Cornell vs. Clarkson, game 1 postgame

A few points I'll make to try and get this "postgame" thread back on topic...

1) The Clarkson shot in OT right after the first disallowed goal that pretty much rolled a few inches across the top of the crossbar almost gave me a heart attack

2) I don't think anyone else mentioned this but I hope Glover is ok and back tomorrow

3) For his ~50 save performance, Leggio was pretty far out of position on a few almost goals, my favorite of which was a pass that Pegoraro(?) slid under Leggio from behind the goal line that unfortunately went right to a Clarkson player in the crease (a step or two in front of a Cornell player) who passed it to Leggio for the cover. Probably a bad description but whatever, it was cool to me

4) The Slapshot from Pegoraro (again, I think...) that went up over the goal but bounced off the glass back over to the front and would have made one of the coolest goals ever but Leggio reacted in time to stop it.

5) The diving call on Cayer was one of the most deserving penalties I've ever seen.

edited to fix my grammer before someone calls me on it

Rich S
It's about discussing hockey.

Thank you.

Please read what you wrote again.

Drew, daredevilcu, Dartmouth Ben, ursaminor, ttnorm, Nostradamus, etc. are all opposing fans who are welcomed and respected members of this community. They post about hockey. Sure, they interject some things about their lives or fan behavior, but for the most part, they contribute to the discussion about hockey. And I value that greatly because they often provide a different viewpoint, or insights to players and fans around the league/nation. We don't always agree or see eye-to-eye, but they are valued here. Dissenting opinions don't start wars with those folks.

You don't give viewpoints. Your main reason of coming here to me seems to be to knock us down several pegs, no matter what. Instead of being a fan, you play some twisted bad-cop role you've invented whose job it is to defeat this community using antagonizing insults and reflected phraseology. You rarely talk about hockey itself.

Maybe you get off starting these fights...who knows? Maybe you hate the Cornell faithful so much, you swore to go on a crusade of hate until we're eradicated from the internet. I can't get into your head. But I do know that you've had a few good moments here interspersed with all the nasty ones. If you took more time to talk about hockey constructively instead of incessantly attacking our fanbase with "you aren't so great" vitriol all the time, there wouldn't be so much animosity towards you. Many of us here are very sick of the "you started it" game you play, when you're just as at fault, if you could only see past your own biases. You're very firm in your mission of painting yourself as the only outsider here giving "balanced" viewpoints and accusing us of being intolerant, but you know as much as anyone here that you could be a good contributor to this forum. I just don't see any viewpoints or hockey discussion...mostly insults and behavioral snarkiness.

That was the point of all this, and I apologize to everyone if I annoyed you with my persistance. I told myself last year after I called him a dick that I was done dealing with this. I'll stop tonight before someone makes a sandbox for me.

[elf.elynah.com]

Let's talk some hockey.

Rich S
I've never liked that "better team lost" concept. If the winner is defined by the one that had the most goals or runs or whatever, doesn't that make them "better" by the only measure that really matters?

For example, IF a hockey game winner took advantage of three defensive miscues to win 4-3 after trailing 3-1, doesn't that make them the "better" team by definition despite having been outshot by a wide margin?

Better at capitalizing on the other guys errors? Better at finishing than the team that controlled play and got 55 shots? Better because their goalie held them in and gave them a chance to come back?

And if the losing team played poorly on D to make that many mistakes that led to so many cheap goals, how can they say they were the better team?

It's semantics, and I don't think your alternative concept is an improvement.

The day Princeton beat Denver earlier this season, they played better than Denver. But I have no qualms about saying "the better team lost." The winning team, however, won - as did the team that played better that night. That still doesn't make Princeton a "better team" than Denver.

Even a blind pig finds a truffle now and again. Doesn't make him a better truffle pig than the one who finds truffles every day except the day the blind one did. Just means he had a better day.

Beeeej

nr53
The diving call on Cayer was one of the most deserving penalty I've ever seen.

Yeah, he's a terrible actor.

Obligatory Praise of Opponent: A fine dancer, though.

