Cornell-Bemidji NCAA regionals postgame

[tretiak]

The 2nd goal was one I know he wishes he had back, but the BSU kid did pick the far post so it wasn't a terrible goal. I don't know if anyone else noticed it but Davenport ran into Scrivens on the third goal. That's why his 5-hole was open and the puck squirted through. If Davenport's wearing a BSU jersey that's 2 minutes for goalie interference and no goal. Just bad luck on that play.

[HeafDog]

[quote DisplacedCornellian]I, too, think Schafer needs to stick/return to his style of big, punishing teams.  Cornell is never going to be able to recruit enough quick, skilled players to play a run-and-gun style.  With our reputation as a defense first team, the majority look elsewhere, and only a few fall in our lap.  That reputation is not going to change in the near future.

I think Schafer tried to recruit more speedy skill guys in recent years, and it didn't work out.[/quote]

I completely agree. The style of game that Schafer coaches is the one he's comfortable with, and when he tried in recent years to add a bit more offense to the balance, it didn't work out so hot. Let the guy continue to do what he does, and if you want a different style of game, then we're gonna need a different coach to take us there. But even though we still have no championship since I first became a Cornellian (or was born, for that matter), I'm still content with Mike to be our man. As others have said, he's doing pretty well with the weapons he's been given (or, more accurately, can acquire).

[quote CowbellGuy]I don't expect to see anyone but Scrivens in net next year, but we can also look forward to Iles coming in for 2010-11.
[/quote]

I thought Garman was supposed to be this top prospect goalie who we were waiting for to be the starter.  Is that not the case?

[Trotsky]

[quote HeafDog]I thought Garman was supposed to be this top prospect goalie who we were waiting for to be the starter.  Is that not the case?[/quote]

Garman was heavily recruited and was expected to challenge Scrivens for the job this year.  None of us are privy to what happens in practice, but one would think if he hasn't been put into rotation... well, we don't really know.

[lynah80]

[quote tretiak]

The 2nd goal was one I know he wishes he had back, but the BSU kid did pick the far post so it wasn't a terrible goal. I don't know if anyone else noticed it but Davenport ran into Scrivens on the third goal. That's why his 5-hole was open and the puck squirted through. If Davenport's wearing a BSU jersey that's 2 minutes for goalie interference and no goal. Just bad luck on that play.[/quote]

It looked to me like the "fake the wrap around, drop the puck on the near side" for the third goal was a rehearsed play for Bemidji.  It was set up when the Bemidji forward squeezed past the Cornell defenseman along the boards, to get into position for a wrap around.  Scrivens may have been focused on preventing the wrap around.  Some of the responsibility for the goal lies with the defense.  But also, it was a creative play by Bemidji.

[lynah80]

[quote Josh '99][quote CUontheslopes]I have to agree. Scrivens just has not been good in big games. In fact, he hasn't been serviceable on many occasions. This season alone we had a number of big big games and he really let us down in many of them. Of course, he had some good games, but all of them seemed to come against lesser opponents. For example:

BU@MSG - terrible
North Dakota - absolutely awful
Yale ECAC Finals - abysmal
[/quote]But then, he was great in the second North Dakota game, and pretty good against Princeton in the ECAC semi, and made some big saves against Northeastern.[/quote]

I don't agree with your criticisms.  Scrivens had his bad moments this season, but the examples you site are not a good representation  of them.  Forget about BU@MSG.  That was a long time ago.  The whole team lost the Yale ECAC final game, not just Scrivens.  

During the first half of the season, Srivens was outstanding.  During the second half, he was good to very good.  He gets blamed for a lot of things because he is the last player in front of the net.  For the year as a whole, he was by far the top goalie on the team and the #4 goalie in the nation.  Give the kid a break.

[sethred]

Once again, Cornell loses and we wonder if we would be more successful with a different coach or goalie.  Lets remember, Schafer consistently fields a competitive team, one that can hold its own  against national competition. I am sure Schafer would love to have a team full of Matt Moulson's, Doug Derraughs, etc.  If you follow hockey,whether college or pro,  the dream of having snipers is often an elusive one. They are just not that many around. Schafer is an excellent coach. He has a system that he thinks is the best for the talent he is able to recruit.
As for Scrivens, he must be doing something right. He has been successful. He didn't lose the Yale game. His team was exhausted and played tired.
Aslo, at the start of the year no one thought this team would be a frozen four team.
I have been following Cornell hockey since 1985. I continue to hope for more success for the team. Maybe next year.

[oceanst41]

Figured I would just throw my two cents in. I'm not sure many had visions of a quarterfinal game as a realistic goal for this Cornell team. I suspect all of us would have jumped at the chance to see the team make it this far.

I will echo the sentiment that this loss was tougher to take than Minnesota and Wisconsin. For once Cornell wasn't the underdog, it was a game that was there for the taking. There is also a reason that there was so much complaining when it came to Cornell's draw in Minneapolis and Green Bay. We knew it would take a huge effort for Cornell to upset a #1 seed essentially at home. This time around Cornell had no "home" team to deal with, and not even a #1 seed to play to advance (to a potential second straight game against a #4 seed). The path to the championship is unlikely to ever be that "easy" for Cornell.

The loss still isn't a reason to blow up the Schafer system. If anything their sound defense got them that far. Even against BSU, for the majority of the game Cornell kept them to the outside. Cornell had their physical and cycle games working, and credit BSU for not packing it in. They withstood and capitalized on their breaks. Which is really what this Cornell team was lacking. 2003, 2005, and 2006 made sure that other teams paid for their mistakes. This team never had that killer instinct (except for maybe Barlow during the playoff run), and no lead was ever really safe it seemed.

