Harvard 2 @ Cornell 3 postgame thread (11/10/06)

[RazzBaronZ]

Just came back from the game...

Before the game, somebody passed around quarter cards that said if you're on the aisles, hold your newspapers up when people toss their fish.  It even had a drawing or something of people doing it.  It was smart, but nobody did it.  On to the fish: I was a bit disappointed by the lack of fish, and saw a sardine can and Swedish fish candies go over, which didn't make me too happy.

The start by Cornell was amazing.  Both the crowd and the team was absolutely psyched for this one.  The Cornell players got to the puck before the SUCKS goalie did every play for a few minutes, which let us have that first goal.  They were out-hustling everyone.  If they ever get to the point where they can keep that intensity up, they will be unstoppable.

We had many quality chances that just didn't go.  The team looked great until sometime in the second period, when we became stagnant.  Harvard SUCKS!) was shutting down every guy that was driving to the goal and intercepting most passes.  Their D was actually great all game.

When the puck was on the other side of the ice, Davenport was the star.  I was absolutely sure that at least two of the saves he made were going to be goals.  People cheered his name many times during the game, with good reason.  He waved to the crowd again as the team was stepping off the ice.

I also thought that the refs were missing some obvious calls against Harvard, but calling everything we were doing and more.  It was frustrating.

The third period, we went down 2-1.  The change in intensity was very palpable.  Everybody stepped up their game.  Also, there was a "townies up" chant that got the whole place going.  The players really fed off of the crowd, and The Goal by Kennedy was everything anyone could have asked for.  I can't imagine what it must have felt like to have Lynah at its loudest, scoring one on one.  Unbelievable ending.

I almost had a heart attack when the crowd got very loud after SUCKS pulled its sieve.  I thought we got scored on, and so did everyone else in section A.  There were too many people in front of the net to let us see.  Instead, it was an amazing save by Davenport.

I'm very happy right now...LGR!

[scoop85]

I'm in the camp that says Troy Davenport was outstanding.  I had no palpitations about Davenport's playing the puck around the net. He had absolutely no shot on either goal.

Agreed with Ari's comment that Harvard is very good.  They seem to have their best defensive team of the recent era, and their freshman (especially on D) are strong.

After waxing poetic on the game thread about our crisp breakout during the first period, we had a lot of trouble the rest of the way.  I thought our young defense played quite well.  

We have a lot of work to do on the powerplay.  Harvard played a disciplined box, and we looked indecisive.  The last powerplay with about 6:00 left was especially weak.

Not a work of art, but sometimes you need to win these games.  It's nice to know we're going to have plenty of time to improve, and 5-0 is a good place to do that from.

[DL]

[quote billhoward][quote Dafatone]Strange, I feel like I disagree with all the comments.  I thought Davenport was great in goal, both goals he had no chance on.  Greening and Carefoot both played a lot and played well.

Our new fast-paced offense just wasn't getting the job done, so we went to a bit of a dump and chase and that worked better toward the end.

Davenport does have some trouble handling the puck, but at least he didn't pay for any of his mistakes.[/quote]

Yes on the first goal and for sure on the second: Yes, you're right, there wasn't much Davenport could do on the two goals. On the second goal, Harvard overloaded near side (camera side / press box side / Cornell bench side) but not Du all by his lonesome on the far side five or eight feet out and when the puck slid across the crease, it would have been a miracle if Davenport could have slid as quickly as the puck to cover the open far side. There was just one Cornell defender trying to cover Du and one other Harvard player who was in the slot. So maybe in hindsight too much of the defense attacked the puck where it was and microseconds later wasn't.[/quote]

It's playing armchair goalie and having wishful thinking to imagine that Davenport might have been able to sense (a) the discrepancy in defense that essentially created a wall on the near side and (b) the wide-open Du camped for the kill on the other, then adjusting accordingly.  Hindsight is certainly much easier to go by...

[scoop85]

More great CU sports news ... the men's basketball team just beat Northwestern in Evanston, 64-61.  Gore with 20 points, Freshman Ryan Wittman with 18.

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote scoop85]More great CU sports news ... the men's basketball team just beat Northwestern in Evanston, 64-61.  Gore with 20 points, Freshman Ryan Wittman with 18.[/quote]
Very nice.  Volleyball beat Penn and is 11-2 Ivy.  Princeton tomorrow.

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote scoop85]I thought our young defense played quite well.  
[/quote]
Considering we've replaced four (Gleed, O'Byrne, Pokulok, and Glover) of six d-men plus the goaltender, the D has been quite amazing so far.

[scoop85]

When Kennedy took the pass for the game winning goal, I immediately thought about his breakaway against Harvard last year in Albany.  Same result on the breakaway, better result for the game :-)

[Larry72]

The game tonite was a "Lynah Mystic" win and showed why Cornell has won over 70% of its games at home over the years.  Cornell did not play well and Harvard's defense was particularly strong.  Only 8 shots on goal in two periods...of course two went in!  Once Krantz scored the tying goal, Lynah came alive.

 I don't know if those watching/listening could hear it, but on Kennedy's breakaway, the rink was about as loud as I've ever heard it...and Kennedy managed to keep his head, made a great move and scored!!  

 While this isn't quite the same as the 1979 Providence comeback win in the ECAC Quarters,the crowd definitely worked its magic tonite.  It's a great win for a young team.  Lots of work to do, but things look bright!!!

