Cornell vs. Clarkson, game 1 postgame

[Beeeej]

[quote Rich S]Why would you be put off?  Did my wording offend you?[/quote]

Because apparently you can't be bothered to walk to the other side of the rink after crawling to Ithaca on your hands and knees, or something.  Yet you expect me to do so.  I sure hope you don't have to go to the bathroom during the game, or anything.

Beeeej

P.S. It's over.  I want my t-shirts and 45s back.

[WillR]

Hey next times you guys decide a pick a fight with Rich S or flirt whatever you want to call it can you just start a new thread.  Just call it Rich S.  You can then get all indignant or kumbaya like in one central easy to shop place.  

Just for the record, now that i know that Rich S is a goalie i think that the more abuse you all hurl at him the better.  Goalies love abuse almost as much as their defensement enjoy poking fun at them when they are not in the locker room.

[Rich S]

Aw come on Beeej,

I can't be bothered you say...

But apparently you can't either, so...??

I won't be crawling to Ithaca if I come.  There's a more serious non-hockey related situation that may keep me here.  Won't know for several more hours at  least.

Oh...I don't have your stinkin' 45s.  And I'm keeping your Mariah Carey CD! :-D

[Beeeej]

[quote Rich S]I can't be bothered you say...

But apparently you can't either, so...??[/quote]

There's a difference.  I'm declining your invitation solely because you declined mine in a way I took as rude.

Tell me you're hobblin' around on a cane?  Afraid of having your Clarkson hat stolen if you cross the rink?  Want to introduce me to nine of your friends and worried they won't be allowed down the stairs with you?  Extend your invitation first before I even have a chance to extend mine?  Your nine friends are hobblin' around on canes?  I'm happy to venture over to Section O and offer a handshake.  I'm a friendly, accomodating dude.

What read to me like "I don't feel I should come to you, rather you should come to me"?  No, thanks.  Not worth it.

Obligatory Praise of Opponent: Your Clarkson hat is both stylish and well-fitting.

Beeeej

[Dafatone]

That pass slid under Leggio play was Bitz, actually.

[cth95]

Thank you all so much for not posting the score!  I was all set to watch the archive when I got home from playing hockey myself, and it wasn't up for some reason.  This really pissed me off, but at least I was able to enjoy the game through the extensive posts and got very nervous as I read about the tie and overtime before getting pumped after the game winner.  Can't wait to watch in person tonight.  LGR!!!!

[Rich S]

Rich,

Despite your latest diatribe which smacks of the same approach or worse that you accuse me of, here's some hockey talk.  After all, if you're up this late (in Horseheads?) you've earned it despite all your shots at me.  And yeah, I was a goalie so I'm thick-skinned enough to take it. :-D

I shared the opinion that Clarkson would have to play their game at the same high level as in recent games, or higher, to have a chance in this series.  As one of the cornell D men said, and everyone knows, Clarkson is young, short on experience, esp on the back line, and has a dreadful road record this year.

They are a finesse team with more skilled players and speed than in quite a few years.  But their physical, gritty play has been lacking often this year and hence the mediocre record.

Beyond Leggio's performance which was at least "solid" if not spectacular, I give this young team, especially playoff-experience wise, credit for battling back, for playing pretty disciplined hockey (not many penalties) and for hanging in there and continuing to play hard.  In recentyears, the 3-1 score would have become 5-1 or worse.

If you want to say cornell's defensive miscues allowed a couple of goals but Clarkson had to have some part in causing them and certainly capitalized and that in itself is creditable.

I believe they expected to get outshot in what was expected to be a cornell-style physical game where Tech's free flowing offense would be limited but with solid goaltending, sound defense, and opportunistic offense, they had a chance.  Basically, that's how I think it went.  Certainly cornell's game wore them down and that's reflected in the SOG.  I know cornell has had a bit of an uneven season but they play a disciplined style that wears on teams and they don't bet themselves.

Both teams missed glorious chances.  Open nets, shots wide, didputed goals, etc.  Part of the game.  If McKee hadn't made a great stop on Dodge, it could have ended in Tech's favor.  Sounds like the winner came on a great effort by Sawada and perhaps a defensive letdown off the faceoff on Tech's part or even an poorly directed rebound by Leggio.  Just going by what descriotions I read.

Could be a deflating loss for Clarkson, it will test their character tom'w night.  A bigger loss for Tech than a bug win for cornell if only because cornell has  the home ice advantage and clarkson needed a confidence jolt with a first game win, however they could have gotten it.

This Clarkson team is a year away at least but they've matured and I think they'll come out with passion tomorrow.  Can they get blown out tomorrow?  Sure, they don't have a margin for error and playing without Genovy will continue to hurt.  But they also can still win although Leggio will have to play as well, or better.  Cornell will come out smelling blood I expect.

Clarkson may not win but I'm proud of the progress they've made this year and very proud of the job the coaches have done.  I know all three of them well and I think they're first rate men as well as coaches.

Hope to get there tom'w and I hope to see a game that forces a game three on Sunday.