Beeeej

Beeej,

Why would you be put off? Did my wording offend you?

What makes my invitation less friendly than yours? You guys on this board engage in banter that is less than "friendly" all the time.

At beyond 2 am, I wasn't giving a lot of thought to whether or not you'd accept. No description? I don't think you'll have trouble finding me, even without anything as distinctive as a lot of pins.

But here ya go...about 5' 9", brown hair with a fair amt of gray covered in part by one Clarkson hockey hat or another and a Clarkson sweatshirt or sweater. I have no idea right now.

Ah who knows...maybe I'll walk over, we'll see how it goes.

Look out Beeej, someone's gonna accuse us of flirting again.

Rich S
Why would you be put off? Did my wording offend you?

Because apparently you can't be bothered to walk to the other side of the rink after crawling to Ithaca on your hands and knees, or something. Yet you expect me to do so. I sure hope you don't have to go to the bathroom during the game, or anything.

Beeeej

P.S. It's over. I want my t-shirts and 45s back.

Hey next times you guys decide a pick a fight with Rich S or flirt whatever you want to call it can you just start a new thread. Just call it Rich S. You can then get all indignant or kumbaya like in one central easy to shop place.

Just for the record, now that i know that Rich S is a goalie i think that the more abuse you all hurl at him the better. Goalies love abuse almost as much as their defensement enjoy poking fun at them when they are not in the locker room.

Aw come on Beeej,

I can't be bothered you say...

But apparently you can't either, so...??

I won't be crawling to Ithaca if I come. There's a more serious non-hockey related situation that may keep me here. Won't know for several more hours at least.

Oh...I don't have your stinkin' 45s. And I'm keeping your Mariah Carey CD!

Rich S
I can't be bothered you say...

But apparently you can't either, so...??

There's a difference. I'm declining your invitation solely because you declined mine in a way I took as rude.

Tell me you're hobblin' around on a cane? Afraid of having your Clarkson hat stolen if you cross the rink? Want to introduce me to nine of your friends and worried they won't be allowed down the stairs with you? Extend your invitation first before I even have a chance to extend mine? Your nine friends are hobblin' around on canes? I'm happy to venture over to Section O and offer a handshake. I'm a friendly, accomodating dude.

What read to me like "I don't feel I should come to you, rather you should come to me"? No, thanks. Not worth it.

Obligatory Praise of Opponent: Your Clarkson hat is both stylish and well-fitting.

Beeeej

That pass slid under Leggio play was Bitz, actually.

Thank you all so much for not posting the score! I was all set to watch the archive when I got home from playing hockey myself, and it wasn't up for some reason. This really pissed me off, but at least I was able to enjoy the game through the extensive posts and got very nervous as I read about the tie and overtime before getting pumped after the game winner. Can't wait to watch in person tonight. LGR!!!!

Rich,

Despite your latest diatribe which smacks of the same approach or worse that you accuse me of, here's some hockey talk. After all, if you're up this late (in Horseheads?) you've earned it despite all your shots at me. And yeah, I was a goalie so I'm thick-skinned enough to take it.

I shared the opinion that Clarkson would have to play their game at the same high level as in recent games, or higher, to have a chance in this series. As one of the cornell D men said, and everyone knows, Clarkson is young, short on experience, esp on the back line, and has a dreadful road record this year.

They are a finesse team with more skilled players and speed than in quite a few years. But their physical, gritty play has been lacking often this year and hence the mediocre record.

Beyond Leggio's performance which was at least "solid" if not spectacular, I give this young team, especially playoff-experience wise, credit for battling back, for playing pretty disciplined hockey (not many penalties) and for hanging in there and continuing to play hard. In recentyears, the 3-1 score would have become 5-1 or worse.

If you want to say cornell's defensive miscues allowed a couple of goals but Clarkson had to have some part in causing them and certainly capitalized and that in itself is creditable.

