Cornell 0 RPI 2

Dafatone · February 24, 2006, 09:11:14 PM

So, we do anything wrong? This sounded like Lange was just a wall.

DeltaOne81 · February 24, 2006, 09:12:04 PM

[quote Dafatone]So, we do anything wrong? This sounded like Lange was just a wall.[/quote]

Somehow I'm beginning to get skeptical that every single goalie we face is virtually a wall against us. Out offense is just pathetic on some nights.

Jocie · February 24, 2006, 09:14:52 PM

Lets Go Red!!!!

ursusminor · February 24, 2006, 09:17:24 PM

[quote Jocie]Lets Go Red!!!![/quote] to Schenectady? ;-)

redhair34 · February 24, 2006, 09:18:03 PM

[quote DeltaOne81][quote Dafatone]So, we do anything wrong? This sounded like Lange was just a wall.[/quote]

Somehow I'm beginning to get skeptical that every single goalie we face is virtually a wall against us. Out offense is just pathetic on some nights.[/quote]

I don't think I've ever heard an announcer say the word "wide" as much as Jason did tonight (as in we shot it wide).

Al DeFlorio · February 24, 2006, 09:18:24 PM

[quote DeltaOne81][quote Dafatone]So, we do anything wrong? This sounded like Lange was just a wall.[/quote]

Somehow I'm beginning to get skeptical that every single goalie we face is virtually a wall against us. Out offense is just pathetic on some nights.[/quote]
Right. RPI'd given up 2.7 goals per game and we manage one in two games.

Rita · February 24, 2006, 09:18:42 PM

[quote Dafatone]So, we do anything wrong? This sounded like Lange was just a wall.[/quote]

I was wondering about this too. Hot goalie or lack of offense? We had chances, but we do not seem to have a "sniper", a true "GO_TO" guy. McC was filling that role earlier this season.

So the combination of having a relatively inexperienced D-core compared to recent years, and an offense that isn't potent, means are coming up short in a lot of games, like this one and the at Princeton game. I think at this point, I'm leaning towards a "not very explosive" offense.

edit: Maybe "pathetic" like Al suggested would be a better description rather than "not explosive".

Jocie · February 24, 2006, 09:22:58 PM

come on cornell lets win this

Oat · February 24, 2006, 09:41:39 PM

Oh-no! We suckagain! ::worry::

Think positive guys. If we lose tomorrow, then we might not get a first-round bye in the ECAC playoff. So we might get to see more of Cornell awesome hockey next weekend! Here in Lynah!! :-} Yay

Ok fine. Seriously, I am counting on our team to do some damage tomorrow against Union. We should expect to see significant improvement in every aspect of the team. I don't know why, but that's just my gut feeling.

Pace · February 24, 2006, 09:50:08 PM

[quote Oat]
Think positive guys. If we lose tomorrow, then we might not get a first-round bye in the ECAC playoff. [/quote]

I was actually thinking about this. I think I saw some posts earlier saying we were guaranteed a buy. However, both Sucks and SLU(t) are 2 points behind us. Since they don't play each other tomorrow, a win for both of them and a loss for us would have all three of us at 27pts a piece. How is it decided then who doesn't get the buy? Does it go by GF in the ECAC RS?

Dafatone · February 24, 2006, 09:50:23 PM

We have the first round bye clinched.

Umm... don't we?

Anyone know if we win a tiebreaker against harvard?

DeltaOne81 · February 24, 2006, 09:55:47 PM

[quote Pace][quote Oat]
Think positive guys. If we lose tomorrow, then we might not get a first-round bye in the ECAC playoff. [/quote]

I was actually thinking about this. I think I saw some posts earlier saying we were guaranteed a buy. However, both Sucks and SLU(t) are 2 points behind us. Since they don't play each other tomorrow, a win for both of them and a loss for us would have all three of us at 27pts a piece. How is it decided then who doesn't get the buy? Does it go by GF in the ECAC RS?[/quote]

First tie breaker is head to head in the group.

We're 1-0-1 against SLU and 1-1 against Harvard. Making us 2-1-1.

Harvard is 1-1 versus us and 2-0 versus SLU. Making them 3-1.

SLU is 0-1-1 versus us and 0-2 versus Harvard. Making them 0-3-1.

Harvard would get 3rd, we'd get 4th, SLU 5th. We'd get the last bye..

Btw, its "bye", not "buy".

Pace · February 24, 2006, 10:01:07 PM

[quote DeltaOne81][quote Pace][quote Oat]
Think positive guys. If we lose tomorrow, then we might not get a first-round bye in the ECAC playoff. [/quote]

I was actually thinking about this. I think I saw some posts earlier saying we were guaranteed a buy. However, both Sucks and SLU(t) are 2 points behind us. Since they don't play each other tomorrow, a win for both of them and a loss for us would have all three of us at 27pts a piece. How is it decided then who doesn't get the buy? Does it go by GF in the ECAC RS?[/quote]

First tie breaker is head to head in the group.

We're 1-0-1 against SLU and 1-1 against Harvard. Making us 2-1-1.

Harvard is 1-1 versus us and 2-0 versus SLU. Making them 3-1.

SLU is 0-1-1 versus us and 0-2 versus Harvard. Making them 0-3-1.

Harvard would get 3rd, we'd get 4th, SLU 5th. We'd get the last bye..

Btw, its "bye", not "buy".[/quote]

Thanks for clearing that up, Delta.

Not being a native English speaker, what is the origin of it being "bye" and not "buy"?

DeltaOne81 · February 24, 2006, 10:12:35 PM

[quote Pace][/quote]
Thanks for clearing that up, Delta.

Not being a native English speaker, what is the origin of it being "bye" and not "buy"?[/quote]

Using a little bit of guess work and a little bit of Merriam Webster.com - it says that "bye" in the sports meaning is an alternation of "by".

Now here's my guessing part: that would make sense as far as you get to "go by" (skip/pass) the first round (or two, etc). Calling it a "by" probably didn't seem intelligent enough, so it changed to "bye". And its always easier to add an 'e' on the end in English than to stick a 'u in the middle

Give My Regards · February 24, 2006, 10:15:17 PM

[quote DeltaOne81]
First tie breaker is head to head in the group.

We're 1-0-1 against SLU and 1-1 against Harvard. Making us 2-1-1.

Harvard is 1-1 versus us and 2-0 versus SLU. Making them 3-1.

SLU is 0-1-1 versus us and 0-2 versus Harvard. Making them 0-3-1.

Harvard would get 3rd, we'd get 4th, SLU 5th. We'd get the last bye.[/quote]

Your seedings are correct, but the procedure in a three-way tie is a bit different. As noted above, Harvard gets the third seed based on head-to-head record among the three teams. The process then starts over from the beginning to break the (now) fourth-place tie between Cornell and St. Lawrence. Cornell wins this one based on head-to-head. The starting-over step doesn't make a difference here, but it's not hard to come up with a scenario in which it would change the order of the seedings.