Blame it on the fans?

[adamw]

is this the annual anti-Schafer ignorance thread?  or is it more than annual at this point?

[Jim Hyla]

Jim - I think you are being a bit enthusiastic we have not beaten Yale since Nov of 2007

I think Jim's point is that, using the ECAC tournament as the final measuring stick, we've finished ahead of Yale five of the last six years.  And three of the four going back to 2007.

I agree with Dafatone that this discussion has been too black and white.  The jackass who threw the water bottle harmed the team's chances (along with the fellow jackasses who threw other items at the same point in the game), but the game was also lost because of too many undisciplined penalties.  

Harvard scored NO five-on-five goals, getting three on power plays and one on a four-on-four that should have been the first two minutes of an unreleasable five-minute Cornell power play--if not for a dumb retaliation.  This year's team has been shooting itself in the foot too often this year.  Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.  That this team finds itself in third place at this point in the season is a tribute to its heart and determination.  If it had complemented that heart with a bit more brains (i.e., discipline) it might be challenging Union and Yale for the league's top two slots.

Exactly, that's why I said,"Yes we haven't looked good against them in recent past, but we still have done better in the end. I don't know what tomorrow will bring, but based upon the recent past, I'll wager we will be close by."

Our main problem with them has been our inability to handle their forecheck. Yet, we seem to do well in the end. Do I wish we had a better PP and breakout, hell yes, but I generally still get to go and cheer in the ECAC tourney. I guess that's my bottom line, if we go far enough in the post-season for me to have a good time, then I'm happy. To date neither Yale nor Union have shown me enough to have been a happy grad of theirs.

[TimV]

I am certainly greatful that we are always in the running for an ECAC playoff spot year after year.

Uhhh...EVERYBODY'S in the running for an ECAC playoff spot year after year, Bro...::doh::

[nyc94]

I am certainly greatful that we are always in the running for an ECAC playoff spot year after year.

Uhhh...EVERYBODY'S in the running for an ECAC playoff spot year after year, Bro...::doh::

Just brought back memories of 1992-93.  Probably best that season ended when it did.

[Towerroad]

Jim - I think you are being a bit enthusiastic we have not beaten Yale since Nov of 2007

I think Jim's point is that, using the ECAC tournament as the final measuring stick, we've finished ahead of Yale five of the last six years.  And three of the four going back to 2007.

I agree with Dafatone that this discussion has been too black and white.  The jackass who threw the water bottle harmed the team's chances (along with the fellow jackasses who threw other items at the same point in the game), but the game was also lost because of too many undisciplined penalties.  

Harvard scored NO five-on-five goals, getting three on power plays and one on a four-on-four that should have been the first two minutes of an unreleasable five-minute Cornell power play--if not for a dumb retaliation.  This year's team has been shooting itself in the foot too often this year.  Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.  That this team finds itself in third place at this point in the season is a tribute to its heart and determination.  If it had complemented that heart with a bit more brains (i.e., discipline) it might be challenging Union and Yale for the league's top two slots.

Exactly, that's why I said,"Yes we haven't looked good against them in recent past, but we still have done better in the end. I don't know what tomorrow will bring, but based upon the recent past, I'll wager we will be close by."

Our main problem with them has been our inability to handle their forecheck. Yet, we seem to do well in the end. Do I wish we had a better PP and breakout, hell yes, but I generally still get to go and cheer in the ECAC tourney. I guess that's my bottom line, if we go far enough in the post-season for me to have a good time, then I'm happy. To date neither Yale nor Union have shown me enough to have been a happy grad of theirs.

Let's not wrap our selves in the Cornell Flag. I bleed as Red and cheer as loud for the Red as anyone. I am not calling for the coaches head on a platter. But I do have concerns about our style of play and what is happinging on the ice. If you think this year is a testament to coaching excellence then so be it. I am not convinced that a KRACH of 31/58 and a Pairwise of 30/58 fits the bill but that is just my numerical bias.

Why don't we leave the squabbling for the post season. Anymore would be bad mojo.

Let's hope we break our streak with Yale this weekend and have 2 great tournaments. (I think we can both agree on that.)

Let's Go Red

[marty]

is this the annual anti-Schafer ignorance thread?  or is it more than annual at this point?

