Colgate 2 at Cornell 2 post-game thread

[billhoward]

Incredible comeback in 34 seconds of the third after being down 2-0.

But 0x10 on PP including an extended 5x3 and the 5-minute major that stretched into overtime?

Very nice control late in the game by Cornell including an awesom flurry in the final minute of OT. To no avail.

3-point extended weekend. It could have been worse.

[Trotsky]

Teams over .500:

.800 Drt 4-1-0
.800 Prn 4-1-0
.750 Cor 2-0-2
.667 Hvd 4-2-0
.667 Yal 2-1-0

Very big weekend coming up.

[Josh '99]

Scoring on a penalty shot?  What's that?

[Cornell11]

Colgate's penalty kill was absolutely spectacular. Not only did they consistently clear the puck, but they created opportunities short-handed. They had 6-7 great looks on short-handed breaks.

The comeback was unbelievable. At the start of the 3rd period, I was hoping for a tie, but after our 2nd goal, I was expecting a win. Its too bad we could convert on the 5-minute major.

Riley Nash made mental mistake after mental mistake today.

And finally, the crowd was dead in the 2nd period. It was the first real home game for a lot of the freshmen, but by the 3rd period, everyone was into it.

I'll absolutely take the 3 points. Lets knock off Harvard and Dartmouth next weekend.

[CUontheslopes]

Ties in general are rather unsatisfying. Some ties are good ties, some ties are bad ties. It's hard to decide what this one is. Overall, I'd have to say it's a good tie being down 2 goals w/6 and change left in the 3rd, but wow...we should've put that away with a 5 minute PP.

Overall, I thought we could not have played much worse. I counted at least 6 horrible sloppy turn overs in our own end that led directly to excellent scoring chance. That Nash turn over was god-awful...he wasn't paying attention and just forgot the puck at center ice.  

Our breakout was pitiful, our puck-handling made me think we had holes in our sticks, and we did not do a good job of clearing the front of the net. Scrivens looked pretty solid - hard to fault him for letting in the penalty shot goal and the first one he didn't have much of a chance on either.

Offensively, we never got an odd man rush that I can remember, yet gave up a ton on our own side.

As a side note, what is wrong with Riley Nash? He's been invisible. The only times i noticed him were when he made an AWFUL turnover at our own blueline by getting his pocket picked.

I guess the good news is we played just awful and still got a point out of it, but wow...we looked just lost out there, slow and lost. There are signs and flashes of some offensive productivity and some creativity, but wow we were fortunate not to lose tonight. As someone who's actively watched CU hockey since I got here as a freshman and now as a 2nd year law student, I'd say we look a lot like the 2005-2006 team...we have some potential, a good goalie, but we need to play more like a team.

[billhoward]

What's wrong with Riley Nash? In the games at Princeton and Quinnipiac,we saw brilliant stickhandling and heads-up play on the ice. But no goals. It's almost as if he wants - needs? - four other people on the ice who play at his level and can be in the slot when Nash gets free for a moment (when others wouldn't even get that far) and needs someone to pass to, or get a pass from. That's one possibility.

It was hard seeing this game on video to get a handle on how he played because of the camera work and resolution of a webcast. But it sure sounds as if tonight was not his best.

As regards the power play - shades of Matt Moulson. The guy was great with the puck, quick release, etcetera, and yet the memory some people have of him is of the guy who couldn't put the puck in the net when Cornell counted on him. So many woulda, shoulda, coulda opportunies.

Hey, it was still fun to watch.

[Josh '99]

[quote billhoward]As regards the power play - shades of Matt Moulson. The guy was great with the puck, quick release, etcetera, and yet the memory some people have of him is of the guy who couldn't put the puck in the net when Cornell counted on him.[/quote]I don't know that I've ever heard anyone say that's the memory they have of Moulson.

[Jim Hyla]

I talked to someone who went to the Friday luncheon. He said Coach Schafer said the team has a virus, flu or not. Before the Thursday game at least three players had to get IV fluids. So maybe the step behind is really physical. We can hope.

[Scersk '97]

[quote Josh '99][quote billhoward]As regards the power play - shades of Matt Moulson. The guy was great with the puck, quick release, etcetera, and yet the memory some people have of him is of the guy who couldn't put the puck in the net when Cornell counted on him.[/quote]I don't know that I've ever heard anyone say that's the memory they have of Moulson.[/quote]

I can understand it.  Moulson had 5 goals in 22 playoff games, and that includes only 1 goal in 7 NCAA playoff games.  And that's a guy that was good for about a goal every two games during the regular season.  It always seemed that someone else was stepping up, even though, surely, some of that was due to other teams keying on Moulson.  Only one game winner in the playoffs in his whole career, in overtime in the second Clarkson game in 2006.

