Women's Hockey Announces Seven Additions for 2016-17 Season. (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2016/8/4/womens-ice-hockey-womens-hockey-announce-seven-additions-for-2016-17-season.aspx) Here's hoping they can bring us back to recent past glory. Meaning last year was an aberration.
Three Cornellians Named to Canada Development Team (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2016/8/15/womens-ice-hockey-three-cornellians-named-to-canada-development-team.aspx)
Only slightly this season, but Seven Cornellians Invited to Canada Fall Festival (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2016/9/7/womens-ice-hockey-seven-cornellians-invited-to-canada-fall-festival.aspx). It does show the tremendous quality of players that we've had.
Today mediocrity (http://www.uscho.com/2016/09/21/ecac-announces-womens-preseason-coaches-poll-all-league-team/), tomorrow oblivion.
There are only 19 players on the women's roster, including 7 freshmen.
Big Red Women start off with big Offensive display Beating Carleton 10-0 (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2016/10/14/womens-ice-hockey-womens-hockey-tops-carleton-10-0-in-exhibition-game.aspx) tonight.
For a first outing the team showed up! I worry that we only have 5 defense-women on the roster. All the more reason to show up and cheer them on against Mercyhurst next weekend. LGR!
The women looked good in their first few games winning both games against Mercyhurst 3-1 and 2-1. I was impressed by the fresh-women hustle and contribution to the scoring.
Folks they are fun to watch - do try to get to some of their games.
Quote from: profudgeThe women looked good in their first few games winning both games against Mercyhurst 3-1 and 2-1. I was impressed by the fresh-women hustle and contribution to the scoring.
Folks they are fun to watch - do try to get to some of their games.
And they received 1 vote in this weeks poll.::burnout::
Quote from: profudgeThe women looked good in their first few games winning both games against Mercyhurst 3-1 and 2-1. I was impressed by the fresh-women hustle and contribution to the scoring.
Folks they are fun to watch - do try to get to some of their games.
3PM this Friday vs. RPI in Troy. Best reason to visit Troy in 2016.
Quote from: marty3PM this Friday vs. RPI in Troy. Best reason to visit Troy in 2016.
What??? Did Dinosaur Grill close???
RPI TV is streaming the women's game live although the Cornell site does not show a broadcast. No score although Cornell looks good.
(http://rpitv.org)
Quote from: dag14RPI TV is streaming the women's game live although the Cornell site does not show a broadcast. No score although Cornell looks good.
(http://rpitv.org)
Final RPI 1 Cornell 0 :)
https://twitter.com/RPIAthletics/status/792119249506447360
Should have won that game, damn. Their goaltender was lights out.
Women playing Union; again the game is being streamed although Cornell Athletics doesn't have a link to the Union site.
Women @ Colgate. It's streaming here for free. (https://campusinsiders.com/live/11-1-16-cornell-at-colgate-wih/) They're at the new Colgate arena. 0-0 at end of first period.
Three underclasswomen selected, along with five grads, to represent Team Canada. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2016/11/23/womens-ice-hockey-eight-cornellians-selected-to-represent-team-canada.aspx)
Anyone know what happened to Christian Higham?
She posted on Instagram after last season something along the lines of it being a very difficult decision to quit hockey to focus on getting healthy. It would be great if she were able to come back next year, but it sounded like a permanent health related retirement.
Quote from: Jim HylaThree underclasswomen selected, along with five grads, to represent Team Canada. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2016/11/23/womens-ice-hockey-eight-cornellians-selected-to-represent-team-canada.aspx)
I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
Quote from: scoop85I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
It does feel that way. Of course, talent and coaching don't guarantee wins--Harvard's poor performance this year seems hard to explain. What is the recipe for success in this ever-evolving college sport?
Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: scoop85I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
It does feel that way. Of course, talent and coaching don't guarantee wins--Harvard's poor performance this year seems hard to explain. What is the recipe for success in this ever-evolving college sport?
$$$$$
Sadly.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: scoop85I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
It does feel that way. Of course, talent and coaching don't guarantee wins--Harvard's poor performance this year seems hard to explain. What is the recipe for success in this ever-evolving college sport?
$$$$$
Sadly.
In terms of roster size, scheduling, facilities, recruiting budget, or other things?
Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: scoop85I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
It does feel that way. Of course, talent and coaching don't guarantee wins--Harvard's poor performance this year seems hard to explain. What is the recipe for success in this ever-evolving college sport?
$$$$$
Sadly.
In terms of roster size, scheduling, facilities, recruiting budget, or other things?
All of those, not to mention scholarship money.
Quote from: mattj711She posted on Instagram after last season something along the lines of it being a very difficult decision to quit hockey to focus on getting healthy. It would be great if she were able to come back next year, but it sounded like a permanent health related retirement.
That's for the update.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: imafrshmnQuote from: scoop85I'm getting a sense that after a bit of a drop-off, the talent level of the women's team is picking up again.
It does feel that way. Of course, talent and coaching don't guarantee wins--Harvard's poor performance this year seems hard to explain. What is the recipe for success in this ever-evolving college sport?
$$$$$
Sadly.
In terms of roster size, scheduling, facilities, recruiting budget, or other things?
All of those, not to mention scholarship money.
Mostly scholarship money. The oil boom in Canada lifted the value of the Canadian dollar so that, by the time Johnston, Campbell, Jenner, Fortino, Rougeau and the others were being recruited, the Canadian dollar was at a small premium to the US dollar. Then the oil glut hit, coupled with opposition in the US to the Keystone pipeline and fracking, driving the loonie down to a 25% discount. This and the general higher-than-inflation annual increases in tuition have made for an unacceptably high cost for kids north of the border to attend Ivy schools that do not offer athletic scholarships as such. I know for a fact that this has derailed a couple of commitments to Cornell.
http://www.canadianforex.ca/forex-tools/my-fx-dashboard
Click on "All Time" to see the trend beginning in 1992. Currently, there is a bit of a joke going around about changes being made to the Canadian $2 coin.
Time back, Cornell had a definite advantage over other Ivy League schools because of NY state support of the statutory colleges including the Ag school, that effectively amounted to a 50% scholarship-in-kind for out-of-state (and out-of-country) students. However, some time ago NY cut back much of this aid and the University was forced to raise the tuition for these students to the same level as the endowed school.
