and despite making an occasional defensive error, had the potential to develop into a defensive mainstain. There was also a lack of size and physicality at defense, a situation that hopefully will improve with the addition of B. Pfeil and M. Widman.

    I'd like to see Kyle Quick play more, especially on the power play. He has good mobility and the best offensive skills of any of the returning defensemen. (I'm not saying he's our best defenseman. I'm just saying that he has the best offensive skills among the returning defensemen.)



    Quote Originally Posted by BrunoFan00 View Post
    Offensively, the team has some bright lights ahead of them. Very impressed with Lorito and Jacobson and their development, and a year or two of prospects behind them should (again, emphasis on SHOULD) mean that anything less than a home ice series is a profound disappointment.

    All of that said, it would be nice for a guy like Zaires to have a breakout-type season. It would be nice for three lines to contribute offensively. It would be nice to find five or six D-men that can load up from the point and lock down inside the hash marks. But my cynicism will refrain from anointing anyone until the pucks drop.
    No disagreement, either. Chris Zaires' best offensive season was his freshman year. I think he's overdue for a big senior season. He has the skills--skating, passing, shooting, hockey sense. Jacobsen was as close to a sniper as we had last year. Lorito is a very creative player and a great passer.

    I hope we can make three strong lines out of Lorito, Jacobsen, Harlow, Lamacchia, Zaires, Hathaway, Roy, Lappin and Naclerio (and/or possibly Prescott).

    As to depth, Chris Draper and Jimmy Siers are two dependable energy guys, both of whom have excellent size and good skating ability. Mark Hourihan will probably never be a scorer, but he's a solid penalty killer and good defensive player. The coaches appear to like him. Frank Drolet is one of the hardest working guys on the team, and was deservedly made an assistant captain. He's the proverbial coachable guy and no one has better attitude. Mike Juola has good passing skills. His skating has improved and he's become stronger. Jeff Ryan is a solid skater, who plays well when called upon. Hopefully guys like Mike Borge and Jake Goldberg will surprise us and contribute more effectively. Some players take longer to develop. It's also likely that with more talent on the top three lines, there'll be less pressure on the role players to contribute offensively, which might enable them to do their jobs more efficiently. Everybody plays better when surrounded by better talent.

  8. #128
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    794

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    [QUOTE=Mike Hutter;5472834]
    Quote Originally Posted by Euler18 View Post
    No disagreement here. Depth has been a problem, especially at defense. Marc-Antoine Carrier's departure in November 2011 left a big gap at defense. Carrier was our most mobile defenseman, and despite making an occasional defensive error, had the potential to develop into a defensive mainstain. There was also a lack of size and physicality at defense, a situation that hopefully will improve with the addition of B. Pfeil and M. Widman.


    I just noted that when Carrier left Brown, he payed for Quebec in the QMJHL. Was playing in the juniors a reason why he left Brown?
    Pure speculation since I'm clearly not in the know, but the QMJHL has had issues with recruiting skaters from North America. Charlie Coyle left BU for the league, but there's been oft-speculated rumors that he left because his academics were also in the toilet. There was a French article from Quebec that outlined the issues they've had in the past, usually centered around scholarships and bursaries. Since the Ivy League is non-scholarship, maybe they offered him some type of bursary to go along with the prospect of playing closer to home?

    I could be totally off on this one, but if he's making $5,000 per year to play juniors, it might also offer him a better chance to resurface somewhere else. Very strange indeed.
    Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose.

    STAY UP #94 #58

  9. #129
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    685

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    [QUOTE=Humanoid;5474807]
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Hutter View Post

    Pure speculation since I'm clearly not in the know, but the QMJHL has had issues with recruiting skaters from North America. Charlie Coyle left BU for the league, but there's been oft-speculated rumors that he left because his academics were also in the toilet. There was a French article from Quebec that outlined the issues they've had in the past, usually centered around scholarships and bursaries. Since the Ivy League is non-scholarship, maybe they offered him some type of bursary to go along with the prospect of playing closer to home?