I believe they expected to get outshot in what was expected to be a cornell-style physical game where Tech's free flowing offense would be limited but with solid goaltending, sound defense, and opportunistic offense, they had a chance. Basically, that's how I think it went. Certainly cornell's game wore them down and that's reflected in the SOG. I know cornell has had a bit of an uneven season but they play a disciplined style that wears on teams and they don't bet themselves.

Both teams missed glorious chances. Open nets, shots wide, didputed goals, etc. Part of the game. If McKee hadn't made a great stop on Dodge, it could have ended in Tech's favor. Sounds like the winner came on a great effort by Sawada and perhaps a defensive letdown off the faceoff on Tech's part or even an poorly directed rebound by Leggio. Just going by what descriotions I read.

Could be a deflating loss for Clarkson, it will test their character tom'w night. A bigger loss for Tech than a bug win for cornell if only because cornell has the home ice advantage and clarkson needed a confidence jolt with a first game win, however they could have gotten it.

This Clarkson team is a year away at least but they've matured and I think they'll come out with passion tomorrow. Can they get blown out tomorrow? Sure, they don't have a margin for error and playing without Genovy will continue to hurt. But they also can still win although Leggio will have to play as well, or better. Cornell will come out smelling blood I expect.

Clarkson may not win but I'm proud of the progress they've made this year and very proud of the job the coaches have done. I know all three of them well and I think they're first rate men as well as coaches.

Hope to get there tom'w and I hope to see a game that forces a game three on Sunday.

As to your comments above Rich, I see some merit in it, regarding my behavior which is admitedly somewhat testy at times and I have not denied that in the past. But you fail to recognize that indeed you guys do start many "fights" with me. I do give viewpoints but if I dont express them in the obsequious manner you want, sorry, that's not always my style any more than I always expect you guys to be "nice" to me. Just the inclusion of that link to an issue with Al D should be enough to remind you of the reality of the snarky, nasty manner that you guys use in response to me. Before you paint yourself as being attacked, how about calming down those who fire shots like he and others do? It's your house, right?

The way you feel compelled to respond (is it defense if your turf?) precludes your recognizing the viewpoints I offer. I can't control that. You want me to be responsible for my behavior but many of you don't seem to want to do the same.

I'm not here to "knock you down" or "start fights." Maybe one of your gifted analysts here can figure out why some of you react that way. Meantime, I'll just call it Ivy arrogance" until I get a btter explanation. You guys poke fun at the North Country with all manner of tasteless jokes and it's cool in your view. But turnabout is not fair play, it seems.

I don't paint myself as anything. That's the spin you want to put on it.

Lastly, you didn't annoy me with your persistance at all. You're to be commended. Not sure that my hockey analysis at this late hour is up to speed, esp given that I didn't see the game but that's a good effort I believe.

What I did find annoying was your calling me "a dick" last year. I thought that was uncalled for and tasteless. To bring it up again was unncessary and equally tasteless. But as I said, I'm thick skinned as all goalies and former goalies should be. I can handle it, no problem.

Good night and enjoy the game tomorrow.

I can see Rich is at it again trolling the Cornell message board picking nits on every word that is typed. Just like in years past and just like in the Red Sox thread of the USCHO cafe.

Good win tonight by our team, and no we don't have to praise Clarkson if we don't feel like it. This is, after all, our message board.

Rich needs to get a life, or this message board needs an ignore feature. In the meantime it's probably best not to feed the troll to prevent these threads from becoming dominated by constant petty nonsense.

I am a very biased hockey fan. I don't know very much about the game myself. I've only been following hockey since I learned the rules in 2002. There is a tremendous flame war going on in this thread. I don't care. I just want to share my opinion of the game with the rest of the community here. So here is what I think:

Clarkson was not that good a team. I was expecting to see us dominate a 3-1 or 4-2 game. I was disappointed with Cornell performance tonight. If we're already struggling this hard against Clarkson, how will we do against the midwest powerhouses? BU? Even Dartmouth? Penalty Kill was ok tonight. I also don't remember the last time our team scored a powerplay goal though. Moulson has been solid. He just needs to show some flare. I think that there will be a fight tomorrow night. It will most likely be Bitz and the big guy who kept shoving people's faces after the whistle.

