New Recruits

[DeltaOne81]

Oh, absolutely, if Schafer said a thing about the ice surface other than blowing it off, he wouldn't be doing his job as a coach. We as fans however, can be more liberal with out topics and are not a public face for the university (or, well, the hockey program) and don't have to be so reserved.

Is there a "point" about 99.9% of the things we talk about? I'd be surprised if there was. Most of it is analysis, its interesting, its something to talk about, it passes the time, its creates interesting conversations. So who cares if there's a point. Its something to talk about and analyze and try to reach a consensus. Guess what, its fun! There doesn't need to be a point.

I don't know Rich. I never said we offended you "personally", but we seem to bother you a whole lot. I'd guess that 9 out of 10 of your posts are here and telling us how something is inappropriate or whiny or flat out wrong or is some form of complaint from you. To be honest I have no idea why you're here, because you seem to always have a problem with our behavior.

[RichS]

Lame, very lame.

I don't rejoice when another ECAC team bows out of the big dance.  See my post on a threadast week encoraging the red to "do the ECAC proud."

I have lots to do, thank you.  College hockey is a passion as it has been for many years.  I trust it is for you as well.  Is that why you're here?  

[DisplacedCornellian]

[Q]RichS Wrote:
I have lots to do, thank you.  College hockey is a passion as it has been for many years.  I trust it is for you as well.  Is that why you're here?  [/q]

If you have lots to do, get to it.

College hockey is a passion of mine, that is why I'm here.  I'm passionate about Cornell hockey.  Being passionate about hockey is fine.  But my passion for college hockey doesn't lead me to go to other team's message boards and piss in their kool-aid.  That sort of behavior is reserved for USCHO.  

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

Yes, Gophers were speedier, an advantage which was helped by the larger ice surface.

[/q]
As Lucia said in his USCHO Q & A's:  "...the biggest advantage Mariucci gave us was playing on the big rink..."

Must have been wearing his "carnelian-tinted glasses," I suppose.

RichS, why don't you take your boneheaded postings over to the Round Table where you can exchange worthless blather with that other rip-roaring hockey genius, Goldie Knight?  Birds of a feather...

[RichS]

Thanks for your boneheaded posting.  Gee Al, that one really hurt!

If there's anyone here who knows "worthless blather", it's you.  I've been reading your not-so-well thought out digs at Clarkson hockey and academics for a long time now.  Let me know when you actually know something about either.

Nice cheap shot at Goldie as well.  She's a passionate Tech fan just as you guys are in support of your team.  And your problem with that is?  

Sounds like you think there's only room in this world for one team in college hockey.

[DeltaOne81]

I just want to say that it didn't go unnoticed, that once Al proves that even Lucia thinks the big ice made a different, Rich immediately drops any substance from the argument and just go straight for the personal attacks. Not that those didn't start, both ways, a while back - but once proven to be in disagreement with Minn's own coach, the original topic is unceremoniously dropped.

[ninian '72]

[Q]Scersk '97 Wrote:

 Of course, the British probably didn't get a chance to tell the colonists that they were "whining" in their own broadsheets:

*********************
Ye Olde Scandal Sheet
---------------------
Colonies in Turmoil!
Babies Eaten!
King George has syphillis!
Letters to the Editor:  King George III, John Jay, Paul Revere

Dear Editor,

You and the colonists are stupidheads.

Cheers,
KG III
They had to rely on proclamations for that:

By Order of His Majesty King George III

Colonists:  STOP WHINING!

Go Red.

[/q]

Maybe it was the Brits doing the whining!  Had an opportunity to see this firsthand last week when I brought an English friend in town for a few days down to Colonial Williamsburg.  During one of the tours, the guide was explaining that some of the colonial governors were great, while others were incompetent/overstepped their authority/went out of their way to stick it to the colonists.  Also made some critical remarks about George III.  Another British guest stepped out of the crowd and whispered to the guide for a few seconds.  The guide replied that she was sorry the visitor was offended, but she was going to continue with her narrative.  The British visitor walked off.  My friend couldn't believe it and wondered what her countryman's problem was, since even the English couldn't stand George III.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

 I just want to say that it didn't go unnoticed, that once Al proves that even Lucia thinks the big ice made a different, Rich immediately drops any substance from the argument and just go straight for the personal attacks. Not that those didn't start, both ways, a while back - but once proven to be in disagreement with Minn's own coach, the original topic is unceremoniously dropped.[/q]
Rich has never let reality deter him from his rants.  I suspect he still thinks "sucks" is some kind of dirty word, despite repeated evidence presented to the contrary.  

