Cornell at Harvard 11/16

[BearLover]

Anyone who says issues are "coaching" - should not be taken seriously in this forum, no matter whether slivers of good points are made elsewhere in his drivel.  Attributing things to "coaching" is just clown talk.  Same guy who says "the same players last year were good, so it must not be them" - then ignores a 30-year track record of coaching - equals ... clown.

Yawn. Really weak take completely devoid of substance. Obviously I think Schafer is an amazing coach and I say that all the time. That doesn't make him infallible, as you seem to believe. Moreover, changing two coaches in the offseason including the head assistant is obviously going to require an adjustment. You mentioned 30 years of Schafer. How about 12 years of Syer (gone). He coached the PK, which has been awful this year. How about trying to incorporate a longtime head coach from another program into some two-headed monster coaching structure which nobody ever tries? The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches. The details were way more precise last season. Why do YOU think that is?

[chimpfood]

The obvious answer is just small sample size. Also even though we only lost Seger he was a massive part of the offense. I completely agree that the special teams have been bad so far but I'm hopeful it is just a combination of those two factors and will improve over the course of the season.

[BearLover]

The obvious answer is just small sample size. Also even though we only lost Seger he was a massive part of the offense. I completely agree that the special teams have been bad so far but I'm hopeful it is just a combination of those two factors and will improve over the course of the season.

I'm sympathetic to sample size arguments but from watching the games this season, the team has not looked good to my eye. We won two coin-flips against injury-depleted NoDak by scoring what I would consider flukey goals and things have gone downhill from there. We've made a lot of mistakes which haven't ended up in the back of our net, particularly against Harvard—we were lucky to come out with a tie. I mean, everybody's standards were really high and this team hasn't even come close to meeting them so far. Not just results-wise but also how they've played.

[ugarte]

... We won two coin-flips against injury-depleted NoDak by scoring what I would consider flukey goals ...

flukey? we scored 7 goals in two games plus a pair of empty netters. they had injuries but as you know, so do we. we started the season beating a good team and have gotten more injured since, not less. i think the depletion of our offense goes a long farther to explaining why the special teams look weak - that's going to be our best players after all - than coaching does. breathe, man. breathe. you may be right but time will tell. you've put down your marker but you don't get extra points by relentlessly eeyoring it up in mid-november.

[BearLover]

... We won two coin-flips against injury-depleted NoDak by scoring what I would consider flukey goals ...

flukey? we scored 7 goals in two games plus a pair of empty netters. they had injuries but as you know, so do we. we started the season beating a good team and have gotten more injured since, not less. i think the depletion of our offense goes a long farther to explaining why the special teams look weak - that's going to be our best players after all - than coaching does. breathe, man. breathe. you may be right but time will tell. you've put down your marker but you don't get extra points by relentlessly eeyoring it up in mid-november.

Yes, they were flukey IMO. Check the highlights, the Cornell goals almost all came off of soft goaltending, blown assignments, or weird bounces. Cornell did some good things in the NoDak games too, particularly on defense, but they were fortunate to sweep.

Not sure what you mean by depletion of the offense but the top PP unit hasn't had any injuries all year.

Lastly, I think/hope Cornell will turn this around. They just aren't playing well right now. I'm not claiming they're a bad team or predicting they'll miss the NCAAs. I don't know what will happen, I just know they haven't looked good so far.

[VIEWfromK]

Yes, they were flukey IMO.

They were definitely soft goals.  Those two goalies were the weakest ones Cornell has faced this year.

[upprdeck]

The main difference vs NDak is that games were played more wide open.  More space, more scoring chances.

[adamw]

Anyone who says issues are "coaching" - should not be taken seriously in this forum, no matter whether slivers of good points are made elsewhere in his drivel.  Attributing things to "coaching" is just clown talk.  Same guy who says "the same players last year were good, so it must not be them" - then ignores a 30-year track record of coaching - equals ... clown.

