Quinnipiac 3 at Cornell 2 postgame

[HockeyMan]

The Greening penalty was legitimate. It could've been called as a 2 min minor, but I didn't have a problem with the call. It was a LOUD, hard hit and the QU player sold the call well. A lot of the other calls, however, I thought were very questionable at best. We seem to have this problem against smaller teams all the time. They seem to get away with lots of clutching, grabbing and interference, but when we hit someone, we get whistled. The elbowing call on Birch was a perfect example. Birch had 5" plus on the guy he hit, so the hit was more to the shoulders than the midsection, but the ref calls contact to the head/elbowing. Overall, I thought it was one of the most poorly officiated games I've seen in a long time at Lynah.

The end of the game was refreshing. Cornell started playing Cornell hockey. Bodies were flying all over the place. We were hitting and hitting HARD. We used our size to wear down QU and really started to turn the play in our favor. If Cornell's going to win, it's going to be because they hit harder and beat daylight out of the opposition. In the last few years, that hasn't been happening. If you go back to the better teams from the last decade, there are two things that stand out - outstanding special teams and physical dominance of the opposition. When we use our size and get rough, we do to the other team what their speed often does to us. We make them play our game. That's what we did against Princeton and what we did at the end of the game. Love to see that more.

OVerall, I wasn't too upset with last night's game. It just was not our night. We hit a post, we had our captain tossed, we had a goal scored with 00 showing on the clock. I think we can figure QU out in a rematch. I kept thinking how much we missed Greening on the PP at the end of the game. I think if he's in the game, we win or tie. He makes everyone around him better.

Fair enough re Greening, but from where I was sitting it looked to me like a 2 min minor at best.  And yes, some of the other calls were highly dubious (including the makeup call on Q after Greening was sent off, which made me think the refs too wondered about the earlier call, or at least about the rule as written).

Agree with your other comments.  I would only say that by my count we hit three posts, not one (including on a great effort by, yes, B.Nash, when he joined the rush in the second period and beat Clarke high on the near side). We also missed a couple of open nets.  As Jones said, the team came out flat in the first, but the effort in the third was nice to see.  I really had a feeling we would tie it in those final frantic minutes.

[ebilmes]

Fair enough re Greening, but from where I was sitting it looked to me like a 2 min minor at best.  And yes, some of the other calls were highly dubious (including the makeup call on Q after Greening was sent off, which made me think the refs too wondered about the earlier call, or at least about the rule as written).

Right, the Q penalty which was called during Greening's major was a very weak call. Clearly a makeup call, although it wasn't clear for what exactly it was making up. You might be right that the refs doubted if the major was warranted.

Q also kept sending guys over the boards well before the previous guys had gotten off the ice. I was glad that finally caught up to them with the too-many-men call.

[Scersk '97]

I really had a feeling we would tie it in those final frantic minutes.

I felt the same.  I don't like what makes the comebacks necessary, but I have the feeling that this team can come back on anybody and from any (reasonable) deficit.

[lynah80]

But we were completely outplayed for the first 53 minutes.

The only time Q looked really strong was during some of their power plays.  6 x 6, Cornell generally had better puck control.  The lack of Cornell speed for a lot of the 6 x 6 was probably fatigue from too much PK.  Greening's absence meant more PK for the better puck-handling guys like Gallagher and R. Nash.  

Rich -- not sure about what's going on with Ross. It seems like Birch and D'Agostino have won themselves regular roles, so either Whitney and Ross has to sit. Birch has a lot of speed and that's been helping on the breakout plays.

Ross is the smallest D and he has a tendency to pinch in, maybe that's why he is sitting.  Still, I prefer him over the freshman because of his skill level.

[lynah80]

photos continued:

4) Krueger continues his fall, Scrivens is tangled up on the ice with Wong, the other Q forward leans on top of Scrivens.  
5) Krueger is down on one knee. Wong is getting up, Scrivens is under the other Q forward (according to Tony on the audio).
6) Davies takes his shot on an open net. Scrivens is still down on the ice.  Krueger is to the left of the crease and looks like the goal tender.  Scrivens' leg is in front of him.

[Jim Hyla]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

[Jim Hyla]

photos continued:

4) Krueger continues his fall, Scrivens is tangled up on the ice with Wong, the other Q forward leans on top of Scrivens.  
5) Krueger is down on one knee. Wong is getting up, Scrivens is under the other Q forward (according to Tony on the audio).
6) Davies takes his shot on an open net. Scrivens is still down on the ice.  Krueger is to the left of the crease and looks like the goal tender.  Scrivens' leg is in front of him.

