New Recruits
Posted by rYe
New Recruits
Posted by: rYe (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 27, 2005 09:48PM
To get off the topic of the Minnesota game, I was wondering if anyone is aware of any good recruits coming in for next season? I'd like to see who fills in for Cook. He will be tough to replace.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Will (---.cable.mindspring.com)
Date: March 27, 2005 09:57PM
There's already a whole thread dedicated to this: [elf.elynah.com]
___________________________
Is next year here yet?
Is next year here yet?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: rYe (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 27, 2005 10:05PM
sorry, kinda new here.
Re: New eLynah Recruits
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.res.rr.com)
Date: March 27, 2005 10:21PM
[Q]rYe Wrote:
sorry, kinda new here.[/q]
no worries! Play around with the site...actually create an account and log in and the site will keep track of the messages you have read and allow you to communicate with other members through private messages (sort of an internal, eLynah mail system).
check out the "search" feature found in the link above this post (or [elf.elynah.com] )...we've covered a million topics already (seriously, a million)...and people don't readily answer questions that can be answered quickly in the same time using the "search" feature.
Check out the links to the left...lots of information there...I would start with the "FAQ" and "TBRW?"
Don't even start the debate of Apple vs Windows...don't laugh, it's a sensitive subject around here
And finally, be liberal in your use of smileys...it will help maintain a level of civility and understanding...we all are passionate about Cornell hockey and that can often lead to poor communication
Enjoy!
Adam Brown
sorry, kinda new here.[/q]
no worries! Play around with the site...actually create an account and log in and the site will keep track of the messages you have read and allow you to communicate with other members through private messages (sort of an internal, eLynah mail system).
check out the "search" feature found in the link above this post (or [elf.elynah.com] )...we've covered a million topics already (seriously, a million)...and people don't readily answer questions that can be answered quickly in the same time using the "search" feature.
Check out the links to the left...lots of information there...I would start with the "FAQ" and "TBRW?"
Don't even start the debate of Apple vs Windows...don't laugh, it's a sensitive subject around here
And finally, be liberal in your use of smileys...it will help maintain a level of civility and understanding...we all are passionate about Cornell hockey and that can often lead to poor communication
Enjoy!
Adam Brown
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: March 27, 2005 11:05PM
Nonetheless, rYe definitely has a good idea. Not a bad idea to start focusing on the future already. Rather than just recapping the recruits, anyone want to comment on the makeup of next years team? Analyze the new recruits and talk about where they may fit in, or even existing players.
Might be a healthier way to focus our energy right now
Might be a healthier way to focus our energy right now
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2005 11:06PM by DeltaOne81.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Pace (209.2.88.---)
Date: March 28, 2005 12:07AM
A very good point indeed. I, for one, am ready to focus on the great things to come. Perhaps someone would be so kind as to summarise the other recruit threads here? Give us a list of the players we know are coming to Cornell next year?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 12:23AM
Projected Roster: [www.tbrw.info]
G:
No idea whether DiLeo will compete for time or whether he's Pizza Hut insurance.
D:
Sasha and Krantz will provide the offense, Gleed is a solid D, O'Byrne needs to step up his game, Glover looked good towards the end of the past season; then a three-way battle for the last starting slot.
F:
Even if the incoming players aren't ready yet, that's a great returning group of forwards. Topher will be a year stronger and better, Sawada and Carefoot will start to break out, the others are known quantities, from Moulson's production to the Abbott's steady two-way play.
G:
No idea whether DiLeo will compete for time or whether he's Pizza Hut insurance.
D:
Sasha and Krantz will provide the offense, Gleed is a solid D, O'Byrne needs to step up his game, Glover looked good towards the end of the past season; then a three-way battle for the last starting slot.
F:
Even if the incoming players aren't ready yet, that's a great returning group of forwards. Topher will be a year stronger and better, Sawada and Carefoot will start to break out, the others are known quantities, from Moulson's production to the Abbott's steady two-way play.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2005 12:31AM by Trotsky.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: pfibiger (---.hsd1.ca.comcast.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 12:26AM
To summarize the incoming recruits:
Forwards
Matt Connors - played for the New York Apple Core, hurt for a bunch of the season, perhaps underperformed this year but put up enormous numbers the prev. year in his midget league, was recruited by 38 of 58 D-I schools.
Evan Barlow - #2 scorer on BCHL's Salmon Arm Silverbacks, one of the top scorers in the league. Brother played at Harvard.
Tyler Mugford - committed a year ago, deferred for a year. Mid-pack on his team in scoring, leads in penalty minutes. A sparkplug, seems Hornby-esque. Plays for the Nanaimo Clippers
Ryan Kindret - leading scorer on the Quesnel Millionaires of the BCHL. A pretty big power forward.
Mike Kennedy - A center, playing with the St. Thomas Stars in the Ontario Jr. B league. good regular season numbers, led the league in playoff goals.
Defensemen
Jared Seminoff - Good size, solid defender. Plays for Nanaimo. Was one of the Clippers' top defensemen.
Taylor Davenport - Plays for the Drayton Valley Thunder. Smaller (5'10). His coach says "He really plays with an edge, but is playing in a way where he's waiting for his opportunity to hit people, not just running around looking to hit somebody."
Goaltender
Dan DiLeo - traded from Fargo - Moorhead of the NAHL to Wichita Falls, and has carried the load for the team, keeping them in the playoff hunt. Decent to good stats on a weak defensive team. G:35 W:22 L:7 OTL:6 GAA: 2.94 SV%: .913
Recruits coming in 2006
Colin Greening - Highly ranked in the mid-term rankings for the now cancelled NHL draft. Big power forward, going to play in Nanaimo next year.
Justin Milo - Topher Scott II. 5'6", #6 in goals scored in the entire USHL. Could really light up the USHL next year.
Tony Romano - played in the US Under-17 team that played in Germany. Plays in a weak league, unknown where he'll play next year, but high scoring, fast, good hands.
Forwards
Matt Connors - played for the New York Apple Core, hurt for a bunch of the season, perhaps underperformed this year but put up enormous numbers the prev. year in his midget league, was recruited by 38 of 58 D-I schools.
Evan Barlow - #2 scorer on BCHL's Salmon Arm Silverbacks, one of the top scorers in the league. Brother played at Harvard.
Tyler Mugford - committed a year ago, deferred for a year. Mid-pack on his team in scoring, leads in penalty minutes. A sparkplug, seems Hornby-esque. Plays for the Nanaimo Clippers
Ryan Kindret - leading scorer on the Quesnel Millionaires of the BCHL. A pretty big power forward.
Mike Kennedy - A center, playing with the St. Thomas Stars in the Ontario Jr. B league. good regular season numbers, led the league in playoff goals.
Defensemen
Jared Seminoff - Good size, solid defender. Plays for Nanaimo. Was one of the Clippers' top defensemen.
Taylor Davenport - Plays for the Drayton Valley Thunder. Smaller (5'10). His coach says "He really plays with an edge, but is playing in a way where he's waiting for his opportunity to hit people, not just running around looking to hit somebody."
Goaltender
Dan DiLeo - traded from Fargo - Moorhead of the NAHL to Wichita Falls, and has carried the load for the team, keeping them in the playoff hunt. Decent to good stats on a weak defensive team. G:35 W:22 L:7 OTL:6 GAA: 2.94 SV%: .913
Recruits coming in 2006
Colin Greening - Highly ranked in the mid-term rankings for the now cancelled NHL draft. Big power forward, going to play in Nanaimo next year.
Justin Milo - Topher Scott II. 5'6", #6 in goals scored in the entire USHL. Could really light up the USHL next year.
Tony Romano - played in the US Under-17 team that played in Germany. Plays in a weak league, unknown where he'll play next year, but high scoring, fast, good hands.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2005 12:34AM by pfibiger.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: oceanst41 (---.housing.hawaii.edu)
Date: March 28, 2005 01:03AM
Well I would be happy if these guys could preform like this year's freshmen class did, and ecstatic if they could produce like the class of '06 did in their first years. 
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 28, 2005 03:35AM
[Q]pfibiger Wrote:
To summarize the incoming recruits:
Forwards
Matt Connors - played for the New York Apple Core, hurt for a bunch of the season, perhaps underperformed this year but put up enormous numbers the prev. year in his midget league, was recruited by 38 of 58 D-I schools.
Evan Barlow - #2 scorer on BCHL's Salmon Arm Silverbacks, one of the top scorers in the league. Brother played at Harvard.
Tyler Mugford - committed a year ago, deferred for a year. Mid-pack on his team in scoring, leads in penalty minutes. A sparkplug, seems Hornby-esque. Plays for the Nanaimo Clippers
Ryan Kindret - leading scorer on the Quesnel Millionaires of the BCHL. A pretty big power forward.
Mike Kennedy - A center, playing with the St. Thomas Stars in the Ontario Jr. B league. good regular season numbers, led the league in playoff goals.
Defensemen
Jared Seminoff - Good size, solid defender. Plays for Nanaimo. Was one of the Clippers' top defensemen.
Taylor Davenport - Plays for the Drayton Valley Thunder. Smaller (5'10). His coach says "He really plays with an edge, but is playing in a way where he's waiting for his opportunity to hit people, not just running around looking to hit somebody."
Goaltender
Dan DiLeo - traded from Fargo - Moorhead of the NAHL to Wichita Falls, and has carried the load for the team, keeping them in the playoff hunt. Decent to good stats on a weak defensive team. G:35 W:22 L:7 OTL:6 GAA: 2.94 SV%: .913
Recruits coming in 2006
Colin Greening - Highly ranked in the mid-term rankings for the now cancelled NHL draft. Big power forward, going to play in Nanaimo next year.
