On to the quarterfinals

Finally.

Rensselaer swept Brown at Houston Field House over the weekend, giving the Engineers a home playoff series win for the first time since 2004.

RPI trailed the Bears 3-0 in Game 2, but a pair of goals by Milos Bubela made it 3-2 before Riley Bourbonnais and Jared Wilson scored to complete the comeback. Wilson’s game-winning goal came at 18:18 in the third period.

Brown had given the Engineers trouble in the playoffs before, knocking off RPI at home in 2010 and 2013. The Bears made it to the league semifinals in both of those seasons.

While much was made of the Engineers’ playoff struggles at home, RPI did win first-round series at Clarkson last year as well as in 2012.

Rensselaer will travel to face third-seeded Harvard this weekend, while Brown ends the year at 5-19-7, the worst record under  seventh year coach Brendan Whittet.

Saturday was also the final game for Brown senior forwards Nick Lappin and Mark Naclerio. Both players should get plenty of interest as NHL free agents.

Here are the rest of the matchups for next weekend’s best-of-three quarterfinal series.

No. 9 Cornell at No. 1 Quinnipiac

No. 7 Dartmouth at No. 2 Yale

No. 5 Clarkson at No. 4 St. Lawrence

Dartmouth and Colgate go the distance

The lone series of the weekend that went to three games didn’t disappoint, as Tim O’Brien’s goal at 4:37 in the second overtime gave Dartmouth a 4-3 win over Colgate.

It was the first time in program history that Dartmouth played two overtimes in one postseason series, as the Big Green won the series opener in overtime on Friday. It was also the first time Dartmouth had played in a Game 3 that needed overtime.

Like Naclerio and Lappin, Colgate seniors Darcy Murphy, Mike Borkowski, and Tylor and Tyson Spink should attract attention from NHL teams. Those four were part of a big senior class that was missing two players this year, as defenseman Ryan Johnston and forward Kyle Baun signed professional contracts last offseason.

Union swept

For the second time in as many seasons following the program’s national title in 2014, Union won’t make the NCAA tournament.

The ninth-seeded Dutchmen’s season came to an end with a sweep at No. 8 Cornell. Union beat the Big Red 5-1 last weekend at Lynah Rink and knocked Cornell out in last year’s ECAC quarterfinals, but lost a pair of one-goal games this weekend. The Big Red won 2-1 in overtime Saturday, with junior Matt Buckles scoring the game-winning goal after not playing  in the series opener.

Union finished the season with a record of 13-14-9, the first time since the 2006-07 season the Dutchmen finished with a losing record.

18 COMMENTS

  1. With 2 OT’s against Cornell this year is the Q going to once again win the Cleary Cup but come up short in the ECAC Tourney and thus lose their #1 seed?

      • Good thing you aren’t suiting up against them. I can guarantee you that everyone putting on a sweater this point on can “see themselves” winning battles, shifts, periods, and games. No one believes they have no chance. Every game forward is “The biggest game of our life”.

        • no but i sure wish union was – but i would not be holding my breath – i saw union at q pac this year and q-pac scored a power play, even strength, short hand, and 3 on 5 goal against union – mighty impressive, as if their record wasn’t enough – but more than that, i know q-pac and have followed them – i don’t care about any given sunday – i can’t even remember a major upset in round 2 – and that’s what it would be if anyone takes two of three from q-pac – epic!!

  2. With 2 OT’s against Cornell this year is the Q going to once again win the Cleary Cup but come up short in the ECAC Tourney and thus lose their #1 seed?

      • Good thing you aren’t suiting up against them. I can guarantee you that everyone putting on a sweater this point on can “see themselves” winning battles, shifts, periods, and games. No one believes they have no chance. Every game forward is “The biggest game of our life”.

        • no but i sure wish union was – but i would not be holding my breath – i saw union at q pac this year and q-pac scored a power play, even strength, short hand, and 3 on 5 goal against union – mighty impressive, as if their record wasn’t enough – but more than that, i know q-pac and have followed them – i don’t care about any given sunday – i can’t even remember a major upset in round 2 – and that’s what it would be if anyone takes two of three from q-pac – epic!!

  3. What makes one scratch their head after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conferences favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

  4. What should make people scratch their heads after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conferences favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

  5. What makes one scratch their head after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conferences favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

  6. What should make people scratch their heads after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conferences favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

  7. What should make people scratch their heads after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conference’s favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

    • Pairwise is a mathematical equation. USCHO poll is opinion, holds no weight for conf. or ncaa. Bottom line win in Tampa and everyone will have you #1

  8. What should make people scratch their heads after this weekend is the USCHO poll. There is a disjunct between conference’s favorability for their results or lack thereof this weekend. Both the ECAC and HEA had four teams with a bye for their tournaments and were inactive this weekend. Yale, Harvard, St. Lawrence, Providence, and Notre Dame all increased in points in the polls without playing a game. The two at the top, Quinnipiac and Boston College, lost points in the polls during their rest as the top seeds. UMass-Lowell rightfully didn’t lose a single point between weeks. There seems to be a similar trend for the bye week teams.

    However, for the teams that did play there was a discrepancy. Cornell almost doubled their points in the poll with their sweep of Union with a 3-1 aggregate score. Northeastern also doubled their points with a sweep of overtime games against Maine, a 7-5 aggregate score. Boston University gained 32 points in the polls for their sweep of UMass with a 7-5 aggregate. Rensselaer and Clarkson, however, lost points in the polls for their sweeps of Brown and Princeton, with aggregates of 7-5 and 6-4, respectively. UMass is comparable to Brown and Maine is comparable to Princeton in terms of the PWR, but beating them this weekend mattered more for one conference more than the other.

    So what the pollsters really told us is that if you sat as the 1 seed this weekend, you lost confidence, but if you sat as the 2-4 seeds you gained confidence (or remained unchanged in UML’s case). If you swept in HEA this weekend, you gained confidence, but if you swept in ECAC you lost confidence unless you are already seen up on the board in the poll and in the PWR (in Cornell’s case). I’m glad these polls don’t mean anything because there’s clearly a cognitive dissonance when it comes to either being inactive for being rewarded the bye or being active and sweeping your opponent at home. There is also a slant between the conferences for the teams that swept this weekend.

    • Pairwise is a mathematical equation. USCHO poll is opinion, holds no weight for conf. or ncaa. Bottom line win in Tampa and everyone will have you #1

  9. What this should tell you TrifectaFire, is that there is a distinct bias against the ECAC and to lesser extent, HEA. How can Michigan lose two games this weekend to a non-top 20 team and hardly drop anywhere and the weekend before St. Cloud State lost two, at home, to another non-top 20 team and dropped very little. If that were Quinny, or as we’ve seen with Harvard / Yale this year, they would lose five places. Something is really messed up with the methods used to value wins / losses when a team plays 80% of their games within 50 miles of their university and drops hardly any when they lose to OSU….twice. The historical bias in voting / weighting of hockey stinks.

  10. What this should tell you TrifectaFire, is that there is a distinct bias against the ECAC and to lesser extent, HEA. How can Michigan lose two games this weekend to a non-top 20 team and hardly drop anywhere and the weekend before St. Cloud State lost two, at home, to another non-top 20 team and dropped very little. If that were Quinny, or as we’ve seen with Harvard / Yale this year, they would lose five places. Something is really messed up with the methods used to value wins / losses when a team plays 80% of their games within 50 miles of their university and drops hardly any when they lose to OSU….twice. The historical bias in voting / weighting of hockey stinks.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here