Last night's game against Princeton at Lynah was exciting and great fun to watch for a fan of ice hockey!
Princeton came in on a roll winning their last 8 games and with seemingly the hottest goal keeper in women's hockey. Princeton scored on desperate scramble around the crease early in the game and that stood as the only goal in a goal keeper's duel. Then the Big Red scored a beautiful goal with 1.02 left on the clock.
Very intense play ensued for final minute and all of OT. Cornell managed a last rush up ice with about 15 seconds on the clock; and finally put the puck in the net about 1.5 seconds after the finally buzzer. So game ended in a 1-1 tie that seemed a just outcome for the effort of both teams.
My applause and admiration to the women Big Red for a great game!
Women just beat Q 3-2 10 sec into OT.
Quote from: Jim HylaWomen just beat Q 3-2 10 sec into OT.
Woohoo!
After all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
Quote from: Jim HylaAfter all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
Done. Big win, and an interesting ending. With a 2-1 lead off a 3rd Period Bunton goal, CU started a 3-on-2 rush at an empty net with under a minute left. Bunton got taken down at the red line as Colgate pushed a flurry of bodies at the net and popped it into the net with about 26 seconds left. The refs went off for a review and waved it off, as Colgate was hit with a penalty. My guess is that there was goaltender interference, but I feel the trip at the red line should have been called, IMO.
Quote from: Jim HylaAfter all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
And they just did beat them 2-1. It was an amazing end. Colgate was a man down and pulled their goalie and scored, but it was reviewed and called off. All with just 25 sec to go. I was watching but not listening, so I don't know what the call was.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: Jim HylaAfter all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
Done. Big win, and an interesting ending. With a 2-1 lead off a 3rd Period Bunton goal, CU started a 3-on-2 rush at an empty net with under a minute left. Bunton got taken down at the red line as Colgate pushed a flurry of bodies at the net and popped it into the net with about 26 seconds left. The refs went off for a review and waved it off, as Colgate was hit with a penalty. My guess is that there was goaltender interference, but I feel the trip at the red line should have been called, IMO.
I totally agree that the trip should have been called. It'll be interesting to watch the end again.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: Jim HylaAfter all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
And they just did beat them 2-1. It was an amazing end. Colgate was a man down and pulled their goalie and scored, but it was reviewed and called off. All with just 25 sec to go. I was watching but not listening, so I don't know what the call was.
I don't know if there was an announcement about why the goal was waved off or about what the penalty was, but I suspect that the penalty was a bench minor against the Colgate coach, and the box score (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/boxscores/20170117_zrh4.xml) shows a penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct.
Quote from: WederQuote from: Jim HylaQuote from: Jim HylaAfter all the ECAC games we're 8 in PWR and 3 in standings, by percentage. Let's beat Colgate Tuesday.
And they just did beat them 2-1. It was an amazing end. Colgate was a man down and pulled their goalie and scored, but it was reviewed and called off. All with just 25 sec to go. I was watching but not listening, so I don't know what the call was.
The play-by-play announcer never said what the penalty was, but I suspect it was a bench minor against the Colgate coach, and the box score (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/boxscores/20170117_zrh4.xml) shows a penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct.
I agree that it was likely on the coach. The ref made a motion to the coach when he skated away, but what was the call to negate the goal?
Quote from: Jim HylaI agree that it was likely on the coach. The ref made a motion to the coach when he skated away, but what was the call to negate the goal?
Had to be on the coach. He was jawing away and the referee made what looked like a baseball umpire's ejection motion.
Looked to me like Colgate's #10 went full speed into the crease and Voorhies, so it was likely an "in the crease" or goalie interference call. Was able to re-run the video a couple of times.
I was at the game and did not hear an announcement of the last penalty or the reason the refs, after a review declared "No Goal" but the very small crowd ROARED! Article on Cornell Women's Hockey web page said it was a goaltender interference call.
I agree the take-down should have been called; looked like a rugby tackle!
In the end a very exciting game - played very hard by both teams!
Way you go - Lady Big Red Team!
Quote from: profudgeI was at the game and did not hear an announcement of the last penalty or the reason the refs, after a review declared "No Goal" but the very small crowd ROARED! Article on Cornell Women's Hockey web page said it was a goaltender interference call.
I agree the take-down should have been called; looked like a rugby tackle!
In the end a very exciting game - played very hard by both teams!
Way you go - Lady Big Red Team!
If the refs were to review the take down, they would be very happy they were able to negate the goal.
Women beat Clarkson 2-1.
Quote from: dag14Women beat Clarkson 2-1.
Really sharp performance from the Red. It was a familiar defense-first formula to make this talented but short-benched edition competitive against a generally stronger and deeper opponent in Clarkson. Strong team defending and solid goaltending led to the upset. Both the Cornell goals were greasy. The one that put us up 2-1 with a minute left was a devious little wraparound that somehow squeezed between pad and post--a little bit soft, but reflected the mental edge we seemed to have in this one.
With the win, we move to 7 in the PWR, (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/) and to 3 in the ECAC standings. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/standings) Even if we lose to SLU tonight, we'll remain in third, but obviously our PWR could change.
Compared to what I thought before the season started, this team is doing much better.::banana::
With the sweep of the Capital District Cornell solidifies their hold on 3rd in league (http://www.uscho.com/conference/ecac-women/), and 7th in PWR (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/).
Micah Hart is POTW. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/Weekly_Awards/W_Weekly_Awards_020717.pdf) Kristin O'Neill is twice Hon. Men. for ROTW.
Quote from: Jim HylaMicah Hart is POTW. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/Weekly_Awards/W_Weekly_Awards_020717.pdf) Kristin O'Neill is twice Hon. Men. for ROTW.
Micah is now a woman's name? wtf? ::wtf::
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: Jim HylaMicah Hart is POTW. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/Weekly_Awards/W_Weekly_Awards_020717.pdf) Kristin O'Neill is twice Hon. Men. for ROTW.
Micah is now a woman's name? wtf? ::wtf::
If it was spelled Myka would you have even thought twice about it?
