ECAC 2015-16

The non-Ivy teams have already played a considerable amount of OOC games and RPI and Harvard swept their travel partners in league games last weekend. Everybody plays this weekend, including the two alleged favorites (Harvard and Yale). We'll see how long that lasts

Yale/RPI currently tied and Harvard/QU still scoreless. Those are probably the most intriguing matchups away from Lynah tonight.

The final two goals in the Qpac Harvard game were scored only one second apart. With Q leading 3-0 and killing a 5 on 3 Harvard pulled the goalie and scored 6 on 3. And then this from the USCHO fan forum.

After Harvard scored, the teams lined up for the center ice faceoff with Harvard's net empty. Travis St. Denis won the draw directly back to Timmy Clifton who seemingly one timed the puck into the net from beyond center ice. Pretty cool.

marty
The final two goals in the Qpac Harvard game were scored only one second apart. With Q leading 3-0 and killing a 5 on 3 Harvard pulled the goalie and scored 6 on 3. And then this from the USCHO fan forum.

After Harvard scored, the teams lined up for the center ice faceoff with Harvard's net empty. Travis St. Denis won the draw directly back to Timmy Clifton who seemingly one timed the puck into the net from beyond center ice. Pretty cool.

Of course that has to take more than 1 second.

Jim Hyla

marty
The final two goals in the Qpac Harvard game were scored only one second apart. With Q leading 3-0 and killing a 5 on 3 Harvard pulled the goalie and scored 6 on 3. And then this from the USCHO fan forum.

After Harvard scored, the teams lined up for the center ice faceoff with Harvard's net empty. Travis St. Denis won the draw directly back to Timmy Clifton who seemingly one timed the puck into the net from beyond center ice. Pretty cool.

Of course that has to take more than 1 second.

You can make your own guesses for the puck speed, but with what seem to me reasonable assumptins, 1 second doesn't seem far off. The puck hits the ice on the faceoff and the clock starts. A clean draw to Clifton, a forward, travels about 20 feet sideways at, maybe, 50 mph. That's 273 ms. Clifton one-times it at the net, 92 feet away (sqrt(90² + 20²)) at maybe 80 mph. That's another 786 ms. Total 1058 ms. I'd expect any reaction time by the timekeeper on starting the clock on the faceoff and stopping it on the goal would approximately cancel. Plug in your own puck speed assumptions, but I don't think you'll get over 1.9 seconds.

David Harding

Jim Hyla

marty
The final two goals in the Qpac Harvard game were scored only one second apart. With Q leading 3-0 and killing a 5 on 3 Harvard pulled the goalie and scored 6 on 3. And then this from the USCHO fan forum.

After Harvard scored, the teams lined up for the center ice faceoff with Harvard's net empty. Travis St. Denis won the draw directly back to Timmy Clifton who seemingly one timed the puck into the net from beyond center ice. Pretty cool.

Of course that has to take more than 1 second.

You can make your own guesses for the puck speed, but with what seem to me reasonable assumptins, 1 second doesn't seem far off. The puck hits the ice on the faceoff and the clock starts. A clean draw to Clifton, a forward, travels about 20 feet sideways at, maybe, 50 mph. That's 273 ms. Clifton one-times it at the net, 92 feet away (sqrt(90² + 20²)) at maybe 80 mph. That's another 786 ms. Total 1058 ms. I'd expect any reaction time by the timekeeper on starting the clock on the faceoff and stopping it on the goal would approximately cancel. Plug in your own puck speed assumptions, but I don't think you'll get over 1.9 seconds.

Oh, I love following an Ivy League team!!!

Brown with an obvious goal disallowed in overtime. From 2:19:08 onward


[www.youtube.com]

Iceberg
Brown with an obvious goal disallowed in overtime. From 2:19:08 onward


[www.youtube.com]

So Marty, or anyone else, did they ever explain that?

what the heck? did he blow a whistle for no reason? he waived off the goal but he didnt seem to blow the play dead? and it was a clear goal?

Jim Hyla

Iceberg
Brown with an obvious goal disallowed in overtime. From 2:19:08 onward


[www.youtube.com]

So Marty, or anyone else, did they ever explain that?

