Cornell-Harvard at MSG

We start with the USCHO article.

And hopefully end with a win, before traveling to Allston next weekend.

CornellBigRed's pregame.

And GoCrimson's.

Can we beat them at least 3 times this season?

One at a time. One at a time.

Need to add this podcast.

Harvard vs. Cornell preview with Crimson coach Ted Donato: USCHO Game of the Week podcast episode 7

Good early returns around the league:

Union 2 BU 1 (title game in Belfast, Ireland)
Yale 6 UConn 3 (Belfast consolation)

Later tonight, in addition to our game:

St. Lawrence vs Clarkson (at Lake Placid)
Vermont at Dartmouth
Princeton at UMass
Quinnipiac at Maine

Anyone have the ESPN+ feed working? Mine changed to "Event About To Begin" around 8:00 PM, give or take, but it is now 8:06 PM, and still nothing.

I have same issue.

Same here.

Now live, at 8:08 or 8:09.

Is this typical camerawork at MSG these days?

jtwcornell91
Is this typical camerawork at MSG these days?

I was wondering the same thing. I can't imagine it is.

They are using far too many low angles, and they keep zooming in, to a ridiculous level, from the high angles, preventing us from seeing enough of the ice and other players to be able to appreciate what is going on.

Or, as my wife put it ten minutes ago, "I'm getting nauseated."

I contacted ESPN+ to complain about the production of the game. Who produces a game using mostly ice level cameras and up close shots. One of the most frustrating games I have tried to follow. Last year at MSG it started this way and got better shortly after the game started. Not this year. Very frustrating. It is so bad.

ESPN+ has live chat in the support section.

flyersgolf
I contacted ESPN+ to complain about the production of the game. Who produces a game using mostly ice level cameras and up close shots. One of the most frustrating games I have tried to follow. Last year at MSG it started this way and got better shortly after the game started. Not this year. Very frustrating. It is so bad.

ESPN+ has live chat in the support section.

I'll try the live chat as well.

A huge improvement would be made if the guys handling the high cameras just didn't use the zoom functionality. That wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would go a long way towards doing so.

Edit: I can't find the live chat option on ESPN+. Link, or directions please? Thanks!

andyw2100

flyersgolf
I contacted ESPN+ to complain about the production of the game. Who produces a game using mostly ice level cameras and up close shots. One of the most frustrating games I have tried to follow. Last year at MSG it started this way and got better shortly after the game started. Not this year. Very frustrating. It is so bad.

ESPN+ has live chat in the support section.

I'll try the live chat as well.

A huge improvement would be made if the guys handling the high cameras just didn't use the zoom functionality. That wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would go a long way towards doing so.

As in previous years, these are the cameras that feed the overhead " Jumbo - whatever" screen for the fans in the rink. Their function for (probably) every other game of the season is just that. We are getting a "free" feed.

[support.espn.com]-

I was able to get a hold of someone through the link above.

He said he would contact someone and let them know, he lied.

Guess I'm glad I'm at MSG. just wish we were playing better in the 2d period

We may have to stop playing these MSG games.

It just doesn’t matter… all that much.

Stupid to play Harvard for this game; disappointing to lose.

Win the next two.

That was sloppy and forced from start to finish. The 1st was OK, but then Harvard started to adjust

I think a lot of the blame falls on Schafer, who couldn't convince his team to not take moronic retaliatory penalties against the best PP in the country.

not a bad effort in the offensive end.. a couple break downs on D which is to be expected when you are playing deep into the bench. we cycle well, but Harvard as always has those 2-3 guys who are just bit quicker. and you cant take bad penalties.

still a bunch of shots inside 10ft we cant seem to put home.

upprdeck
not a bad effort in the offensive end.. a couple break downs on D which is to be expected when you are playing deep into the bench. we cycle well, but Harvard as always has those 2-3 guys who are just bit quicker. and you cant take bad penalties.

still a bunch of shots inside 10ft we cant seem to put home.

I thought the same thing. We had plenty of chances and had the better of play. I think with a healthier blue line and a few more big stops in goal, we'd be a really, really good team.

But we do need a healthier blue line.

Dafatone

upprdeck
not a bad effort in the offensive end.. a couple break downs on D which is to be expected when you are playing deep into the bench. we cycle well, but Harvard as always has those 2-3 guys who are just bit quicker. and you cant take bad penalties.

still a bunch of shots inside 10ft we cant seem to put home.

