Humbling Weekend

If you told Schafer before this weekend that his defense would allow 3 goals in 2 games, he would probably expect a sweep. Terrible performance by the offense (Moulson and the offense vanished into thin air) and without McKee the scores should have been 5-1, and 4-0 with the sloppy defense that was played in our zone, espescially around the net by the freshmen d-men.

Just goes to show how overrated this team really is when they can only muster one goal over two games against an unranked opponent (even though they should be ranked).

Good luck against an underrated, resurgent Vermont squad, and a Dartmouth team that is strong in their barn. This season could quickly spiral out of control.

Easy there. Clearly a disappointing, underachieving weekend, but nothing to get all bent out of shape over. They are SIX games into the season.

Apropos of Cornell's great first four games and humbling fifth and sixth games, I just finished re-reading A Season Inside, Jon Feinstein's chronicle of Cornell's 1988 Ivy champsionship basketball season along with the seasons of the teams that made the basketball playoffs that year. (OK, Cornell got about three sentences for getting blown by Arizona and Steve Kerr in the opening round. It was really about Arizona and Villanova and Kansas and Pitt and George Mason.) Point was: It's all about peaking at the end of the season. And luck. And about the high-ranked teams in your bracket getting knocked out, which is how eventual champion Kansas got to cut down the nets that final Monday of the season.

So maybe Cornell isn't going all the way to the NCAA hockey title game this year, but stranger things have happened - including the favorite *not* going the past couple. And it is early in the season. And it was at their rink and they'd be playing twice as many games as Cornell had. And ...

So Cornell's GAA is up to, what, 1.16 now? Take that, Jimmy Howard.

Yes, this weekend's performance was dissapointing, but this weekend doesn't mark the end of our season. Maybe it's time for you to jump off the bandwagon.

Wheres facetimer when you need him?

[Q]Jacob '06 Wrote:

Wheres facetimer when you need him?[/q]

There are some posters who're a bit like herpes -- they lie dormant for long periods, only to surface at critical junctures.

Could be lunar, too.

Faithful 07 is a bit over the top with the gloom and doom but does have a point. After the first 4 games, the talk was all about the NCAAs. That's still a possibility for sure but this weekend made an at large bid quite a bit tougher. The season is only 6 games old but these were important statement games and 2/7 of the OOC schedule. A few years ago the Red split at BU around the same time of the year with BU ranked in the top 10. For those of us comparing this team to the 01-02 Red, this weekend didn't live up to expectations. Hopefully, the Red of this year will refocus and take care of business in the league. Faithful 07's points about next weekend are right. Taking 4 points will be a challenge. Let's hope the frustration of the MSU weekend is used to good effect next weekend and in the end we don't look back on this one point weekend as the reason the Red missed the NCAAs.

After listening to the game this afternoon as well as following the running commentaries on the forum at the same time, here's my take on the Big Red season to date.

We went into the weekend as the only unbeaten team and yes, it would have been wonderful to come home with another 4 point weekend. However, that didn't happen. Thanks to McKee, we were able to salvage a tie in Friday night's game...a gift most definitely. After a miserable first period, Cornell regained their deserved respect and came back strong in the second and third periods to salvage a tie.

At the outset, one would think that today was going to be a carbon copy of the Friday game. Mckee played another strong game but this time, it was Vicari's turn to rise to the occasion. Cornell was outshot in the first period but ended up outshooting MSU 31-22 by the end of the third period. The only thing we couldn't do was put the puck past Vicari. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'd also like to add that there were no freshmen d-men on the ice when both goals were scored this afternoon...alluding to the comment that someone made with respect to the sloppy play of the freshmen d-men around the net.

All things considered and especially since these were the first away games of a very young season, to come away with a tie and a low scoring loss is more than respectable...but that's just my humble opinion. See y'all in Burlington on Friday!

Go Big Red!!!!!

No, the talk wasn't "all" about the NCAAs. There will always be a few people who view a 4-0-0 start against any opponents as a sign that we're going to the Frozen Four, and there will always be a few doomsayers who think that a tie and a loss against a strong team on the road is a reason to throw in the towel or start calling for heads to roll. Think of them as the French and Ukrainian judges, whose 9.5 and 6.5 respectively we throw out when the pairs rate an 8.0.

