Tech 4 Cornell 2 (Post-Game Thread)

I noticed nobody had started this thread, and I have a few comments about the game.

First, a huge thank you to all the Greek kids out there who put their frats and sororities ahead of Cornell hockey and to students arriving in Ithaca Sunday night. That crater in Section B owes you one.

Second, Cornell was clearly outplayed for the majority of that game. The first period was just brutal to watch. After playing SLU(T), Onion, RPI, and Niagara twice, it's evident that the team just wasn't prepared to skate, hustle, and make plays against Tech. The Defense could not move the puck, and we forced long passes through the neutral zone all game. Clarkson was just too quick.

The Defense in general was brutal to watch. None of them had respectable games. Berk and Johnston skated with lead feet, while Seminoff and Krantz acted better as pile-ons, although Krantz played the best of all defensemen. Devin needs to make better decisions when he quarterbacks the powerplay, as quite often his shots are blocked. I'd still like to see him hit the one-timer more often. By settling the puck instead of pulling the trigger, he's allowing the opposing team to plug the shooting lane. Krueger was -2.

Offensively, how much is there to say? Topher Scott was without question the best player on the ice. He moved the puck extremely well and his vision was incredible tonight. He alone was responsible for half a dozen scoring opportunities, not to mention the two times he lit the lamp. His line is just on fire. I thought the top line played decently. Clarkson was all over Nash the entire game, and I thought under the NHL crackdown, a number of holds and hooks could have been called. I'm a huge fan of our fourth line of Fontas, Nicholls, and Scali, but the bottom two line combinations were both brutal to watch, and neither saw much ice time in the the period as players began to double shift more.

Overall, the game was a real wakeup call for this team. We're definitely a top-4 team in the massively mediocre ECAC, but if they want to compete with the top teams it's time to kick it into gear. Now that the second half of league schedule is underway, this team must find its identity. Are they going to step it up and have a real shot at winning in Albany, or will this season ultimately become one of "we just didn't have the talent"?

amerks127
Are they going to step it up and have a real shot at winning in Albany, or will this season ultimately become one of "we just didn't have the talent"?

I was with you until the last sentence. IMHO this team has an abundance of talent. Maturity and experience are what's lacking.

Trotsky

amerks127
Are they going to step it up and have a real shot at winning in Albany, or will this season ultimately become one of "we just didn't have the talent"?

I was with you until the last sentence. IMHO this team has an abundance of talent. Maturity and experience are what's lacking.

I agree wholeheartedly with you. As I posted on the game thread, not counting goalies, we have 4 seniors and 5 juniors. As also posted, if we can win 2 next weekend, we are tied for second. OK by me. We played good enough to beat Clarkson in 2 games, not as good as I would like, but Clarkson was supposed to be the class of the league. So, not too bad for a young team.

Jim Hyla
I agree wholeheartedly with you. As I posted on the game thread, not counting goalies, we have 4 seniors and 5 juniors. As also posted, if we can win 2 next weekend, we are tied for second. OK by me. We played good enough to beat Clarkson in 2 games, not as good as I would like, but Clarkson was supposed to be the class of the league. So, not too bad for a young team.

Playing two games against a team touted by their fans as a Frozen Four team with a tie and one-goal loss (discounting the empty net goal) as outcomes and people think we can't "compete" with them? Give me a break.

As far as Scrivens is concerned, I'm still very up in the air about him. Some nights he has looked absolutely fantastic (see: UMASS), but he's had three games so far, this one included, where he looked completely flat. He needs to start playing up to his own standard in the big games.

amerks127

First, a huge thank you to all the Greek kids out there who put their frats and sororities ahead of Cornell hockey and to students arriving in Ithaca Sunday night. That crater in Section B owes you one.

I didn't see the game, but I'm not sure what you expect for a game moved to a sunday afternoon in the middle of conference championship games (involving two teams with pretty decent fan bases on campus) during rush and before classes even start. Add to that the fact that the game was on TV so you could watch it at your frat while also watching the football and the poor showing is no shock. I know it's Clarkson and I know it's a big game but I've been to enough winter break games to not expect a huge turnout.

This is a tough game to analyze. I think the reality is that the team just lacks a solid identity, and lacks belief in their own tactics and abilities. It's not only about effective game plans, it's about effective team systems that everyone understands and buys into.