I would have to disagree about Moulson being solid, granted he is the leading scorer in the team but that is in part cause they always position him in the point. In my opinion, Moulson has been a major let down this year; hardly any even strength goals, leads an erradic power play, and has shown no leadership as captain. Knoepfli showed much more leadership on the ice. Also, the majority of the big goals (ie. in close games and OTs) have come from other players like McCutcheon, Abbott, etc.

My Saturday Morning QB opinion:

We clearly controlled the play, but as has been the case all year, a couple of defensive screw-ups cost us significantly. I think the 3-1 score at th end of 2 is far more indicative of the play than the regulation score. I think Leggio played a good game, but not a great game. From what I can tell from the Clarkson broadcast, he made some great saves, but was caught out of position several times and Cornell missed the empty net.

OTOH, I kept wondering when the top line would show up. We seem to be doing it with balance in the scoring. In a way, that's a good thing, but if it means that the top line has to disappear from the radar, I'm not sure I'm happy with that behavior.

Now, to address RichS: I tend to stay out of these arguments, but I've pretty much come to the conclusion that if I see RichS is posting it's going to turn into a flame-fest. And that instinct hasn't been wrong too often. So what does that say to me? Since I don't see that same level of consistency of deterioration in other threads, I'm forced to conclude that RichS is the catalyst for that deterioration.

Either Rich is looking to pick a fight or has such a thin skin he can't help but see extreme insults where only mild tweak of the nose were intended. Personally I think he gets off on these fights, but that's just pop psych on my part.

I know it's difficult, people, but we have to ignore him (despite my not doing so here). That's the only way to modify his behavior. If we don't, he'll continue to troll on this boaqrd and feed his need for attention.

LGR! I wanna go to Albany! (and how often do you hear that? )

Just woke up and re-read (parts of) the thread. Man, did we slide off topic or what -- if this was an advertising sponsored forum, I'd say Rich and Age were conspiring to split the click money and going out for two very handsome dinners tonight. Since that's not the case, it's just hockey passions.

Wonder what it's like to bait Dookies on the CoachKIsLord.com forum?

Rich S

krose
Rich, I've defended you several times over the past few months, but you really are approaching "Troll" status for me. Good lord, please stop being so confrontational.

Kyle

Offering a different opinion from the one shared by all th ecornell posters here makes me confrontational? You're being a tad close-minded.

Why this isn't an argument, it's just contradiction.

automaton version of Rich S
No it isn't!

Yes it is!

automaton version of Rich S
No it isn't!

Yes it is!

[www.mindspring.com]

Rich S

DeltaOne81
[Q]Bill's review was highly respectful of Clarkson.

Great game by both teams tonight.[/Q]

r board. Or just don't come here.

"Leggio deserves credit for making 50 saves. We make ECAC goalie of the week out of a lot of goalies."


The above was the only comment in Bill's review that I commented on. Hardly "highly respectful."

Greg made the other statement, right? Or was it John. Fine.

I don't expect out and out praise for the opponent here or on any forum. But to not recognize the oponent's efforts in a game that went to 2 OTs is taking a very narrow view. The implication is that cornell had to go to 2 OTs only because of their own occasional poor play. That's silly.

Please don't lecture me about my behavior here. Clean up your own house first. When inaccurate or narrow-minded statements are made, I'll call you on it. If you want to throw stones at me, be prepared to catch a few coming back.

1) This is precisely the the place to make narrow-minded statements. It's *elynah* by gosh. Our home rink. The place to kick off your shoes and be as narrow minded as we like. If we make the same comments on USCHO call us on it. But you don't storm in to someone's home, track mud around on the floor, start shouting "Where's the food?!?!" and then criticize them for not being hospitible.

2) You want an objective assessment of Leggio? He played OK, but I didn't see any saves he made that I thought were particularly great. The second and third Cornell goals were ones for which at least some of the people here would have been all over McKee had he let them in.