Women's Hockey Commissioners Association announces creation of national awards. (http://www.uscho.com/2017/02/07/womens-hockey-commissioners-association-announces-creation-of-national-awards/)
They're to have POTM and ROTM. Announcement of the fist winners is supposed to be today.
Quote from: Jim HylaAnnouncement of the fist winners is supposed to be today.
Now
that's commitment.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: Jim HylaMicah Hart is POTW. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/Weekly_Awards/W_Weekly_Awards_020717.pdf) Kristin O'Neill is twice Hon. Men. for ROTW.
Micah is now a woman's name? wtf? ::wtf::
If it was spelled Myka would you have even thought twice about it?
To be honest, no. But is is pronounced MEE-kah or MAI-kah?
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: Jim HylaMicah Hart is POTW. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/Weekly_Awards/W_Weekly_Awards_020717.pdf) Kristin O'Neill is twice Hon. Men. for ROTW.
Micah is now a woman's name? wtf? ::wtf::
If it was spelled Myka would you have even thought twice about it?
To be honest, no. But is is pronounced MEE-kah or MAI-kah?
Probably the latter. Everyone I've known with either spelling pronounced it that way.
Women's Hockey Clinches Ivy Title With 5-1 Win At Brown (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2017/2/11/womens-ice-hockey-7-womens-hockey-takes-ivy-title-with-5-1-win-at-brown.aspx).
At the beginning of the season I never thought that it would happen.
Congrats. It looks like good times may be returning.
Team in playoffs. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/News/201718102_Pairings_Set)
[b][u]QUARTERFINALS (Friday, February 24 - Sunday, February 26 - Best-of-three games)[/u][/b]
No. 8 Rensselaer at No. 1 Clarkson
Friday, February 24 - Rensselaer at Clarkson, 6 p.m.
Saturday, February 25 - Rensselaer at Clarkson, 3 p.m.
Sunday, February 26 - Rensselaer at Clarkson, 3 p.m. (if necessary)
No. 7 Yale at No. 2 St. Lawrence
Friday, February 24 - Yale at St. Lawrence, 6 p.m.
Saturday, February 25 - Yale at St. Lawrence, 3 p.m.
Sunday, February 26 - Yale at St. Lawrence, 3 p.m. (if necessary)
[b][u]No. 6 Colgate at No. 3 Cornell
Friday, February 24 - Colgate at Cornell, 3 p.m.
Saturday, February 25 - Colgate at Cornell, 3 p.m.
Sunday, February 26 - Colgate at Cornell, 3 p.m. (if necessary)[/u][/b]
No. 5 Quinnipiac at No. 4 Princeton
Friday, February 24 - Quinnipiac at Princeton, 3 p.m.
Saturday, February 25 - Quinnipiac at Princeton, 3 p.m.
Sunday, February 26 - Quinnipiac at Princeton, 3 p.m. (if necessary)
Winners of the quarterfinals will earn a spot in the league's championship weekend set to take place on March 4-5 on the campus rink of the [b][u]highest remaining seed[/u][/b].
Should be good games. I wonder if 'gate will bring some fans. Semi and finals will almost for sure be at Clarkson. I hope SLU makes it, they should. It would make an interesting weekend.
I just noticed that there is no video listed for any of the women's tourney games. Does anyone have any insight on this? Might the ECAC work out something like they do with the men?
edit: Scrolling down I see that the semi and finals are on ESPN3, but nothing on this weekend's games.
Quote from: Jim HylaI just noticed that there is no video listed for any of the women's tourney games. Does anyone have any insight on this? Might the ECAC work out something like they do with the men?
edit: Scrolling down I see that the semi and finals are on ESPN3, but nothing on this weekend's games.
I got an email from Mr. Hagwell that the quarterfinal games will be streamed by the host schools. So it should eventually show up on the ILDN schedule. The ECAC sites, full and mobile, now list them. However they list Clarkson at Harvard, so that needs to be changed.
Women come from behind to win QF Game 1 (http://www.ivyleaguedigitalnetwork.com/cornell/video/cornell-highlights-cornell-whky-vs-colgate) 2-1 against Colgate on a late third period penalty shot goal by Freshman Kristin O'Neill.
Vorhees' 9th career shut out, 1-0, to send #3 Cornell to the North Country and the ECAC Semis. We will probably play #2 SLU, with #1 Clarkson hosting the winner of the Princeton-Quinnipiac game 3.
Quote from: TrotskyVorhees' 9th career shut out, 1-0, to send #3 Cornell to the North Country and the ECAC Semis. We will probably play #2 SLU, with #1 Clarkson hosting the winner of the Princeton-Quinnipiac game 3.
Today was a case of better to be lucky than good. Colgate clearly outplayed us, and we were hanging on at the end. Strong game by Vorhees or else we'd be looking at a game 3.
2017 GAME SCHEDULE @ Clarkson
Saturday, March 4
Semifinal Game One - No. 4 Princeton at No. 1 Clarkson, 1 p.m.
Semifinal Game Two - No. 3 Cornell vs. No. 2 St. Lawrence, 4 p.m.
Sunday, March 5
Championship Game - 2 p.m.
They will be shown on ESPN3.
Derraugh Named Finalist For ECAC Hockey Coach Of The Year (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2017/2/28/womens-ice-hockey-derraugh-named-finalist-for-ecac-hockey-coach-of-the-year.aspx)
The way the pairwise stands now, Cornell stands a good chance of getting into the NCAA tourney but the scenarios are strange. Using the pairwise calculator (http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey/2016/10/30/13465322/2016-2017-ncaa-womens-hockey-pairwise-rankings-calculator), we see that the biggest source of uncertainty for Cornell is whether or not BC wins Hockey East; this is more important than whether or not Cornell beats St. Lawrence. If BC wins Hockey East as they are heavy favorites to do, Cornell should get in regardless of other outcomes. If BC does not win Hockey East, they should still make the NCAAs, which bumps out Cornell unless Cornell wins the auto-bid.
