Cornell at Colgate postgame

[Trotsky]

[quote sah67]the Colgate kids' response being "Every game? Man, you guys are fucking losers."[/quote]
So, guys attending a hockey game remarked that attending a hockey game makes you a loser?

[oceanst41]

I can't really say because I wasn't there and didn't see it on TV, but it sounds like pulling Davenport got the desired result. The team played better after he left the game. I'm no expert but sometimes a goalie can be pulled to jump start a team from sleep walking through a game. Shots may have been 14-3 in the first, but maybe Schafer didn't see the fire he though a team trying to come out of an 0-4-2 slump should have.

Not that I agree or disagree with the move, I just think that sometimes a coach pulls a goalie because of how the team is playing in front of him, not because of how the goalie is playing.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Trotsky][quote sah67]the Colgate kids' response being "Every game? Man, you guys are fucking losers."[/quote]
So, guys attending a hockey game remarked that attending a hockey game makes you a loser?[/quote]

No, they remarked that attending any other hockey games makes you a loser.  I guess if you're gonna be a facetimer, you may as well be a proud facetimer.

[mtmack25]

Dekanich played a very good game and I saw him making some nice saves.  Does anyone think that his saves are a little inflated?  Maybe we can modify the statistic.  Can anyone break out shots on goal v. shots on the goalie's chest?

On a more serious note, does it appear to anyone else that Cornell shots generally strike center of mass on the goalie? Is this a coaching strategy aimed at scoring on rebounds, a leftover of the big forwards era? I think it happens on break aways as well. Am I mistaken and there is no trend?

Edit: Also, did anyone notice the change in the PP?  Bitz makes the pass to Scott then cuts down to the net, pulling the D in a bit as Scott moves to the blue line and passes to McCutcheon.  Was that new last night or did I miss it last week?  It seemed to work well to get McCutcheon a better shot than usual.

[calgARI '07]

[quote oceanst41]I can't really say because I wasn't there and didn't see it on TV, but it sounds like pulling Davenport got the desired result. The team played better after he left the game. I'm no expert but sometimes a goalie can be pulled to jump start a team from sleep walking through a game. Shots may have been 14-3 in the first, but maybe Schafer didn't see the fire he though a team trying to come out of an 0-4-2 slump should have.

Not that I agree or disagree with the move, I just think that sometimes a coach pulls a goalie because of how the team is playing in front of him, not because of how the goalie is playing.[/quote]

The team didn't play any different after Davenport was pulled.  They were dictating the play the entire game and were brutal on special team the entire game.

[redhair34]

[quote RazzBaronZ][quote evilnaturedrobot]
And while Scrivens did make two nice saves on the shorthanded breakaway, that third goal was just awful.  There's no excuse for loosing your balence before the shot even goes off.
[/quote]

I was at the game and it wasn't Scrivens' fault.  He had to dive to make one save, and they got a rebound that they lofted above him.  It was pretty impossible to save from my angle. [/quote]

Here's the way I remember the sequence.  Nash checked up a Colgate player along the half-wall (who passed the puck behind the net when he was checked) and lost his balance--this set off the breakdown.  Because Nash was out of position, Kennedy had to come down to the crease which left St. Pierre wide open on the point.  He wisely drifted towards the slot accepted the pass with time to shoot and fired a shot which Scrivens blocked.  The rebound came directly out to Fulton's stick and he had a wide open net to shoot at.  Even if Scrivens hadn't fallen down, I don't think he would have been able to recover in time to stop one of Colgate's best goal scorers.


Although Dekanich was excellent, I would have liked to see us get some more bodies in front of him to make his job more difficult.

[redice]

Surprisingly, the Colgate students weren't all that offensive.  Apparently, the worst they could throw at us were those Mickey Mouse-voiced girls in the sports-bras who were just as keen to dance and sing along with OUR band, and quickly shut up when the band let them have it with "Cheap hotel rooms clap clap clap-clap-clap" in response to their lame "Hotel management" chant.