Answering my own question. From the RPI thread on USCHO Forum:

Without a Peer @without_a_peer

Hearing that the goal was disallowed because that was the call on the ice and the replay malfunctioned. Hooooboy.

this is another game ending replay mistake. the ECAC should change the result unless that can offer some explanation as to why its a no goal.

and now we see the replay system broke.. what i dont get is why it was called a no goal in the first place.. the original waive off seemed tobe for the shot the defense saved not for the goal itself. they should have gone to replay which i though they were allowed to do by the new rules.

Jim Hyla

Iceberg
Brown with an obvious goal disallowed in overtime. From 2:19:08 onward


[www.youtube.com]

So Marty, or anyone else, did they ever explain that?

From [www.timesunion.com]

Brown appeared to get a puck into the RPI net on a power play with 41.9 seconds left in overtime, but officials called it no-goal and went to the in-house replay system to review the play.

The press box replay system failed and was unable to produce an overhead view of the puck and its position relative to the goal line. Schroeder claims he knocked it out while helping goalie Cam Hackett. The officials were forced to stick with their original call despite furious protests from Brown coach Brendan Whittet.

So the RPI-tv crew (and audience) watched it about 8 times, but they couldn't get the outstanding overhead camera view to the refs? Terrible. The league needs to remedy this.


This was also good from the RPI player who ended up in the net:

"I crashed (the net) and got it out of there; that's all I can really say," Schroeder said. "I don't know what happened from there. I was face down. I got it out from the goal line when Cam made the first save. It was trickling in and I got it out."

Video clearly shows him swiping the puck lying underneath him out of the goal as he was getting up.

Appert claims the refs blew it dead. Somehow. As the puck careened off his goalie's skate into the net.

"Zach made a good defensive play," said RPI coach Seth Appert, who firmly believed an official's whistle preceded any possibility of the puck crossing the line. "Apparently, it didn't go in. All four officials didn't see it go in. They were all in good postion. I thought they handled it well considering the circumstances."

A couple more observations from the video:

Are Kitchen and Drain permanently paired together as linesmen? That would be awesome.

RPI students have picked up our Remote Control goalie, only they seem to just enjoy the tuuuuuuurn a great deal. Besides, Cornell students only seem to care about chanting "bend over" now.

As Brown called the time-out, a very loud "Brown is shit! Shit is Brown!" chant happened.

was there any whistle at all? and how do all te refs ignore the fact the puck is in the back of the net? its not like it was in and out too fast to see.

upprdeck
was there any whistle at all? and how do all te refs ignore the fact the puck is in the back of the net? its not like it was in and out too fast to see.

The whistle happens more than three seconds after the puck enters the net. You can watch the clock wind down on the video.

I think it was ruled "no goal" initially because it was judged that the net was dislodged before the puck went in. The replay clearly shows that not to be the case, but if they couldn't see the replay, the initial call on the ice has to stand.

Hmmmm...funny time for the replay system to "fail" when the home team benefits. At a tech school.

This is clearly one of those times when the honest thing to do would be for RPI to decline the win. Judging by Appert's statements, that'll be a cold day in hell.

NM

Jim Hyla
This is clearly one of those times when the honest thing to do would be for RPI to decline the win. Judging by Appert's statements, that'll be a cold day in hell.

We should all send Appert the Fifth Down article in the current Cornell Alumni magazine.

RichH
Hmmmm...funny time for the replay system to "fail" when the home team benefits. At a tech school.

Many stories--perhaps apocryphal, perhaps not--of strange failures at Houston when Ned's RPI teams needed a breather.

i thought the no goal was because he was ruling the first Save by the D kept it out and had little to do with the net. just a bad call and as it was on TV why didnt they use the TV replay too?

Jim Hyla
This is clearly one of those times when the honest thing to do would be for RPI to decline the win. Judging by Appert's statements, that'll be a cold day in hell.

"win"?

Considering how mysterious the penalty was that put Brown on the power play leading to the goal, I think that justice was served.

I also add that RPI-TV is not part of the league video requirements. If they look at that they would then have to start looking at numerous cell phone videos for each goal under review. It has to be uniform in the league if not the NCAA.

i thought the rule said if tv replay was available they could use it not that it had to be used.

ursusminor

Jim Hyla
This is clearly one of those times when the honest thing to do would be for RPI to decline the win. Judging by Appert's statements, that'll be a cold day in hell.

"win"?

Considering how mysterious the penalty was that put Brown on the power play leading to the goal, I think that justice was served.

