USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
- Thread starter mattj711
- Start date
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Cornell was really No. 5 the end. I just didn't anticipate how high they'd go in the RPI after beating Clarkson. The PWR also put too much weight on comparison "loss" to wisconsin that the committee either ignored, or they used some judgment in Cornell's favor on that.
It's been pretty standard for most teams to schedule around 4 Nations. Teams generally struggle to schedule around U-22s. Ivy teams in particular.
Cornell was really No. 5 the end. I just didn't anticipate how high they'd go in the RPI after beating Clarkson. The PWR also put too much weight on comparison "loss" to wisconsin that the committee either ignored, or they used some judgment in Cornell's favor on that.
It's been pretty standard for most teams to schedule around 4 Nations. Teams generally struggle to schedule around U-22s. Ivy teams in particular.
HockeyTeacher
Hockey Nomad
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
I believe injuries--- I know one needs surgery.....
I believe injuries--- I know one needs surgery.....
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Sounds like you're making excuses. I could put a * next to a handful of games that Harvard had to play without a full roster. We went with 14 players for two weeks because of injuries and lack of depth. You didn't hear anyone complaining from our side about that. We lost our starting goalie and career wins leader for the last six weeks of the season either due to U-22 commitments or season ending injury. Injuries and players playing for their country are part of the deal of playing women's hockey. You can't selectively say, well, we didn't have those players for those games so that's why we lost. That's total BS.
Sounds like you're making excuses. I could put a * next to a handful of games that Harvard had to play without a full roster. We went with 14 players for two weeks because of injuries and lack of depth. You didn't hear anyone complaining from our side about that. We lost our starting goalie and career wins leader for the last six weeks of the season either due to U-22 commitments or season ending injury. Injuries and players playing for their country are part of the deal of playing women's hockey. You can't selectively say, well, we didn't have those players for those games so that's why we lost. That's total BS.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
If you're saying which team deserves to host, it's clearly Harvard. They did better in the criteria that the NCAA defined at the start of the season.
I don't think Matt's necessarily implying that though (even though he replied to a poster who did and doesn't know or care about the NCAA criteria, or at least thinks they should be changed). Matt's just saying Cornell is a better team than any statistical system that didn't take into account personnel would indicate.
If you asked which team I would pick on a neutral ice game if they played tomorrow, I'd say Cornell, factoring the fact that a lot of their losses came when they were undermanned or at a serious disadvantage going to Mercyhurst first week of the season.
Given home ice advantage though, I think this game is a toss up.
I mean, depends on what the purpose is.
If you're saying which team deserves to host, it's clearly Harvard. They did better in the criteria that the NCAA defined at the start of the season.
I don't think Matt's necessarily implying that though (even though he replied to a poster who did and doesn't know or care about the NCAA criteria, or at least thinks they should be changed). Matt's just saying Cornell is a better team than any statistical system that didn't take into account personnel would indicate.
If you asked which team I would pick on a neutral ice game if they played tomorrow, I'd say Cornell, factoring the fact that a lot of their losses came when they were undermanned or at a serious disadvantage going to Mercyhurst first week of the season.
Given home ice advantage though, I think this game is a toss up.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
So when we had only 14 players dressed for Clarkson, are we supposed to discount that game as well as a few others when we didn't have a full roster? Harvard got much better once we got our players back as well and even without Christina Kessler (ask Cornell if they would like to go into Friday's game without Mazzota), I like our chances whether at Bright or on neutral ice.
So when we had only 14 players dressed for Clarkson, are we supposed to discount that game as well as a few others when we didn't have a full roster? Harvard got much better once we got our players back as well and even without Christina Kessler (ask Cornell if they would like to go into Friday's game without Mazzota), I like our chances whether at Bright or on neutral ice.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
ok, fair enough, hard to tell how either team would do on neutral ice. They'd just both clearly deserve to be favored at home, and Harvard earned home ice.
ok, fair enough, hard to tell how either team would do on neutral ice. They'd just both clearly deserve to be favored at home, and Harvard earned home ice.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Sounds like both teams are at < 100% right now, so the winner will be the one that handles the adversity the best.
I think that you're the only one who is reading it that way. He's just stating a fact about his team and their season, in the Cornell thread. You just chose to be offended, as is often the case.
Sounds like both teams are at < 100% right now, so the winner will be the one that handles the adversity the best.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
While most of your posts really never should be dignified with a response, especially one as hypocritical as this one (i.e. you have posted more excuses for Harvard Women's Hockey over the years than you obviously care to remember)...I would just like to point out the following:
That pretty much sums up my thoughts. I wish Skate79 was able or willing (can't really tell which it is) to engage in critical thought when interpreting others' posts.
While most of your posts really never should be dignified with a response, especially one as hypocritical as this one (i.e. you have posted more excuses for Harvard Women's Hockey over the years than you obviously care to remember)...I would just like to point out the following:
That pretty much sums up my thoughts. I wish Skate79 was able or willing (can't really tell which it is) to engage in critical thought when interpreting others' posts.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Not true. If you are going to put injuries or absences due to U-22 commitments on the table as a reason for not winning games, then you open yourself up to questioning your post as being reasonable for the simple fact that all teams have to go through this at one point in the season. I merely offered examples of how we could have put asterisks next to Harvard losses as well. And yeah, they are excuses. You play the hand that's dealt to you.
And how am I not stating a fact here? My post was critically thought out to respond to what Matt was stating. I never said his post was factually incorrect. I simply pointed out that if he is going to use the absences as a reason for Cornell losing those games, then he opens it up for anyone else to point out games in which their team was missing players as well. UNH had half their team sick with the flu when they played us and it really should have been postponed. But they played and it was a great game winding up in a 1-1 tie. Should UNH put an asterisk next to that game and claim illness as a reason for the tie? I didn't hear anything from their side about it.
