Quotes from coach Paluch after some losses this year

cowboyjoe · Post by **cowboyjoe** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 2:29 pm

After losing to Merrimack College:

"It was a tough loss, but I thought we did a lot of thing necessary to win the hockey game," said head coach Scott Paluch. "We created a lot of changes, but I thought their goaltender was outstanding." "I thought we were playing pretty well and we had chances."

After loss to Boston College:

"We played a pretty good hockey game against a a pretty good team, said head coach Scott Paluch. "We had a lot of chances. Our power play kept answering the bell when we needed it, and for the most part our penalty kill did a good job for us against a good power-play team." "I was extremely proud when we got it back to 6-6, and we showed a lot on who we are," said Paluch.

After loss to Ferris State:

"We just couldn't finish off plays. They came at us hard early, but we handled that. From that point on we played extremely well." All-in all our game was extremely good for a road game. We just have to get some confidence and start scoring some goals."

After loss to Northern Michigan:

"The name of the game for us right now is we are a big play defensive team in the fact that we do a lot of positive things on a shift and then there is a mistake and we give up a scoring chance against us."

After a tie against Ohio State:

"I was just so proud on how our team responded tonight."

BGHockey · Post by **BGHockey** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 2:43 pm

And your point is...?

Freddie · Post by **Freddie** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 3:42 pm

BGHockey wrote:And your point is...?

my guess is: he has no point.

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 5:03 pm

This is pretty interesting. CowboyJoe has decent point on the fact that Coach Palach's statements are pretty close to mirroring Coach Brandon's comments on why the team didn't get the job done. I love Paluch's enthusiams and fan friendliness but I'm wondering if his coaching style isn't getting the players up for every game.

There has to be a reason why the team is able to hang with OSU one game then bomb next or vice versa. VS Northen Mich. we play horrid the 1st game then great the next. This has been a reacurring theme I've seen ever since I've kept up with Falcon Hockey on a some what regular basis. I hope the coach can get it figured soon other wise the season will be lost cause. I honostly thought we'd' be alot better than this , but what can you say. I guess nice recruiting classes don't always spell wins like it would seem.

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 5:15 pm

falconboy wrote:This is pretty interesting. CowboyJoe has decent point on the fact that Coach Palach's statements are pretty close to mirroring Coach Brandon's comments on why the team didn't get the job done. I love Paluch's enthusiams and fan friendliness but I'm wondering if his coaching style isn't getting the players up for every game.

I thought of the same similarities for a moment, but this season especially, Paluch and Brandon are in about as entirely different situations as you can have. Brandon brought a team to the field that was picked by everyone to run through their conference schedule, quite possibly win their non-conference schedule, and be setting up camp in or around the Top 15 nationally. For him to come out with "we wanted to be in a position to win in the fourth quarter" in games against Buffalo and Kent State opens the door for some justifiable criticism about what's going on.

Paluch, on the other hand, is coaching a team on the rise, early in the year, that, while they've been picked to do much better than years past, still has some question marks, with the loss of one of the top goalies in school history and the unexpected departure of one of their top defensemen. There is an entirely different context of him saying "we were in it through two, then just didn't get it done" than Brandon trying to use the same coach speak to explain why his offensive juggernaut had to seriously hold off Buffalo in the fourth quarter.

I see nothing wrong with what Paluch is saying. It's a young team, and young teams will often show a different face from night to night. Without studying it closely, it seems like they've been getting similar shot totals from night to night, the difference between "great" and "horrid" may be nothing more than facing a hot goalie.

Falcon Fanatic · Post by **Falcon Fanatic** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 5:39 pm

TG1996 wrote:
falconboy wrote:This is pretty interesting. CowboyJoe has decent point on the fact that Coach Palach's statements are pretty close to mirroring Coach Brandon's comments on why the team didn't get the job done. I love Paluch's enthusiams and fan friendliness but I'm wondering if his coaching style isn't getting the players up for every game.

I thought of the same similarities for a moment, but his season especially, Paluch and Brandon are in about as entirely different situations as you can have. Brandon brought a team to the field that was picked by everyone to run through their conference schedule, quite possibly win their non-conference schedule, and be setting up camp in or around the Top 15 nationally. For him to come out with "we wanted to be in a position to win in the fourth quarter" in games against Buffalo and Kent State opens the door for some justifiable criticism about what's going on.

Paluch, on the other hand, is coaching a team on the rise, early in the year, that, while they've been picked to do much better than years past, still has some question marks, with the loss of one of the top goalies in school history and the unexpected departure of one of their top defensemen. There is an entirely different context of him saying "we were in it through two, then just didn't get it done" than Brandon trying to use the same coach speak to explain why his offensive juggernaut had to seriously hold off Buffalo in the fourth quarter.

