attendance

[andyw2100]

I'm sure this has been answered before, but why did they switch the ends of the ice where we shoot twice? It would seem logical that the team should shoot twice at the end where the most fans are concentrated rather than at the scoreboard end.

I believe the official reason for switching ends was given as being so that the players could be facing the scoreboard for two periods instead of for one. (Helpful for end of penalty and even end of period, as at the time there was no game clock at the other end.)

An additional, and I don't believe stated reason was, supposedly, the weird bounces that would occasionally come from the "Zamboni" door that once in a while result in a puck that is being wrapped around the boards just flying out into the slot. Always unexpected, never good for the defense, and often exceptionally good for the offense.

[andyw2100]

Also, I don't see pounding on the glass as a good thing. While it may have created a zoo-like atmosphere, it's one thing I don't miss.  I think it should be grounds for kicking people out, at any arena, anywhere. I can't stand it.

Just for the record, and for the younger posters / lurkers here, the "glass" now is nothing like what it was in the 80s, and pounding on it, if students were allowed to pound on it, would not have even close to the same effect. The "glass" back then was lower, was plexiglass or something, and when people pounded on it the entire boards seemed to shake.

[adamw]

Also, I don't see pounding on the glass as a good thing. While it may have created a zoo-like atmosphere, it's one thing I don't miss.  I think it should be grounds for kicking people out, at any arena, anywhere. I can't stand it.

Just for the record, and for the younger posters / lurkers here, the "glass" now is nothing like what it was in the 80s, and pounding on it, if students were allowed to pound on it, would not have even close to the same effect. The "glass" back then was lower, was plexiglass or something, and when people pounded on it the entire boards seemed to shake.

It's still plexiglas far as I know - it's just taller, maybe thicker, and the connections between them are tighter.

[andyw2100]

Also, I don't see pounding on the glass as a good thing. While it may have created a zoo-like atmosphere, it's one thing I don't miss.  I think it should be grounds for kicking people out, at any arena, anywhere. I can't stand it.

Just for the record, and for the younger posters / lurkers here, the "glass" now is nothing like what it was in the 80s, and pounding on it, if students were allowed to pound on it, would not have even close to the same effect. The "glass" back then was lower, was plexiglass or something, and when people pounded on it the entire boards seemed to shake.

It's still plexiglas far as I know - it's just taller, maybe thicker, and the connections between them are tighter.

Perhaps then and now were both plexiglass, or perhaps the 80s glass wasn't plexiglass and the current glass is, but I assure you the material in use back then felt and behaved completely differently from the way the thick glass in place now behaves.

[RichH]

I'm sure this has been answered before, but why did they switch the ends of the ice where we shoot twice? It would seem logical that the team should shoot twice at the end where the most fans are concentrated rather than at the scoreboard end.

I believe the official reason for switching ends was given as being so that the players could be facing the scoreboard for two periods instead of for one. (Helpful for end of penalty and even end of period, as at the time there was no game clock at the other end.)

An additional, and I don't believe stated reason was, supposedly, the weird bounces that would occasionally come from the "Zamboni" door that once in a while result in a puck that is being wrapped around the boards just flying out into the slot. Always unexpected, never good for the defense, and often exceptionally good for the offense.

Also, the bench configurations were different. Both benches were opposite the student section, and small details like the door locations may have come into play. IIRC, the Dan Dufresne Memorial Penalty Boxes weren't symmetrical around the red line. They were closer to the wall end, and a freshly-sprung player would be ready to receive a pass at the blue line for a breakaway.

[RichH]

Also, I don't see pounding on the glass as a good thing. While it may have created a zoo-like atmosphere, it's one thing I don't miss.  I think it should be grounds for kicking people out, at any arena, anywhere. I can't stand it.

Just for the record, and for the younger posters / lurkers here, the "glass" now is nothing like what it was in the 80s, and pounding on it, if students were allowed to pound on it, would not have even close to the same effect. The "glass" back then was lower, was plexiglass or something, and when people pounded on it the entire boards seemed to shake.

It's still plexiglas far as I know - it's just taller, maybe thicker, and the connections between them are tighter.

Perhaps then and now were both plexiglass, or perhaps the 80s glass wasn't plexiglass and the current glass is, but I assure you the material in use back then felt and behaved completely differently from the way the thick glass in place now behaves.

Lynah now has the seamless glass, which is notorious for making everything more rigid. There are plenty of articles with comments from players complaining how little "give" the new glass has. In the 90s, the glass was shorter and had the metal rib dividers between each pane. They rattled quite a bit.

And were fun to jump over.

Starting around the 2000 rink improvements, the glass height increased so you couldn't reach the top from the benches. The "tradition" of storming the ice after a QF series win changed to just opening the zamboni doors and letting the students walk out. I don't think they even do that anymore.

[adamw]

Perhaps then and now were both plexiglass, or perhaps the 80s glass wasn't plexiglass and the current glass is, but I assure you the material in use back then felt and behaved completely differently from the way the thick glass in place now behaves.

I wasn't disagreeing with you. As I said, the boards are higher, tighter and put together more rigidly ("seamless glass", as Rich pointed out)

[andyw2100]

Perhaps then and now were both plexiglass, or perhaps the 80s glass wasn't plexiglass and the current glass is, but I assure you the material in use back then felt and behaved completely differently from the way the thick glass in place now behaves.

