RPI @ Cornell 2/24/17

I haven't been to Lynah in a few years, but I will be in the area and can go to the RPI game. I don't see anything in the ticket exchange. Have there been tickets available at the window lately?

Thanks, Chris

There have been tickets available for many games - call and ask.

Also I have seen folks outside selling extra tickets several times - usually at or below cost... come 40 minutes early and hang out outside ticket office area and ask folks.

Good luck!

You can also buy online. Plenty of tickets available for this weekend.

there hasnt been a rush on tickets since the box seats were created.. the occasional game, but otherwise 1-200 almost every week usually more are free

Thank you for all of the helpful comments.

With Union and Harvard both winning, we can finish no higher than 3rd.

Cornell's win locks us into 3rd, but of course the PWR ramifications are important tomorrow, not to mention a chance to end the season red hot.

Still at 9 in PWR, BTW.

i dont think the pwr has even reflected tonights game yet. it still has us a 17-6-4

upprdeck
i dont think the pwr has even reflected tonights game yet. it still has us a 17-6-4

USCHO is always behind. CHN updates it with every result, we're 18-6-4, and we've fallen to #10 based on other results:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Trotsky
Still at 9 in PWR, BTW.

Now 10th (11th in RPI)

Chris '03

Trotsky
Still at 9 in PWR, BTW.

Now 10th (11th in RPI)

This year beating RPI did little to raise our RPI. :

big PWR game tomorrow.. a loss and we might drop out again. A win and we could sweep the second round and probably lock in a bid.

If we win all games we should win and lose all games we are underogs...would we still be in?

upprdeck
big PWR game tomorrow.. a loss and we might drop out again. A win and we could sweep the second round and probably lock in a bid.

Absent any other results at all, a loss to Union tomorrow drops us to #14 and hanging on by a thread. But of course there will be a few dozen other results.

Beeeej

upprdeck
big PWR game tomorrow.. a loss and we might drop out again. A win and we could sweep the second round and probably lock in a bid.

Absent any other results at all, a loss to Union tomorrow drops us to #14 and hanging on by a thread. But of course there will be a few dozen other results.

Right. Keep in mind that a Cornell loss tomorrow + a Penn State loss would put Cornell at 9th (without accounting for any other results). There's just so much that can happen.

LGR14

Beeeej

upprdeck
big PWR game tomorrow.. a loss and we might drop out again. A win and we could sweep the second round and probably lock in a bid.

Absent any other results at all, a loss to Union tomorrow drops us to #14 and hanging on by a thread. But of course there will be a few dozen other results.

Right. Keep in mind that a Cornell loss tomorrow + a Penn State loss would put Cornell at 9th (without accounting for any other results). There's just so much that can happen.

That's not what I get at all. Cornell loss to Union and Penn State loss to Michigan State still puts us at 14th. Are you customizing via CHN?

As someone pointed out at some point, our great win% kinda works against us, in that a loss hurts our win% more than a win helps it, due to the math and how fractions work and whatnot.

This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC. 10th in the pairwise with a lower win% (.600 or so) gives us more room to grow and more ability to weather a loss than 10th in the pairwise with a really high win% (.700+).

Beeeej

LGR14

Beeeej

upprdeck
big PWR game tomorrow.. a loss and we might drop out again. A win and we could sweep the second round and probably lock in a bid.

Absent any other results at all, a loss to Union tomorrow drops us to #14 and hanging on by a thread. But of course there will be a few dozen other results.

Right. Keep in mind that a Cornell loss tomorrow + a Penn State loss would put Cornell at 9th (without accounting for any other results). There's just so much that can happen.

That's not what I get at all. Cornell loss to Union and Penn State loss to Michigan State still puts us at 14th. Are you customizing via CHN?

I am, but you're right. For some reason it's not saving my Cornell result when I go to input PSU's.

Dafatone
As someone pointed out at some point, our great win% kinda works against us, in that a loss hurts our win% more than a win helps it, due to the math and how fractions work and whatnot.

This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC. 10th in the pairwise with a lower win% (.600 or so) gives us more room to grow and more ability to weather a loss than 10th in the pairwise with a really high win% (.700+).

This is completely absurd. All that matters is the tally at the end of the season. Your inability to handle the ups and downs should not be a factor

Dafatone
This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC.

Top 5 winning percentages in D1:

1. .786 Harvard
2. .758 Denver
3. .734 Minn-Duluth
4. .727 Union
5. .714 Cornell

Did anyone see why Buckles was so torqued off after receiving his 3rd period holding penalty?

