Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by Trotsky
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Trotsky (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 11:35AM
Beeeej
I realize that I should have said "I" instead of "we," though I know that at least a few other members of this board feel the same way. But I also have doubts about your statement concerning today's staff, particularly since Schafer, the leader of the staff, once shot a puck at Cleary during a game where Harvard blew us out 11-3 (in Nieuwendyk's last season, no less)
For shame, Beeeej! That was during 1985-86, Joe's second-to-last season.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Ben (158.143.162.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 11:36AM
Fixed & completed.billhoward
The only immutable fact: Every year since the beginning of the universe, Harvard _ sucks _.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: cbuckser (134.186.175.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 11:43AM
For one year when I was living in Princeton, my primary care physician was one of those Union fill-ins who got their asses handed to them every game. He didn't share great stories, but he had memories of the camaraderie and the blowouts.Beeeej
Aaron M. Griffin
I overlooked that. It is somewhat difficult with how Cornell has such a tradition of relying upon talent from Canada (pioneered by Harkness) to remember that fact. Often, I pay no attention to our players's nation of origin (as a born Upstater, I do take special notice of the players from my region of New York State). It seems like flagrant disrespect that no accolade in our conference is named for the college hockey coach who owns still the best collegiate win percentage of any coach and who coached most of his collegiate career in the ECAC.
It's also seriously contradicted by how his players felt and feel about him; I've never heard of any college hockey player whom Ned coached disliking him, and many of them felt like he was their second father. When Ned left Union College after the first six games of the 1977-78 season amid rumors that he had violated recruiting rules or pressured the college to compromise their admissions standards, the entire varsity team stepped down and refused to play for the remainder of the season. (JV and intramural players were cobbled together to form a varsity, and lost every remaining game, the first one by the score of 19-1.)
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 28, 2012 11:45AM
Trotsky
Beeeej
I realize that I should have said "I" instead of "we," though I know that at least a few other members of this board feel the same way. But I also have doubts about your statement concerning today's staff, particularly since Schafer, the leader of the staff, once shot a puck at Cleary during a game where Harvard blew us out 11-3 (in Nieuwendyk's last season, no less)
For shame, Beeeej! That was during 1985-86, Joe's second-to-last season.
Of course it was, and I should know that, having worked with Joe's graduating class, 1988, while I was on Cornell's staff, and remembering that he left before his senior year. For some reason I had it in my head that he left in 1986 right after Cornell won the ECAC tournament and then lost to Denver by splitting one of those stupid two-game "total goals" series.
It's also worth mentioning in the context of this thread that Harvard lost the national championship game by one goal in 1986.
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2012 11:49AM by Beeeej.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Trotsky (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 11:49AM
Also a good place to mention that Cornell was leading Denver, the #1 team in the country, in total goals midway through the second game, but surrendered two goals to lose the series. Had Cornell advanced they would have played Harvard in the 1986 NCAA SF in Providence.Beeeej
in 1986 right after Cornell won the ECAC tournament and then lost to Denver by splitting one of those stupid two-game "total goals" series.
It's also worth mentioning in the context of this thread that Harvard lost the national championship game by one goal in 1986.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2012 11:51AM by Trotsky.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Aaron M. Griffin (---.mobility-up.psu.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:04PM
billhoward
But still slightly better than the odds of the second-, third-, or fourth-place teams winning the Whitelaw Cup as the ECAC tourament champion? The only immutable fact: Every year since 2001, Harvard ______.Aaron M. Griffin
I know we have been speculating about if there is a superstition around winning the Cleary Cup and why one would not touch it. So, while I awaited comments regarding the Cornell-specific reasons for not acting Union-like upon winning it, I crunched the numbers to see if history warranted the supposition of a curse. Admittedly, the Cleary Cup has been awarded only since 2001 so there is a very small sample size. However, the following is the results of my analysis:
73% of the time the winner of the Cleary Cup loses the Whitelaw Cup
36% of the time the winner of the Cleary Cup makes the ECAC Championship Final
27% of the time winner of the Cleary Cup is eliminated in the ECAC Championship Semifinal
36% of the time the winner of the Cleary Cup is eliminated in ECAC Tournament Quarterfinal
Yale, in 2009, and Cornell, in both 2003 and 2005, are the only teams to have won both the Whitelaw Cup and the Cleary Cup since awarding of the Cleary Cup began in 2001.