Quote from: imafrshmnThe way the pairwise stands now, Cornell stands a good chance of getting into the NCAA tourney but the scenarios are strange. Using the pairwise calculator (http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey/2016/10/30/13465322/2016-2017-ncaa-womens-hockey-pairwise-rankings-calculator), we see that the biggest source of uncertainty for Cornell is whether or not BC wins Hockey East; this is more important than whether or not Cornell beats St. Lawrence. If BC wins Hockey East as they are heavy favorites to do, Cornell should get in regardless of other outcomes. If BC does not win Hockey East, they should still make the NCAAs, which bumps out Cornell unless Cornell wins the auto-bid.
Thanks, that helps.
ECAC announces awards. (http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/News/20170303_League_Awards)
[b][u]FIRST TEAM ALL-LEAGUE[/u][/b]
Forward Kennedy Marchment, St. Lawrence
Forward Cayley Mercer, Clarkson
Forward Brooke Webster, St. Lawrence
Defense Savannah Harmon Clarkson
[b][u]Defense Micah Hart, Cornell[/u][/b]
Goaltender Steph Neatby, Princeton
[b][u]SECOND TEAM ALL-LEAGUE[/u][/b]
Forward Genevieve Bannon, Clarkson
Forward Karlie Lund, Princeton
Forward Hannah Miller, St. Lawrence
Defense Kelsey Koelzer, Princeton
Defense Kirsten Padalis, St. Lawrence
Goaltender Grace Harrison, St. Lawrence
[b][u]THIRD TEAM ALL-LEAGUE[/u][/b]
[b][u]Forward Hanna Bunton, Cornell[/u][/b]
Forward Jessie Eldridge, Colgate
Forward Phoebe Staenz, Yale
Defense Taryn Baumgardt, Quinnipiac
Defense Ella Shelton, Clarkson
Goaltender Shea Tiley, Clarkson
[b][u]ALL-ROOKIE TEAM[/u][/b]
Forward Carly Bullock, Princeton
[b][u]Forward Kristin O'Neill, Cornell[/u][/b]
Forward Michaela Pejzlova, Clarkson
[b][u]Defense Jaime Bourbonnais, Cornell[/u][/b]
Defense Ella Shelton, Clarkson
Goaltender Steph Neatby, Princeton
[b][u]COACH OF YEAR[/u][/b]
[b][u]Winner is Doug Derraugh, Cornell[/u][/b]
[b][u]BEST DEFENSEMAN[/u][/b]
Winner is Savannah Harmon, Clarkson
[b][u]BEST FORWARD[/u][/b]
Winner is Cayley Mercer, Clarkson
[b][u]ROOKIE OF YEAR[/u][/b]
Winner is Carly Bullock, Princeton
[b][u]GOALTENDER OF YEAR[/u][/b]
Winner is Steph Neatby, Princeton
[b][u]PLAYER OF YEAR[/u][/b]
Winner is Cayley Mercer, Clarkson
[b][u]MANDI SCHWARTZ STUDENT-ATHLETE OF YEAR[/u][/b]
[b][u]Winner is Paula Voorheis, Cornell[/u][/b]
Women's game is on ESPN3 -- leading SLU after one period.
Quote from: dag14Women's game is on ESPN3 -- leading SLU after one period.
3-1 AFTER 2.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: dag14Women's game is on ESPN3 -- leading SLU after one period.
3-1 AFTER 2.
They win 3-1.
Great finish; kill a long 5on3 and then survive SLU pulling the goalie with about 4 minutes left in the 3rd. Hope they have enough gas in the tank to take on Clarkson tomorrow....
Quote from: dag14Great finish; kill a long 5on3 and then survive SLU pulling the goalie with about 4 minutes left in the 3rd. Hope they have enough gas in the tank to take on Clarkson tomorrow....
Yes it was...also Cornell making the NCAA tournament now pretty much comes down to either pulling off another upset tomorrow or, failing that, for BC to not choke against whomever the play (BU or NU) tomorrow.
Quote from: dag14Great finish; kill a long 5on3 and then survive SLU pulling the goalie with about 4 minutes left in the 3rd. Hope they have enough gas in the tank to take on Clarkson tomorrow....
They pulled the goalie on the 5 on 3, to make 6 on 3, and kept her off for the rest of the game. Although they survived that, I have to think that Clarkson will be much better rested tomorrow. We basically played 2 lines and D for a lot of the game. Get your rest women, sleep tight.
Game at 2 on ESPN 3.
Anyone else getting a technical difficulties issue from ESPN3?
The broadcast of the finals, on ESPN3, is not working. There is just a message saying, "The broadcast you are watching is experiencing technical difficulties."
Quote from: DafatoneAnyone else getting a technical difficulties issue from ESPN3?
Yes.
See the post below yours. We posted at the same time.
There's an audio link on the ecac site: http://ecachockey.com/links/eds860
But it's that really, really, really annoying Clarkson guy with the annoying mic issues, and I have a hangover, so no thanks.
Clarkson up 1-0, 7:39 remaining in the first.
ESPN3 video working now.
I have the feed in time to enjoy the between-period commercials.
Here's a link to the NOT FREE working video (start of the 2nd) if anyone needs it.
http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2016-17/BoxCast/Women-s_Championship_Game
Quote from: imafrshmnThe way the pairwise stands now, Cornell stands a good chance of getting into the NCAA tourney but the scenarios are strange. Using the pairwise calculator (http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey/2016/10/30/13465322/2016-2017-ncaa-womens-hockey-pairwise-rankings-calculator), we see that the biggest source of uncertainty for Cornell is whether or not BC wins Hockey East;
The finals--Northeastern vs BC-- is tied at 1 at the end of regulation.
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: imafrshmnThe way the pairwise stands now, Cornell stands a good chance of getting into the NCAA tourney but the scenarios are strange. Using the pairwise calculator (http://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-womens-hockey/2016/10/30/13465322/2016-2017-ncaa-womens-hockey-pairwise-rankings-calculator), we see that the biggest source of uncertainty for Cornell is whether or not BC wins Hockey East;
The finals--Northeastern vs BC-- is tied at 1 at the end of regulation.
BC wins in OT. Takes a little sting off Cornell's loss.
BC wins, so Cornell should get in. Big question is whether we get matched up against Clarkson again or perhaps Minnesota-Duluth.
