In 1969 Harvard scored 16 points in the final 42 seconds to erase a 29-13 deficit in their football game, leaving both at 8-0-1, and the Harvard Crimson crowed, "Harvard Beats Yale, 29-29." If there was a moral victory Saturday in the 3-3 tie at Madison Square Garden, it wasn't ours. I saw three game-changers:
- The goal (short-handed) that trickled in past Scrivens to cut the lead to 2-1.
- All the penalties Cornell took late: 5 of our 8 in the third period, 2 in the last 3:20.
- Jack Parker's decision to call time-out when Locke Jillson's breakaway made it 2-0 5:27 into the game and calm the team.
The shots advantage said 35-17 BU though the game play didn't seem similarly one-sided except in the third when it was 13-3 BU. The acoustics of a big arena make it hard to tell about the intensity on the ice but Cornell's passion seemed to wane after the first period. We did come to life in overtime and it seemed as if we might win after all.
The game thread recounts fans hearing a whistle before the final goal but the officials were pretty adamant about it being a goal. And their not going to a replay suggests it was clearer in their minds than ours. I'd be curious to hear comments by people watching on TV.
Our power play was more effective, 2x5 vs. 1x6. A coach would say it doesn't matter, but BU's power play STYLE was impressive. They really attacked Cornell. Late in the third, it was morbidly fascinating to see us fall to a 5x3 deficit and then BU pulled the goalie for a 5x3 man advantage with 1:58 to play. After we fought off the 51 seconds of 6x3, it almost seemed a relief when Brendon Nash got back on-ice and I thought, "Heck, we survived a 6x3, how bad can a 6x4 be?"
Attendance was announced as an 18,2000 sellout. It looked as if there were 500, perhaps 1,000 empty seats still, at the end of the first period. Some Cornell players two years ago suggested the team was unnerved playing in such a big arena. It didn't seem that way this year and for the freshmen it's good experience should we wind up in a big arena should we make the NCAAs. This was an opportunity lost to register a huge win psychologically even if BU was not a quality opponent based on its 3-7-2 record coming in.
Small consolation that Cornell fans seemed to outnumber BU fans by 2-1 or 3-1. Cornell owned this town except for the final scoreboard. Filing out, I felt almost as empty as last Memorial Day after we ran out of gas against Syracuse in the NCAA lax finals and couldn't hold that lead, either. The difference is that one game mattered a lot more. This morning I'm just not sure which one.
The only victory for the Big Red seemed to be their ability to bring the puck to the net in OT. They couldn't finish and that was due in large part to a good defense that met them from BU.
I am wondering how the OT looked to those who were at the rink.
Quote from: billhowardThe game thread recounts fans hearing a whistle before the final goal but the officials were pretty adamant about it being a goal. And their not going to a replay suggests it was clearer in their minds than ours. I'd be curious to hear comments by people watching on TV.
I just posted in the game thread on this subject. Short summary - the radio guys heard a whistle.
Quote from: billhowardIn 1969 Harvard scored 16 points in the final 42 seconds to erase a 29-13 deficit in their football game, leaving both at 8-0-1, and the Harvard Crimson crowed, "Harvard Beats Yale, 29-29." If there was a moral victory Saturday in the 3-3 tie at Madison Square Garden, it wasn't ours. I saw three game-changers:
- The goal (short-handed) that trickled in past Scrivens to cut the lead to 2-1.
- All the penalties Cornell took late: 5 of our 8 in the third period, 2 in the last 3:20.
- Jack Parker's decision to call time-out when Locke Jillson's breakaway made it 2-0 5:27 into the game and calm the team.
The shots advantage said 35-17 BU though the game play didn't seem similarly one-sided except in the third when it was 13-3 BU. The acoustics of a big arena make it hard to tell about the intensity on the ice but Cornell's passion seemed to wane after the first period. We did come to life in overtime and it seemed as if we might win after all.
The game thread recounts fans hearing a whistle before the final goal but the officials were pretty adamant about it being a goal. And their not going to a replay suggests it was clearer in their minds than ours. I'd be curious to hear comments by people watching on TV.
Our power play was more effective, 2x5 vs. 1x6. A coach would say it doesn't matter, but BU's power play STYLE was impressive. They really attacked Cornell. Late in the third, it was morbidly fascinating to see us fall to a 5x3 deficit and then BU pulled the goalie for a 5x3 man advantage with 1:58 to play. After we fought off the 51 seconds of 6x3, it almost seemed a relief when Brendon Nash got back on-ice and I thought, "Heck, we survived a 6x3, how bad can a 6x4 be?"
Attendance was announced as an 18,2000 sellout. It looked as if there were 500, perhaps 1,000 empty seats still, at the end of the first period. Some Cornell players two years ago suggested the team was unnerved playing in such a big arena. It didn't seem that way this year and for the freshmen it's good experience should we wind up in a big arena should we make the NCAAs. This was an opportunity lost to register a huge win psychologically even if BU was not a quality opponent based on its 3-7-2 record coming in.
Small consolation that Cornell fans seemed to outnumber BU fans by 2-1 or 3-1. Cornell owned this town except for the final scoreboard. Filing out, I felt almost as empty as last Memorial Day after we ran out of gas against Syracuse in the NCAA lax finals and couldn't hold that lead, either. The difference is that one game mattered a lot more. This morning I'm just not sure which one.
Good analysis. BU controlled more of the play, and their puck possession and stick skills were tremendous. That being said, the game was nowhere like 2007 when we had the deer-in-the-headlights syndrome and were totally outclassed. We certainly played well enough to win, and I thought we could hold on after killing the 5-on-3.
It was a real positive that we came out in OT and played like we had the 1st 10 minutes of the game. We had the better OT chances.
While the tie was disappointing, there's no comparison with what happened last Memorial Day. I was able to enjoy last night more, as the stakes were nowhere near as high. The Cornell crowd was fabulous, and it made for a memorable experience for my kids as well. Even my wife (who's a BU grad :-O) remarked that "Cornell has amazing school spirit."
Quote from: scoop85It was a real positive that we came out in OT and played like we had the 1st 10 minutes of the game. We had the better OT chances.
Yes, that was a positive. But it begs the question: Why didn't we play at all like that for the remaining 50 minutes of regulation? Was it a deliberate decision to go into a shell With a 2-0 lead?
Quote from: martyI am wondering how the OT looked to those who were at the rink.
Although it was very end-to-end, we appeared to control most of the OT period, and BU seemed to be running out of gas.