I would happily continue my undergradute years if Cornell offered a course in the Statistics of Sport (and Reflections on the Real World). Maybe offered online via eLynah and we hired the Redcast Guy to do the video? Just tell the prof not to walk too quickly toward either end of the chalkboard.
Sucks.
Here's the breakdown by seed.
% of times that a given seed has won the Whitelaw Cup:
45% second seed
27% first seed
9.1% third seed
9.1% fourth seed
9.1% team outside of the top four seeds
___________________________
Class of 2010
2009-10 Cornell-Harvard:
11/07/2009 Ithaca 6-3
02/19/2010 Cambridge 3-0
03/12/2010 Ithaca 5-1
03/13/2010 Ithaca 3-0
Class of 2010
2009-10 Cornell-Harvard:
11/07/2009 Ithaca 6-3
02/19/2010 Cambridge 3-0
03/12/2010 Ithaca 5-1
03/13/2010 Ithaca 3-0
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: RichH (---.northropgrumman.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:14PM
Aaron M. Griffin
and Union, with its status as a respectable program.
A shiver just went down my spine.
A brief history lesson: After turning Division I in 1992, Union made their first advancement in the ECAC tournament in 2009. Before that, over the course of 17 years and 11 tournaments, Union's playoff record was 2-21-0 (if my TBRW counting is accurate). To include the recent successes since 2008, (7-6 in 3 years), that pulls their ECAC tournament record up to 9-27-0 over 20 years and 14 tournaments. They've reached the ECAC Championship weekend once, losing the 2010 Championship game to somebody.
So I completely understand why they would go crazy and make a big deal about it. They won SOMETHING. There's actually something to look at in a trophy case now. Even though that's about as weird to me as seeing banners now hanging in Ingalls and Baker. At least Brown is still flying those Pentagonal league championship banners proudly.
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown,
Now if Union fans could actually make noise without the help of bells or milk jug rattles, or just grunting "U!!" over other teams' cheers, I could think about respecting them.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2012 12:25PM by RichH.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Chris '03 (38.104.240.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:19PM
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
___________________________
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:21PM
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
Yes, they shared it with Colgate in 2006, and had the #1 seed in the tournament, losing in the seminfinals to Harvard 10-1. It wasn't pretty.
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Trotsky (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:22PM
Dartmouth won the RS title in 2006.RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
To be fair to Union, they have finished in the top 4 seeds in 4 of the last 5 years. We oldsters think of them as awful, but that's a good run, and their roster is dominated by young players so they should continue it in the near future.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2012 12:23PM by Trotsky.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Aaron M. Griffin (---.mobility-up.psu.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:23PM
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
2006. Dartmouth websites mention it probably. One example:
While at Dartmouth, the program has enjoyed a tremendous resurgence, capturing the 2005-06 Cleary Cup as the ECAC Regular Season Champions.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: RichH (---.northropgrumman.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:24PM
Beeeej
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
Yes, they shared it with Colgate in 2006, and had the #1 seed in the tournament, losing in the seminfinals to Harvard 10-1. It wasn't pretty.
So they did. My mistake in quickly jumping between charts and hastily scanning data.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:26PM
Trotsky
Dartmouth won the RS title in 2006.RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
To be fair to Union, they have finished in the top 4 seeds in 4 of the last 5 years. We oldsters think of them as awful, but that's a good run, and their roster is dominated by young players so they should continue it in the near future.
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season. And that Cornell team didn't really lack for talent, either, though we only finished 5th (we lost in the ECAC title game to St. Lawrence).
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Chris '03 (38.104.240.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:29PM
Beeeej
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
Yes, they shared it with Colgate in 2006, and had the #1 seed in the tournament, losing in the seminfinals to Harvard 10-1. It wasn't pretty.
The next night wasn't so hot either...
___________________________
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:32PM
Chris '03
Beeeej
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
Yes, they shared it with Colgate in 2006, and had the #1 seed in the tournament, losing in the seminfinals to Harvard 10-1. It wasn't pretty.
The next night wasn't so hot either...
For that year, I prefer to remember instead our improbable comeback against Colorado College the week after, followed the next night by one of the single greatest college hockey games ever played, our 3OT 0-1 loss to eventual national champions Wisconsin.
