Union Postgame

[Jim Hyla]

So I'll start it. All I expect from this team is 3 pts at home & 2 on the road. Throw in an occ. 4 & 3 and you've got a good season.

[mnagowski]

I beg to differ. Sure, 2 points are great for a weekend in the North Country or at Lynah East and in Hanover. But not all road games are created equal. I expect at least 1 point against Union.

Still, I realize that last night's game against RPI was physically exhausting and the team was hurting a bit tonight. As Trotsky noted in the other thread, I hope we can learn something from tonight.

[redhair34]

[quote Jim Hyla] 2 on the road.[/quote]

Judging by what I saw tonight, that's also what the team expects.  I understand your point though.  I'm more concerned about seeing shades of the 06-07 squad on the ice.

[Chris '03]

[quote metaezra]I beg to differ. Sure, 2 points are great for a weekend in the North Country or at Lynah East and in Hanover. But not all road games are created equal. I expect at least 1 point against Union.

Still, I realize that last night's game against RPI was physically exhausting and the team was hurting a bit tonight. As Trotsky noted in the other thread, I hope we can learn something from tonight.[/quote]

5-3 in league with only two of those games at home is reasonably good regardless of opponent for this team. Only 5 road games to go with 9 at home. That looks favorable to me. I'd rather see the team beat a solid RPI squad on the road and fall flat against union than beat union and lose to RPI personally. The team is a long way from solid contender and isn't totally healthy. There's plenty of hockey to go and much of it will be in friendly confines.

Hopefully the team will be back in Albany in two months.

[Trotsky]

Only 5 road games to go with 9 at home. That looks favorable to me.

If they can win at home.  They haven't been a Lynah RS juggernaut lately: 7-4-2 in the last two seasons, plus the unfortunate matter of the '07 QF.

[ebilmes]

[quote Jim Hyla]So I'll start it. All I expect from this team is 3 pts at home & 2 on the road. Throw in an occ. 4 & 3 and you've got a good season.[/quote]

With respect, Jim, it bothers me a little when people frame college hockey in these terms. This isn't bowling -- it's not just Cornell versus the same generic opponent every night. Over the last few years, I've seen this team play 100 percent and lose, and also play lazily and win.

Cornell faces a different opponent every time they skate, and whether they win, lose, or tie depends on a multitude of factors. There have been zero games this year about which I would have said "Cornell should definitely lose," and the Niagara games were the only ones in which I said "Cornell should definitely win."

I don't look at this as a respectable two-point road weekend. I see two games in which (from what I've heard) Cornell was outshot, outhit, and outhustled. Instead of honing its ability to plunder a solid EZAC winning percentage from the ruins of an otherwise mediocre season, I'd like to see this team play each game like it's theirs to win. And we've had the chance to win every game this year.

31 total SOG against two bottom-half ECAC teams.

Clarkson looked very beatable in Florida, and SLUt has a losing record. 3 points will keep us competitive at the top of the standings, but as far as I'm concerned, 4 points is the target.

[marty]

[quote Trotsky]

Only 5 road games to go with 9 at home. That looks favorable to me.

If they can win at home.  They haven't been a Lynah RS juggernaut lately: 7-4-2 in the last two seasons, plus the unfortunate matter of the '07 QF.[/quote]

On the other hand, Onion has been very fragrant at home this year.

They are 6-1-3 at home with the loss coming in the final two minutes of the third period vs Nebraska Omaha.  That said, their at home schedule has not been against highly ranked opponents.

[ugarte]

[quote ebilmes]With respect, Jim, it bothers me a little when people frame college hockey in these terms. This isn't bowling -- it's not just Cornell versus the same generic opponent every night. Over the last few years, I've seen this team play 100 percent and lose, and also play lazily and win.

Cornell faces a different opponent every time they skate, and whether they win, lose, or tie depends on a multitude of factors. There have been zero games this year about which I would have said "Cornell should definitely lose," and the Niagara games were the only ones in which I said "Cornell should definitely win."[/quote]
Every year we are going to win some we should lose and lose some we should win. It is a bad loss, for sure, but as previously discussed the Union bug appears to be a sadly chronic condition.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote ebilmes] but as far as I'm concerned, 4 points is the target.[/quote]

Of course that's the target, but my point is that everyone seems to be very negative all the time. It's like we have the best team in the nation (OK a bit of hyperbole) and we're falling flat. We are not Wisconsin or Minny, we are an Ivy League school that has given us a lot of pleasure over the years. My expectations seem a lot lower than most who post here, but having seen the magnificent Harkness years, as well as those terribly down periods, I'm enjoying the Schafer years. I don't ever expect to go back to the late 60's and early 70's, there are just too many scholarship schools playing hockey. But I do expect us to be competitive in our league each year. This year we are and I expect us to be competitive all the way to Albany. However, I doubt past there. Next year maybe.

Having gotten down off my soapbox, I also have to also agree with you on your main point (I think). We should look at how they perform against the quality of the competition. That's why I said throw in an occasional 3 pt road weekend. This past weekend was one of those, like Brown/ Yale, that I hoped we could get 3 road points. I'm happy, however, with 2 and the ability to improve. There are many more under producing teams just in our league than we are, say Harvard, SLU, and Colgate.