I also add that RPI-TV is not part of the league video requirements. If they look at that they would then have to start looking at numerous cell phone videos for each goal under review. It has to be uniform in the league if not the NCAA.

Not much mystery here, but as they say the your eyesight may vary:

marty

ursusminor

Jim Hyla
This is clearly one of those times when the honest thing to do would be for RPI to decline the win. Judging by Appert's statements, that'll be a cold day in hell.

"win"?

Considering how mysterious the penalty was that put Brown on the power play leading to the goal, I think that justice was served.

I also add that RPI-TV is not part of the league video requirements. If they look at that they would then have to start looking at numerous cell phone videos for each goal under review. It has to be uniform in the league if not the NCAA.

Not much mystery here, but as they say the your eyesight may vary:

2015-11-15%203_zps0q93iiza.jpg

Bourbonnais played a bit of music on the boards with his head. Of course the retired pee wee refs in section 7 saw this differently too. They always have better view than the zebras on the ice.


Since RPI TV had the overhead view that the refs were entitled to see it isn't really fair to compare this to a hypthetical cell phone camera.

I'm amazed at the Brown team that won two in OT this weekend. Parity is an interesting dance partner.

upprdeck
i thought the rule said if tv replay was available they could use it not that it had to be used.

The NCAA rule book goes into detail on how a review using replay is to be conducted, under what cicumstatnces, how the off-ice video replay official interacts with the referee, and so forth. The current rule book is completely silent on what constitutes a minimal or ideal video camera configuration, who provides it, how it is operated, or anything else about acquiring images. I can't fnd anything that looks like league rules on the ECACHL web site except for the tournament seeding rules.

Very true. Especially about Section 7. But I think Ralph's point was that RPI can't decline the "win" because the game ended in a tie. But maybe now the endemic RPI attitude that the refs are always screwing them will go away.

Naaaaahhhhhhhh. They'll say they were owed that one.

TimV
Very true. Especially about Section 7. But I think Ralph's point was that RPI can't decline the "win" because the game ended in a tie. But maybe now the endemic RPI attitude that the refs are always screwing them will go away.

Naaaaahhhhhhhh. They'll say they were owed that one.

Yes, that was my point.

The refs almost always screw us. They did count George Servinis's goal in the 1985 NCAA final despite the fact that he was offside.

ursusminor
The refs almost always screw us. They did count George Servinis's goal in the 1985 NCAA final despite the fact that he was offside.

I'd say you still come out ahead.

Trotsky

ursusminor
The refs almost always screw us. They did count George Servinis's goal in the 1985 NCAA final despite the fact that he was offside.

I'd say you still come out ahead.

At this point, I'd trade that for years of constant bad calls.

Really, I'd kind of pay a little bit of money to hear the Brown Radio Guys' (heretofore: BRG) call on this. After all, the only reason they haven't won 6 straight NCAA championships at this point is because of an all-encompasing conspiracy by the stone-cutters' guild of hockey referees to make sure every call goes against Brown. Proven by the fact that an inferior crosstown school was handed the championship in April just to rub it in.

David Harding

upprdeck
i thought the rule said if tv replay was available they could use it not that it had to be used.

The NCAA rule book goes into detail on how a review using replay is to be conducted, under what cicumstatnces, how the off-ice video replay official interacts with the referee, and so forth. The current rule book is completely silent on what constitutes a minimal or ideal video camera configuration, who provides it, how it is operated, or anything else about acquiring images. I can't fnd anything that looks like league rules on the ECACHL web site except for the tournament seeding rules.

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved several changes to the criteria for allowing video replay in men’s and women’s ice hockey, effective for the 2014-15 season.

It was clarified that the video used for replays may come from any source that is available to the game officials. Previously, the video used was required to come from a television broadcast.

Fascinating that RPI TV if not the officials had the replay and it appears - more than appears - the shot by Brown went in. This could have been a chance for RPI to have its own Fifth Down Game moment of honor.

the ECAC should be asking why the refs never tried to see the TV replay when its an RPI game and everyone knows TV replay is available.,

upprdeck
the ECAC should be asking why the refs never tried to see the TV replay when its an RPI game and everyone knows TV replay is available.,

I'm not going to put that on the refs unless they ignored a protocol that already exists. The rules should specifically spell out the order of precedence for replays, and where they're allowed to stop (i.e., let's say the rink replay exists but so does a better TV replay -- are they permitted to view the TV replay or does the rink replay availability mean full stop?). The refs should only be charged with execution, not policy.