Justin Milo - Topher Scott II. 5'6", #6 in goals scored in the entire USHL. Could really light up the USHL next year.
Tony Romano - played in the US Under-17 team that played in Germany. Plays in a weak league, unknown where he'll play next year, but high scoring, fast, good hands.[/q]
I actually saw Milo play on Friday night and he is definitely a different player than Scott. He is much more of a goal scorer with an absolutely deadly release. He is a bit bigger than scott and skates differently. He is a very gifted offensive player who could step right in as a freshman and score a lot especially with all the open forward spots when he comes in.
To summarize the incoming recruits:
Forwards
Matt Connors - played for the New York Apple Core, hurt for a bunch of the season, perhaps underperformed this year but put up enormous numbers the prev. year in his midget league, was recruited by 38 of 58 D-I schools.
Evan Barlow - #2 scorer on BCHL's Salmon Arm Silverbacks, one of the top scorers in the league. Brother played at Harvard.
Tyler Mugford - committed a year ago, deferred for a year. Mid-pack on his team in scoring, leads in penalty minutes. A sparkplug, seems Hornby-esque. Plays for the Nanaimo Clippers
Ryan Kindret - leading scorer on the Quesnel Millionaires of the BCHL. A pretty big power forward.
Mike Kennedy - A center, playing with the St. Thomas Stars in the Ontario Jr. B league. good regular season numbers, led the league in playoff goals.
Defensemen
Jared Seminoff - Good size, solid defender. Plays for Nanaimo. Was one of the Clippers' top defensemen.
Taylor Davenport - Plays for the Drayton Valley Thunder. Smaller (5'10). His coach says "He really plays with an edge, but is playing in a way where he's waiting for his opportunity to hit people, not just running around looking to hit somebody."
Goaltender
Dan DiLeo - traded from Fargo - Moorhead of the NAHL to Wichita Falls, and has carried the load for the team, keeping them in the playoff hunt. Decent to good stats on a weak defensive team. G:35 W:22 L:7 OTL:6 GAA: 2.94 SV%: .913
Recruits coming in 2006
Colin Greening - Highly ranked in the mid-term rankings for the now cancelled NHL draft. Big power forward, going to play in Nanaimo next year.
Justin Milo - Topher Scott II. 5'6", #6 in goals scored in the entire USHL. Could really light up the USHL next year.
Tony Romano - played in the US Under-17 team that played in Germany. Plays in a weak league, unknown where he'll play next year, but high scoring, fast, good hands.[/q]
I actually saw Milo play on Friday night and he is definitely a different player than Scott. He is much more of a goal scorer with an absolutely deadly release. He is a bit bigger than scott and skates differently. He is a very gifted offensive player who could step right in as a freshman and score a lot especially with all the open forward spots when he comes in.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 06:57AM
What is the history of committed recruits for the year after (eg for the fall of 2006 right now) actually staying committed and showing up on campus?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: ursusminor (---.nrl.navy.mil)
Date: March 28, 2005 07:05AM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
What is the history of committed recruits for the year after (eg for the fall of 2006 right now) actually staying committed and showing up on campus? [/q] Overall, it's excellent, a commitment is a commitment, but if you guys want to give up on Greening, I'd gladly still take him at RPI.
What is the history of committed recruits for the year after (eg for the fall of 2006 right now) actually staying committed and showing up on campus? [/q] Overall, it's excellent, a commitment is a commitment, but if you guys want to give up on Greening, I'd gladly still take him at RPI.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 08:50AM
What's your thinking: His jumping from Cornell to the Tute would help the GPA of both schools? <g> He wants to get an early head start on spring break each year?
(Let the 2005-06 sniping begin. Where are the Clarkson faithful? The Lynah Faithful are now just about as gainfully without purpose as you are, other than griping about the rink size and officiating and seediing and ... )
(Let the 2005-06 sniping begin. Where are the Clarkson faithful? The Lynah Faithful are now just about as gainfully without purpose as you are, other than griping about the rink size and officiating and seediing and ... )
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Will (---.cable.mindspring.com)
Date: March 28, 2005 08:56AM
My total guesses at the lines for next year. Feel free to pick apart:
Mugford - Chris Abbott - Sawada
Moulson - Bitz - Hynes
Connors - Barlow - Carefoot
Cam Abbott - Pegoraro - Scott
Seminoff - O'Byrne
Krantz - Gleed
Pokulok - Glover
And McKee likely starts just about every game once again, barring injury or illness.
The order of those lines can change, to be sure.
Mugford - Chris Abbott - Sawada
Moulson - Bitz - Hynes
Connors - Barlow - Carefoot
Cam Abbott - Pegoraro - Scott
Seminoff - O'Byrne
Krantz - Gleed
Pokulok - Glover
And McKee likely starts just about every game once again, barring injury or illness.
The order of those lines can change, to be sure.
___________________________
Is next year here yet?
Is next year here yet?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Trotsky (---.cust-rtr.swbell.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 09:00AM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
What is the history of committed recruits for the year after (eg for the fall of 2006 right now) actually staying committed and showing up on campus? [/q]
I don't recall a deferred player ever failing to show up. The only committed player I can remember Cornell losing was Casson Masters, but he was to attend Cornell in year N, then bailed and came in for Princeton in year N+1, which is not quite the same thing.
What is the history of committed recruits for the year after (eg for the fall of 2006 right now) actually staying committed and showing up on campus? [/q]
I don't recall a deferred player ever failing to show up. The only committed player I can remember Cornell losing was Casson Masters, but he was to attend Cornell in year N, then bailed and came in for Princeton in year N+1, which is not quite the same thing.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2005 09:00AM by Trotsky.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: ursusminor (---.nrl.navy.mil)
Date: March 28, 2005 09:18AM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
What's your thinking: His jumping from Cornell to the Tute would help the GPA of both schools? <g> He wants to get an early head start on spring break each year? [/q]
All I was thinking was that he was originally rumored as heading to RPI. Among other things, this from USHR [www.ushr.com] [q]Upper Canada College star power forward Colin Greening, a 6’1†LW from St. John’s, Newfoundland, has reportedly been offered a full scholarship by RPI. Clarkson and Cornell are also in the picture[/q] He did visit RPI.
What's your thinking: His jumping from Cornell to the Tute would help the GPA of both schools? <g> He wants to get an early head start on spring break each year? [/q]
All I was thinking was that he was originally rumored as heading to RPI. Among other things, this from USHR [www.ushr.com] [q]Upper Canada College star power forward Colin Greening, a 6’1†LW from St. John’s, Newfoundland, has reportedly been offered a full scholarship by RPI. Clarkson and Cornell are also in the picture[/q] He did visit RPI.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 28, 2005 10:26AM
[Q]Will Wrote:
My total guesses at the lines for next year. Feel free to pick apart:
Mugford - Chris Abbott - Sawada
Moulson - Bitz - Hynes
Connors - Barlow - Carefoot
Cam Abbott - Pegoraro - Scott
Seminoff - O'Byrne
Krantz - Gleed
Pokulok - Glover
And McKee likely starts just about every game once again, barring injury or illness.
The order of those lines can change, to be sure.[/q]
I'm pretty sure Connors is a right winger and I think that Kindret will get into the lineup over Mugford. Things are pretty flexible because Scott can play any forward position. I for one am for reuniting the Abbotts as they were outstanding when put together on a makeshift basis the last two weeks.
Moulson-Bitz-Connors
Barlow-Pegoraro-Hynes
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
My total guesses at the lines for next year. Feel free to pick apart:
Mugford - Chris Abbott - Sawada
Moulson - Bitz - Hynes
Connors - Barlow - Carefoot
Cam Abbott - Pegoraro - Scott
Seminoff - O'Byrne
Krantz - Gleed
Pokulok - Glover
And McKee likely starts just about every game once again, barring injury or illness.
The order of those lines can change, to be sure.[/q]
I'm pretty sure Connors is a right winger and I think that Kindret will get into the lineup over Mugford. Things are pretty flexible because Scott can play any forward position. I for one am for reuniting the Abbotts as they were outstanding when put together on a makeshift basis the last two weeks.
Moulson-Bitz-Connors
Barlow-Pegoraro-Hynes
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Will (---.cable.mindspring.com)
Date: March 28, 2005 10:39AM
I think a lot of us want the Abbotts back together all the time, but I assume Schafer must have a good reason for keeping them split up on the official lines.
___________________________
Is next year here yet?
Is next year here yet?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.public.cornell.edu)
Date: March 28, 2005 11:32AM
[Q]Will Wrote:
I think a lot of us want the Abbotts back together all the time, but I assume Schafer must have a good reason for keeping them split up on the official lines.[/q]
I think he likes to keep Chris is more of a checking role and Cam in more of a scoring role.
I think a lot of us want the Abbotts back together all the time, but I assume Schafer must have a good reason for keeping them split up on the official lines.[/q]
I think he likes to keep Chris is more of a checking role and Cam in more of a scoring role.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: mjh89 (---.redrover.cornell.edu)
Date: March 28, 2005 11:40AM
Moulson-Bitz-Hynes
Barlow-Pegoraro-Scott
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
McCutcheon*-Kennedy-Carefoot
I think McCutcheon will get better this summer, and get into the lineup. If not, Connors will get a chance, but from I'm skeptical based on his stat line for Applecore and from what I've heard about him.
Defense
Pokulok-Glover
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Salmela if no one steps up and plays the offensive role vacated by Cook.