All in all it was a frustrating season, because at times they showed flashes of how brilliant they could be and other times, well not so much. Truthfully, I was terrified that Cornell's chance to save the ECAC's rep this year would die in a dominating perfomance by Northeastern. So this team made it one step farther than I thought. However, once they made it that far the ending was ever so disappointing.

[abmarks]

[quote HockeyMan][quote DisplacedCornellian]

I, too, think Schafer needs to stick/return to his style of big, punishing teams.  Cornell is never going to be able to recruit enough quick, skilled players to play a run-and-gun style.  With our reputation as a defense first team, the majority look elsewhere, and only a few fall in our lap.  That reputation is not going to change in the near future.

I think Schafer tried to recruit more speedy skill guys in recent years, and it didn't work out.  I think that for this team, moreso than other teams, Herb Brooks' "I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones" rings true.  We need character guys who are going to buy into the system and work hard.  If we can get one or two of those who have a finishing touch, well, that'd be most helpful.  Just getting guys with offensive talent isn't going to help if they don't buy into the system (e.g. Tony Romano).[/quote]

No one is saying you need a run-and-gun style, but you do need some offensive flair.  The game has changed, and you can no longer win merely by recruiting tree trunks and grinders.  If Yale can build a team with considerable speed and skill, surely we can too.  All season long, the lack of finishing was painful to observe. (I remember walking out of Lynah after the second Niagara game thinking we had just won two games we could easily have lost, in part because too many Red shooters couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.)

Yes, Brooks's comment rings true, but it also rings banal.[/quote]

Thank You.  Another believer. Amen

[kaelistus]

That second goal.. That was disgusting. The players on the ice completely broke down their play. Sure Scrivens could/should/whatever stop it. But at least 3 other CU players should have been in position and they weren't.

I don't usually see goals where our defense completely breaks down that way, so that's why it stuck in my mind.

Scrivens may not be the best goalie we've ever had, but I'll keep him thank you very much.

[srg1]

I think Shafer tried to change the team with smaller skilled players a few years ago.  Those players didn't seem to like the defensive scheme and left the program or didn't work out.  Now it seems like he is back to his tried and true formula of big bodied defense.  The difference this year was that we were missing a speedy sniper to pair with Riley Nash.  I also did not see anyone who could blast the puck from the blueline.  The Cornell team overall is a poor skating team and pretty short on talent.  I think this team truly overachieved.  

We just need a Matt Moulson/Brad Chartrand type who can score.  Unfortunately I don't really see one in the incoming recruiting classes but I will reserve judgement.  Shafer has done an amazing job but somehow needs to bring in a couple of talented players to really make the power play buzz.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote jtwcornell91]So, looking back, this is the first time Cornell has lost to a lower-seeded team in the NCAAs since the 2003 semifinal, and the only time we've ever been upset in the regionals.  (Even before the neutral-site regionals, Cornell's quarterfinal and 1/8-final series in 1981, 1986, and 1991 were all on the road.)[/quote]

To be more specific, since the start of the current regional format, Cornell is 5-2 as the higher seed and 2-5 as the lower seed.

[redGrinch]

One of the things that was driving me crazy during the game was Cornell winning all the wall battles and cycling well in the offensive zone... which is great... that's the way Cornell had to use its size to win this game.  But there was almost never a passing option in the slot or someone driving to the net to turn the successful cycle into a scoring opportunity.  And no, I don't necessarily count shots from the point as good scoring opportunities, unless we've got guys parked in front of the net ready to screen, tip, or pounce on rebounds.

I agree with the need for more offense... we can't expect to win consistently with 1-0 or 2-1 scores.  granted we're used to it... but we've got to be able to win sometimes when our D or goalie isn't on. Our record when allowing 2 or less goals this year: 20-2-4.  Our record when allowing 3 or more: 2-8-0 (both wins during the ECACs).  You can get more offense w/o sacrificing the defensive play... ideally we need a good power forward who goes hard to the net with the puck.  There were so many times last night, I just wanted someone to take the puck hard to the net and use their size to an advantage.  It's not like Bemidji was punishing our players near the crease... nor am I sure they could have knocked our folks off the puck.

and yes, this hurt... because I also have tix to the FF.  More than Minnesota... about the same or a little less than Wisconsin. Less than UNH.  Less than idiot Koharsky not calling goaltender interference in game 7 of the Caps/Flyers series last season.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote srg1]We just need a Matt Moulson/Brad Chartrand type who can score.  [/quote]Well I don't have the time to search, but I can certainly remember the multiple posts on why can't Moulson score. Things always look better in our memories, and I expect this season will as well.

[min]

[quote srg1]The Cornell team overall is a poor skating team and pretty short on talent. [/quote]

Is poor skating one of the team's problems? Doesn't Cornell own one of those few skating treadmills in the country? (I seem to remember watching a video about it). In any case, I'm not disagreeing with you, but was just wondering.

[Trotsky]

[quote oceanst41]2003, 2005, and 2006 made sure that other teams paid for their mistakes. This team never had that killer instinct (except for maybe Barlow during the playoff run), and no lead was ever really safe it seemed.[/quote]

It's hard to tell whether this was an absence of killer instinct or just killers.  The three teams mentioned were incredibly intimidating.  This year's team did not have that "back alley / broken bottle" mystique.  They were solid, and talented, but they didn't have the mean streak.

This may just indicate that hockey as a whole is moving away from that.