Cornell 4 at Colgate 1 Post-game Thread

Starr looked devoid of any Colgate "fans" with more than a minute left. Nice game. A bit undisciplined, but at least the offense showed up...and Scrivens was excellent again, despite the shutout streak ending.

Sooner or later, the whole "letting the other team outshoot us by 3-to-1 and bank on Scrivens"-strategy isn't going to pan out.

I hope Mugford is alright.

Shots were 41-19 Colgate. No arguing with results, though: 2-0-1 on the road including a win at the consensus league favorite. Next 5 ECAC games are at Lynah.

Trotsky
Shots were 41-19 Colgate

Funny, Age gave the shots as 29-9 Cornell after 2 on Elynah live.

It will be a big loss if Mugford is out for any significant amount of time.

JDeafv

Trotsky
Shots were 41-19 Colgate

Funny, Age gave the shots as 29-9 Cornell after 2 on Elynah live.

Jason gave the shots as:

Cornell 7-5-6
Colgate 11-19-11

any updates on mugford's injury?

who took him down?

Good first, we were in the box most of the second (some crap calls, some stupid penalties), and they seemed to phone it in for most of the third. Scrivens looked awesome, but he's wandering again. If this keeps up, my coworkers will start giving me odd looks when I yell at the screen.

From the "Oddities" file. Schafer as coach has a perfect record in Game 3 of the season (14-0-0). This is true of no other game, and hasn't been since he lost a Game 21 in the 2003-04 season after being 8-0-0.

Trotsky
From the "Oddities" file. Schafer as coach has a perfect record in Game 3 of the season (14-0-0). This is true of no other game, and hasn't been since he lost a Game 21 in the 2003-04 season after being 8-0-0.

It scares me that your statistic-keeping is such that you know this.

On a side note, moving to California has thrown off my Cornell hockey schedule...I missed this game not because I forgot it was tonight but because I forgot it was at 4:30 PST.

Trotsky
From the "Oddities" file. Schafer as coach has a perfect record in Game 3 of the season (14-0-0). This is true of no other game, and hasn't been since he lost a Game 21 in the 2003-04 season after being 8-0-0.

Dude...step away from the spreadsheet. It's gonna be OK. We're here for you.

puckbunny
any updates on mugford's injury?

who took him down?

If I remember correctly, it was more that he was fighting for the puck going behind the net, lost his balance and footing and just fell awkwardly. The replay looked pretty painful so I hope he's doing ok.

Shots on goal, at least according to the scoreboard, were really screwy this game. At one point in the second period, they started giving every shot on goal to Colgate (including the ones we shot) and then at one point subtracted three or four from our total. I'm not sure if this was negligence or some plan to decrease their own goalie's save percentage? Either way it was bizarre.

Colgate students turned out for the free pizza, but things were pretty empty on the townie side. As others mentioned in the game thread, the 'gate fans were classless as usual. Some of them left after 1 period, and most had left by the start of the 3rd.

As for Mugford, he was hobbling around the stands a few minutes after the injury. Let's hope it's nothing major.

Scrivens had another great game. He was hung out to dry by the defense on that one goal tonight...just left the puck in front of the net and there wasn't much Ben could do. He had some other nice saves...and a few near-misses he didn't see. Davenport and Garman were both on the bench tonight; not sure what that's about.

The offense was great to see, but we still have some major problems that are going to cause trouble against NoDak, in FL, and against better teams. First and foremost is the breakout play, which has been awful for two years now. As some of us have commented at the games, what is Schafer having them practice during the week? Our breakout plays, starting from behind our own net, usually result in our having lost possession by the red line, if not before. A couple times tonight, we lost the puck trying to carry it out of the zone and gave up a good scoring opportunity. It didn't matter if Colgate only sent one forward to harass, or if 'gate was changing, we still looked terrible. These kinds of blunders are going to cost us if we play a team that can finish.

Of course, it's hard to knock this team at 2-0-1. Let's keep the momentum going.

ebilmes
Davenport and Garman were both on the bench tonight; not sure what that's about.

According to Brandon Thomas in his coverage in the IJ, Davenport is just getting back to full-strength after some elbow surgery and wasn't supposed to dress tonight, but apparently did.

I assume Garman was Scrivens's backup only while Davenport was side-lined with the surgery and he might turn into #3 behind Davenport now. That is of course unless Schafer really does have that much confidence in him from what he saw in the exhibition games and from what he sees during practice.