Hard fought game, Clarkson makes their 1st period goal stand up. That Cornell team seemed completely spent in the 3rd, as they couldn't seem to set up any offensive zone pressure as the clock wound down. Tough loss, but hopefully their season isn't over.
Clarkson wins their first ECAC title, to go along with their...NCAA championship from a few years ago.
Quote from: imafrshmnBC wins, so Cornell should get in. Big question is whether we get matched up against Clarkson again or perhaps Minnesota-Duluth.
They pick 8 teams and here's the PWR before today's results.
Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank
1 Wisconsin 35 30-2-4 .8889 2 .6608* 2
2 Minnesota-Duluth34 25-5-5 .7857 7 .6178* 3
3 Clarkson 33 28-4-5 .8243 3 .6169* 4
4 St. Lawrence 32 26-5-4 .8000 4 .6050* 5
5 Boston College 31 26-5-5 .7917 6 .6025* 6
6 Minnesota 30 25-7-5 .7432 8 .5975* 7
7 Cornell 29 20-7-5 .7031 9 .5775* 8
8 Robert Morris 28 24-4-6 .7941 5 .5590* 9
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz4aUNUY6a8
These 8 should get bids, as 9 & 10 are PU & NE, and the 8 include the conf champs.
They seed 4 and put 4 more in by geographic criteria. They want to not have air travel.
So W & UMD in west, Clarkson & I'd guess BC in east.
The remaining 4 are difficult as there's only 1 more western team, Minny.
So I'm guessing they send RMU to the West #1 seed.
CU and SLU in east. Which goes to Clarkson and which to BC? I'd like to see final PWR, but based on us beating SLU, they might send us to BC and SLU to Clarkson.
But I'm pretty sure we'll stay east.
We'll see at 9 tonight.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: imafrshmnBC wins, so Cornell should get in. Big question is whether we get matched up against Clarkson again or perhaps Minnesota-Duluth.
They pick 8 teams and here's the PWR before today's results.
Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank
1 Wisconsin 35 30-2-4 .8889 2 .6608* 2
2 Minnesota-Duluth34 25-5-5 .7857 7 .6178* 3
3 Clarkson 33 28-4-5 .8243 3 .6169* 4
4 St. Lawrence 32 26-5-4 .8000 4 .6050* 5
5 Boston College 31 26-5-5 .7917 6 .6025* 6
6 Minnesota 30 25-7-5 .7432 8 .5975* 7
7 Cornell 29 20-7-5 .7031 9 .5775* 8
8 Robert Morris 28 24-4-6 .7941 5 .5590* 9
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz4aUNUY6a8
They seed 4 and put 4 more in by geographic criteria. They want to not have air travel.
So W & UMD in west, Clarkson & I'd guess BC in east.
The remaining 4 are difficult as there's only 1 more western team, Minny.
So I'm guessing they send RMU to the West #1 seed.
CU and SLU in east. Which goes to Clarkson and which to BC? I'd like to see final PWR, but based on us beating SLU, they might send us to BC and SLU to Clarkson.
But I'm pretty sure we'll stay east.
We'll see at 9 tonight.
With the BC's win today, they should pass SLU in the standings. So Cornell will most likely end up at Clarkson and SLU should head to BC. SLU is far enough ahead of Cornell in the standings that it would be highly unlikely that SLU will be sent to Clarkson.
Final PWR is:
1 Wisconsin
2 Clarkson
3 Minnesota-Duluth
4 Boston College
5 St. Lawrence
6 Minnesota
7 Cornell
8 Robert Morris
With it being so straightforward to keep perfect bracket integrity, it would be a pretty ridiculous thing to send Cornell to Boston. Pretty nakedly shrewd "save a bus trip expense" decision if it goes that way.
#8 Robert Morris @ #1 Wisconsin
#7 Cornell @ #2 Clarkson
#6 Minnesota @ #3 Minnesota-Duluth
#5 St. Lawrence @ #4 Boston College
If it goes any other way, the selection committee is being dumb.
EDIT:
Watched the selection show. Official bracket is:
#8 Robert Morris @ #1 Wisconsin
#5 St. Lawrence @ #4 Boston College
#6 Minnesota @ #3 Minnesota-Duluth (WCHA semifinal rematch)
#7 Cornell @ #2 Clarkson (ECAC final rematch)
Back to Clarkson. Saturday @ 3.
http://www.ecachockey.com/women/members/cornell/20170703_Suspension
Wow.
Quote from: daredevilcuhttp://www.ecachockey.com/women/members/cornell/20170703_Suspension
Wow.
Wow is right. I didn't see what exactly she did to draw the penalty at the time. I would like to see that play in front of Cornell's empty net again.
I would too. I don't recall thinking anything heinous.
Crazy thought, but could this be the powers that be at the ECAC wanting to try to tip the scales a bit to make it more likely that the "stronger" team moves on to the next round?
I was watching the game and also thought it didn't look like much of anything at the time.
Spoke with some friends who were at the game, and they thought it was pretty bad. Apparently it was a cross check to stop a Clarkson player who was about to score on the empty net or something. Again, I don't recall thinking it was anything crazy, certainly not suspension-worthy, but I would really like to see the hit again.
Quote from: andyw2100Crazy thought, but could this be the powers that be at the ECAC wanting to try to tip the scales a bit to make it more likely that the "stronger" team moves on to the next round?
I was watching the game and also thought it didn't look like much of anything at the time.
My mind went there too.
Quote from: daredevilcuSpoke with some friends who were at the game, and they thought it was pretty bad. Apparently it was a cross check to stop a Clarkson player who was about to score on the empty net or something. Again, I don't recall thinking it was anything crazy, certainly not suspension-worthy, but I would really like to see the hit again.
As I recall, both players were kind of tussling at the side of the empty net. It wasn't as if the Clarkson player was stopped, and the Cornell player took a run at her. It also wasn't one player being pulled down from behind, heading for a sure goal with an empty net.
I remember thinking at the time that it was a stupid penalty to take, as it did not seem clear to me that it was preventing a sure goal.