It's clear that Brown scored and that the refs blew the call, but bad calls abound. This was not a procedural issue like the 5th down. That would be something like the clock not running for a couple extra minutes in overtime and not being corrected. In that case, were I the beneficiary, I would petition to have the result changed. But this is just a really awful judgment call mistake. It happens -- ask Armando Galarraga.

Trotsky

upprdeck
the ECAC should be asking why the refs never tried to see the TV replay when its an RPI game and everyone knows TV replay is available.,

I'm not going to put that on the refs unless they ignored a protocol that already exists. The rules should specifically spell out the order of precedence for replays, and where they're allowed to stop (i.e., let's say the rink replay exists but so does a better TV replay -- are they permitted to view the TV replay or does the rink replay availability mean full stop?). The refs should only be charged with execution, not policy.

It's clear that Brown scored and that the refs blew the call, but bad calls abound. This was not a procedural issue like the 5th down. That would be something like the clock not running for a couple extra minutes in overtime and not being corrected. In that case, were I the beneficiary, I would petition to have the result changed. But this is just a really awful judgment call mistake. It happens -- ask Armando Galarraga.

It was procedural in the the replay didn't work. Once it was seen, there was a goal. So RPI should concede. I don't see the difference from a fifth down. We're not talking about the blown call, but the replay not working.

the procedure says use any replay available. first question every game should be, what replays does this rink have and how do we access it. every place in the ECAC has to provide a replay assistant to the ref's. they all have it in a room for the ref's for the most part, but rpi knows the system they have and they know RPI has tv replay available so they should make it clear to the refs before the game starts. every place has issues , but if you have more than one system available you should plan on being able to access both if needed.

Jim Hyla
It was procedural in the the replay didn't work. Once it was seen, there was a goal. So RPI should concede. I don't see the difference from a fifth down. We're not talking about the blown call, but the replay not working.

I don't agree, as it is still a judgment call. However I would say RPI would get 100x more out of conceding the game than it ever will get from the win. With the sports networks and hot takes going 24/7 they would become the symbol of Genuinely Nice Planet for a generation of sports fans.

Even better is if they offered the concession and Brown declined.

Neither OT goals at RPI made the cut here but it appears that Colgate has entered the ancient nine if you listen to the announcer. Number four for the week for a freshman is nice but so is the number one goal which seems to have had at least three assists.

Here is the week's top 5

The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

drs48
The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

Wow!!!

drs48
The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

one of the best scoring plays I've seen at any level of hockey

scoop85

drs48
The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

one of the best scoring plays I've seen at any level of hockey

If I were watching that live I might start crying like Catholics do when they meet the Pope.

ugarte

scoop85

drs48
The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

one of the best scoring plays I've seen at any level of hockey

If I were watching that live I might start crying like Catholics do when they meet the Pope.

Yeah, the first four goals were relatively ho-hum (nice finish by Angello, put his shot exactly where he wanted it, but not like it was anything that spectacular) and then holy crap.

Dafatone

ugarte

scoop85

drs48
The NoDak goal is a thing of beauty....

one of the best scoring plays I've seen at any level of hockey

If I were watching that live I might start crying like Catholics do when they meet the Pope.

Yeah, the first four goals were relatively ho-hum (nice finish by Angello, put his shot exactly where he wanted it, but not like it was anything that spectacular) and then holy crap.

Jaw dropping. Easiest #1 choice in recent memory.

Of course if any of those passes happened to be broken up or mishandled, there's the chorus of "why didn't he just SHOOOT?" and complaints that they were trying to be too fancy.

Here it is isolated.

Total homer move, but I love the announcer hypothesizing that the officials were reviewing the play because they wanted to see it a bunch of times just like everybody else.

Funny, nobody mentions they caught Miami in a line change or that the situation was essentially 4-on-2. It's testimony to North Dakota's skill that they made all those passes, but they weren't under much pressure or moving down the ice at a particularly high speed. Instead, the passes just isolated one of the defenders along the boards and made the other, remaining defender have to decide between 3 other players.