Am I remembering this right, or isn't Colgate the wacky rink that records "saves" and not "shots" on the scoreboard? Perhaps that could have caused some of the confusion... always pissed me off, ALMOST as much as the big red chewing gum and free pizza give aways. Although hey, at least we brought our jerseys this game.

Doug '08
Am I remembering this right, or isn't Colgate the wacky rink that records "saves" and not "shots" on the scoreboard? Perhaps that could have caused some of the confusion... always pissed me off, ALMOST as much as the big red chewing gum and free pizza give aways. Although hey, at least we brought our jerseys this game.

Actually I think you're right, it was probably saves. I just assumed it counted shots like every other scoreboard.

As for the chewing gum, it took 3-4 minutes to clear the ice of the damn things AFTER the refs were ready to drop the puck. I thought that was legitimate grounds for a penalty.

ebilmes

Doug '08
Am I remembering this right, or isn't Colgate the wacky rink that records "saves" and not "shots" on the scoreboard? Perhaps that could have caused some of the confusion... always pissed me off, ALMOST as much as the big red chewing gum and free pizza give aways. Although hey, at least we brought our jerseys this game.

Actually I think you're right, it was probably saves. I just assumed it counted shots like every other scoreboard.

As for the chewing gum, it took 3-4 minutes to clear the ice of the damn things AFTER the refs were ready to drop the puck. I thought that was legitimate grounds for a penalty.

how can you be mad about packaged chewing gum being thrown on the ice when cornell students throw unpackaged, dead fish on the ice?

is the pot calling the kettle black?

Dpperk29

ebilmes
Actually I think you're right, it was probably saves. I just assumed it counted shots like every other scoreboard.

As for the chewing gum, it took 3-4 minutes to clear the ice of the damn things AFTER the refs were ready to drop the puck. I thought that was legitimate grounds for a penalty.

how can you be mad about packaged chewing gum being thrown on the ice when cornell students throw unpackaged, dead fish on the ice?

is the pot calling the kettle black?

Lynah's staff are ready to clean the fish up and do so, without fail, by the time the game is ready to start. (They're sure to do so because they know that Cornell can be penalized if it doesn't get done in time.) Starr's rink staff apparently were not similarly prepared; perhaps a delay of game penalty would motivate them to be ready in the future.

Dpperk29
how can you be mad about packaged chewing gum being thrown on the ice when cornell students throw unpackaged, dead fish on the ice?

is the pot calling the kettle black?

I don't care what people throw on the ice so long as it's cleaned up quickly and doesn't delay the game for several minutes.

Josh '99
Lynah's staff are ready to clean the fish up and do so, without fail, by the time the game is ready to start. (They're sure to do so because they know that Cornell can be penalized if it doesn't get done in time.) Starr's rink staff apparently were not similarly prepared; perhaps a delay of game penalty would motivate them to be ready in the future.

The general sequence of events in a situation like this is:

1. Fans throw stuff on the ice.
2. The referee has a warning read over the PA, indicating that further object-tossing will result in a bench minor for the home team.
3. If further objects are tossed, the penalty is called.

1 and 2 happen at every Harvard game at Lynah. The warning was announced at Starr last night, while the rink staff was gathering up the gum. It seemed to be read just after a long dark object that was definitely *not* a package of gum hit the ice.

I don't know why the staff was so under-prepared to clear the gum off the ice. Don't they give the stuff out at the game?? What do they think people are going to do with it??

ebilmes

Doug '08
Am I remembering this right, or isn't Colgate the wacky rink that records "saves" and not "shots" on the scoreboard? Perhaps that could have caused some of the confusion... always pissed me off, ALMOST as much as the big red chewing gum and free pizza give aways. Although hey, at least we brought our jerseys this game.

Actually I think you're right, it was probably saves. I just assumed it counted shots like every other scoreboard.

As for the chewing gum, it took 3-4 minutes to clear the ice of the damn things AFTER the refs were ready to drop the puck. I thought that was legitimate grounds for a penalty.

It is saves, and after the period ends they change the numbers. So, I assume the ones during the period are "not official" and changed to the official numbers later.