BU supporters seemed to find their energy in double OT though, and by that I mean sen'08 and I being harassed and repeatedly challenged to a fight by some drunk BU jocks as we walked down 33rd st. Although we managed to successfully to ignore the one standing a few inches behind me screaming in my ear for the length of 33rd, they finally found the brawl they were looking for at 8th avenue with a group of equally drunk Cornell supporters. I use "supporters" in this case instead of "fans", since neither the BU group nor the Cornell group appeared to be wearing any sort of school colors or apparel.
The fight was thankfully short-lived, and after a few bloody noses and some wrestling on the ground, it was broken up by a homeless man who sent each group on their respective ways.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: scoop85It was a real positive that we came out in OT and played like we had the 1st 10 minutes of the game. We had the better OT chances.
Yes, that was a positive. But it begs the question: Why didn't we play at all like that for the remaining 50 minutes of regulation? Was it a deliberate decision to go into a shell With a 2-0 lead?
I don't know if we deliberately went into a shell as much as BU's level of desperation was racheted up. I was struck by BU's ability to control the puck in center ice, and their players have a lot of ability with the puck. Our D was trying to be careful not too pinch too much, while BU pinched on every opportunity. Once in OT it seemed to be a bit of role reversal, as we raised our "desperation" level, while BU seemed intent to not squander the tie.
Cornell's offense seems to rely a lot on setting up highlight reel goals instead of setting up in the offensive zone and creating scoring chances. The shot totals seem off but they weren't. BU was getting the puck to the net while we were passing into traffic all night.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: scoop85It was a real positive that we came out in OT and played like we had the 1st 10 minutes of the game. We had the better OT chances.
Yes, that was a positive. But it begs the question: Why didn't we play at all like that for the remaining 50 minutes of regulation? Was it a deliberate decision to go into a shell With a 2-0 lead?
I don't know if we deliberately went into a shell as much as BU's level of desperation was racheted up. I was struck by BU's ability to control the puck in center ice, and their players have a lot of ability with the puck. Our D was trying to be careful not too pinch too much, while BU pinched on every opportunity. Once in OT it seemed to be a bit of role reversal, as we raised our "desperation" level, while BU seemed intent to not squander the tie.
Maybe we need to raise our "desperation" level more than ten minutes a game.
I see it much differently on many of your points.
Quote from: billhowardIn 1969 Harvard scored 16 points in the final 42 seconds to erase a 29-13 deficit in their football game, leaving both at 8-0-1, and the Harvard Crimson crowed, "Harvard Beats Yale, 29-29." If there was a moral victory Saturday in the 3-3 tie at Madison Square Garden, it wasn't ours.
We put it to BU for most of the game. The shot totals do not tell the story. The first period we were outshot by about 3 when BU had 2 PPs to our one. Second period BU put on more pressure and outshot us by 5, mostly because we put fewer of ours on goal, not because we went into a shell. Third period we take 5 penalties, including an atrocious call that set up the 6 on 3. BU needed to scramble to salvage a tie aganst the second place "EZAC" team, and needed significant zebra help to get it. As you point out, he needed to use up his one time out (although there were several others that appeared to be TV time-outs? at other times in the game) to rally his team.
Quote from: billhowardI saw three game-changers:
- The goal (short-handed) that trickled in past Scrivens to cut the lead to 2-1.
- All the penalties Cornell took late: 5 of our 8 in the third period, 2 in the last 3:20.
- Jack Parker's decision to call time-out when Locke Jillson's breakaway made it 2-0 5:27 into the game and calm the team.
BU's shorty was answered in 90 seconds. Not a game changer. Agree with the second one you list. Parker's TO was not a game changer as I stated above. It was a panic-mode move. Induced by OUR pressure.
Quote from: billhowardThe shots advantage said 35-17 BU though the game play didn't seem similarly one-sided except in the third when it was 13-3 BU. The acoustics of a big arena make it hard to tell about the intensity on the ice but Cornell's passion seemed to wane after the first period. We did come to life in overtime and it seemed as if we might win after all.
Agree with your feelings on the shot advantage. From my seat about 12 rows above the ice, the intensity was outstanding throughout. I was surprised at our effort to press the attack in OT - but pleased to see it.
Quote from: billhowardThe game thread recounts fans hearing a whistle before the final goal but the officials were pretty adamant about it being a goal. And their not going to a replay suggests it was clearer in their minds than ours. I'd be curious to hear comments by people watching on TV.
I was in Section 92, about 12 rows up, as I said, just about at the goal line on the side that the puck went in. Both I and my next-seat neighbor thought a whistle blew just before the puck went in. The referee right behind the goal gestured very emphatically that the goal was scored, but it seemed to me there were a lot of bodies in the crease. It was notable that this "goal" was the only one of the night NOT replayed on the video screen. And I have no idea why they wouldn't do a video review of such a major play.
Quote from: billhowardOur power play was more effective, 2x5 vs. 1x6. A coach would say it doesn't matter, but BU's power play STYLE was impressive. They really attacked Cornell. Late in the third, it was morbidly fascinating to see us fall to a 5x3 deficit and then BU pulled the goalie for a 5x3 man advantage with 1:58 to play. After we fought off the 51 seconds of 6x3, it almost seemed a relief when Brendon Nash got back on-ice and I thought, "Heck, we survived a 6x3, how bad can a 6x4 be?"
Well said.
Quote from: billhowardAttendance was announced as an 18,2000 sellout. It looked as if there were 500, perhaps 1,000 empty seats still, at the end of the first period. Some Cornell players two years ago suggested the team was unnerved playing in such a big arena. It didn't seem that way this year and for the freshmen it's good experience should we wind up in a big arena should we make the NCAAs. This was an opportunity lost to register a huge win psychologically even if BU was not a quality opponent based on its 3-7-2 record coming in.
I think BU is much better than that record. They may have been "Post NCAA Title Fat" coming in, but my money is on their recovery to the top of Hockey East. They look great. And we stayed with them every step. I'm very optimistic.
Quote from: billhowardSmall consolation that Cornell fans seemed to outnumber BU fans by 2-1 or 3-1. Cornell owned this town except for the final scoreboard. Filing out, I felt almost as empty as last Memorial Day after we ran out of gas against Syracuse in the NCAA lax finals and couldn't hold that lead, either. The difference is that one game mattered a lot more. This morning I'm just not sure which one.