Has anyone noticed that they have been using more of a "man" defense in the defensive zone at least these past 2 games (I haven't paid enough attention on the webcasts on previous games). I think a lot of the miscues that led to the 3 goals came from guys not sticking with their man in a man type defense, and the more traditional zone defense played by Cornell maybe would have made the coverage a little easier. I could be crazy though.

I'm surprised nobody's said this, but TOPHER! Good God! He's the true Clarkson-killer. He wanted to tie the game all by himself (and nearly did).

Trotsky
I was with you until the last sentence. IMHO this team has an abundance of talent. Maturity and experience are what's lacking.

totally.

When Riley Nash was interviewed during the second intermission he said something to the effect of "we weren't prepared to skate with them in the first period." They certainly weren't and there really is no excuse for that. We played Clarkson a few weeks ago, we had a day off at home the day before. They should have come out ready to play in the first and instead stood around like cones while the guys in green skated circles around them. Like Greg said, there's plenty of talent on the team but it doesn't help when there's no effort like we saw in the first period yesterday.

I don't recall any of the Clarkson goals being particularly soft. The defense didn't give Scrivens much help on the the second and third. What he didn't do was stand on his head to stop one or two of those goals and keep the team in the game. He can be quite good but I don't think he has that kind of talent.

From my televised perspective Cornell did dominate play in the third. But I think Clarkson's strategy helped us out there. In the second and the first half of the third they seemed to be content to sit back and hold the three goal lead.

I concur of most of the previous comments, and just want to add that Topher has been playing like a true Senior leader the last number of games, which I wouldn't have said the first part of the season.

Didn't seen this posted on here before:
[www.ksml.fi]

I'm glad to see Matt is making the most of his professional hockey career.

Now is the hair a symptom of the syphillis, or just a result of the subsequent dementia?

Also, from earlier in the fall, Matt goes on a homicidal rampage during a game:
[www.ksml.fi]

sah67
Didn't seen this posted on here before:
[www.ksml.fi]

I'm glad to see Matt is making the most of his professional hockey career.

Now is the hair a symptom of the syphillis, or just a result of the subsequent dementia?

Also, from earlier in the fall, Matt goes on a homicidal rampage during a game:
[www.ksml.fi]

You do realize that Clarkson is 4 years removed from Nickerson, meaning this year's seniors never played with him and with the exception of the hockey seniors probably never even saw him play? Most of us who did see him play will admit that he's a little insane, but you Cornell fans seem to have such an irrational hatred toward someone who isn't really even associated with ECAC hockey anymore, I have to question if you guys aren't the same.

Also, since this is the internet and many people (myself included sometimes) have trouble recognizing them : I AM JOKING.

daredevilcu

sah67
Didn't seen this posted on here before:
[www.ksml.fi]

I'm glad to see Matt is making the most of his professional hockey career.

Now is the hair a symptom of the syphillis, or just a result of the subsequent dementia?

Also, from earlier in the fall, Matt goes on a homicidal rampage during a game:
[www.ksml.fi]

You do realize that Clarkson is 4 years removed from Nickerson, meaning this year's seniors never played with him and with the exception of the hockey seniors probably never even saw him play? Most of us who did see him play will admit that he's a little insane, but you Cornell fans seem to have such an irrational hatred toward someone who isn't really even associated with ECAC hockey anymore, I have to question if you guys aren't the same.

Hatred? Nah. Amusement and bemusement? Definitely. Some of us just like to keep tabs on ECAC characters of the past. And, besides, you don't even have to question if any of the people on Elynah are insane...it's a given. Nonetheless, I don't think anyone on here would do that to their head

I do have to admit that it is pretty amusing. And a friend and I were just discussing how we don't understand why teams allow him to play -- pretty soon he's going to be flipping burgers somewhere. Or in prison.

He was just so endearing...

I'm sure this is all part of Nickerson's strategy, next thing you know he will be in the NHL and have a celebrated 20 year career. Rich S will back me up on this.

daredevilcu
I do have to admit that it is pretty amusing. And a friend and I were just discussing how we don't understand why teams allow him to play -- pretty soon he's going to be flipping burgers somewhere. Or in prison.

Whatever happens to him, I think "He chased TPS-winger Teemu Laine around the ice and tried to abuse him." should be on his gravestone.

Scott's skills didn't complement the rest of his line very well when he was skating with Gallagher and Roeszler or Gallagher and Devin. Scott, Kennedy, and Sawada seem to have an intuitive sense for eachother's games and we've all seen how well that has worked out.

