Congradulations on the Minnesota Referees win !!!

[Josh '99]

[Q]Trotsky Wrote:

 The poll response on USCHO was "excuses, excuses, excuses."

Unfortunately, the question was, "If Cornell beats Minny..." not "If Minny beats Cornell..."

Disappointment is understandable, but the level of poor sportsmanship on this thread is depressing.  People are blaming *everything*.  Guess what?  The better team won.  There's no blame, or if you want to assign blame, blame higher admissions standards or something.  That I might see.

This... this is silly.[/q]Maybe it's a response to all the Gopher back-slapping and dick-sucking that's going on at USCHO and elsewhere.  You're honestly going to tell me that if those three games had been played in Worcester (let alone at Lynah), or even at the Xcel center, you don't think things would've turned out differently?  But all of a sudden the Gophers win two home games against teams who almost never play on Olympic ice and they're "Lying In Wait"?  Give me a break.  Yes, we could very well have won that game.  Yes, Minnesota did what they needed to do to win.  But they did it after waking up in their own beds, getting dressed in their own locker room, playing on the ice they practice on every day, where no other skater on the ice had ever played a game.  Whether or not it sounds whiny, whether or not Minnesota had played well at home this season, sending teams that never play on Olympic ice to play on Olympic ice at someone else's campus rink is a stacked deck.  I said all along that I'd rather have been bracketed with one of the other three 1 seeds at an actual neutral site, and I stand by that assessment.

[Will]

[Q]Trotsky Wrote:

Disappointment is understandable, but the level of poor sportsmanship on this thread is depressing.  People are blaming *everything*.  Guess what?  The better team won.  There's no blame, or if you want to assign blame, blame higher admissions standards or something.  That I might see.

This... this is silly.[/q]

I blame you. :-P

[atb9]

[Q]Trotsky Wrote:

People are blaming *everything*.

This... this is silly.[/q]

I'm convinced that Minnesota has a machine below the rink that puts a slight grade on the ice depending on which way the Gophers are skating.  Call me a homer but I think that's unfair.  :-P

[billhoward]

Meow. (But you're right.) And they never explained if that was his sister or girlfriend sitting next to them.

[Will]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

 Meow. (But you're right.) And they never explained if that was his sister or girlfriend sitting next to them. [/q]

Given that he wants to be a country music star...could be both. :-P

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]jmh30 Wrote:
I said all along that I'd rather have been bracketed with one of the other three 1 seeds at an actual neutral site, and I stand by that assessment.[/q]

The more I think about it, the more I like Greg's idea of letting the teams bracket themselves: Identify the 1-8 teams via PWR.  Let #1 chose a site and a first-round opponent from 9-16.  Then #2, #3, and #4, with the only requirement being that they have to end up in different regionals, and no one can pick a region which prevents the host from playing at home.  (You could add a similar clause about not chosing a team from your conference or forcing anyone else to.)  Then repeat the process for the 5-8 teams until the brackets are filled.  So we can choose to play a higher-seeded team in return for not having to face them in their home rink.

[Jacob 03]

[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:

The more I think about it, the more I like Greg's idea of letting the teams bracket themselves: Identify the 1-8 teams via PWR.  Let #1 chose a site and a first-round opponent from 9-16.  Then #2, #3, and #4, with the only requirement being that they have to end up in different regionals, and no one can pick a region which prevents the host from playing at home. [/q]

I understand the reasons for this, but I'm not sure it's not a little unfair to the #9 seeds of the world.  They earned something too by separating themselves so far from the #16 seeds, so I'd cringe a little if they were forced to face a sadistic #1 seed in the first round while a #16 seed gets a better draw.  It's likely this wouldn't happen too often (nor can I imagine many good reasons a rational #1 coach would choose to upgrade his opponent so signficiantly...injuries?  familiarity with the team?  hot tip?), and I do realize that if one is going to punish some team, it should be the lower seeds and not the higher ones.  The idea of a #9 seed getting such a worse draw than a #16 seed based on the whim of don lucia or red berenson is a bit disturbing, though, and I'm not sure it's justified by the desire to reward the top seeds to their complete liking.  

[tvset]

[Q]Trotsky Wrote:

 The poll response on USCHO was "excuses, excuses, excuses."

Unfortunately, the question was, "If Cornell beats Minny..." not "If Minny beats Cornell..."

Disappointment is understandable, but the level of poor sportsmanship on this thread is depressing.  People are blaming *everything*.  Guess what?  The better team won.  There's no blame, or if you want to assign blame, blame higher admissions standards or something.  That I might see.

This... this is silly.[/q]

Trotsky SUCKS !!!!

[RichS]

Why?  Because he's correct?

[BCrespi]

Get over yourself Rich, it's a cheer we do (if you haven't heard, i think it has been mentioned in other threads, perhaps use the "search" feature:-P).  Regardless of weather the esteemed "tvset" is right or wrong, he feels he is right and is responding in jest.  Your addition to this argument is extremely insightful, thank you.

[RichS]

Oh yeah, I've heard that cheer many times.  Very clever, but I expect more originality from the self-proclaimed "best fans in college hockey."

If anyone needs to get over themselves, it's you guys who can't take a contrary opinion.  Or a contrary "fact" in some cases.

[ben03]

[Q]RichS Wrote:
Or a contrary "fact" in some cases.[/q]
did you put fact in quotes b/c you know your facts are full of $hit?

[Will]

[Q]RichS Wrote:

If anyone needs to get over themselves, it's you guys who can't take a contrary opinion.  Or a contrary "fact" in some cases.[/q]

"tvset" doesn't speak for all of us, Rich.  In any case, that's why we have a forum like this, so we can share and discuss opinions about Cornell hockey and related matters.  You're welcome to do so as well, of course, though it does seem like your major reason for posting here is to piss us off.  It's working, but it does make me wonder why you're so intent on trying to piss us off.  Is that really how you get your kicks in life?  There's nothing better you could be doing with your time?

[RichS]

It's not about pissing you guys off, really.   I have much better things to do with my time than that.   Like take my dog for a walk which I'm about to do.  

On the other hand, you guys love to "piss off" Clarkson people by trashing Morris more than two years after the fact and Nickerson a year after he's gone.  Do you have anything...?

You just seem to not handle a contrary opinion very well.  And easy for you because I'm pretty much the only non-red fan here these days.

Thanks ben but it's you guys who don't know a "fact" from a carnellian-tinted opinion.

[DeltaOne81]

Hi Rich, I'm on this thread too

We trash Nickerson and Morris because its funny and entertaining. In no way is it intended to piss off Clarkson people. In fact, trust me, we'd rather you never saw it.

Also, there's a difference between a contrary opinion, and trying to tell us what to do and how to behave. On this thread, tvset is being silly and you're correct, but usually you're just here to complain.