No comparison to that game. None. Zero. I, and I hope the team, see this game as a sign of progress made and a confidence builder. They outplayed BU for long periods of time, especially defensively. They had a little trouble with BU's trap, but still broke it successfully frequently enough. They lack the shooting skill of BU, and were outshot, and STILL BU needed 3 minutes of power play including 1+ minutes of 6 on 3 to gain the tie.
No way was this as important as the lacrosse loss. No way was this as heartbreaking as dropping a national championship in our first final in 20 years in the last four seconds. I know you're disappointed, Bill, as am I. But that last sentence defines Hyperbole.
Anyone know if the jerseys from the game which had the Red Hot Hockey patch will be auctioned off?
Quote from: TimVI see it much differently on many of your points.
Quote from: billhowardIn 1969 Harvard scored 16 points in the final 42 seconds to erase a 29-13 deficit in their football game, leaving both at 8-0-1, and the Harvard Crimson crowed, "Harvard Beats Yale, 29-29." If there was a moral victory Saturday in the 3-3 tie at Madison Square Garden, it wasn't ours.
I'm not going to go over each point by point, but I liked what you did even if I disagree. We did not look good, at least by Redcast. Never, never, never should we lose a game 3-1 in third period. If we do we have no hope in the NCAAs. We cannot expect to keep up with the great teams. We need to be opportunistic and to play good defense. Once we get to the NCAAs all the teams are as good, or better than BU. They played well but so far are not the class of their league. We can't expect to win like Q did over UMass.
I expect them to come out to play for 60 min. and in too many games lately they haven't. I thought it was just getting the season going, but now I'm starting to get concerned. We need to show we can beat good teams and so far we're not doing well on that. They have times of great play, which needs to last longer. I think BU controlled 60-75% of the game yesterday and played good enough to win. We didn't.
Most of you know I'm basically an optimist, and I'm still optimistic about this team. They have shown they can do well on offense but need to pick up their D. Do you remember the quote, I think from Moulson, that 4 years with Coach Schafer teaches you to have good puck control, well we need to do a much better job. We can't turn it over and not expect good teams to put it to us. As we were saying on chat last night we need more of the D of the late 90s and early 00s to go along with an offense that is much better than recent years.
We can show a lot next weekend. The Capital district teams are not great, but are much better than prior years. It won't be easy to beat them, but if we want to go far we should.
I'm a great admirer of Mike & the job that his coaching staff does at CU. But, I feel strongly that he cost his team a victory by going into a defensive shell for the whole third period. I spotted it in the first two minutes. And, the shell lasted until the end of the period. Granted, there were penalties to kill. But,at even strength, there seemed no urgency to forecheck. If they had spent more time in the BU end, which they seemed quite capable of doing, BU doesn't get so many shot or goals. And, maybe we're not scrambling and taking penalties in the defensive zone. When the OT started, CU applied the offensive pressure that was missing for most of the third.
BU was a different team than any other we've played this year. They were better, and I'm not sure why their record is so bad (I guess it's Millan's fault?).
I hope our guys learned something from watching their powerplay. I know we've had great special teams this year, but imagine how often we could score if we passed like they did! Some good stops by Scrivens and a few missed open nets, otherwise we would never have been ahead by two goals.
Most of our forwards, in ECAC play, are able to make a strong move with the puck along the boards by the blue line and at least succeed in dumping the puck into the corner. BU's defensemen seemed to anticipate this and did a great job of hitting every Cornell player who attempted this and sending the puck back out of the zone most of the time. Overall I thought BU played a more physical game, which is very rare to see in a Cornell game.
Shots would have been even more lopsided if we hadn't blocked so many. BU seemed pretty content to shoot from anywhere, at any time, which meant that there were plenty of crappy shots.
Plenty could be written about the penalties, but I'll leave it at this:
First period:
COR-2 Patrick Kennedy (2-Holding) 17:47
Second period:
COR-3 Mike Devin (2-Cross-Checking) 17:58
Third period:
COR-7 Brendon Nash (2-Cross-Checking) 16:40
COR-8 Patrick Kennedy (2-Slashing) 18:02
Colgate second period:
COR-4 Joe Scali (2-Interference) CLG 2x4 19:46
Yale second period:
COR-5 Brendon Nash (2-Interference) YAL 0x4 19:06
I'm not sure if it's a mental letdown at the end of the period, fatigue, or just the consequence of extra effort and intensity, but we are taking way too many dumb penalties at the end of periods. Finally caught up to us at the end of the game last night.
Some interesting quotes from the USCHO article (http://www.uscho.com/recaps/20092010/m/11/28/bu-cor.php):
Quote"When they made it 3-2, we stopped making plays," Schafer said. "Sometimes that happens. You're up 3-1, and you start protecting the lead, sitting back too much. We didn't take care of the puck."
QuoteThings got really interesting, though, when two Cornell penalties with 1:58 remaining led Parker to pull the goalie for a six-on-three power play for 39 seconds.
Asked if he could remember the last time he had opted for such a strategy, Parker was quick to reply. "Yeah, the 12th," he said. After letting the media scratch their head over that for a moment, he added, "The 12th of never." He went on to explain that he had never tried the tactic in his 37 years of coaching, but that former assistant Ben Smith had been "haunting him" to try it. So, oddly enough, the team practiced the formation for the first time this week.
"We actually worked on a six-on-three this week; it's funny that we got one," Connolly said. Cornell got the first man back, but the Terriers scored six-on-four. Bonino threw the puck at the net, and Vinny Saponari got a piece of it. Scrivens thought he had squeezed it between his pads, but Connolly saw otherwise.
"Myself and the ref were the only ones who saw that the puck was free between the goalie's legs, so he was in great position to see that. I was fortunate enough to pull it out and just stuff it in."--
IJ article is up. (http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20091129/SPORTS03/911290353/1128/sports/Hockey+thriller+at+MSG+ends+in+a+tie+for+Cornell)
I'm pretty sure the reason we lost is the band not playing the alma mater during the second intermission. Didn't even play the new cornell fight song, or "good old days on the hill." Come on!
Quote from: BMacI'm pretty sure the reason we lost is the band not playing the alma mater during the second intermission. Didn't even play the new cornell fight song, or "good old days on the hill." Come on!
Uh, it might have felt like a loss, but it was a tie.
Quote from: rediceI'm a great admirer of Mike & the job that his coaching staff does at CU. But, I feel strongly that he cost his team a victory by going into a defensive shell for the whole third period. I spotted it in the first two minutes. And, the shell lasted until the end of the period. Granted, there were penalties to kill. But,at even strength, there seemed no urgency to forecheck. If they had spent more time in the BU end, which they seemed quite capable of doing, BU doesn't get so many shot or goals. And, maybe we're not scrambling and taking penalties in the defensive zone. When the OT started, CU applied the offensive pressure that was missing for most of the third.
