Figured it might be a little less unwieldy ("more wieldy"...?) to use a brand-new thread for tonight.
CANNOT WAIT. LGR!!
Quoteunwieldy (adj.)
late 14c., "lacking strength, powerless," from un- (1) "not" + obsolete wieldy, from Old English wielde "active, vigorous," from Proto-Germanic *walth- "have power" (see wield (v.)). Meaning "moving ungracefully" is recorded from 1520s; in reference to weapons, "difficult to handle, awkward by virtue of size or shape" it is attested from 1540s. Related: Unwieldiness.
You wield a weapon, so if you do that poorly you are unwieldy.
https://twitter.com/BT_unassisted/status/972615372489871361
Well, it means we won't be eliminated tonight.
Other than that, diddlysquat.
Quote from: TrotskyWell, it means we won't be eliminated tonight.
Other than that, diddlysquat.
Disagree- don't forget pairwise considerations. Win is much better than a loss for our RPI.
Same video link as last night? I see boxing...starting.
Quote from: Chris '03Same video link as last night? I see boxing...starting.
Yup. More interesting than darts? Not sure.
Agree- anyone know link?
The link is https://www.twitch.tv/elevensportsprime . In theory they'll switch to the hockey broadcast around 7:05pm as it did last night.
Thanks- it's on!
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: TrotskyWell, it means we won't be eliminated tonight.
Other than that, diddlysquat.
Disagree- don't forget pairwise considerations. Win is much better than a loss for our RPI.
In the post-game interviews, Vanderlaan said having an extra day (Sunday) to rest would be "huge."
Nice to hear that Vanderlaan only skated 2 shifts in the 3rd period last night.
Prn 1 Uni 0; Drt 0 Hvd 2; Cgt 0 Clk 1
Scoreless through 1. Cornell had the better of the play even strength. Our pp was anemic and disorganized but it was right at the end of a very physical period so maybe everybody was tired.
Quote from: TrotskyScoreless through 1. Cornell had the better of the play even strength. Our pp was anemic and disorganized but it was right at the end of a very physical period so maybe everybody was tired.
I thought Q had the better of the play throughout the period and Cornell was very sloppy in taking advantage of the little room Q gave them
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyScoreless through 1. Cornell had the better of the play even strength. Our pp was anemic and disorganized but it was right at the end of a very physical period so maybe everybody was tired.
I thought Q had the better of the play throughout the period and Cornell was very sloppy in taking advantage of the little room Q gave them
I thought we played good positional hockey between the blue lines. Q is being very conscientious in their end probably because Rand (rightfully) peeled the paint off the walls after last night.
We're not connecting on our passing but some of that might be hearing footsteps (er, skate swishes?) from all the hitting by both teams.
But... stay outta the box.
Is anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
Quote from: IcebergIs anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
Which feed and what device are you using?
I ask because I had an error with Twitched on ROKU until I backed out more than I would have anticipated.
Quote from: martyQuote from: IcebergIs anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
Which feed and what device are you using?
I ask because I had an error with Twitched on ROKU until I backed out more than I would have anticipated.[/quote
I just connected to their web site using the Firefox app on AFTV. I had to connect 2-3 times (still haven't learned how to make the app refresh), but right now it's a great picture and quality of streaming.
Quote from: martyQuote from: IcebergIs anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
Which feed and what device are you using?
I ask because I had an error with Twitched on ROKU until I backed out more than I would have anticipated.
I'm using my PC to get to Eleven Sports Prime on Chrome.
What was the delay before the major?
Quote from: IcebergIs anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
I'm also outside the US and getting the same error. As I did yesterday.
Quote from: Greenberg '97What was the delay before the major?
Reviewing the video to determine whether it was a major.
two bad penalties in the third and the upshot of them is that angello and vanderlaan got some extra rest for the semis against princeton. incredible defense by this team, especially short-handed and short-benched. great win, great weekend. LGR
Quote from: AKMerQuote from: IcebergIs anyone else getting the "5000: Content not available" error? Maybe it's because I'm not the US currently, but I would think that doesn't matter in this instance.
I'm also outside the US and getting the same error. As I did yesterday.
Have you tried using a VPN?
Thanks for the heads up on elevensports streaming. Down here in south Florida this was the first game that I've seen the Big Red play this year.
Put it up on Chrome and and Chromecast it to our big Screen.
And it was most satisfactory result!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Be nice to play Dartmouth Friday or maybe Colgate. But Princeton is okay and the Tigers took out a team who could be trouble for us were we both to reach the final.