Barlow-Pegoraro-Scott
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
McCutcheon*-Kennedy-Carefoot
I think McCutcheon will get better this summer, and get into the lineup. If not, Connors will get a chance, but from I'm skeptical based on his stat line for Applecore and from what I've heard about him.
Defense
Pokulok-Glover
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Salmela if no one steps up and plays the offensive role vacated by Cook.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (128.84.198.---)
Date: March 28, 2005 02:50PM
I thought Krantz took huge strides in the second half of the season and showed glimpes of being an outstanding offensive defenseman. He has more offensive upside than Cook because he has better hands and a harder shot. There were times this weekend where he looked like a seasoned, offensive stalwart. I have very high hopes for both him and Pokuluk as big time offensive forces from the backline.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: DisplacedCornellian (---.hr.hr.cox.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 03:48PM
[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
I thought Krantz took huge strides in the second half of the season and showed glimpes of being an outstanding offensive defenseman. He has more offensive upside than Cook because he has better hands and a harder shot. There were times this weekend where he looked like a seasoned, offensive stalwart. I have very high hopes for both him and Pokuluk as big time offensive forces from the backline.[/q]
I agree. Krantz turned it up near the end of the season. He still looked uncomfortable and indecisive at times bringing the puck out of his own end, but I suspect he'll settle down and get that worked out. I really like seeing him out there on offense zone faceoffs: win it back to him and let him take the quick shot. That was pretty effective at times.
I thought Krantz took huge strides in the second half of the season and showed glimpes of being an outstanding offensive defenseman. He has more offensive upside than Cook because he has better hands and a harder shot. There were times this weekend where he looked like a seasoned, offensive stalwart. I have very high hopes for both him and Pokuluk as big time offensive forces from the backline.[/q]
I agree. Krantz turned it up near the end of the season. He still looked uncomfortable and indecisive at times bringing the puck out of his own end, but I suspect he'll settle down and get that worked out. I really like seeing him out there on offense zone faceoffs: win it back to him and let him take the quick shot. That was pretty effective at times.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: gobigred24 (---.lib.upenn.edu)
Date: March 28, 2005 03:57PM
Agree on the Abbotts, the just play damn well together. Ari, any reason you think Schafer will break up Moulson and Hynes?? I would rather him keep them together and have Pegoraro center them. But just my not that informed opinion.
Moulson-Pegoraro-Hynes
Barlow-Bitz-Connors
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
Does anyone know if all the forwards plan on staying with the team. Particularly McCleod and McKeown seem buried- they will probably be at least behind McCutcheon and whichever of Kennedy/Kindret doesn't make the lineup, and possibly Mugford as well. Seems like a lot of insurance to have them around.
Moulson-Pegoraro-Hynes
Barlow-Bitz-Connors
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
Does anyone know if all the forwards plan on staying with the team. Particularly McCleod and McKeown seem buried- they will probably be at least behind McCutcheon and whichever of Kennedy/Kindret doesn't make the lineup, and possibly Mugford as well. Seems like a lot of insurance to have them around.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (205.232.75.---)
Date: March 28, 2005 04:30PM
[Q]gobigred24 Wrote:
Agree on the Abbotts, the just play damn well together. Ari, any reason you think Schafer will break up Moulson and Hynes?? I would rather him keep them together and have Pegoraro center them. But just my not that informed opinion.
Moulson-Pegoraro-Hynes
Barlow-Bitz-Connors
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
Does anyone know if all the forwards plan on staying with the team. Particularly McCleod and McKeown seem buried- they will probably be at least behind McCutcheon and whichever of Kennedy/Kindret doesn't make the lineup, and possibly Mugford as well. Seems like a lot of insurance to have them around. [/q]
I think that Hynes would benefit from being the primary offensive presence on his line. He needs more responsibility and accountability to produce. This isn't a knock on him at all, but I think he can be better utilized with added offensive responsibility.
Agree on the Abbotts, the just play damn well together. Ari, any reason you think Schafer will break up Moulson and Hynes?? I would rather him keep them together and have Pegoraro center them. But just my not that informed opinion.
Moulson-Pegoraro-Hynes
Barlow-Bitz-Connors
Abbott-Abbott-Sawada
Kindret/Scott-Scott/Kennedy-Carefoot
Seminoff-O'Byrne
Krantz-Gleed
Pokuluk-Glover
Does anyone know if all the forwards plan on staying with the team. Particularly McCleod and McKeown seem buried- they will probably be at least behind McCutcheon and whichever of Kennedy/Kindret doesn't make the lineup, and possibly Mugford as well. Seems like a lot of insurance to have them around. [/q]
I think that Hynes would benefit from being the primary offensive presence on his line. He needs more responsibility and accountability to produce. This isn't a knock on him at all, but I think he can be better utilized with added offensive responsibility.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 04:34PM
[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote: I think that Hynes would benefit from being the primary offensive presence on his line. He needs more responsibility and accountability to produce. This isn't a knock on him at all, but I think he can be better utilized with added offensive responsibility.[/q]Was it so busy out in Minneapolis we forget to asign primary offensive responsibility for Sunday's game?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: mjh89 (---.resnet.cornell.edu)
Date: March 28, 2005 04:35PM
Interesting that you like his hands that much. I tend to think he handles the puck poorly, and often makes poor decisions on the breakout, while Cook seems to have great vision and stickhandling. Krantz's shot is outstanding, and I think he could take over for Knoepfli as a shooter on a power play unit.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: calgARI '07 (205.232.75.---)
Date: March 28, 2005 05:02PM
[Q]mjh89 Wrote:
Interesting that you like his hands that much. I tend to think he handles the puck poorly, and often makes poor decisions on the breakout, while Cook seems to have great vision and stickhandling. Krantz's shot is outstanding, and I think he could take over for Knoepfli as a shooter on a power play unit.[/q]
I wouldn't say I like hands a lot, but I think he handles the puck as well if not better than Cook who handles it adequately, but not anything amazing. I always thought Cook had good hockey sense and saw the ice well and as soon as he stopped being so tentative about shooting the puck (mid-way through this season and the Maine game in particular), it all came together for him. Krantz needs to work on his decision making, but he sees the ice well and when he makes the right decision to skate the puck, he is very effective.
Interesting that you like his hands that much. I tend to think he handles the puck poorly, and often makes poor decisions on the breakout, while Cook seems to have great vision and stickhandling. Krantz's shot is outstanding, and I think he could take over for Knoepfli as a shooter on a power play unit.[/q]
I wouldn't say I like hands a lot, but I think he handles the puck as well if not better than Cook who handles it adequately, but not anything amazing. I always thought Cook had good hockey sense and saw the ice well and as soon as he stopped being so tentative about shooting the puck (mid-way through this season and the Maine game in particular), it all came together for him. Krantz needs to work on his decision making, but he sees the ice well and when he makes the right decision to skate the puck, he is very effective.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 06:11PM
[Q]Trotsky Wrote:
No idea whether DiLeo will compete for time or whether he's Pizza Hut insurance.
[/q]
I really think that Chabot is "Pizza Hut insurance," i.e., good enough for one game but not for a significant injury (god help us) fill-in. DiLeo is probably a pretty good prospect--someone who might be a top goaltender in the CHA or AHA (or CCHA--hah!). My hypothesis is that he is a Skazyk/Burt/Marr. Has a real chance at starting during his junior year but will probably platoon with a freshman phenom working through the kinks and jitters. I'd be happy if he's as good as any of those three.
On the defense, I'll go with this, though I'm not so sure how much right/left affects such things. Paying no attention to that, my pairings:
Pokulok--Gleed
Glover--O'Byrne
Seminoff--Krantz
It seems to me that Schafer likes to balance his pairings with one offensive and one defensive defenseman. Early in the season it's upperclassman with inexperience. (It was Downs--O'Byrne, Pokulok--Cook, and Gleed--Krantz to start the season.) I wonder sometimes if Pokulok was thought to be less offensively talented when they brought him in. I don't think he'll be a tree-like defensive defenseman like O'Byrne. (By the way, that's why we need O'Byrne to continue improving. The bare hints of an offensive game that we've been starting to see will just be icing if he can fulfill his defensive potential. O'Byrne must, eventually, become equal to Murray (defensively)/McMeekin/Adler.) In fact, I think he and Krantz (who was supposed to be much better coming in and seemed to be getting comfortable late in the season) are types of defensemen that we haven't had before, with the possible exception of Murray. These guys are legitimate defensemen, trees, and offensive threats. That's cool. Pin these recruits on Schafer's reputation. I expect that Seminoff and Davenport will be just as good.
That's why I paired up Seminoff with Krantz. If he's a top defensive defenseman out of Nanaimo, he'll be a great Downs replacement; that is, if Glover isn't really the Downs replacement. With the others' offensive skills developing, we won't really need a Cook replacement. That's probably Krantz. I'm guessing that the four power play guys (Pokulok, Krantz, O'Byrne, Gleed, (Salmela?)) will be having a talk with Schafer like Charlie Cook did this last summer. Someone will develop a boomer.
Man, our defense will lose two fantastic defensemen and still, probably, improve. Go Schafer. Only worry is a Downs replacement and some puck carrying skill. On the latter, Gleed is fine, Pokulok can be amazing (if slow), and Krantz will get better.
