More Union post-game wrap up

I know there are posts from after the Union game over on the other thread, but just thought I'd start this thread, in response to RedAr's good suggestion, and so that others don't have to repeatedly sift through the 87 + post thread...although there are still postgame posts on there..

ANYWAY.......I was at the game, and think I had a decent view of the questionable cornell goal in the first period. Granted, my eyes do not have instant replay, but I could have sworn I saw the puck go in, over the line, in the net and then bounce back out....and I still believe it did. I think it was an iffy call, but I guess the final decision is up to the refs and the old guy sitting behind the goal who never hit the red light [favortism] as there is no instant replay to prove it either way

I figured the Union one was easy since there is a "final" tag at the end of "postgame" posts, but may be not, since those are the only posts I read...anyways, here's what I posted to the Union game thread a few minutes ago...

A few of my thoughts from the Onion Game:

*Their fans suck. They wave cheap cowbells to make noise and they only cheered after a goal. The loud horns after a goal killed me! Get a band! They have no cheers what so ever during the game and I think for the first time this season, fans pumped up the Onion team--our fans, that is. Whenever we did a "Let's Go Red" cheer the Onion fans just screamed "U" after the "Let's Go" to drown us out. Pretty sad. Age confused them by starting a "Go CU" chant! We were able to get their blond haired mascot guy to walk away in shame after we started chanting "ugly"

*What is up with our breakout? We used to do three guys behind the goal line with Vesce circling behind the net to the left. We've been trying to switch it up recently so teams can't scout us prior to the game but it was disasterous against Onion. We had FOUR guys behind the goal line with a fake to the left then a break out to the right, OR a break out to the left and then a pass across the crease. It was scary! We had a lot of trouble getting the puck out of the zone.

*Onion started the game with no real forecheck. They allowed us to sit behind the net and set up our breakout during the first period. We were held to four shots that period, which is counterintuitive. Then, in the second period, Onion comes out with two forecheckers but we pepper their goal with 12 or 14 shots. Maybe this is because the neutral zone is more open with two forecheckers? But it was also because Schafer told the guys to get the puck to the net.

*McKee played well giving up very few rebounds. On the goal, he went down too early, leaving the top open but he didn't have much of a choice. He was on his heels and the goalscorer was going around him fast to his backhand. I think McKee could have disturbed him and kept him from lifting the puck on another day. Many times the D left McKee out to dry AFTER the shot and Onion had two guys crashing the net. I thought the D did a good job blocking shots but they didn't protect McKee. If McKee gave up more rebounds the score would have been 3-0 without the ENers.

*The puck fell to a crashing Bitz in the final seconds with an open net but he couldn't get enough wood on the puck to finish.

*It looked like a goal to me and Moulson certainly thought it was a goal by the way he reacted. Moyette (sp? the Onion goalie) held his form for a second or two as if the puck went in but who knows...it was close and I'm a homer. It was sick shot none the less.

*I thought it was a classic let down game. Onion had just lost a nail bitter and we had just won a nail bitter. Onion came out blazing and we came out tired.

See you all in Ithaca next weekend!

Thanks Robin

Not much to add. Of the two games this weekend, if we had to win one and lose one (as we did), winning the RPI game was much more important, so I guess I have to be grudgingly happy about the results.

Not that it really matters, but, just to recap the results from the top 15 this weekend....

   Team        (First Place)    Record  Pts   
 1 Boston College       (40)    23-3-4  600     W, W (Mass-Lowell)  
 2 North Dakota                 20-6-3  539     W, W (Mankato)
 3 Maine                        21-6-3  496     W, W (Providence)
 4 Michigan                     21-8-1  485     W, W (Bowling Green)
 5 Minnesota-Duluth             20-8-3  468     W, W (Colorado College)
 6 Wisconsin                    17-9-6  371     T, W (St. Cloud State)
 7 Minnesota                   18-11-3  363     W, W (Alaska-Anchorage)
 8 St. Cloud State              18-9-3  320     T, L (Wisconsin)
 9 New Hampshire               16-10-5  231     W    (Northeastern)
10 Miami                       18-11-3  224     idle
11 Denver                      18-10-4  209     T, W (Michigan Tech)
12 Ohio State                  19-13-0  143     L, W (Western Michigan)
13 Brown                        14-6-5   99     L, L (St. Lawrence, Clarkson)
14 Massachusetts                16-8-5   79     L, T (Boston University)
15 Colorado College            16-11-3   59     L, L (Minnesota-Duluth)

Post Edited (02-22-04 20:48)

Maybe the loss to Union will turn out to be a good thing...fire them up for the final 2 home games of the RS and then the playoffs. It was a heartbreaking loss that might serve the same function as the loss to Colgate in OT did last season. That is, the players don't want to feel like that again, especially with a lot on the line from now on, and especially on home ice. And also, a long winning streak going into the playoffs usually makes me, at least, a lot more nervous than when there has been maybe 1 relatively recent loss.