Beeeej

Just got home from East Lansing. My thoughts about the team are not much different after the weekend than they were before. I told several Faithful before game 1 that we'd be playing against a whole different level of talent than we had before, and I think that was the case. There are players available to Michigan State and other big time progams that Cornell can't recruit for a myriad of reasons. Although I only see a few games a year in person, Mich St. is the best team I've seen Cornell play since eventual NCAA champ No. Dak. in '97 (and I've seen us play UNH and BC in '03 and two Florida tournaments). The difference in the results compared with the first four games of the season was likely the result of who we played, not how we played.
Even in game 2, the better chances and the 2 on 1's were going to Michigan State. But, that doesn't mean we can't build a team that can play with the big boys, for we certainly did in 2002-2003. We played much better today than Friday, and we learned what it will take to be a national contenders. This should only make us stronger and more motivated to improve as the season progresses. Let's remember that these are student-athletes, and not got too "up' or too "down' based upon the results.

Well put, Jeff. Thanks for the perspective.

I cannot but concur. As someone already said, both the hyper-optimists and those prophesising doom need to chill.

Where are we? We're six games into the season and we're 4-1-1 over them. Considering that we faced two laughable opponents, two so-so ones and one strong one, that position sounds about right. When the opponents were not good and we were at home, we did what had to be done, we won.

A 1 point weekend is not great even for a road trip, but it was our first of the season, and it was against a strong team that has twice as many games under the belt. Oh, and it was in their home.

As evidenced by our better overall play on Sunday, we have already learnt a thing or two of what it takes to play really serious opponents. I say have patience. Give Schafer time to work with the guys. Give the freshmen, who albeit talented, are still pretty inexperienced some time too. Maybe even Krantz will stop clearing the puck through our crease.

Our no. 8 seed was not deserved. Not yet. It may very well be in just a few weeks. The season could get worse, but I see no reason to think so. We have a solid team with a lot of potential. While we may not be quite ready to really take on big time programs, we should do well against Vermont and Dartmouth.

There are always early setback weekends in a successful Cornell season. In 02-03, it was Estero (kind of late on, but that's how good we were); in 01-02, it was an early loss at Harvard in overtime, setting up something better left unsaid but which was karmically redressed; in 96-97, it was a snowy weekend at RPI and Union, ending up in a loss and a tie. Better to have an early setback versus a solid team than glide through with ties or wins against cupcakes.

My personal favorite early setback was in 1996 against RPI and Union (the first time, but also snowy). Back in the old days (cue Victrola playing 78s) Cornell wasn't expected to win the ECAC every year. In fact, during my freshman and sophomore years we pretty much sucked. McCutcheon didn't seem to be able to motivate his seemingly undertalented squad to do anything, much less play championship quality hockey. Need I mention 1992-93?

Anyway, it was early in the season, we had recently beaten Harvard for the first time in ages. (I remind you all that people stormed the ice for the third game of the season. Chartrand's performance in that game sends chills up my spine even now.) Spirits were high. Skazyk was hot.

Well, we went to RPI and got our asses handed to us. The score was 5-3, but it wasn't that close. The next day, we went to Union, were up heading into the third by, I think, two or three, and lost all composure. This goalie, Jason Elliott, just collapsed, even letting in a wrap around goal--unexcusable. My comment: "If Schafer plays Elliott again, I'll jump the glass and strangle him myself." Why the hell hadn't Schafer played Skazyk instead of this Elliott kid? Elliott had seemed pretty underwhelming during his freshman year; though Skazyk was somewhat schizophrenic, the team seemed to like playing in front of him.

This story illustrates a few things:

1) I'm a horrible judge of hockey talent, as my friends have never ceased to remind me since that day.
2) Expectations have really changed since then. BU, Michigan State, and Colorado College all kicked our butts that year. I mean, 11-0 to CC. Ouch.
3) Schafer knows what he's doing. Remember everyone complaining about Marr not getting starts? This weekend, McKee proved, in spades, that he's the kind of goalie that you build a championship team around.
4) I tell round-about stories. (Not roundabout stories. Did anyone else notice how many roundabouts there were on MSU's campus? Pretty progressive for the main state campus of the State of the Automobile.)
5) Most importantly, early season setbacks are important in winning championships.

