Cornell-RIT post game

[Jacob '06]

Cornell played pretty well, I think they got 56 shots off in the game. The power play looked good, but they really need to be a little more creative. On the 5x3 after the time out they ran the same play 3 times in a row, I think the other team can figure it out after the first two. The RIT goal was another turnover on the breakout and McKee was left one on one with the shooter, and not really in set position as the shooter started to come in. He really didn't have much of a chance on that goal, and otherwise he made some pretty solid saves. The dirtiness at the final buzzer was pretty bush league. Right as the buzzer sounded 3 RIT players in unison went after Cornell players. Our guys really wanted no part of it. I think it was a pretty good game, but we still have some things to work on.

[CowbellGuy]

If 3 goals on 53 shots on a team that RPI scored 10 goals against that's made up of 75% D-III players qualifies as "pretty well" we need to reevaluate our standards. I was standing next to a Penguins scout who came to check out Moulson, but also had a few other Red hilighted on his roster. There was a lot of head-shaking and he left before Moulson's late goal. I don't think he was too impressed. Can't say I blame him. Sure, RIT played out of their skin. I think they've got a good foundation to build on and I wish them lots of luck, but Cornell should have been able to handle them much better than they did.

[section N]

Don't you mean RPI scored 10 goals against them?

[ithacat]

[quote Jacob '06]Cornell played pretty well, I think they got 56 shots off in the game. The power play looked good, but they really need to be a little more creative. On the 5x3 after the time out they ran the same play 3 times in a row, I think the other team can figure it out after the first two. The RIT goal was another turnover on the breakout and McKee was left one on one with the shooter, and not really in set position as the shooter started to come in. He really didn't have much of a chance on that goal, and otherwise he made some pretty solid saves. The dirtiness at the final buzzer was pretty bush league. Right as the buzzer sounded 3 RIT players in unison went after Cornell players. Our guys really wanted no part of it. I think it was a pretty good game, but we still have some things to work on.[/quote]

I don't know, Cornell should have put 5, 6, 7...on the board: It's RIT.

Guimond played very well & he's clearly a D1 goalie, but Cornell was terribly sloppy (as they've been all year). Cornell continues to have one of the least imaginative PPs one will see -- though their only goals tonight came on the PP. They didn't have one 5x5 goal against RIT...ugh.

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote ithacat]They didn't have one 5x5 goal against RIT...ugh.[/quote]
Ten 5x5 goals in the last ten games--and six of those in the two games with Niagara.

[Will]

Cornell's shot count of 56 is a little deceiving since a lot of those shots came on the 5-on-3 and other PPs.  Even then, and also especially on even strength play, there were very few "good" shots made by Cornell.  A lot of them were shots from the point by the usual suspects (Moulson, O'Byrne), probably in hopes of generating a good rebound opportunity.  I'm right there with Age and the Penguins scout in being disappointed with Cornell's offense.  If our players keep doing things the same way, they're going to look like total crap during the real tough part of the schedule (the games against Colgate and the North Country teams).  On the bright side, though, the defense appears to be doing decently well, despite the idiotic turnover that led to the RIT goal.

[CowbellGuy]

RPI. RIT. Close enough

[Will]

[quote CowbellGuy]RPI. RIT. Close enough [/quote]

They're both institutes, after all. :-D

[Cactus12]

Who turned over the puck that led to the RIT goal?

[Tub(a)]

First Round Draft Pick and Canadian Olympian Sasha Pokoluk  ::uhoh::

[Brian]

Where the hell has the physical play gone??  It seems as though the referees have affected our physical style of play.  RIT was banging us around and we just stood there and took it.  I'm very disappointed that a coach Schafer team would be physically dominated.  Once a couple of guys starting hitting later in the game RIT started to slow down.  The only one that was throwing his wait around the whole game was Topher, when the hell are the defensemen going to follow his lead.  I wouldn't care so much if our defensemen were taking penalties as a result of physical play because it has a purpose but getting penalties for stupid things, it's simply bad defense. I'm talking about you Pokoluk!!!!!

[Mike899]

Byt the way it was not Sasha who turned the puck over it was evan salmela when he tried a cross ice pass to Sasha. Where you at the game?

[Dpperk29]

Olympian? WJC is not the olympics...

[Tub(a)]

[quote Mike899]Byt the way it was not Sasha who turned the puck over it was evan salmela when he tried a cross ice pass to Sasha. Where you at the game?[/quote]

The pass made it to Sasha, but it bounced into the air and he lost track of it. It may have technically deflected off of someone besides Sasha, but he was certainly responsible for the puck and the man that eventually found the puck and put it into the net.

[mkool]

to steer this thread back with some positive comments, mckee sounded like he was doing very well (according to the announcers).  I'm glad it seems that he's picked up his stride again.