    I could be totally off on this one, but if he's making $5,000 per year to play juniors, it might also offer him a better chance to resurface somewhere else. Very strange indeed.
    For the record, Humanoid gave the impression (unwittingly, I'm sure) that I was the author of the question about why Marc Antoine Carrier had left Brown. This is not incorrect. The question came from Mike Hutter. Humanoid linked my post and Mike Hutter's without attribution to Mike.

    I'm not comfortable discussing the specifics of why Marc Antoine left, but I want to state categorically that he was not in trouble academically. The team definitely missed his skills -- his smooth skating and precise passing. He was still developing, but had great potential as a Division I player.

  10. #130
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    46

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Sorry to hear about Roy......

  11. #131
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    and just last week Roy confirmed he was still going to Brown. I guess a lot can change in a week, sorry guys.

  12. #132
    Clark-Hislop-Cox
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,035

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    US Hockey Report: "Brown Kicked in the Head"

  13. #133
    Ever True since '92
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Some New England rink or another
    Posts
    2,624

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    I say good riddance. If he doesn't have enough character to be straight forward with the school he committed to, and in fact "puts to rest" the rumors a week before de-committing by declaring his loyalty to Brown, I don't want him anyway. He's clearly a narcissist, and those have no place in a Whittet-run locker room.

    Have fun riding the pine at BC or Wisconsin, you little turd.

  14. #134
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Eastern Mass.
    Posts
    670

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    As a NU fan, I can empathize with you. Laast year we lost Johnny Gaudreau to BC in a case of the rich getting richer.
    The only silver lining is that you might have been saddled with a one and done guy and a tag-along older brother whose goaltending credentials were reasonably impressive on a very strong team in a very mediocre league.

    Bummer. But life goes on. Roy apparently never learned that Brown is so much more than a place to prepare for the NHL. It's such a shame that youth is wasted on the young.

  15. #135
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,015

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    being a late 4th round pick after lighting up USHL does not mean a 1 and done player. NHL guys are not as sold...

    He better do well after giving up everything a Brown degree offers

    Will be interesting to see who would take and start a little rift with Brown. Might neevr play D 1 and go MJ instead

  16. #136

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Windham, NH
    Posts
    6,753

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by C-H-C View Post
    US Hockey Report: "Brown Kicked in the Head"
    The USHR article mentions rumors of possible tampering by other DI programs. Hard to prove, but it will be interesting to see where he / they end up.

  17. #137
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Eastern Mass.
    Posts
    670

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    you're right. He is smallish, and that probably cost him a round or two. Going MJ is certainly an option for him, but why did his older brother decommit? I believe he is too old for juniors.

  18. #138
    Brown Wins!
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Albany, NY USA
    Posts
    1,943

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryecheers View Post
    As a NU fan, I can empathize with you. Laast year we lost Johnny Gaudreau to BC in a case of the rich getting richer.
    The only silver lining is that you might have been saddled with a one and done guy and a tag-along older brother whose goaltending credentials were reasonably impressive on a very strong team in a very mediocre league.

    Bummer. But life goes on. Roy apparently never learned that Brown is so much more than a place to prepare for the NHL. It's such a shame that youth is wasted on the young.
    I didn't follow the Gaudreau decommit situation last year. Did he give any reasons? Charges of tampering?

  19. #139
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    19

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Johnny Gaudreau was a different story as there was a coaching change late in the off season. I am not sure why Roy de-committed, although there have been rumors for months. I think he is committed to going the college route and not the QJuniors, but maybe didn't want to play for Brown as it was trying to rebuild, but he should have known that a long time ago. These are young kids and hopefully there wasn't any tampering....

  20. #140
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,193

    Re: Brown Hockey 2012-2013:Climbing the ECAC Ladder

    Quote Originally Posted by boblav1 View Post
    The USHR article mentions rumors of possible tampering by other DI programs. Hard to prove, but it will be interesting to see where he / they end up.
    This has Parker/BU written all over it....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •