Hahvahd @ Cornell

This will either be a great recruiting opportunity, or a debacle of "biblical proportions".

[www.ecachockey.com]

Anybody want to guess which Cornell hockey team shows up?
The one that beat a tough CC twice, or the one that was crushed by the lowly (?) Quinnies??

Getting out-muscled and, worse, out-positioned and, worst of all, out-hustled at Q was ugly. I'm sure it did not pass without comment from the coaching staff.

From WAFT:

Brian Sullivan @SullivanHockey

The OHL's @MattyMo26 reports that Harvard G Steve Michalek has been added to the USHL's Cedar Rapids roster; I'm awaiting word from Harvard.

As tipped on the USCHO Forum Harvard thread, the Cedar Rapids Gazette has this article.

The Cedar Rapids RoughRiders have placed goaltender Stephen Michalek on their protected list. Now will he actually be joining the RoughRiders?

“There is nothing definitive, yet,” RoughRiders head coach/general manager Mark Carlson said Monday.

Somebody mentioned in the P thread that they came up firing on all cylinders in the third after coach yelled the right stuff- they got stymied when some Princeton guy made the goal of his life on a falling down crazy-angle slapshot.

I'm betting that these three factors will make sure the right team shows up:
1- Lynah
2- National TV audience
3- They're playing Sucks

Either way, we'll find out what this team is made of on Friday.

BMac
Somebody mentioned in the P thread that they came up firing on all cylinders in the third after coach yelled the right stuff- they got stymied when some Princeton guy made the goal of his life on a falling down crazy-angle slapshot.

That only tied the game. How do you explain allowing a guy to skate with the puck completely untouched from the faceoff cirle directly to the goalmouth for the GWG? Heck of a time-out by Princeton to draw that play up, but CU has to react better.

Other than that, the rest of the 3rd period was dominant, and a glimpse of how powerful this team can be. If they're going to go through this, it's good for it to happen this early.

RichH


Other than that, the rest of the 3rd period was dominant, and a glimpse of how powerful this team can be. If they're going to go through this, it's good for it to happen this early.

This.

This team will be measured by what it does in March and April not in November. For once, strength of schedule is likely to help this team absorb bad November ECAC weekends and a few bad loses do not completely erode the margin of error come spring. Hopefully the last two weeks are enough to show this team that they need to come ready to play at 100% for 60 minutes whether they are playing CC or AIC. There are no easy games to day dream through on this schedule.

Where do we put our roll call and viewing party inquiries these days? Or is that all handled via the Google+ circles these days or something? The Twitter? This is what happens when you stay away from eLynah for so long, kids: you come back and you sound like your 71-year-old aunt trying to comment on a Facebook photo.

Anyway, Hahvahd bad. Big Red good. I agree with what RichH and Chris '03 said above.

Jerseygirl
Where do we put our roll call and viewing party inquiries these days? Or is that all handled via the Google+ circles these days or something? The Twitter? This is what happens when you stay away from eLynah for so long, kids: you come back and you sound like your 71-year-old aunt trying to comment on a Facebook photo.

Anyway, Hahvahd bad. Big Red good. I agree with what RichH and Chris '03 said above.

Viewing party link

If you are in Atlanta or Fort Lauderdale, there is a party.

I think the Roll Calls are for the away games, and it is a tad too early to start one for the Estero games .

Trotsky
Getting out-muscled and, worse, out-positioned and, worst of all, out-hustled at Q was ugly. I'm sure it did not pass without comment from the coaching staff.

Schafer is blunt in the CHA newsletter: "The early season started out great, but lately, we have been reading too many press clipping because our play
has dropped off, and we have not been ready for how a nationally-ranked team should perform."

ECAC tries to show replay of the 2006 Harvard @ Cornell game. However it seems to stop before Kennedy's game winning goal. I've emailed them about it. Also thru the ECAC, here's the Harvard Crimson article on the weekend.

“It’s huge,” Fallstrom said. “It’s going to be a packed barn, loud, probably not a single Harvard fan in the stands. It’s going to be fun though.”

I guess they can't even get their parents to show up.

Jim Hyla
ECAC tries to show replay of the 2006 Harvard @ Cornell game. However it seems to stop before Kennedy's game winning goal. I've emailed them about it. Also thru the ECAC, here's the Harvard Crimson article on the weekend.

“It’s huge,” Fallstrom said. “It’s going to be a packed barn, loud, probably not a single Harvard fan in the stands. It’s going to be fun though.”

I guess they can't even get their parents to show up.

Not even parents want to watch Harvard Hockey.