Give My Regards

Josh '99
Lynah's staff are ready to clean the fish up and do so, without fail, by the time the game is ready to start. (They're sure to do so because they know that Cornell can be penalized if it doesn't get done in time.) Starr's rink staff apparently were not similarly prepared; perhaps a delay of game penalty would motivate them to be ready in the future.

The general sequence of events in a situation like this is:

1. Fans throw stuff on the ice.
2. The referee has a warning read over the PA, indicating that further object-tossing will result in a bench minor for the home team.
3. If further objects are tossed, the penalty is called.

1 and 2 happen at every Harvard game at Lynah. The warning was announced at Starr last night, while the rink staff was gathering up the gum. It seemed to be read just after a long dark object that was definitely *not* a package of gum hit the ice.

I don't know why the staff was so under-prepared to clear the gum off the ice. Don't they give the stuff out at the game?? What do they think people are going to do with it??

ok, so the it's not a pot-kettle situation if your complaints are with the rink staff not cleaning them up in a timely manner.

I got the impression you were saying that the fans were jerks for throwing the gum onto the ice. (they are jerks for so many other reasons it doesn't matter either way)

As in past years, this was passed out at the game last night.

Not sure if this was mentioned but Scrivens’ shutout streak lasted 206:44, passing Cropper’s record of 189:45.

amerks127
Not sure if this was mentioned but Scrivens’ shutout streak lasted 206:44, passing Cropper’s record of 189:45.

Yeah, in the game thread. It ranks #2 all-time for ECAC streaks to Colgate's Mark Dekanich's 217:16 set this past February. Scrivens missed that mark by 10:32.

ECAC Shutout Streaks
1. 217:16   Dekanich 	Colgate '07-'08
2. 206:44   Scrivens 	Cornell '07-'08 & '08-'09
3. 199:44   Koenig 	Union   '96-'97
4. 198:30   Laing 	RPI     '98-'99
5. 189:48   Cropper 	Cornell '69-'70

Source: [www.dailygazette.com]

For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23. MSU's Ryan Miller had one at 229:29, but the all-time record (playoffs included) was a ridiculous 375:01 — Blaine Lacher for Lake Superior St., Feb. 26-March 2, 1994.

160:59 to open a season...I would guess that would be a record.

Edit: 165:59 to open the season because I neglected the 5:00 OT at Quinnipiac. Thanks to Ronald '09.

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

RichH

amerks127
Not sure if this was mentioned but Scrivens’ shutout streak lasted 206:44, passing Cropper’s record of 189:45.

Yeah, in the game thread. It ranks #2 all-time for ECAC streaks to Colgate's Mark Dekanich's 217:16 set this past February. Scrivens missed that mark by 10:32.

ECAC Shutout Streaks
1. 217:16   Dekanich 	Colgate '07-'08
2. 206:44   Scrivens 	Cornell '07-'08 & '08-'09
3. 199:44   Koenig 	Union   '96-'97
4. 198:30   Laing 	RPI     '98-'99
5. 189:48   Cropper 	Cornell '69-'70

Source: [www.dailygazette.com]

For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23. MSU's Ryan Miller had one at 229:29, but the all-time record (playoffs included) was a ridiculous 375:01 — Blaine Lacher for Lake Superior St., Feb. 26-March 2, 1994.

160:59 to open a season...I would guess that would be a record.

Is 160:59 the official number to start the season? On the surface it seems to me not to include the 5 minute overtime. Or is that made up by Ben's leaving the ice on delayed penalty calls?

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

Dpperk29
is the pot calling the kettle black?

Racist!!

Beeeej

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

Schneider played goalie naked.

Beeeej

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

The difference might be due to "shutout" but if so, the Gazette could have explained it. Maybe they had to fit another Fucillo Hyundai ad on the page and there wasn't any more room for something trivial like hockey.

Beeeej

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

Holy fuck!

Because I used poor sentence structure! Is that what you want me to say, Beeeej Noonan? Woe is me upon the eLynah Forum to have made such an egregious non-sequitur! May I be cast into the pit of Palin-English! Seriously, Beeeej...I don't understand your confusion. Give My Regards got it right.

All I was doing was listing other NCAA streaks surpassing Dekanich's ECAC mark. I typed the way my mind was thinking whilst reading a USCHO report about Schneider's streak which also mentioned Clemmensen's. They are both regular season streaks, as was Ryan Miller's. I used the words "For regular season streaks" to set up the punchline of Lacher's playoff streak. Technically, Scrivens's streak is not a regular season streak, since it began in the ECAC Tournament (Conso vs. Colgate). I see nothing wrong with my paragraph.