I can't say yes, I won"t say no, but I might say maybe!

[Trotsky]

is this the annual anti-Schafer ignorance thread?  or is it more than annual at this point?

It's more of a flu bug.  Early headache and red splotches give way for just long enough you think it's over, then it comes back as raging diarrhea.

It will pass.

[ajh258]

Let's not wrap our selves in the Cornell Flag. I bleed as Red and cheer as loud for the Red as anyone. I am not calling for the coaches head on a platter. But I do have concerns about our style of play and what is happinging on the ice. If you think this year is a testament to coaching excellence then so be it. I am not convinced that a KRACH of 31/58 and a Pairwise of 30/58 fits the bill but that is just my numerical bias.

Why don't we leave the squabbling for the post season. Anymore would be bad mojo.

Let's hope we break our streak with Yale this weekend and have 2 great tournaments. (I think we can both agree on that.)

Let's Go Red

Hear, hear.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

is this the annual anti-Schafer ignorance thread?  or is it more than annual at this point?

It's more of a flu bug.  Early headache and red splotches give way for just long enough you think it's over, then it comes back as raging diarrhea.

It will pass.

More specifically diarrhea of the mouth along with constipation of the brain.

[Josh '99]

Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.

In the team's defense, two of those penalties were absolute joke calls.

(I don't disagree with your general point, though, just not sure that this example really illustrates it.)

[Josh '99]

Jim - I think you are being a bit enthusiastic we have not beaten Yale since Nov of 2007

And earlier in Schafer's tenure there was a bunch of years where we couldn't beat Dartmouth, and before that there was a stretch when we couldn't beat Union.  If anything it's worse when you have that kind of a stretch against a bottom-feeder like late-'90s Union than against one of the better teams in the league like current Yale (no shame in losing to a good team playing a style that gives us problems), but in all cases I think it's a quirk of sample size given that we only play each of those teams twice a year.  Sometimes you'll flip a coin and it'll come up tails seven times in a row too but it doesn't mean there's something wrong with the coin.  On balance, like Jim said, I'm perfectly to put our (read: Schafer's) end-of-year results up against anyone else in the ECAC.

[Al DeFlorio]

Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.

In the team's defense, two of those penalties were absolute joke calls.

(I don't disagree with your general point, though, just not sure that this example really illustrates it.)

In the game at Harvard?  Nonsense.  I called all three of them at the same time as the ref did.  Dumb.

[polar]

Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.

In the team's defense, two of those penalties were absolute joke calls.

(I don't disagree with your general point, though, just not sure that this example really illustrates it.)

In the game at Harvard?  Nonsense.  I called all three of them at the same time as the ref did.  Dumb.

Nevertheless, all weekend long, the referees didn't seem to give us any slack at all. Most of the calls were understandable, but have been allowed by the same referees earlier in the year. Our theory was that, after last weekend, the officials were instructed or independently decided to be less lenient this weekend. Not a criticism of the officials in the least, just an interesting observation.

[Al DeFlorio]

Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.

In the team's defense, two of those penalties were absolute joke calls.

(I don't disagree with your general point, though, just not sure that this example really illustrates it.)

In the game at Harvard?  Nonsense.  I called all three of them at the same time as the ref did.  Dumb.

Nevertheless, all weekend long, the referees didn't seem to give us any slack at all. Most of the calls were understandable, but have been allowed by the same referees earlier in the year. Our theory was that, after last weekend, the officials were instructed or independently decided to be less lenient this weekend. Not a criticism of the officials in the least, just an interesting observation.

Of which weekend do you write?  This past one?  I'm referring to January 29 at Harvard.  With RedCast video quality, I can't second guess penalty calls at Lynah, and have to take what the refs call at face value.

[Josh '99]

Three penalties taken in the offensive zone in the third period while nursing a one-goal lead at Lynah East is a perfect example.

In the team's defense, two of those penalties were absolute joke calls.

(I don't disagree with your general point, though, just not sure that this example really illustrates it.)

In the game at Harvard?  Nonsense.  I called all three of them at the same time as the ref did.  Dumb.

Disagree with me if you want, there's no need for name-calling, especially since penalties are often subjective and reasonable minds can differ on what deserves be called.