He took it out on the penalty box.

The fact that ECAC teams are 1st 4th and 5th in winning percentage is a double edged sword. While on the surface it sure looks to be a positive, from a negative, the reason
for the high % rankings causes the league as a whole to be weakened which affects Pairwise. This certainly is apparent in the current rankings. The bottom teams are very weak and bring down the top teams. There really are only four teams where wins help you. A likely Quarterfinal match up with Clarkson who hopefully we defeat gives us two more wins against a team under .500 not particularly helpful. Paralysis by analysis is setting in but that defeats the point of this forum. The only thing for certain is to just keep winning and things will take care of themselves.

marty
Did anyone see why Buckles was so torqued off after receiving his 3rd period holding penalty?

He took it out on the penalty box.

I'm guessing it was because he thought it was a ridiculous call. He was carrying the puck and was trying to fight off a defender.

On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

True Andy, and defender had stick up high on Buckles when he grabbed at it and pushed it aside; + Schafer was a bit upset on that call also. But Buckles then going out and taking a fairly weak neutral zone penalty a short time later was poor decision or impulse control on his part.

We took 3-4 really poor decision penalties in this game - I am glad our penalty kill played very well for most of the game.

Why is it that most other internet video offering from other schools show replays? We pay for this sub par product so it's the least they could do. Never mind the fact that most non Ivy School offer the games for free but that takes me back to posts month ago. Not sure the fee is solely a Cornell issue. It apparently is an Ivy League driven decision to
require the schools be a part of the ILDN. I did see where last weekend viewing the Clarkson or St Lawrence feed it was free of charge based on a generous donation
from a benefactor to the hockey program. Wonder if such a person stepped forward at CU, whether or not it would be allowed. One thing for certain is that he or she would be a hero in many people's eyes.

wakester2468
Why is it that most other internet video offering from other schools show replays? We pay for this sub par product so it's the least they could do. Never mind the fact that most non Ivy School offer the games for free but that takes me back to posts month ago. Not sure the fee is solely a Cornell issue. It apparently is an Ivy League driven decision to
require the schools be a part of the ILDN. I did see where last weekend viewing the Clarkson or St Lawrence feed it was free of charge based on a generous donation
from a benefactor to the hockey program. Wonder if such a person stepped forward at CU, whether or not it would be allowed. One thing for certain is that he or she would be a hero in many people's eyes.

We've discussed this so much that I'm hesitant to respond. However I feel pushed to do so.

When you say "most non Ivy School offer the games for free", you mean most ECAC non Ivy schools. If you look around the rest of college hockey, the streaming costs. The non Ivy schools are mainly Div III, except for hockey and hockey seems like their main sport, Colgate with football is an exception and maybe Q (but I don't know enough about general Q athletics). Those free schools also don't come close to covering the range of sports that the ILDN does. Does that mean that when we pay for the sports we love, we are subsidizing the other sports, probably. You'll have to decide whether that means anything to you.

Would I like better video, sure. Does that mean we need better cameras, more cameras, better processing, I don't know. If someone does know, please post. Maybe there's an alum that would take it up.

Do you know how many ILDN schools do replays, I don't.

Clarkson is free, generous alum, but they don't even archive their games. For a tech school, that's ridiculous. SLU didn't used to have archives, and now if you want an archive, you pay.

So I don't think things areas bad as you say, but I don't have all the data, so I could be convinced.

Jim Hyla

wakester2468
Why is it that most other internet video offering from other schools show replays? We pay for this sub par product so it's the least they could do. Never mind the fact that most non Ivy School offer the games for free but that takes me back to posts month ago. Not sure the fee is solely a Cornell issue. It apparently is an Ivy League driven decision to
require the schools be a part of the ILDN. I did see where last weekend viewing the Clarkson or St Lawrence feed it was free of charge based on a generous donation
from a benefactor to the hockey program. Wonder if such a person stepped forward at CU, whether or not it would be allowed. One thing for certain is that he or she would be a hero in many people's eyes.

We've discussed this so much that I'm hesitant to respond. However I feel pushed to do so.

When you say "most non Ivy School offer the games for free", you mean most ECAC non Ivy schools. If you look around the rest of college hockey, the streaming costs. The non Ivy schools are mainly Div III, except for hockey and hockey seems like their main sport, Colgate with football is an exception and maybe Q (but I don't know enough about general Q athletics). Those free schools also don't come close to covering the range of sports that the ILDN does. Does that mean that when we pay for the sports we love, we are subsidizing the other sports, probably. You'll have to decide whether that means anything to you.