I wish I could see a video of it to compare, and perhaps my mind is seeing it through red-tinted glasses, but the greatest goal I've ever seen in college hockey was in the 1966 ECAC Holiday Festival Tournament. Cornell was playing defending national champion Michigan State. With the game in overtime, Doug Ferguson forechecked in the neighborhood of Michigan State's blue line, took the puck puck away, raced down ice on a break, and at full speed dropped a pass to a trailing Mike Doran, totally faking out the goalie as Doran shot the puck into the upper right of the net.

Oh, if we only had video cameras back then. Instead, sports journalists had to sketch the action, and we had to take turns viewing the pictures with a camera obscura. And we liked it!

Swampy
Oh, if we only had video cameras back then. Instead, sports journalists had to sketch the action, and we had to take turns viewing the pictures with a camera obscura. And we liked it!

The goal judge hung lanterns.

Trotsky

Swampy
Oh, if we only had video cameras back then. Instead, sports journalists had to sketch the action, and we had to take turns viewing the pictures with a camera obscura. And we liked it!

The goal judge hung lanterns.

And old guys on skates pushed tanks of water around the ice to resurface it.

Oh, wait...that's true.

WaP editorial on Brown's goal:

An editorial on L'affaire Brun from Saturday night: [t.co]

— Without a Peer (@without_a_peer) November 19, 2015

ursusminor
WaP editorial on Brown's goal:

An editorial on L'affaire Brun from Saturday night: [t.co]

— Without a Peer (@without_a_peer) November 19, 2015

Could've said exactly the same thing in many fewer words:

"Oh well, someone else got screwed and we benefited; whaddaya gonna do?"

Al DeFlorio

Trotsky

Swampy
Oh, if we only had video cameras back then. Instead, sports journalists had to sketch the action, and we had to take turns viewing the pictures with a camera obscura. And we liked it!

The goal judge hung lanterns.

And old guys on skates pushed tanks of water around the ice to resurface it.

Uphill, both ways.

ursusminor
WaP editorial on Brown's goal:

An editorial on L'affaire Brun from Saturday night: [t.co]

— Without a Peer (@without_a_peer) November 19, 2015

The tweet (which I can't cut and paste here at work) makes comment about RPI TV's HD camera over the net. So is "without peer" claiming two cameras over the net or did RPI TV donate a better than average cam for the cause? Houston has to have the overhead shot available for the refs and either I'm confused by this or "wap" is perhaps just a little sloppy with their comment.

When reading the newspaper explanation I just assumed the feed from the overhead cam wasn't available on ice even though it was available on the RPI equipment.

I may need to bring my opera glasses to the game on the 24th to search for the second camera.

marty,

I don't know, but it sounds like there are two systems.

Pretty sure I saw both up there when I was helping film this weekend's games, but RPITV has used two different above-goal cameras. The original, league-mandated camera (SD only) and the RPITV camera (1080p). Included clips of what each looks like below.

RPI vs Yale from Feb 2013, showing the SD camera for replay. Relevant footage at timestamp 12:09 of the 1st period video

RPI vs BC from October, showing the HD camera. Already queued up to relevant time.

I believe the official replay system still uses the original SD camera

Thanks.

the question is why any replay system is using such outdated equipment when good stuff is not really that costly these days? cornell is pretty much in the same boat. the teams should find a sponser and every time they go to the replay system throw the name out.. a few hunder dollars and problem solved.

Sheesh. RPI-TV has in-net goalie cams and high-def overhead cams.

I do envy that, and admire them for it. But to be fair, it's their only Division 1 sport, and the athletic department offers 21 intercollegiate sports to our 35 or so.

RPI TV is a well established club that builds year by year with great alumni support. They're legitimate geeks in the good sense and as you can tell I'm impressed.

so is there a reason that cornell cant do the same, or is it because we are an ivy we have to use the lower quality digital network?

It seems that SLU/QU decided to follow in the footsteps of Cornell and Yale yesterday. Not one team in the league had a 4-point weekend.

Some observations about the current ECAC standings that may be of some interest...

--the top four teams are separated by one point.
--two teams are one and two points back, so the top six teams are separated by three points.
--the bottom six teams are separated by only two points
--there is one team from each travelling pair in the top half and one team from each travelling pair in the bottom half.
--the travelling pairs' point totals all equal 12, except for Harvard/Dartmouth, leading with 13, and St. Lawrence/Clarkson, trailing with 9.

andyw2100
--the travelling pairs' point totals all equal 12, except for Harvard/Dartmouth, leading with 13, and St. Lawrence/Clarkson, trailing with 9.