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: RichH (---.northropgrumman.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:44PM
Beeeej
Trotsky
Dartmouth won the RS title in 2006.RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
To be fair to Union, they have finished in the top 4 seeds in 4 of the last 5 years. We oldsters think of them as awful, but that's a good run, and their roster is dominated by young players so they should continue it in the near future.
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season. And that Cornell team didn't really lack for talent, either, though we only finished 5th (we lost in the ECAC title game to St. Lawrence).
I never want to be fair to Union. They've been the source of way too many "losing points to a cellar dweller" over the years. In 1998, we gave them half of their league wins, the year before their infamous 4-point Season. I'm still trying to get momentum for my brilliant "Trade-Union-For-RIT" plan. Sell high!!
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Aaron M. Griffin (---.mobility-up.psu.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 12:48PM
RichH
Beeeej
Trotsky
Dartmouth won the RS title in 2006.RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
To be fair to Union, they have finished in the top 4 seeds in 4 of the last 5 years. We oldsters think of them as awful, but that's a good run, and their roster is dominated by young players so they should continue it in the near future.
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season. And that Cornell team didn't really lack for talent, either, though we only finished 5th (we lost in the ECAC title game to St. Lawrence).
I never want to be fair to Union. They've been the source of way too many "losing points to a cellar dweller" over the years. In 1998, we gave them half of their league wins, the year before their infamous 4-point Season. I'm still trying to get momentum for my brilliant "Trade-Union-For-RIT" plan. Sell high!!
We looked so good against RIT the last time we played them. Cornell would lose also the ability to claim that we were the last ECAC team to make the Frozen Four without conditionalities. I do like a Cornell-RIT travel partnership though.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Swampy (64.134.65.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 01:17PM
css228
In an alternate world where we hold even a reasonable proportion of those leads we're a national title contender.Trotsky
KenP
Two questions -- how many 3rd period leads have we blown this year and what is our record in those games?
Games in which we have blown third period leads:
Game # / Opponent / Result / Notes
1 / Merchyhurst / L / Led 4-3 with 10 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
3 / at Brown/ L / Led 4-3 with 8 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
15 / at CC / T / Led 3-2 with 30 seconds to go, gave up 1 goal.
17 / Princeton / T / Led 3-0 with 17 minutes to go, gave up 3 goals.
18 / Dartmouth / W / Led 3-2 with 11 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
19 / Harvard / T / Led 2-1 with minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
21 / at Colgate / L / Led 3-1 with 16 minutes to go, gave up 4 goals including an empty netter.
22 / at RPI / T / Led 2-0 with 18 minutes to go, gave up 2 goals (in 90 seconds).
23 / at Union / T / Led 4-3 with 3 minutes to, gave up tying goal.
26 / at Clarkson / T / Led 1-0 with 7 minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
27 / at St. Lawrence / W / Led 3-2 with 16 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
29 / RPI / L / Led 1-0 with 3 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but lost in overtime.
So, the answers to your questions are 12, and 2-4-6.
In an alternative universe in which Cornell holds all 12 leads, they finish 20-1-1 in the ECAC and 25-3-1 overall.
The alternate world is called 2012-2013.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Trotsky (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 01:29PM
Here's hoping.Swampy
css228
In an alternate world where we hold even a reasonable proportion of those leads we're a national title contender.Trotsky
KenP
Two questions -- how many 3rd period leads have we blown this year and what is our record in those games?
Games in which we have blown third period leads:
Game # / Opponent / Result / Notes
1 / Merchyhurst / L / Led 4-3 with 10 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
3 / at Brown/ L / Led 4-3 with 8 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
15 / at CC / T / Led 3-2 with 30 seconds to go, gave up 1 goal.
17 / Princeton / T / Led 3-0 with 17 minutes to go, gave up 3 goals.
18 / Dartmouth / W / Led 3-2 with 11 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
19 / Harvard / T / Led 2-1 with minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
21 / at Colgate / L / Led 3-1 with 16 minutes to go, gave up 4 goals including an empty netter.
22 / at RPI / T / Led 2-0 with 18 minutes to go, gave up 2 goals (in 90 seconds).
23 / at Union / T / Led 4-3 with 3 minutes to, gave up tying goal.
