Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Harvard 2021-22: Back to Work

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Skate79 View Post
    Any time you beat Cornell, life is good. Hopefully it carries over to tomorrow’s big clash with the Red Raiders.
    Yes, they played an ebullient game yesterday, peppering Cornell's All-American goalie with shots and winning face offs at something like a 2-for-1 clip, Patrice Bergeron territory!

    Have to watch delayed on ESPN for this one, so signing off from USCHO right now

    Comment


    • #32
      Tough loss to Colgate yesterday but it is something to build on. Proud of the way the team came back to tie the game in the third. That will help them going forward. And I think the next time we play the 'Gate, the outcome will be different. Harvard is good to very good this year. Dutton was amazing on Friday.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by D2D View Post
        I forget, what's Harvard's endowment again? : rolleyes :
        It is up to around $52 billion up around $11 billion but thinking of inflation and skyrocketing fuel costs not much more than breaking even.
        At least on the south shore gas is way up and I expect fuel oil will be up twice last years price.

        Not moaning, I know Harvard has to respond to climate issues, for Saturday’s game I bundled up more and was ok.
        (n.b. Above figures are not exact, each is +/- a few hundred million)

        Comment


        • #34


          HARVARD BEATS COLGATE, 4-4


          That’s what I was poised to post until the eleventh of Harvard’s penalties (which included a game misconduct) bled into OT and Colgate’s PPG.

          When’s the last time the excitement of a win against Cornell was dwarfed by the excitement of a loss to Colgate? As the early card of a memorable weekend, the only thing I remember about the Cornell game, besides Dutton’s play, is the two ENGs (how often does that happen?) scored by one player (how often does that happen?). But that was ages ago - - - a ho-hummer against the Big Red.

          The Colgate game was electric: numerous 4x4s, a 5x3 shortie, and this fantastic goal by KDR (@ 1 min), where she waits for her rebound to descend from the rafters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pG6ewY9cXw.

          Reed is back in form, which means we have two starting goalies, a one-two punch that will allow both some rest if they stay in rotation. At both ends of the ice the vets seem to be upping their game in response to the infusion of serious new talent (we finally have some D!). Harvard was overpowered at the end, but they were never overmatched.



          Siri, play something exciting!









          Last edited by thirdtime's . . .; 11-01-2021, 01:21 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Thanks for posting the highlights, looks like it was an exciting game. KDR is putting up some stats.

            Comment


            • #36
              thirdtime's wrote: "the two ENGs (how often does that happen?) scored by one player (how often does that happen?)"

              After the Cornell game was over I was about to post something snarky about how the Cornell coach had denied Gilmore the chance to score a hat trick of what I was going to call short handed goals, but then I thought better of it. He was right, I now think, to continue with the empty net even after the first ENG, and right to concede after the second ENG. And to call an ENG a shortie because (technically) it happens during a 6-on-5 is, I admit, stretching it.

              Besides, nobody should ever achieve again what CJ Young achieved years ago...a pure hat trick...against Dartmouth...in 47 seconds...all three short handed

              Comment


              • #37
                Off-topic quiz question:

                While I drift down memory lane (see the above post),
                the men's football team's experience in the recent Princeton game of seeing three successive apparent scores in overtime get called back due to penalties and time outs, reminded me of one of the happiest posts I ever wrote on this forum:

                "Q: What do you do if, in the finals of the ECAC women's hockey tourney, with both the ECAC championship and a perfect 26-0-0 season hanging in the balance, in overtime, your team's apparent game-winning goal is called back?

                "A: Pick up the puck in front of your own goal, stickhandle through their entire team, and put the puck in the net."


                Anybody recall the reference?
                Last edited by Watson Rink; 11-04-2021, 01:53 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Watson Rink View Post
                  Off-topic quiz question:

                  While I drift down memory lane (see the above post),
                  the men's football team's experience in the recent Princeton game of seeing three successive apparent scores in overtime get called back due to penalties and time outs, reminded me of one of the happiest posts I ever wrote on this forum:

                  "Q: What do you do if, in the finals of the ECAC women's hockey tourney, with both the ECAC championship and a perfect 26-0-0 season hanging in the balance, in overtime, your team's apparent game-winning goal is called back?

                  "A: Pick up the puck in front of your own goal, stickhandle through their entire team, and put the puck in the net."


                  Anybody recall the reference?
                  I’m was prepared to guess the 98-99 season when AJ scored the game winner in OT against UNH. Except she didn’t skate end to end to score the goal. She took a pass from Jennifer Botterill, swung in front and backhanded a shot for the winner.

                  I think you’re referring to the 2008 ECAC championship at Bright where Katie Vaughan’s point shot goal was disallowed for a stick above the shoulder. A couple of minutes later, Caitlin Cahow skated down the left side from her own end and snapped a wrist shot past the SLU goalie.

                  Did i get it?
                  Last edited by Skate79; 11-05-2021, 04:43 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by skate79 View Post

                    i’m was prepared to guess the 98-99 season when aj scored the game winner in ot against unh. Except she didn’t skate end to end to score the goal. She took a pass from jennifer botterill, swung in front and backhanded a shot for the winner.

                    I think you’re referring to the 2008 ecac championship at bright where katie vaughan’s point shot goal was disallowed for a stick above the shoulder. A couple of minutes later, caitlin cahow skated down the left side from her own end and snapped a wrist shot past the slu goalie.