That's a great stat idea, and it will show up at some point in TBRW as a historical analysis.

Typically, there are good pairs and bad pairs. This is atypical for being a season in which the quality is spread evenly across all pairs.

First draft.
ECAC Traveling Partners, total points. (Highlighting is top pair per season.)

TimV
I do envy that, and admire them for it. But to be fair, it's their only Division 1 sport, and the athletic department offers 21 intercollegiate sports to our 35 or so.

I suspect that you know it, but women's ice hockey is also D-I at RPI.

Trotsky
First draft.
ECAC Traveling Partners, total points. (Highlighting is top pair per season.)

Interesting stuff. I suggest adding a footnote that Army played everyone else only once per year. It also might be interesting to calculate the average for each of the three eras. E.g., how do the sets of travel partners rank on average since QU has been in the league.

Or, why we probably need Princeton to get better before Quinnipiac leaves for Hockey East.

(To answer: Notre Dame will jump West; QU will take their spot in a 12-team HE. Since the ECAC will probably take in RIT, our travel partnership with Colgate will get split up and we'll be put with Princeton for "Ivy something or other." )

andyw2100
Some observations about the current ECAC standings that may be of some interest...

--the top four teams are separated by one point.
--two teams are one and two points back, so the top six teams are separated by three points.
--the bottom six teams are separated by only two points
--there is one team from each travelling pair in the top half and one team from each travelling pair in the bottom half.
--the travelling pairs' point totals all equal 12, except for Harvard/Dartmouth, leading with 13, and St. Lawrence/Clarkson, trailing with 9.

Also: Top six teams are all at .667 or above; bottom six at .333 or below. Haves and have nots.

ursusminor

Trotsky
First draft.
ECAC Traveling Partners, total points. (Highlighting is top pair per season.)

Interesting stuff. I suggest adding a footnote that Army played everyone else only once per year.

Um, what?

Beeeej

ursusminor

Trotsky
First draft.
ECAC Traveling Partners, total points. (Highlighting is top pair per season.)

Interesting stuff. I suggest adding a footnote that Army played everyone else only once per year.

Um, what?

In '85 and '86 Army had an 11-game conference schedule.

Trotsky
That's a great stat idea, and it will show up at some point in TBRW as a historical analysis.

Typically, there are good pairs and bad pairs. This is atypical for being a season in which the quality is spread evenly across all pairs.

Glad you like it! (I didn't realize it was a novel idea. )

Sorry Ralph. I meant Hockey in general. I counted both men's and women's sports separately in the overall counts of the sports offered.

TimV
Sorry Ralph. I meant Hockey in general. I counted both men's and women's sports separately in the overall counts of the sports offered.

No problem

Syphilis sighting.

Trotsky
Syphilis sighting.

Strange error concerning which teams have played only five games. Should be Clarkson and St Lawrence. And on a sad note for him, freshman Tironese of RPI mentioned here is out with
season ending shoulder surgery.

marty

Trotsky
Syphilis sighting.

Strange error concerning which teams have played only five games. Should be Clarkson and St Lawrence. And on a sad note for him, freshman Tironese of RPI mentioned here is out with
season ending shoulder surgery.

He also had a shoulder injury which ended his season a year ago with Alberni Valley (BCHL).

"Saturday’s 0-0 tie between St. Lawrence and Quinnipiac was the first scoreless game in the history of the Saints’ program — a span of 2,083 games dating to the 1925-26 season.

This is an incredible statistic.

BearLover

"Saturday’s 0-0 tie between St. Lawrence and Quinnipiac was the first scoreless game in the history of the Saints’ program — a span of 2,083 games dating to the 1925-26 season.

This is an incredible statistic.

Absolutely!

Cornell's history of 0-0 games:

01/20/23 vs. Clarkson ... Coach Nick Bawlf
03/04/89 at Clarkson (D'Alessio in goal) ... Coach Brian McCutcheon
11/30/07 vs. UMass (Scrivens) ... Coach Schafer
11/08/08 at Quinnipiac (Scrivens)
01/31/09 at Clarkson (Scrivens)
12/03/11 vs. Clarkson (Iles)
12/28/14 vs. Lake Superior State (Gillam)
11/20/15 at Yale (Gillam)

Out of 8 games... 6 in the Schafer era! 3 in the last 4 seasons! 4 against Clarkson! A 66-year gap between the first and second!

imafrshmn

BearLover

"Saturday’s 0-0 tie between St. Lawrence and Quinnipiac was the first scoreless game in the history of the Saints’ program — a span of 2,083 games dating to the 1925-26 season.