Agreed. I told someone in the second intermission that I feared Schafer would have them go into a shell in the third. It's not a new approach for this team, after all.
BU is a very good team. Judging by last night, if we played them in a best-of-seven, they win 4 games to 1. As Elie notes, they moved the puck around beautifully on the PP, and could easily have had two or three more goals.
Faceoffs were pretty even overall, but for long stretches in the second half of the game we seemed to lose all the key ones.
Only one tiny addendum to redice's comment. The penalty that really stands out in my mind came in the
offensive zone, late in the third...
Quote from: HockeyManOnly one tiny addendum to redice's comment. The penalty that really stands out in my mind came in the offensive zone, late in the third...
Oops!!! I stand corrected.....::blush::
Quote from: ebilmesI'm not sure if it's a mental letdown at the end of the period, fatigue, or just the consequence of extra effort and intensity, but we are taking way too many dumb penalties at the end of periods. Finally caught up to us at the end of the game last night.
Additionally, in Cornell's 3 regular season non-wins the opponent managed to score a goal in the final minute of play of a period (only one of those on a PP).
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: BMacI'm pretty sure the reason we lost is the band not playing the alma mater during the second intermission. Didn't even play the new cornell fight song, or "good old days on the hill." Come on!
Uh, it might have felt like a loss, but it was a tie.
I didn't think it felt like a loss. While certainly blowing a 2-goal lead and a last-minute game-tying goal is no fun, one could
easily argue that BU should have had a couple more goals long before that. They often skated circles around us in even-strength situations, and were it not for an endless string of slightly-shanked one timers, missed open nets, and fortuitous bounces on scrambles in front of the crease, we easily could have been the ones pulling our goalie in the end.
All in all, it was a thoroughly enjoyable game. The atmosphere was great once again, and this time the excitement carried onto the ice.
I certainly don't fault the band either for not wanting to play Alma and have it screamed over by the play-by-play of an on-ice tricycle race, nor have it cut short by the players returning to the ice for the period. NCFS or MYOC could probably have been squeezed in the little playing time they did have, instead of Star or whatever the selection was (my memory fails me). But who cares; they sounded fantastic as always. And it was great to hear them take as many opportunities as they could to play after whistles, while the BU band seemed content to just watch the game.
I was sitting in 215 at the end of the rink, so I had a good view of the game. For the first 10-15 minutes the team came out flying, working the puck behind the net and looking for the open man in front. Then it definitely seemed like we went into a shell after getting the 2-goal lead. For the entire 2nd and 3rd periods, I felt like we were hanging on for dear life. I don't know if BU adjusted, or if we backed off, but our offensive pressure seemed to completely stop. The forecheck went from excellent to minimal, and BU started to win most of the battles along the boards.
In the 2nd and 3rd it also seemed like our defensemen opted to back off numerous times when it seemed they could have easily beaten the BU forwards to the puck in the neutral zone or around our blue line. I realize they didn't want to get beat with noone behind them, but it lead to many BU attacks when I think we could have been heading the other way instead.
I didn't look at the stats yet, but it seemed like we lost a lot of key face-offs, leading to even more BU possession time.
Some dumb penalties (particularly the cross-check by Brendon) and the soft short-handed goal cost us the game as far as the score was concerned, but BU really owned most of this game. Scrivens probably should have had the shortie, but he had many huge saves including an amazing glove save through about 5 players during the 6-3 that more than made up for it.
I can't imagine BU played anything in their losses like they played against us. They were very fast, moved the puck well, and fought well along the boards. Our team played great with intense offensive pressure during the first period and overtime, but they were flat and really didn't get much going during the 2nd and 3rd periods. I guess this season will be determined by whichever one of these teams shows up for the remaining games.
Quote from: cth95Some dumb penalties (particularly the cross-check by Brendon)...
I think Kennedy's slash was much worse and the deciding penalty.
Kennedy's could be. I was at the other end, so I couldn't see how blatant it was. Brendon was right in front of me so it was very obvious and seemed completely unnecessary.
Lots of astute observations here, so I'll just add a few.
BU seemed to beat us at what has been the trademark of Schafer-coached teams. They were more physical, hit harder, and wore us down so that they totally outplayed us in the third period. Our guys came out like gang-busters at the start of the first period and OT, but they seemed to lack the confidence and elan of a championship team. Shafer-coached teams have improved tremendously over the course of a season, and this team has lots of talent. But they didn't show it for a full 60 minutes last night. ND and CC are going to be real challenges. If we're a legitimate NC contender, the guys have to play these games as if they expect to win, not as if they just hope to win.
Quote from: SwampyLots of astute observations here, so I'll just add a few.
BU seemed to beat us at what has been the trademark of Schafer-coached teams. They were more physical, hit harder, and wore us down so that they totally outplayed us in the third period. Our guys came out like gang-busters at the start of the first period and OT, but they seemed to lack the confidence and elan of a championship team. Shafer-coached teams have improved tremendously over the course of a season, and this team has lots of talent. But they didn't show it for a full 60 minutes last night. ND and CC are going to be real challenges. If we're a legitimate NC contender, the guys have to play these games as if they expect to win, not as if they just hope to win.
Yeah, I think there was a lot of "trying not to lose" thinking going on after we got the 3rd goal, rather than a playing to win attitude. Certainly might have been player driven rather than a directive from the coaches -- wouldn't be the first time that has happened. We will certainly have a number of opportunities against quality teams, so we'll have a better sense of how good we might be by New Year's Eve.
Of course we can't overlook the Capital District games this coming weekend. Both teams are improved, and we'll need to be focused.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fluky 2nd goal. During the game I couldn't figure out what happened, and the replay on the MSG screen didn't really help me. The goal was unassisted, but I was sure the BU player passed it during the 2 on 1. After watching it a few times on Redcast, I saw how unlucky that goal really was. Yes, it was bad to allow a 2 on 1, but I thought it looked like Brendan Nash defended it well. He didn't allow the guy to shoot and forced him to pass. Unfortunately his attempt to sweep away the pass with his stick created a crazy deflection that left Scrivens with no chance.
My feeling is that we could have easily won this game 3-0, as every one of BU's goals had some sort of flukiness to it. I also feel that we could have easily lost 6-3 considering how many great saves Scrivens was forced to make.