Yawn. Really weak take completely devoid of substance. Obviously I think Schafer is an amazing coach and I say that all the time. That doesn't make him infallible, as you seem to believe. Moreover, changing two coaches in the offseason including the head assistant is obviously going to require an adjustment. You mentioned 30 years of Schafer. How about 12 years of Syer (gone). He coached the PK, which has been awful this year. How about trying to incorporate a longtime head coach from another program into some two-headed monster coaching structure which nobody ever tries? The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches. The details were way more precise last season. Why do YOU think that is?

Yawn ... Schafer's history of strong PKs long predates Ben Syer. You're nothing more than a dude who thinks they know more than they do, and are more confident in these opinions than they have any right to be. This is quite common in America these days, so hey.

[George64]

Yawn ... Schafer's history of strong PKs long predates Ben Syer. You're nothing more than a dude who thinks they know more than they do, and are more confident in these opinions than they have any right to be. This is quite common in America these days, so hey.

Dunning-Kruger effect?  BTW, David Dunning is a retired Cornell psychology professor.
.

[BearLover]

Anyone who says issues are "coaching" - should not be taken seriously in this forum, no matter whether slivers of good points are made elsewhere in his drivel.  Attributing things to "coaching" is just clown talk.  Same guy who says "the same players last year were good, so it must not be them" - then ignores a 30-year track record of coaching - equals ... clown.

Yawn. Really weak take completely devoid of substance. Obviously I think Schafer is an amazing coach and I say that all the time. That doesn't make him infallible, as you seem to believe. Moreover, changing two coaches in the offseason including the head assistant is obviously going to require an adjustment. You mentioned 30 years of Schafer. How about 12 years of Syer (gone). He coached the PK, which has been awful this year. How about trying to incorporate a longtime head coach from another program into some two-headed monster coaching structure which nobody ever tries? The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches. The details were way more precise last season. Why do YOU think that is?

Yawn ... Schafer's history of strong PKs long predates Ben Syer. You're nothing more than a dude who thinks they know more than they do, and are more confident in these opinions than they have any right to be. This is quite common in America these days, so hey.

Once again, I ask: why are special teams so bad? Why has Cornell been so sloppy with the puck in their own end/the neutral zone? You offer no explanation! The only thing you have to offer is an empty defense of the coaches.

Here are some things I said in this very thread: "I'm no expert ... my guess is ... this suggests to me." Does that sound like someone who thinks they know more than they do?

BTW love the implication that I'm a Trump voter (lol) or am otherwise contributing to the sorry state of our country

[Tom Lento]

The obvious answer is just small sample size. Also even though we only lost Seger he was a massive part of the offense. I completely agree that the special teams have been bad so far but I'm hopeful it is just a combination of those two factors and will improve over the course of the season.

I'm sympathetic to sample size arguments but from watching the games this season, the team has not looked good to my eye. We won two coin-flips against injury-depleted NoDak by scoring what I would consider flukey goals and things have gone downhill from there. We've made a lot of mistakes which haven't ended up in the back of our net, particularly against Harvard—we were lucky to come out with a tie. I mean, everybody's standards were really high and this team hasn't even come close to meeting them so far. Not just results-wise but also how they've played.

Speaking of small sample sizes, I took a look at the shooting stats and by the numbers Cornell got outplayed by Harvard, played NoDak pretty evenly overall apart from one truly atrocious period, and significantly outplayed everybody else on the schedule. A split vs NoDak, a loss vs Harvard, and wins all round would be a fair approximation of the run of play they've had this season. 4-2-0 feels better to me than 3-1-2, but they're basically the same record for all practical purposes. Looking at the season advanced stats Cornell has been the equivalent of a bubble team for NCAA selection. Disappointing, given the expectations, but maybe not so terrible considering the injuries.