Thanks, I missed that in real time. As an aside, I sure wish CU would let season ticket holders have access to archived games. It seems only reasonable. Does anyone know who is the right person to contact?

[ajh258]

We have a good team - the potential is there and I don't think anyone disagrees.

The coaching staff needs to figure out what works best for our players and formulate a plan to break up faster teams. There's the problem with hogging the puck too much, and there's also a problem with receiving passes on the fly. I'm just getting a general sense that there's a lack of strategy when we are on offense. Maybe this has something to do with Schafer's focus on individual performance, who knows. The bottom line is, we need to work on our teamwork and that's a persistent shortfall that I've observed in all of our games, either wins or losses.

[Al DeFlorio]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

He took a similar hotheaded penalty in the last minute or two on the game at Lynah East last year when Cornell was pressing for a tie.

Looked to me on Redcast that he deserved what he got.  Jason said so about as explicitly as the "home" announcer can say.  It was a really stupid play in what was, so far, the most important home game--and a game for first place in the league.

[amerks127]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

When B.Nash starts leading the country in points per game, wears a C on his shoulder, and becomes the undisputed team leader, I'll let him have a pass for his first mental lapse in dozens of games.  When you can say B.Nash is the best player on the ice every time he laces his skates, I won't complain that he sits in the box 80% of our games.  It's an insult to Greening by comparing him to B.Nash.

In all honesty, I think the problem is that B.Nash isn't skilled enough to be a top-line defenseman.  He doesn't have the speed or smartness to defend against fast and strong forwards so he ends up looking slow and is forced to take penalties.  However, with all the offensive skill of our top-line, I wonder why he still pinches so frequently, rendering him out of position far too often.  He also undeniably takes ridiculous penalties at costly points of the game.

Perhaps if he was paired against our opponents' checking line he'd fly under the radar a little more.

[Jim Hyla]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

When B.Nash starts leading the country in points per game, wears a C on his shoulder, and becomes the undisputed team leader, I'll let him have a pass for his first mental lapse in dozens of games.  When you can say B.Nash is the best player on the ice every time he laces his skates, I won't complain that he sits in the box 80% of our games.  It's an insult to Greening by comparing him to B.Nash.

In all honesty, I think the problem is that B.Nash isn't skilled enough to be a top-line defenseman.  He doesn't have the speed or smartness to defend against fast and strong forwards so he ends up looking slow and is forced to take penalties.  However, with all the offensive skill of our top-line, I wonder why he still pinches so frequently, rendering him out of position far too often.  He also undeniably takes ridiculous penalties at costly points of the game.

Perhaps if he was paired against our opponents' checking line he'd fly under the radar a little more.

Well, I don't think we can come together on this, but unless I come up with major reasons, I'll still go with coach's decision. Maybe comparing him to Greening wasn't fair in your opinion, but what about comparing him to his brother? He's expected to be the best person on the ice every game. However he makes major mistakes and we don't call him on it anywhere near as much. If he were to be playing to his presumed potential on average we'd probably be undefeated. He was our leading scorer last year at a point per game, this year he's still at a point per game but others have taken their game a step further and this year Riley is tied for fourth with 3 others, including his brother:-O, in conference play. So he needs to pick it up. I'm not trying to criticize him, coach has commented upon how difficult it's been for him this year; I'm just trying to point out that we don't seem to spread our criticism around fairly.

[amerks127]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

When B.Nash starts leading the country in points per game, wears a C on his shoulder, and becomes the undisputed team leader, I'll let him have a pass for his first mental lapse in dozens of games.  When you can say B.Nash is the best player on the ice every time he laces his skates, I won't complain that he sits in the box 80% of our games.  It's an insult to Greening by comparing him to B.Nash.

In all honesty, I think the problem is that B.Nash isn't skilled enough to be a top-line defenseman.  He doesn't have the speed or smartness to defend against fast and strong forwards so he ends up looking slow and is forced to take penalties.  However, with all the offensive skill of our top-line, I wonder why he still pinches so frequently, rendering him out of position far too often.  He also undeniably takes ridiculous penalties at costly points of the game.

Perhaps if he was paired against our opponents' checking line he'd fly under the radar a little more.

