Cornell-Bemidji NCAA regionals postgame

[Germ]

[quote CUontheslopes]Let's not forget how good our special teams were. It seems to me the biggest problem is our PP. We were something like 39th in the country. You can get away with being a great defensive team if you score 2-3 pp goals a game. When you don't...you struggle. I'm sorry, but the 03 team would be a beast no matter who they played. Of course, had a puck bounced our way in 05 or 06 we'd probably think Schafer was a genius and the system was great...[/quote]

Yeah, 39 out of how many D-1 programs?

[CUontheslopes]

50something now I think? 39th won't get it done. In previous successful seasons we were much better (at least it seemed)

[abmarks]

[quote Germ][quote CUontheslopes]Let's not forget how good our special teams were. It seems to me the biggest problem is our PP. We were something like 39th in the country. You can get away with being a great defensive team if you score 2-3 pp goals a game. When you don't...you struggle. I'm sorry, but the 03 team would be a beast no matter who they played. Of course, had a puck bounced our way in 05 or 06 we'd probably think Schafer was a genius and the system was great...[/quote]

Yeah, 39 out of how many D-1 programs?[/quote]

I think Germ meant 39th This year.  In 03 we were top 10 for sure.

Good point Germ- OUr powerplay was sorely lacking all year. Anemic.  Not enough skill.   THe 03 Powerplay was able to put the puck in the net.

[Lowell '99]

Huh???  What did you agree with?   Can we live with zero offense or not?

I agree with not hating on Schafer's system when we've had lots of success, and also with the idea that a purely defensive game is a part of that system.  The offense is more control-oriented than breakout-oriented (or "skilled"), but it is not always absent.

Furthermore, you can't ignore the role of scholarships in the classification of Cornell's program as a notch below Michigan/BU/whomever (which I'd agree with), nor can you say it plays no role in shaping the system.  You coach the players you have, and perhaps a high scoring player is going to attract more recruiter attention than some of the grinders we get.  But that's just speculation on my part.

[CUontheslopes]

I'm convinced that's the difference maker...the PP was just so much better in 03...seems like it's been getting progressively weaker.

[Rosey]

Another heartbreaking end to a season.

Ugh...

Not much more to say than that. :-(

[Germ]

[quote abmarks][quote Germ][quote CUontheslopes]Let's not forget how good our special teams were. It seems to me the biggest problem is our PP. We were something like 39th in the country. You can get away with being a great defensive team if you score 2-3 pp goals a game. When you don't...you struggle. I'm sorry, but the 03 team would be a beast no matter who they played. Of course, had a puck bounced our way in 05 or 06 we'd probably think Schafer was a genius and the system was great...[/quote]

Yeah, 39 out of how many D-1 programs?[/quote]

I think Germ meant 39th This year.  In 03 we were top 10 for sure.

Good point Germ- OUr powerplay was sorely lacking all year. Anemic.  Not enough skill.   THe 03 Powerplay was able to put the puck in the net.[/quote]

Yeah, what I should have said was we were almost dead last in PP.  That ain't gonna cut it.  And..putting the '03 season aside, I'd be curiuos how our PP ranked in each of the last ten years.  Just don't think we have the finishers to be a top 10-15 PP team year-in year-out.

[abmarks]

[quote Lowell '99]

Huh???  What did you agree with?   Can we live with zero offense or not?

I agree with not hating on Schafer's system when we've had lots of success, and also with the idea that a purely defensive game is a part of that system.  The offense is more control-oriented than breakout-oriented (or "skilled"), but it is not always absent.

Furthermore, you can't ignore the role of scholarships in the classification of Cornell's program as a notch below Michigan/BU/whomever (which I'd agree with), nor can you say it plays no role in shaping the system.  You coach the players you have, and perhaps a high scoring player is going to attract more recruiter attention than some of the grinders we get.  But that's just speculation on my part.[/quote]

Lowell, you missed the boat- that was Tims point.

he posted earlier in the thread that

"I have my doubts that we could beat Miami if we had gotten that far. I agree pretty much with whoever said we're just not that good. We have half a team - defense - and the nature of hockey is that that will get you a decent number of wins, may be even banners in a league that perrenially doesn't have a lot of scorers, and an occasional magic season, but you really can't live like that and expect to make National Championship noise."

He and I are both saying you can't live with no offense.

We'll actually never know about the impossibilities of recruiting other types of players until some time after there is a coaching staff that happens to bring with it a different recruiting base IMO. (I'm not saying kick em out here FYI)  But if we keep doing the same thing we will have the same results.   I have no idea what the experiment would yield were we to go otherwise.

Edit:  It doesn't matter WHY we are below Michigan and Minnesota. We Are.  No matter how you slice it they are great programs... and we are not.  We can't go crying over lack of scholarships and massive arenas.  It might noit be fair to expect consistently great teams without those things sure, but in the meantime we need to realize that we've been very good for a number of years, and excellent in 1 or 2 and otherwise.

[Dafatone]

Last I counted, there are 66 D1 teams.  So 39th/66 is somewhere around 40%.  I'm too lazy to do the math.