I thought the same thing. We had plenty of chances and had the better of play. I think with a healthier blue line and a few more big stops in goal, we'd be a really, really good team.

But we do need a healthier blue line.

Harvard recruits better players and doesn't beat itself with terrible penalties and leaving one guy back on D against one of the best PP/transition teams in the country. Given the injuries, not a surprising result. Not much offensive talent on our team with our three top goal scorers from last year gone. Agree the team would be good defensively if healthy. Played overall a pretty good defensive game tonight.

Schafer was pretty pissed with the team in his post game comments.

“Disappointing. Really disappointing, how we played tonight,” said head coach Mike Schafer ’86. “That’s the least physical I’ve ever seen a Cornell team play in a game against Harvard.

“No life on the bench. … How could you be lifeless in this type of game?” Schafer said of his team in front of 14,132 at Madison Square Garden.

If you thought they were good in the offensive end I don't know what you were watching. What I saw was a lot of guys who thought they could skate through traffic or thread needles with passes and kept turning the puck over and wasting the chances they had. I also saw wide open guys in space get the puck passed firmly into their skates or into nothing or blindly to a guy in crimson. Absolute crap and awful to watch. I hated almost every second of this game.

ugarte
If you thought they were good in the offensive end I don't know what you were watching. What I saw was a lot of guys who thought they could skate through traffic or thread needles with passes and kept turning the puck over and wasting the chances they had. I also saw wide open guys in space get the puck passed firmly into their skates or into nothing or blindly to a guy in crimson. Absolute crap and awful to watch. I hated almost every second of this game.

On the other hand, at least the beer prices have gone up.

The only hope I have is that we will be a better, more determined team once we are are at full strength - we still have four players out, and four important ones, including two of our best Ds. I have to imagine that the reshuffling of lines to accommodate for their absences has played a part in our performance to a certain extent. Plus, we are overworking our healthy Ds and top players, so they are probably experiencing more fatigue and wear and tear. I had read somewhere that coach expected three of them back for the MSG game but that unfortunately wasn't the case. I have to imagine that probably was a bit of a morale blow. When they do return, I hope it is both a morale and performance boost.

Minority opinion here: I liked the camera work as a different way to watch the game, after I got used to it. It was off-putting for the first few minutes, but after adjusting I enjoyed the mental calisthenics of having to infer the big picture from the close up angles we were shown. There were many excellent intervals when we intimately saw corner battles or the chaos of the crease when the offense was pressing. I'll grant we also had several close ups of a puck sitting against the boards without one player in frame.

I wouldn't want to watch every game like this, but I enjoyed it as a change. As with essentially everything in life, moderate use to add variety to the vanilla broadcast would satisfy the most people.

margolism
The only hope I have is that we will be a better, more determined team once we are are at full strength - we still have four players out, and four important ones, including two of our best Ds.

It did not appear to me that we adjusted our style to account for this. There's something to be said for staying within your game and not allowing externals to dictate your play, but it felt like last night we could have stayed back a bit and respected the fact that we were undermanned.

BUT, we faced the same situation against Princeton, played our game, and creamed them. So I don't know. After 38 seasons of this I still haven't settled on any precept other than outscore the opponent.

There wasn't much difference between the Princeton game and this one, IMO. In both we played well on defense, showed little cohesion on offense, and Galajda was solid in net. The difference last night was that Harvard is more talented and Cornell made two inexcusable mental errors.

I would like to see our success the past two seasons translate to an uptick in recruiting, especially of forwards. So far I don't think there's any evidence it has.

BearLover
There wasn't much difference between the Princeton game and this one, IMO. In both we played well on defense, showed little cohesion on offense, and Galajda was solid in net. The difference last night was that Harvard is more talented and Cornell made two inexcusable mental errors.

I would like to see our success the past two seasons translate to an uptick in recruiting, especially of forwards. So far I don't think there's any evidence it has.

I seriously don't know what game people were watching who think we played well on defense last night. It's understandable that we didn't play well on defense last night given our injury situation, but I wouldn't even say we played well on defense considering our injury situation.