Forwards? Well, we've already got 12 forwards. There are clear first liners, the middle, and the clear checkers. What we need is organization. Freshman projections are parentheses and multi-positionals are brackets:
I think we need to stop thinking about first line, second line, "inexperience line," and checking line. Schafer is moving towards something different: 1) No line next year will be "inexperienced." 2) No line will be the clearly checking or offensive, i.e., Moulson/Bitz/Hynes and Abbott/Abbott/Sawada (and Mugford/Scott/Carefoot) will be equal defensively. 3) All lines have someone capable of an offensive explosion.
So, about the forwards, I think there are a couple of keys for next year:
1) Barlow, or maybe Kindret, will have to step in as a left wing and be an immediate contributor.
2) We are thin--or maybe small--at center, but Schafer seems intent on "making" centers. Perhaps Kennedy is the checking center that Schafer has been looking for. Perhaps the Bitz experiment will stop. Perhaps Barlow will actually play center. In any case, we are *still* looking for a Vesce-like (Chartrand, Casey Jones, Nieuwendyk) clear first-line center. Although he seems to have the skills, I'm afraid that Scott is actually too small to play first line 5x5 with Hynes and Moulson. He will continue to be absolutely integral to the power play. One amongst Pegoraro, Bitz, Barlow, or Abbott needs to prove that he is a honest-to-goodness first-line center.
3) Someone will step up, which brings me to:
[Q]mjh89
I think McCutcheon will get better this summer, and get into the lineup.
[/Q]
I also nominate McCutcheon as the best potential "difference maker" for next season.
Take a look at our players' ages:
So, my final analysis: I look forward to 2005-2006. I think we're set to get just as far as we did this year. If three things happen--Barlow (or Kindret) stepping in and having an immediate impact, a center elevates his game, and McCutcheon and O'Byrne improve as I think they will--we're going to be a scary team next season. And I mean on offense.
No idea whether DiLeo will compete for time or whether he's Pizza Hut insurance.
[/q]
I really think that Chabot is "Pizza Hut insurance," i.e., good enough for one game but not for a significant injury (god help us) fill-in. DiLeo is probably a pretty good prospect--someone who might be a top goaltender in the CHA or AHA (or CCHA--hah!). My hypothesis is that he is a Skazyk/Burt/Marr. Has a real chance at starting during his junior year but will probably platoon with a freshman phenom working through the kinks and jitters. I'd be happy if he's as good as any of those three.
On the defense, I'll go with this, though I'm not so sure how much right/left affects such things. Paying no attention to that, my pairings:
Pokulok--Gleed
Glover--O'Byrne
Seminoff--Krantz
It seems to me that Schafer likes to balance his pairings with one offensive and one defensive defenseman. Early in the season it's upperclassman with inexperience. (It was Downs--O'Byrne, Pokulok--Cook, and Gleed--Krantz to start the season.) I wonder sometimes if Pokulok was thought to be less offensively talented when they brought him in. I don't think he'll be a tree-like defensive defenseman like O'Byrne. (By the way, that's why we need O'Byrne to continue improving. The bare hints of an offensive game that we've been starting to see will just be icing if he can fulfill his defensive potential. O'Byrne must, eventually, become equal to Murray (defensively)/McMeekin/Adler.) In fact, I think he and Krantz (who was supposed to be much better coming in and seemed to be getting comfortable late in the season) are types of defensemen that we haven't had before, with the possible exception of Murray. These guys are legitimate defensemen, trees, and offensive threats. That's cool. Pin these recruits on Schafer's reputation. I expect that Seminoff and Davenport will be just as good.
That's why I paired up Seminoff with Krantz. If he's a top defensive defenseman out of Nanaimo, he'll be a great Downs replacement; that is, if Glover isn't really the Downs replacement. With the others' offensive skills developing, we won't really need a Cook replacement. That's probably Krantz. I'm guessing that the four power play guys (Pokulok, Krantz, O'Byrne, Gleed, (Salmela?)) will be having a talk with Schafer like Charlie Cook did this last summer. Someone will develop a boomer.
Man, our defense will lose two fantastic defensemen and still, probably, improve. Go Schafer. Only worry is a Downs replacement and some puck carrying skill. On the latter, Gleed is fine, Pokulok can be amazing (if slow), and Krantz will get better.
Forwards? Well, we've already got 12 forwards. There are clear first liners, the middle, and the clear checkers. What we need is organization. Freshman projections are parentheses and multi-positionals are brackets:
Left Wings: 1st--Moulson, [(Barlow)]
Mid--Abbott, (Kindret)
Chk--McLeod, (Mugford)
Centers: 1st--Pegoraro, [(Barlow)], Scott
Mid--[Bitz], Abbott
Chk--(Kennedy)
Right Wings: 1st--Hynes, [Bitz], (Connors)
Mid--Sawada, McCutcheon
Chk--Carefoot
???: McKeown
So, this could be:
LW C RW
Moulson Pegoraro Hynes
Bitz Scott Carefoot
Abbott Abbott Sawada
McLeod McKeown? McCutcheon (the McDaddies, or Big Mc's)
Or, say, more like this year:
LW C RW
Moulson Bitz Hynes
Abbott Abbott Sawada
Barlow Pegoraro McCutcheon
Mugford Scott Carefoot
There are obvious weirdnesses in here: Topher Scott is not a checking center, Pegoraro may not be the right center for Moulson and Hynes, and some "mid-level" player will step up, like Iggulden, and surprise us all. What to say?
I think we need to stop thinking about first line, second line, "inexperience line," and checking line. Schafer is moving towards something different: 1) No line next year will be "inexperienced." 2) No line will be the clearly checking or offensive, i.e., Moulson/Bitz/Hynes and Abbott/Abbott/Sawada (and Mugford/Scott/Carefoot) will be equal defensively. 3) All lines have someone capable of an offensive explosion.
So, about the forwards, I think there are a couple of keys for next year:
1) Barlow, or maybe Kindret, will have to step in as a left wing and be an immediate contributor.
2) We are thin--or maybe small--at center, but Schafer seems intent on "making" centers. Perhaps Kennedy is the checking center that Schafer has been looking for. Perhaps the Bitz experiment will stop. Perhaps Barlow will actually play center. In any case, we are *still* looking for a Vesce-like (Chartrand, Casey Jones, Nieuwendyk) clear first-line center. Although he seems to have the skills, I'm afraid that Scott is actually too small to play first line 5x5 with Hynes and Moulson. He will continue to be absolutely integral to the power play. One amongst Pegoraro, Bitz, Barlow, or Abbott needs to prove that he is a honest-to-goodness first-line center.
3) Someone will step up, which brings me to:
[Q]mjh89
I think McCutcheon will get better this summer, and get into the lineup.
[/Q]
I also nominate McCutcheon as the best potential "difference maker" for next season.
Take a look at our players' ages:
Age at MSU game 10/2005
Dan Glover JR 5/4/83 22
Evan Salmela JR 6/13/83 22
Doug Krantz SO 8/22/83 22
Cam Abbott SR 10/24/83 22
Chris Abbott SR 10/24/83 22
Matt Moulson SR 11/1/83 21
Shane Hynes SR 11/7/83 21
Jon Gleed SR 1/3/84 21
Daniel Pegoraro SR 1/13/84 21
Mark McCutcheon JR 5/21/84 21
Ryan O'Byrne JR 7/19/84 21
Byron Bitz JR 7/21/84 21
Kevin McLeod JR 10/25/84 21
Mitch Carefoot JR 1/2/85 20
Tyler Mugford FR 1/14/85 20
Matt McKeown SO 1/16/85 20
Raymond Sawada SO 2/19/85 20
Ryan Kindret FR 4/11/85 20
Taylor Davenport FR 4/15/85 20
Topher Scott SO 7/23/85 20
Evan Barlow FR 11/8/85 19
Jared Seminoff FR 2/27/86 19
Sasha Pokulok SO 5/25/86 19
Mike Kennedy FR 8/21/86 19
Matt Connors FR 11/15/86 18
Iggulden turned 22 during this season. He and Cook were our youngest seniors. Something seems to happen during those years. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but there's an obvious reason that Krantz looked better than Pokulok by the end of the year: he's not still in the throes of growing/catching up with himself. I mean, by gum, Pokulok is 18... 18! He, Scott, and Sawada are way ahead of schedule. (Bitz is also ahead of schedule, scarily.) Look who solidified this season and who didn't: Gleed and Pegoraro became rocks; O'Byrne and McCutcheon, well, weren't. I think we can expect big things out of both of them next season. I have had this vision of McCutcheon scoring a very important goal...
So, my final analysis: I look forward to 2005-2006. I think we're set to get just as far as we did this year. If three things happen--Barlow (or Kindret) stepping in and having an immediate impact, a center elevates his game, and McCutcheon and O'Byrne improve as I think they will--we're going to be a scary team next season. And I mean on offense.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/29/2005 02:15PM by Scersk '97.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Larry72 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 28, 2005 08:46PM
I love this thread!!! After about 40 years of watching Cornell play and especially after this past weekend, it's really nice to read about next year! Cornell has a great core group of players coming back and a super crop of freshman. Thanks to the Seniors. LGR!!!
Larry '72
Larry '72
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: March 28, 2005 10:11PM
Older players probably fit in better at Cornell because they're not bothered so much by the 21-year drinking age.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Kyle Rose (---.krose.org)
Date: March 28, 2005 10:15PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Older players probably fit in better at Cornell because they're not bothered so much by the 21-year drinking age. [/q]
Why do I get the feeling that the Schafer System doesn't include drinking most nights of the week?
Kyle
Older players probably fit in better at Cornell because they're not bothered so much by the 21-year drinking age. [/q]
Why do I get the feeling that the Schafer System doesn't include drinking most nights of the week?