Quote from: BMacI'm pretty sure the reason we lost is the band not playing the alma mater during the second intermission. Didn't even play the new cornell fight song, or "good old days on the hill." Come on!
It was also disappointing to get only one "Screw BU". But it was great to have a couple of pep bands invade MSG.
Not to mention the awesomeness of not only the "regular" cowbell but the old-time washboard-cowbell band. (Did anyone get a video of them? I was too far away.)
This totally unrelated to hockey.
But, I wanted to mention that, after the game, I found a camera under a seat in the row behind us. I really didn't look at the camera (for details). It was in a small black case. My wife commented that the people sitting in those seat were Cornell fans. So, it's possible that they read this forum.
We were sitting in Sec. 65, Row F. Presumably, the row behind us is Row G. Anyway, I turned the camera over to a security person standing near Gate 63.
Hopefully, the camera's owner will get it back.
Quote from: Willy '06My feeling is that we could have easily won this game 3-0, as every one of BU's goals had some sort of flukiness to it. I also feel that we could have easily lost 6-3 considering how many great saves Scrivens was forced to make.
I agree with the latter sentiment more than the former. I think the shorty was soft but none of the goals were fluky. The first BU goal was the result of BU's aggressive forechecking on the PK. The was an unfortunate deflection but if Nash doesn't get his stick on the puck BU probably gets a clean goal off of a redirect, since BU created a 2 on 1. The third BU goal was a 6x4 crash-the-net mucker's goal; it was only fluky to the extent that Scrivens lost the puck.
As for BU's record, I briefly spoke to a BU fan after the game (a fan who was HIGHLY complimentary of the Big Red, and Scrivens in particular) about their record. He shrugged his shoulders and said "they're very young." That sounds about right. They seemed highly-skilled but kind of sloppy.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Willy '06My feeling is that we could have easily won this game 3-0, as every one of BU's goals had some sort of flukiness to it. I also feel that we could have easily lost 6-3 considering how many great saves Scrivens was forced to make.
I agree with the latter sentiment more than the former. I think the shorty was soft but none of the goals were fluky. The first BU goal was the result of BU's aggressive forechecking on the PK. The was an unfortunate deflection but if Nash doesn't get his stick on the puck BU probably gets a clean goal off of a redirect, since BU created a 2 on 1. The third BU goal was a 6x4 crash-the-net mucker's goal; it was only fluky to the extent that Scrivens lost the puck.
As for BU's record, I briefly spoke to a BU fan after the game (a fan who was HIGHLY complimentary of the Big Red, and Scrivens in particular) about their record. He shrugged his shoulders and said "they're very young." That sounds about right. They seemed highly-skilled but kind of sloppy.
I looked for this in the program, if I recall correctly, they only have 3 seniors. Too bad we didn't win. I expect that come late season, a win would have really helped our RPI.
One of the oddest things I've ever seen at a hockey game happened after this one. Walking up 8th avenue, a slow-rolling Hummer stretch limo passed by. The rear window was open, a BU flag was flying from it, and a lone guy was shouting at Cornell fans on the sidewalk, "Cornell sucks!".
Yes, the idiots were out in NYC Saturday night.
I had a fellow & (presumably) his two sons almost run over my wife. All four parties were walking. My wife has some mobility issues and uses a cane. After my wife recovered, I said (sarcastically) to the guy: "nice!!!!". He turned around & stared at me, obviously contemplating completion of his "I'm a thoughtless clod" imitation. He decided to walk away. Jerk!!
Oh yes, he was wearing a Cornell hockey jersey. Too bad people like that don't dress in a way that renders them anonymous. He gives Cornellians a bad name.....
To the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety school(s)", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety school(s)", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
LOL. That's almost as good as my buddy Joe-×'s post on why he is a libertarian. See the last paragraph: http://pmpub.krose.org/forum?action=view&forum_id=2&message_id=352746
Quote from: redice. . . He gives Cornellians a bad name.....
As did the Cornell fan sitting right behind us who spilled his full cup of beer which made the floor beneath our seats a sea of suds, ruining my tote bag and soaking my girlfriend's pocketbook with beer. He didn't even have the courtesy to apologize. I guess he was too pissed off about wasting a $9 glass of beer.
Quote from: dbilmesAs did the Cornell fan sitting right behind us who spilled his full cup of beer which made the floor beneath our seats a sea of suds, ruining my tote bag and soaking my girlfriend's pocketbook with beer. He didn't even have the courtesy to apologize. I guess he was too pissed off about wasting a $9 glass of beer.
Not an excuse for not apologizing, but it's frakkin' ridiculous that the "most famous arena in the world" doesn't have cup holders. ::doh::
Quote from: dbilmesQuote from: redice. . . He gives Cornellians a bad name.....
As did the Cornell fan sitting right behind us who spilled his full cup of beer which made the floor beneath our seats a sea of suds, ruining my tote bag and soaking my girlfriend's pocketbook with beer. He didn't even have the courtesy to apologize. I guess he was too pissed off about wasting a $9 glass of beer.
I guess that's the part that disappointed me most (about our encounter). The jerk made no effort to say excuse me, sorry, etc. With that omission, I couldn't resist
complimenting him on his behavior. After all, in a large crowd, things like that (collisions) are going to happen. It's the courtesy after the collision that shows the character.
Quote from: rediceQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: redice. . . He gives Cornellians a bad name.....
As did the Cornell fan sitting right behind us who spilled his full cup of beer which made the floor beneath our seats a sea of suds, ruining my tote bag and soaking my girlfriend's pocketbook with beer. He didn't even have the courtesy to apologize. I guess he was too pissed off about wasting a $9 glass of beer.
I guess that's the part that disappointed me most (about our encounter). The jerk made no effort to say excuse me, sorry, etc. With that omission, I couldn't resist complimenting him on his behavior. After all, in a large crowd, things like that (collisions) are going to happen. It's the courtesy after the collision that shows the character.
Well, it is New York City. When somebody bumps me in NY and apologizes, after checking to see if my wallet hasn't been lifted, I'll say, "Hey, no apology necessary. This is New York," which usually gets a smile. It's the handful of polite New Yorkers that spoil what the majority have worked so hard to establish as a reputation.
