Cornell at Colgate postgame

[Rich S]

[quote 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.[/quote]

The rotating of goalies and pulling one for the other is something Morris did quite a bit of at Clarkson when either one was not playing well or he wanted to try to light a fire under the team that was playing poorly in front of its netminder.

A lot of coaches do that whereas others are loath to do so.

I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.

There is no difference.  When a goalie plays poorly in his coach's judgement, he gets pulled, particularly when the points are so precious this deep into the season.

[calgARI '07]

[quote Rich S]

I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.

[/quote]

I wouldn't say many of us are supporting Schafer's moves with regard to the goaltenders.  It's probably an even split.  I think he is killing Davenport's confidence and it has negatively affected his play.  Considering McKee stayed in through thick and thin, I really don't understand it.

[Robb]

[quote Rich S][quote 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.[/quote]

The rotating of goalies and pulling one for the other is something Morris did quite a bit of at Clarkson when either one was not playing well or he wanted to try to light a fire under the team that was playing poorly in front of its netminder.

A lot of coaches do that whereas others are loath to do so.

I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.

There is no difference.  When a goalie plays poorly in his coach's judgement, he gets pulled, particularly when the points are so precious this deep into the season.[/quote]
There's a difference between platooning goalies on a regular basis and randomly pulling them for goals that aren't their fault to try to wake up the rest of the team.

Playing one goalie all the time isn't always good (but it can be), and playing multiple goalies all the time isn't always bad (but it can be).  It would be nice if there were a hard-and-fast rule, because then we could stop paying coaches and just have a spreadsheet behind the bench.

[Omie]

Thing is that Mckee even at his worse was probably better that Davenport or Scrivens on most nights.

What surprises me right now, is that even though we recognized this was a rebuilding year (granted we were spoiled by wins in the Fall) people are questioning Schafer's decisions so much now. What happened to "In Schafer we trust!"?

[Avash]

Only three points separate fourth place from twelfth place now (and none of those nine teams are over .500 in conference play).

[Drew]

[quote Omie]Thing is that Mckee even at his worse was probably better that Davenport or Scrivens on most nights.

What surprises me right now, is that even though we recognized this was a rebuilding year (granted we were spoiled by wins in the Fall) people are questioning Schafer's decisions so much now. What happened to "In Schafer we trust!"?[/quote]

Does Davenport/Scrivens get the same defensive support that McKee received?  I ask the question from the outside looking in and if you ask me, no way.

[Rich S]

[quote Robb][quote Rich S][quote 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.[/quote]

The rotating of goalies and pulling one for the other is something Morris did quite a bit of at Clarkson when either one was not playing well or he wanted to try to light a fire under the team that was playing poorly in front of its netminder.

A lot of coaches do that whereas others are loath to do so.

I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.

There is no difference.  When a goalie plays poorly in his coach's judgement, he gets pulled, particularly when the points are so precious this deep into the season.[/quote]
There's a difference between platooning goalies on a regular basis and randomly pulling them for goals that aren't their fault to try to wake up the rest of the team.

Playing one goalie all the time isn't always good (but it can be), and playing multiple goalies all the time isn't always bad (but it can be).  It would be nice if there were a hard-and-fast rule, because then we could stop paying coaches and just have a spreadsheet behind the bench.[/quote]

Robb,

My point was that what Schafer has had to do, i.e., pull the goalie  either to shake up the team when they were playing poorly or because the goalie was playing poorly, is the same thing Morris did when he did not have a clear #1.

There isn't a hard and fast rule because goalies have different emotional makeups and it's a real challenge for coaches to know which buttons to push and how his goalie(s) will react.  Plus a spreadsheet wouldn't be very much fun to watch behind the bench.  ::rolleyes::

[duffs4]

[quote Drew]
Does Davenport/Scrivens get the same defensive support that McKee received?  I ask the question from the outside looking in and if you ask me, no way.[/quote]

In the colgate game i would say yes they did.  If you only stop 10 shots in a game and lose I think you have to look at the goltending. One thing I would like to point out about our successful PK in years past is that the credit was  always givin to our #1 penalty killer, whether it was lenny, underhill, or McKee.  I think that when our PK becomes successful again we will not have as much to talk about regarding the 'goaltender situation.'  9 time out of 10 you win that game 2-1, unfortunately this was the 10th game.  

If we switched goaltenders with CU thursday night what would the score have been?

[Trotsky]

[quote Rich S]I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.[/quote]

Just as I thought Morris' wild gyrations with his goalies were counter-productive, I'm starting to feel the same way about Schafer's.