26 / at Clarkson / T / Led 1-0 with 7 minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
27 / at St. Lawrence / W / Led 3-2 with 16 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
29 / RPI / L / Led 1-0 with 3 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but lost in overtime.
So, the answers to your questions are 12, and 2-4-6.
In an alternative universe in which Cornell holds all 12 leads, they finish 20-1-1 in the ECAC and 25-3-1 overall.
The alternate world is called 2012-2013.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Swampy (64.134.65.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 01:29PM
css228
I guess my frustration is that this team is so close to not just being good, but great, and the flaws that this team has are traditional strengths (PK and 3rd Periods). Its pretty clear that the team plays up or down to its opponent - six points against the bottom three proves that - so if we get past Ithaca in two weeks I feel pretty confident in a deep run. But when I look back on the regular season I'm frustrated by missed opportunities. We were so close to beating BU. If we could have held up for 34 more seconds we could have swept CC at CC. We blew third period leads to Mercyhurst, Princeton, Brown and RPI - all solidly in the twenty worst teams in the country. There is so much promise to this team and its so frustratingly close to being great (the only games we didn't hold 3rd period leads in were BU, Colgate at home, Clarkson at home, and UMass.I'm sure that some of the top 5 teams in the country can't even claim to have held a 3rd period lead in over 80% of their games. It just is hard to be optimistic about the result being different next time (even though logically these stretches don't last forever) when you repeatedly witness the same outcome. Anyone who grew up in Philly knows this kind of team. This team is just one of those teams that you can't help but have optimism about, but the moment you let your guard down, they get gut punched. I know they're really young,but I'm just not ready to raise my expectations for them again. In 3 weeks maybe. Though I really hope not. We play better when I'm not optimistic
These are characteristics of a very talented YOUNG team.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: ajh258 (---.redrover.cornell.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 01:31PM
Very convincing evidence that we might win in Atlantic City.Aaron M. Griffin
Here's the breakdown by seed.
% of times that a given seed has won the Whitelaw Cup:
45% second seed
27% first seed
9.1% third seed
9.1% fourth seed
9.1% team outside of the top four seeds
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: ursusminor (---.res.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 02:26PM
Beeeej
Aaron M. Griffin
Why did the league name neither trophy after Ned Harkness? I know that Union is a recent addition, but Harkness is the common thread through the two historically most successful programs on the national stage. Harkness' legacy is the common connection between Cornell and RPI, with their history and current levels of competitiveness, and Union, with its status as a respectable program.
I can't answer that question with any certainty, but it's probably worth knowing that almost everybody besides RPI resented Ned for recruiting so many Canadian players at a time when American college hockey was still largely populated with Americans (it was much more common by the time he arrived at Cornell, but still stirred the pot a bit). And although he brought RPI to a national title, I think they had some lingering resentment about his departure for Cornell.
Yes indeed there was. I arrived in RPI in the fall of 1964, a full year after he left, and that resentment was told to us by the upper classmen. It took many years before that wore off, but it did, and he was honored several times by RPI.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: marty (---.sub-166-248-15.myvzw.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 02:31PM
Swampy
css228
In an alternate world where we hold even a reasonable proportion of those leads we're a national title contender.Trotsky
KenP
Two questions -- how many 3rd period leads have we blown this year and what is our record in those games?
Games in which we have blown third period leads:
Game # / Opponent / Result / Notes
1 / Merchyhurst / L / Led 4-3 with 10 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
3 / at Brown/ L / Led 4-3 with 8 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
15 / at CC / T / Led 3-2 with 30 seconds to go, gave up 1 goal.
17 / Princeton / T / Led 3-0 with 17 minutes to go, gave up 3 goals.
18 / Dartmouth / W / Led 3-2 with 11 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
19 / Harvard / T / Led 2-1 with minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
21 / at Colgate / L / Led 3-1 with 16 minutes to go, gave up 4 goals including an empty netter.
22 / at RPI / T / Led 2-0 with 18 minutes to go, gave up 2 goals (in 90 seconds).
23 / at Union / T / Led 4-3 with 3 minutes to, gave up tying goal.
26 / at Clarkson / T / Led 1-0 with 7 minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
27 / at St. Lawrence / W / Led 3-2 with 16 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
29 / RPI / L / Led 1-0 with 3 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but lost in overtime.
So, the answers to your questions are 12, and 2-4-6.
