Cornell 3 UAH 1

From a UAH thread on USCHO:

UAH finally made it to Cornell!!! After the bus ride from hell, (left campus Wed ~ 8pm arrived Cornell Fri at 11:30am) trailer problem in Kentucky, then dodging a ton of \"lake effect\" snow and weather across New York. They never left the bus except to eat for that whole time. You gotta feel for them. In my book, this trip wins the record for \"worst bus ride\"."]

That's what you call traveling on a budget!

Had UAH made Werner von Braun an honorary Hockey Booster, the team would have arrived inside of 30 minutes.

OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

ScrewBU

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

No, look at those two statements. Certainly what I said does not prove what you interpreted. Beeeej had part of it. But to expand. Everyone, well of course not everyone, has been saying that Schafer has to change his style to adapt to the new rules and players. Some have seemed to imply that the game may be going past him. I, and others have tried to say that he is changing, this team is nothing like the 90s, and that he is trying to get the players to do it. However, even with the changing more open style, because we will never have the same quality forwards as the scholarship schools, it still has to start with good defense. Tonight our only GA was because Gotovets tried to do too much offensively and he left the defense vulnerable, bam a goal. By the way he skated to the bench, he knew it as well. Against a team like UAH we can get away with it, against a better team, it would have been more than 1 GA.

I guess I want to say Schafer is doing what everyone seems to want, but that it's going to take more time for the team to understand when to pinch in and when to lay back. If we are going to compete nationally we have to start with defense and add the offense, that we showed tonight, on top of it. Hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive in the ECAC, but it will take longer nationally.

Or to put it simply, stop complaining, Schafer understands today's game and how to get there. And no I'm not trying to direct this to anyone specific.

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

No, look at those two statements. Certainly what I said does not prove what you interpreted. Beeeej had part of it. But to expand. Everyone, well of course not everyone, has been saying that Schafer has to change his style to adapt to the new rules and players. Some have seemed to imply that the game may be going past him. I, and others have tried to say that he is changing, this team is nothing like the 90s, and that he is trying to get the players to do it. However, even with the changing more open style, because we will never have the same quality forwards as the scholarship schools, it still has to start with good defense. Tonight our only GA was because Gotovets tried to do too much offensively and he left the defense vulnerable, bam a goal. By the way he skated to the bench, he knew it as well. Against a team like UAH we can get away with it, against a better team, it would have been more than 1 GA.

I guess I want to say Schafer is doing what everyone seems to want, but that it's going to take more time for the team to understand when to pinch in and when to lay back. If we are going to compete nationally we have to start with defense and add the offense, that we showed tonight, on top of it. Hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive in the ECAC, but it will take longer nationally.

Or to put it simply, stop complaining, Schafer understands today's game and how to get there. And no I'm not trying to direct this to anyone specific.

I completely agree with you about the team's direction. It's (brutally) obvious this team is really trying hard to take a different approach, and it will no doubt take some time.

My only point (not trying to be argumentative) is that you're playing the same game as the haters. When we lose, people say Schafer's done (no matter the circumstances of the game), but when we win, people say we're fine (no matter the quality of the opponent.) Both sides need to relax a little bit, it's going to be a wild ride.

The fun part is that it will all work itself out, and as you say, hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive. Time to break out some

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

No, look at those two statements. Certainly what I said does not prove what you interpreted. Beeeej had part of it. But to expand. Everyone, well of course not everyone, has been saying that Schafer has to change his style to adapt to the new rules and players. Some have seemed to imply that the game may be going past him. I, and others have tried to say that he is changing, this team is nothing like the 90s, and that he is trying to get the players to do it. However, even with the changing more open style, because we will never have the same quality forwards as the scholarship schools, it still has to start with good defense. Tonight our only GA was because Gotovets tried to do too much offensively and he left the defense vulnerable, bam a goal. By the way he skated to the bench, he knew it as well. Against a team like UAH we can get away with it, against a better team, it would have been more than 1 GA.

I guess I want to say Schafer is doing what everyone seems to want, but that it's going to take more time for the team to understand when to pinch in and when to lay back. If we are going to compete nationally we have to start with defense and add the offense, that we showed tonight, on top of it. Hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive in the ECAC, but it will take longer nationally.