Meanwhile, I was checking scores on ECAC site not USCHO. And ECAC has Union getting that third goal in the final minute. Oops, final minute of the second period and never changed it. Had me thinking series was going to 3 games
Quote from: cufanThanks for the heads up on elevensports streaming. Down here in south Florida this was the first game that I've seen the Big Red play this year.
Put it up on Chrome and and Chromecast it to our big Screen.
And it was most satisfactory result!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For future reference, I used an Amazon Fire TV with the Firefox app. No need to cast. Worked like a charm.
The 10th shut out (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Shutouts.html) (9 for Galajda, 1 for Stewart) ties the Cornell season record set in 2005.
Galajda ties Iles for 6th in career (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt50_Goalies_Career_Shutouts.pdf) shut outs. Andy, 118 GP. Matt, 27.
Princeton's advance to the ECAC Final Four breaks the 3rd longest drought (http://www.tbrw.info/index.html?/ecac_Tournament/ecac_F4_Icon_Matrix.htm) in the conference (9 seasons). Clarkson, as hard as this is for we Olds to comprehend, has the second-longest (11), and can break that tomorrow. RPI is the longest (16). They aint breaking anything.
Highlight package already up.
https://twitter.com/CornellOnILN/status/972677149801906176
Quote from: billhowardBe nice to play Dartmouth Friday or maybe Colgate. But Princeton is okay and the Tigers took out a team who could be trouble for us were we both to reach the final.
Meanwhile, I was checking scores on ECAC site not USCHO. And ECAC has Union getting that third goal in the final minute. Oops, final minute of the second period and never changed it. Had me thinking series was going to 3 games
Use College Hockey News, Bill.
Quote from: BeeeejHighlight package already up.
https://twitter.com/CornellOnILN/status/972677149801906176
You made Ugarte very happy.
#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
#3 Minnesota State lost to unranked Michigan Tech
Quote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: BeeeejHighlight package already up.
https://twitter.com/CornellOnILN/status/972677149801906176
You made Ugarte very happy.
MONGO VERY HAPPY
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
Does that mean that the women several years ago, in the 2OT championship game, are actually secret co-champions?
Quote from: RichHQuote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
1.5x good
Quote from: RichHQuote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
The goal was 5x5 in a 20 minute ot. I assume it's a full loss and not a pretend loss for the nchc tie for pwr result.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
Result seems to have moved cornell to 2nd or a complete tie with notre dame at the moment.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: RichHQuote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
The goal was 5x5 in a 20 minute ot. I assume it's a full loss and not a pretend loss for the nchc tie for pwr result.
I've been trying to find confirmation one way or another for the past 10 minutes (wooo HOT SATURDAY NIGHT) and couldn't. At this point, I'll believe anybody who sounds like they know what they're talking about.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: Chris '03Quote from: RichHQuote from: ugarteQuote from: margolism#1 Saint Cloud State just lost to unranked Miami
this is double good
Yeah, but the winning goal came 7:10 into overtime. Since it was after 5:00 of OT, the NCAA counts it as a tie. Still a good result for Cornell, just not AS good as it seems.
The goal was 5x5 in a 20 minute ot. I assume it's a full loss and not a pretend loss for the nchc tie for pwr result.
I've been trying to find confirmation one way or another for the past 10 minutes (wooo HOT SATURDAY NIGHT) and couldn't. At this point, I'll believe anybody who sounds like they know what they're talking about.
That lets me out.
Our 8th 25-win season, reached 6th fastest (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_25_Win_Seasons.html).
Quote from: margolismDoes that mean that the women several years ago, in the 2OT championship game, are actually secret co-champions?
3OT, and I'm sure the NCAA just wanted to get to the bar.
I was under the impression that the only thing that counted as a tie like that for selection purposes was if the game were decided by a shootout.
Quote from: jtwcornell91I was under the impression that the only thing that counted as a tie like that for selection purposes was if the game were decided by a shootout.
But it's possible it changed and I've been too out of it to realize.
Quote from: Chris '03Result seems to have moved cornell to 2nd or a complete tie with notre dame at the moment.
Denver's comeback win moves ND ahead 0.5822 to 0.5821 since ND and Denver played h2h.
Quote from: TrotskyPrinceton's advance to the ECAC Final Four breaks the 3rd longest drought (http://www.tbrw.info/index.html?/ecac_Tournament/ecac_F4_Icon_Matrix.htm) in the conference (9 seasons). Clarkson, as hard as this is for we Olds to comprehend, has the second-longest (11), and can break that tomorrow. RPI is the longest (16). They aint breaking anything.