Video. (https://youtu.be/CYpvDZ3D9Iw)
That center ice camera angle sure makes it look violent, but it's really hard to tell what's going on. A ref has a good angle on it and didn't think it was worth more than a minor. So yeah, this league decision is pretty flabbergasting.
hard to tell if clarkson was embellishing the contact but she stayed down for a while and it was definitely a cheap hit
Where did you find a video?
Edit: missed it on mobile. It does look like she cross checks her in the head from that angle. With the emphasis on CTH I wouldn't be surprised if that was the logic for the suspension.
I know very little about the women's game, but given the lack of hitting I assume the bar is much lower for a DQ/suspension.
Quote from: BearLoverI know very little about the women's game, but given the lack of hitting I assume the bar is much lower for a DQ/suspension.
That may be, but she wasn't given a game disqualification by the officials. The league chose to get involved.
In my opinion, even if the league thought there was enough there to issue the disqualification under normal circumstances, in what I'm sure was a close call, it would seem that for an NCAA playoff game they might have chosen to go the other way. They could even have had someone call Coach Derraugh, and say, "Hey--we seriously considered suspending your player, but chose not to because it was the NCAA tournament. Just know it was close."
Kristin O'Neill probably grew up dreaming of getting the chance to play for a National Championship. Sure, she's a freshman, so hopefully will get another chance (or two or three), but to have this one taken away from her for something that wasn't even called on the ice just really rubs me the wrong way. I feel for her.
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: BearLoverI know very little about the women's game, but given the lack of hitting I assume the bar is much lower for a DQ/suspension.
That may be, but she wasn't given a game disqualification by the officials. The league chose to get involved.
In my opinion, even if the league thought there was enough there to issue the disqualification under normal circumstances, in what I'm sure was a close call, it would seem that for an NCAA playoff game they might have chosen to go the other way. They could even have had someone call Coach Derraugh, and say, "Hey--we seriously considered suspending your player, but chose not to because it was the NCAA tournament. Just know it was close."
Kristin O'Neill probably grew up dreaming of getting the chance to play for a National Championship. Sure, she's a freshman, so hopefully will get another chance (or two or three), but to have this one taken away from her for something that wasn't even called on the ice just really rubs me the wrong way. I feel for her.
Oh, I didn't mean to suggest she'd received a DQ. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in my initial post. I completely agree with the rest of your post--just as the bar may be lower due to the nature of the women's game, it should be higher because it's the NCAA tournament.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: andyw2100Quote from: BearLoverI know very little about the women's game, but given the lack of hitting I assume the bar is much lower for a DQ/suspension.
That may be, but she wasn't given a game disqualification by the officials. The league chose to get involved.
In my opinion, even if the league thought there was enough there to issue the disqualification under normal circumstances, in what I'm sure was a close call, it would seem that for an NCAA playoff game they might have chosen to go the other way. They could even have had someone call Coach Derraugh, and say, "Hey--we seriously considered suspending your player, but chose not to because it was the NCAA tournament. Just know it was close."
Kristin O'Neill probably grew up dreaming of getting the chance to play for a National Championship. Sure, she's a freshman, so hopefully will get another chance (or two or three), but to have this one taken away from her for something that wasn't even called on the ice just really rubs me the wrong way. I feel for her.
Oh, I didn't mean to suggest she'd received a DQ. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it in my initial post. I completely agree with the rest of your post--just as the bar may be lower due to the nature of the women's game, it should be higher because it's the NCAA tournament.
No, she came at a defenseless player with a hard illegal check. It should be called for what it was. I would hope that even in the men's game, a defenseless check would have been punished. Those are the type of checks that can be career ending, and how can you say that because the next game is an NCAA game, you'll look the other way. If you want to eliminate that type of play, you call it whenever it occurs. She hurt the team and now has to live with it.
Quote from: andyw2100Crazy thought, but could this be the powers that be at the ECAC wanting to try to tip the scales a bit to make it more likely that the "stronger" team moves on to the next round?
I was watching the game and also thought it didn't look like much of anything at the time.
Let's not be Got6. ::smashfreak::
haha wow ... barely touched her
Quote from: Jim HylaNo, she came at a defenseless player with a hard illegal check. It should be called for what it was. I would hope that even in the men's game, a defenseless check would have been punished. Those are the type of checks that can be career ending, and how can you say that because the next game is an NCAA game, you'll look the other way. If you want to eliminate that type of play, you call it whenever it occurs. She hurt the team and now has to live with it.
It's not often that I disagree with you, Jim, but I'm going to now.
The main issue is that the infraction wasn't called on the ice. It wasn't even called as a major penalty. My concern is the league stepping in, and increasing the punishment so significantly.
As for the Clarkson player being defenseless, she was already engaged with another Cornell player, so it's not as if she was skating in clear ice and was blind-sided. O'Neill did come skating in from some distance away, but as I see it, she basically stopped before cross-checking the Clarkson player. If there was truly "inten to to injure", she wouldn't have stopped.
If the play was black and white, sure, don't change anything because it is the NCAA tournament. But I really think the ECAC waded into a very gray-area play, especially since the hit was ruled a minor penalty on the ice. To levy that much additional punishment in this situation I just see as wrong.
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: Jim HylaNo, she came at a defenseless player with a hard illegal check. It should be called for what it was. I would hope that even in the men's game, a defenseless check would have been punished. Those are the type of checks that can be career ending, and how can you say that because the next game is an NCAA game, you'll look the other way. If you want to eliminate that type of play, you call it whenever it occurs. She hurt the team and now has to live with it.
It's not often that I disagree with you, Jim, but I'm going to now.
The main issue is that the infraction wasn't called on the ice. It wasn't even called as a major penalty. My concern is the league stepping in, and increasing the punishment so significantly.
As for the Clarkson player being defenseless, she was already engaged with another Cornell player, so it's not as if she was skating in clear ice and was blind-sided. O'Neill did come skating in from some distance away, but as I see it, she basically stopped before cross-checking the Clarkson player. If there was truly "inten to to injure", she wouldn't have stopped.
If the play was black and white, sure, don't change anything because it is the NCAA tournament. But I really think the ECAC waded into a very gray-area play, especially since the hit was ruled a minor penalty on the ice. To levy that much additional punishment in this situation I just see as wrong.
