CU-BU 2023

[BMac]

Unorganized notes:

Crowd was great

Ian Shane for Hobey

Goal line clearance in the first period was incredible

Shane lost his stick like three times and scrambled quickly to grab it. I'm still scarred from Scrivens letting a goal in that way but Shane is clearly just a faster skater.

I wonder what coach said during the first intermission. Or BU got gassed.... Because the second period was SO much better. Our guys are fast and big and when they're hustling it's a sight to see.

The first power play has a lovely shot up the middle, following some quick puck movement, that gave me hope.

They were SO excited to win that game. Love to see it. Screw BU.

[George64]

That makes sense.  It's in the contract.

I started watching Ranger hockey at MSG in the mid-50s.  In those days, four guys on skates, with those plow-like shovels, would clear the snow off the ice.  They were followed by another four guys on skates pushing two ice-making contraptions.  They were essentially 55-gallon drums on wheels or skids that spread water on the cleared ice.  Zambonis were in general use everywhere else, so why not at MSG?  I was told it was because of a union contract.

They were probably the same guys who shoveled up the elephant shit when the circus came to MSG.  

BTW, I'm referring to the prior incarnation of MSG.  

Like many other New Yorkers, my family moved to Nassau County in the early 50s.  Some of my high school friends and I would get a ride to 179th Street in Queens and catch the subway to MSG. The old Garden had a true balcony with general admission seating.  Tickets were $2.50 — $1.25 with a student ID.

First row seats were terrific, but some guys from Jersey would get there earlier and stake out the whole row at center ice for their friends.  We sat in the second row.  Who's going to argue with some guys from Jersey?

How fortunate I was to get accepted at a school with a hockey team, although mediocre until god appeared in Ithaca in 1963!

[George64]

Nicely done. The game winner was a beauty.

Hopefully, this will be the start of a nice run for Psenicka.

[George64]

The Sun reported the game in great detail https://cornellsun.com/2023/11/25/mens-hockey-defeats-no-5-boston-university/

That is a great write up.  Good job to those writers.

And the Cornell highlight crew did a great job here!

The post game interview is worth a watch too.

Both really great! Thanks!

[andyw2100]

I meant televised on actual TV. The games on ESPN+ tend to have one commercial timeout per period. Games on actual TV tend to have three commercial timeouts per period (at least pro games and college games in the NCAA tournament). Tonight's game had three per period.

Speaking about the ads, why were there no Cornell ads? In the past, the school ads were split evenly between both schools. I'm pretty sure there wasn't a single Cornell ad shown last night.

[Trotsky]

The Sun reported the game in great detail https://cornellsun.com/2023/11/25/mens-hockey-defeats-no-5-boston-university/

That is a great write up.  Good job to those writers.

Hopefully to be updated with quotes

Honestly, I never think quotes add anything.  They are the cliche scene from Bull Durham.  They have zero value.

[Iceberg]

I meant televised on actual TV. The games on ESPN+ tend to have one commercial timeout per period. Games on actual TV tend to have three commercial timeouts per period (at least pro games and college games in the NCAA tournament). Tonight's game had three per period.

Speaking about the ads, why were there no Cornell ads? In the past, the school ads were split evenly between both schools. I'm pretty sure there wasn't a single Cornell ad shown last night.

They showed one on the jumbotron right before the anthem but that's it. Also, they didn't show any famous or notable administrators or alumni from either school except Mike Eruzione. I guess Moore, Pollack, etc. decided to skip the game this year?

[Weder]

I meant televised on actual TV. The games on ESPN+ tend to have one commercial timeout per period. Games on actual TV tend to have three commercial timeouts per period (at least pro games and college games in the NCAA tournament). Tonight's game had three per period.

Speaking about the ads, why were there no Cornell ads? In the past, the school ads were split evenly between both schools. I'm pretty sure there wasn't a single Cornell ad shown last night.

They showed one on the jumbotron right before the anthem but that's it. Also, they didn't show any famous or notable administrators or alumni from either school except Mike Eruzione. I guess Moore, Pollack, etc. decided to skip the game this year?

Moore was there and posted a bunch of pictures and videos on her Instagram account.

[BearLover]

I'm very happy Cornell won last night and I had a great time at the game. But the performance did not inspire confidence for the rest of the year. Looking at the chances Cornell gave up, BU easily could have had four or five goals. Even though Cornell did finally score on the PP, it came when a puck popped out to Walsh from the half-wall, rather than set up by a passing play. The PP did look somewhat better but it still needs to vastly improve. I think the game would have been very ugly if not for Shane.