Or to put it simply, stop complaining, Schafer understands today's game and how to get there. And no I'm not trying to direct this to anyone specific.

I completely agree with you about the team's direction. It's (brutally) obvious this team is really trying hard to take a different approach, and it will no doubt take some time.

My only point (not trying to be argumentative) is that you're playing the same game as the haters. When we lose, people say Schafer's done (no matter the circumstances of the game), but when we win, people say we're fine (no matter the quality of the opponent.) Both sides need to relax a little bit, it's going to be a wild ride.

The fun part is that it will all work itself out, and as you say, hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive. Time to break out some

I think if you look at my posts this year, I've been pretty consistent, win or lose.

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

No, look at those two statements. Certainly what I said does not prove what you interpreted. Beeeej had part of it. But to expand. Everyone, well of course not everyone, has been saying that Schafer has to change his style to adapt to the new rules and players. Some have seemed to imply that the game may be going past him. I, and others have tried to say that he is changing, this team is nothing like the 90s, and that he is trying to get the players to do it. However, even with the changing more open style, because we will never have the same quality forwards as the scholarship schools, it still has to start with good defense. Tonight our only GA was because Gotovets tried to do too much offensively and he left the defense vulnerable, bam a goal. By the way he skated to the bench, he knew it as well. Against a team like UAH we can get away with it, against a better team, it would have been more than 1 GA.

I guess I want to say Schafer is doing what everyone seems to want, but that it's going to take more time for the team to understand when to pinch in and when to lay back. If we are going to compete nationally we have to start with defense and add the offense, that we showed tonight, on top of it. Hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive in the ECAC, but it will take longer nationally.

Or to put it simply, stop complaining, Schafer understands today's game and how to get there. And no I'm not trying to direct this to anyone specific.

I completely agree with you about the team's direction. It's (brutally) obvious this team is really trying hard to take a different approach, and it will no doubt take some time.

My only point (not trying to be argumentative) is that you're playing the same game as the haters. When we lose, people say Schafer's done (no matter the circumstances of the game), but when we win, people say we're fine (no matter the quality of the opponent.) Both sides need to relax a little bit, it's going to be a wild ride.

The fun part is that it will all work itself out, and as you say, hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive. Time to break out some

I think if you look at my posts this year, I've been pretty consistent, win or lose.

True, at least something about this season is consistent (ducks for cover.)

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla

ScrewBU

Beeeej

ScrewBU

Jim Hyla
OK, so I get back and there are no posts about how Schafer needs to change his system. How he needs to get up to speed, pun intended, with the rest of the hockey world. Maybe that's because his players aren't quite good enough to yet compete with the rest of the league, and when they can play against a team with less talent, they can indeed show that they want to and can skate. Eh?

So your argument is that the team is fine because when they DO play a team with less talent, they CAN skate with them?

I kind of thought his argument was that when the team wins, nobody criticizes them.

That would have been a fine argument, for example, last week, when we needed 3rd period heroics to beat a bottom feeding 2-win ECAC team.

But unfortunately, his quote is admitting that we played a team with less talent, and that somehow that proves we CAN skate with the rest of the hockey world, which doesn't seem like a very good argument.


Edit: Hey, who's complaining, it's two in a row, and that's something to build on

No, look at those two statements. Certainly what I said does not prove what you interpreted. Beeeej had part of it. But to expand. Everyone, well of course not everyone, has been saying that Schafer has to change his style to adapt to the new rules and players. Some have seemed to imply that the game may be going past him. I, and others have tried to say that he is changing, this team is nothing like the 90s, and that he is trying to get the players to do it. However, even with the changing more open style, because we will never have the same quality forwards as the scholarship schools, it still has to start with good defense. Tonight our only GA was because Gotovets tried to do too much offensively and he left the defense vulnerable, bam a goal. By the way he skated to the bench, he knew it as well. Against a team like UAH we can get away with it, against a better team, it would have been more than 1 GA.

I guess I want to say Schafer is doing what everyone seems to want, but that it's going to take more time for the team to understand when to pinch in and when to lay back. If we are going to compete nationally we have to start with defense and add the offense, that we showed tonight, on top of it. Hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive in the ECAC, but it will take longer nationally.