I guess I just like half full glasses, maybe as I get old mine have turned to rose colored.

[Scersk '97]

Really, past results are not the best indicator of future performance, as we're so often reminded.

If the team wins their next game, they're doing better in league than last year.  Win the next two games, and they're doing better than '06.  Go on a tear, win the next eight, and they've matched '05.

Yeah, they're not '03, but so what?  Even the magical '03 team lost a close one to Colgate (who finished eighth that year) on the road.

How many seniors on this squad?  Oh, right, four.

The problem, Jim, is not your perspective, but the utter lack of perspective from so many on this board.  My message to the classes of '05 and '06?  If you can't take the lean years, don't watch.

[Doug '08]

This team is not going anywhere.  Disgraceful performance this weekend.  I thought Cornell was lucky to come away with the win at RPI and even though both teams played horrible on Saturday, Union was clearly the better team for that 60 minutes.  And when our top line is a minus 2 for the night, we will lose almost every time.  I thought Nash and Greening both had their worst weekends of the year.

I think it will be especially tough for this team to rebound now that the injuries are piling up... although luckily the "parody" in the ECAC now is such that the overall quality of play is sufficiently poor to think that another trip to Albany might not be totally out of the question...

[lynah80]

[quote Scersk '97]Really, past results are not the best indicator of future performance, as we're so often reminded.

If the team wins their next game, they're doing better in league than last year.  Win the next two games, and they're doing better than '06.  Go on a tear, win the next eight, and they've matched '05.

Yeah, they're not '03, but so what?  Even the magical '03 team lost a close one to Colgate (who finished eighth that year) on the road.

How many seniors on this squad?  Oh, right, four.

The problem, Jim, is not your perspective, but the utter lack of perspective from so many on this board.  My message to the classes of '05 and '06?  If you can't take the lean years, don't watch.[/quote]

I completely agree.  Good fans are loyal fans, especially during mediocre years.  Clearly, Cornell is not as good as the 02-03 or 05-06 teams, but they are better than the 98-99 team.  Much of the fun this year is in watching the young players develop and in watching the team gel.  With regard to the latter, I think they are ahead of the 06-07 team, which seemed to have significant "clubhouse" problems.  I believe they will finish in the ECAC top 4 and assuming there are no "premature graduations" should have a much better team next year.

[Scersk '97]

[quote Doug '08]This team is not going anywhere.
 

[snip]

...although luckily the "parody" in the ECAC now is such that the overall quality of play is sufficiently poor to think that another trip to Albany might not be totally out of the question...[/quote]

So, I guess Albany is nowhere?  There were years in the past when we were happy to make the playoffs!

Really, perfect example of a spoiled fan-base.  Let's see... '05, '06, '07, '08... a little miffed that you're not going to recapture the underclass glory years?

[Rosey]

[quote Scersk '97]Really, perfect example of a spoiled fan-base.  Let's see... '05, '06, '07, '08... a little miffed that you're not going to recapture the underclass glory years?[/quote]
I talked to Doug at Union on Saturday, and assured him he would get this response if he posted his thoughts here.  For the record, I agree with him.  I'd be satisfied with a trip to Albany this year, but only given their mediocre performance resulting from known and yet still unremediated problems.  That I'm not satisfied with.

AFAICT, this team is wasting talent year-in and year-out, and I'm surprised more people don't see it.  Or maybe they do, and they're just too afraid to post their thoughts here for fear of the Always Positive Brigade dropping a 500 pound bomb on them.

Kyle

[Tom Lento]

[quote krose]AFAICT, this team is wasting talent year-in and year-out, and I'm surprised more people don't see it.  Or maybe they do, and they're just too afraid to post their thoughts here for fear of the Always Positive Brigade dropping a 500 pound bomb on them.
[/quote]

Kyle, I think you know me well enough to realize that I'm hardly a member of the Always Positive Brigade, so I'm here to tell you that hyperbole doesn't help your point.

The 2006 team gave eventual national champion Wisconsin all it could handle in a regional semi-final in Wisconsin. The 2005 team lost a close regional final in Minnesota to the Gophers. The 2004 team simply wasn't that good, and it also suffered a number of bad injuries towards the end of the year. I don't think that team wasted talent, but for that one season it's at least possible. The 2003 team lost a 1-goal game in the national semi-final. The 2002 team lost a tough game in the regional final, and that team was about a year away from greatness.

And if you think the 1998, 1999, and 2000 teams were wasting talent, then you're even crazier than I remember. Those teams weren't very good, talent-wise, and it showed on the ice and in the standings (although 2000 had TONS of potential in that amazing freshman class). The 1996 team, by almost any measure, overachieved. The 1997 team did AT LEAST as well as it was expected to, and pulled a minor upset over a higher-seeded Miami team in the NCAAs before getting run over by the NoDak juggernaut.

To say that Cornell "is wasting talent year-in and year-out" is simply preposterous given the results the team has put up. Unless year-in and year-out really means "maybe 2004 (4 years ago), maybe last year, and so far this year."

I suggest you stick to meaningful complaints about the coaching and leadership. There are enough of those (e.g. the power play strategy and the breakout) without all the crazy talk. :p