There were a few obnoxious guys two rows behind us, who tried to pick a fight with the Cornell fans right behind us, starting with something like "Wow...you guys are really funny with all your synchronized cheers...that's really cool."  The Cornell fans informed them that we're able to do that because we go to more than one game a year, with the Colgate kids' response being "Every game? Man, you guys are fucking losers."  That was pretty much all that needed to be said [/quote]

I had two obnoxious-Colgate-fan experiences.  1.  Just before the second intermission, I had a problem with one of their ushers.   I was waiting for the interrmission to start before returning to my seat.  Two ushers saw me standing for a few minutes (without bothering me).  But as soon as I yelled in celebration of Cornell's second goal, the lady usher immediately asked for my credentials and asked me to leave the area (chicken shit, in my estimation).   2. When Bitz got involved in that scrum at the end of the game, one of the more mature Colgate fans singled me out to yell that our "coach is a thug."   I don't know what the hell made her direct that to me.  But, it made her feel better (I guess) while making an ass of herself!!

For me, that's two trips to Starr Rink and both trips included bush-league behavior by their fans/staff.

[redhair34]

[quote redice]Surprisingly, the Colgate students weren't all that offensive.  Apparently, the worst they could throw at us were those Mickey Mouse-voiced girls in the sports-bras who were just as keen to dance and sing along with OUR band, and quickly shut up when the band let them have it with "Cheap hotel rooms clap clap clap-clap-clap" in response to their lame "Hotel management" chant.[/quote]

The atmosphere was definitely a letdown after last year.  I guess the students don't get loaded on Thursday evenings.

[KP '06]

[quote redhair34]The atmosphere was definitely a letdown after last year.  I guess the students don't get loaded on Thursday evenings.[/quote]

Those Colgate nerds. :-P

It was nice to see Cornell carry the play for the entire game ... though a win would be nicer. I'm hoping for a solid win on Saturday, especially if the crowd gets to Mark. He's made himself into an easy target.

[French Rage]

This has nothing to do with this weekend and is just a random observation, but the team that beats Colgate in the semis has lost the last 3 ECAC finals.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote redice]one of the more mature Colgate fans singled me out to yell that our "coach is a thug."[/quote]

Wonder if she knows that our coach and her coach were assistants together at Cornell.

[Will]

[quote French Rage]This has nothing to do with this weekend and is just a random observation, but the team that beats Colgate in the semis has lost the last 3 ECAC finals.[/quote]

At this point, I'd be happy if Cornell could just make it to the semis.

[Omie]

[quote calgARI '07]

Schafer is doing everything in his power to kill Davenport's confidence.  Pulling him after two goals that he couldn't do anything about when the team hadn't scored yet.  Brutal.   Is it Davenport's job to score goals?
[/quote]

The Cornell goaltending situation right now is not the best (be it Davenport or Scrivens), so hopefully Garman will be good come '08. Davenport let in the first shot he faced all night and then let in another one. 2 goals in 6 shots and it is not the first time either, remisniscent of the Dartmouth & RPI games. Schafer is willing to pull both Scrivens or Davenport at this point, besides you can't argue that Scrivens played well the rest of the game and it gave a lil bit more spark to our team.

[calgARI '07]

[quote Omie]

The Cornell goaltending situation right now is not the best (be it Davenport or Scrivens), so hopefully Garman will be good come '08. Davenport let in the first shot he faced all night and then let in another one. 2 goals in 6 shots and it is not the first time either, remisniscent of the Dartmouth & RPI games. Schafer is willing to pull both Scrivens or Davenport at this point, besides you can't argue that Scrivens played well the rest of the game and it gave a lil bit more spark to our team.[/quote]

I'm hoping Garman can be something big as well especially considering he has given the highly regarded Cheverie a run for the starting job in Nanaimo.

I'm not sure what Schafer wanted Davenport to do on the Burton goal.  He was standing by himself on the either side of the crease with no Cornell players anywhere near him.  The second goal could be argued either way.  Bottom line is that Cornell wasn't scoring though they were outplaying Colgate by a wide margin.  Cornell's play did not change one bit after Davenport was pulled.  They were totally carrying the play at even strength the whole game while doing nothing on special teams before he was pulled and after he was pulled.  

The penalty kill was brutal and so was the powerplay.  Maybe Schafer should focus his energy there rather than the goaltending.  He is so quick to make changes in net but leaves the first powerplay alone the whole net.  Yeah, they scored in the third period, but they were still 1-for-9 with only a handful of chances.

[Omie]

I agree that Schafer has been harder on the goalies when the special teams have just been brutal. However, on the Brown game people were arguing that Davenport was the clear #1 when Scrivens let in similar goals to the one you just described that Davenport let in, that were mostly due to defensive breakdowns. All I am saying is that there is no clear #1 goalie, period. And it probably is best for Schafer to have them rotate constantly.