Not to mention that O'Neill's stick blade is on the ice when she makes contact with the Clarkson player. It looks like she was trying to play the puck/defend Cornell's net so she leaned into the Clarkson player making bodily contact with her. After watching that replay a number of times, I'm still shocked that she received a game suspension particularly given it only drew a minor penalty at the time. It isn't like it happened behind the play and the refs couldn't see what happened.
Honestly other than the womens game allows very little contact, im not even sure why its a penalty.
it wasnt from behind, it wasnt with a stick, it was if anything a slight elbow/ shoulder contact.
when you slow it down it looks more like a dive then a contact play, the clarkon player took for more contact by losing balance with the ice than with the player
i didnt watch most of the game but there were several contact plays much worse than that not called for anything
Slow down the video. The Clarkson player had no physical contact with the Cornell player at the goal. We came in and hit her from the side, in a way that she could not defend herself. Our stick was up when the hit occurred and both officials called the penalty. If that was my daughter, I would have been angry. "No body checking" in women's hockey is a joke, but you cannot do an open ice blind side check. The injury could have been significant.
As for those of you continuing to harp on the "and the officials didn't call it worse than a minor at the time!" point, that is literally the reason why the league reviews potentially serious infractions, so they can 1) mete out what they believe is the appropriate punishment even if the refs didn't do so at the time, and 2) clarify to the refs that this should have been a point of emphasis and ought to be for the future. Whether you disagree with their eventual conclusion is really the only relevant question.
Quote from: BeeeejAs for those of you continuing to harp on the "and the officials didn't call it worse than a minor at the time!" point, that is literally the reason why the league reviews potentially serious infractions, so they can 1) mete out what they believe is the appropriate punishment even if the refs didn't do so at the time, and 2) clarify to the refs that this should have been a point of emphasis and ought to be for the future. Whether you disagree with their eventual conclusion is really the only relevant question.
Well, then I hope the league had better video of the play than we do, and that that video shows something a lot worse than what we can see. Because based on what we can see, the contact just does not look that serious. O'Neill's stick blade was on the ice. She slowed and almost stopped before making contact. The contact appears to be shoulder to shoulder, and into open ice--not the boards. I just don't see it.
I really don't think I am looking at this through red-tinted glasses. I think I'd feel the same way if it was a Clarkson player suspended for a hit like that.
i dont deny there was minor contact and sometimes they call that a penalty and sometimes they dont. to elevate it to major with suspension is what is bizarre.
had the girl not fallen down there is no call at all.
Quote from: BeeeejAs for those of you continuing to harp on the "and the officials didn't call it worse than a minor at the time!" point, that is literally the reason why the league reviews potentially serious infractions, so they can 1) mete out what they believe is the appropriate punishment even if the refs didn't do so at the time, and 2) clarify to the refs that this should have been a point of emphasis and ought to be for the future.
Also, to address the above directly...
I wasn't so much questioning the purpose of the league reviewing by pointing out that it was ruled a minor on the ice as much as I was suggesting that the "double-upgrade" seemed out of line.
Sure, review anything you want, but I think you really have to see something that the refs couldn't see to change a minor penalty into a disqualification.
That's really all I was getting at when saying it was ruled a minor on the ice.
mean while the men lose a player for the year and there seems to be no film to review?
Basically what the league is saying with the DQ is this:
The hit was illegal.
The call on the ice was insufficient and should have been a major penalty with at least a game misconduct, but more likely a game disqualification due to the time of the infraction and nature of the play.
Since a game misconduct was not issued, the proper remedy is to issue a one-game suspension.
If you don't agree that the hit deserved a misconduct/DQ, that's the only thing there is to talk about. If the league felt that was the right call, they have taken the appropriate steps to remedy it. The only thing they haven't done is given a clear public explanation of the decision, which everyone always hates.
Quote from: daredevilcuSince a game misconduct was not issued, the proper remedy is to issue a one-game suspension.
This is the only part that I don't buy. With 1:40 left in the game, a GM is pretty much the same as a minor. I think the league suspended her for a game because they thought she deserved a one game suspension. It's not much more complicated than that.
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: BeeeejAs for those of you continuing to harp on the "and the officials didn't call it worse than a minor at the time!" point, that is literally the reason why the league reviews potentially serious infractions, so they can 1) mete out what they believe is the appropriate punishment even if the refs didn't do so at the time, and 2) clarify to the refs that this should have been a point of emphasis and ought to be for the future. Whether you disagree with their eventual conclusion is really the only relevant question.
Well, then I hope the league had better video of the play than we do, and that that video shows something a lot worse than what we can see. Because based on what we can see, the contact just does not look that serious. O'Neill's stick blade was on the ice. She slowed and almost stopped before making contact. The contact appears to be shoulder to shoulder, and into open ice--not the boards. I just don't see it.
I really don't think I am looking at this through red-tinted glasses. I think I'd feel the same way if it was a Clarkson player suspended for a hit like that.
I guess we just have to disagree, but if you'll go back and watch in slo-mo, you can see that her stick came up when the hit occurred, cross-check. And no one seems to address that it was an open ice, blind side hit that could have led to serious injury. The fact that it didn't, doesn't matter.
Let's just hope that the team rallies and she gets to play in the semis.
where was it open ice blind side?
I saw slowed down shoulder to shoulder almost face to face but not quite.
open ice blind side hits would be penalized in the means game.
this would not be a penalty at all in the mens game, its the rule about contact that made it a penalty, even it it seemed mostly minor, i think the fact the clarkson player had her head down is the reason she went down, had she not gown down but spun around its probably not even a penalty.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: daredevilcuSince a game misconduct was not issued, the proper remedy is to issue a one-game suspension.
This is the only part that I don't buy. With 1:40 left in the game, a GM is pretty much the same as a minor. I think the league suspended her for a game because they thought she deserved a one game suspension. It's not much more complicated than that.
Maybe, but I also think that if this were the beginning of the 2nd period and a 5+game was the call on the ice, you wouldn't see the suspension.
Quote from: Jim HylaLet's just hope that the team rallies and she gets to play in the semis.
