Freshmen Forwards (Overrated)

Schafer gambled with the freshman forwards this season and lost. His nepotistic country club recruiting agenda and guarantees have cost Cornell dearly. Funny how everyone was on the bandwagon about the freshman forwards scoring potential at the start of the season; they were the salvation of the team. Funny how people can believe so much hype and BS they can’t see what’s really there.

Greening: How does a freshman go to the top line, and stay there with meager production. At the beginning of the season all I heard was size, size and more size. Where are all the points? Moulson had more goals and points in his freshman year and Moulson sure didn’t play on the first line or get as much if any power play time. Most of Greening’s goals were all scored in a few games. With all the chances that he was given, playing with 2 seniors, he should have been close to Moulsen’s numbers last year. The problem is, Greening floats, yes he plays physical, but it seems the only time he does score is when he is parked in front of the net. His skating is weak; size alone doesn’t win you games. Is he a distant relative of Schafer’s? Because I can’t figure how he got on the first line.

Milo: Again, how does a freshman go to the second line and stay there with only 3 goals and 1 assist for the whole season. But then he was one goal short of Cam Abbott’s 4-goal production quota from last season, so I guess that makes him a keeper on the second line. At the start of the season, I heard he put up great numbers in the USHL. Well, they weren’t that great, Milo was ranked somewhere in the mid 30’s in scoring and if wasn’t for the fact that he was traded to Lincoln mid season he wouldn’t have even had those numbers. He may possess some skill, but he is small and underpowered. Short strike zones don’t count in this sport. He was virtually invisible most of season. Again, could he also be a relative of Schafer’s.

Gallagher: Again from the smurf collection is Gallagher. He is probably the most skilled and definitely has the most hockey sense of the freshman forwards. However, he lacks the production and like Milo suffers from lack of size. Of the entire freshman, I had high hopes for Gallagher; I thought he would have done much better, point wise. How many Gopher Scotts do we really need?

Romano: Is Romano really that good or is it because everyone else on the team looks so bad. He looks good at times with his speed and moves. But what about all the times when he fails, and things that he doesn’t do. One-dimensional player. He reminds me that peewee player, you know the one, the kid that carries the puck in all 3 zones while the parents in the stands yell; “pass the puck” before he loses it. The peewee team loses 5-3, “ But coach I got 3 goals”. Romano is the consummate score 1 goal for me and lose two goals for the team type of player. He’s slight, looks like he should still be playing AAA, makes mistakes on his risk taking, but he does manage to outscore most of his team mates. 1 out 3 ain’t good. If he really were pro material would he be playing on a mediocre team in a mediocre conference. Time for a reality check. He will disappear in minor pro, guaranteed, despite any pro reports. NJ used up a low draft pick on a long shot. They won’t cash in.

Scali: The only freshman forward that didn’t make it to the lineup on regular basis. Some thought his defensive abilities would get him on a checking line or on the PK. Perhaps next season; there’ll probably be a few more openings, maybe quite a few. Scali reminds me of that energizer bunny. Skates around all over the ice with lots of energy and is real noticeable. But doesn’t seem to accomplish anything.

Fontas could have centered the checking line this season and probably done a very good job. This would have allowed Kennedy to center the 2nd line and would have most likely made more of an offensive impact than Gallagher. Barlow and Kindret, I’m sure could have been more productive on left wing on the 1st and 2nd line. In fact a combo of Barlow, Kindret and Kennedy would have made a formidable line. They were certainly awesome the rare times they played together last season. Connors could have been highly productive as right-winger this season if Schafer hadn’t ruined him and forced him to quit. This kid could blast up and down the wing and take the big shot.

Think this year’s freshmen will improve under the Schafer system. Highly doubt it. CU fans will be in store for more of the same old, same old next season.

But wait, there’ll be a new crop of freshman next year, let’s turf these guys and put all our beleaguer hopes onto the new freshman. In Schafer we trust. LGR! LOL!

Ice Meets Metal
Romano: Romano is the consummate score 1 goal for me and lose two goals for the team type of player.

Oh really, if thats the case then why was his +/- rating this season including the playoffs a +8?

This one was at least entertaining to read.

I thought Greening was one of this team's best forwards coming down the stretch, and he was all over the score sheet towards the end of the season. He started out slow and progressed as the year went on, isn't that what freshman are supposed to do?

over the last 11 games of the season Greening put up 7 goals, and 3 assists for 10 points. Not awful for a freshman.

LOUD NOISES!

Can't say I agree with much of what you said in that post. To begin with your sarcasm and ridiculous accusations of nepotism within the organization clearly point to you being more interested in pissing people off than actually talking hockey.