I don't think maturity and experience have as great an impact on this team as pure lack of talent. I agree with you that the team is young, but at the same time how much of a difference is it making with our seniors and juniors? Sawada is setting up plays, but for all his experience he still is only 1+7. What kind of seasons are Jared Seminoff, Taylor Davenport, Doug Krantz, or Tyler Mugford having? Up until the New Year, Mike Kennedy wasn't having an outstanding season, and Evan Barlow's play has definitely dropped off the table since the beginning of the season. Few of the guys on the team with maturity and experience are making big impacts, the one exception obviously being Topher Scott.

There is a huge amount of disparity on this team between the few players who have real hockey skills, senses, and abilities, namely Riley Nash, Colin Greening, and maybe Scott and those players who just don't have the talent to lead this team past Albany. The team works hard, but maturity and experience aren't what we're lacking; it's players with abilities to make plays, be creative, move the puck, find shooting lanes, and most importantly capitalize on opportunities.

amerks127
I don't think maturity and experience have as great an impact on this team as pure lack of talent. I agree with you that the team is young, but at the same time how much of a difference is it making with our seniors and juniors? Sawada is setting up plays, but for all his experience he still is only 1+7. What kind of seasons are Jared Seminoff, Taylor Davenport, Doug Krantz, or Tyler Mugford having? Up until the New Year, Mike Kennedy wasn't having an outstanding season, and Evan Barlow's play has definitely dropped off the table since the beginning of the season. Few of the guys on the team with maturity and experience are making big impacts, the one exception obviously being Topher Scott.

There is a huge amount of disparity on this team between the few players who have real hockey skills, senses, and abilities, namely Riley Nash, Colin Greening, and maybe Scott and those players who just don't have the talent to lead this team past Albany. The team works hard, but maturity and experience aren't what we're lacking; it's players with abilities to make plays, be creative, move the puck, find shooting lanes, and most importantly capitalize on opportunities.

I think you missed the point. You say it's not youth but lack of talent. You then show how our mature players are not doing it. That's the point. Our most talented players are young. Young players have a lot more ups and downs than more mature players (at least you hope they learn that). Riley Nash can say that they didn't bring their A game to the first period of the Clarkson game, but you hope when he's a junior or senior he won't have that problem. Time will tell.

sah67
Whatever happens to him, I think "He chased TPS-winger Teemu Laine around the ice and tried to abuse him." should be on his gravestone.

I believe this is the video clip of the incident:




Does anyone speak Finnish? I'd be interested in understanding some the comments.

I graduated, and so the only game I saw was the Thanksgiving BU debacle...

But I want to point out that Seminoff looked great that game. He's the best one on one shutdown defender I've seen at Cornell, when he's out of the penalty box.

Maybe he's regressed, and just had a good game?

Well this game was not all that dissimilar from the BU debacle, with the quick 3-0 lead that Cornell tried to chip away at. I would say though that most night Seminoff is Cornell's best d-man.

I mean Cornell laid an egg in the first period, but at least they didn't quit on the game. They played until the final whistle, which is encouraging that a young team didn't give up and/or get chippy. They have a stretch of games coming up that they should be able to win, and three of these are at home. Like many have said they are not in bad shape within the conference, and Albany is absolutely a possibility. Not bad for a young and inexperienced team.

I agree with Jim. The fact that the upperclassmen aren't stepping up their games isn't reflective of the young talent, which IMO is fine. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find many (if any) teams across the ECAC with higher skill levels in the younger classes. Yes this is certainly bolstered by Riley Nash and Greening, but there's still talent. I do think the Schafer system is based on a level of puck control, which I'm not sure the smaller, faster players can achieve (Scott is an exception). Alternatively, they may just require more time to settle in.

Also, I think the success of the teams in the past few years bends perceptions of individual skill level. A team playing a system very well makes everyone look good. I will say, however, that I found those teams to be more diverse- penalty killers, assist guys, heavy shots, big guys, fast guys, etc. I have a hard time differentiating a bunch of this years players from one another, and I think it hurts things such as the transition game. The opponent doesn't have to adjust.

Jim Hyla
Riley Nash can say that they didn't bring their A game to the first period of the Clarkson game, but you hope when he's a junior or senior he won't have that problem. Time will tell.