Or to put it simply, stop complaining, Schafer understands today's game and how to get there. And no I'm not trying to direct this to anyone specific.

I completely agree with you about the team's direction. It's (brutally) obvious this team is really trying hard to take a different approach, and it will no doubt take some time.

My only point (not trying to be argumentative) is that you're playing the same game as the haters. When we lose, people say Schafer's done (no matter the circumstances of the game), but when we win, people say we're fine (no matter the quality of the opponent.) Both sides need to relax a little bit, it's going to be a wild ride.

The fun part is that it will all work itself out, and as you say, hopefully by playoff time we will be competitive. Time to break out some

I think if you look at my posts this year, I've been pretty consistent, win or lose.

True, at least something about this season is consistent (ducks for cover.)

Our ability to suck? However, I noticed less backtracking and more aggressive play in the neutral and offensive zone, and we saw how that paid off tonight. If we can perfect what we did tonight in ECAC games, then we'll start racking up points.

Anyone got any impressions on the game itself, as opposed to in the context of the larger flamewar?

jtwcornell91
Anyone got any impressions on the game itself, as opposed to in the context of the larger flamewar?

Yeah, we're a lot better than UAH in all aspects of the game. We were able to show our skating ability, but against a not so hard forechecking team it's hard to know how much better we've become. I'm continuing to be impressed with how well the freshmen are fitting in, and taking control at times. The team seems very relaxed with letting the defense enter the offense. In particular, combining the above two points, Gotovets is allowed to pretty much do what ever he wants to do. There was one shift where instead of coming off with his shift, he saw an offensive opportunity and skated up. He stayed on for almost an entire extra shift, keeping the puck in the offensive zone the entire time. He's obviously in shape and the coaches must think highly of him. One nice note, when he came off the ice after being responsible for UAH's only goal, he sat on the end of the bench. The coaches just let him sit there, none of that yelling, 'what the h*ll were you thinking" type that you get in football and basketball.

Overall it's hard to know how much better we were, since the competition wasn't. Tonight should tell a lot. If they come out skating hard, and take it to them, as they did last night, I'll be happy. If they sit back and realize that they're better, therefore don't have to work hard, it'll be a long season. In that regard, the UAH goal might have helped.

It's like clockwork, the defensiveness vis a vis Schafer on this board. He's clearly had success as a coach here; no one would suggest otherwise. I for one hope he sticks around a good long while, even if I don't love his brand of hockey. He graduates players who are solid in the fundamentals of the game, and that's no small thing. But surely we can allow honest criticism when that's called for, no? I've been faithfully in my seat in section L most games this season, and what I see is a mediocre team, lacking creativity and a scoring touch up front and prone to defensive lapses, with a so-so freshman class and not a great deal going on among the upperclassmen. True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools. This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

As for the game itself, a reasonably comfortable win against an undersized and struggling UAH team. Not to much to say, really. I continue to like D'Agostino's play, and I thought Esposito showed a lot. Good to see Kennedy get a nice goal, off a lovely feed by Gotovets. I was happy to see Jillson playing and moving pretty well. Crowd was a bit on the small side, and somewhat subdued.

HockeyMan
It's like clockwork, the defensiveness vis a vis Schafer on this board. He's clearly had success as a coach here; no one would suggest otherwise. I for one hope he sticks around a good long while, even if I don't love his brand of hockey. He graduates players who are solid in the fundamentals of the game, and that's no small thing. But surely we can allow honest criticism when that's called for, no? I've been faithfully in my seat in section L most games this season, and what I see is a mediocre team, lacking creativity and a scoring touch up front and prone to defensive lapses, with a so-so freshman class and not a great deal going on among the upperclassmen. True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools. This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

As for the game itself, a reasonably comfortable win against an undersized and struggling UAH team. Not to much to say, really. I continue to like D'Agostino's play, and I thought Esposito showed a lot. Good to see Kennedy get a nice goal, off a lovely feed by Gotovets. I was happy to see Jillson playing and moving pretty well. Crowd was a bit on the small side, and somewhat subdued.

