CU vs Yale

[MattS]

Just finished watching on the DVR. Painful loss, but not horribly discouraging. Yale's a damn good team, and each team had their moments.  Miller missed a bunch of chances, and Iles was excellent.  I don't have a lot of complaints other than the result.

I thought Ferlin was just terrific (except he should have shot on the two on one in the 2nd period), and I thought DeSewardt had maybe the best game I've ever seen him play.  Espo also played well and showed nice hands on his goal.

It was a bit bizarre how Birch lost his footing on two occasions, with the second time almost costing us the game in the last minute of regulation.

Gotta bounce back against Brown tomorrow.

Agreed on everything. I think the Mowrey horse collar, while entertaining, was ill-timed, and we probably could have done without it. The Lowry (?) embellishment should have been a penalty on us. Not to cause a potential tangent, but as much as I love soccer, diving is decidedly not one thing I'd like to see in more sports.

If we're going to talk about bad penalties then the Lowry slash (actually a spear) after the second Yale goal has to be at the top. At least Mowery was helping out a teammate.

After watching the game again this morning, I need to correct myself. While I still think Lowry's penalty was stupid. It wasn't a spear like it looked from my angle at Lynah.

[TimV]

We're hovering around a .500 record, and 6th place in the EZAC, but we played well (maybe) against a good team.

My God - have we sunk to THIS?

[Towerroad]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

Let's see, your arguement is that we are just as good as we always were it's just that everyone else got better? We have a good team but we don't score enough? Yale has a lot of good talent but we have 3 talented players?

Your expectation is that we could end up somewhere between going out in the first round of the ECAC Tournament to winning the NCAA's?

[Ben]

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.

That is decline, decline relative to the rest of the conference. The consensus among my friends is in line with what BearLover said: this season has sucked. And I see no evidence that we'll turn it around. There's no consistency from game to game or period to period.

[RichH]

I don't have a lot of complaints other than the result.

Just watched my recording this morning.

I have complaints. That 2nd period was atrocious. CU looked completely inept at simply passing the puck. Yale made some good plays throughout the period, sure, but there was a stretch where we weren't being pressured and couldn't complete 2 passes coming out of our defensive end.  It took them 6 minutes to get a single standard 5x5 offensive set opportunity.  Both the RPI and Yale games were winnable, had Cornell been able to play a possession-oriented game, and they didn't.  They stunk at puck-possession, and that 2nd period was exhibit A. I don't know if it's because they panic at seeing any kind of aggressive fore-checking or what, but opponents know that that's what works against us, and they aren't going to stop seeing it now.  They finally got their transition game going late in the 2nd period (leading to the PPG) and the 3rd was better, but where's the vaunted CU cycle?  The '00s run teams played a possession game to near-perfection; this team doesn't have the offensive firepower to be successful without doing that.  Possession.

The OT was fun to watch. We finally leaned on the throttle a bit, and got some great opportunities, but in the end, a more frantic pace favors Yale, and once they got our D running around, things like that happen. Ryan was the only player to see the open man, but couldn't move fast enough to stop the shot.

Mowrey is leading the "dumb penalty" race this season. By a lot.

[redice]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

[Dafatone]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

Exactly.  We've played worse than we'd like, sure.  But the ECAC has gotten better, too.  Put those together and here we are.

[Towerroad]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

Realistically, we have one shot at getting into the NCAA tournament, that is to win the ECAC tournament. That in turn requires us to play consistently well during the ECAC tournament. Consistency has not been our strong suit to date. One can hope.

[css228]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

Exactly.  We've played worse than we'd like, sure.  But the ECAC has gotten better, too.  Put those together and here we are.

I still believe that with our backline talent we should be 2-3 in the league. Q has been exceptional, but Princeton isn't that much better, U is worse than last year, and we are somehow significantly worse despite losing only four seniors. Personally I think these guys came in thinking it would be easy after all the success they had freshman year to find the league got better, and they weren't ready. Hopefully they take that lesson to heart the next summer. As for the stupid penalties, I stand by my claim Schafer needs to start benching guys. Anyone who commits a penalty while in the offensive zone on a power play should be benched for the next game. You can't be 1st in the country in penalty minutes with a kill that's near dead last. Dear God these players go to Cornell, I would hope they are smart enough to understand that.

[redice]

I'll tell you another thing that Schafer needs to do....    Get Wilcox off the power play!!    This is a defenseman who shows a serious reluctance to shoot the puck at the goal.   Now, why in the world, would the Coach leave a D-man in place on the power-play, all season that does not like to shoot the puck on goal?    This is especially frustrating when one considers that the PP is not producing.   There are other D-men who would be much better point-men on the PP.