Also on this branch of the thread, Kyle Rose notes one more thing wrong with the self-proclaimed world's greatest arena (no cupholders). The MSG PA announcer kept saying "world's greatest arena" in the form of an untruth repeated often becoming a truth. It's ancient, it's uncomfortable, and it isn't populated by very good teams. Plus no cupholders. Plus you never could evacuate the place quickly in an emergency. It's one of the oldest NHL arenas, I believe (Mellon Pittsburgh 1961, MSG 1968, Nassau Colisum 1971). I'm not a fan of replacing arenas at 25 the way the Devils did, but the wider concourses and greater amenities (especially for fatcat fans) make newer places better to be. If and when this MSG comes down, it will bring back the stories about why the beautiful old Penn Station was razed to make way for an arena that doesn't last much more than 50 years or 60 years. The old Boston Garden was a worse place by far than MSG, but Boston Garden had charm, and we had a lot of victories there.
I thought BU fans were not at all problematic, in part because there weren't many of them. For the Cornell fans who got hassled, imagine how difficult the BU people would be if BU had lost.
MSG was supposed to undergo a $600 million renovation, including widening the concourses. I haven't heard anything official, but I'm assuming it's on hold due to the recession.
Quote from: scoop85MSG was supposed to undergo a $600 million renovation, including widening the concourses. I haven't heard anything official, but I'm assuming it's on hold due to the recession.
It is rescheduled to start this summer. The prevailing theory is that the Dolan's were just threatening to try and get the move across the street to happen still, but I think at this point the renovations are just going to go forward.
Quote from: billhowardblah blah blah..."world's greatest arena" in the form of an untruth repeated often becoming a truth...blah blah blah
Actually, that's not what he (or anyone) said. It's "World's Most Famous Arena" which I invite you to dispute. Fame has nothing to do with cup holders or amenities. As you seem to be bursting at the seams with excess words and repeatedly choose ELF as the overflow receptacle, the least you could do is use the right ones.
Some game impressions:
It was a very up tempo game, with both teams battling hard. It seemed like I was using the term "freshman mistake" to explain a lot of our misplays. Both D'Agostino and Birch have a lot of upside, but D'Agostino made a few passes to no one, and Birch made a few mental errors in backing away from an attempt to keep the puck in our offensive end and also rushing clearing attempts without looking. Both have been generally impressive this season, but neither has the defensive poise that Keir Ross showed last year, so I hope they continue to rotate Ross in as well. Also, the Kary, Miller, Axell line never generated any offense.
Although it's easy to see how we could have won, it also could have been a lot worse. There were three or four times when BU made a pass to a player who was about 10 feet from the net with plenty of open net to shoot at, and the shots just missed everything.
A thought on the lines: Would it make sense to have Jillson and Joe Devin switch lines? Jillson is a better passer than Joe, and with Greening and Gallagher both being scorers, would fit well on that line. And Joe Devin may be a better scorer (although that may be a result of his linemates), and perhaps that would give Riley, who likes to pass, someone to finish his plays. I thought Jillson played well all evening. It seemed like only the top two lines ever had the puck in the offensive zone.
And finally, so ebilmes doesn't have to say it this week, you just can't take a cross-checking penalty in the offensive zone, paticularly late in the third period.
Quote from: I'm not a fan of replacing arenas at 25 the way the Devils did
The Devils replaced Continental Airlines Arena because it was the center of North Jersey gridlock. It wasn't worth driving to games to sit in traffic for an hour within viewing distance of the arena, so the Prudential Center was built a block away from the Newark train station. I agree though - MSG needs some renovation to make it more fan-friendly.
Quote from: jkahnAnd finally, so ebilmes doesn't have to say it this week, you just can't take a cross-checking penalty in the offensive zone, paticularly late in the third period.
And to repeat myself, it's OK to take a slashing penalty when you're a man down at the end of the game? After all, that's the one that led to the goal.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: jkahnAnd finally, so ebilmes doesn't have to say it this week, you just can't take a cross-checking penalty in the offensive zone, paticularly late in the third period.
And to repeat myself, it's OK to take a slashing penalty when you're a man down at the end of the game? After all, that's the one that led to the goal.
Both penalties were stupid. Both came late in the 3rd in a close game. One was in the offensive zone, one was when Cornell was already down a man. Two wrongs don't make a right. ::smashfreak::
Quote from: ebilmesQuote from: Jim HylaQuote from: jkahnAnd finally, so ebilmes doesn't have to say it this week, you just can't take a cross-checking penalty in the offensive zone, paticularly late in the third period.
And to repeat myself, it's OK to take a slashing penalty when you're a man down at the end of the game? After all, that's the one that led to the goal.
Both penalties were stupid. Both came late in the 3rd in a close game. One was in the offensive zone, one was when Cornell was already down a man. Two wrongs don't make a right. ::smashfreak::
Agreed, we just need to be honest and equal in describing our wrongs.
Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
Quote from: Jordan 04And it was great to hear them take as many opportunities as they could to play after whistles, while the BU band seemed content to just watch the game.
The BU Band was very large (maybe 70? So
that's what it looks like when a university supports their band) and actually pretty good. Also they started most of the BU cheers throughout the game.
I know this because my seats, purchased through the Cornell ticket office as soon as they went on sale, were RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE BU BAND. How on earth does that happen? It wasn't just me - there was a whole stretch of Cornell sections back there.
The fact that we were put there in the first round of ticket allotments tells me either
(a) it was determined ahead of time that those would be Cornell sections (makes no sense), or
(b) somebody screwed up, put Cornell people on the wrong side of the rink, and figured it out too late to fix.
It wasn't the end of the world, just a little bizarre.
Quote from: Roy 82Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
The only thing douchier than doing something like that is to brag about it in public afterwards. Thanks for proving my point, douche.
Quote from: Roy 82Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
What does his first post even mean? What is he alluding to? I am confused.
Quote from: OatQuote from: Roy 82Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
What does his first post even mean? What is he alluding to? I am confused.
There was a Cornell fan making fun of other Cornell fans that it is technically incorrect to call BU a safety school. Since they are a university, it should be safety school
s. Seriously.
Quote from: ScrewBUQuote from: Roy 82Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
The only thing douchier than doing something like that is to brag about it in public afterwards. Thanks for proving my point, douche.
You haven't been here very long, have you?
Quote from: KeithKQuote from: ScrewBUQuote from: Roy 82Quote from: ScrewBUTo the Cornell fan reprimanding everyone around him that it is in fact "safety schools", because BU is a university, you are the reason no one likes us. Die in a fire.
Fixed your post. I will now douse myself with gasoline and light a match.
The only thing douchier than doing something like that is to brag about it in public afterwards. Thanks for proving my point, douche.
You haven't been here very long, have you?
