Harvard at Cornell lax 2014 - Har 14-9 (final)

Started by billhoward, April 05, 2014, 03:29:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

mountainred

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: billhoward
Quote from: Jim Hyla
Quote from: rss77Credit to Harvard but this game pointed to one of the weaknesses of the college game which is the faceoff. The rules committee needs to look at some reforms which would negate faceoff advantage.  I think a 45 second shot clock would be a step in the right direction.
That's what SU wants. We should be able to beat them, they're terrible at faceoffs.
Because the Harvard game was so lopsided on faceoffs, it skewed the game's outcome. Does this become like basketball where the team scored on gets the ball? Then the skill advantage goes to how well you can ride the clear and maybe the game becomes harder hitting with more injuries. Doug Tesoriero has done yeoman work for Cornell on faceoffs but as he improves on his awesome Cornell career stats (just shy of 600 FO wins?) there have been games where the other team outdid us.

I'd love a rematch with Harvard. We won't give up that bad brain-fade goal by Christian Knight's errant clear. Donovan, Lintner, and Buczek won't be held to 1G 0A. Although Florida was probably thinking UConn couldn't get lucky twice in one season against them.

They actually tried eliminating face-offs in the late 70's.  I don't remember when they went back in.
I think it was the next season.  It is remembered by those old enough to remember as a colossal failure.  (I'm old enough to remember, but don't.  I didn't really follow lax until I arrived at Cornell in 1984.)

billhoward

At what point does the specialist dominate the faceoff and affect the outcome, when he wins 2 of 3, 3 of 4? If I recall, the Harvard faceoff guy was nothing special, like 55% going into the Cornell game. Wait, here:

Quote from: GoCrimson.comGabriel Mendola set career-highs with 20 faceoffs won and 10 ground balls collected. Mendola has won 55.8 percent (82-142) [20x27 at Cornell, 74%-ed] of the faceoffs he has taken this season.
\\
So, yes, winning 3/4 of the faceoffs tilted the game.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Quote from: mountainred
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82
Quote from: billhoward
Quote from: Jim Hyla
Quote from: rss77Credit to Harvard but this game pointed to one of the weaknesses of the college game which is the faceoff. The rules committee needs to look at some reforms which would negate faceoff advantage.  I think a 45 second shot clock would be a step in the right direction.
That's what SU wants. We should be able to beat them, they're terrible at faceoffs.
Because the Harvard game was so lopsided on faceoffs, it skewed the game's outcome. Does this become like basketball where the team scored on gets the ball? Then the skill advantage goes to how well you can ride the clear and maybe the game becomes harder hitting with more injuries. Doug Tesoriero has done yeoman work for Cornell on faceoffs but as he improves on his awesome Cornell career stats (just shy of 600 FO wins?) there have been games where the other team outdid us.

I'd love a rematch with Harvard. We won't give up that bad brain-fade goal by Christian Knight's errant clear. Donovan, Lintner, and Buczek won't be held to 1G 0A. Although Florida was probably thinking UConn couldn't get lucky twice in one season against them.

They actually tried eliminating face-offs in the late 70's.  I don't remember when they went back in.
I think it was the next season.  It is remembered by those old enough to remember as a colossal failure.  (I'm old enough to remember, but don't.  I didn't really follow lax until I arrived at Cornell in 1984.)

I just remember the fans couting off the goals and going "We want more.....FACE-OFFS!"

upprdeck

the problem is less the faceoffs and more that once you win them you can control the ball and pace of play for so long. they need a hybrid shot clock..  if you win the faceoff the clock starts and you have until it runs out to score or lose the ball.  once the clock is done the ball goes to the other team. make it min or two but something so a team doesnt possess the ball for 3-4 min and take 5-10 shots.. then they score and win the next faceoff and one teams offense is left standing for 75% of a period..

this way you reward one part of the game, but dont punish a team for losing a faceoff.

rss77

Agreed and the point I was trying to make.  The hand held clock is not working this season.