I was going to ask if there was a page with the F4 appearance counts by team, but I already found it. Tip of the hat.
Quote from: TrotskyOur 8th 25-win season, reached 6th fastest (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_25_Win_Seasons.html).
2005 has the weird fate of occurring only 2 years after 2003. I think perhaps the 2005 team may have even been better, but occurring so soon after and not reaching the Frozen 4 puts in a bit in 2003's shadow.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: billhowardBe nice to play Dartmouth Friday or maybe Colgate. But Princeton is okay and the Tigers took out a team who could be trouble for us were we both to reach the final.
Meanwhile, I was checking scores on ECAC site not USCHO. And ECAC has Union getting that third goal in the final minute. Oops, final minute of the second period and never changed it. Had me thinking series was going to 3 games
Use College Hockey News, Bill.
Heh. Who'd know the score better than the people controlling the playoffs? You'd think.
But, yeah, I got burned there and caused some confusion in the eLynah chat. My bad.
Memory lane: Cornell's only prior SF vs Princeton (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/2009/box20090320.pdf).
Galajda vs Quinnipiac:
W 2-1 60:00 28 1
W 1-0 59:58 28 0
W 9-1 46:10 12 1
W 2-0 58:28 21 0[hr]4-0 14-2 224:36 89 2 0.53 .978
Didn't see the '03 team, only heard legends. Was freshman for 04-05, and that's still the best team I've seen. Being undefeated at Lyman will make an impressionable young freshman:
A) a fan for life, and
B) believe that team got robbed by being sent to MN. We shoulda won.
Phenoooooomenal game. Losing by two, but you could feel they had something special left in them. Barlow went coast to coast, then the two best players score the tying and winning goals.
Too bad they were so gassed the next day :-(
If it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Quote from: jtwcornell91I was under the impression that the only thing that counted as a tie like that for selection purposes was if the game were decided by a shootout.
Also the second OT which is played 3 x 3 in the NCHC (I think or is it 4 x 4) would not count as a win if a GWG is scored. This is followed by a shootout and is accompanied by an annoying point system which I can't begin to pretend to remember - the way that I am pretending to remember what I just typed....
Quote from: TrotskyGalajda vs Quinnipiac:
W 2-1 60:00 28 1
W 1-0 59:58 28 0
W 9-1 46:10 12 1
W 2-0 58:28 21 0[hr]4-0 14-2 224:36 89 2 0.53 .978
Unreal. Gave up 1 even strength goal in 4 games and that was all the way back on Nov 3 - our 3rd game of the season, their 6th. We also went 14/15 on the kill, including 3 majors. That's 1 ppg against in 39 minutes of PK, so it's really like going 18/19.5 (95%). Quinnipiac just had no answer for Galajda and the rest of our team defense (it's The System).
Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
I've heard of this but never witnessed it. Was this in the 60s?
Quote from: martyQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
I've heard of this but never witnessed it. Was this in the 60s?
http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1997/box19961227.pdf
Compare period numbers to goalie minutes.
Hat tip, richh
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: martyQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
I've heard of this but never witnessed it. Was this in the 60s?
http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1997/box19961227.pdf
Compare period numbers to goalie minutes.
Hat tip, richh
Ah, good, so not creeping senility (yet). This might also be the game where the opposing goalie threw up on the ice.
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: martyQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
I've heard of this but never witnessed it. Was this in the 60s?
http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1997/box19961227.pdf
Compare period numbers to goalie minutes.
Hat tip, richh
Ah, good, so not creeping senility (yet). This might also be the game where the opposing goalie threw up on the ice.
Yep. http://amurgsval.org/joe/hockey/SITrd1.html
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
Things like this did happen, as was noted. But I'm pretty sure it was only because the teams were also confused. This was a common question on Hockey-L back in the day. But let's put it this way, if it ever were a thing (where after 5 minutes, it counted as a tie for NCAA tournament purposes), it was a thing for a very limited amount of years. I'm certain that by 1997 it was not a tie, because that's when I started calculating things closely. And the Pairwise as a thing was only around since about 1990 - although in more primitive form. So maybe it's possible that between 1990 and 1997, this was a thing. I'll try to find some hockey-L posts that discuss it.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: adamwIf it goes past 5:00 of conference tournament OT (or Beanpot, or anything), it's still a win/loss for NCAA purposes. I think that has always been the case. But the idea that it counts as a tie is a myth that seems to never die.
Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but I recall being at the tournament that Cornell participated in a few times that was played at the Syracuse War Memorial and a game going to OT and they put up five minutes, presumably to be like a "regular" OT game and then putting up the remaining 15 minutes to continue OT when there was still no winner. I guess that wasn't necessary but maybe the coaches wanted it?
Things like this did happen, as was noted. But I'm pretty sure it was only because the teams were also confused. This was a common question on Hockey-L back in the day. But let's put it this way, if it ever were a thing (where after 5 minutes, it counted as a tie for NCAA tournament purposes), it was a thing for a very limited amount of years. I'm certain that by 1997 it was not a tie, because that's when I started calculating things closely. And the Pairwise as a thing was only around since about 1990 - although in more primitive form. So maybe it's possible that between 1990 and 1997, this was a thing. I'll try to find some hockey-L posts that discuss it.
And here is Greg's (Trotsky's) Hockey-L post from 1996 about this very topic and this very game.
http://lists.maine.edu/cgi/wa?A2=ind9612&L=Hockey-L&P=R18822&1=Hockey-L&9=A&I=-3&J=on&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4
Note that he is replying to Mike Machnik, who at that time knew more about the Pairwise than anyone.
There was definitely confusion among teams about this issue. I remember games where coaches looked at each other and asked how long the OT should be. And different tournaments did it different ways.
But I'm all but certain that, as long as the OT was played 5-on-5 under normal conditions, it counted towards NCAA criteria no matter.
I also distinctly recall that some time in the late '90s, all of this confusion forced the Ice Hockey Committee to put out clarifications on what should happen and what kinds of formats could be used. They basically said - it had to be 5 minutes and that's it. Or play to a conclusion. Those were the choices. And that stands to this day.
Gallagher scraping up puke is one of my cherished hockey memories.
If not for David Adler's innocuous floater, we might all still be at the Syracuse (Hockey) Invitational Tournament. Perhaps in some other universe, we still are.
Quote from: Scersk '97Gallagher scraping up puke is one of my cherished hockey memories.
If not for David Adler's innocuous floater, we might all still be at the Syracuse (Hockey) Invitational Tournament. Perhaps in some other universe, we still are.
And I really wish you'd take an occasional shower, like the rest of us have managed to take turns doing.
Quote from: TrotskyMemory lane: Cornell's only prior SF vs Princeton (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/2009/box20090320.pdf).
One of the best games in Cornell history, IMO. Princeton was 8th in the country and the defending champions, and if my memory serves me correctly Cornell likely had to win this game to make the NCAAs. Barlow's coast-to-coast goal with under 3 to play is possibly the prettiest Cornell goal I've ever seen (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb1Eb339cuA), and then Riley sent it to OT with 25 seconds remaining. Greening's second-OT rip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slzu7SLnnrc) put the Red into the championship game and the NCAA tournament.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyMemory lane: Cornell's only prior SF vs Princeton (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/2009/box20090320.pdf).
One of the best games in Cornell history, IMO. Princeton was 8th in the country and the defending champions, and if my memory serves me correctly Cornell likely had to win this game to make the NCAAs. Barlow's coast-to-coast goal with under 3 to play is possibly the prettiest Cornell goal I've ever seen (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb1Eb339cuA), and then Riley sent it to OT with 25 seconds remaining. Greening's second-OT rip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slzu7SLnnrc) put the Red into the championship game and the NCAA tournament.
Zane Kalemba was also having an outstanding year that season. Don't remember exactly but he was one of national leaders in GAA and save pct. Of course, that would all change after facing U Minnesota-Duluth in NCAAs after which he was never the same.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyMemory lane: Cornell's only prior SF vs Princeton (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/2009/box20090320.pdf).
One of the best games in Cornell history, IMO. Princeton was 8th in the country and the defending champions, and if my memory serves me correctly Cornell likely had to win this game to make the NCAAs. Barlow's coast-to-coast goal with under 3 to play is possibly the prettiest Cornell goal I've ever seen (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb1Eb339cuA), and then Riley sent it to OT with 25 seconds remaining. Greening's second-OT rip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slzu7SLnnrc) put the Red into the championship game and the NCAA tournament.
Back in the day when folks had to work to get the highlights up.