There was never a sense, except perhaps in the UNH game in '03, that goaltending let us down in the NCAAs.  It's always been scoring.  We looked to Moulson in both '05 and '06, and scoring certainly came up short both years.

So, the perception that Moulson was not a big game scorer is understandable...  a little uncharitable, but understandable.

[Travis 02]

What was up with some of those calls?  I was unfortunately seated in section O and from my vantage point I couldn't see some of the action that led to the penalties giving Cornell the 2-man advantage (particularly the call that put Cornell up by 2 men that occurred away from the play, in the neutral zone).  The Colgate fans were starting to get irate, especially with the 5-minute major with about 3 minutes to go in the game.

I, too, thought Cornell surely would have scored a go-ahead there and put this one away, but to Colgate's credit they held off the flurry.  Exciting as the last 10 minutes were, Cornell played like doink and did not deserve even a point.

But my main question remains: what was up with some of those calls?  Any of them seem questionable?  I understand the Colgate fans are biased a bit and some of their freaking out was certainly not justified as they could not see the action much better than I did, but it did seem to be getting a bit out of hand with how many calls that were going against them.

[Jacob '06]

[quote Travis 02]What was up with some of those calls?  I was unfortunately seated in section O and from my vantage point I couldn't see some of the action that led to the penalties giving Cornell the 2-man advantage (particularly the call that put Cornell up by 2 men that occurred away from the play, in the neutral zone).  The Colgate fans were starting to get irate, especially with the 5-minute major with about 3 minutes to go in the game.

I, too, thought Cornell surely would have scored a go-ahead there and put this one away, but to Colgate's credit they held off the flurry.  Exciting as the last 10 minutes were, Cornell played like doink and did not deserve even a point.

But my main question remains: what was up with some of those calls?  Any of them seem questionable?  I understand the Colgate fans are biased a bit and some of their freaking out was certainly not justified as they could not see the action much better than I did, but it did seem to be getting a bit out of hand with how many calls that were going against them.[/quote]

I wasn't watching close enough on the 5x3s, but the 5 minute major was absolutely a correct call. If Scali had a stop sign on his back the Colgate guy would've seen it quite clearly and took him quite hard in to the boards. I was actually surprised how quickly Scali got up after that hit because it looked pretty ugly. With the new emphasize on checking from behind and the automatic 5er for hitting someone from behind into the boards the refs had no choice, but I would imagine it would've been 5 even if they did.

[Scersk '97]

[quote Jacob '06]
I wasn't watching close enough on the 5x3s, but the 5 minute major was absolutely a correct call.[/quote]

The internet feed (with its replay!) had a perfect angle.  Textbook 5.

[Travis 02]

And what of the call putting Cornell up by 2 men in the third (the infraction took place in the neutral zone, away from the action as far as I remember).  Was that one on the 'net feed?

[sah67]

For those who still have any interest in the standing vs. sitting issue in Section G: even after the supposed resolution via Email from Athletics, there were a few students who started to stand at the bottom of G tonight right after Devin tied it in the 3rd.

The female usher who hadn't looked too happy be there at any point during the game quickly came down the steps to get them to sit, but the students decided to argue with her.  While this was going on, someone over in E started yelling for all of G to stand up and "stick it to the man" (or woman in this case).  Interestingly enough, all of G did stand in solidarity for the remainder of the game...and those of us in front of small children made some room for them to step up on the bleachers and get a good view in between us.

The usher, who was definitely pissed off at this point, simply resigned herself back to her post at the top of G and glared at the entire section for the rest of the game.  So much for this being resolved...

[Dpperk29]

[quote sah67]For those who still have any interest in the standing vs. sitting issue in Section G: even after the supposed resolution via Email from Athletics, there were a few students who started to stand at the bottom of G tonight right after Devin tied it in the 3rd.

The female usher who hadn't looked to happy be there at any point during the game quickly came down the steps to get them to sit, but the students decided to argue with her.  While this was going on, someone over in E started yelling for all of G to stand up and "stick it to the man" (or woman in this case.  Interestingly enough, all of G did stand in solidarity for the remainder of the game...and those of us in front of small children made some room for them to step up on the bleachers and get a good view in between us.

The usher, who was definitely pissed off at this point, simply resigned herself back to her post at the top of G and glared at the entire section for the rest of the game.  So much for this being resolved...[/quote]

Trying to stick it to the man will only result in the return of the Lynah Gestapo.