Cornell-Clarkson Postgame Thread

[nyc94]

[quote Beeeej]No, I don't.  Please point out the part of my post where I claim to describe everything he ever says and all the circumstances under which he does or doesn't say it.[/quote]

I did not make that assertion.

[Trotsky]

[quote Scersk '97]It probably felt a whole lot like losing to RPI in 1985, Harvard in 1986, Harvard and SLU from 1988–89, and us in 2002, 2003, and 2005.  We were good, but they were just better.[/quote]Harvard in 86 and SLU in 88-89 didn't feel like that.  They were "sneaky good" -- it felt like you played them even, maybe even outplayed them, and then at the end you look at the scoreboard and you lost anyway.

RPI '85 and Harvard in '89 were like that, though.  You were dead the moment you took the ice against them.  I'd like to think Cornell '03 was like that, too, but of course, different perspective (and Cornell's defensive style can turn any game into a nail-biter).

[Beeeej]

[quote nyc94][quote Beeeej]No, I don't.  Please point out the part of my post where I claim to describe everything he ever says and all the circumstances under which he does or doesn't say it.[/quote]

I did not make that assertion.[/quote]

You pretty much had to, in order to say that I "ignored" the contingencies that my statements didn't cover.

I basically said when A, generally B has been true.  Your response was that I ignored the times that B is untrue.  And I did no such thing.

Go take a logic class.  I'm serious, you'll appreciate it.

[Trotsky]

"When Lawyers Attack"

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

[quote Trotsky]"When Lawyers Attack"[/quote]

Unless of course, they're a defense attorney.  ::banana::

[Scersk '97]

[quote Trotsky][quote Scersk '97]It probably felt a whole lot like losing to RPI in 1985, Harvard in 1986, Harvard and SLU from 1988–89, and us in 2002, 2003, and 2005.  We were good, but they were just better.[/quote]Harvard in 86 and SLU in 88-89 didn't feel like that.  They were "sneaky good" -- it felt like you played them even, maybe even outplayed them, and then at the end you look at the scoreboard and you lost anyway.

RPI '85 and Harvard in '89 were like that, though.  You were dead the moment you took the ice against them.  I'd like to think Cornell '03 was like that, too, but of course, different perspective (and Cornell's defensive style can turn any game into a nail-biter).[/quote]

I like the "sneaky good" vs. "demoralizingly good" distinction.  In fact, if this year's team is one of those, it's sneaky good.

Was 2003 demoralizingly good?  Yeah, I think so.  I think most teams knew they were going to lose when they stepped on the ice against us.  In fact, the opening of that semifinal vs. UHN felt like the Imperial March might as well have been playing in the background.  The 'Cats were shaking in their boots.

And then there was that 10-minute intermission...

And then things fell apart in the second scene.

Argh.