LGR

Larry '72

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote Larry72]...and Kennedy managed to keep his head, made a great move and scored!!  
[/quote]
He looked cool and confident skating in.  No wasted moves.

[Rita]

Parts of this game were slow and ugly, but a great job by The Big Red in getting the win, especially tying and winning the game in the last 5 minutes. A good team needs to be able to win games in which they have been outplayed. A very good win for us.

Kennedy's goal was beautiful and I like how we can score some "pretty" goals as well the usual tips and rebounds. I was also impressed with Krantz's shot from the point and how he got the shots on net.

I thought Davenport played very well. I didn't notice him wandering out of the net too much, but I'll check again on the replay.

[Lowell '99]

[quote redhair34]Cornell is 5-0 for the first time in more than 30 years!![/quote]

Really?  I could swear there were a few 6-0 seasons in the last 8 years or so, as well as a string of Cornell being the last undefeated team in the country (although at least one or two of those may have included ties).

[Robb]

2007: 5 (at least) -0
2006: 1-0
2005: 4-0
2004: 0-0
2003: 1-0
2002: 4-0
2001: 0-0
2000: 0-0
1999: 4-0
1998: 4-0
1997: 4-0
1996: 0-0
1995: 0-0
1994: 1-0
1993: 1-0
1992: 1-0
1991: 3-0
1990: 0-0
1989: 3-0
1988: 2-0
1987: 0-0
1986: 1-0
1985: 2-0
1984: 2-0
1983: 2-0
1982: 0-0
1981: 2-0
1980: 0-0
1979: 1-0
1978: 2-0
1977: 2-0
1976: 1-0
1975: 1-0
1974: 2-0
1973: 5-0
1972: 8-0
1971: 1-0
1970: 29-0  (had to be said!)

[redheadfanatic]

Does anyone know who the radio said were the three stars of the game?

[marry_me_topher]

A few bones to pick:

1)  We were playing so bad before 5 min before the end that on a bunch of Harvard shots on Davenport (2nd period) a few of our guys had to resort to diving.  Literally, sprawling on purpose to roadblock precisely when they're making the breaks.  I mean, it worked, but can't refs make calls against that?  


2)  For the entire game, the only thing that was truly consistent was our HORRIBLE passing.  And Davenport's pretty good performance.


3)  Where was our defense?  Definately left back in New Hampshire.


4)  Be glad Dartmouth won, and that we won while having played mediocre till 5 min till the end. This makes a win tomorro alot more possible than if Dartmouth was coming back for redemption and we had an easy win.  

LGR TOMORRO NIGHT

Also, hockey fans-- SUPPORT OUR AMAZING WOMENS VOLLEYBALL TEAM 4 PM at Bartels before the Dartmouth game.  Not only is it Senior Night, but we're honoring one of the best teams we've had in a while, with 6 seniors graduating.  With a win tomorro we'll have the Ivy title and a berth in the NCAA tournament. Lets make it double victories tomorro night!

[ebilmes]

My thoughts:

We. Got. Lucky.

Coming out of the gate, there was a lot of excitement, both in the stands and on the ice. After the first quick goal, I was hoping we could race out to an early lead, but Harvard's D clamped down pretty well.

Harvard looked like the Cornell of the past couple years. Big, strong, skillful D. This wasn't the kind of York team our forwards could skate around. Romano and Gallagher, etc. brought speed and some fancy moves that just weren't working against the Sucks D. I got really worried during our flat stretches in the 2nd and 3rd that we were getting worn down by Sucks' physical play. I remember the '05 ECAC final, in which our big guys slowly wore down Harvard and weakened them to the point where we could pull ahead and maintain the lead. We just got a couple of huge goals at the end.

I believe Ari said after Yale that part of Yale's physical play might be explained by the fact that this Cornell team is a lot smaller, and therefore easier to push around, than the Cornell teams of the past few years. It seemed to me that Harvard might also have been thinking along those lines. Whether it was smothering our forwards on rushes or Richter kicking our guys when they were in the slot, it just seemed like Harvard had the phyiscal edge. Paradoxically, though we were outplayed physically, we spent a hell of a lot more time killing penalties than Harvard had to.

The goal to make it 2-2 seemed very similar to Mark McRae's '03 goal against Sucks in the final. Win the faceoff, get it to the point, and let it fly.

I had never been to a Sucks@Lynah game before, so I don't have much basis for comparison. However, I was a little disappointed in the amount of fish. (Full disclosure: I was too wimpy to bring one myself.) The fan intensity was really there at the beginning and the end, but it was easy to tell who the facetimers were in the middle stretches. They were the ones yelling "shoot" just for the sake of getting a SOG, or complaining that the hockey was boring when there was no scoring in the 2nd. (How did they make it through the past few years?)

All in all, Cornell clearly deserved to lose this game. I don't really know if it was as much a bad night for the team as it was that we are just not as experienced as at this point in some other years. Yes, we had sloppy passes, trouble clearing, etc. But I think the truth might be that this team just isn't that good. Sucks was the better team tonight.

Finally, you can't give enough credit to Davenport. Maybe he won't put up the numbers of Leneveu or McKee, but he made the big stops when he had to, and without him, we might not have been in the position to come back at the end.

A win against Harvard is always a cause for celebration, so I'll definitely take it. I just hope there's no letdown tomorrow against Dartmouth (like on the road last year).