Kyle
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: abmarks (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)
Date: March 29, 2005 02:40AM
[Q]krose Wrote:
billhoward Wrote:
Older players probably fit in better at Cornell because they're not bothered so much by the 21-year drinking age. [/Q]
Why do I get the feeling that the Schafer System doesn't include drinking most nights of the week?
Kyle[/q]
You didn't see his system when he was a player then
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Roy 82 (---.SRI.COM)
Date: March 29, 2005 03:03AM
Schafer is the one system to have when you are having more than one. 
(I fear that I am really dating myself)
(I fear that I am really dating myself)
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: March 29, 2005 05:50AM
Excellent post, Scott (and a lot of work)!
The only thing I would disagree with is that all the lines will be O/D balanced. I think there will be a "#1 line" for sure, the difference being that the #1 line under Schafer is his primary checking line, to counter the other team's scorers.
The only thing I would disagree with is that all the lines will be O/D balanced. I think there will be a "#1 line" for sure, the difference being that the #1 line under Schafer is his primary checking line, to counter the other team's scorers.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: March 29, 2005 08:42AM
We're saying the 25 young men of the Cornell hockey team all go dry from October through April of each year? It must be a cruel reminder for the defenseman who lines up behind Matt Moulson during a faceoff, looks up, and sees that cool and refreshing word on the back of Matt's jersey. And then to have a coach named ...
At least the trainer isn't named Bud.
At least the trainer isn't named Bud.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: March 29, 2005 08:43AM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
We're saying the 25 young men of the Cornell hockey team all go dry from October through April of each year? It must be a cruel reminder for the defenseman who lines up behind Matt Moulson during a faceoff, looks up, and sees that cool and refreshing word on the back of Matt's jersey. And then to have a coach named ...
At least the trainer isn't named Bud. [/q]
Um, anyone who says that has never been to Dunbar's on a Saturday night.
We're saying the 25 young men of the Cornell hockey team all go dry from October through April of each year? It must be a cruel reminder for the defenseman who lines up behind Matt Moulson during a faceoff, looks up, and sees that cool and refreshing word on the back of Matt's jersey. And then to have a coach named ...
At least the trainer isn't named Bud. [/q]
Um, anyone who says that has never been to Dunbar's on a Saturday night.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Kyle Rose (---.krose.org)
Date: March 29, 2005 08:51AM
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
billhoward Wrote:
We're saying the 25 young men of the Cornell hockey team all go dry from October through April of each year? It must be a cruel reminder for the defenseman who lines up behind Matt Moulson during a faceoff, looks up, and sees that cool and refreshing word on the back of Matt's jersey. And then to have a coach named ...
At least the trainer isn't named Bud. [/Q]
Um, anyone who says that has never been to Dunbar's on a Saturday night.[/q]
I'm just contending that Schafer is probably a no-drinks-Sunday-night-through-Saturday-afternoon guy. I would be, if I were a coach.
Kyle
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: andyw2100 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)
Date: March 29, 2005 09:53AM
[Q]krose Wrote:
I'm just contending that Schafer is probably a no-drinks-Sunday-night-through-Saturday-afternoon guy. I would be, if I were a coach.
Kyle[/q]
Saturday afternoon? "Hey fellas, why don't we go out and get toasted before the game tonight, eh?"
But yes, I understand your point. I'm sure you meant to write "...through Saturday, after the game...", or something like it.
Andy
I'm just contending that Schafer is probably a no-drinks-Sunday-night-through-Saturday-afternoon guy. I would be, if I were a coach.
Kyle[/q]
Saturday afternoon? "Hey fellas, why don't we go out and get toasted before the game tonight, eh?"
But yes, I understand your point. I'm sure you meant to write "...through Saturday, after the game...", or something like it.
Andy
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Kyle Rose (---.akamai.com)
Date: March 29, 2005 10:11AM
[Q]andyw2100 Wrote:
But yes, I understand your point. I'm sure you meant to write "...through Saturday, after the game...", or something like it.
[/q]
Indeed. Thanks for the clarification. Though tanking up before the game has its own advantages...
Kyle
But yes, I understand your point. I'm sure you meant to write "...through Saturday, after the game...", or something like it.
[/q]
Indeed. Thanks for the clarification. Though tanking up before the game has its own advantages...
Kyle
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Byoo (---.resnet.cornell.edu)
Date: March 29, 2005 12:52PM
I see :
Pokulok - Seminoff ( played together on the same unit at Notre-Dame before Sasha's freshman campain, there defenitely has to be some chemistry there...)
Krantz - O'Byrne ( solid 1-2 punch of speed-offensiveness and huge-killing will shut other team good lines down)
Glover - Gleed ( will probably be counted on to take on the other team's top lines, never have i seen a player block so many shots as Gleed)
Pokulok - Seminoff ( played together on the same unit at Notre-Dame before Sasha's freshman campain, there defenitely has to be some chemistry there...)
Krantz - O'Byrne ( solid 1-2 punch of speed-offensiveness and huge-killing will shut other team good lines down)
Glover - Gleed ( will probably be counted on to take on the other team's top lines, never have i seen a player block so many shots as Gleed)
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)
Date: March 29, 2005 02:29PM
Another thing that occurs to me re: McCutcheon:
We, rather famously, play a "left wing lock." McCutcheon seems to have spent most of his time on the right side, where our big power forwards rack up assists but not goals by aggressively forchecking and then hitting the cutting left wing. (Bâby (or Paolini?)/Bitz/Hynes to Moulson/Paolini (or Bâby?)) With all these experienced players returning, maybe Schafer will have the team playing a reversible version of the lock? Having little actual strategic hockey knowledge, I don't know how easy/hard this new wrinkle would be to implement.
For all his lack of scoring, McCutcheon was recruited, I believe, as a scorer. He's always looked more like a finesse player than a bruiser, a Moulson rather than a Carefoot. I have a feeling that Schafer will be hunkering down with 101 Offensive Schemes for Hockey this summer, since he's obviously got defense down pat. I bet that one of the things he comes up with will exploit McCutcheon's puck handling skills... if McCutcheon hits the weights so he isn't easy to knock off the puck.
We, rather famously, play a "left wing lock." McCutcheon seems to have spent most of his time on the right side, where our big power forwards rack up assists but not goals by aggressively forchecking and then hitting the cutting left wing. (Bâby (or Paolini?)/Bitz/Hynes to Moulson/Paolini (or Bâby?)) With all these experienced players returning, maybe Schafer will have the team playing a reversible version of the lock? Having little actual strategic hockey knowledge, I don't know how easy/hard this new wrinkle would be to implement.
For all his lack of scoring, McCutcheon was recruited, I believe, as a scorer. He's always looked more like a finesse player than a bruiser, a Moulson rather than a Carefoot. I have a feeling that Schafer will be hunkering down with 101 Offensive Schemes for Hockey this summer, since he's obviously got defense down pat. I bet that one of the things he comes up with will exploit McCutcheon's puck handling skills... if McCutcheon hits the weights so he isn't easy to knock off the puck.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/29/2005 02:33PM by Scersk '97.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.res.rr.com)
Date: March 29, 2005 08:36PM
[Q]krose Wrote:
Though tanking up before the game has its own advantages...
[/q]
Depends on what you're tanking up on...
Though tanking up before the game has its own advantages...
[/q]
Depends on what you're tanking up on...
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
griping
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 04:10PM
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. 
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:08PM
The signal-to-noise ratio on RichS is awful. Where's my "squelch?"
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: ben03 (---.rochester.res.rr.com)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:11PM
age are you still working on the "Ignore RichS" button? please tell me you're close ... 
___________________________
Let's GO Red!!!
Let's GO Red!!!
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:13PM
And, if you do end up programming such a useful thing, could you add a way for the poster to see just how many people have "ignored" him? What better response to a troll?
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: Jacob 03 (---.mobility-dn.psu.edu)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:38PM
Remember back before technology when we could ignore a person without a special button? This is as bad as when they added spin-o-rama to NHL96...the D-pad was RIGHT THERE!
Re: tsk tsk
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:48PM
you guys are amazing...lough to dump on other programs and razz em to death...but atke a little gibe about your whining? "You can't handle the truth!"
Re: tsk tsk
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: March 30, 2005 05:54PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
"You can't handle the truth!"[/q]
And we all know what happened to Col. Jessep, don't we? Busted by the good guys.
RichS, you have the right to remain silent...please.
"You can't handle the truth!"[/q]
And we all know what happened to Col. Jessep, don't we? Busted by the good guys.
RichS, you have the right to remain silent...please.
Re: tsk tsk
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 06:02PM
and you have the right to grow up and take some ribbing....like you dish it out.
Your choice.
Your choice.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 06:03PM
A graet suggestion from one who knows all about Clarkson hockey...
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: March 30, 2005 06:07PM
[Q]And, if you do end up programming such a useful thing, could you add a way for the poster to see just how many people have "ignored" him? What better response to a troll?[/q]That could well be encouragement for a troll. "How many people can I piss off enough that they will want to ignore me?"
For the record, I don't think Rich is a troll. And we are still griping three days later, so that at least is the truth.
For the record, I don't think Rich is a troll. And we are still griping three days later, so that at least is the truth.
Re: tsk tsk
Posted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)
Date: March 30, 2005 06:18PM
And what do you think I've just been doing?
Wake up, Rich!
Wake up, Rich!
Re: griping
Posted by: French Rage (---.Stanford.EDU)
Date: March 30, 2005 07:32PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/q]
Yeah it could be worse. We've won at least a game each time we've gone to the NCAAs in the last 4 years. Sure beats going 5 straight years and only having 1 win to show for it.