The 96 team needed to learn that it couldn't coast, even for a second, despite its overwhelming talent. (If that damn LSSU forward hadn't been leaving the penalty box at the exact right moment for a freak bounce to cause a breakaway, we would've been talking about Schafer's amazing run to the Final Four in his first year. We *owned* Vermont, psychologically. They would've crumbled.) The 97 team needed to learn that <= 2 goals = win, > 2 goals = loss. The 02 team didn't seem to learn how to win the close one in overtime; the 03 team proved that wasn't the case.

Now, having been at the game, what do I hope the 05 team has learned? I hope they've learned that a #8 ranking means nothing. I hope they've learned that a team won't just hand you the game in its own barn, that you have to claw and jam and fight for every loose puck like its Harvard in Albany in overtime. I hope they've learned that, if they can just figure out what to do in front of him, McKee can carry them very, very far. Most of all, I hope they figure out that playing physically bruising hockey, even in this year of penalty emphasis, is their bread and butter. With that penalty kill (best since the "power kill" of 95-96 with Chartrand and Cooney), penalties mean very little. Don't take stupid ones, but don't play tentatively.

Golly that trip back from Lansing took for god damn ever. Jeff, that was very well said, and right on target. A great learning experience for our team and I hope to see MSU again in the post season.

[Q]Jacob '06 Wrote:

Wheres facetimer when you need him?[/q]

Sorry, Facetimer was at the Patriots game.

But let us not forget the true story in this thread: apparently Bill Howard has herpes.

Well said, Ari. The poster sounds like someone from that other Big Red. Reminds me of my Nebraska in-laws back in the Osbourne era when the Huskers played mostly junior college teams and then thought the sky was falling when they couldn't score 70 points against ranked teams.

To add a little perspective, a few excerpts from the MSU student rag on the weekend series:

"'It was very hard fought," MSU head coach Rick Comley said. "Our kids showed a lot of character and played their hearts out the whole weekend.'

"On Sunday, it was much the same, as both Vicari and Cornell goaltender David McKee were nearly impenetrable. Both goalies stood on their heads throughout much of the contest.

"Both goalies once again put on a show, as McKee stoned MSU junior forward David Booth several times and Vicari stopped everybody in red. The play of McKee, who came into the game with a 1.02 goals-against average, forced Vicari and the team to take its game to another level.

"'He's a great goalie," Vicari said. "We knew we had to come out and get good, quality scoring chances early.'

"'(He) was really good at the end," Comley said of Vicari. "They got some shots on him and he was there when we needed him the most."

"MSU will now look toward No. 2 Michigan for a two-game set starting Thursday at Munn."

I'll be very curious to see how MSU does against Michigan this weekend. It will be a real test for MSU, and -- coming so soon after the Cornell series -- should be a good indicator of how well Cornell runs with the big dogs. The Vicari/Montoya competition should be fun. Stay tuned...

Well, Cornell held on to #8 in the INCH power rankings. Although, when they seem to care more about Sideshow Mel than anything Cornell did on the ice, I'm not sure how seriously they can be taken.

[Q]billhoward Wrote:Point was: It's all about peaking at the end of the season. [/q]
So, you can "underachieve" [maybe even for for three years], but do well in the playoffs, win two titles, and claim a good degree of success? Who does that sound like?

I don't know about you, but I'll take Sucks's last 3 years every three years. Cornell did have slightly more success, but not by much.

[Q]Pete Godenschwager Wrote:

Well, Cornell held on to #8 in the INCH power rankings. Although, when they seem to care more about Sideshow Mel than anything Cornell did on the ice, I'm not sure how seriously they can be taken.[/q]

I don't think anyone takes the INCH Power Rankings very seriously. In 02-03, didn't they have Ferris State at #2 or so right until the NCAA Tournament? Sure, they were having a good season, but not that good a season.

The only polls that we should care about are the USCHO and USA Today polls. And, as we all know, the polls don't matter.

[Q]JohnnieAg'99 Wrote:

billhoward Wroteoint was: It's all about peaking at the end of the season. [/Q]
So, you can "underachieve" , but do well in the playoffs, win two titles, and claim a good degree of success? Who does that sound like? [/q]

It sounds like my undergraduate days. If you do poorly at the outset, the professor is always impressed by the progress you made later on. This worked well at least in the liberal arts where there is never only one correct answer.