Beeeej

BearLover
There wasn't much difference between the Princeton game and this one, IMO. In both we played well on defense, showed little cohesion on offense, and Galajda was solid in net. The difference last night was that Harvard is more talented and Cornell made two inexcusable mental errors.

I would like to see our success the past two seasons translate to an uptick in recruiting, especially of forwards. So far I don't think there's any evidence it has.

I seriously don't know what game people were watching who think we played well on defense last night. It's understandable that we didn't play well on defense last night given our injury situation, but I wouldn't even say we played well on defense considering our injury situation.

We did a good job of minimizing their chances and keeping play in the offensive zone.

Unfortunately, the chances we did give up were giant honking chances.

Beeeej
I seriously don't know what game people were watching who think we played well on defense last night. It's understandable that we didn't play well on defense last night given our injury situation, but I wouldn't even say we played well on defense considering our injury situation.

Agreed - last night was my first time seeing this year's team. I know that we are missing some of our usual D, but I can't remember seeing a Schafer-coached team make so many errors across all three periods. Turnovers at the blue line that led to 2-on-1s, miscommunication that gave H clear looks at the net, dumb penalties. I am especially alarmed since our defense was so solid last year and we returned basically everyone, current injuries notwithstanding. H looked better than their record indicated, but they aren't an especially speedy or skillful team. We did not look like the same team that contained Jordan Greenway et al for most of the MSG game last year.

On offense, we had some great opportunities to stretch the lead to 2-0, and then a lot more to tie at 2-2. Watching the replay on the scoreboard, Vanderlaan had the tying goal on his stick and just needed to elevate the puck over the goalie's right pad, but shot it directly into the pad. We continue to pass up one-timer opportunities. It isn't a new problem for us to lack people who can finish around the net, but I am wondering what happened to our breakout/transition. This was such a happy surprise last year that generated great offensive chances. Last night, had trouble carrying the puck into the zone and didn't seem to translate our quality cycling into good looks at the net.

Good news is that Galajda played well and kept us ahead for longer than we deserved, and I'm sure it will help to get our injured guys back. I'm hoping we can get some revenge next weekend.

Beeeej
I seriously don't know what game people were watching who think we played well on defense last night. It's understandable that we didn't play well on defense last night given our injury situation, but I wouldn't even say we played well on defense considering our injury situation.

We limited the chances of a good offensive team by keeping them to the outside, getting in passing/shooting lanes, etc. Harvard had few Grade-A chances.

ebilmes
H looked better than their record indicated, but they aren't an especially speedy or skillful team. We did not look like the same team that contained Jordan Greenway et al for most of the MSG game last year.

I disagree with all of this. Harvard's edge is precisely their speed and skill. They have several blue-chip offensive players on their team this year, which was evident from their skating/puck movement last night. Jordan Greenway, a giant, lumbering power forward, is an entirely different kind of player from the speedy forwards on Harvard, and Cornell has always struggled more defending speed than defending size.

BearLover is right that when our defense was set up they played well. With the exception of the Z-G goal on the power play (which was insanely embarrassing - he wrote and had delivered a letter to his beloved in Cambridge regarding the conditions in New York while handling the puck before shooting) Harvard's best chances were all a result of a team that could gain the offensive zone but refused to do anything with it. The team is literally allergic to good shots or good passes, seeking always the perfect shot or pass and winding up with absolutely nothing to show for it. Our first goal should be a model but instead the team seems to treat a goal from a deflection in front as the result of a fortunate error by the referee, as the rules of the game specify that you can only score on a wraparound.

I lost track of the number of times we had a skater with the puck, with a trailer, take the puck into the corner only to once again find a wall there, and a defenseman who took advantage of this dead end to stall the possession. I also lost count of the number of times a Cornell player with oodles of time didn't bother to glance at where he was putting he puck, and chose to fire it directly at someone from Harvard, or when we were lucky, to nowhere.

We played a very good third period against Q and were unfortunate to lose. None of the crap festival I described above was going on, despite the same injuries. Against Princeton, we weren't quite as sharp but a lot luckier with the puck and we reaped the rewards. But last night? Seriously, that game revealed the potential of the team but was in all non-Galajda* respects a 60 minute catastrophe.