I just hope he will be a junior or senior and we have the pleasure of worrying about it. Time will tell.

I think we are all in agreement that the talent on this team is focused in the younger players. My point, however, is that the talent on this team does not run deep. Past the top one or two recruiting prospects, neither the freshmen nor the sophomore class show outstanding potential. There is potential among our upperclassmen. Sawada, Kennedy, Seminoff, Krantz, Barlow, Mugford, etc. all have the ability to be great players, but they just don't bring it every game. This team has leadership, certainly much more than Bitz ever brought last season, but they just can't seem to play consistent, solid hockey most weekends of the season. It's not asking a lot for passes to be crisp and for us to not turn it over in the defensive zone on a 3-on-1 breakout play.

My point is that we have maturity and experience, but it isn't put to good use. It doesn't matter to me that Nash is a freshman and Greening is a 21 year-old sophomore. They play as, if not more, consistent than everyone else on the team. I am not overly optimistic that our freshman and sophomore classes suddenly gaining 2 years of experience would factor much into this team.

Patrick Kennedy, Riley Nash (who will definitely not be here for his senior year, let alone his junior one), Colin Greening, Brendon Nash, Blake Gallagher (all of 5 points), and maybe Mike Devin all show good potential. But hypothetically if we gave all the freshman and sophomores two more years experience, how much better off would this team be? With players like Roeszler, Johnston, Krueger's play of late, Scali, Berk, Joe Devin, and Nicholls filling crucial roles, I wouldn't bet the house. They may play a little smarter, but I don't think their games are going to make substantial improvements.

You are obviously still free to disagree, but the fact of the matter is maturity and experience can only get you so far. You need talent to win championships. Our talent being stuck in semi-consistent freshman and sophomores is not the problem. The problem is that there are serious disparities on this team between the very few players with great talent and players without. I hear our next recruiting classes look promising in positions, among others, goaltending, and hopefully they will complement the underclassmen we have now.

amerks127
My point is that we have maturity and experience, but it isn't put to good use. It doesn't matter to me that Nash is a freshman and Greening is a 21 year-old sophomore. They play as, if not more, consistent than everyone else on the team. I am not overly optimistic that our freshman and sophomore classes suddenly gaining 2 years of experience would factor much into this team.

I'm glad I don't have the same overly negative outlook. It's a lot more fun to go to the games and expect that players will improve during their years at school. All won't - many do - and some who seem totally inept as freshmen can grow into scoring aces whose shorthanded heroics can put a smile on my face (when reminiscing ) for the rest of my life.

[elf.elynah.com]

Okay before bed, let me clarify myself one last time... I'm talking specifically about this year's team. As I implied in my first statement, this team can find its identity and perform well, but all players must be committed to winning and playing their best. If we don't come out and play 100% of the game, the team will not win against quality teams. We've seen what happens when we fall asleep at the wheel...3 goals against BU and Clarkson twice, as well as that comeback against Lowell. When we're on, we can compete with teams such as UMass. It takes a complete game of solid hockey for this team to have a chance at winning. I'm happy with our ECAC results this season...but I think we can all agree that the ECAC is remarkably mediocre this season.

I'm excited for future seasons because our talent is concentrated in the younger players, and I hope that the next two season's of recruitments can complement the underclassmen we currently have. I'm not saying that one of the current underclassmen won't breakthrough...certainly that Iggy comment speaks to that...but the play of the freshmen and sophomores is not encouraging at this point in the season. The fact that Riley Nash will leave early, and Greening might not stay 4 years is also a dark cloud considering we don't have the depth of teams past.

I'm just a sophomore, I haven't been spoiled by the 2003-2006 runs. I want to be here when the team at least makes the NCAA's, and while I can be optimistic about that, I also have to be realistic about the current state of the team.

amerks127
If we don't come out and play 100% of the game, the team will not win against quality teams.

I don't think that any Cornell teams in the past few years (maybe 02-03) have been afforded the ability to win at less than full effort. For example, there were 8 one-goal wins in 04-05 (and 3 losses, 2 not counting those played on olympic ice after bullshit seeding and crappy officiating, but who's bitter). My point- requiring full effort to win doesn't show a lack of talent.

Let's all just agree to disagree.

amerks127
I'm just a sophomore, I haven't been spoiled by the 2003-2006 runs. I want to be here when the team at least makes the NCAA's, and while I can be optimistic about that, I also have to be realistic about the current state of the team.