I dunno, I've lurked for a while. I know there are passionate discussions about cheers (e.g. the long DIIIIEEEEE) but confronting another Cornell fan about it at a game is really sad and petty. If this is what we've become, we DO SUCK.
Also, I'd like to see him say the same thing to the BU fans at Egg-Anus arena. They would laugh him out of the building and crack his skull open on Comm. Ave., that's for sure.
Quote from: ScrewBUAlso, I'd like to see him say the same thing to the BU fans at Egg-Anus arena. They would laugh him out of the building and crack his skull open on Comm. Ave., that's for sure.
BUPOLICE have a station house right on the corner of Agganis and Comm Ave, so they'd wait till he got to the Essex before pounding him.
Much like the people who run into my sons wheelchair and keep walking without ever stopping to say their sorry. Really pisses off the wife!
Quote from: slh10Much like the people who run into my sons wheelchair and keep walking without ever stopping to say their sorry. Really pisses off the wife!
And, just how
are you restraining that little ball of terror??::innocent::
Interesting comment regarding Yale's loss to UVM on ECAC recap (http://www.ecachockey.com/men/2009-10/Game_Stories/20093011_YaleVermont). There was a controversial goal, sounding similar to ours.
QuoteWhat seemed to be at issue was either the net being moved at the time the puck went over the goal line or the whistle coming after the goal had been scored. Only the first case can be reviewed. When asked for a statement from the referee, all that was mentioned was the puck crossing the goal line.
Does anyone know the rules?
Quote from: Jim HylaInteresting comment regarding Yale's loss to UVM on ECAC recap (http://www.ecachockey.com/men/2009-10/Game_Stories/20093011_YaleVermont). There was a controversial goal, sounding similar to ours.QuoteWhat seemed to be at issue was either the net being moved at the time the puck went over the goal line or the whistle coming after the goal had been scored. Only the first case can be reviewed. When asked for a statement from the referee, all that was mentioned was the puck crossing the goal line.
Does anyone know the rules?
Are you the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules!?!
(http://10.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ks5q8b0fVz1qzhy30o1_500.jpg)
[clear]
"Over the line!!!"
Quote from: Mike Schafer"Right now the plan is to go not next year, but the year after back down at Madison Square Garden."
http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20091201/SPORTS03/912010365/1128/Sports/Cornell-hockey-players--fans-savor-night-in-the-Garden
I'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
Quote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
You did the links just fine, but what does it have to do with Cornell hockey?
Just a tangent from the BU game. Sorry if it was inappropriate.
the wife or my son::popcorn::
Quote from: slh10the wife or my son::popcorn::
Your wife, silly!!::bang::
Quote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
Nice article, thanks. Beeeej tends to be ultra picky. Keep posting.
Quote from: jkahnQuote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
Nice article, thanks. Beeeej tends to be ultra picky. Keep posting.
Well, there's the pickiness factor. And then there's the eLynah tradition of never letting a good deed go unpunished by a snarky comment. (Which I tend to embace most of the time.) Anyway, keep posting.
Quote from: KeithKAnd then there's the eLynah tradition of never letting a good deed go unpunished by a snarky comment. (Which I tend to embace most of the time.)
Why do you debase tradition?
Quote from: jkahnBeeeej tends to be ultra picky.
It's why we kick his ass every year. On principle.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jkahnBeeeej tends to be ultra picky.
It's why we kick his ass every year. On principle.
That's fine. But this is the Cornell Hockey discussion, not the college hockey discussion. Of course out of town scores are relevant because they affect Cornell, and bashing our own rivals is just tradition. But there should be
some limit to what's appropriate, and I don't think an article about two other schools' rivalry in another conference really qualifies. That said, it is just my opinion, and I didn't remove it, 'cause there are also limits to what I'll bother with when it comes to "policing."
I
have removed some other posts in the past, though. That's sometimes good fun. ::banana::
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: jkahnBeeeej tends to be ultra picky.
It's why we kick his ass every year. On principle.
That's fine. But this is the Cornell Hockey discussion, not the college hockey discussion. Of course out of town scores are relevant because they affect Cornell, and bashing our own rivals is just tradition. But there should be some limit to what's appropriate, and I don't think an article about two other schools' rivalry in another conference really qualifies. That said, it is just my opinion, and I didn't remove it, 'cause there are also limits to what I'll bother with when it comes to "policing."
I have removed some other posts in the past, though. That's sometimes good fun. ::banana::
That gets you an extra ass-kicking.
Beeeej, here's her post.
Quote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
She obviously didn't know exactly what to do, and was asking for help. I can understand why she'd be confused since her possibilities were to post on:
"Men's Hockey", "Discussions about the Cornell men's hockey team" or
"Other Sports", "Discussions about sports other than men's hockey".
So when she's posting, which is appropriate, Cornell men's hockey or sports other than men's hockey?::pop::
Maybe "John Spencer is Dead", but not all would see it.
Rather than just give a terse "... but what does it have to do with Cornell hockey?", why not tell her what to do. That would help a new poster, who obviously cares to do it correctly.**]
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: jkahnBeeeej tends to be ultra picky.
It's why we kick his ass every year. On principle.
That's fine. But this is the Cornell Hockey discussion, not the college hockey discussion. Of course out of town scores are relevant because they affect Cornell, and bashing our own rivals is just tradition. But there should be some limit to what's appropriate, and I don't think an article about two other schools' rivalry in another conference really qualifies. That said, it is just my opinion, and I didn't remove it, 'cause there are also limits to what I'll bother with when it comes to "policing."
I have removed some other posts in the past, though. That's sometimes good fun. ::banana::
That gets you an extra ass-kicking.
Indeed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV7DzFP6FUY).
Quote from: Jim HylaBeeeej, here's her post.Quote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
She obviously didn't know exactly what to do, and was asking for help. I can understand why she'd be confused since her possibilities were to post on:
"Men's Hockey", "Discussions about the Cornell men's hockey team" or
"Other Sports", "Discussions about sports other than men's hockey".
So when she's posting, which is appropriate, Cornell men's hockey or sports other than men's hockey?::pop::
Maybe "John Spencer is Dead", but not all would see it.
Rather than just give a terse "... but what does it have to do with Cornell hockey?", why not tell her what to do. That would help a new poster, who obviously cares to do it correctly.**]
Well, then, my answer would've been "Post it on USCHO."
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: Jim HylaBeeeej, here's her post.Quote from: pepbandmomI'm pretty new here and don't know if this will work - let me know if I should do something differently!