I think it may be different people, however.  Current students, who appear to be the ones supporting Schafer's moves, have probably never even heard of Morris.  The old fogeys who gleefully reported Morris' repeated undercutting of his goalies' confidence have been pretty underwhelmed by Mike doing the same thing this year.

Cornell had a fairly undistinguished pair of goalies named Edmands and Fawcett once, and the strategy was a rotation broken only by a spectacularly good performance, which earned a repeat start, or a spectacularly bad one, which earned one lost start.  Not that it worked, exactly but I don't recall any sort of controversy about the goalies.

Weak goaltending is really the one thing you just have to grin and bear.  You can't coach or strategize your way out of it.  It is what it is.  In my opinion, pulling the goalies willy-nilly just adds to the problems.

[Robb]

[quote Trotsky][quote Rich S]I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.[/quote]

Just as I thought Morris' wild gyrations with his goalies were counter-productive, I'm starting to feel the same way about Schafer's.

I think it may be different people, however.  Current students, who appear to be the ones supporting Schafer's moves, have probably never even heard of Morris.  The old fogeys who gleefully reported Morris' repeated undercutting of his goalies' confidence have been pretty underwhelmed by Mike doing the same thing this year.

Cornell had a fairly undistinguished pair of goalies named Edmands and Fawcett once, and the strategy was a rotation broken only by a spectacularly good performance, which earned a repeat start, or a spectacularly bad one, which earned one lost start.  Not that it worked, exactly but I don't recall any sort of controversy about the goalies.

Weak goaltending is really the one thing you just have to grin and bear.  You can't coach or strategize your way out of it.  It is what it is.  In my opinion, pulling the goalies willy-nilly just adds to the problems.[/quote]

I agree.  I didn't think Morris's strategy helped, and I don't think Schafer's is helping either.

Yet, I predict that Rich will find some way to try to show that this makes me a hypocrite, proves that Schafer has put on 50 lbs, and Morris deserves a Nobel prize...  :-P

[jtwcornell91]

I wonder if Schafer's views on alternating goalies have changed over the years.  For most of his early tenure he alternated goalies until the stretch run, then went with the hot hand through the playoffs: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, Underhill/LeNeveu.  The only exception was Elliott's senior year (after JMP left early), and that sort of backfired when Elliott got hurt and Burt was thrust into action with no game experience.

But since Underhill graduated in 2002, he's been primarily a one-goalie coach.  With Lenny and McKee, that was sort of an obvious choice, but it seems like this would be a good year to let Davenport and Scrivens show who's best in a game situation before riding one of them the rest of the season.  Maybe Schafer now feels that he has enough head coaching experience to identify the top goalie based on their performance in practice.

[RichH]

[quote Rich S]I find it interesting that many folks here are now supporting Schafer's moves whereas they roasted Morris for doing the same thing.[/quote]

Define "many."  From this thread alone:

can't say I agree with the decision to pull davenport.

I didn't like the move to bring in Scrivens.

I have a much bigger problem with the decision to pull Troy tonight than the one to start Scrivens against Brown.

I would like to see Coach go to a goalie rotation (one for Friday, and the other one gets Saturday, no matter what the outcome of the previous night's game) and the goalie of the night stays in for the whole game

I also disagreed with Davenport being pulled early

Pulling him after two goals that he couldn't do anything about when the team hadn't scored yet. Brutal.

While there are some defending the moves here, it seems that the majority are annoyed by it.  Like Trotsky said, the current students weren't around for the Morris bashing so are exempt from the hypocrite tag.  Most of the people here seem to be non-plussed with Schafer's decisions.  Either way, there are definitely differing opinions here, so be careful about painting us with one big "you support Schafer but mocked Morris" stroke.

[calgARI '07]

So much of goaltending is confidence and neither has confidence right now.  Scrivens never seemed to have it and Davenport's has been taken away from him.

[Omie]

I am for the rotation of our goalies until one of them clearly proves himself (clearly being debatable). I have no idea how Morris was coaching but rotation of goalies has seemed to work at other schools, just because it didn't work at Clarkson doesn't mean it will not work at Cornell. For those saying that rotating goalies or pulling them after bad performances is killing Davenport's confidence (less have talked about Scrivens') I would counterargue that the threat of rotation and being pulled definitely creates a motivational factor for them to prove themselves.

[Omie]

A highly debatable statement. Scrivens has seemed to be more comfortable than Davenport in goal at times.