[JohnF81]

It was a great crowd and atmosphere at MSG. 15,289 was an excellent turnout.  St. John's basketball drew 14,188 when they played Michigan at MSG two weeks ago. Great comments by Mike in the postgame on alumni support.

[Trotsky]

I'm very happy Cornell won last night and I had a great time at the game. But the performance did not inspire confidence for the rest of the year. Looking at the chances Cornell gave up, BU easily could have had four or five goals. Even though Cornell did finally score on the PP, it came when a puck popped out to Walsh from the half-wall, rather than set up by a passing play. The PP did look somewhat better but it still needs to vastly improve. I think the game would have been very ugly if not for Shane.

I think this is the difference between teams that should win and teams that do win.

Ideally, you'd like to be both (2003, 2020).  But we have seen editions of each in our time: teams that were stacked and clearly superior in personnel that repeatedly fell short (1991, 2018), and teams that were fine but not exceptional yet had some sort of extra gear or killer instinct that made them as tough as cockroaches (1986, 1996).

[arugula]

I'm very happy Cornell won last night and I had a great time at the game. But the performance did not inspire confidence for the rest of the year. Looking at the chances Cornell gave up, BU easily could have had four or five goals. Even though Cornell did finally score on the PP, it came when a puck popped out to Walsh from the half-wall, rather than set up by a passing play. The PP did look somewhat better but it still needs to vastly improve. I think the game would have been very ugly if not for Shane.

I think this is the difference between teams that should win and teams that do win.

Ideally, you'd like to be both (2003, 2020).  But we have seen editions of each in our time: teams that were stacked and clearly superior in personnel that repeatedly fell short (1991, 2018), and teams that were fine but not exceptional yet had some sort of extra gear or killer instinct that made them as tough as cockroaches (1986, 1996).

Yes!  Of course BU is more talented but the takeaway here is the fortitude and the commitment to the process.  Of course Shane kept us in position but the team kept coming. I think it augurs very well because we are unlikely to see any team like BU until hopefully the NCAA. This should give us a boost and I'd like to see us take care of Colgate next week. Schaf's job is to get the team refocused.

[BearLover]

I'm very happy Cornell won last night and I had a great time at the game. But the performance did not inspire confidence for the rest of the year. Looking at the chances Cornell gave up, BU easily could have had four or five goals. Even though Cornell did finally score on the PP, it came when a puck popped out to Walsh from the half-wall, rather than set up by a passing play. The PP did look somewhat better but it still needs to vastly improve. I think the game would have been very ugly if not for Shane.

I think this is the difference between teams that should win and teams that do win.

Ideally, you'd like to be both (2003, 2020).  But we have seen editions of each in our time: teams that were stacked and clearly superior in personnel that repeatedly fell short (1991, 2018), and teams that were fine but not exceptional yet had some sort of extra gear or killer instinct that made them as tough as cockroaches (1986, 1996).

I think I disagree both with the specific example (the 2018 team got a 1-seed in the NCAA tournament and lost six games the entire season including playoffs) as well as the general point. Cornell was badly outplayed last night, except in goal. Cornell could point to the Dartmouth, Harvard, and Princeton games this season where the reverse was true. I don't think that's due to some quality of any team having a killer instinct or being touch as cockroaches. Rather, that's just hockey. Hockey games have a lot of puck luck. You try to possess the puck and get shots on net and be positionally sound on defense and play well in goal, and let the chips fall where they may. BU has better talent than Cornell and has a lot of seniors and graduate students. They are faster and more skilled and Pandolfo gets them to actually play defense. But BU scored on one of their 10-15 grade-A chances, while Cornell scored on two of their five or so grade-A chances. On multiple occasions the puck was literally behind Shane, but didn't go into the net. Cornell was fortunate to win last night just as they were unfortunate to lose/tie vs Dartmouth/Harvard/Princeton.  I think a lot of euphemisms about "finding a way to win" are just attempts to explain away puck luck.

[Trotsky]

I will never argue against this:

[Scersk '97]

But we have seen editions of each in our time: teams that were stacked and clearly superior in personnel that repeatedly fell short (1991, 2018), and teams that were fine but not exceptional yet had some sort of extra gear or killer instinct that made them as tough as cockroaches (1986, 1996).

Your distinction is fine, but I will quibble. 1996 had fantastic talent: Chartrand, Drouin, Sancimino, et al.; 1997 had no business winning a championship and taking North Dakota as deep into the third as they did. Tough as nails.