Amazing.  I have just read two posts about the teams that faced off Friday at
Houston Fieldhouse, and my impressions don't support either.
 
Bryce, the Jimmy Page is God guy, writes:
 
>RPI looked better against BU than they did against Northeastern....I guess RPi
is always going to have the same kind of team.
 
What?  Didn't RPI win on Friday night?  Did the Engineers blank the Huskies in
the third period, something no Engineer team has done in the last three years,
or was that my imagination?  Wasn't that first game against a BU team, which,
as I noted, doesn't seem to have the plethora of finishing possibilities it
is accustomed to?
 
The Engineers showed they do have some offensive talent in the first period,
maybe not a lot, but some.  Their rookie goaltender didn't make much of a sh
showing that period, but settled down and played pretty good the rest of the wa
way.  Comparing the efforts of Laing and Prekaski suggest neither significantly
outplayed the other.  Defensively, the Engineers may have played a little better
against Northeastern.  There weren't any major breakdowns, and basically the
score should have been 4-1 RPI if Prekaski hadn't suffered his rookie tremors
in the first.
 
But BU was a much better offensive team than Northeastern.  OK, that's true.  I
didn't come away with much of a positive opinion of the Huskies.  But...
 
Mike Machnik, esteemed hockey observor, writer and critic writes:
 
>...Northeastern (is) going to be better than expected.  Northeastern showed me
a lot against Michigan State.
 
Was the Huskie team at the Fieldhouse one of those dimensional replicas a la
"Sliders"?  I can't say I have much to recommend about the Northeastern team,
other than there dependable, but not flashy, goalie Robitaille.  I didn't see
any vestiges of offensive pressure exerted by the Huskies.  Again they scored
on goal, and Prekaski let in the other two.  On the defensive side, RPI was
able to muster consistent offensive pressure, often overpowering the NE
defensemen down low, and even threading neat little centering passes by the
Huskie defense.  RPI's lack of finishing polish was the reason they only scored
four goals.  And granted, that's not an easy problem to solve.  But Noverall, I
would have to say that RPI outclassed Northeastern.  This in spite of my
assumption that Bruce Crowder's head coaching ascendancy would reap immediate
dividends for the Huskies.
 
I don't know what all this means.  RPI is a different team this year.  They
are bigger, more physical, more defensive minded.   Also less offensively
skilled, especially less talented scoring wise, and less experienced.  So are th
the Engineers a team that will surprise this year, as evidenced by their play
against the "better than expected" Northeastern team?  Are they the same old
RPI team, as evidenced by their won/loss record?  Obviously, two questions that
will have to be answered as the season goes on.
*********************************************************************************
Brian Morris                    RPI Engineers--Big and Nasty
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.