Would I like better video, sure. Does that mean we need better cameras, more cameras, better processing, I don't know. If someone does know, please post. Maybe there's an alum that would take it up.

Do you know how many ILDN schools do replays, I don't.

Clarkson is free, generous alum, but they don't even archive their games. For a tech school, that's ridiculous. SLU didn't used to have archives, and now if you want an archive, you pay.

So I don't think things areas bad as you say, but I don't have all the data, so I could be convinced.

No argument with any of this, but didn't we have reply on ILDN last year? I seem to remember that the replays were always preceded with the awful bear noise, but they were there nonetheless. It feels like they fired someone who was in charge of activating the replays during games.

Trotsky

Dafatone
This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC.

Top 5 winning percentages in D1:

1. .786 Harvard
2. .758 Denver
3. .734 Minn-Duluth
4. .727 Union
5. .714 Cornell

Sure, and for this year, the "weak" ECAC is really just that the bottom teams suck even more than usual.

But it is dragging us down. Sucks, union, and Cornell all have better win% rankings than RPI rankings. When your win% is ahead of your RPI, it means your schedule is weak. Part of that is OOC issues, but the common factor is that brown and RPI suck.

Also, RPI beat Sucks this year. Ha.

abmarks

Dafatone
As someone pointed out at some point, our great win% kinda works against us, in that a loss hurts our win% more than a win helps it, due to the math and how fractions work and whatnot.

This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC. 10th in the pairwise with a lower win% (.600 or so) gives us more room to grow and more ability to weather a loss than 10th in the pairwise with a really high win% (.700+).

This is completely absurd. All that matters is the tally at the end of the season. Your inability to handle the ups and downs should not be a factor

We've had two years recently where we were the first team out. Personally, I wouldn't have minded if factors out of our control had resulted in us being the last team in, instead.

andyw2100
On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Edit: With frequent pausing, I don't think it was a goal. The ref was in good position, I don't see any movement of the net, and Weidner's reaction to jam at the puck after you hear the post ring (instead of starting a celebration, for example) are all signs. I think the light operator was excited to see the puck squeeze through the five-hole.

wakester2468
Why is it that most other internet video offering from other schools show replays? We pay for this sub par product so it's the least they could do.

I just move the slider at the bottom of the screen back a bit and watch it again, then click the "Live" button. Won't work on Roku, but does on computer or tablet.

ILDN means you get to have many sports streaming. it would be pretty trivial to find people to do hockey for free and these days pretty easy to stream it and archive it. you still wouldnt get replay though.. i would think that replay requires more than just a couple people with cameras. i dont know how ildn works but they could have 1-2 people sitting somewhere streaming all the games and insert replays for any goals or plays, but thats more cost overhead.

the advantage of watching on the computer is starting and stopping.

RichH

andyw2100
On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Edit: With frequent pausing, I don't think it was a goal. The ref was in good position, I don't see any movement of the net, and Weidner's reaction to jam at the puck after you hear the post ring (instead of starting a celebration, for example) are all signs. I think the light operator was excited to see the puck squeeze through the five-hole.

I doubt they could even tell on the over head replay.. our frame rate is so slow the puck on hard shots moves 2-3 feet in between frames.

upprdeck

RichH

andyw2100
On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Edit: With frequent pausing, I don't think it was a goal. The ref was in good position, I don't see any movement of the net, and Weidner's reaction to jam at the puck after you hear the post ring (instead of starting a celebration, for example) are all signs. I think the light operator was excited to see the puck squeeze through the five-hole.

I doubt they could even tell on the over head replay.. our frame rate is so slow the puck on hard shots moves 2-3 feet in between frames.

Why do you think the overhead shot is of poor quality?

RichH
While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Thanks! I was, and am posting from my phone, and hadn't yet looked for the highlights. I didn't know if that play would make the highlights or not. (I had looked last night, but of course the highlights had not been put together yet then.)

I'll watch the play later on a computer. I expect you're right. I guess you see what you want to see!

marty

upprdeck

RichH

andyw2100
On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Edit: With frequent pausing, I don't think it was a goal. The ref was in good position, I don't see any movement of the net, and Weidner's reaction to jam at the puck after you hear the post ring (instead of starting a celebration, for example) are all signs. I think the light operator was excited to see the puck squeeze through the five-hole.