We can definitely agree on that!
Hit from another angle.
https://twitter.com/CapCareyWDT/status/839569078025084928
Quote from: daredevilcuHit from another angle.
https://twitter.com/CapCareyWDT/status/839569078025084928
I think this video strengthens O'Neill's case more than the league's.
Quote from: daredevilcuHit from another angle.
I'm just watching on my phone, but it looks worse, almost like it was a punch.
I agree with Jim. This video makes it look like a very deliberate headshot.
Quote from: Jim HylaI'm just watching on my phone, but it looks worse, almost like it was a punch.
Quote from: daredevilcuI agree with Jim. This video makes it look like a very deliberate headshot.
Seeing the play from this angle, I actually agree now too.
That video raises an interesting question, I think.
What video does the league use when reviewing these kinds of plays? Do they use any video available, including people's individual videos that may be posted online, or are they limited to some set of "official" videos.
now we are talking a completely different kind of hit..
with that video you can see why the ref ruled it a minor from the other angle.
and that looks like a blow to the head from this angle.
Quote from: andyw2100That video raises an interesting question, I think.
What video does the league use when reviewing these kinds of plays? Do they use any video available, including people's individual videos that may be posted online, or are they limited to some set of "official" videos.
There should be an overhead replay camera. That, too, would pick up the momentum leading up to the check/hit.
i think the overhead is probably the one that actually shows if there was head contact
Free video of the NCAA quarter-final vs. Clarkson here:
http://www.clarksonathletics.tv/whockey/whockey170311/index.html
Down 1-0 halfway through 2nd period, but not looking very good for the Big Red. We're getting pinned in our own zone often; defensemen getting caught on some long shifts, and loose pucks out in front of Voorheis often. Without the speed of O'Neill, it's hard to generate decent scoring opportunities. It also seems like we're saving our energy for the third period with very conservative tactics.
Quote from: imafrshmnDown 1-0 halfway through 2nd period, but not looking very good for the Big Red. We're getting pinned in our own zone often; defensemen getting caught on some long shifts, and loose pucks out in front of Voorheis often. Without the speed of O'Neill, it's hard to generate decent scoring opportunities. It also seems like we're saving our energy for the third period with very conservative tactics.
And the Clarkson goal coming on a power play after a dumb, unnecessary elbowing penalty.
Now a fifth straight penalty called on Cornell with 3:28 left in the second.
Still down 1-0 heading into the third period, I think it's been a fairly successful game thus far. It's always seemed that in order to beat Clarkson this year, especially without O'Neill, we've gotta just hang tough and give ourselves a chance to steal it at the end.
Quote from: imafrshmnStill down 1-0 heading into the third period, I think it's been a fairly successful game thus far. It's always seemed that in order to beat Clarkson this year, especially without O'Neill, we've gotta just hang tough and give ourselves a chance to steal it at the end.
Tough playing a good team with only 5 defenders.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: imafrshmnStill down 1-0 heading into the third period, I think it's been a fairly successful game thus far. It's always seemed that in order to beat Clarkson this year, especially without O'Neill, we've gotta just hang tough and give ourselves a chance to steal it at the end.
Tough playing a good team with only 5 defenders.
And without your leading goal scorer.
We didn't get the bounces tonight, and the refs didn't do us any favors either. Clarkson capitalizes on a 3-on-2 with under 2' left to likely seal the deal. Felt like a sucker punch but it was very well executed. Stop the presses! EAG for Cornell , 2-1 with a minute to go
Good pressure in the last five but not a lot on net and then they gave up a 3 on 2 and a goal with just under two minutes left.
Cornell popped one in almost immediately after, but the ENG by Clarkson to make it 3-1 should end this one.
And Clarkson promptly puts in the empty netter. Oof. Valiant efforts all around for the Big Red.
As close as we came in this match, we still overachieved to get to this position. Derraugh's post-game conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0jBxQ7o9fk
I can't believe it's time to say goodbye to seniors Hanna Bunton, Paula Voorheis, Kaitlin Doering, and Sydney Smith. They go out as Ivy League Champs, which is nothing to sneeze at in women's hockey. So very proud of the seniors and all the rest of these women all season long. I'll be looking forward to an even more competitive squad in 2017-18.
Clarkson women win their second NCAA title. Beating UW 3-0.
Tremendous upset victory for Clarkson. Wisconsin's superiority this year was based on fast pace of play, puck possession, high shot count, and good goaltending. We knew their weakness was that their scoring chances were often low quality, but we didn't have the depth to deal with their pace in our two game series with the Badgers. I didn't have a chance to watch the championship, but it seems like Clarkson was able to limit high quality chances for Wisc while burying their own. Not sure how luck and reffing factored in. It's bittersweet to see our conference rival get their second NCAA (after just their first ECAC tourny title) while we sit with 4 ECAC titles. Still, today's upset speaks to the strength of our league.
Quote from: imafrshmnIt's bittersweet to see our conference rival get their second NCAA (after just their first ECAC tourny title) while we sit with 4 ECAC titles. Still, today's upset speaks to the strength of our league.
I used to tease my friends at Clarkson for not even having a women's team when we were in school. Now they not only have a program, but two national titles. Every time I think of that, I'm transported right back to watching Cornell start the third OT of the 2010 NCAA Final in an Albany bar.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: imafrshmnIt's bittersweet to see our conference rival get their second NCAA (after just their first ECAC tourny title) while we sit with 4 ECAC titles. Still, today's upset speaks to the strength of our league.
I used to tease my friends at Clarkson for not even having a women's team when we were in school. Now they not only have a program, but two national titles. Every time I think of that, I'm transported right back to watching Cornell start the third OT of the 2010 NCAA Final in an Albany bar.
Seeing that game, and all the close chances Cornell and Minnesota had, I was thinking: Awesome if Cornell wins. If not, they'll be back in the title game soon. I knew not to think that the same month when Cornell made the Sweet Sixteen in basketball.
Still, this is good for the ECAC overall.
Unfortunate and surprising news that North Dakota (http://www.startribune.com/report-university-of-north-dakota-to-cut-women-s-hockey-program/417493423/) is axing women's hockey and some other sports due to budgetary issues.