* and I'm a Galajda skeptic, so I was very happy to see him make me look dumb because we could have lost by a lot more than 3

I was at MSG, and anyone who thought we played other than crap wasn't watching the same game. We fumbled just about every pass and were a step behind on almost ever play. Other than Galajda, I can't think of anyone in a white jersey who played a halfway decent game. And it was especially disappointing since, as Ugarte noted, we had played pretty well against Q and Princeton the prior weekend, and are certainly capable of better performances even while being down a few guys.

BearLover
We limited the chances of a good offensive team by keeping them to the outside, getting in passing/shooting lanes, etc. Harvard had few Grade-A chances.

They cycled better along the wall, they undressed us passing around our net and setting up trailers, we gave up eight two-on-one rushes then screwed up even the standard last-ditch two-on-one defense on two of them, we constantly passed directly onto a Hahvahd stick, and we lost nearly every footrace.

Galajda was the main reason this wasn't a 9-1 game. I've got a serious historical case of Big-Red-colored glasses, and I genuinely don't know what game you were watching.

From Schafer's email about the game. Bad news.

"The injuries are really catching up to us. We played three lines in the third period. Sophomore forward Brenden Locke and senior forward Jeff Malott, along with senior defenseman Brendan Smith and sophomore defenseman Alex Green are huge parts of our team, but that doesn’t excuse the way we played. To make matters worse we suffered a couple more injuries this weekend and most likely will have a couple others out of lineup this weekend."

Ugh

And some thought people were coming back for last weeks games.. a split this weekend would be great with the injuries right now

Break is coming one week too late.

Oh well. Are there rules about the number of players who can travel on a trip? I would expect Schafer to take everybody he can do he can use different 7-th men (and even other positions) in Hanover and Alston.

Beeeej

BearLover
We limited the chances of a good offensive team by keeping them to the outside, getting in passing/shooting lanes, etc. Harvard had few Grade-A chances.

They cycled better along the wall, they undressed us passing around our net and setting up trailers, we gave up eight two-on-one rushes then screwed up even the standard last-ditch two-on-one defense on two of them, we constantly passed directly onto a Hahvahd stick, and we lost nearly every footrace.

Galajda was the main reason this wasn't a 9-1 game. I've got a serious historical case of Big-Red-colored glasses, and I genuinely don't know what game you were watching.

We definitely didn't give up eight 2-on-1s and they barely out-chanced us, if at all. They had several more PPs than we did. Our defensive positioning was very solid when we were able to set up. You are correct that Cornell's defender went down too early on two of the 2-on-1s. They didn't cycle better than us, but cycling isn't their game. Their game is creating turnovers and speed in transition. I don't know how many footraces you expect us to win, or how few pucks you expect us to cough up, against a clearly faster and more skilled team. Unless your suggestion is to revamp the roster with 2nd-round NHL draft picks to mirror Harvard's team.

BearLover

Beeeej

BearLover
We limited the chances of a good offensive team by keeping them to the outside, getting in passing/shooting lanes, etc. Harvard had few Grade-A chances.

They cycled better along the wall, they undressed us passing around our net and setting up trailers, we gave up eight two-on-one rushes then screwed up even the standard last-ditch two-on-one defense on two of them, we constantly passed directly onto a Hahvahd stick, and we lost nearly every footrace.

Galajda was the main reason this wasn't a 9-1 game. I've got a serious historical case of Big-Red-colored glasses, and I genuinely don't know what game you were watching.

We definitely didn't give up eight 2-on-1s and they barely out-chanced us, if at all. They had several more PPs than we did. Our defensive positioning was very solid when we were able to set up. You are correct that Cornell's defender went down too early on two of the 2-on-1s. They didn't cycle better than us, but cycling isn't their game. Their game is creating turnovers and speed in transition. I don't know how many footraces you expect us to win, or how few pucks you expect us to cough up, against a clearly faster and more skilled team. Unless your suggestion is to revamp the roster with 2nd-round NHL draft picks to mirror Harvard's team.

I didn't say I know how to coach this team better or obtain a better outcome, I was giving examples of why I thought you were wrong in saying that we did a good job defensively. I said I saw a different game than you did, one in which the Cornell defense performed poorly, and apparently I'm not the only one.

Watch the game again. They cycled better than we did. They actually did have eight 2-on-1 chances. And I'm done here, because this does nobody any good.

Nevermind...wrong thread.

i tried multiple sports and nothing i could find was working