Gigantic Upset Tonight

[calgARI \'07]

UNH fell to Niagara 5-2.  This is after Niagara was beat pretty bad by a crappy Hockey East team UMASS-Lowell last night (6-1).
There have certainly been unordinary amount of upsets this year, but this is Definitely the biggest of the year, IMO.
Other notables included Clarkson tying Colorado College, Union tying Bowling Green and Dartmouth falling to the strongest Canadian school, St. Francis Xavier.  I should say, however, that I think that Dartmouth is going to surprise a lot of people this year in how bad they are.  I do not think they will finish in the top half of the ECAC.  What carried Dartmouth last year was not the commonly accepted top line, but the defensive stalwarts Trevor Byrne and Pete Sommerfelt.  Jessiman is intensely overrated.

[Greg Berge]

According to the Washington Post (that timely source of college hockey news), 7 members of the UNH team were suspended for the weekend due to team rules violations which roughly translated to going to the trim triangle, getting drunk and acting like morons after the Sox choked away the pennant -- another Fine Intellectual Moment in the South End.  That probably had a lot to do with it.



Post Edited (10-26-03 06:46)

[Rob \'98]

The ppl on uscho were saying 8 guys were suspended and Caron was serving a 1 game for a spearing incident. It will be ineteresting to see how that affects UNH this season (cost them a 1 seed down the road maybe?). I assume that there werent shorthanded else the coach was being foolish to have them all serve at once.

[DeltaOne81]

When I first saw this thread, I thought it was about the World Series :-D

[Section A]

The sizeable "Yankees suck!" chant in Section A last night was kind of amusing....


The funny thing is, a lot of Yankees fans I know were so drained from the Boston series that they seemed not to really care at all during the World Series.



Post Edited (10-26-03 12:40)

[Keith K \'93]

The coach was foolish to sit them all at once?  Nonsense.  The players got suspended for violating team rules.  If you want to send the message that team rules must be obeyed then you suspend the players, regardless of the consequences on the ice.  If you suspend two players per game for 4 games you are saying that the rules kind of matter, but aren't that important.

[jtwcornell91]

Keith K '93 wrote:

The coach was foolish to sit them all at once?  Nonsense.  The players got suspended for violating team rules.  If you want to send the message that team rules must be obeyed then you suspend the players, regardless of the consequences on the ice.  If you suspend two players per game for 4 games you are saying that the rules kind of matter, but aren't that important.

But it is common practice when a lot of players are suspended at once.

[Greg Berge]

The theory being that the other players ought not to be punished by weakening their chances to win.

Now, I know to some people that might seem a fig leaf for hypocrisy, but I assure you... nothin to see here... move along...

[nyc94]

Didn't that happen in a Knicks-Heat series?  The league spread out the suspensions so the teams would have enough players to actually play with substitutions.  It's slightly different when the punishment comes from the league and the stupid behavior (fighting, leaving the bench, etc.) comes during a game - when the players really should know better.

[Rob \'98]

The coach was foolish to sit them all at once? Nonsense. The players got suspended for violating team rules. If you want to send the message that team rules must be obeyed then you suspend the players, regardless of the consequences on the ice. If you suspend two players per game for 4 games you are saying that the rules kind of matter, but aren't that important.

Well, I did say IF they were shorthanded. Let's say hypothetically that suspending all 8 meant they had only 7 forwards and therefore couldnt even field 3 full lines? Would it be so egregious if he only suspended 6 for that specific game so he could have 3 lines? What if 15 guys broke curfew (as I recall a couple of Cornell player were suspended for this reason a couple years back)? Is the coach suppose to forfeit the game?

As for 2 per game for 4 games, no I would find that wrong. That would send the message that it doesnt matter like you said.

[Will]

I don't think games should be forfeited unless the entire team was at fault for some infraction.  Otherwise, forfeited games just punish the players who supposedly followed the rules and did nothing wrong.

[CowbellGuy]

The sizeable "Yankees suck!" chant in Section A last night was kind of amusing.

Maybe for you. I know this has been beaten to a bloody pulp, but you Yankee-haters need a better hobby. Ever think how utterly petty you come off as?

[q]The funny thing is, a lot of Yankees fans I know were so drained from the Boston series that they seemed not to really care at all during the World Series.[/q]
It's not that we didn't care. We just know how to accept loss with dignity, no doubt a foreign concept to some of you. Go on back to making fun of Mariano's expression of emotions in game 7 that you find so amusing.

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]We just know how to accept loss with dignity[/Q]
Yes, Yankees fans tend to lose pretty well - it's easy when you have a 5/6ths shot of being in the World Series again the next year.

But (this isn't a shot at you Age... I've never been around you as a Yankees fan), it's about 50/50 odds that any given Yankees fan is gonna be the worst damn winner possible. Having watched plenty of baseball in the dorms over the last several years, that's about the ratio.

[Dale]

I don't seem to recall any "Yankees" that play hockey! Who the hell are they and who the hell cares?

[jtwcornell91]

Dale wrote:

I don't seem to recall any "Yankees" that play hockey!

Down here in N'Awlins, they tell me nobody but Yankees plays hockey!



Post Edited (10-29-03 19:52)