Tech 4 Cornell 2 (Post-Game Thread)

[Cactus12]

If we don't come out and play 100% of the game, the team will not win against quality teams.

I don't think that any Cornell teams in the past few years (maybe 02-03) have been afforded the ability to win at less than full effort. For example, there were 8 one-goal wins in 04-05 (and 3 losses, 2 not counting those played on olympic ice after bullshit seeding and crappy officiating, but who's bitter). My point- requiring full effort to win doesn't show a lack of talent.

[amerks127]

Let's all just agree to disagree.::starwars::

[Tom Lento]

[quote amerks127]I'm just a sophomore, I haven't been spoiled by the 2003-2006 runs.  I want to be here when the team at least makes the NCAA's, and while I can be optimistic about that, I also have to be realistic about the current state of the team.[/quote]

Then you didn't see the 2000-2006 teams, which typically had one or two bright lights in each recruiting class and a whole lot of role players, including a few guys who never saw any ice time. If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.

The freshmen and sophomores on this team have the potential to be pieces of a winning puzzle. Roeszler could easily be a solid 2nd-3rd line forward in another year or two. Nicholls has a bit of a brain problem at the moment but in 2-3 seasons he should be an excellent checking line forward. Doesn't sound like much, but a big part of Cornell's success in recent years was predicated on a brutally physical fourth line that could occasionally put the puck in the net. Krueger is already a decent collegiate defensive d-man, and he's got plenty of upside. Scali is *already* an excellent penalty killer and strong on the forecheck, and I think he'll quietly put up great game after great game when all is said and done. Berk and Johnston looked completely overmatched this weekend. Time will tell if they'll develop and be part of the team in a few years or if they'll watch most of the games from the stands. Throw in the guys you actually like, and even accounting for the fact that Nash and Greening won't be here in two years you've got a pretty solid core.

The best part is, none of these lower-level guys are likely to leave early.

You can find plenty to complain about over the past two seasons, but I don't think the *talent* in those recruiting classes is on that list. Cornell was so good from 2002-2006 that people forget that those teams basically had one amazing recruiting class (Class of 2003) and a whole lot of classes that were very much like the ones from the past two seasons, at least in terms of the quality of players. Whether or not these guys are the right fit for the program is another matter entirely.


What I saw this past weekend was a team that looked tentative and seemed to be playing a half step slow. It was almost like they were thinking about everything out there instead of going out and executing. Hopefully this is a sign that they're working on some systems and haven't gotten them nailed down yet (as opposed to them actually being half a step slow). That would also explain why they have to retreat behind the net on the breakout every time, and why the PP is so predictable (unless Nash gets the puck). This is, in some ways, reminiscent of the 2000 and 2001 teams. They retreated behind the net on nearly every breakout, even on the power play, just like this team. Eventually they got it, and the 2002 and 2003 teams had the best breakout of any Cornell team I've ever seen.

Time will tell if they're buying into those systems and if those systems will work. At the moment, though, this team will struggle to beat any squad that's better than mediocre, and will likely be fairly frustrating to watch, particularly in transition and on the attack. There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet. Realistically, this team might be very good and playing deep in the NCAAS in a couple of years, or it  might be a decent ECAC team with a reasonable shot at an upset conference title and a quick first round exit from the NCAAs.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote Tom Lento] If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.[/quote]How about never.

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

::screwy::Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.:-D

[Tom Lento]

[quote Jim Hyla]

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

::screwy::Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.:-D[/quote]

I was telling a friend earlier that I was trying to be more like Yogi Berra. Looks like it's working.

[Rosey]

[quote Tom Lento][quote Jim Hyla]

There's reason to be optimistic about the future, but the future isn't here yet.

::screwy::Sorry, but I just had to respond to this.:-D[/quote]

I was telling a friend earlier that I was trying to be more like Yogi Berra. Looks like it's working. [/quote]
Well, one of these days you will be, unless you aren't.

[daredevilcu]

Well, one of these days you will be, unless you aren't.

I laughed out loud at that one.  Well done.

[oceanst41]

[quote Tom Lento]Realistically, this team might be very good and playing deep in the NCAAS in a couple of years, or it  might be a decent ECAC team with a reasonable shot at an upset conference title and a quick first round exit from the NCAAs.[/quote]

So they either return to the '02-'06 form (minus that year that never happened), or we become Harvard. ;-)

Sounds pretty simple to me. My first year of season tickets was that unfortunate 2003-2004 season, and a lot of nights showed a lot less from Cornell than we saw with Clarkson on Sunday. They were frustrating to watch, but you could see the pieces were there. You had a young goalie (thought of as a plan B by the way) and a lot of young players. One senior was in the top five in scoring (Vesce) and you had to go all the way down to Ben Wallace (with 9 points) to find the next highest senior scorer, who narrowly edged out Greg Hornby for those honors. This year is not all that different so far as Scott is the only senior in the top five scorers.

I'm sure everyone can remember the complaining done about that team, especially coming off a Frozen Four appearance. And I would say that it wouldn't take much for this team to put up a better performance than the 2003-2004 team did in the ECAC playoffs.

[Trotsky]

[quote Tom Lento]If you want NHL caliber talent to run two lines deep, you'll have to transfer to Michigan or Minnesota. Seriously, Cornell just doesn't get that kind of recruiting depth, and hasn't for well over 10 years.[/quote]

Cornell wins when they have a hardworking team of lunchpail players all doing their best within the system.  Cornell wins a lot when they have that plus a number of top echelon college players which John Tester could count on one hand.

Both the classes of 2010 and 2011 are excellent by Cornell's standards -- the only clearly superior class in recent history was the "once in a lifetime" class of 2003; the class of 2006 was equivalent.

[KeithK]

His left hand.