At least once he found himself mind bogglingly out of position to the point that he was sprawled out on the ice nowhere near the goal for no real apparent reason. Maybe his own player decided to check him or something; the camera work wasn't great so it was hard to tell. That should have been an easy Cornell goal but Moulson for some reason couldn't get a clean poke at the puck. Another time he seemed to think he was in position but was clearly leaving Pegararo about 2/3rds of the goal to shoot at from the slot. Should have been another goal but Pegs decided to get cute.

Even though on paper it looks like he had a great game making 50 saves, watching the play gave a different impression. If I'm the Clarkson coach he doesn't start tonight.

Now, take this all with a grain of salt not just because I'm a Cornell Fan but because the camera work last night left a bit to be desired. I suspect I only saw 2 out of every 3 shots that reached the Clarkson net.

Rich S
Rich,

... I shared the opinion that Clarkson would have to play their game at the same high level as in recent games, or higher, to have a chance in this series. As one of the cornell D men said, and everyone knows, Clarkson is young, short on experience, esp on the back line, and has a dreadful road record this year.

They are a finesse team with more skilled players and speed than in quite a few years. But their physical, gritty play has been lacking often this year and hence the mediocre record.

Beyond Leggio's performance which was at least "solid" if not spectacular, I give this young team, especially playoff-experience wise, credit for battling back, for playing pretty disciplined hockey (not many penalties) and for hanging in there and continuing to play hard. In recentyears, the 3-1 score would have become 5-1 or worse.

If you want to say cornell's defensive miscues allowed a couple of goals but Clarkson had to have some part in causing them and certainly capitalized and that in itself is creditable.

I believe they expected to get outshot in what was expected to be a cornell-style physical game where Tech's free flowing offense would be limited but with solid goaltending, sound defense, and opportunistic offense, they had a chance. Basically, that's how I think it went. Certainly cornell's game wore them down and that's reflected in the SOG. I know cornell has had a bit of an uneven season but they play a disciplined style that wears on teams and they don't bet themselves.

Both teams missed glorious chances. Open nets, shots wide, didputed goals, etc. Part of the game. If McKee hadn't made a great stop on Dodge, it could have ended in Tech's favor. Sounds like the winner came on a great effort by Sawada and perhaps a defensive letdown off the faceoff on Tech's part or even an poorly directed rebound by Leggio. Just going by what descriotions I read.

Could be a deflating loss for Clarkson, it will test their character tom'w night. A bigger loss for Tech than a bug win for cornell if only because cornell has the home ice advantage and clarkson needed a confidence jolt with a first game win, however they could have gotten it.

This Clarkson team is a year away at least but they've matured and I think they'll come out with passion tomorrow. Can they get blown out tomorrow? Sure, they don't have a margin for error and playing without Genovy will continue to hurt. But they also can still win although Leggio will have to play as well, or better. Cornell will come out smelling blood I expect.

Clarkson may not win but I'm proud of the progress they've made this year and very proud of the job the coaches have done. I know all three of them well and I think they're first rate men as well as coaches.

Hope to get there tom'w and I hope to see a game that forces a game three on Sunday...

Good night and enjoy the game tomorrow.

Who is the new guy?

This is kind of a random observation...but did anbody else notice how many water bottles Leggio was going through in the 1st OT?!? He must have gone through at least 4 or 5. Thirsty sieve (well..that and he was pouring it over his head)

DisplacedCornellian
This is kind of a random observation...but did anbody else notice how many water bottles Leggio was going through in the 1st OT?!? He must have gone through at least 4 or 5. Thirsty sieve (well..that and he was pouring it over his head)

He needed to lubricate himself for when those goals would get through.

Section A Banshee

DisplacedCornellian
This is kind of a random observation...but did anbody else notice how many water bottles Leggio was going through in the 1st OT?!? He must have gone through at least 4 or 5. Thirsty sieve (well..that and he was pouring it over his head)

He needed to lubricate himself for when those goals would get through.

Makes it easier to slip into the hot tub after the game too.

jtwcornell91

action jackson
Either way, our fans were out of line throwing crap on the ice...it's a bad habit that has to stop. We don't want to be that kind of crowd.