Next, just because certain freshman didn't put up lots of points this season (read: Milo) doesn't mean that their contributions weren't seen in other areas of the ice.

Third, attempting to compare the type of team that played at Lynah when Moulson was a freshman and when Greening was a freshman serves no purpose. Players Vesce, Bâby, and Paolini were putting up 30-45 points. This year, our leading scorer had 25 points. Greening had 19 and scored the most goals. Bitz just didn't put up the type of numbers that everyone expected him to. It's not Greening's fault and is irresponsible to attempt to place blame on him. Greening also has blasted goals from the left faceoff circle and I see no problem with parking himself in front of the net and causing chaos. One of Cornell's weaknesses this season was that they didn't send the puck to the front of the net enough. Players like Jason Botterill have put up 40 goals in the AHL playing similar games.

Gallagher was second only to Bitz and Scott in terms of assists and was easily one of Cornell's best play makers all season. Your comments about him actually say nothing.

As for Romano, he just makes things happen. People are excited when he gets the puck and he produces. I'm not saying he plays a perfect game, but with some development he certainly has the potential to be one of the most talented Red players this decade. As previously stated too...his +8 stat speaks for itself.

I don't really see how you can blame the freshman for anything this year. With a weak senior class (Bitz and McCutcheon having less than desirable years) the team leaned heavily on the freshman and they stepped it up.

Look for the freshman only to get better and be poised to make deep runs in '08 and '09.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE YELLING ABOUT!!!

Dude...are you Kindret's little brother or something? You were blathering on idiotically in October about Kindret, and then telling us in November how much the team sucked and how we would never crack the polls.

Oh wait, I get it...seeing as you're Canadian, are you president of the York U. hockey booster club or something?

But seriously...idiots feed on attention...if no one had replied to his last CAPITALIZED diatribe, he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.

He reminds me of that peewee player, you know the one, the one with "issues" who can't lace up a pair of skates, but gets sat on the bench to make him feel better.

Let's all just ignore...

sah67
he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.

Would he have taken the Kings to the Cup playing against the computer with the offsides off?

I like the title of this post a lot but it didn't deliver the promised goods. This only talked about ONE annoying dumbass poster. The title of the post promised more than one.

Josh '99
I like the title of this post a lot but it didn't deliver the promised goods. This only talked about ONE annoying dumbass poster. The title of the post promised more than one.

Apologies...title fixed.

Will

sah67
he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.

Would he have taken the Kings to the Cup playing against the computer with the offsides off?

As long as the only shots he took were wrap-arounds

ebilmes
This one was at least entertaining to read.

But not worthy of comment!!

Ice Meets Metal
Greening: How does a freshman go to the top line, and stay there with meager production. At the beginning of the season all I heard was size, size and more size. Where are all the points?

Greening 31games 19pts
Moulson 33games 23pts

Not a huge difference at all.

The offensive production is very similar to the Freshman class of that year, as a whole. Could be better, but they turned out to give us a lot of good hockey!

Will

sah67
he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.

Would he have taken the Kings to the Cup playing against the computer with the offsides off?

Breakfast, shmreakfast. Look at the score, for Christ's sake. It's only the second period and I'm up 12 to 2. Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, "the Whale," they only beat Vancouver once, maybe twice in a lifetime.

redice
But not worthy of comment!!

sah67
Let's all just ignore...

Totally agree.

Will

sah67
he probably would have gone back down to mommy's basement to play NHL '94 and put his superb strategies to work.

Would he have taken the Kings to the Cup playing against the computer with the offsides off?

It's not so much me as it is Roenick. He's good.

Facetimer, is that you???????

Good god, people. Cut it out with the (exclusively) ad hominem attacks on IMM. Yes, IMM is all-caps CRAZY and seriously negative. But no, he is not simply trolling and spraying stupidity around like a lawn sprinkler.

He¹, like bandrews37, has written lengthy, provocative posts that attack some sacred cows. This is not a crime. While a lot of people address the criticisms on the merits, others seem to feel that if someone says something negative it is bad; if they say it twice, they are trolls. It kills discussion. I agree with some of what the new agony aunts have to say, disagree with some and lack knowledge to evaluate the rest. But whatever the merits of IMM's and bandrews' views, those posts have prompted some of the most interesting conversation that the board has seen in a long time. And while they are stating things in a declarative, self-important manner, so do most of us most of the time. They are not being disrespectful (definitely not, by internet standards), they are stating unpopular opinions.