Well, I don't think we can come together on this, but unless I come up with major reasons, I'll still go with coach's decision. Maybe comparing him to Greening wasn't fair in your opinion, but what about comparing him to his brother? He's expected to be the best person on the ice every game. However he makes major mistakes and we don't call him on it anywhere near as much. If he were to be playing to his presumed potential on average we'd probably be undefeated. He was our leading scorer last year at a point per game, this year he's still at a point per game but others have taken their game a step further and this year Riley is tied for fourth with 3 others, including his brother:-O, in conference play. So he needs to pick it up. I'm not trying to criticize him, coach has commented upon how difficult it's been for him this year; I'm just trying to point out that we don't seem to spread our criticism around fairly.

I think you have a fair point there to an extent.  However, Elie and I did call out Riley in our Monday column for his struggles in scoring, while defensively Scrivens, Whitney, and Birch have also seen a critical lens thus far (along with praise).

A lot of times I can't help thinking B.Nash makes mistakes which are avoidable while other players do not.  For example, his careless penalties at critical game moments coupled with his blunder on Yale's second goal last weekend stand out.  No player is perfect, (I don't think anyone expects B.Nash to be Nicklas Lindstrom) but since coach relies on him, we hold him to a higher standard.

[Jim Hyla]

My point, if you reread my post, about B. Nash is not that we shouldn't point out his mistakes, but that some do to the exclusion of others. With this game the biggest example was Greening's penalty. If I'm not mistaken he took one like that last year, and if so, he should have learned not to do it. That was the biggest mistake by anyone on the team, and yet we give him a pass and just bemoan the fact that we lost him. We lost him because he screwed up. However I'd still start him for the next game if it fits coach's strategy.

When B.Nash starts leading the country in points per game, wears a C on his shoulder, and becomes the undisputed team leader, I'll let him have a pass for his first mental lapse in dozens of games.  When you can say B.Nash is the best player on the ice every time he laces his skates, I won't complain that he sits in the box 80% of our games.  It's an insult to Greening by comparing him to B.Nash.

In all honesty, I think the problem is that B.Nash isn't skilled enough to be a top-line defenseman.  He doesn't have the speed or smartness to defend against fast and strong forwards so he ends up looking slow and is forced to take penalties.  However, with all the offensive skill of our top-line, I wonder why he still pinches so frequently, rendering him out of position far too often.  He also undeniably takes ridiculous penalties at costly points of the game.

Perhaps if he was paired against our opponents' checking line he'd fly under the radar a little more.

Well, I don't think we can come together on this, but unless I come up with major reasons, I'll still go with coach's decision. Maybe comparing him to Greening wasn't fair in your opinion, but what about comparing him to his brother? He's expected to be the best person on the ice every game. However he makes major mistakes and we don't call him on it anywhere near as much. If he were to be playing to his presumed potential on average we'd probably be undefeated. He was our leading scorer last year at a point per game, this year he's still at a point per game but others have taken their game a step further and this year Riley is tied for fourth with 3 others, including his brother:-O, in conference play. So he needs to pick it up. I'm not trying to criticize him, coach has commented upon how difficult it's been for him this year; I'm just trying to point out that we don't seem to spread our criticism around fairly.

I think you have a fair point there to an extent.  However, Elie and I did call out Riley in our Monday column for his struggles in scoring, while defensively Scrivens, Whitney, and Birch have also seen a critical lens thus far (along with praise).

A lot of times I can't help thinking B.Nash makes mistakes which are avoidable while other players do not.  For example, his careless penalties at critical game moments coupled with his blunder on Yale's second goal last weekend stand out.  No player is perfect, (I don't think anyone expects B.Nash to be Nicklas Lindstrom) but since coach relies on him, we hold him to a higher standard.

OK, but although I read your column, I actually pay to have the Sun mailed to me, I don't think about that here.

But enough, talk only about toothpaste. (Isn't there an emoticon for that?) I sure hope the team now understands that they have to be ready from the first drop.

No more back and forth, at least till after the next game.:-D

[oceanst41]

I really had a feeling we would tie it in those final frantic minutes.

I felt the same.  I don't like what makes the comebacks necessary, but I have the feeling that this team can come back on anybody and from any (reasonable) deficit.

I think this means we have a team that has a shot to continue the trend of falling behind 2-0, only to win 3-2 in the NCAAs. ;-)

[Rita]

I really had a feeling we would tie it in those final frantic minutes.

I felt the same.  I don't like what makes the comebacks necessary, but I have the feeling that this team can come back on anybody and from any (reasonable) deficit.

I think this means we have a team that has a shot to continue the trend of falling behind 2-0, only to win 3-2 in the NCAAs. ;-)

Yeah, but those 3-2 wins were followed by heartbreaking losses the next day. We need to do something about the latter!::help::