Hear, hear. That shit has got to stop.

Did anyone get tossed from the rink for throwing stuff?

... 'cause they should have.

KP '06

jtwcornell91

action jackson
Either way, our fans were out of line throwing crap on the ice...it's a bad habit that has to stop. We don't want to be that kind of crowd.

Hear, hear. That shit has got to stop.

Did anyone get tossed from the rink for throwing stuff?

... 'cause they should have.

What I didn't see get thrown onto the ice was Jim's candy, but apparently bottles aren't as dangerous as a milky way.

any reason why they dont switch sides for the 1st/2nd OT? Each team defended the same net for 3rd/1stOT/2ndOT. I wanted to see more action in section G

Not switching keeps your bench near your defensive zone indefinitely.

NHL changed that rule a few years ago. Now they change sides each of the OT's.

Rich,

Sincere thanks for your hockey thoughts. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Rich S
As to your comments above Rich, I see some merit in it, regarding my behavior which is admitedly somewhat testy at times and I have not denied that in the past.

Thanks for admitting that.

[Q]But you fail to recognize that indeed you guys do start many "fights" with me. [/Q]

I think I did when I wrote, "you're just as at fault," implying that there are people who have unfair knee-jerk reactions to you. But that's generally based on the snarky capital you've built up over the years and your overall reputation here. I listed a number of opposing fans who have no problem participating here, yet you're the only one who manages to engage flame wars often.

I hope everything is OK with your family for you to make the trip to Ithaca. Enjoy the game.

Tub(a)

Section A Banshee

DisplacedCornellian
This is kind of a random observation...but did anbody else notice how many water bottles Leggio was going through in the 1st OT?!? He must have gone through at least 4 or 5. Thirsty sieve (well..that and he was pouring it over his head)

He needed to lubricate himself for when those goals would get through.

Makes it easier to slip into the hot tub after the game too.

Hey, the water just got warmer!

Ack

KP '06

jtwcornell91

action jackson
Either way, our fans were out of line throwing crap on the ice...it's a bad habit that has to stop. We don't want to be that kind of crowd.

Hear, hear. That shit has got to stop.

Did anyone get tossed from the rink for throwing stuff?

... 'cause they should have.

What I didn't see get thrown onto the ice was Jim's candy, but apparently bottles aren't as dangerous as a milky way.

Hey, that's Snickers, only Snickers.

That wasn't the only diving call he should have gotten either. When Abbott was whistled after the play down by Section A, Cayer threw himself to the ice by swinging his own legs out from underneath him. Hansen, on the ball as usual, call the nearest Cornell player because he only saw a Clarkson player on the ice.

Maybe he'd be better off playing soccer the way he flopped to the ice last night.

All four lines looked good for the most part last night. As usual the Mugford, Abbott, Sawada line played great, and got the game winner. McCutcheon, Abbott and Pegs had a lot of scoring chances, they had a good chunk of those 50 shots. Freshmen line + Topher had some great energy and I'm glad they got on the board to show something for it.

I also agree with one of the few hockey related comments above that the first line was much, much more of a threat when Topher was out there with Bitz and Mouslon. This is no knock on Carefott, but Topher is just so good along the boards that Clarkson has to commit fully to taking him off the puck. That provides so much more space for Bitz and Mouslon to get chances.

McKee looked generally solid. The tip away of Dodge's chance was by far his best save of the night. The first and third goals looked indentical, initial right pad save and rebound gets put home, and not much he could do about either second chance. Second goal was in the net before McKee could even turn his head, not the place you want the puck bouncing off your skate.

Way too much time has been spent dwelling on this... Elynah.com... this is a forum to talk about CORNELL hockey,hence the lynah. The fact of the matter is that most cornell fans don't give a shit about leggio, much less want to complement him- if they do acknowledge him at all, that's their perogative.
If you want to talk about clarkson's strong points start your own forum, ehack.com, or whatever the hell you want to call it

Jim Hyla

Ack

KP '06

jtwcornell91

action jackson
Either way, our fans were out of line throwing crap on the ice...it's a bad habit that has to stop. We don't want to be that kind of crowd.