Well said. Jim Hyla & Co. may well be right that this is just the normal ebb and flow of college hockey. Certainly BU's rise, fall and recovery are an excellent example of this phenomena. I think the claim that we are also making a transition to a more balanced style of play still needs to be proven. I am not sure that lack of scholarships is the reason why we do not attract better offensive talent. Yale, as you cite, and to a lesser extent Princeton have had better success attracting "skaters and puckhandlers". I think that our reputation, as Jim quite accurately points out, as a team that builds its offense from our goalmouth out, may lead forwards that we might otherwise get to consider other programs.

As for UAH, kudos to a team that is willing to take a 1000 mile bus ride from hell just to play for the weekend. They may not be the strongest competition but they are clearly dedicated to their sport.

HockeyMan
It's like clockwork, the defensiveness vis a vis Schafer on this board. He's clearly had success as a coach here; no one would suggest otherwise. I for one hope he sticks around a good long while, even if I don't love his brand of hockey. He graduates players who are solid in the fundamentals of the game, and that's no small thing. But surely we can allow honest criticism when that's called for, no? I've been faithfully in my seat in section L most games this season, and what I see is a mediocre team, lacking creativity and a scoring touch up front and prone to defensive lapses, with a so-so freshman class and not a great deal going on among the upperclassmen. True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools. This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

As for the game itself, a reasonably comfortable win against an undersized and struggling UAH team. Not to much to say, really. I continue to like D'Agostino's play, and I thought Esposito showed a lot. Good to see Kennedy get a nice goal, off a lovely feed by Gotovets. I was happy to see Jillson playing and moving pretty well. Crowd was a bit on the small side, and somewhat subdued.

There's a talent gap with Yale's forwards. What else and with whom?

jtwcornell91
Anyone got any impressions on the game itself, as opposed to in the context of the larger flamewar?

Agree with everyone above, it seemed to me Cornell wore them down and it looked at one point as if the floodgates might open, but UAH reigned it in. I can say this, had it only been 2-0 when UAH scored that first goal, I think it would have been a completely different game and it may have gotten scary (with the caveat that you can always play the "if" game.) I hope they make sure to not let them hang around tonight.

HockeyMan
True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools. This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

Only recently has Cornell bolstered its financial aid policies to match those announced by H-Y-P a few years ago. I think we're seeing catch-up.

While it is clear that Cornell doesn't put as many people in the NHL as the top scholarship schools, I wonder if someone with more time on their hands could determine if our NHL placement success rate based on draft position is better or worse than the top schools. In other words, does Schafer do a better job of turning lower ranked players into NHL material than other schools?

I agree with Al that our newly improved financial aid, include matching HYP awards, can only enhance Cornell's attractiveness for outstanding hockey players.
Cornell, unlike many of its peers, is a place where hockey matters. Who wouldn't want to play at Lynah?

Having nothing better to argue about, this thread devolves to arguments of the meaning of wording rather than intent. I think I know how to divert the discussion quickly (in the manner of Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles asking "where the white women at?" ): Have I mentioned lately how nice RPI's web feed is ... ?

billhoward
Having nothing better to argue about, this thread devolves to arguments of the meaning of wording rather than intent. I think I know how to divert the discussion quickly (in the manner of Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles asking "where the white women at?" ): Have I mentioned lately how nice RPI's web feed is ... ?

I think that was marty.

With the disclaimer that I dont follow much hockey at the NHL level and mostly just track Cornell now from afar (be at Lynah Easy in the Spring though)

I wonder how much of the talent issue is financial aid related. Certainly it can limit the pool of potential players, but I would think the academic rigor (and entrance requirements) would have a lot more impact on recruiting.
I also wonder how much the aspiration to jump to the next level (NHL) plays in to decisions. Not only the lack of TV and press exposure you get in the ECAC compared to Hockey East or the western conferences, but also whether the coaching staff is receptive to bringing in guys (like Riley Nash) that have a high likelihood of bailing after 2 years. I dont have a good feel for how many people jump from the 'blue-chip' programs before graduating... I know it is less than basketball but certainly it is an issue for both the student-athletes and for the recruiting staff.