There are fans who talk hockey and there is the old Clarkson Roundtable. Don't be the Clarkson Roundtable.² As my mother always told me, Don't be Goldie Knight. (This was cryptic advice at the time.)

¹ Given the number of regular female posters here, sorry if I am taking liberties.

² Apologies to Neil O'Donnell (do I remember that right?) who ran a great, enjoyable precursor to CHDF/eLF and to all the sane Roundtable members who had to put up with my not-so-youthful trolling over there. It was just so much fun.

ugarte
He¹, like bandrews37, has written lengthy, provocative posts that attack some sacred cows. This is not a crime. While a lot of people address the criticisms on the merits, others seem to feel that if someone says something negative it is bad; if they say it twice, they are trolls. It kills discussion. I agree with some of what the new agony aunts have to say, disagree with some and lack knowledge to evaluate the rest. But whatever the merits of IMM's and bandrews' views, those posts have prompted some of the most interesting conversation that the board has seen in a long time. And while they are stating things in a declarative, self-important manner, so do most of us most of the time. They are not being disrespectful (definitely not, by internet standards), they are stating unpopular opinions.

Well said, and well footnoted.

And thanks for bringing up fond memories of the Clarkson Roundtable.

The only thing that really bothers me is PUTTING THE TITLE OF THE POST ALL IN CAPS LIKE THIS, as if one's specific intention is to grab attention. (Luckily, Age has taken care of that, at least for now. Thanks, Age!) Otherwise, if you've got your negative opinions, yeah, let's discuss them.

I'm pretty sure bandrews37 isn't trolling. He just has an unpopular negative opinion right now. IMM's first post looked like the same. This one is so over the top negative that I can't help but think he's trolling. Even if e he's not there's no point in arguing with someone who thinks " Schafer gambled with the freshman forwards this season and lost".

_____________________________Goals_____ST Goals_____5x5

Bitz-Sawada-Greening ________8-10-11_____3-5-5_____5-5-6

Carefoot-Mugford-Kennedy_____ 9-1-5______4-0-0_____5-1-5

McCutcheon-Barlow-Gallagher___10-6-3_____8-2-1_____2-4-2

Milo-Scott-Romano____________3-4-9_______0-2-4_____3-2-5

I think it is important to see who puts the puck in the net. We only scored 3 shorties this year, they are included in ST goals but dont make much of a difference. The #1 PP unit for most of the year was Bitz, Sawada, McCutcheon, Scott and someone was plugged in here for a while I think.

From my memory, the freshmen were excluded from most PP time until the second half, so there best opportunity to score came in 5x5 hockey. Our "top" line was pretty good at putting the puck in the net, in fact, Greening was the best at it. Would McCutcheon have been better in that spot? Maybe. But Greening did well there. Romano and Milo both outscored McCutcheon, absent his PP stats. Had they been on the PP all year, maybe they would have scored more, but they did well with the time they had.

I cannot agree that Greening, our top goal scorer, did not deserve to be on the "top" line, even if he did score half of his goals in 2 games. If it was so easy, why didn't everyone else score half of their goals in those games. The fact is that he found the back of the net.

With that said, I don't believe that the freshman were our best players this year. I think that as freshman they show a lot of potential for the future. That is what excites me the most. Some of them played immature at times this year and that can get ugly, but players learn over time. The strong talents that they show now do not make them complete players, but the weak aspects of their game will be addressed in time.

And if you don't think that poor decision-making improves with time, please see Cook, Charlie(stop passing in front of our net) or O'Byrne, Ryan(I can still see it going in)

I do think that IMM makes some interesting line suggestions. I think that Kennedy has some good offensive talent waiting to be seen. And while I am defending the freshman to an extent, I think that Milo could have been left out of the lineup for one of the other scratches. At least to give them the chance to step up.

Why is everyone being so tough on Milo? He was our best 2-way freshman that saw regular playing time. He was also the only on that was put on penalty kill. He may not have produced offensively as much as everyone would have liked, but his contributions went beyond that.

mtmack25
With that said, I don't believe that the freshman were our best players this year. I think that as freshman they show a lot of potential for the future.

If a team's best players are freshmen it probably means either 1) you landed a once-in-a-generation elite class or 2) you had weak upper classes to begin with. I'm won't say that our frosh were out best players this year, but that's how it's supposed to work.

Note: I'm talking about how they played this year, not about potential.

ugarte
opinions.

As my mother always told me, Don't be Goldie Knight. (This was cryptic advice at the time.)

KNOW NO LIMITS, ELYNAH POSTERS!! DISINTEGRIZINATE THE TROLLINATORS!!