If you are going to watch your kid lose a few games, probably better to come to the BeanPot 1st round and consolation games
That way the losing is spread out over a couple weeks and is at a neutral site. Not back to back nights (Cornell and our travel partner) and in Lynah East

Cornell95
If you are going to watch your kid lose a few games, probably better to come to the BeanPot 1st round and consolation games
That way the losing is spread out over a couple weeks and is at a neutral site. Not back to back nights (Cornell and our travel partner) and in Lynah East

To be fair, Harvard usually beats Northeastern in the consolation game.

Sun articles.

Waiting for Ryan to lead the rush.

Same story as always. We have no offensive talent.

abmarks
Same story as always. We have no offensive talent.

Lame. But a clutch delurk.

Cornell outplayed them, but a horrible turnover by D'agostino and a single incredible offensive play by Harvard swung the game in their favor.

Postgame threads not what they used to be. Could we have a fuller recap, please, from someone who was there? Flyersgolf?

The best part of the game was Emerick's pre-game discussion about Lynah Rink "traditions". Made me smile.

The rest of the game? Not so much.

really was a story that has been told over and over..

while most of the year cornell has come out flat and been outshot for most of the first two periods and then tried to come back, this time it was much different.

Cornell outhit, out shot, out chanced harvard from the puck drop.

Still we cant find the back of the net. The back end turnovers on bad passes or weak stick handling is giving up 4-5 chances a game and often turning into 2 on 1s that the other teams are burying.

in this game from the Dots out Cornell did most everything right, we cleared, we created speed thru center ice, we cycled. but behind the Dots we play soft , make bad decision, we lose the puck off our sticks under no pressure, and we fail to understand how much faster other teams are when coming up from behind us.

still we need to score. we have won a bunch of games over the years being outshot but generally we the quality chances are much closer than the shot totals. in this game other than the giveaway chances harvard didnt do much other than look good on the PP where they didnt end up scoring, but neither did we.

playing hard for a full game was a first step in the right direction. not they need to start seeing some reward for that.

HockeyMan
Postgame threads not what they used to be. Could we have a fuller recap, please, from someone who was there? Flyersgolf?

I think everybody's drunk. Give it until this afternoon.

Cornell addressed the two immediate problems from prior games: playing with intensity and taking dumb penalties. They didn't finish what seemed like a dozen great chances, but that may have been less a system failure than just plain bad luck.

Trotsky

HockeyMan
Postgame threads not what they used to be. Could we have a fuller recap, please, from someone who was there? Flyersgolf?

I think everybody's drunk. Give it until this afternoon.

Cornell addressed the two immediate problems from prior games: playing with intensity and taking dumb penalties. They didn't finish what seemed like a dozen great chances, but that may have been less a system failure than just plain bad luck.

When you generate that many chances, odds are you'll get your share of goals. I wasn't concerned with the offensive effort last night. If they can keep that up, they'll be fine. What concerned me were the BILLIONS of atrocious turnovers, most right around their goal. If Harvard could have hit the broad side of a barn, they could have easily had 10 goals. There were so many wide open nets that they missed that it wasn't funny.

CowbellGuy

Trotsky

HockeyMan
Postgame threads not what they used to be. Could we have a fuller recap, please, from someone who was there? Flyersgolf?

I think everybody's drunk. Give it until this afternoon.

Cornell addressed the two immediate problems from prior games: playing with intensity and taking dumb penalties. They didn't finish what seemed like a dozen great chances, but that may have been less a system failure than just plain bad luck.

When you generate that many chances, odds are you'll get your share of goals. I wasn't concerned with the offensive effort last night. If they can keep that up, they'll be fine. What concerned me were the BILLIONS of atrocious turnovers, most right around their goal. If Harvard could have hit the broad side of a barn, they could have easily had 10 goals. There were so many wide open nets that they missed that it wasn't funny.

Harvard did miss a number of golden opportunities, but we missed just as many (think Espo's breakaway). Certainly no comparison to the debacle in AC last March, as we had the better of territorial play last night.

I was curious as to who would sit last night, and was not surprised it was DeSewardt. I have to imagine it was because of his penchant for taking bad penalties, and Schafer was determined that we stay out of the box, which we largely did.

scoop85
I was curious as to who would sit last night, and was not surprised it was DeSewardt. I have to imagine it was because of his penchant for taking bad penalties, and Schafer was determined that we stay out of the box, which we largely did.

Speaking of guys who have had that problem in the past, it's great to see how much McCarron's game has improved in general and how much smarter he is playing in particular. The sophomores seem to have mostly taken a big step forward, whether it be conditioning or just general maturity. Ferlin alone seems not to have, and I get the impression on any given night he's only at about 60% out there. Vinnie Auger syndrome.

