Cornell 11 York 1

Trotsky · October 21, 2006, 09:23:53 PM

"Double digits."

Rosey · October 21, 2006, 09:24:55 PM

[quote Trotsky]"Double digits."[/quote]Okay, they can let up now.

Rosey · October 21, 2006, 09:26:00 PM

[quote krose][quote Trotsky]"Double digits."[/quote]Okay, they can let up now.

[/quote]
Spoke too soon! 11-1!

Trotsky · October 21, 2006, 09:27:22 PM

I guess they like the new configuration.

Trotsky · October 21, 2006, 09:35:13 PM

This game makes me appreciate the magnitude or Cornell's 24-1 loss to BC in 1939-40.

Liz '05 · October 21, 2006, 09:37:33 PM

3 stars of the game, from the broadcasting crew:
3. Byron Bitz
2. Ray Sawada
1. Topher Scott

billhoward · October 21, 2006, 09:39:47 PM

[quote Liz '05]3 stars of the game, from the broadcasting crew:
3. Byron Bitz
2. Ray Sawada
1. Topher Scott[/quote]

York deserves half a star for showing up.

Seems unsporting to roll it up on a team playing their national sport.

French Rage · October 21, 2006, 09:42:42 PM

[quote Trotsky]I guess they like the new configuration.[/quote]

Possibly, but can't read too much into this game.

redhair34 · October 21, 2006, 09:49:36 PM

My three stars...

1. The Freshmen
2. Sawada
3. McCutcheon

ebilmes · October 21, 2006, 09:52:36 PM

[quote French Rage]
Possibly, but can't read too much into this game.[/quote]

I agree completely. I loved seeing all the offense, but the D (mainly 5x5) was shaky for a lot of the game. I'd think that an ECAC team would have capitalized on some of our defensive clumsiness, particularly right in front of the net. Kudos to Davenport and Scrivens for solid play in net. I liked our kill tonight, too.

redhair34 · October 21, 2006, 09:53:25 PM

[quote scoop85]Barlow from Romano! Sounds like Romano made a great move to set up the score.[/quote]

I thought that was definitely the goal of the game. On a 2 on 1 Romano made an unbelievable toe drag to get their goalie down and slid it over to Barlow for the score.

redhair34 · October 21, 2006, 09:57:30 PM

[quote ebilmes][quote French Rage]
Possibly, but can't read too much into this game.[/quote]

I agree completely. I loved seeing all the offense, but the D (mainly 5x5) was shaky for a lot of the game.[/quote]

This was especially true in the first period. The score could have been 5-4 at intermission. But, I think as the game progressed we improved and made fewer mental mistakes (particularly in front of the net).

RazzBaronZ · October 21, 2006, 10:20:25 PM

I just looked up York and they lost to the Montreal Canadiens' Rookie team 15-1 about a month ago. I feel bad for them.

Still, it was fun to be able to chant double digits, and the passing looked crisp out there. So far, so good.

Jordan 04 · October 21, 2006, 10:23:20 PM

Does our reportedly bad defensive play mean that the goalies were playing well to keep them off the board? Or was York just not converting?

redhair34 · October 21, 2006, 10:25:49 PM

[quote Jordan 04]Does our reportedly bad defensive play mean that the goalies were playing well to keep them off the board? Or was York just not converting?[/quote]

I thought it was more of York not converting. But the goalies looked solid. Davenport bailed us out a couple of times in the 1st. And I would call it rusty more so than "bad"...but that is just me.