One thing I'll give the NCHC is that their highlight clips show the plays developing. Cornell Athletics should take a lesson from them and that Martytoo guy. ;-)
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyMemory lane: Cornell's only prior SF vs Princeton (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/2009/box20090320.pdf).
One of the best games in Cornell history, IMO. Princeton was 8th in the country and the defending champions, and if my memory serves me correctly Cornell likely had to win this game to make the NCAAs. Barlow's coast-to-coast goal with under 3 to play is possibly the prettiest Cornell goal I've ever seen (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb1Eb339cuA), and then Riley sent it to OT with 25 seconds remaining. Greening's second-OT rip (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slzu7SLnnrc) put the Red into the championship game and the NCAA tournament.
That win was made even sweeter by the fact that it much more than made up for the last second defeat at Lynah earlier in the season. Cornell had been up 1-0, and gave up two goals in the final 38 seconds to lose.
http://cornellbigred.com/news/2009/2/7/MICE_0207091856.aspx
I had sold one or two of my season tickets to a nice Princeton fan (and possibly her friend...my recollection is iffy on this point) and I believe she or they actually sat in the seats (in Section C) for some or all of the game.
What I do recall with clarity is that very shortly after the great win in Albany my daughters and I ran into her in a pizza place, and that she was incredibly gracious and congratulatory about our win.
Edit: And I believe that loss at Lynah is one of the reasons my daughter, now 24, --FREAKS THE F**K-- OUT-- (as she did last night) when anyone breaks out keys in a one goal game or when we're working on a shutout. If you've ever seen the small woman in the Topher Scott home jersey screaming (and possibly cursing) at Cornell fans in this situation, that was her.
Quote from: TrotskyGalajda vs Quinnipiac:
W 2-1 60:00 28 1
W 1-0 59:58 28 0
W 9-1 46:10 12 1
W 2-0 58:28 21 0[hr]4-0 14-2 224:36 89 2 0.53 .978
Since we like Q so much, here's one more fun fact: In 4 games against us this year, Q never had the lead.
One question I forgot to ask. What's up with not one but two major penalties? After the lengthy reviews I'll trust the refs that they were called right. IMO no excuse for committing a major penalty. Was it a mistake? Are we just a bunch of goons? Was it that easy for them to get under our skin?
Quote from: KenPOne question I forgot to ask. What's up with not one but two major penalties? After the lengthy reviews I'll trust the refs that they were called right. IMO no excuse for committing a major penalty. Was it a mistake? Are we just a bunch of goons? Was it that easy for them to get under our skin?
I disagree with the first one on Angello. The Q player was not at a dangerous distance from the boards, turned away as the check was coming, and Angello kept hands down and hit with his body. Q player's head bounced against the glass and I suspect he milked that a bit. Second major seemed reasonable.
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: KenPOne question I forgot to ask. What's up with not one but two major penalties? After the lengthy reviews I'll trust the refs that they were called right. IMO no excuse for committing a major penalty. Was it a mistake? Are we just a bunch of goons? Was it that easy for them to get under our skin?
I disagree with the first one on Angello. The Q player was not at a dangerous distance from the boards, turned away as the check was coming, and Angello kept hands down and hit with his body. Q player's head bounced against the glass and I suspect he milked that a bit. Second major seemed reasonable.
i didn't have a problem with either call but didn't think either hit was maliciously intended
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: KenPOne question I forgot to ask. What's up with not one but two major penalties? After the lengthy reviews I'll trust the refs that they were called right. IMO no excuse for committing a major penalty. Was it a mistake? Are we just a bunch of goons? Was it that easy for them to get under our skin?
I disagree with the first one on Angello. The Q player was not at a dangerous distance from the boards, turned away as the check was coming, and Angello kept hands down and hit with his body. Q player's head bounced against the glass and I suspect he milked that a bit. Second major seemed reasonable.
i didn't have a problem with either call but didn't think either hit was maliciously intended
Grady and his cohort seemed to indicate the second was accidental.
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: KenPOne question I forgot to ask. What's up with not one but two major penalties? After the lengthy reviews I'll trust the refs that they were called right. IMO no excuse for committing a major penalty. Was it a mistake? Are we just a bunch of goons? Was it that easy for them to get under our skin?
I disagree with the first one on Angello. The Q player was not at a dangerous distance from the boards, turned away as the check was coming, and Angello kept hands down and hit with his body. Q player's head bounced against the glass and I suspect he milked that a bit. Second major seemed reasonable.
Cornell will need to be real careful this weekend. Princeton's PP% is 29.4 and Clarkson's is 26.8.