Andrew Brecher and Carl Sussman are certainly entitled to their opinion
that Mike Parsons is not one of the best goalies in the league, and
Brecher is entitled to his view that Brown (the fourth best defensive
team in the league) has a bad defense. Nevertheless many, perhaps most
"Brown faithful" (to use Sussman's terminology), would disagree with
both Brecher and Sussman.
 
Parsons has kept Brown in many games in which the offense sputtered,
and on many occasions gave the team time to settle down by making key
saves when Brown was beleaguered. Why Parsons didn't play as well as he's
capable of in the two games against Clarkson is beyond me. Throughout
the season he was never the only reason why Brown lost, and often was the
main reason why Brown won. The game at RPI is a case in  point. Brown
lost 6-1, but it wasn't Parsons' fault that RPI had so many 3-on-2s and
2-on-1s. There are so many times any goaltender can prevent goals on
3-on-2s and 2-on-1s, and so many times any goaltender can thwart
breakways. In these situations what has generally occurred is that a
forward has missed his defensive assignment -- and in the Brown system
every forward has a defensive assignment.
 
I also find it a bit odd that Brecher considers the Brown defense to be
weak. Many of us think that this year the defense has played a key role
in Brown's success. There is, in fact, so much depth at defense that
Bob Gaudet was able to move Charlie Humber to left wing, and keep him
there even after promising freshman D.J.Harding broke his jaw and was
out for the season.
 
Parsons is a capable goalie, who plays a sound, conservative game. I
must agree with RPI sportscaster Jayson May that Parsons has been a
wonderful replacement for Geoff Finch.
 
Luiz F. Valente