I see nothing wrong with what Paluch is saying. It's a young team, and young teams will often show a different face from night to night. Without studying it closely, it seems like they've been getting similar shot totals from night to night, the difference between "great" and "horrid" may be nothing more than facing a hot goalie.

Thank you TG, I couldn't have said it better!!!

GO ICERS!!
BEAT THE REDSKINHAWKS!!

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:14 pm

We seem to be facing them every night almost.

Is this a coincidence? I have no idea. :-\

BGDrew · Post by **BGDrew** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:48 pm

falconboy: could you compare contrast the European/Dump and Chase styles and explain which you think is more able to create offense?

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 7:01 pm

The "hot goalies" comment is only part of the equation. The shot totals, and for the most part, eyewitnesses from this board that watch ALOT of BG hockey seem to think the effort is there MOST nights. As I said, there will be up and downs with a generally young team. Hockey isn't like football, or even basketball in that sense, I think. You can carry the flow of play all night, but have pucks not find the holes, and take a close loss. While all losses are disappointing, I think if you had a hockey team take 40 shots and have them blocked, hit posts, saved, tipped away or whatever, it's alot easier to come away frustrated, but pleased with the effort given. If the football team gets eight or nine trips into the red zone and comes away with only a few points, or the basketball team misses a dozen layups and short jumpers, you can point to the execution and in some cases, the effort.

heyman · Post by **heyman** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 8:31 pm

falconboy you are right on about what's going on.
Wouldn't Dorothy and the others have been spared a lot of torment if Toto had pulled back that curtain the first time they visited the Wizard of Oz.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:09 pm

BGDrew wrote:falconboy: could you compare contrast the European/Dump and Chase styles and explain which you think is more able to create offense?

And no using spread or west coast offense analogies.

Falcon Fanatic · Post by **Falcon Fanatic** » Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:05 pm

cowboyjoe · Post by **cowboyjoe** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:17 pm

Here we go again...after last night's game against Mich. St.:

"We did a real good job for 2 1/2 periods of playing an extremely smart game and not giving up a lot of turnover chances which have been hurting us the first part of the year. Our defensemen were a lot smarter with a lot of their decisions and kept the puck in a lot of safe areas. (Horrell) was very, very strong."

"Both teams did some things well and they got the goals, said Paluch. "It was a game that was fairly-evenly played. Going into the third period, we had played a game that was perfect as far as giving us a chance to win in the third period. We just weren't able to get as many chances as we wanted in the third period. They did a good job keeping pucks clear. The first two periods, we were able to generate a lot more chances."

you've got to be kidding....3-0 shutout for gosh sakes!

TG1996 · Post by **TG1996** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:26 pm

This is getting silly.

Through two periods, it was a 1-0 game, shots were (relatively) even at 28-21. Yes, the offensive production fell off in the third, but there is nothing wrong with what Paluch said about playing well through 2 1/2 periods. NOTHING! The day he comes out and says "we're not going to show up for the third period because we're not good enough" is the day we let you coach the hockey team.

As has been pointed out countless times, this team is young, and is a work in progress. Is it an excuse for everything? Hell no! But it takes encouragement and building on signs of improvement (two weeks ago, you were bitching because he said "the first two periods were good", now we're up to two and a half!) to keep the momentum going. Would it make you happy if he came out in press conferences and said "We're shitty, I don't know why we spend the gas money to get up here, we're not going to win anyway?" I don't know the coach, but I'd guarantee he's busting the kids asses in practice for not finishing the job in third periods this year, or whatever it takes to get a complete game out of them, but I'd probably be more pissed if he took that speech to the media. Some things are meant for the locker room, some are meant for the newspaper.

cowboyjoe · Post by **cowboyjoe** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 3:55 pm

What is silly is that you are defending this team that is underachieving thus far. We finished 5th last year with almost everyone back as Paluch's quotes backs me up. "Our big concern was that we finished fifth a year ago. A lot of those guys from that team are back and those guys went through the rigors all season long that got us home ice. We want to improve on that finish. This quote was from media day earlier this year. Do you know how many teams are close for 2 periods? Heck, our football team could be close to USC for a half or 3 quarters. There is no consolation for being "close" to a team that is below .500. The positive spins he puts on these losses are getting old... at least to me.

Quotes from coach Paluch after some losses this year

Quotes from coach Paluch after some losses this year

MMM......

Re: MMM......

Re: MMM......

Hot goalies??