This is an incredible statistic.

Absolutely!

Cornell's history of 0-0 games:

01/20/23 vs. Clarkson ... Coach Nick Bawlf
03/04/89 at Clarkson (D'Alessio in goal) ... Coach Brian McCutcheon
11/30/07 vs. UMass (Scrivens) ... Coach Schafer
11/08/08 at Quinnipiac (Scrivens)
01/31/09 at Clarkson (Scrivens)
12/03/11 vs. Clarkson (Iles)
12/28/14 vs. Lake Superior State (Gillam)
11/20/15 at Yale (Gillam)

Out of 8 games... 6 in the Schafer era! 3 in the last 4 seasons! 4 against Clarkson! A 66-year gap between the first and second!

The 1989 game was particularly interesting. I've discussed it before, but for those that haven't heard about it, it had a very unusual ending. It was an ECAC 1/4final game at the old Walker Arena in Potsdam. At that time the 1/4final playoffs were the first team to get to 3 points. So 2 wins, or a win and a tie, does it. If the games were split, then a 10 min. mini game was played right after the second game.

We won the first game and in the third period, with the game tied 0-0, Clarkson pulled their goalie to try and win, thus setting up the mini game.

Here's the box score, courtesy of TBRW:

March 4, 1989
ECAC Quarterfinal Potsdam, New York
Clarkson (20-13-3) 0 0 0 - 0
Cornell (16-11-1)  0 0 0 - 0

Walker Arena
Saves
Clk T Jason Poirier    59:00 39 x 39
Cor T Corrie D'Alessio 60:00 29 x 29

As you can see, he was pulled at the traditional 1 min. mark. Watching it was one of the more bizarre experiences I've had at a hockey game. I'm glad they ditched that idea for playoffs.

I had an equally bizarre experience relating to that game. I couldn't go to the game & cannot receive the radio broadcast at my home. So, I took my wife to a movie in Ithaca and listened to the game on my Walkman. As the game wore on and it became obvious that a single goal could be sending us to the next round, I began to realize that I needed to work on my self-control. Standing up & yelling in a movie theater can excite some types..... The 0-0 tie worked well for me!!

The minigame produced some interesting strategy. In 1987 RPI defeated Colgate in the first game. They were losing the second game. RPI coach Mike Addesa pulled his goalie on every power play in order to pepper Colgate's goalie and tire him out. The strategy worked in that although RPI lost game 2 they won the minigame.

A lot of league teams are going up against well ranked OOC opponents this weekend. Yale/Providence especially should be good

Brown shuts out Colgate 5-0 in the "Friendship Tournament in Belfast Ireland. Announcers said the game was for ECAC points - don't know if that's right. Brown now gets winner of Mass-Lowell v Northeastern for another OOC game. That Lowell-NEastern game starts shortly on NESN.

TimV
Brown shuts out Colgate 5-0 in the "Friendship Tournament in Belfast Ireland. Announcers said the game was for ECAC points - don't know if that's right. Brown now gets winner of Mass-Lowell v Northeastern for another OOC game. That Lowell-NEastern game starts shortly on NESN.

That is correct. I read in a tournament preview that Colgate gave up their home game vs Brown so this would count as a league game. Most likely because of the Ivy games limit.

Brown will play at Lynah on Feb. 12 but that'll be their only game for the weekend. That's still a long way from now though


Update: With UML coming back to win their game, tomorrow's matchup would be a golden opportunity for Brown to actually do something noteworthy.

In Belfast, Colgate has the troubles, giving up 5 goals on 9 shots in the second period in the consolation game against Northeastern.

Today could be the ECAC Waterloo, or it could be a day where the conference holds its own. Non-conference schedule:


* Colgate about to lose very badly to Northeastern
* Clarkson should win hosting Arizona State (though they needed a comeback to win by 1 goal last night)
* Cornell anybody's guess vs BU
* Union should lose at Merrimack
* Princeton should lose at Maine
* Yale should lose at Providence though maybe we'll see them emerge
* Quinnipiac should win hosting UMass
* Dartmouth should lose at Michigan
* Brown anybody's guess vs Lowell in the Belfast final

Last night the conference was 4-2 in NC. Tonight they could easily go 3-6 or even 2-7, with all the concomitant PWR consequences.