From watching the games I agree the team doesn't look great - certainly not like a national title contender - but I also wouldn't say that they've been under-performing expectations throughout. I saw the last two periods of the second NoDak games and it was like Cornell switched out its entire roster during the second intermission, because the third period team carried the play while the second period team looked lost, exhausted, and outmatched. In the 5 or so periods I watched them play against Dartmouth and Yale there were extended periods of dominance that made winning feel like an inevitability broken up by about 10 minutes per game of total ineptitude.

To my eyes the main problem is this mind-boggling level of inconsistency, and the penalty kill is bad because that's where it's most obvious. That might be a result of all the injuries and attendant lineup shuffling, it might be the coaching changes, it might be on-ice leadership, it might be some combination of those things. I don't know. I just hope they figure it out. The good news is given the injuries and the way they played at the end of last season I think the smart money is on them figuring it out, assuming everyone gets healthy. Time will tell, I guess.

[David Harding]

When I was a student from 81-85, it was a 10 minute OT at 5 x 5.

I will always remember the time on the Bright scoreboard when Shippel scored in overtime on 2/16/85:

Code Select Expand


5:55


My most memorable overtime game was the women's 2013 NCAA quarterfinal game at Lynah against BU.  https://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/3/10/WICE_0310121319.aspx
We were in town for my father's birthday.  With the score 7-7 after three periods, we figured that someone would score quickly, that it would be unsatisfyingly quirky, and we could go to dinner.  But no.  As the clock wound down in the third overtime, Lauriane Rougeau took the puck from the defensive zone, cleanly got past two defenders, and scored with 10 seconds left.  Beautiful.  And we just made it in time for dinner.  My wife and I even showed up in the featured celebration photo right above BU's #23.

[Cornell95]

I will absolutely regret jumping in on this thread...

Here are some things I said in this very thread: "I'm no expert ... my guess is ... this suggests to me." Does that sound like someone who thinks they know more than they do?

BTW love the implication that I'm a Trump voter (lol) or am otherwise contributing to the sorry state of our country

Here are some other things you have also said in this thread:

I can't tell how much of it is missing the players who are hurt and how much is the resulting line shuffling, but there's a shocking lack of cohesion on offense...
 I think it's an injury and coaching problem more than anything.

That plus heinous special teams tells me it's a strategic issue more than anything.

Considering the two problems I keep harping on are injuries and coaching, well...

The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches.

I can understand where Adam and several other posters are coming from given the above posts. Being short 7 players including critical components like Fegaras & Psenicka would be my explanation for early season issues. The careless tunovers are a player execution issue that likely has nothing to do with coach instruction. With the injury shortened bench they have zero options to sit someone as a punishment/encouragement to make better decisions on the ice.

With regards to supposed implications of your political leanings, I dont see it.
Your outrage to something not actually stated is exhibit 1A why discourse in this country is broken from my perspective (that is my opinion and not an attempt to interpret Adam's thoughts)

If there is a serious coaching issue I would call out, it would be scheduling Quinnipiac at MSG this year. Surely there must have been someone else with a sizeable NYC alumni population  that would want to be involved?? Otherwise I look forward to the team getting healthy and rolling stable lines for a few weekends.


"It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it." Mark Twain
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience". Mark Twain

[adamw]

Anyone who says issues are "coaching" - should not be taken seriously in this forum, no matter whether slivers of good points are made elsewhere in his drivel.  Attributing things to "coaching" is just clown talk.  Same guy who says "the same players last year were good, so it must not be them" - then ignores a 30-year track record of coaching - equals ... clown.

Yawn. Really weak take completely devoid of substance. Obviously I think Schafer is an amazing coach and I say that all the time. That doesn't make him infallible, as you seem to believe. Moreover, changing two coaches in the offseason including the head assistant is obviously going to require an adjustment. You mentioned 30 years of Schafer. How about 12 years of Syer (gone). He coached the PK, which has been awful this year. How about trying to incorporate a longtime head coach from another program into some two-headed monster coaching structure which nobody ever tries? The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches. The details were way more precise last season. Why do YOU think that is?