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/q]
Yeah it could be worse. We've won at least a game each time we've gone to the NCAAs in the last 4 years. Sure beats going 5 straight years and only having 1 win to show for it.
Re: griping
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 08:39PM
[Q]French Rage Wrote:
RichS Wrote:
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/Q]
Yeah it could be worse. We've won at least a game each time we've gone to the NCAAs in the last 4 years. Sure beats going 5 straight years and only having 1 win to show for it.[/q]
I guess being a good sport about it could make it worse, eh?
Re: griping
Posted by: French Rage (---.Stanford.EDU)
Date: March 30, 2005 08:46PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
French Rage Wrote:
RichS Wrote:
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/Q]
Yeah it could be worse. We've won at least a game each time we've gone to the NCAAs in the last 4 years. Sure beats going 5 straight years and only having 1 win to show for it.[/Q]
I guess being a good sport about it could make it worse, eh?
[/q]
Nah, whining incessantly on another team's message board is the only thing that could do that.
Re: New Recruits
Posted by: billhoward (---.ziffdavis.com)
Date: March 30, 2005 08:53PM
There is a Clarkson message board, one assumes. Can ladies read recent posts, or do they have to ask their boyfriends to find out ("and don't forget to wash your hands".
.
Re: griping
Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)
Date: March 30, 2005 08:58PM
[Q]French Rage Wrote:
RichS Wrote:
French Rage Wrote:
RichS Wrote:
Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/Q]
Yeah it could be worse. We've won at least a game each time we've gone to the NCAAs in the last 4 years. Sure beats going 5 straight years and only having 1 win to show for it.[/Q]
I guess being a good sport about it could make it worse, eh?
[/Q]
Nah, whining incessantly on another team's message board is the only thing that could do that.[/q]
That might be true but you don't see me whining here. I find it amusing that some of you just can't handle a little tweaking now and then. And then some say the ice size accounted for cornell's loss. You admire Schafer so much...fine. Follow is lead...have you heard him say that?
I'm proud of the accomplishments the Clarkson teams achieved in those years. Disappointed in their performance in the NCAAs? Yep. Embaressed...nope.
You're barking up the wrong tree.
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: ithacat (---.twcny.res.rr.com)Date: March 30, 2005 09:50PM
[Q]KeithK Wrote:
And we are still griping three days later, so that at least is the truth.
[/q]
Ah, who's griping? 3 Regional finals in 4 years, 1 Frozen Four...these are good times for Cornell hockey. This year was about getting experience for a team that's poised to make a deep run next year.
Enjoy & get out to support the lax team & their potential run to the Final Four.Re: gripingPosted by: Steve M (---.fluor.com)Date: March 31, 2005 12:09PM
Rich,
It's not whining. I think most objective people would agree that the size of the rink gave Minny an advantage as it suits their game and hurts ours. They might have still won anyway, but there's nothing wrong with making this observation when assessing our chances for next year. And really, don't you have anything better to do than to come on to eLynah and stir up the pot? If you want to get a flame war going, USCHO is the best place. At least it won't be one-sided there.Re: gripingPosted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)Date: March 31, 2005 12:30PM
It may not be whining, but it certainly is griping about a bad draw (and I am very much guilty of it). There's a fine line between the two.Re: gripingPosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: March 31, 2005 12:57PM
It's whining when someone says words to the effect that 'we'd have one if it were played on NHL size ice' or 'their advantage on that ice was the reason they won'.
Fact is both teams played on the same surface and if indeed Minny was faster and forced cornell to take restraining penalties because they could not keep up with their speed, as one of your colleagues reported, then that's a sign of a competitive advantage that the Gophers had. Admit it and don't whine about the ice surface.
Re: gripingPosted by: Steve M (---.fluor.com)Date: March 31, 2005 12:59PM
Agreed and I am too. I'm proud of the team for almost pulling it out against the odds and refusing to gripe at all, even though it must be a lot more frustrating for them than it was for us. Bad draws come along every now and then for some and more often for others. Congrats to CC for managing to overcome theirs this year.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.raytheon.com)Date: March 31, 2005 01:14PM
We never said we would have won. We *did* say the game would have gone much differently and we would have had a much better chance. I don't see how you could objectively argue with those statements.
Just like we could have won on big ice, we could have lost on small ice, but I don't think pointing out the factual differences is whining. It does make a big difference, that's a fact.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)Date: March 31, 2005 02:27PM
There's quite a difference between "whining" and "analyzing a loss."
Whining: Oh, geez. Why do we always get screwed? Why does this always happen to us? Why did we have to go to Minnesota? Why couldn't it have been somebody else? We deserved the #1 seed, not Minnesota. Oh, geez, being a Cornell hockey fan is so difficult!
Analyzing: You know, I thought we had a chance against Minnesota, but the large ice looked to be a factor. Of course, it's kind of difficult to tell whether it was the large ice or their superior team speed. Hmmm... let's think about this.
I count it as a particularly American neurosis that we are almost unable to analyze defeat publicly. Talking about a loss is, after all, what losers do; exploring hypothetheticals is "whining." Look at Vietnam, look at recent problems with figuring out 9/11, look at reports of sporting matches: it's somewhat endemic to our society. How does the cliché go? "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it?" Perhaps it should be, "Those who do not analyze and understand their losses are doomed to be losers."
I think this discussion has been particularly aimed towards figuring out how Cornell might solve, or might be in the process of solving, the problems we've had facing the Minnesotas and UHNs of the world. In that vein, I thought the discussion was progessing well. And then you, RichS, came along and made an inane comment about "whining." Way to be juvenile. I had almost started to feel some sort of respect for you when, responding to one of my own threads regarding Clarkson/Cornell history, you showed some reasonable knowledge of the situation. Then you have to go and screw it up.
Yes, we do have our trolls, and they, even Facetimer, sometimes display bursts of knowledge like you do. The problem, as I said, is the signal-to-noise ratio. How do you ever expect anyone to pay attention when you have something to say if you keep spouting off idiocy at every chance? It's one thing to make a snide comment in the space of a reasonable analysis, but it's quite another to come up with the "trollish one-liner." Frankly, I've heard them all before. If you want to do that kind of crap, go to USCHO.
Basically, grow up.Re: gripingPosted by: Steve M (---.fluor.com)Date: March 31, 2005 03:27PM
Everything you said in the post above is true and I do think the better team won. I never said, however, that Cornell would have won if the game were played on NHL ice. I only said they would have had a much better chance. There's a difference.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Trotsky (---.cust-rtr.swbell.net)Date: March 31, 2005 03:31PM
I'm sure the British thought the colonists were "whining."
Where you stand depends on where you sit...Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Scersk '97 (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)Date: March 31, 2005 04:00PM
Of course, the British probably didn't get a chance to tell the colonists that they were "whining" in their own broadsheets:
********************* Ye Olde Scandal Sheet --------------------- Colonies in Turmoil! Babies Eaten! King George has syphillis! Letters to the Editor: King George III, John Jay, Paul Revere Dear Editor, You and the colonists are stupidheads. Cheers, KG IIIThey had to rely on proclamations for that:
By Order of His Majesty King George III Colonists: STOP WHINING! Go Red.
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Jeff Hopkins '82 (---.airproducts.com)Date: March 31, 2005 05:46PM
The would have said STOP WHINGING, but point takenRe: gripingPosted by: BCrespi (---.twcny.res.rr.com)Date: March 31, 2005 08:27PM
Circular logic at its finest right there.
___________________________
Brian Crespi '06Re: gripingPosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: March 31, 2005 09:15PM
Not at all.
What made the difference is greater speed on the part of the Gophers if I read game reports and some comments here correctly. If an opponent can't match their speed, that's an edge for them in hockey skill, not an edge created by a different ice surface.
Is the edge exacerbated by a bigger surface? Perhaps so although many dispute that notion. What doesn't change is that speed is a big advantage regardless of the surface.Re: gripingPosted by: BCrespi (---.twcny.res.rr.com)Date: March 31, 2005 09:23PM
Would you argue that size and solid stay-at-home defense are also attributes/skills that are helpful in hockey? I think this goes without saying, but who knows, I'm a whiny Cornell hockey fan. Regardless, this cannot be solved here. I think that a larger rink would help a speedy, more skilled team, while a smaller rink would help a more physical, defensive team. Oh well, not really worth arguing, but you can't say that nomatter where/when/how/why a game is played has no bearing simply because a team is faster. Many other factors come into play. The Yankees have (almost) always built their team around lefthanded power hitting and lefthanded starting pitching due to the dimensions of their home ballpark. Of course in Major League Baseball all teams play at home in the playoffs...but who am I to judge.
___________________________
Brian Crespi '06
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2005 01:54AM by BCrespi.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: March 31, 2005 09:48PM
Wow Rich, you almost understood what we were talking about!
Yes, Gophers were speedier, an advantage which was helped by the larger ice surface.
We're more solid defensively, wear the other team down more, and play better along the boards. Advantages which are helped by smaller rinks.
So, had the rink been smaller, we would have stood a better chance. That's all.
No one here said "the Gophers were completely talentless and the only thing they had going for them was a bigger rink". That doesn't make any sense. If you have no skill, then rink size doesn't matter. By us saying rink size helped the Gophers, which it clearly did, that must OBVIOUSLY mean that the Gophers have skills which are helped by a larger rink. It's so incredibly inherent in the argument that we didn't feel we need to spell it out to avoid offending someone who searches for reasons to be offended.Re: Ice surfacePosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: March 31, 2005 09:59PM
Relax Delta.
