Cornell 2 vs. Princeton 3 (Final)

scoop85

That's really my point. If we were truly outplayed I would have real concern, but it's apparent we have some talent on this team. If Scali puts in the puck in the third period (I don't know how he didn't score on the play), we're probably talking about a gritty comeback win.

Talk to me after ten games; then we can have a real sense of what we're looking at. Sure we'd love to be 2-0, but lets see what type of resilliency this team has.

The game was pretty even with Cornell getting the edge in chances. The issue is that they don't have the talent or they would have generated more chances and converted on more of the ones they had. Guys like Milo and Romano would have really changed things around for this team but instead, there are guys in scoring roles who are not suited for it. There is an average amount of talent on this team relative to the ECAC. I think they will show resiliency, but that doesn't make up for the fact that talent really isn't there at any position.

calgARI '07
The issue is that they don't have the talent or they would have generated more chances and converted on more of the ones they had. Guys like Milo and Romano would have really changed things around for this team but instead, there are guys in scoring roles who are not suited for it. There is an average amount of talent on this team relative to the ECAC. I think they will show resiliency, but that doesn't make up for the fact that talent really isn't there at any position.

Bah. This team has oodles more talent at forward and defense than the championship teams of '96 and '97. Welcome to what it's like when a Cornell team doesn't have dominant goaltending. It happened last year, it happened in '99 and '00, and it happened from '93 to '95.

Hopefully Scrivens steps it up this year and becomes an Elliott figure, since he didn't really show much until his sophomore season either, even though he clearly had the natural capabilities. We need that: Davenport, to my eyes, continues to be unimpressive. Next year Garman comes in, and he's gotten good reviews, and I see Davenport playing a Skazyk role...

If Scrivens steps it up, this team is going to be a lot like '01, and we all know what happened in '02 and '03. I anticipate big things in the next two years.

Scersk '97
If Scrivens steps it up, this team is going to be a lot like '01...

...yup, that's the last Cornell team that opened with two Ls against perennially weak teams.

Beeeej

Scersk '97
If Scrivens steps it up, this team is going to be a lot like '01...

...yup, that's the last Cornell team that opened with two Ls against perennially weak teams.

Exactly. There are other patterns at work. '01 was a young team: 5 workman-like seniors, some better juniors, very promising sophomores, and one spectacular freshman. With all that, they couldn't seem to figure out how to score goals, but they did, eventually, figure out how to keep pucks out of the net. They put together a nice run, somehow squeaked out a fourth seed, and almost won themselves a championship. St. Lawrence was one year removed from their Frozen Four (tm) run and was just too much.

I think this year's freshmen are more impressive than Vesce's class, that the sophomores are a bit less impressive (with Nash) than the class of '03 (what a class!), that the juniors are better than the class of '02, and that the seniors are better than the class of '01. I think this year's team will either be a replay of '01 or '02, but it all comes down to goaltending and the power play. Some members of this team also need to start playing with the fire we used to see from, say, the Abbotts, Cooney, and Hornby.

In the end, I'm expecting Clarkson to be too much this year, but any Clarkson fan would tell you never to bet against us in the tournament.