Given the choice of losses on the weekend, it was better to lose to Union:

+ Got the important points against RPI.
+ Saved the potential tie-break against RPI (if Brown falls out of the top 4).
+ Killed off any overconfidence they would feel going into the 1R/QF.

They have a bye completely within their power, and given the young squad, replacement of key personnel, and then midseason crippling barrage of injuries, I do not think we could ask for more.

I am hoping for a home 4 point weekend and a 3rd place seed.



Post Edited (02-23-04 08:41)

Greg Berge '85 wrote:
+ Got the potential tie-break against RPI (only if Gate falls out of the top 4... rotsa ruck).

Do you mean Brown? Colgate swept both of us, and has already clinched fourth place. Anyway, even if Brown is in the top four, it's still a wash with RPI as long as Dartmouth is in the top four as well. (And that's the most important tiebreaker scenario anyway, since it determines who gets the bye.)

Everyone knows I have the highest respect for what Coach Shafer has done in turning around Cornell's program from the Brain M. years, but after yet another torturous result at Onion, I can only ask..........

"Why can't we have any offense?"

I understand how important defense is, so please, hold the lectures on the merits, but I contend that super defense works much better int he playoffs than in the regular season.

We have three defensive minded coaches: Our Head coach and two assistants.

Are we allowed to have three assistans? We need a purely offense minded assistant coach. Yes, we had more shots, but many, many times I saw the forwards stood up before the redline and the defensement skating throguh them. THAT should NOT be happening... the forwards should always be leading the defensemen on the attack. Also, the team did not look comfortable to me on offense, but much more at home defending (they lkooked better offensively Sat. night against RPI. (I'm very Happy we got THAT win! )

We are only avg. about 2.35 GF (if my math is correct), which even with our low, low GAA, is still tenous for consistently winning. 13 of our total goals have come aginat one doormat this season : Princeton.

Take 13 goals away, and the GF drops to an astonishingly low 1.7 GF.

We NEED at Least.. an average offense................... period !

LGR!!!!

--- Da Bear

> Do you mean Brown?

Yep.

Chief,

I think it would work at cross-purposes to have an assistant who did not evaluate talent and have the same priorities as Coach.

Something suppressing their absolute numbers is Cornell's play style once they have the lead -- emphasis is on discipline and control all over the ice, not just the defensive zone. Schafer refuses to get into shooting contests after Cornell is up, and I think that's wise. More to the point, it's working. Nothing succeeds like success -- that's why we see so many ECAC teams getting a lot bigger and a little slower -- it's working.

Glad to have you back, and NEVER stop demanding 4 gpg -- it hasn't been the same without you.



Post Edited (02-23-04 10:12)

Adam Brown wrote:

Whenever we did a "Let's Go Red" cheer the Onion fans just screamed "U" after the "Let's Go" to drown us out. Pretty sad. Age confused them by starting a "Go CU" chant!

Another option that we used when playing Wisconsin some years back, and faced with their fans trying to usurp the "Let's Go Red" cheer, was to turn it into "Go Big Red". Could work against those hokey Engineers as well.

Killer wrote:

Adam Brown wrote:

Whenever we did a "Let's Go Red" cheer the Onion fans just screamed "U" after the "Let's Go" to drown us out. Pretty sad. Age confused them by starting a "Go CU" chant!

Another option that we used when playing Wisconsin some years back, and faced with their fans trying to usurp the "Let's Go Red" cheer, was to turn it into "Go Big Red". Could work against those hokey Engineers as well.

I had another thought. The next time Union fans try to usurp our "Let's Go Red" cheer into "Let's Go U", we should just quickly turn it into "Let's Screw U!" I think it might work--it's something to keep in mind for next year.

I had another thought. The next time Union fans try to usurp our "Let's Go Red" cheer into "Let's Go U", we should just quickly turn it into "Let's Screw U!" I think it might work--it's something to keep in mind for next year.

