the back of the house, so to speak," Jacobs said. "I can't speak enough for the total organization and how it's moved forward. I'm just so proud of what they've achieved."It wasn't easy. Even though goaltender Tim Thomas has two shutouts and an impressive 2.29 goals-against average, and David Krejci and Nathan Horton each have 17 points through three rounds, the Bruins still had to play 18 games to get here. Wrapped around a surprisingly thorough four-game sweep of the Flyers in Round 2, were two emotionally draining seven-game series vs. the Canadiens and Lightning.Round 3 ended with a classic 1-0 victory over Tampa Bay on Friday night, in front of a charged home crowd."I think it was disciplined hockey at its best. You had to dig deep," Jacobs said. "And I thought it was great hockey. This city thought it was great hockey. That's more important than anything — that the fans came out the way they did, and that they responded the way they did. I couldn't have been more pleased with it."And keep in mind, the Bruins — in a sports town that is quick to push the panic button — opened the playoffs by dropping the first two games at home to Montreal.Boston is 12-4 since."I was disappointed we were down 2-0. I had a lot of confidence in our team, but I have to tell you — when you're down 2-0 — you've got to be concerned about whether or not you can pull that off," Jacobs said. "And to go into Montreal, and win the next two, well that was very refreshing."The Bruins will journey back into Canada on Monday after a practice in Boston. The Canucks, who defeated Chicago, Nashville and San Jose to win the West, haven't played since last Tuesday, when they defeated the Sharks 3-2 in Game 5 of the conference finals.Vancouver led the NHL with 117 points this season, 10 more than any other team. After a tougher-than-expected first round, in which they needed overtime of Game 7 to dispose of the Blackhawks, the Cades far-reaching plans to alter the two major government-run health-care programs. Senators will continue voting on three further budget plans, all of which are certain to fail in the Senate. The dueling votes were set up to illustrate the vast differences that exist between Democrats and Republicans on federal government funding levels in the near-term but more importantly how to address the fiscal problems that the large entitlement programs threaten the country with. The Senate vote was 40-57 against beginning formal debate on the spending framework. One Democrat and two Republicans didn't cast a vote. The five Republicans who voted against the plan were Sens. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Rand Paul of Kentucky. Paul opposed the plan because he believes it doesn't go far enough to rein in federal spending, while the others all voted no over concerns about the Medicare proposal. Ryan's plan would essentially replace Medicare with a voucher scheme providing subsidies to seniors toward th