Hear, hear. That shit has got to stop.

Did anyone get tossed from the rink for throwing stuff?

... 'cause they should have.

What I didn't see get thrown onto the ice was Jim's candy, but apparently bottles aren't as dangerous as a milky way.

Hey, that's Snickers, only Snickers.

Oh I know. Just razzin' ya. I've caught my fair share. And thanks for those!

Regardless if it was a penalty or not, Cayer streaked to the net after the whistle and Abbott took care of that. Should be coincidentals in my book. The goalie should be offered some protection by the rules (and is) and Cayer was flying in long after the play was stopped.

KP '06

jtwcornell91

action jackson
Either way, our fans were out of line throwing crap on the ice...it's a bad habit that has to stop. We don't want to be that kind of crowd.

Hear, hear. That shit has got to stop.

Did anyone get tossed from the rink for throwing stuff?

... 'cause they should have.

No one in E got tossed that I saw, though at least three people threw stuff. I screamed at each of them and told them that throwing things these days is NOT a good idea, in light of the recent heavy enforcement of the throwing rules. Convinced at least one kid not to throw his waterbottle, and hopefully convinced some others not to do it again.

Oat
I was expecting to see us dominate a 3-1 or 4-2 game.

I was actually surprised to see us play as well as we did, for several reasons:
1. We were adding several guys back into the mix who were previously injured, so it was definitely an adjustment.
2. We had a week out of competition. Schafer played it up as an opportunity to rest, but I think to some extent, no matter how hard you practice it doesn't really compare to the effort put forth in a real game.
3. Just because we had a week out of competition and an extra day off practice doesn't really mean the players got to relax. Hello, prelim week!

All right, time for me to get some of my own studying done for a little while before the game... LET'S GO RED!

Aaaah, now I understand why we needed more than one goal in overtime to win:
According to the Official Cornell Athletics Website, Sawada's goal apprently wasn't needed for the Clarkson game and so they instead used it to beat Dartmouth on the same night:
[cornellbigred.collegesports.com]

(since they will probably fix it soon here is what the headline said)
Sawada's Double Overtime Goal Lifts Men's Hockey Over Dartmouth, 4-3

Big Red back in action for second game of ECAC Quarterfinal tomorrow night

March 10, 2006

I guess it was a late night at the sports desk.

We must certainly have gotten a PWR boost from beating two TUC simultaneously.

Out of curiosity, I missed the beginning of the first OT and didn't see why the first Schroedinger's goal was disallowed. Anything interesting or just the standard puck was already blown dead sort of thing?

Play was already blown dead, basically

Roger. Thanks.

schoaff

Rich S

DeltaOne81
[Q]Bill's review was highly respectful of Clarkson.

Great game by both teams tonight.[/Q]

r board. Or just don't come here.

"Leggio deserves credit for making 50 saves. We make ECAC goalie of the week out of a lot of goalies."


The above was the only comment in Bill's review that I commented on. Hardly "highly respectful."

Greg made the other statement, right? Or was it John. Fine.

I don't expect out and out praise for the opponent here or on any forum. But to not recognize the oponent's efforts in a game that went to 2 OTs is taking a very narrow view. The implication is that cornell had to go to 2 OTs only because of their own occasional poor play. That's silly.

Please don't lecture me about my behavior here. Clean up your own house first. When inaccurate or narrow-minded statements are made, I'll call you on it. If you want to throw stones at me, be prepared to catch a few coming back.

Even though on paper it looks like he had a great game making 50 saves, watching the play gave a different impression. If I'm the Clarkson coach he doesn't start tonight.

Now, take this all with a grain of salt not just because I'm a Cornell Fan but because the camera work last night left a bit to be desired. I suspect I only saw 2 out of every 3 shots that reached the Clarkson net.

Well, good thing for Clarkson they didn't pay any attention to me. Thought Leggio played much better tonight.