Kevin writes: >Some other observations of this game: Merrimack's big players are trying >to make to many individual efforts. I noticed it in the Notre Dame game, >and tonight it continued. Well, to a certain extent this is true. But the team as a whole is really on a downer, at least they were until tonight's third period which was some of the best hockey Merrimack played dating back to about the first period of the Lowell game on Nov 13. It's difficult to find more than a couple of players who have played well night in and night out. Sure, the big guns have struggled, but it's really been a team non-effort. In the third, we saw Casale and Fowler make some of those individual efforts and they nearly produced goals. But at least they were getting shots and Merrimack hadn't been putting nearly as many shots on net as they should have been. >The referree, Bunyon was his name, I personally felt called a terrible game. >I really thought he was going to end up breaking up a fight, because he wasn't >calling a lot of hitting after the whistle penaltys, and wasn't calling a lot >of calls that could have been called. A lot of people don't like the way Bunyon calls a game; I actually do because he tends to let teams play. You're right, he doesn't call many hitting after the whistle penalties, but many of those are due to incidental contact. There was never any danger of the game getting out of hand. Bunyon also is usually pretty consistent as far as not calling stuff. He tends to fit my three main criteria for a good refereeing job: 1) be consistent, 2) let the teams play, 3) don't let the game get out of hand. >Merrimack next plays Dartmouth. I have visions of these teams playing to a >0-0 tie. I doubt it will happen. My actual prediction is Dartmouth 2 >Merrimack 1. The third period of tonight's game was very encouraging, from my point of view. I would have expected that after the ND game, and knowing what a good team they were to face tonight, Merrimack would come out storming and playing hard. This didn't happen, partly because they were put back on their heels early by UAA, and so after falling behind 3-0 and trailing in shots 27-9 after two periods, it would have been easy to pack it in. Instead, they played the third the way those of us who follow this team know they can play, and had they played that way the first two periods, they likely would have won. I suggested to someone that maybe after seeing the fantastic work ethic of UAA, they decided to come out and play the third that way, and now this makes the Dartmouth game very interesting to me. Perhaps all the early goals and scoring accolades made the team think they were a little better than they were. In reality, that's not right; Merrimack does not have the scoring of an NMU, the defense of UAA or the goaltending of BC. They are going to have to play 60 minutes to win games. We will see if they have realized that. As you and I have said, they are certainly a much better team than their 5-7-0 record shows. B.L. Elfring, Lowell SID, was on hand and suggested that this is just a down stretch that almost every team goes through at one point or another, whether it is because of finals, playing many games in a short time, etc. - that for whatever reason, they find it difficult to "get up" mentally for each game. But he added that this usually passes, so we will see. BTW, in an attempt to try something new, I brought my Terminator 2 soundtrack CD to John Savastano who runs the (excellent) sound system at Merrimack. After failing with the Hawaii 5-0 theme over the past few games, John took my advice and used the spooky Terminator theme when the team returned to the ice for the third, and the result was the best period they have played in quite a while. Who knows what effect that had, but rest assured you'll be hearing it again Tuesday night... Tuesday night's game with Dartmouth will be shown live on NESN. --- Mike Machnik [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]