HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Mon, 6 Feb 1995 15:54:23 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (102 lines)
Mike Machnik writes:
 
On the game...I thought this game had been postponed until I saw
Deron's report!  [snip]  I suspect I was not the only one who tuned in and
assumed the game was off when I didn't see it.
 
.....
 
What was the attendance like at Lowell?
 
=========================
 
Attendance at the Lowell game was around 1700.  Pre-game sales had less
that 300 tickets remaining, and if the weather was decent, Lowell probably
would have had their fourth sellout of the year.
 
I'm sure that the weather had much to do with the smaller turnout, but I,
for one, didn't go because when I called the university to check on the
status if the game I WAS TOLD THAT THE GAME WAS CANCELLED!!!!!!!  About 15
minutes before the time the game would've started I turned on WLLH radio
to see if they had any news about when the game would've been made up.
How surprised do you think I was to hear a pre-game!?!?!  After my initial
anger I convinced myself that it might be OK to watch the game on WNDS and
listen to the radion broadcast.  Again, how PO'd was I when I saw Baywatch
on WNDS instead?!??!?
 
IMHO, it was stupid for the school to play the game.  Ironically, a very
similar thing happened when Maine was in town two seasons ago - a
potential sellout was nullified by not cancelling a game while an
ice-storm was going on.
 
 
Deron Treadwell and Mike Machnik both voiced their opinions/concern about
Greg Bullock's chippy play.  I've been saying this for a few weeks now
about his (and teammate Christian Sbrocca's) knack for taking stupid
penalties.  It's not necessarily that Greg's a dirty player, as Deron
wondered, but that he loses his cool very easily.  As Mike mentioned, he's
got a lot to learn about "walking away" from confrontation.  Other teams
are now finding out how to defend against him - just get him riled up and
he basically takes himself out of the play.  He does need to do alot of
growing up, especially if he expects to be a leader.  He need to
understand that when you're a player of his caliber, you're going to draw
alot of extra attention - he's got to learn to keep focused on helping put
the puck in the net and not sticking an opponent in the ribs just because
said opponent may have been "giving him the business".  As Deron said, in
many ways he hurts more than he helps.  As Mike said, he definitely needs
to develop a thik skin.
 
 
Dave Hendrickson writes:
 
(FWIW, I've seen only one period total out of the four recent UML blowout
losses due to my son's hockey and my daughter's swimming, so I have no
clue
as to what has gone wrong.  But the numbers speak volumes...)
=============================
 
I'm not so sure that the two losses to NU were quite the same as the
losses to BC and Maine.  Sure the end result was the same, but I think the
team played quite differently.  In the two games against NU, Lowell didn't
even show up.  It my eyes, it was basically 120 minutes of standing
around.  Northeastern seems to be getting it back together again, but
Lowell sure didn't help.  No checking, no skating, no passing, no
shooting.  Period.  'Tis tough to win without any of those!
 
The game against BC showed a much more determined Lowell team.  Despite
the final score, I thought Lowell dominated play for about 50 minutes.
Scott Fankhouser looked VERY shaky in net and BC scored on the few
mistakes Lowell made in the first couple of periods.  I wonder why Coach
Crowder didn't start Craig Lindsey - BC was a MUST game, the Maine game
IMHO was a "throw-away".  To me, Greg Taylor was the story of this game.
Lowell put 26 shots on net in the third period.  While giving up alot of
shots, to their credit, BC's defense did an excellent job of not allowing
Lowell 2nd and 3rd opportunities.  When BC went up by two in the third,
Lowell packed it in.
 
Although I wasn't at the Maine game, it seemed similar.  Again, Lowell
seemed to play better than they had in a while, only allowing Maine to
take 4 (or thereabouts) shots in the 2nd.  Again, when Maine extended
their lead in the third, Lowell packed it in.
 
Lowell seems to be struggling with their confidence.  Once things get a
bit out of hand, the team loses its collective poise and the wheels fall
off the bus.  Once this happens, everyone starts to play as individuals
(another thing that Bullock does to often), or stops trying altogether and
it gets ugly.  I don't mind losing to a better team, it's the lack of
effort this team shows at times that really disgusts me.
 
Two weeks ago Lowell had an excellent chance at third - now fifth is more
likely.  However, after the luck we've had against NU this season, I think
I'd rather finish 6th and take my chances against UNH!!!
 
 
   - Steve
 
 
**************************************************************************
Steve Weisfeldt
Univ. of Lowell  1986, 1988                       Home of the 'Hawks!!
[log in to unmask]                          7-9-1 [1] (12-14-4)
**************************************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2