This Rivalry Really Stinks

There's an article at USCHO.com about the harvard game and the fish, in case you didn't know.


[www.uscho.com]

Nice article. Looks like he used the photos from Mark A's website. Age (and his slip-up ) is mentioned by name in the article, and JTW is referenced in the epilogue box.

I just wanted to point out that several times in the build-up to the Hahvahd Game as well as in Wodon's article, the loss in November has been described as ending with a "last-second overtime goal." Ummm...isn't every OT goal a last-second goal? Unless you really mean that there was 0:01 left on the clock in the OT period when the goal was scored (which wasn't the case in Cambridge...it was at 1:14 into OT). The only time I remember that having happened was a few years ago at Appleton. [www.hockey.cornell.edu]

Yeah, yeah...I'm sure it's redundantly phrased that way to make the point about how much it stung us on the Cornell side. What really stings is that CU was 41 seconds away from a regulation victory, and a split second late for a REAL last second regulation victory. Damn, that was one helluva game, and I'm sooo happy we extracted such satisfying revenge in our house.

Interesting article as well. It's fun to be compared with the Cameron Crazies.
What got on my nerves a little is that I had to re-read Mazzoleni's comments about Cornell-Harvard games: that Cornell fans are only the ones making a big fuss about them; that Harvard has other hometown rivalries to worry about.
Whatever, man.
But let's pretend for a second that M's remarks echo the overall feeling of the Harvard team, fans and community. Then, is it true that the cornell-harvard "rivalry" is something the big red players/fans thought up? how do/can you define a rivalry when one side says it's not? does it matter, and do we care?

sorry for the philosophical turn on a overcast tuesday...

m

There are lots of one-way rivalries. Colgate considers Cornell their biggest rival, while we tend to consider them as, well, an annoyance on the rivalry scale. Everyone seems to think Harvard places more importance on the Cornell "rivalry" than they actually seem to. Union gave Cornell fits for years, and I think all of us were very happy to get that monkey off our backs, just like the Harvard players were happy to beat Cornell for the first time in years in their own barn, especially in the manner they did it. Their celebration probably would have been the same if PeeWee state was the culprit rather than Cornell. As for the Harvard fans, well, their general apathy at the Bright games seems self explanatory. All they care about is Yale.
There's nothing wrong with a one-way rivalry, just don't make it out like they care more than they do.

But do they really care about Yale in hockey, any more than we care about Penn in, say, baseball?

We care about baseball?

doh i didnt realize there was another thread on this...
"The only thing that went wrong for the Red all night was when Manocchia —Lynah's reigning "Cowbell Guy" — dropped the miniature bat he uses to create the cowbell cadence, right in the middle of his "performance." from that article... sorry, age

and wasnt the chicken tied to the goal post at Lynah East and not Lynah??? Or am i mistaken

John T. Whelan '91 wrote:

But do they really care about Yale in hockey, any more than we care about Penn in, say, baseball?

PENN SUCKS
Sorry, force of habit.

We have a baseball team?

> and wasnt the chicken tied to the goal post at Lynah East and not Lynah??? Or am i mistaken

You are mistaken.

That is one tradition I miss, for what it's worth. Although the very-much-NOT-alive-chicken in '84 was quite disturbing.