                    Did i get it?
                    absolutely! You got it

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Always nice to get a win in the North Country...tomorrow will be a bigger test, though

                      That trip must be exhausting...though a friend who played soccer for Yale said the worst trip was to Cornell because after the bus ride the team had to bed down in sleeping bags on the floor of the Cornell field house

                      What on earth has happened to Cornell? Maybe twelve consecutive major penalties resulting in 60 minutes of 5-on-4 hockey? Has tonight's 7-0 shellacking by Yale cheapened Harvard's win over the putative #9 seed?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        After the first two weeks, I think it is safe to say that the Crimson women can compete with any team in the ECAC. They deserve to be in the conversation for a Top 8 national ranking. Even though they lost two heartbreaking OT games. To me, that establishes the team as legit. And I think Clarkson and Colgate know it too.

                        Comment


                        • #42

                          This may be coming from the dead horse department but after having seen two really riveting games go into OT in the last couple of weeks, the folly of the 3-on-3 format really hit me, pulling the rug out from under of the feet of watching dedicated team play. The decision against allowing either real hockey for five more minutes, or the dreaded shoot-outs (which at least, because of penalty shots, incorporate a familiar part of the game) seems like a cynical way to provide a cheap thrill. Cynical, because in divvying up the OT points it acknowledges that this is really no solution at all to the presumed problem; cheap thrill, because it calls for six exhausted players basically going one-on-one, gladiator style. With this format in place how can the outcome be anything other than a crap shoot? Why deny players and fans the old-fashioned satisfaction of having two worthy opponents emerge unscathed from sixty (or sixty-five) minutes of intense rivalry — also known as a tie.

                          FWIW I’d like to think I’d feel the same way if Harvard had prevailed in either of these two sideshows.




                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
                            This may be coming from the dead horse department but after having seen two really riveting games go into OT in the last couple of weeks, the folly of the 3-on-3 format really hit me, pulling the rug out from under of the feet of watching dedicated team play. The decision against allowing either real hockey for five more minutes, or the dreaded shoot-outs (which at least, because of penalty shots, incorporate a familiar part of the game) seems like a cynical way to provide a cheap thrill. Cynical, because in divvying up the OT points it acknowledges that this is really no solution at all to the presumed problem; cheap thrill, because it calls for six exhausted players basically going one-on-one, gladiator style. With this format in place how can the outcome be anything other than a crap shoot? Why deny players and fans the old-fashioned satisfaction of having two worthy opponents emerge unscathed from sixty (or sixty-five) minutes of intense rivalry — also known as a tie.

                            FWIW I’d like to think I’d feel the same way if Harvard had prevailed in either of these two sideshows.



                            As I stated in the Wisconsin thread the other day:

                            I do not like 3 on 3 for the OT either although it sure makes for some exciting hockey. Watched the Harvard-Clarkson OT. Harvard hits a post, Clarkson hits the crossbar and Harvard hits another post all on breakaways, then Clarkson wins it with a 2 on 1 five hole goal that the Harvard goalie really should have stopped (Looked like it hit the bottom of the inside of her left pad as she was going down and dribbled into the net.

                            I would rather give each team a 3 min power play. Score as much as you can with your 3 min. Home team gets the choice to have the first or 2nd Power Play. Short handed goal is an automatic winner if it is the first score in the first PP, game over. 2nd power play shorthanded goal is again the auto winner if it is the 1st score and the score is tied going into the 2nd PP. End of 2 PP's if game is still tied call it a draw.


                            At least playing OT using power plays resembles hockey as played in a regulation game. How often do you see 3 on 3 hockey in a regulation game? On the women's side, I personally in my 15 or so years of following Clarkson have never witnessed it.
                            Fan of CLARKSON: 2014, 2017 & 2018 NC$$ WOMEN'S DIV 1 HOCKEY NATIONAL CHAMPIONS *******https://fanforum.uscho.com/core/images/smilies/smile.gi*********
                            And of 3 Patty Kaz recepients: Jamie Lee Rattray, Loren Gabel and Elizabeth Giguere
                            WHOOOOOOOOO WHOOOOOOOOO
                            If Union Can Do It So Can CCT (One of These Years) *******https://fanforum.uscho.com/core/images/smilies/smile.gi*********

                            Comment


                            • #44

                              vicb wrote: "At least playing OT using power plays resembles hockey as played in a regulation game."

                              What a positive proposal...most or perhaps almost all the players would contribute to the outcome, and draw on teamwork rather than the individual brilliance of a handful of stars.

                              It's for that reason that I like the overtime format of college football rather than professional football. Each team gets identical opportunities to use its full repertory from the 30 yard line, and then when time becomes a factor, the two point conversion still encapsulates almost all offensive and defensive skills.

                              Only two caveats from the very first time I saw the collegiate overtime rules in effect: one was that they should have set kick off time for the game early enough to allow for what was then an infinite series of 30 yard drives (no two point conversions in those early days) before darkness fell, and the other was that, even in the gloom of an unlit stadium, Harvard and its opponent should have been able to do better than having each of the first five drives end in fumbles, interceptions or blocked field goals!
                              Last edited by Watson Rink; 11-10-2021, 02:10 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                vicb wrote: "How often do you see 3 on 3 hockey in a regulation game?"

                                Just wait until the Olympic Committee adds 3-on-3 hockey to all its other cut down, "more exciting" versions of traditional sports!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X