I've played hockey in college and now have coached at the youth and high school level for several years. I know the game pretty well.
First off, when the issue of a larger ice surface hurting cornell came up a few years ago re" the Olympic Arena in Lake Placid, Schafer blew it off and said it would not have a meaningful affect. He was right, it didn't. His team adjusted appropriately to the surface.
I didn't see the game last week but I do not recall him making any comments either before or after re: the ice size being a big factor. I may have missed some so please enlighten me if I did.
As a coach you focus on the things you can control, not the ones you cannot, such as where the game is being played once the seedings are done. I'm sure he did that. You use techniques to minimize the speed advantage the other team has the best you can. That can largely negate the percived huge advantage that many fans (those who don't know the strategic part of the game as well) think a faster team will have. If they have other talents that compliment their speed and allow them to offset your adjustments, that means they have an advantage...another hockey skill advantage.
No point whining about that and certainly no point whining about the seeding and ice size as I read here for a week before the game was played.
As for your last comment re: looking for reasons to be offended...are you serious? If the stuff that you guys say to me or at me offended me personally, would I be here? Come on, do better than that.Re: Ice surfacePosted by: DisplacedCornellian (---.hr.hr.cox.net)Date: March 31, 2005 10:05PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
As for your last comment re: looking for reasons to be offended...are you serious? If the stuff that you guys say to me or at me offended me personally, would I be here? Come on, do better than that.[/q]
Yes, you probably would be here because you have nothing better to do.
And if that's not the case, then enlighten us. Why, exactly, are you here? Shouldn't you be rejoicing in Cornell's NCAA misfortune with your cronies over on the roundtable?Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: March 31, 2005 10:12PM
Oh, absolutely, if Schafer said a thing about the ice surface other than blowing it off, he wouldn't be doing his job as a coach. We as fans however, can be more liberal with out topics and are not a public face for the university (or, well, the hockey program) and don't have to be so reserved.
Is there a "point" about 99.9% of the things we talk about? I'd be surprised if there was. Most of it is analysis, its interesting, its something to talk about, it passes the time, its creates interesting conversations. So who cares if there's a point. Its something to talk about and analyze and try to reach a consensus. Guess what, its fun! There doesn't need to be a point.
I don't know Rich. I never said we offended you "personally", but we seem to bother you a whole lot. I'd guess that 9 out of 10 of your posts are here and telling us how something is inappropriate or whiny or flat out wrong or is some form of complaint from you. To be honest I have no idea why you're here, because you seem to always have a problem with our behavior.Re: Ice surfacePosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: March 31, 2005 10:12PM
Lame, very lame.
I don't rejoice when another ECAC team bows out of the big dance. See my post on a threadast week encoraging the red to "do the ECAC proud."
I have lots to do, thank you. College hockey is a passion as it has been for many years. I trust it is for you as well. Is that why you're here?Re: Ice surfacePosted by: DisplacedCornellian (---.hr.hr.cox.net)Date: March 31, 2005 10:15PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
I have lots to do, thank you. College hockey is a passion as it has been for many years. I trust it is for you as well. Is that why you're here? [/q]
If you have lots to do, get to it.
College hockey is a passion of mine, that is why I'm here. I'm passionate about Cornell hockey. Being passionate about hockey is fine. But my passion for college hockey doesn't lead me to go to other team's message boards and piss in their kool-aid. That sort of behavior is reserved for USCHO.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)Date: March 31, 2005 10:19PM
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
Yes, Gophers were speedier, an advantage which was helped by the larger ice surface.
[/q]
As Lucia said in his USCHO Q & A's: "...the biggest advantage Mariucci gave us was playing on the big rink..."
Must have been wearing his "carnelian-tinted glasses," I suppose.
RichS, why don't you take your boneheaded postings over to the Round Table where you can exchange worthless blather with that other rip-roaring hockey genius, Goldie Knight? Birds of a feather...
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65Re: carnellian BlatherPosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 01, 2005 03:09AM
Thanks for your boneheaded posting. Gee Al, that one really hurt!
If there's anyone here who knows "worthless blather", it's you. I've been reading your not-so-well thought out digs at Clarkson hockey and academics for a long time now. Let me know when you actually know something about either.
Nice cheap shot at Goldie as well. She's a passionate Tech fan just as you guys are in support of your team. And your problem with that is?
Sounds like you think there's only room in this world for one team in college hockey.
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: April 01, 2005 07:53AM
I just want to say that it didn't go unnoticed, that once Al proves that even Lucia thinks the big ice made a different, Rich immediately drops any substance from the argument and just go straight for the personal attacks. Not that those didn't start, both ways, a while back - but once proven to be in disagreement with Minn's own coach, the original topic is unceremoniously dropped.Re: Colonists Whining [OT]Posted by: ninian '72 (---.ed.gov)Date: April 01, 2005 10:08AM
[Q]Scersk '97 Wrote:
Of course, the British probably didn't get a chance to tell the colonists that they were "whining" in their own broadsheets:
*********************
Ye Olde Scandal Sheet
---------------------
Colonies in Turmoil!
Babies Eaten!
King George has syphillis!
Letters to the Editor: King George III, John Jay, Paul Revere
Dear Editor,
You and the colonists are stupidheads.
Cheers,
KG III
They had to rely on proclamations for that:
By Order of His Majesty King George III
Colonists: STOP WHINING!
Go Red.
[/q]
Maybe it was the Brits doing the whining! Had an opportunity to see this firsthand last week when I brought an English friend in town for a few days down to Colonial Williamsburg. During one of the tours, the guide was explaining that some of the colonial governors were great, while others were incompetent/overstepped their authority/went out of their way to stick it to the colonists. Also made some critical remarks about George III. Another British guest stepped out of the crowd and whispered to the guide for a few seconds. The guide replied that she was sorry the visitor was offended, but she was going to continue with her narrative. The British visitor walked off. My friend couldn't believe it and wondered what her countryman's problem was, since even the English couldn't stand George III.
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)Date: April 01, 2005 10:12AM
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
I just want to say that it didn't go unnoticed, that once Al proves that even Lucia thinks the big ice made a different, Rich immediately drops any substance from the argument and just go straight for the personal attacks. Not that those didn't start, both ways, a while back - but once proven to be in disagreement with Minn's own coach, the original topic is unceremoniously dropped.[/q]
Rich has never let reality deter him from his rants. I suspect he still thinks "sucks" is some kind of dirty word, despite repeated evidence presented to the contrary.
He's a self-appointed conscience for us. Sad, actually, that he's obsessed to do behave that way.
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65Re: conscience...lolPosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 01, 2005 08:12PM
Al, I have a very firm grip on reality. One thing I know very well is that you're the one who is obsessed with ripping me and virtually everyone ever associated with Clarkson University and Clarkson hockey, not withstanding the long standing high quality of both which you can't bring yourself to acknowledge. For example, you stand alone as one who I've ever heard say an unkind word about Len Ceglarski.
I'd never pretend to be your conscience and your suggesting that indicates that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Is there no end to your pomposity? Your arrogance is what leads many folks to dislike Ivy leaguers and their attitudes of superiority. Sad that you don't see that.
Sadder still that you are so childish that you TWICE in recent days bitched publicly to me about Goldie Knight. If she bothers you that much, then take it up with her directly. So far all you've done is whine to me about her in your typical fashion.
As one of your collegues here said to me earlier..Grow up.Re: dropped?Posted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 01, 2005 08:17PM
Not at all. I posted yesterday that an opposing coach (Schafer) would try to counteract the advantage Minnesota had in speed by making stategic moves. I said that the Gophers perhaps used other hockey skills to offset those moves.
I didn't think I needed to name Lucia personally to indicate that I agree that the larger ice gave them an advantage because of their speed. My point was that there are ways to mitigate that advantage, ways that I'm sure both coaches involved know better than anyone on this board.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: April 01, 2005 08:38PM
[Q]If an opponent can't match their speed, that's an edge for them in hockey skill, not an edge created by a different ice surface.
Is the edge exacerbated by a bigger surface? Perhaps so although many dispute that notion. What doesn't change is that speed is a big advantage regardless of the surface.[/Q]
[Q]I didn't think I needed to name Lucia personally to indicate that I agree that the larger ice gave them an advantage because of their speed.[/Q]
Seems to me you had just said that you were, at best, unconvinced that the ice size made any significant difference. Keep dancing around your changing your mind to cover your behavior, buddy.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2005 09:26PM by DeltaOne81.Re: Ice surfacePosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 01, 2005 09:24PM
You're not keeping up with the dance too well I guess.
Lets see if I can make it clearer.
On the surface (no pun intended) a larger ice surface appears to afford a faster team a huge advantage.
Not necessarily so. The opposition can try to utilize strategies and style to lessen the faster team's advantage on the larger ice. If I recall correctly, as I stated before, this issue was raised a few years ago when a slower cornell team faced Harvard at Lake Placid. Schafer said he did not think the larger ice surface put his team at a disadvantage, probably because h ewas confident that his team could play to their strengths and negate the effect of the larger surface. I believe that is what happened that year and following that, there was talk to the effect of "so much for the advantage of larger ice".
Sounds like Minny was an even faster team than that Harvard squad and that cornell did a pretty decent job of containing their offense depsite a sizeable edge in SOG for the Gophers. Probably golatending had a lot to do with that. Was the GWG the result of greater speed?