Yawn ... Schafer's history of strong PKs long predates Ben Syer. You're nothing more than a dude who thinks they know more than they do, and are more confident in these opinions than they have any right to be. This is quite common in America these days, so hey.

Once again, I ask: why are special teams so bad? Why has Cornell been so sloppy with the puck in their own end/the neutral zone? You offer no explanation! The only thing you have to offer is an empty defense of the coaches.

Here are some things I said in this very thread: "I'm no expert ... my guess is ... this suggests to me." Does that sound like someone who thinks they know more than they do?

BTW love the implication that I'm a Trump voter (lol) or am otherwise contributing to the sorry state of our country

No one - let alone yourself - can give a certain answer as to why - over 6 games - special teams haven't been good this year, so far. It's foolish to suggest anyone could possibly give a credible, foolproof explanation for such a thing. You love to call out people for not giving more substantive retorts, when really what it means is, other people are willing to accept that ... sh** happens.

That said -- it's VASTLY more likely that it's just: players are still getting up to speed, they've had a bad day, they're getting the rust off, they need to learn how to click with each other better, or it's just bad luck, etc..., etc..., etc... -- than coaching. A great coach doesn't forget how to coach overnight after 30 years.  But the physical activities that go into playing, and the changes in lineups and so forth, are much more susceptible to fluctuations in outcomes.

BTW - there was no implication of being a Trump voter. Never mentioned that sh**head. Neither "side" has the market cornered on delusion.

[BearLover]

I will absolutely regret jumping in on this thread...

Here are some things I said in this very thread: "I'm no expert ... my guess is ... this suggests to me." Does that sound like someone who thinks they know more than they do?

BTW love the implication that I'm a Trump voter (lol) or am otherwise contributing to the sorry state of our country

Here are some other things you have also said in this thread:

I can't tell how much of it is missing the players who are hurt and how much is the resulting line shuffling, but there's a shocking lack of cohesion on offense...
 I think it's an injury and coaching problem more than anything.

That plus heinous special teams tells me it's a strategic issue more than anything.

Considering the two problems I keep harping on are injuries and coaching, well...

The decisionmaking has been atrocious this year, and that's on the coaches.

I can understand where Adam and several other posters are coming from given the above posts. Being short 7 players including critical components like Fegaras & Psenicka would be my explanation for early season issues. The careless tunovers are a player execution issue that likely has nothing to do with coach instruction. With the injury shortened bench they have zero options to sit someone as a punishment/encouragement to make better decisions on the ice.

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it." Mark Twain
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience". Mark Twain

Appreciate being called a stupid person and a fool. Thank you!

Strange for you to suggest coaches have no control over player decisionmaking and execution. "Careless turnovers have nothing to do with coaching instruction"? Who's the fool here?

Also, when discussing injuries, let's be clear: for the six games so far, there haven't been seven players out with injury. Outside of Devlin, Wallace, and Fegaras, everyone was healthy for NoDak. We have since lost Psenicka for four games and Mack for two. Meanwhile, NoDak couldn't even field a full lineup against us in the second game, and Dartmouth is missing their best player (Haymes). Harvard is missing one of their best players (Gaffney). I'm sure our opponents were missing other players too, these are just the ones I'm aware of. Which is to say, Cornell is not the only team dealing with injuries. Moreover, this team is deep enough that it should still put out a far more talented lineup than Yale, Brown, and Dartmouth even when 3-5 players are out.

The top PP unit has experienced no injuries. The PK unit has experienced a couple in the last week or two, but most of the breakdowns were defensemen who would typically play PK (even without other players being out with injury) failing to tie up/box out forwards in front of the net. Given that our biggest failing (special teams) is not directly related to injuries, other teams are also experiencing significant injuries, and despite our injuries we should still be way more talented than opponents we've struggled against, I definitely don't think the bad start can be pinned solely, or even mostly, on injuries.