I doubt they could even tell on the over head replay.. our frame rate is so slow the puck on hard shots moves 2-3 feet in between frames.

Why do you think the overhead shot is of poor quality?

because it is.. unless its a review of a slow moving shot you cant tell most of the time what happened..

Dafatone
As someone pointed out at some point, our great win% kinda works against us, in that a loss hurts our win% more than a win helps it, due to the math and how fractions work and whatnot.

This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC. 10th in the pairwise with a lower win% (.600 or so) gives us more room to grow and more ability to weather a loss than 10th in the pairwise with a really high win% (.700+).

This makes no sense. The ECAC being worse is priced in to our record. We'll have a better record when the ECAC is worse and a worse record when it is better. If you're saying that the net effect of the ECAC being better is positive (that improved SOS more than cancels out weakened win %), then I'd disagree with you for a number of reasons (we've won the ECAC less, we've probably lost out on recruits to other ECAC schools, and more directly relevant we've finished lower in the PWR than we did when the ECAC sucked). But I don't know if that's what you're saying.

BearLover

Dafatone
As someone pointed out at some point, our great win% kinda works against us, in that a loss hurts our win% more than a win helps it, due to the math and how fractions work and whatnot.

This, if nothing else, is why we want a strong ECAC. 10th in the pairwise with a lower win% (.600 or so) gives us more room to grow and more ability to weather a loss than 10th in the pairwise with a really high win% (.700+).

This makes no sense. The ECAC being worse is priced in to our record. We'll have a better record when the ECAC is worse and a worse record when it is better. If you're saying that the net effect of the ECAC being better is positive (that improved SOS more than cancels out weakened win %), then I'd disagree with you for a number of reasons (we've won the ECAC less, we've probably lost out on recruits to other ECAC schools, and more directly relevant we've finished lower in the PWR than we did when the ECAC sucked). But I don't know if that's what you're saying.

My point is that I'd rather be 10th in the pairwise with a strong ECAC and a lower win% than 10th in the pairwise with a weak ECAC and a higher win%. Because with a very high win%, a single loss has a larger impact on win% and therefore RPI.

We're in 10th right now, but drop all the way to 14th with a loss to a really good Union team. That's kinda weird, and it's a function of a loss hurting your win% more when it's very high.

upprdeck

marty

upprdeck

RichH

andyw2100
On another note, I really would like to see a replay of our no-goal in the second period. I had a good look at it, and was certain that was a goal! I thought it had deflected off the goalie, hit the right post, and then hit the back of the net, fairly high up.

While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Edit: With frequent pausing, I don't think it was a goal. The ref was in good position, I don't see any movement of the net, and Weidner's reaction to jam at the puck after you hear the post ring (instead of starting a celebration, for example) are all signs. I think the light operator was excited to see the puck squeeze through the five-hole.

I doubt they could even tell on the over head replay.. our frame rate is so slow the puck on hard shots moves 2-3 feet in between frames.

Why do you think the overhead shot is of poor quality?

because it is.. unless its a review of a slow moving shot you cant tell most of the time what happened..

So you've seen the overhead camera video? How did that happen? Tell us more about what it's like. I'm sure everyone here would be interested.

cornell uses a vendor package like most schools do, i dont think the entire league uses the same package but i forget.. its gotten better, allows you to rewind the feed and see feed and clock at the same time. when the system was specked out one thing we told them was that the cameras could/should be better. my discussions though are a bit old since it was more when the system was original installed that i had most of my conversations. its been a few years and the group controlling the software has changed over time.

i dont know if anyone on this board is still part of that group but there were some on here for awhile

andyw2100

RichH
While the live broadcast doesn't currently feature replays, the "highlights" videos of each game have reliably been good, put on YouTube for easy access, and you don't even need an ILDN subscription.

[youtu.be]

In this case, the camera angle provided doesn't give a good view at all of the no-goal you mentioned.

Thanks! I was, and am posting from my phone, and hadn't yet looked for the highlights. I didn't know if that play would make the highlights or not. (I had looked last night, but of course the highlights had not been put together yet then.)

I'll watch the play later on a computer. I expect you're right. I guess you see what you want to see!

I was sitting right at the goal line in section K. It went right off the post and back out into the zone. The red light went on a couple seconds later, so they stopped play for the review.

No matter what I wanted to see, it was "no goal."