As to your comments above Rich, I see some merit in it, regarding my behavior which is admitedly somewhat testy at times and I have not denied that in the past. But you fail to recognize that indeed you guys do start many "fights" with me.  I do give viewpoints but if I dont express them in the obsequious manner you want, sorry, that's not always my style any more than I always expect you guys to be "nice" to me.  Just the inclusion of that link to an issue with Al D should be enough to remind you of the reality of the snarky, nasty manner that you guys use in response to me.  Before you paint yourself as being attacked, how about calming down those who fire shots like he and others do?  It's your house, right?

The way you feel compelled to respond (is it defense if your turf?) precludes your recognizing the viewpoints I offer.  I can't control that.  You want me to be responsible for my behavior but many of you don't seem to want to do the same.

I'm not here to "knock you down" or "start fights."  Maybe one of your gifted analysts here can figure out why some of you react that way.  Meantime, I'll just call it Ivy arrogance" until I get a btter explanation.  You guys poke fun at the North Country with all manner of tasteless jokes and it's cool in your view.  But turnabout is not fair play, it seems.

I don't paint myself as anything.  That's the spin you want to put on it.

Lastly, you didn't annoy me with your persistance at all.  You're to be commended.  Not sure that my hockey analysis at this late hour is up to speed, esp given that I didn't see the game but that's a good effort I believe.

What I did find annoying was your calling me "a dick" last year.  I thought that was uncalled for and tasteless.  To bring it up again was unncessary and equally tasteless.  But as I said, I'm thick skinned as all goalies and former goalies should be. I can handle it, no problem.

Good night and enjoy the game tomorrow.

[Steve M]

I can see Rich is at it again trolling the Cornell message board picking nits on every word that is typed.  Just like in years past and just like in the Red Sox thread of the USCHO cafe.

Good win tonight by our team, and no we don't have to praise Clarkson if we don't feel like it.  This is, after all, our message board.

Rich needs to get a life, or this message board needs an ignore feature.  In the meantime it's probably best not to feed the troll to prevent these threads from becoming dominated by constant petty nonsense.

[Oat]

I am a very biased hockey fan. I don't know very much about the game myself. I've only been following hockey since I learned the rules in 2002. There is a tremendous flame war going on in this thread. I don't care. I just want to share my opinion of the game with the rest of the community here. So here is what I think:

Clarkson was not that good a team. I was expecting to see us dominate a 3-1 or 4-2 game. I was disappointed with Cornell performance tonight. If we're already struggling this hard against Clarkson, how will we do against the midwest powerhouses? BU? Even Dartmouth? Penalty Kill was ok tonight. I also don't remember the last time our team scored a powerplay goal though. Moulson has been solid. He just needs to show some flare. I think that there will be a fight tomorrow night. It will most likely be Bitz and the big guy who kept shoving people's faces after the whistle.

[Omie]

I would have to disagree about Moulson being solid, granted he is the leading scorer in the team but that is in part cause they always position him in the point. In my opinion, Moulson has been a major let down this year; hardly any even strength goals, leads an erradic power play, and has shown no leadership as captain. Knoepfli showed much more leadership on the ice. Also, the majority of the big goals (ie. in close games and OTs) have come from other players like McCutcheon, Abbott, etc.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

My Saturday Morning QB opinion:

We clearly controlled the play, but as has been the case all year, a couple of defensive screw-ups cost us significantly.  I think the 3-1 score at th end of 2 is far more indicative of the play than the regulation score.  I think Leggio played a good game, but not a great game.  From what I can tell from the Clarkson broadcast, he made some great saves, but was caught out of position several times and Cornell missed the empty net.

OTOH, I kept wondering when the top line would show up.  We seem to be doing it with balance in the scoring.  In a way, that's a good thing, but if it means that the top line has to disappear from the radar, I'm not sure I'm happy with that behavior.

Now, to address RichS:  I tend to stay out of these arguments, but I've pretty much come to the conclusion that if I see RichS is posting it's going to turn into a flame-fest.  And that instinct hasn't been wrong too often.  So what does that say to me?  Since I don't see that same level of consistency of deterioration in other threads, I'm forced to conclude that RichS is the catalyst for that deterioration.  

Either Rich is looking to pick a fight or has such a thin skin he can't help but see extreme insults where only mild tweak of the nose were intended.  Personally I think he gets off on these fights, but that's just pop psych on my part.  

I know it's difficult, people, but we have to ignore him (despite my not doing so here).  That's the only way to modify his behavior.  If we don't, he'll continue to troll on this boaqrd and feed his need for attention.

LGR!  I wanna go to Albany!  (and how often do you hear that?   ::help:: )

[billhoward]

Just woke up and re-read (parts of) the thread. Man, did we slide off topic or what -- if this was an advertising sponsored forum, I'd say Rich and Age were conspiring to split the click money and going out for two very handsome dinners tonight. Since that's not the case, it's just hockey passions.

Wonder what it's like to bait Dookies on the CoachKIsLord.com forum?

[marty]

[quote Rich S][quote krose]Rich, I've defended you several times over the past few months, but you really are approaching "Troll" status for me.  Good lord, please stop being so confrontational.

