We can't possibly win

[BMac]

Waaaah waaaah

Ok come on give me some details!!!!

I can conclusively say that the Cornell '08 Boston meetup (at John harvards of course) was living and dying by my CHN app. But tell us about the game!!

[css228]

Waaaah waaaah

Ok come on give me some details!!!!

I can conclusively say that the Cornell '08 Boston meetup (at John harvards of course) was living and dying by my CHN app. But tell us about the game!!

Still gotta win another, but I don't mind being wrong.

[CowbellGuy]

What kind of Cornell meetup is scheduled during a hockey playoff game? Cornell was opportunistic. They were generally outplayed, scored 2 PPGs in a game, which they've only done to open the season at CC, home against Clarkson, and at St. Lawrence, and got a lot of help from the iron behind Iles and unlucky whiffs by Q players looking at wide-open nets. I hope they have more than that for tomorrow.

[Trotsky]

That was our first win against a national #1 since 11/15/96 against Vermont, and our first win at a national #1 since the second game of the Denver NCAA series on 3/22/86.

[Jordan 04]

Might want to wait to see if we win the series before making such posts.

[Swampy]

Waaaah waaaah

Ok come on give me some details!!!!

I can conclusively say that the Cornell '08 Boston meetup (at John harvards of course) was living and dying by my CHN app. But tell us about the game!!

Q's recap here. ::banana::

[BearLover]

i hate to admit it, but cornell got terribly lucky.  they aren't going to win one of the next two if they keep playing like this.  still...whoever said cornell has no chance does not understand the randomness of hockey

[andyw2100]

That was our first win against a national #1 since 11/15/96 against Vermont, and our first win at a national #1 since the second game of the Denver NCAA series on 3/22/86.

And our first MEANINGFUL win at a #1 since (I expect Greg to tell us), because that Denver win was somewhat less than meaningful since it was a total goals series and we won the game but lost the series.

[Rosey]

That was our first win against a national #1 since 11/15/96 against Vermont, and our first win at a national #1 since the second game of the Denver NCAA series on 3/22/86.

And our first MEANINGFUL win at a #1 since (I expect Greg to tell us), because that Denver win was somewhat less than meaningful since it was a total goals series and we won the game but lost the series.

Last I checked, there is at least (multiply, shift, carry the one...) one game left.

[Trotsky]

That was our first win against a national #1 since 11/15/96 against Vermont, and our first win at a national #1 since the second game of the Denver NCAA series on 3/22/86.

And our first MEANINGFUL win at a #1 since (I expect Greg to tell us), because that Denver win was somewhat less than meaningful since it was a total goals series and we won the game but lost the series.

Thye Pioneer game could have been pretty damn meaningful, and we were indeed leading the total goals for the series after breaking out to a 3-0 lead in the second game to move the aggregate goals to 5-4, with the winner heading to Providence to take on a Harv ard team we had already beaten.  But after we took the lead exhaustion, luck, and a really skilled Denver team wore us down.

To respond to andyw, because I have very spotty record for team ranking prior to the 80's I do not have a clue what the last significant win at a national #1 was, other than... tonight's.  

[andyw2100]

That was our first win against a national #1 since 11/15/96 against Vermont, and our first win at a national #1 since the second game of the Denver NCAA series on 3/22/86.

And our first MEANINGFUL win at a #1 since (I expect Greg to tell us), because that Denver win was somewhat less than meaningful since it was a total goals series and we won the game but lost the series.

Last I checked, there is at least (multiply, shift, carry the one...) one game left.

I wasn't implying anything about this series. All I was saying is that there was a big difference between this game and the game at Denver in 1986. At the end of that game the buzzer sounded, we looked at the scoreboard, we had more goals than the other team, yet they were the ones celebrating and our season was finished. After tonight's game we were the ones celebrating. Not celebrating a series win, but still celebrating.

[Trotsky]

If all first games repeated, the QF would be:

9. Cornell at 3. Yale
7. Brown at 4. Union

[Give My Regards]

Thye Pioneer game could have been pretty damn meaningful, and we were indeed leading the total goals for the series after breaking out to a 3-0 lead in the second game to move the aggregate goals to 5-4, with the winner heading to Providence to take on a Harv ard team we had already beaten.

Uh, dude, we didn't beat Harvard that year.  85-86 was the start of -- well, never mind what it was the start of, but it lasted -- well, never mind how long it lasted.

[gored]

Although this may posted elsewhere (other than by me) tonight's game is televised live on NESN.

[Robb]

i hate to admit it, but cornell got terribly lucky.  they aren't going to win one of the next two if they keep playing like this.  still...whoever said cornell has no chance does not understand the randomness of hockey

I definitely don't deny that we got some bounces last night.  However, we did play well enough that those bounces mattered.  If Q had played its best game and we played our worst, Q would have been "unlucky" even more often - they probably would have missed twice as many open nets while potting 10 goals.  In those cases, though, you don't notice the bad bounces because they're hidden under the layer of A playing better than B.  

We've all seen this Cornell team play much, much worse hockey than they did last night - they're still a work in progress, but they're definitely still improving.  I wasn't expecting them to out-skate, out-pass, and out-create Q last night - they weren't going to turn into the 1970 team overnight.  Tonight is going to be a war - strap in and foil up!