Wall Street Journal article on the BU-BC rivalary:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125971611923171991.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
And the accompanying video:
http://online.wsj.com/video/bu-vs-bc-a-beantown-rivalry-on-ice/C5A9E5ED-01A2-4A1B-A3F6-4BE09139691D.html
She obviously didn't know exactly what to do, and was asking for help. I can understand why she'd be confused since her possibilities were to post on:
"Men's Hockey", "Discussions about the Cornell men's hockey team" or
"Other Sports", "Discussions about sports other than men's hockey".
So when she's posting, which is appropriate, Cornell men's hockey or sports other than men's hockey?::pop::
Maybe "John Spencer is Dead", but not all would see it.
Rather than just give a terse "... but what does it have to do with Cornell hockey?", why not tell her what to do. That would help a new poster, who obviously cares to do it correctly.**]
Well, then, my answer would've been "Post it on USCHO."
Beeeej,
I can't believe you're being so hard on this woman. Would you do the same if it was a hockey parent. I know it was not entirely appropriate for the forum thread, but after all she is a students mom and has never done this before and from her post maybe doesn't even know anything about USCHO. Can't we try and enlarge our group of Lynah Faithful and nicely accept them for what they can do and help them grow into their role?
God knows here are a lot of things posted here that have nothing to do with Cornell hockey, I'll bet you can find something in 1/2 of the threads. The Jerk response comes to mind. We accept that because it's an inside joke, but it sure doesn't have anything to do with the thread it's in, nor does it add to our knowledge.
I, for one, am happy she posted and have invited her to join me at a game.
In what way am I being "so hard on" her? I don't think a post on the North Dakota/Denver rivalry would be appropriate even though we're playing NoDak this year; I would ask in the same way, what does it have to do with Cornell hockey? If a Cornell hockey parent posted something here that wasn't relevant to Cornell hockey, I'd ask the same question.
In addition, you're not privy to the conversation I've had with this woman via PM. If I was hard on her in public, I think I made it clear in private that I meant nothing personal or individual. And if she attends a game with you, I'll happily buy her a hot cocoa.
Anyway, the culture of how we deal with each other on this board in good humor ("Jerk") has nothing to do with what topics are appropriate in the first place. And yes, we talk about other schools, but largely to the extent that they affect Cornell, not just because they happen to have college hockey programs. I don't think it's that absurd to see a line between posts about the BU/Cornell game and posts about a BU/BC rivalry. There's already a college hockey discussion board, and it's called USCHO.
(Note, again, that I didn't delete the post. I just don't think it's out of line for me to discourage imitators.)
I really don't think you're being at all fair, Beeeej. I know you're attempting to be nice about it, but still doesn't make you correct.
Why? The following is the list of threads in the last 5 pages that have really nothing to do with Cornell men's hockey:
- The Gentrification of North Dakota - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,149733
- forum issues - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,149350
- Cops pull tasers on UMD player during game - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,149549
- CCHA Denies UAH - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,147352
- Incredibly Funny Flamefest on USCHO - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,148363
- 2010 Frozen Four tickets - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,138556
- Clarkson hockey players face sex charges - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,147539
- Entry music - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,147720
- An impending early departure - http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,147276
And that's entire topics, not single posts within a thread. I can't imagine how many dozens of those we could find around here. Should we discourage posting out out-of-town scores that don't at least involve an ECAC team or one of our season opponents?
I read a few forums where the mods jump in if something isn't at least 99% on topic. It sucks, because it shuts down many interesting conversations that really are within the realm of interest of all involved.
It's really long since established that this forum is the appropriate place for topics on men's college hockey, even if it doesn't involve Cornell. It might be a problem if that became the majority of the threads, but one of every dozen or every score or so hasn't been a problem and it's been that way for years. I kind've feel there's a "use it or lose it" copyright-law-style principal at play here. If you want to enforce something, it has to be done consistently & regularly. We can't have years of all sorts of mens-but-not-Cornell hockey topics and then call out one post for not being about Cornell.
I must say that I had an initial negative (I think that word is even too strong) reaction to the post. It was not that I didn't want to read it, but was just expecting more Cornell-BU analysis and had a "who cares?" reaction when I saw the contents. I would have been happy to see this post as its own topic in the Cornell Mens Hockey forum or Other Sports and simply was surprised that it did not have to deal with Cornell-BU. The post is most certainly valuable, just potentially misplaced.
You raise some very valid points. Thank you for doing so cogently and calmly. :-)
Quote from: BeeeejYou raise some very valid points. Thank you for doing so cogently and calmly. :-)
But what does this have to do with Cornell Hockey? (Sorry. Couldn't resist!)
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: BeeeejYou raise some very valid points. Thank you for doing so cogently and calmly. :-)
But what does this have to do with Cornell Hockey? (Sorry. Couldn't resist!)
I am sure you could PM him for details :P
eLynah has manageable size, so if a post on the BC-BU rivalry appears in Cornell men's hockey rather than other sports, it's no big deal.
MSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Quote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
Quote from: statenauroraQuote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
What does this have to do with Cornell hockey?
Quote from: ScrewBUQuote from: statenauroraQuote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
What does this have to do with Cornell hockey?
PM me for details.
Quote from: Kyle RoseQuote from: ScrewBUQuote from: statenauroraQuote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
What does this have to do with Cornell hockey?
PM me for details.
Jerk. ::rolleyes::
Quote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
I don't see any signs that the escalator capacity will be increased. :-/
The "Fact Sheet" says the lower bowl work is expected to be ready for when we return in 2011. Upper bowl work ready for the following season.
It says "Improved upper bowl sightlines that put patrons 17.5 degrees closer to the action," whatever that means.
Quote from: David HardingIt says "Improved upper bowl sightlines that put patrons 17.5 degrees closer to the action," whatever that means.
Maybe it means they won't have to watch on the jumbotron.
Quote from: ScrewBUQuote from: statenauroraQuote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
What does this have to do with Cornell hockey?
Cornell will play in MSG, Cornell fans buy drinks at games, Drinks come in cups, Cups need holders.
Quote from: statenauroraQuote from: ScrewBUQuote from: statenauroraQuote from: SirJWMSG renovation details;
http://www.msg.com/renovation/
Nice, but will there be cup holders?
What does this have to do with Cornell hockey?
Cornell will play in MSG, Cornell fans buy drinks at games, Drinks come in cups, Cups need holders.
You haven't been here very long, have you?
[insert jerk/typical loop here]