Brown leading Lowell 5-4 late third.
Union 2-0 over Merrimack after 1st.
Colgate flattened 7-1 by Northeastern.

Bummer: Lowell ties it with a minute left.

Q up 1-0 mid-second.
U now up 3-0 mid-second.
Brown ties Lowell in OT. Shootout now?

Al DeFlorio
Brown leading Lowell 5-4 late third.
Union 2-0 over Merrimack after 1st.
Colgate flattened 7-1 by Northeastern.

Bummer: Lowell ties it with a minute left.

Union now up 3 on the road.

Brown/UML in as a tie.

Chris '03

Al DeFlorio
Brown leading Lowell 5-4 late third.
Union 2-0 over Merrimack after 1st.
Colgate flattened 7-1 by Northeastern.

Bummer: Lowell ties it with a minute left.

Union now up 3 on the road.

Brown/UML in as a tie.

Three goals for Brown's top line, and they are good.

TimV
Brown shuts out Colgate 5-0 in the "Friendship Tournament in Belfast Ireland. Announcers said the game was for ECAC points - don't know if that's right. Brown now gets winner of Mass-Lowell v Northeastern for another OOC game. That Lowell-NEastern game starts shortly on NESN.[/quot

While I have always respected the hockey knowledge I have seen displayed on this site I must confess, as a native of the IRELAND, a sense of disappointment re knowledge of European political geography
herein displayed. To wit: Belfast - while it is on the island of Ireland- is correctly (sadly) noted as Belfast, U.K. not part of the 26 County Republic of Ireland. Ever the pedant!

Yale down two early in Providence.

And Yale scores twice in twenty seconds and leads 3-2.

Yale loses 4-3 after Providence gets 2 goals in the 3rd.

Dartmouth and Michigan are currently tied 1-1 late in the 3rd at Yost.

Edit: Those two now in overtime but Dartmouth with a PP after some rather nasty stuff near the end.

Al DeFlorio
Brown ties Lowell in OT. Shootout now?

There was a shootout and Lowell won, but it is a tie for NCAA purposes.

ursusminor

Al DeFlorio
Brown ties Lowell in OT. Shootout now?

There was a shootout and Lowell won, but it is a tie for NCAA purposes.

As is our game with BU.

I realize the pairwise doesn't mean a heck of a lot this early in the season, but I thought it was interesting that the ECAC has seven teams in the top 16, including the teams at 1 and 2. I don't imagine something like this happens very often.

1 Quinnipiac 59 13-0-2 .9333 1 .6642* 1
2 Harvard 58 6-1-1 .8125 5 .6386* 2
3 Providence 57 9-0-3 .8750 3 .6289* 3
4 St. Cloud State 56 10-3-0 .7692 9 .6242* 4
5 Nebraska-Omaha 55 11-2-1 .8214 4 .6203* 5
6 Boston College 54 12-1-0 .9231 2 .6137* 6
7 North Dakota 53 11-2-2 .8000 6t .5994* 7
8 Massachusetts-Lowell 52 10-1-4 .8000 6t .5914* 8
9 Cornell 51 6-1-2 .7778 8 .5846* 9
10 Yale 50 5-2-2 .6667 15t .5828* 10
11 St. Lawrence 49 8-3-2 .6923 13 .5826* 11
12t Denver 47 7-3-2 .6667 15t .5741 12
12t Michigan 47 7-2-2 .7273 10 .5728 13
14 Rensselaer 46 8-5-2 .6000 21 .5577 14
15 Merrimack 45 6-2-4 .6667 15t .5444 15
16 Clarkson 44 7-4-2 .6154 19 .5405 16

It does, but historically it was the WCHA that it happened to.

Too bad Brown didn't hold on yesterday. May be one of those little results that has a big impact in March. Between Brown, Cornell, and Yale all leading HEA teams woulda been nice to get at least one W. Throw Dartmouth surrendering the lead in there too...

Despite this, five of the top ten teams in the KRACH are ECAC. We're #7 in KRACH and tied with Sucks for #3 in the ECAC.

Thinking ahead to how young we were going to be this year, many of us -- myself included -- did not expect too much. It's still early, but gray skies seem to be clearing up.