In an alternative universe in which Cornell holds all 12 leads, they finish 20-1-1 in the ECAC and 25-3-1 overall.
The alternate world is called 2012-2013.
Who's afraid of the big bad woof?
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Aaron M. Griffin (---.altnpa.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 28, 2012 02:50PM
Trotsky
Games in which we have blown third period leads:
Game # / Opponent / Result / Notes
1 / Merchyhurst / L / Led 4-3 with 10 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
3 / at Brown/ L / Led 4-3 with 8 mins to go, gave up 2 goals.
15 / at CC / T / Led 3-2 with 30 seconds to go, gave up 1 goal.
17 / Princeton / T / Led 3-0 with 17 minutes to go, gave up 3 goals.
18 / Dartmouth / W / Led 3-2 with 11 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
19 / Harvard / T / Led 2-1 with minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
21 / at Colgate / L / Led 3-1 with 16 minutes to go, gave up 4 goals including an empty netter.
22 / at RPI / T / Led 2-0 with 18 minutes to go, gave up 2 goals (in 90 seconds).
23 / at Union / T / Led 4-3 with 3 minutes to, gave up tying goal.
26 / at Clarkson / T / Led 1-0 with 7 minutes to go, gave up tying goal.
27 / at St. Lawrence / W / Led 3-2 with 16 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but won in overtime.
29 / RPI / L / Led 1-0 with 3 minutes to go, gave up tying goal but lost in overtime.
So, the answers to your questions are 12, and 2-4-6.
In an alternative universe in which Cornell holds all 12 leads, they finish 20-1-1 in the ECAC and 25-3-1 overall.
You're missing one. We let the Hockey East official take that puck right out of the net during the BU game and we lost a 2-1 third-period lead as a result.
___________________________
Class of 2010
2009-10 Cornell-Harvard:
11/07/2009 Ithaca 6-3
02/19/2010 Cambridge 3-0
03/12/2010 Ithaca 5-1
03/13/2010 Ithaca 3-0
Class of 2010
2009-10 Cornell-Harvard:
11/07/2009 Ithaca 6-3
02/19/2010 Cambridge 3-0
03/12/2010 Ithaca 5-1
03/13/2010 Ithaca 3-0
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Give My Regards (---.atc-nycorp.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 04:16PM
Beeeej
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season.
I don't care if you are a moderator -- bringing up that game should be grounds for suspension.
___________________________
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 28, 2012 04:19PM
Give My Regards
Beeeej
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season.
I don't care if you are a moderator -- bringing up that game should be grounds for suspension.
Would it help if I also brought up Leeor Shtrom?
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Chris '03 (38.104.240.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 04:28PM
Beeeej
Give My Regards
Beeeej
They also beat us the first time they ever played us at Lynah, in 1991-92, their very first year in the conference when they were pathetically bad - one of their only two conference wins the entire season.
I don't care if you are a moderator -- bringing up that game should be grounds for suspension.
Would it help if I also brought up Leeor Shtrom?
Only if you quote Ian Burt too:
"We were just having a conversation, I just asked him how the game was," Burt said. "I asked him why he didn't jump me and he was like, 'Oh, your back was turned.' He was like, 'You want to go with me?' and I [said], 'Not really, you'll probably beat me up.' He said, 'Well, let's go then,' and throws his gloves off."
To replay a six year old conversation: [elf.elynah.com]
___________________________
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
"Mark Mazzoleni looks like a guy whose dog just died out there..."
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: jtn27 (---.redrover.cornell.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 04:43PM
ugarte
This is cray talk. The student paper will have teenagers who know fuck-all about anything. The IJ will have a staff that is a combination of young writers building their clip file before trying to move to a bigger paper and more experienced writers that have decided they like horrible weather. The average member of either group should be better than most of the Sun writers. The young writers will have gotten the job based on their own college clip file and the experienced writers are EXPERIENCED WRITERS.Beeeej
jtn27
Beeeej
jtn27
The Ithaca Journal is perhaps best known for sucking. I don't think that there's any question that the Sun is the best paper in Ithaca (although as a Sun writer I am a bit biased).
Being "the best paper in Ithaca" is kind of like being the toughest kid in second grade. And if you took all my posts on this forum over the years about individual examples of horrendous writing or editing in the Sun and laid them end to end, they'd... well, they'd reveal how much time I've spent complaining about horrendous writing or editing in the Sun, I guess.