Then you didn't see the 2000-2006 teams, which typically had one or two bright lights in each recruiting class and a whole lot of role players, including a few guys who never saw any ice time. If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.

The freshmen and sophomores on this team have the potential to be pieces of a winning puzzle. Roeszler could easily be a solid 2nd-3rd line forward in another year or two. Nicholls has a bit of a brain problem at the moment but in 2-3 seasons he should be an excellent checking line forward. Doesn't sound like much, but a big part of Cornell's success in recent years was predicated on a brutally physical fourth line that could occasionally put the puck in the net. Krueger is already a decent collegiate defensive d-man, and he's got plenty of upside. Scali is *already* an excellent penalty killer and strong on the forecheck, and I think he'll quietly put up great game after great game when all is said and done. Berk and Johnston looked completely overmatched this weekend. Time will tell if they'll develop and be part of the team in a few years or if they'll watch most of the games from the stands. Throw in the guys you actually like, and even accounting for the fact that Nash and Greening won't be here in two years you've got a pretty solid core.

The best part is, none of these lower-level guys are likely to leave early.

You can find plenty to complain about over the past two seasons, but I don't think the *talent* in those recruiting classes is on that list. Cornell was so good from 2002-2006 that people forget that those teams basically had one amazing recruiting class (Class of 2003) and a whole lot of classes that were very much like the ones from the past two seasons, at least in terms of the quality of players. Whether or not these guys are the right fit for the program is another matter entirely.


What I saw this past weekend was a team that looked tentative and seemed to be playing a half step slow. It was almost like they were thinking about everything out there instead of going out and executing. Hopefully this is a sign that they're working on some systems and haven't gotten them nailed down yet (as opposed to them actually being half a step slow). That would also explain why they have to retreat behind the net on the breakout every time, and why the PP is so predictable (unless Nash gets the puck). This is, in some ways, reminiscent of the 2000 and 2001 teams. They retreated behind the net on nearly every breakout, even on the power play, just like this team. Eventually they got it, and the 2002 and 2003 teams had the best breakout of any Cornell team I've ever seen.

Time will tell if they're buying into those systems and if those systems will work. At the moment, though, this team will struggle to beat any squad that's better than mediocre, and will likely be fairly frustrating to watch, particularly in transition and on the attack. There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet. Realistically, this team might be very good and playing deep in the NCAAS in a couple of years, or it might be a decent ECAC team with a reasonable shot at an upset conference title and a quick first round exit from the NCAAs.

Tom Lento
If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.

How about never.

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.

Jim Hyla

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.

I was telling a friend earlier that I was trying to be more like Yogi Berra. Looks like it's working. :D

Tom Lento

Jim Hyla

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.

I was telling a friend earlier that I was trying to be more like Yogi Berra. Looks like it's working. :D

Well, one of these days you will be, unless you aren't.

krose
Well, one of these days you will be, unless you aren't.

I laughed out loud at that one. Well done.

Tom Lento
Realistically, this team might be very good and playing deep in the NCAAS in a couple of years, or it might be a decent ECAC team with a reasonable shot at an upset conference title and a quick first round exit from the NCAAs.

So they either return to the '02-'06 form (minus that year that never happened), or we become Harvard.

Sounds pretty simple to me. My first year of season tickets was that unfortunate 2003-2004 season, and a lot of nights showed a lot less from Cornell than we saw with Clarkson on Sunday. They were frustrating to watch, but you could see the pieces were there. You had a young goalie (thought of as a plan B by the way) and a lot of young players. One senior was in the top five in scoring (Vesce) and you had to go all the way down to Ben Wallace (with 9 points) to find the next highest senior scorer, who narrowly edged out Greg Hornby for those honors. This year is not all that different so far as Scott is the only senior in the top five scorers.

I'm sure everyone can remember the complaining done about that team, especially coming off a Frozen Four appearance. And I would say that it wouldn't take much for this team to put up a better performance than the 2003-2004 team did in the ECAC playoffs.

Tom Lento
If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.

Cornell wins when they have a hardworking team of lunchpail players all doing their best within the system. Cornell wins a lot when they have that plus a number of top echelon college players which John Tester could count on one hand.

Both the classes of 2010 and 2011 are excellent by Cornell's standards -- the only clearly superior class in recent history was the "once in a lifetime" class of 2003; the class of 2006 was equivalent.

His left hand.