In any event, Lucia noted that the ice surface gave his team an edge. Did it make the game a cakewalk for his team? Obviously not. Did it reduce the effectiveness of cornell's grinding style? Some here have said yes. In any game each team has their own advantages to some extent, this being just one of them. The winner is often the one who maximizes their advantages and minimizes th edamage caused by the other guys'.
Sorry to be lengthy about this but I'm demonstrating that I'm not at all denying th epresence of an advantage and also saying it may not necessarily have been the deciding factor.
I've had experience coaching against faster teams. If you want an explanation from someone more qualified, why not call or email Coach Schafer? Seriously.
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: April 01, 2005 09:40PM
Hmmm, compare your last post, a well reasoned thought out explanation and honest, uninsulting (except for the first line) analysis, to your first post:
[Q]Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. rolleyes[/Q]
Why is your first instinct always to be insulting and glib, rude and dismissing? Sure, we can drag you kicking and screaming into an honest dialog, but by default your behavior is either intending to inflame (a troll) or just downright rude and insulting. Considering the natural reaction to a rude and insulting remark, is to get defensive and insult back, perhaps you can have some idea why your behavior isn't exactly considered.
Of course, that also explains your natural defensive and insulting nature when you see us teasing/insulting some aspect of the Clarkson program. Believe it or not, most of us do respect the Clarkson program and would like to see them back as a strong program. Cornell, Harvard, Dartmouth, Clarkson, and SLU as strong programs would do the conference wonders. But you also have to understand that we're allowed to have fun that's not necessarily polite... < Stuart Smaley (sp?) > and that's... okay < / Stuart >. What we have a hard time respecting is someone who comes on here and insults us 90% of the time.
You clearly know hockey, but maybe it's possible we do too. Try to take things with a grain of salt, and try to engage us in actual dialog and not always resort to being a jerk, and maybe we can actually have an exchange of ideas. Maybe?Re: New RecruitsPosted by: RichS (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 01, 2005 10:08PM
Yeah sure we can have good exchanges, and we have at times. I can think of two posters here who have never, as far as I can recall, taken nasty or inane shots at me.
Most of the rest of you resort to that as soon as I say anything less than complimentary about cornell, no matter how thoughtfully and politely I have expressed it.
My default behavior is not at all as you describe it. I suppose I resort to taht because it appears often that it's the only way many of you guys can communicate with the enemy. You don't like it? Guess what, I don't care much for it either.
It can be hard to believe you guys have any respect for the Clarkson program when one considers the long list of Clarkson people that you have trashed here...and in a most "rude and insulting" manner. Why do you think most Clarkson fans no longer come here? Have you given that any thought at all?
It's like a continuation of attending a game at Lynah...the insults never stop and it does become tiresome. And some folks aren't patient enough to absorb that in large doses to wade through to find a decent hockey conversation! Your claim that you have to drag me kicking and screaming into one is way off base. I'm happy to have one anytime.
On the other hand, I note how quickly you guys get your dander up when I tease you about something or other. My comment about the whining about the rink size is a good example. The "whining" started here when the seedings, pairings, and sites were announced and continued several days after the game. I commented on it and you guys jumped all over me. Hey, I'm tough (and old
Hence my comment about your dishing it out but not taking it. When that happens, you lose credibility. That's classic bullying but I guess when it's just me here responding, you don't look like the bully...I look like the pain in the ass. Interesting.
I don't think the hockey knowledge is in question here but too often it seems that you don't acknowledge it coming from someone whose team is other than yours. Just think about how most pro Clarkson comments have been responded to over the years. Think of one "responder" in particular.
Tired, gotta go.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: RedAR (66.101.241.---)Date: April 01, 2005 11:11PM
[Q]Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/Q]
RichS, the above was the first comment you made on this thread. You come into this discussion throwing dirt, and then you complain that we respond critically to your assinine comment. As Delta pointed out, you subsequently agreed that the size of the ice surface could have impacted the results of the game.
If you didn't have your head up your ass, you'd notice how we have civil DIALOGUES with fans of other teams (BU and Dartmouth here come to mind, Western Michigan, Mankato, Ohio State, and Minnesota fans on the USCHO boards). Yes, we have the tongue-in-cheek disses here and then, but for the most part, the exchange between many of the fans of these other teams are informative. One wonders why EVERY thread you chime in on ALWAYS deteriorates. If we Cornell fans can't "take it" as you wish to believe, why do you think it is that we have informative discussions with them, but NEVER with you?
Despite the fact that you don't believe that Cornell fans have respect for Clarkson, most of us actually do, and REALLY hope that Clarkson can revive their hockey program back to prominence. Likewise, most Cornell fans have tremendous respect for the BU hockey program despite the fact that at EVERY game, we chant "Screw BU!"
I say this in the nicest way possible...
Get your head out of your arse.
Here's hoping that Roll is successful in righting the ship up in Potsdam, and bringing Clarkson back to national prominence.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2005 11:15PM by RedAR.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)Date: April 01, 2005 11:55PM
[Q]RichS Wrote:
Yeah sure we can have good exchanges...
It can be hard to believe you guys have any respect for the Clarkson program when one considers the long list of Clarkson people that you have trashed here...and in a most "rude and insulting" manner.
It's like a continuation of attending a game at Lynah...the insults never stop and it does become tiresome.[/q]
Here are just two of your recent postings on the Round Table, Mr. Pot:
"Yeah no kidding but our kids do pretty well and all the Ivies have had their share of underachievers in the classroom. They do a good job of "concealing" it. Anyone my age remembers Ed Marinaro's classroom exploits."
"Ask people who went to other Ivies and many will tell you that "SUNY-Ithaca" is "barely" an Ivy... Sometimes, they make it sound like all their hockey players are "Rhodes scholars" and ours are flunkies. That arrogance cracks me up."
Might those not be called "trashing," Rich? Why do you call similar statements "rude and insulting" when they appear here yet you write them yourself regularly on the Round Table--and invariably directed at Cornell? Are you going to tell us you intended to encourage "good exchanges" with these postings? If someone wrote something similar here about Clarkson you'd throw a hissy-fit on the spot, right?
Why do you hold us to a higher standard than you do yourself and your colleagues on the Round Table? Why do you take issue with what you perceive to be shots taken at Clarkson here but consistently pander to those on the Round Table who take similar shots at Cornell? Why is behavior like yours on the Round Table acceptable but ours here not?
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)Date: April 02, 2005 10:25AM
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."
-- Mark TwainWake me when it's hockey season...Posted by: ithacat (---.twcny.res.rr.com)Date: April 02, 2005 02:11PM
Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Rich S (---.dyn.optonline.net)Date: April 02, 2005 03:58PM
Al,
I don't call those remarks "trashing" because they're in reference to or in response to comments demonstrating the looking-down-the-nose and hypocritical approach you and others take towards non-Ivy student athletes in the ECAC. Call it defensive if you like.
You would do well to ask yourself those same questions you asked me. And why don't you respond to Goldie directly, rather than rip her only in your diatribes at me...Mr. Black, is it? Are you chicken...or afraid of her?
No, not all postings, as you of all people should know, generate good exchanges or are intended to. What's your aim when you continue to take that snotty arrogant attitude towards me and other Clarkson people as you did ad nauseum on the old Roundtable and on USCHO?
I think we all should behave at a higher standard and I said so on the old Roundtable when it was active but apparently your selective nature prevents you from remembering.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)Date: April 02, 2005 04:36PM
As has been pointed out many times, we regularly have civil, sane, and mutually respectful conversations on this board with members from many other schools, Dartmouth, BU, and, yes, Clarkson! Drew and DareDevilCU are welcome back anytime. We've even had civil exchanges with Minnesota fans both here and on USCHO.
You are the sole and only person who comes here and consistently and regularly makes trouble. Even facetimer has a higher portion of useful, interesting, and non-insulting posts than you do on this board. You really have to turn the microscope a little on yourself, my friend. You claim that anyone that comes here with a contrasting opinion is attacked, but time and time again, that's not true. Yet time and time again you come here and start fights.
You assume that everything we say is with disdain and superiority to others... but I'm sure you know as well as I do, that things can be taken many ways on the internet, cause there's no tone of voice. So half the thing that demostrate our "looking-down-the-nose" approach, are only read that way because you're predisposed to find that anywhere you can. You look for it, you expect it, so you find it. Numerous fans of other teams come here and have good conversations, and its because they don't expect to find what doesn't exist.
Based on the fact that we have very good conversations with many fans of other teams, you really have to look inwards a bit here, pal.Re: New RecruitsPosted by: Dpperk29 (---.twcny.res.rr.com)Date: April 02, 2005 05:55PM
I second everything Delta just said!
richS just seems to cause trouble.
___________________________
"That damn bell at Clarkson." -Ken Dryden in reference to his hatred for the Clarkson Bell.So AnywayPosted by: gobigred24 (---.chrstn01.pa.comcast.net)Date: April 04, 2005 12:05AM
Anyone else have anything of interest to say about the new recruits??Re: So AnywayPosted by: ninian '72 (---.dalect01.va.comcast.net)Date: April 04, 2005 02:18AM
Thanks! Let's not feed the trolls anymore, please!Re: New RecruitsPosted by: abmarks (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)Date: April 04, 2005 04:06AM
enough with the RichS stuff already..I'm sure he understands everyones feelings and vice versa...let it go and talk about new recruits or start a We hate RichS thread....Big ice/small ice discussion continuesPosted by: Al DeFlorio (---.hsd1.ma.comcast.net)Date: April 04, 2005 07:56PM
I'm not sure how this topic found its way into a "new recruits" thread in the first place, but it still seems to be au courant approaching the Frozen Four.
[rockymountainnews.com]
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.