I think that's a fair analogy. My point was more that the Journal sucks than that the Sun is good. Although, you would expect the professional newspaper to be better than the student one.
Not really. With rare exceptions, a professional newspaper in Ithaca isn't going to attract the best journalists, it's generally going to attract the best journalists who already want to live in or near Ithaca. A student paper at an Ivy League university is going to attract many of the best students who want to be the best journalists.
This isn't to say that the IJ is or is not fishwrap, only to point out that teenagers are bad writers and a red sweatshirt doesn't change that. Sorry, Sun staffers. You are probably terrible. Did I mention that I wrote a thing for The Classical? If you want your revenge, please feel free to tell me that I suck too.
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
___________________________
Class of 2013
Class of 2013
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2012 04:48PM by jtn27.
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: jtn27 (---.redrover.cornell.edu)
Date: February 28, 2012 04:47PM
ajh258
Very convincing evidence that we might win in Atlantic City.Aaron M. Griffin
Here's the breakdown by seed.
% of times that a given seed has won the Whitelaw Cup:
45% second seed
27% first seed
9.1% third seed
9.1% fourth seed
9.1% team outside of the top four seeds
Unfortunately for us that type of statistic doesn't hold much weight in determining the outcome of this year's tournament (or future tournaments). I hope the pattern holds though.
___________________________
Class of 2013
Class of 2013
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Ben (158.143.162.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 05:40PM
By this logic, Bleacher Report is better than ESPN.jtn27
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: RichH (167.225.107.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 05:51PM
Ben
By this logic, Bleacher Report is better than ESPN.jtn27
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
Well, at least Bleacher Report covers more than one sport...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: css228 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 05:56PM
A better analogy is SB NationRichH
Ben
By this logic, Bleacher Report is better than ESPN.jtn27
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
Well, at least Bleacher Report covers more than one sport...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Ben (158.143.162.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 05:59PM
Not really, SBN pays its writers (yes, I would know).css228
A better analogy is SB NationRichH
Ben
By this logic, Bleacher Report is better than ESPN.jtn27
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
Well, at least Bleacher Report covers more than one sport...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: css228 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 06:04PM
Not its fan postsBen
Not really, SBN pays its writers (yes, I would know).css228
A better analogy is SB NationRichH
Ben
By this logic, Bleacher Report is better than ESPN.jtn27
I don't mean to harp on this and I promise this will be the last thing I say on the subject, but the fact that I think the Sun is better than the IJ has little to do with the quality of writing. The IJ has some good writers and as students we at the Sun are prone to make mistakes. The main reason the Sun is better is that the Sun has more writers. Sun writers are volunteers, but IJ writers are paid, meaning the Journal can't afford to hire as many as they need. With a shortage of writers the Journal can't always cover everything that deserves coverage and it also means that reporters write more articles and thus spend less time on some articles than an article deserve.
Anyway, that being said, back to hockey...
Well, at least Bleacher Report covers more than one sport...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Ben (158.143.162.---)
Date: February 28, 2012 06:39PM
True, but that's not the main body of content on SBN sites and sbnation.com.css228
Not its fan postsBen
Not really, SBN pays its writers (yes, I would know).
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: css228 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 06:42PM
My point was more the'yre both semi-respectable.Ben
True, but that's not the main body of content on SBN sites and sbnation.com.css228
Not its fan postsBen
Not really, SBN pays its writers (yes, I would know).
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: French Rage (---.packetdesign.com)
Date: February 28, 2012 07:20PM
Beeeej
Chris '03
Beeeej
Chris '03
RichH
Good ECAC trivia: Current teams to never win either title? Brown, Dartmouth, & Quinnipiac.
Didn't Dartmouth win or share the regular season title recently?
Yes, they shared it with Colgate in 2006, and had the #1 seed in the tournament, losing in the seminfinals to Harvard 10-1. It wasn't pretty.
The next night wasn't so hot either...
For that year, I prefer to remember instead our improbable comeback against Colorado College the week after, followed the next night by one of the single greatest college hockey games ever played, our 3OT 0-1 loss to eventual national champions Wisconsin.