He's a self-appointed conscience for us.  Sad, actually, that he's obsessed to do behave that way.

[RichS]

Al, I have a very firm grip on reality.  One thing I know very well is that you're the one who is obsessed with ripping me and virtually everyone ever associated with Clarkson University and Clarkson hockey, not withstanding the long standing high quality of both which you can't bring yourself to acknowledge.   For example, you stand alone as one who I've ever heard say an unkind word about Len Ceglarski.

I'd never pretend to be your conscience and your suggesting that indicates that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Is there no end to your pomposity?  Your arrogance is what leads many folks to dislike Ivy leaguers and their attitudes of superiority.  Sad that you don't see that.  

Sadder still that you are so childish that you TWICE in recent days bitched publicly to me about Goldie Knight.  If she  bothers you that much, then take it up with her directly.  So far all you've done is whine to me about her in your typical fashion.

As one of your collegues here said to me earlier..Grow up.

[RichS]

Not at all.  I posted yesterday that an opposing coach (Schafer) would try to counteract the advantage Minnesota had in speed by making stategic moves.  I said that the Gophers perhaps used other hockey skills to offset those moves.

I didn't think I needed to name Lucia personally to indicate that I agree that the larger ice gave them an advantage because of their speed.  My point was that there are ways to mitigate that advantage, ways that I'm sure both coaches involved know better than anyone on this board.

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]If an opponent can't match their speed, that's an edge for them in hockey skill, not an edge created by a different ice surface.
Is the edge exacerbated by a bigger surface? Perhaps so although many dispute that notion. What doesn't change is that speed is a big advantage regardless of the surface.[/Q]

[Q]I didn't think I needed to name Lucia personally to indicate that I agree that the larger ice gave them an advantage because of their speed.[/Q]

Seems to me you had just said that you were, at best, unconvinced that the ice size made any significant difference. Keep dancing around your changing your mind to cover your behavior, buddy.

[RichS]

You're not keeping up with the dance too well I guess.  :-D   Or else you don't understand this aspect of the game that well.

Lets see if I can make it clearer.

On the surface (no pun intended) a larger ice surface appears to afford a faster team a huge advantage.

Not necessarily so.  The opposition can try to utilize strategies and style to lessen the faster team's advantage on the larger ice.  If I recall correctly, as I stated before, this issue was raised a few years ago when a slower cornell team faced Harvard at Lake Placid.   Schafer said he did not think the larger ice surface put his team at a disadvantage, probably because h ewas confident that his team could play to their strengths and negate the effect of the larger surface.   I believe that is what happened that year and following that, there was talk to the effect of "so much for the advantage of larger ice".

Sounds like Minny was an even faster team than that Harvard squad and that cornell did a pretty decent job of containing their offense depsite a sizeable edge in SOG for the Gophers.  Probably golatending had a lot to do with that.  Was the GWG the result of greater speed?  

In any event, Lucia noted that the ice surface gave his team an edge.  Did it make the game a cakewalk for his team?  Obviously not.  Did it reduce the effectiveness of cornell's grinding style?  Some here have said yes.  In any game each team has their own advantages to some extent, this being just one of them.  The winner is often the one who maximizes their advantages and minimizes th edamage caused by the other guys'.

Sorry to be lengthy about this but I'm demonstrating that I'm not at all denying th epresence of an advantage and also saying it may not necessarily have been the deciding factor.

I've had experience coaching against faster teams.  If you want an explanation from someone more qualified, why not call or email Coach Schafer?   Seriously.

[DeltaOne81]

Hmmm, compare your last post, a well reasoned thought out explanation and honest, uninsulting (except for the first line) analysis, to your first post:

[Q]Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. rolleyes[/Q]

Why is your first instinct always to be insulting and glib, rude and dismissing? Sure, we can drag you kicking and screaming into an honest dialog, but by default your behavior is either intending to inflame (a troll) or just downright rude and insulting. Considering the natural reaction to a rude and insulting remark, is to get defensive and insult back, perhaps you can have some idea why your behavior isn't exactly considered.

