Cornell - Quinnipiac postgame

[DeltaOne81]

Oh yeah, our second goal:

I was thinking, no need to look at that, we know how it happened. But then I remembered there was some question.

So let's see... the Q defenseman goes down and tries to put his hands on the puck, but he's out of the crease. McC definitely swatted at it, and at the very least, his the D man's hands, if not the puck itself, knocking it into the net. So it was definitely his doing in my mind, whether or not direct contact was made.

[Drew042]

For those who need even more confirmation about the short handed non-goal by Cornell; we were on the goal line in Section O and the Q defenseman clearly batted the puck and stopped in from going into the net.  A great play by him.

I agree that Q outskated us pretty much the first 40 min., they were clearly quicker and outhustled us in the corners.  However, great character win for Cornell and hopefuly this will spur them on the Florida.  

I think the best d-men last night were Seminoff and O'Byrne whereas Topher and Sawada played the best up front.  

[Cactus12]

I thought it bounced off a Quinnipiac stick but it may have been off the posts.  Wasn't very pretty either way

[scoop85]

Got back from Ithaca after my first game at Lynah in many years.  While I was in the corner in Section K (and did not get a good view of any of the goals), here's my two cents:

1.  At this point we are nowhere near the team we need to be to contend for anything more than the ECACHL title (and maybe not even for that).  Our passing was sloppy (the ice seemed terrible to me -- a real embarrassment for a top-flight program), and Q effectively pinched at every turn, or stood us up at the red line.  We had no one creative enough (save possibly for McCutcheon) to make a play at the blue line.

2.  I agree with the previous player evaluations -- Pokoluk and Krantz were weak, while the other D played well.  McKee looked confident.  No one has mentioned it, but I thought Bitz had a poor game, and Sawada didn't do much.  I thought Scott, McCutcheon and Moulson  were our best forwards.

3.  I had a great view of Q hitting the crossbar just after we tied the score.  Off of an excellent forecheck (a common theme for the evening) Q stole the puck and someone got a shot off in the slot.  McKee got a piece, and it flipped up and skittered off the crossbar into the corner.  A very scary moment, but from that point forward Q sort of sat back and seemed to play for the tie, which is fortunate for us.

4.  My biggest concern coming out of this game is the lack of an obvious scoring threat after Moulson.   We have a lot of grinders, obviously, but the absence of a finisher may well doom us.  Q clearly has a similar limitation, but that is to be expected at this point.

5.  I don't have much to compare it to, but I thought the crowd was as boisterous (if not more so) than I remember from the early 80's).

6.  As the game ended, the Cornell players were incredibly excited as they mobbed McKee (almost as if they were the underdog having pulled off the upset).  I'm sure some of that was relief at having overcome a big obstacle, as well as the good feeling of heading into break off of 4 straight wins.

[Karlmoose]

I thought Salmela played a particularly strong game on Saturday. I have been at least a moderate fan every time he has played any significant time, but I was even more impressed this weekend. His defensive zone coverage is at least adequate, and he doesn't make the mistakes that I have seen from the other defensemen. His greatest asset, however, was the spark he gave the team offensively. I can remember at least 2 or 3 rushes into the Q zone during which he brought the puck in with good speed and drew defenders with him. He was solid with the puck and I think he deserves more credit than we're giving him. At the very least, it's a good sign for an apparently injury-plagued defense.

[calgARI '07]

[Q]scoop85 Wrote:

2.  I agree with the previous player evaluations -- Pokoluk and Krantz were weak, while the other D played well.  McKee looked confident.  No one has mentioned it, but I thought Bitz had a poor game, and Sawada didn't do much.  I thought Scott, McCutcheon and Moulson  were our best forwards.

[/q]

I think the reason nobody has mentioned Bitz playing poorly is because quite honestly that has been the norm.  The guy is very overrated by the coaching staff IMO.  I like him as a third line winger, not as a first line center.  Somehow he consistnetly manages to get knocked off the puck by players half his size.  

[KeithK]

I was listening to the 1997 Live at Lynah CD on the way home from watching the game.  As many of you know, the disk includes radio commentary from the comeback win against Brown (Nov. 1997).  Pete Tufford's color commentary at the beginning of that segment seemed particularly appropriate for this years team as well.  I meant to transcribe a little, but the gist of it was that Cornell's strength is "wanting every puck", in other words working hard on every shift.  During the first two periods of Saturday's game Quinnipiac outskated and outworked our guys consistently.  Through large stretches guys weren't moving their feet and just didn't seem to be putting out the effort needed to get to every loose puck.  Late in the game they turned it on and played with the intensity we have come to expect.

Talent alone is not enough to win ECAC championships, let alone to play in April.

[Robb]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:
Pete Tufford's color commentary at the beginning of that segment seemed particularly appropriate for this years team as well.  I meant to transcribe a little, but the gist of it was that Cornell's strength is "wanting every puck", in other words working hard on every shift.  [/q]

My favorite part of the commentary is "the net to our empty is right." (sic)  I'm sure they're glad that's immortalized on the CD...

[KeithK]

[q]My favorite part of the commentary is "the net to our empty is right." (sic) I'm sure they're glad that's immortalized on the CD...[/q]Yeah, that's classic.  I break up laughing every time!