See, if you use Caps in the actual post, it's more effective. But on a serious note, apologies if I offended anyone...I didn't mean to make troll accusations. I was just cranky at the time and sick of the ALL CAPS POST SUBJECTS. Everyone's opinion is obviously welcome on this board, as long as you present it in a manner that doesn't visually offend us

I agree to an extent with what ugarte said - it's mostly just unpopular opinion, and that by itself isn't trolling. But what puts stuff like this over the line into trolliness for me is that it's all negative with no constructive suggestions. Not that I'm expecting IMM to step in as head coach for a retroactively played season to prove he could have done better and gone farther - but if you're going to criticize the coach's choices of who's on what line, tell us who you would've used instead, and why, and what makes you think it would've worked better. If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead. Back up your statement about Connors with some evidence that he was unreasonably forced to quit despite enormous potential that could've been the missing link for the team's season.

Criticism isn't prohibited without an accompanying mind to help, but it sure comes across more credibly with one.

Beeeej
If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.

Uh-oh. Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

Al DeFlorio

Beeeej
If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.

Uh-oh. Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

I think his head just exploded!

fullofgas

Al DeFlorio

Beeeej
If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.

Uh-oh. Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

I think his head just exploded!

LOL!
Nice catch Al.

Rita

fullofgas

Al DeFlorio

Beeeej
If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.

Uh-oh. Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

I think his head just exploded!

LOL!
Nice catch Al.

He should lose an "e" for that...or maybe change the spelling to Beeeeg??

Townie

Rita

fullofgas

Al DeFlorio

Beeeej
If you think Schafer's probable off-ice efforts to reign in Romano's selfish and/or undisciplined play were ineffective, tell us what you would've done instead.

Uh-oh. Beeeej blows one at last. [Schafer may rule--or reign--but in this case he reins.]

I think his head just exploded!

LOL!
Nice catch Al.

He should lose an "e" for that...or maybe change the spelling to Beeeeg??

How about Al's Beeeeatch?

The freshman were the best most talented players on the ice. It was said that Cornell gambled and lost with the freshmen. I disagree. It was the freshmen that gambled with Cornell and lost. Schaffer has no idea how to use them and has succeeded in taking proven offensive talent and severely limiting them via his systems and coaching style.

Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

DILLIGAF
Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

I agree. Schaffer is an awful coach and he should never work in this business again. Schafer, on the other hand...

KeithK

DILLIGAF
Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

I agree. Schaffer is an awful coach and he should never work in this business again. Schafer, on the other hand...

Sorry inside joke that only maybe 2 would actually get.

The game has passed him by.

DILLIGAF

KeithK

DILLIGAF
Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

I agree. Schaffer is an awful coach and he should never work in this business again. Schafer, on the other hand...

Sorry inside joke that only maybe 2 would actually get.

A lot more than 2 got it. Keith is usually quicker than that -- I'll bet he was just having an off-night.

Trotsky

DILLIGAF

KeithK

DILLIGAF
Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

I agree. Schaffer is an awful coach and he should never work in this business again. Schafer, on the other hand...

Sorry inside joke that only maybe 2 would actually get.

A lot more than 2 got it. Keith is usually quicker than that -- I'll bet he was just having an off-night.

He has experience and skills. He should be doing better. The only answer is that his coach isn't getting the most out of him.

It's time for a change.

ugarte

Trotsky

DILLIGAF

KeithK

DILLIGAF
Shaffer is a dinosaur and the game has passed him by.

I agree. Schaffer is an awful coach and he should never work in this business again. Schafer, on the other hand...

Sorry inside joke that only maybe 2 would actually get.

A lot more than 2 got it. Keith is usually quicker than that -- I'll bet he was just having an off-night.

He has experience and skills. He should be doing better. The only answer is that his coach isn't getting the most out of him.

It's time for a change.

Keith has been transitioning to an up-tempo style. These things take time.

KeithK
I'm pretty sure bandrews37 isn't trolling. He just has an unpopular negative opinion right now. IMM's first post looked like the same. This one is so over the top negative that I can't help but think he's trolling. Even if e he's not there's no point in arguing with someone who thinks " Schafer gambled with the freshman forwards this season and lost".

Thanks, Keith. I've been out of the country for a week and a half and hadn't checked around here for a bit.

I assure you I'm not trolling and you're right, I don't have a popular opinion with many folks on here now. At least I'm willing to defend why I believe the way I do. I'm always willing to discuss the team, pros and cons.

This guy though... wow... My only thought is that he's like the little monkey at the zoo: throw enough shit at the wall and some of it's bound to stick.