I like that one. Keep it ready. Heck, we can even use it at home if, by some miracle, Union surfaces again this year.

FWIW - I don't think it's "sad" for the Union fans to try to drown out a cheer started by the visiting fans. That's what you're supposed to do to opposing fans cheers.

But I do think it's sad that the only way time they cheer is to coopt our cheer. If a fan base wants to do a "Let's Go U" cheer, that's great. If the only way they can do it is when the opposing fans start a cheer, that's pathetic.

It's also pathetic how many of the Union fans pointed to the scoreboard during the 2nd and 3rd periods (before the 1st empty netter) in a 1 goal game. Alas, it seems as if the Hockey Gods were inattentive Saturday night.

[Q]But I do think it's sad that the only way time they cheer is to coopt our cheer.[/Q]OK, I'll agree with that. I missed that part of the original complaint.

Keith K '93 wrote:
[Q]But I do think it's sad that the only way time they cheer is to coopt our cheer.[/Q]OK, I'll agree with that. I missed that part of the original complaint.

Can we please keep this in mind when playing e.g., Clarkson and not just yell "RED" at the end of their "Let's Go Tech" cheers? I always thought that sort of thing was lame, whichever side was doing it.

That's what I meant. It was sad that they never started their own cheer. Sorry for not communicating it well.

Adam Brown wrote:

That's what I meant. It was sad that they never started their own cheer. Sorry for not communicating it well.

Well, towards the end of the game, they did start up that oh-so-original "Let's Go Union *clap clap clapclapclap*", though that only happened with three or four minutes left on the clock in the third period.

Keith K '93 wrote:

FWIW - I don't think it's "sad" for the Union fans to try to drown out a cheer started by the visiting fans. That's what you're supposed to do to opposing fans cheers.

yes, but they had the audacity to do it to the lynah faithful...

There was/is nothing more enjoyable than getting opposing fans so worked up that they started acting like us ... but that's just my opinion



Post Edited (02-24-04 18:48)

There's an article in today's Daily Sun about the Pep Band and not being able to make the trip this weekend :

[www.cornelldailysun.com]

The article mentions the SA as a place for many of the funding requests. Does the athletic dept. provide any assistance to the band? One would think that the athletic dept. would see the advantages of having the pep band at away contests and fork over some dough to at least help.

[q] Does the athletic dept. provide any assistance to the band?[/q]

They provide the band 51 tickets to home games and the right to represent the university. They provide no money for travel or other expenses, that is all SAFC and alumni dollars.

The way SAFC funding works is a joke at best. It makes life very difficult for a group like the band. They can't request funding for ECAC or NCAA playoffs because in september there is no guarantee these events will happen. In the past they have also declined funding citing the fact that SAFC money is for groups that "benefit the entire cornell community" and that the band only really benefits the athletic community. Yet somehow LGBTQ gets funding for an outside speaker, and the karate club gets money to compete in some tournament.

When I had to present them a budget, instead of questioning the cost of buses or equipment they offered me a calculator and asked me to justify the requested money for photocopies. For five minutes we debated how many copies the band needed to make in the coming year. We then multiplied by 2 cents or something ridiculous and they gave us like 14.75....

When you go to a ridiculous organization like the Student Assembly for funding, you have to expect that you will be asked ridiculous questions.

Chris, are you the head honcho of the band? If so, could you email me? I want to try to work out a way to get donations to the Pep Band via contributions by people who are interested in getting the DVD of this year's Lynah East game.

RedAR,

You'd want to contact Grant Macintyre '05 at gbm23, he's the pep band's manager for 2004.

From the end of that Sun article today:

[Q]So where do the current SAFC funding guidelines leave us? Where does it leave diehard fans like Cowbell Guy, Indian Ray Romano, or Avinash? Where does it leave the Cornell Hockey Family?[/Q]


I'm Indian Ray Romano .

Avash '05 wrote:

I'm Indian Ray Romano .

I never thought about it before, but there is a striking resemblance, isn't there? Wow.

The SAFC responds!

[www.cornelldailysun.com]

Basically, they gave the answer I thought they would give--they have to fund too many groups, so they have to scrutinize everyone and everything. Of course, it wouldn't surprise me if there was some measure of redundancy in some of the clubs on this campus (I think at one point not too long ago, there were three distinct video game clubs at Cornell, with seemingly similar goals and methods, although I can't find them in the Student Organizations directory anymore).