Ronald '09
Is 160:59 the official number to start the season? On the surface it seems to me not to include the 5 minute overtime. Or is that made up by Ben's leaving the ice on delayed penalty calls?

Ah, great catch, Ronald. My own math neglected to add the 5:00 OT! Somehow I thought 1 Shutout = 60 minutes, which was my mistake.

165:59.

RichH

amerks127
Not sure if this was mentioned but Scrivens’ shutout streak lasted 206:44, passing Cropper’s record of 189:45.

Yeah, in the game thread. It ranks #2 all-time for ECAC streaks to Colgate's Mark Dekanich's 217:16 set this past February. Scrivens missed that mark by 10:32.



For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23. MSU's Ryan Miller had one at 229:29, but the all-time record (playoffs included) was a ridiculous 375:01 — Blaine Lacher for Lake Superior St., Feb. 26-March 2, 1994.

Well, speaking of the (New Jersey) Devil, he had a shut out going for a whole 9 minutes and 52 seconds tonight, until Laich capitalized for Washington. Clemmensen got another shut out streak going, but alas after ~ 28 minutes that too came to an end.

RichH

Beeeej

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

Holy fuck!

Because I used poor sentence structure! Is that what you want me to say, Beeeej Noonan? Woe is me upon the eLynah Forum to have made such an egregious non-sequitur! May I be cast into the pit of Palin-English! Seriously, Beeeej...I don't understand your confusion. Give My Regards got it right.

From the context of your post, and the discussion everyone else was having, it sounded like you were talking only about record streaks, and so the mention of one other streak that clearly couldn't be a record because of the very next streak mentioned left me wondering why it was in there. I wasn't picking on your grammar, I was asking a simple question. Lighten the hell up.

Beeeej
Lighten the hell up.

Chill, I wasn't really upset. There's a smiley in there. Sounds like beer needs to be consumed the next time I see you.

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej

Give My Regards

Beeeej

RichH
For regular season streaks, BC's Schnieder had 242:19. The record for a regular season shutout streak is BC's Clemmensen 254:23.

I must be missing something. What's the distinction between the two?

Um... Clemmensen's is a regular-season record, and Schneider's isn't. I assume Schneider's is being mentioned because it was more recent (2006).

So why does it say "For regular season streaks" before Schneider's? That's the only reason I asked. It sounded to me like they're both regular season streaks, and so one would have to be the record while the other is not.

Holy fuck!

Because I used poor sentence structure! Is that what you want me to say, Beeeej Noonan? Woe is me upon the eLynah Forum to have made such an egregious non-sequitur! May I be cast into the pit of Palin-English! Seriously, Beeeej...I don't understand your confusion. Give My Regards got it right.

From the context of your post, and the discussion everyone else was having, it sounded like you were talking only about record streaks, and so the mention of one other streak that clearly couldn't be a record because of the very next streak mentioned left me wondering why it was in there. I wasn't picking on your grammar, I was asking a simple question. Lighten the hell up.

Why doesn't everybody lighten up. Look this was a simple misunderstanding of intent. God, if you guys had guns we might have a duel. On second thought that might not be a bad idea.

But I really think that is better than
There's hockey tonight and maybe Scriven's can start another streak, record or not. We've already this .

So before someone s someone else over this, let's stop .I'm tired of.

As the crowd said when Colgate took forever to clean up those Big Red gum packages, LET'S PLAY HOCKEY and by the way how many Colgate toothpaste boxes will there be tonight?

See ya, back to my .

RichH

Beeeej
Lighten the hell up.

Chill, I wasn't really upset. There's a smiley in there. Sounds like beer needs to be consumed the next time I see you.

I can't argue with that.

By the way - "Beeeej Noonan"?

Jim Hyla
We've already this .

THAT'S REDUNDANT!

CHN's injury report lists Mugford's injury as "back" and status as "questionable for Nov. 15 game". I think everyone who was at the game would agree that it was clearly not a back injury. I hope the bit about his status is accurate though. He's been one of our best players this year. Get well Muggy.

Ten smileys! Is that a record? For one continuous post (regular season, not including playoffs...)?

RichH
Sounds like beer needs to be consumed the next time I see you.

How is this different from normal Cornell Hockey gatherings?