As for how Harvard fared in the NCAAs, look down there
|
|
|
V
___________________________
03/23/02: Maine 4, Harvard 3
03/28/03: BU 6, Harvard 4
03/26/04: Maine 5, Harvard 4
03/26/05: UNH 3, Harvard 2
03/25/06: Maine 6, Harvard 1
03/23/02: Maine 4, Harvard 3
03/28/03: BU 6, Harvard 4
03/26/04: Maine 5, Harvard 4
03/26/05: UNH 3, Harvard 2
03/25/06: Maine 6, Harvard 1
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (Moderator)
Date: February 29, 2012 08:29AM
Beeeej
In addition to what previous repliers have said about mirroring the tradition farther up the hockey food chain, the Cornell program has a history with Bill Cleary that is somewhat different from the classy, honorable image Harvard presents of him and that the ECACHL "honored" by naming the cup after him.
Cleary and his Harvard team won the 1989 Frozen Four, and it wasn't even that improbable a victory - they had a lot of great players on that team, including Hobey Baker winner Lane McDonald, and they had won the ECAC tournament in 1987 (though not in 1988 or 1989). A number of very strong players returned for the 1989-1990 season, and expectations were high for at least a repeat appearance in the NCAAs, and it was all the more meaningful because everyone knew it would be Cleary's final season at the helm before he stepped into an administrative position as Harvard's Athletics Director. Somewhere along the way, the wheels came off a bit, and they finished 6th in the ECAC at 12-9-1, and only 13-14-1 overall.
At the time, we were in the 10-team playoff structure, where 7 hosted 10 and 8 hosted 9 for the first round, and the top 6 got a bye, so with Cornell's #3 finish, we would host Harvard after the bye week no matter what happened in the first round.
Cornell's 1990 team included some pretty serious firepower themselves, including future NHLers Kent Manderville, Corrie D'Alessio, Dan Ratushny, and Ryan Hughes (though the latter three only had a cup of coffee in the NHL), plus the infamous scoring machines on Hughes's line, Trent Andison and Doug Derraugh. When Harvard arrived at Lynah, Cornell pretty much shut them down, sweeping the "quintafinals" 6-2 and 4-2. Cleary's coaching career was over, and it didn't end prettily.
If I recall correctly - and it's entirely possible that I don't, but this is how I remember it - after the second game, despite giving Cornell coach Brian McCutcheon a hug, Cleary directed his players to skate off the ice without shaking the Cornell players' hands.
And that is part of why we don't have much respect for Cleary, and part of the reason why we don't have much respect for the cup named after him.
Pedant alert: they were still quarterfinals in 1990, since the four winners went on to to the ECAC semifinals in Boston. "Quintafinals" refers to the five series (1v10, 2v9, etc) whose winners went on to either the semis or the 4v5 playin game, which took place from 1998 to 2002.
The other thing about that 1990 quarterfinal series is that Cornell entered with an 11-game losing streak vs Harvard, dating back to 1985. IIRC someone associated with the Hahavahd program provided some good locker room quotes about how lucky they were to have drawn Cornell in the playoffs...
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Beeeej (Moderator)
Date: February 29, 2012 11:12AM
jtwcornell91
Pedant alert: they were still quarterfinals in 1990, since the four winners went on to to the ECAC semifinals in Boston. "Quintafinals" refers to the five series (1v10, 2v9, etc) whose winners went on to either the semis or the 4v5 playin game, which took place from 1998 to 2002.
Of course... I was confused by seeing the tourney results on TBRW? and noting the 7 vs. 10 and 8 vs. 9 matchups prior to the quarterfinals, which I barely remembered existing at all.
___________________________
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Beeeej, Esq.
"Cornell isn't an organization. It's a loose affiliation of independent fiefdoms united by a common hockey team."
- Steve Worona
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Trotsky (---.hsd1.md.comcast.net)
Date: February 29, 2012 01:32PM
The pedants are revolting.jtwcornell91
Pedant alert
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: February 29, 2012 05:37PM
Trotsky
The pedants are revolting.jtwcornell91
Pedant alert
Bloody pedant!
Oooh what a giveaway!
Re: Cornell 1 RPI 2 (ot)
Posted by: Give My Regards (---.atc-nycorp.com)
Date: February 29, 2012 06:00PM
Trotsky
The pedants are revolting.
Revolting?? You're a fine one to talk -- you're pretty repulsive yourself.
___________________________
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.