Of course, that also explains your natural defensive and insulting nature when you see us teasing/insulting some aspect of the Clarkson program. Believe it or not, most of us do respect the Clarkson program and would like to see them back as a strong program. Cornell, Harvard, Dartmouth, Clarkson, and SLU as strong programs would do the conference wonders. But you also have to understand that we're allowed to have fun that's not necessarily polite... < Stuart Smaley (sp?) > and that's... okay < / Stuart >. What we have a hard time respecting is someone who comes on here and insults us 90% of the time.

You clearly know hockey, but maybe it's possible we do too. Try to take things with a grain of salt, and try to engage us in actual dialog and not always resort to being a jerk, and maybe we can actually have an exchange of ideas. Maybe?

[RichS]

Yeah sure we can have good exchanges, and we have at times.  I can think of two posters here who have never, as far as I can recall, taken nasty or inane shots at me.

Most of the rest of you resort to that as soon as I say anything less than complimentary about cornell, no matter how thoughtfully and politely I have expressed it.

My default behavior is not at all as you describe it.  I suppose I resort to taht because it appears often that it's the only way many of you guys can communicate with the enemy.  You don't like it?  Guess what, I don't care much for it either.

It can be hard to believe you guys have any respect for the Clarkson program when one considers the long list of Clarkson people that you have trashed here...and in a most "rude and insulting" manner.  Why do you think most Clarkson fans no longer come here?  Have you given that any thought at all?

It's like a continuation of attending a game at Lynah...the insults never stop and it does become tiresome.  And some folks aren't patient enough to absorb that in large doses to wade through to find a decent hockey conversation!  Your claim that you have to drag me kicking and screaming into one is way off base.  I'm happy to have one anytime.

On the other hand, I note how quickly you guys get your dander up when I tease you about something or other.  My comment about the whining about the rink size is a good example.  The "whining" started here when the seedings, pairings, and sites were announced and continued several days after the game.  I commented on it and you guys jumped all over me.  Hey, I'm tough (and old  :-D ) I can take it.  But on the flipside you guys have been teasing Clarkson fans forever about whining about this or that.   Something about the goose and gander comes to mind here.

Hence my comment about your dishing it out but not taking it.  When that happens, you lose credibility.  That's classic bullying but I guess when it's just me here responding, you don't look like the bully...I look like the pain in the ass.  Interesting.

I don't think the hockey knowledge is in question here but too often it seems that you don't acknowledge it coming from someone whose team is other than yours.  Just think about how most pro Clarkson comments have been responded to over the years.  Think of one "responder" in particular.

Tired, gotta go.

[RedAR]

[Q]Yeah, it's Wednesday and I see the griping about the rink size costing cornell the game continues. I never thought I'd see them whine. [/Q]

RichS, the above was the first comment you made on this thread. You come into this discussion throwing dirt, and then you complain that we respond critically to your assinine comment. As Delta pointed out, you subsequently agreed that the size of the ice surface could have impacted the results of the game.

If you didn't have your head up your ass, you'd notice how we have civil DIALOGUES with fans of other teams (BU and Dartmouth here come to mind, Western Michigan, Mankato, Ohio State, and Minnesota fans on the USCHO boards). Yes, we have the tongue-in-cheek disses here and then, but for the most part, the exchange between many of the fans of these other teams are informative. One wonders why EVERY thread you chime in on ALWAYS deteriorates. If we Cornell fans can't "take it" as you wish to believe, why do you think it is that we have informative discussions with them, but NEVER with you?

Despite the fact that you don't believe that Cornell fans have respect for Clarkson, most of us actually do, and REALLY hope that Clarkson can revive their hockey program back to prominence. Likewise, most Cornell fans have tremendous respect for the BU hockey program despite the fact that at EVERY game, we chant "Screw BU!"

I say this in the nicest way possible...
Get your head out of your arse.

Here's hoping that Roll is successful in righting the ship up in Potsdam, and bringing Clarkson back to national prominence.