Normally, I think we get too lazy with the puck up top on the PP, and don't try to force it down low enough.  Today, we did the opposite.  I kept yelling at the TV "cycle it up top!"  We kept forcing the puck down low and losing it on the PP.

Oh well.

[Germ]

[quote Kyle Rose]Another heartbreaking end to a season.

Ugh...

Not much more to say than that. :-([/quote]

True but let's not forget the two "magical" games against Princeton and NE which gave us a chance to have the heartbreaking ending.

[Lowell '99]

Lowell, you missed the boat- that was Tims point.



He and I are both saying you can't live with no offense.

I'm saying two things:

1) You win by outscoring your opponent.  Of course you can't live with zero offense, but you can live without leading the country in scoring (or even being top 10).  Like the adage that pitching and defense win in baseball, it's idiotic.  Scoring more than your opponent wins, whether you shut them down completely, or bludgeon them with goals.  There were  many Brown teams in the late 90s and early 00s that were up there in the ECAC in goals scored (ahead of Cornell even) and finished exactly where we're used to seeing Brown.  

2) I'm sure Schafer would love to have tons of talented scorers, and in fact, has brought in a few (Moulson, Knopp, Vesce, and Moynihan come to mind).  What I'm not sure of is if your critique is of the type of players brought in or the style he prefers.  

In fairness, I agree with your assessment of the level of our program relative to others in the country.  I imagine most people on this board would as well, even if they do use the adjective "great" to describe it.

[fink]

From collegehockeystats.com:

08-09: 38th, 15.3% 31/203 (3 SHGA)
07-08:  8th, 21.5% 39/181 (5)
06-07: 50th, 13.6% 21/154 (4)
05-06: 40th, 15.9% 36/227 (5)
04-05:  1st, 24.3% 43/177 (2)
03-04: 38th, 16.0% 28/175 (3)
02-03: 14th, 22.6% 38/168 (2)
01-02:  3rd, 28.0% 40/143 (0!)

Switching to ECAC stats:
00-01:  2nd, 21.1% 31/147 (2)
99-00: 10th, 15.3% 24/157 (3)

seems rather bimodal: either as close to the top as doesn't matter, or mediocre bordering on atrocious

[Jim Hyla]

Well after reading all the posts in different threads, here's my take on them.

First, I'm to blame because before the game I posted on how much better we were doing on the breakouts. Well tonight we fell back to our prior ways of standing behind the net wondering how to get out.


Second, I have to take Al's side, anyone doubt that two old farts might agree. This was the best opportunity for us to advance. No way would I have picked to play ND instead. All the ND fans wondered what happened to their team. There is no way ND is that bad considering their season this year and last. Because of the way we lost, when I think we had our best chance of being in DC, this game hurts much more than Minny or Wisc.

Third, this game was nothing like the Yale game. Yale had multiple pretty passing goal scoring opportunities. they connected on a few but had others as well. Tonight was not at all like that. Maybe we adjusted to that and didn't let it happen, but I still think Yale is a much better team than Bemidji. We should have beaten them, but like other games this year, for some reason we could not put together a consistent attack.


Fourth, I'd like  to second whoever wrote about how difficult it is to compete with the scholarship schools. Yale and Princeton have turned around with good coaches, but I have to wonder how important the easy tuition issue is.

Fifth, as has previously stated, having a good defensive team first does not mean not scoring goals. As was pointed out we have had great PP teams and good scoring teams in the Schafer era, but not this year.

Finally, I'll again take responsibility for the loss. Before the game I'd posted that I thought this team did about as good as I could have expected when the season began. Strike me down if I ever again talk that way before a big game. Overall, I'm on the side of those who said we would have been happy if told in the beginning of the season we'd get a game from the Frozen Four. But given what we could have done tonight this still hurts the most of our regional losses. If as many have said, we keep our team together, we could have a great year next year. But playing in DC would have been a lot better than what I expect for Detroit next year. I don't want to have a championship series played in a gimmicky surrounding.

[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.)

[abmarks]

[quote Lowell '99]

Lowell, you missed the boat- that was Tims point.



He and I are both saying you can't live with no offense.

2) I'm sure Schafer would love to have tons of talented scorers, and in fact, has brought in a few (Moulson, Knopp, Vesce, and Moynihan come to mind).  What I'm not sure of is if your critique is of the type of players brought in or the style he prefers.  

[/quote]

Just did a quick look at the database.  As an arbitrary number I counted all the players woth 10 or more points on the 2002-2003 team vs this year.  0203- had 15 players at 10 or more point.  THis year it was an abysmal 8.  So we obviously scored more and it was spread out much deeper that year, which I think was our best team of the Schafer years.

I don't know wheteher our system has evolved (devolved), the breadth of the recruiting classes is not as good as it could be, or if we're doing the same things we have been doing but the world has changed around us.

All I know is my eyeballs tell me that we don't look skilled out there and I see guys go flying by us.

Yes winning means outscoring the opponent.  But you need a margin for error- so that when the defense isn't working, you can shift gears.

Without a potent powerplay we haven't had more than one gear.   I can't say what the solution is like I said, I just know that with rare exceptions like 02-03, we haven't done things right in order to deserve to be at or near the top of the heap.