Don't get me wrong.   Wilcox is a real asset to the team.   But, he's in the last part of his frosh season and he's not yet established himself as a high-scoring D-man.    It's probably not going to happen this year.   Later?   Maybe.    Get him off the PP, Coach!!    Opposing coaches/players have to know that he's not a threat to shoot on goal.    That means they can cheat in other directions...   Not good!!

[css228]

I'll tell you another thing that Schafer needs to do....    Get Wilcox off the power play!!    This is a defenseman who shows a serious reluctance to shoot the puck at the goal.   Now, why in the world, would the Coach leave a D-man in place on the power-play, all season that does not like to shoot the puck on goal?    This is especially frustrating when one considers that the PP is not producing.   There are other D-men who would be much better point-men on the PP.

Don't get me wrong.   Wilcox is a real asset to the team.   But, he's in the last part of his frosh season and he's not yet established himself as a high-scoring D-man.    It's probably not going to happen this year.   Later?   Maybe.    Get him off the PP, Coach!!    Opposing coaches/players have to know that he's not a threat to shoot on goal.    That means they can cheat in other directions...   Not good!!

He does move the puck faster than most of the other D men on the power play and at least when he has the puck he's never stationary, but you're absolutely right, he's gotta shoot when he has a lane. He should hit up Kimmo Timmonen to see what a good point man on the power play does (at least that's what I'd try to do if I were in the Flyers org)

[scoop85]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

Exactly.  We've played worse than we'd like, sure.  But the ECAC has gotten better, too.  Put those together and here we are.

That is really my outlook. We are playing below where we should be, but the better competition accross the board leaves us little margin for error -- and we keep paying the price for our errors.

As far as my reference to winning the title, I was referring to the ECAC title. A national title seems out of the question.

[Trotsky]

The consensus among my friends is in line with what BearLover said: this season has sucked.

This is why "suck" should be retired.

It has been a .500 season where the team has been in almost every game.  It's disappointing compared to pre-season NCAA ambitions.  Every game is a nail-biter.  It's far more exciting to root for the team this year than during the Silver Age in the '00's.

This team can be appreciated for other things than dominance.  They are playing critical games every night now, rather than March.  Enjoy it.

[Dafatone]

......I think the team is loaded with talent and creativity, and they might be able to pull it together during the tournament.  ........

Ya know, until I saw Yale last night, I thought the same thing about CU's talent & creativity.    After watching Yale, I'm not so sure that CU's talent level hasn't been surpassed.    All the statistics show that that was a close game.   But, I saw Yale as a much much more talented team last night.

Yale clearly gets the style points, so yes they probably have more pure hockey "talent" top to bottom.  But I didn't feel we were overmatched last night as I did when we lost to Yale 8 in a row prior to last year.  Guys like Ferlin, Lowry and Esposito can play with anyone, and our 3rd and 4th lines do a solid job, although they don't score enough.  And on the defensive end we can get the job done.

While we're surely not at the level of the early-to-mid 2000's teams, my feeling watching this year is not so much that we're in any particular state of decline, but that the rest of the ECAC has gotten so much better.  No real cupcakes anymore, and for whatever reason we're not getting much puck luck at critical times. Enough of a season remaining that we can make a strong run.  Given what I've seen, come playoff time, neither a run to the title nor a first round loss would surprise me.

I agree most with the underlined portion of your post...    Think about it.   CU's "talented" team is sub-.500 in the ECACHL, residing in the middle of the pack.   IMO, Yale was clearly the more talented team on the Lynah ice Friday and Yale is significantly behind Q....  That says to me that CU's talent level has been surpassed by Y & Q....   I can't speak for the 3rd, 4th, & 5th place teams.  I think there are players with potential who are not producing at the level expected of them.   If that could suddenly & consistently change, across the board, it could be said that CU is as talented as anyone.   But, undisplayed potential does not equate to talent.  

Playoff possibilities for CU?   We can always hope.......

Realistically, we have one shot at getting into the NCAA tournament, that is to win the ECAC tournament. That in turn requires us to play consistently well during the ECAC tournament. Consistency has not been our strong suit to date. One can hope.

Given how well the ECAC is doing, I bet that making the finals (or winning the consolation game, ideally against a pretty highly-ranked team) would be enough.  But, that's a long ways away.

[Jim Hyla]

The consensus among my friends is in line with what BearLover said: this season has sucked.

This is why "suck" should be retired.

It has been a .500 season where the team has been in almost every game.  It's disappointing compared to pre-season NCAA ambitions.  Every game is a nail-biter.  It's far more exciting to root for the team this year than during the Silver Age in the '00's.

This team can be appreciated for other things than dominance.  They are playing critical games every night now, rather than March.  Enjoy it.

Talk about Rose Colored Glasses.

Speaking for myself, I found rooting for the '00's a lot more fun than this year. I'd much rather be worrying about playing critical games in March than worrying about being able to get into March.