I wasn't disagreeing with you. As I said, the boards are higher, tighter and put together more rigidly ("seamless glass", as Rich pointed out)

I didn't really think you were. I was just trying to point out that if the stuff is now plexiglass it is very different plexiglass, or the stuff back in the 80s may not have been plexiglass at all. No one would confuse the stuff in use back in the 80s for actual glass. It was nothing like the glass in your windows, for example.

The stuff in use now looks and feels like real glass. I would not be able to tell it apart from the glass used in my windows, except for the fact that it is much thicker. So if it is not actual glass, but rather plexiglass, then plexiglass has come a long way.

[redice]

Edit: I can definitely believe that late 60s, 70s and early 80s Lynah was as good or even better. I just never got to experience that.

I can tell you it was wonderful, just look at my signature lines. As I've posted before, driving to Boston and walking up the ramps to the old Boston Garden was something that will stick in my memories forever. After-all it's one of those distant memories that stay with you when get senile, isn't it?

Of course winning, especially in Boston, had a lot to do with fan support.

You're absolutely right, Jim!!

[Trotsky]

Also, I don't see pounding on the glass as a good thing. While it may have created a zoo-like atmosphere, it's one thing I don't miss.  I think it should be grounds for kicking people out, at any arena, anywhere. I can't stand it.

Same here.  That's noob garbage and NHL-level dumbassery.  It detracts from atmosphere.

[abmarks]

I'm sure this has been answered before, but why did they switch the ends of the ice where we shoot twice? It would seem logical that the team should shoot twice at the end where the most fans are concentrated rather than at the scoreboard end.

I believe the official reason for switching ends was given as being so that the players could be facing the scoreboard for two periods instead of for one. (Helpful for end of penalty and even end of period, as at the time there was no game clock at the other end.)

An additional, and I don't believe stated reason was, supposedly, the weird bounces that would occasionally come from the "Zamboni" door that once in a while result in a puck that is being wrapped around the boards just flying out into the slot. Always unexpected, never good for the defense, and often exceptionally good for the offense.

Also, the bench configurations were different. Both benches were opposite the student section, and small details like the door locations may have come into play. IIRC, the Dan Dufresne Memorial Penalty Boxes weren't symmetrical around the red line. They were closer to the wall end, and a freshly-sprung player would be ready to receive a pass at the blue line for a breakaway.

This is all accurate.  Then-assistant-coach Schaefer sat in at a pep band rehearsal to thank/give encouragement sometime around 89-91 IIRC as to the timeframe.  He talked about the rink at length and said, at least to that "unofficial gathering", that the zamboni doors were definitely a reason in addition to the scoreboard issue.

Also, by this time the pep band had been seated in Section A after some number of years in F(E?).  He talked about how it would put the other goalie in a lot more noise from the band alone if only during breaks from play.  He also said that a main reason for the band moving to A at the time was that it was widely known from current/former coaches/players of visiting teams that it could be crazy loud in the visiting dressing room because of all the band noise, making pre-game and intermission conversation and coaching a difficult exercise.

[Al DeFlorio]

In the Harkness era, Cornell shot twice toward the scoreboard.  Bertrand switched it sometime in the 70s so the opposing goalie was surrounded by Cornellfans for two periods.  It was switched back, as I understand it, because the blank wall under the scoreboard was thought to be a better background for the Cornell goalie to see the puck.  Now the wall is not so blank.

[scoop85]

In the Harkness era, Cornell shot twice toward the scoreboard.  Bertrand switched it sometime in the 70s so the opposing goalie was surrounded by Cornellfans for two periods.  It was switched back, as I understand it, because the blank wall under the scoreboard was thought to be a better background for the Cornell goalie to see the puck.  Now the wall is not so blank.

Yeah, it would seem logical to me to have the opposing goalie surrounded by the Faithful for 2 periods.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

I remember one game, where we were harassing the Vermont goalie so severely that the goalies switched ends at the 10 minute mark of the thrid period.

[ACM]

I'm sure this has been answered before, but why did they switch the ends of the ice where we shoot twice? It would seem logical that the team should shoot twice at the end where the most fans are concentrated rather than at the scoreboard end.

I believe the official reason for switching ends was given as being so that the players could be facing the scoreboard for two periods instead of for one. (Helpful for end of penalty and even end of period, as at the time there was no game clock at the other end.)

An additional, and I don't believe stated reason was, supposedly, the weird bounces that would occasionally come from the "Zamboni" door that once in a while result in a puck that is being wrapped around the boards just flying out into the slot. Always unexpected, never good for the defense, and often exceptionally good for the offense.

Also, the bench configurations were different. Both benches were opposite the student section, and small details like the door locations may have come into play. IIRC, the Dan Dufresne Memorial Penalty Boxes weren't symmetrical around the red line. They were closer to the wall end, and a freshly-sprung player would be ready to receive a pass at the blue line for a breakaway.

Before the 2000 renovations, both teams shared a single penalty bench in front of the scorer's table and Section C at center ice, on the red line. The 2000 renovations introduced separate penalty boxes for each team, still in front of Section C, and moved the scorer's table from behind the penalty bench to ice level, between the penalty boxes. The current configuration, with players' benches and penalty boxes on opposite sides of the ice, happened with the 2006(?) renovation. I don't know what rink you're thinking of, but it's not Lynah.