CowbellGuy
If Harvard could have hit the broad side of a barn, they could have easily had 10 goals. There were so many wide open nets that they missed that it wasn't funny.

Maybe Andy just has those angles computed perfectly...

BTW, please don't ever even joke about Harvard getting 10 goals at Lynah. I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.

scoop85
The sophomores seem to have mostly taken a big step forward, whether it be conditioning or just general maturity. Ferlin alone seems not to have, and I get the impression on any given night he's only at about 60% out there. Vinnie Auger syndrome.

I agree that Ferlin hasn't looked as dominant this season as he did last year. Last year, every time he touched the puck, it seemed like he could make something happen. This year, that only happens sporadically. I know he was hurt against Princeton last weekend, although he didn't miss any subsequent games. But it's hard to believe that he has only two points this season and is still looking for his first goal.

Cornell lost due to any number of reasons, but lack of effort and intensity was not one of them. You could tell they were playing as hard as they possibly could the entire game. They must be incredibly frustrated right now, more than the seniors on this team can ever remember. Freshman year they won these games. Sophomore year they were legitimately mediocre. Junior year they had to wait for the freshmen to settle in, but once they did, they won these games too. This year, I have a feeling they're having a more difficult time diagnosing their problems. Big game tonight.

Another positive: even with the obvious frustration they didn't melt down, spend their time bitching to the refs, or go into Army of One mode. They kept playing within the system, kept their patience, and didn't take themselves out of the game with penalties. Yeah, it didn't lead to a comeback this time, but those are the conditions that at least allow comebacks.

Trotsky
Another positive: even with the obvious frustration they didn't melt down, spend their time bitching to the refs, or go into Army of One mode. They kept playing within the system, kept their patience, and didn't take themselves out of the game with penalties. Yeah, it didn't lead to a comeback this time, but those are the conditions that at least allow comebacks.

Excellent point. They stayed disciplined and kept plugging away. Results should follow.

scoop85

Trotsky
Another positive: even with the obvious frustration they didn't melt down, spend their time bitching to the refs, or go into Army of One mode. They kept playing within the system, kept their patience, and didn't take themselves out of the game with penalties. Yeah, it didn't lead to a comeback this time, but those are the conditions that at least allow comebacks.

Excellent point. They stayed disciplined and kept plugging away. Results should follow.

That's my reading of it. Luck and Girard had much to do with the loss. The Red were able to impose their style of play on the game and that bodes well. No time for soul searching, gotta press on.

I thought the boys came out and played with intensity and fire. They really dominated the territorial battle and had a lot of shots. The intensity was there throughout the game which was nice to see. That was the good news.

The bad was the D. Too many odd man rushes. And lack of tenacity down low. I agree that if Harvard could shoot better then they could have easily had 2 - 3 more goals. Of course Cornell could have had a couple of more goal too if they could have gotten better shots off on wide open nets. I thought that the D was also turning over the puck too much when pressured. IIRC, D'Agostino coughed up the puck pretty easily and it lead directly to the third Harvard goal.

PP was its typical self. Lots of passing at the top of the zone. Very little creating of any good shots. Always looking for the perfect shot or tip in. It seems like they treat every goalie as if they were the second coming of Sawchuk or Roy. I don't get it.

On Espo's breakaway, I was impressed he had that much left in the tank and got off a decent shot because at that point he had been out of the PK for about 1;40.

Ferlin does seem to be struggling. Late in the third period and right in front of me near the red line and on the Harvard side, he watched a Harvard player skate away with the puck because he was bitching at the ref about another Cornell player being knocked down. I can only assume he thought it was a penalty but damn you got to keep yourself in the play.

CowbellGuy

Trotsky

HockeyMan
Postgame threads not what they used to be. Could we have a fuller recap, please, from someone who was there? Flyersgolf?

I think everybody's drunk. Give it until this afternoon.

Cornell addressed the two immediate problems from prior games: playing with intensity and taking dumb penalties. They didn't finish what seemed like a dozen great chances, but that may have been less a system failure than just plain bad luck.

When you generate that many chances, odds are you'll get your share of goals. I wasn't concerned with the offensive effort last night. If they can keep that up, they'll be fine. What concerned me were the BILLIONS of atrocious turnovers, most right around their goal. If Harvard could have hit the broad side of a barn, they could have easily had 10 goals. There were so many wide open nets that they missed that it wasn't funny.

Hmm. Not sure I like the new system.

upprdeck
really was a story that has been told over and over..

while most of the year cornell has come out flat and been outshot for most of the first two periods and then tried to come back, this time it was much different.

I don't disagree with anything you wrote, but I'm confused as to why you said it was both much different from previous games and also a story that has been told over and over.