Kyle[/quote]

Offering a different opinion from the one shared by all th ecornell posters here makes me confrontational?  You're being a tad close-minded.[/quote]

Why this isn't an argument, it's just contradiction.

[quote automaton version of Rich S]No it isn't![/quote]

Yes it is!

[quote automaton version of Rich S]No it isn't![/quote]

Yes it is!

http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/sketch.htm

[schoaff]

[quote Rich S][quote DeltaOne81][Q]Bill's review was highly respectful of Clarkson.

Great game by both teams tonight.[/Q]

r board. Or just don't come here.[/quote]

"Leggio deserves credit for making 50 saves. We make ECAC goalie of the week out of a lot of goalies."


The above was the only comment in Bill's review that I commented on.  Hardly "highly respectful."

Greg made the other statement, right?  Or was it John.  Fine.

I don't expect out and out praise for the opponent here or on any forum.  But to not recognize the oponent's efforts in a game that went to 2 OTs is taking a very narrow view.  The implication is that cornell had to go to 2 OTs only because of their own occasional poor play.  That's silly.

Please don't lecture me about my behavior here.  Clean up your own house first.  When inaccurate or narrow-minded statements are made, I'll call you on it.  If you want to throw stones at me, be prepared to catch a few coming back.
[/quote]

1) This is precisely the the place to make narrow-minded statements. It's *elynah* by gosh. Our home rink. The place to kick off your shoes and be as narrow minded as we like. If we make the same comments on USCHO call us on it. But you don't storm in to someone's home, track mud around on the floor, start shouting "Where's the food?!?!" and then criticize them for not being hospitible.

2) You want an objective assessment of Leggio? He played OK, but I didn't see any saves he made that I thought were particularly great. The second and third Cornell goals were ones for which at least some of the people here would have been all over McKee had he let them in.

At least once he found himself mind bogglingly out of position to the point that he was sprawled out on the ice nowhere near the goal for no real apparent reason. Maybe his own player decided to check him or something; the camera work wasn't great so it was hard to tell. That should have been an easy Cornell goal but Moulson for some reason couldn't get a clean poke at the puck. Another time he seemed to think he was in position but was clearly leaving Pegararo about 2/3rds of the goal to shoot at from the slot. Should have been another goal but Pegs decided to get cute.

Even though on paper it looks like he had a great game making 50 saves, watching the play gave a different impression. If I'm the Clarkson coach he doesn't start tonight.

Now, take this all with a grain of salt not just because I'm a Cornell Fan but because the camera work last night left a bit to be desired. I suspect I only saw 2 out of every 3 shots that reached the Clarkson net.

[ugarte]

[quote Rich S]Rich,

... I shared the opinion that Clarkson would have to play their game at the same high level as in recent games, or higher, to have a chance in this series.  As one of the cornell D men said, and everyone knows, Clarkson is young, short on experience, esp on the back line, and has a dreadful road record this year.

They are a finesse team with more skilled players and speed than in quite a few years.  But their physical, gritty play has been lacking often this year and hence the mediocre record.

Beyond Leggio's performance which was at least "solid" if not spectacular, I give this young team, especially playoff-experience wise, credit for battling back, for playing pretty disciplined hockey (not many penalties) and for hanging in there and continuing to play hard.  In recentyears, the 3-1 score would have become 5-1 or worse.

If you want to say cornell's defensive miscues allowed a couple of goals but Clarkson had to have some part in causing them and certainly capitalized and that in itself is creditable.

I believe they expected to get outshot in what was expected to be a cornell-style physical game where Tech's free flowing offense would be limited but with solid goaltending, sound defense, and opportunistic offense, they had a chance.  Basically, that's how I think it went.  Certainly cornell's game wore them down and that's reflected in the SOG.  I know cornell has had a bit of an uneven season but they play a disciplined style that wears on teams and they don't bet themselves.

Both teams missed glorious chances.  Open nets, shots wide, didputed goals, etc.  Part of the game.  If McKee hadn't made a great stop on Dodge, it could have ended in Tech's favor.  Sounds like the winner came on a great effort by Sawada and perhaps a defensive letdown off the faceoff on Tech's part or even an poorly directed rebound by Leggio.  Just going by what descriotions I read.

Could be a deflating loss for Clarkson, it will test their character tom'w night.  A bigger loss for Tech than a bug win for cornell if only because cornell has  the home ice advantage and clarkson needed a confidence jolt with a first game win, however they could have gotten it.

This Clarkson team is a year away at least but they've matured and I think they'll come out with passion tomorrow.  Can they get blown out tomorrow?  Sure, they don't have a margin for error and playing without Genovy will continue to hurt.  But they also can still win although Leggio will have to play as well, or better.  Cornell will come out smelling blood I expect.

Clarkson may not win but I'm proud of the progress they've made this year and very proud of the job the coaches have done.  I know all three of them well and I think they're first rate men as well as coaches.

Hope to get there tom'w and I hope to see a game that forces a game three on Sunday...

Good night and enjoy the game tomorrow.[/quote]Who is the new guy?