I'm fine with you guys having a different opinion. You seem not to be able to handle someone with an opposite view. Can't do anything about that.
Not true. If you are going to put injuries or absences due to U-22 commitments on the table as a reason for not winning games, then you open yourself up to questioning your post as being reasonable for the simple fact that all teams have to go through this at one point in the season. I merely offered examples of how we could have put asterisks next to Harvard losses as well. And yeah, they are excuses. You play the hand that's dealt to you.
And how am I not stating a fact here? My post was critically thought out to respond to what Matt was stating. I never said his post was factually incorrect. I simply pointed out that if he is going to use the absences as a reason for Cornell losing those games, then he opens it up for anyone else to point out games in which their team was missing players as well. UNH had half their team sick with the flu when they played us and it really should have been postponed. But they played and it was a great game winding up in a 1-1 tie. Should UNH put an asterisk next to that game and claim illness as a reason for the tie? I didn't hear anything from their side about it.
I'm fine with you guys having a different opinion. You seem not to be able to handle someone with an opposite view. Can't do anything about that.
Watson Rink
Registered User
A constructive suggestion
A constructive suggestion
Seriously, does anybody have any thoughts about how Cornell, Harvard and the other Ivies can deal with always being behind the eight ball in the schedule at the start of the season? Often having to play their first game against a team that has a dozen games under its belt?
I suppose the individual college can always decline to play the M'hursts of the world at that point in the season although declining might make it even harder to arrange dates with them.
Within the ECAC, though, it might be more equitable to have the four travel buddy duos that contain one or more Ivies play a round robin with each other the first three weekends of the season.
Speculating, without thinking it through, that such a proposal should receive the approval of the six Ivies and the two lucky travel buddies who would get to play mostly Ivies during those first three weeks.
Knowing nothing about ECAC governance, I wonder if such a proposal could be seriously advanced?
A constructive suggestion
Seriously, does anybody have any thoughts about how Cornell, Harvard and the other Ivies can deal with always being behind the eight ball in the schedule at the start of the season? Often having to play their first game against a team that has a dozen games under its belt?
I suppose the individual college can always decline to play the M'hursts of the world at that point in the season although declining might make it even harder to arrange dates with them.
Within the ECAC, though, it might be more equitable to have the four travel buddy duos that contain one or more Ivies play a round robin with each other the first three weekends of the season.
Speculating, without thinking it through, that such a proposal should receive the approval of the six Ivies and the two lucky travel buddies who would get to play mostly Ivies during those first three weeks.
Knowing nothing about ECAC governance, I wonder if such a proposal could be seriously advanced?
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: A constructive suggestion
Re: A constructive suggestion
Re: A constructive suggestion
I don't have a problem with differing opinions. I'm not going to quibble about it any further, because it has nothing to do with Cornell hockey.
I don't think it is a dozen -- you don't start six weeks later. For example, this season MC had 4 games and 2 exhibitions in advance of the Cornell series. Harvard's start was delayed one more week. Playing another Ivy in week 1 would make some sense, although I can see that you wouldn't necessarily want to "waste" one of your two games against a big rival in game 1 when neither really has their act together (e.g., Harvard/Dartmouth.) The key is probably that first weekend; after that, the rust/unfamiliarity differential won't be as big a factor.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Article on incoming freshman Hayleigh Cudmore
http://www.insidehalton.com/community/oakvillebeaver/article/647846
Article on incoming freshman Hayleigh Cudmore
http://www.insidehalton.com/community/oakvillebeaver/article/647846
Un_Poco_Lento
Professional Slacker
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
What a season. Thanks to the Big Red for a great ride. Hope it goes just a little bit further next year.
What a season. Thanks to the Big Red for a great ride. Hope it goes just a little bit further next year.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
I'd say congrats to the Big Red, their players, coaches and fans on a fantastic season. Calling it a break out year would almost be an understatement.
What a season. Thanks to the Big Red for a great ride. Hope it goes just a little bit further next year.
I'd say congrats to the Big Red, their players, coaches and fans on a fantastic season. Calling it a break out year would almost be an understatement.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
The official record book may not show it, but the Big Red should consider themselves champions based on their performance this weekend.
The only way to go further is to play more OTs.What a season. Thanks to the Big Red for a great ride. Hope it goes just a little bit further next year.
The official record book may not show it, but the Big Red should consider themselves champions based on their performance this weekend.Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Hey Skate Guy
Cornell will be getting much, much better next season. Harvard, not so much. There has been a true changing of the guard and based on Cornell's 6-2 pasting of Harvard on the road in the quarters and their great showing this weekend they are for real. Deal with it.
PS. Find a goalie.
Hey Skate Guy
Cornell will be getting much, much better next season. Harvard, not so much. There has been a true changing of the guard and based on Cornell's 6-2 pasting of Harvard on the road in the quarters and their great showing this weekend they are for real. Deal with it.
PS. Find a goalie.
Re: Cornell Big Red Women's hockey 2009-2010
Hey hockey genius
I hate to break it to you, but I don't think too many teams are likely to listen much to your advice any time soon...particularly where goaltending is concerned. Cornell's done pretty well with their goalie haven't they? Noticed her save percentage is >92%...as are the goalies for Harvard and Clarkson you've gone on record as saying should sit. Hmm. But wait, didn't you actually suggest too that Clarkson should be sitting her in favour of a goalie with a save percentage <85%? Yeah, right.
Cornell has certainly proven they are for real, and with 4 incoming/returning national level players they will get even better next year. But here's a news bulletin for ya. None of the other top teams are exactly standing still either. Harvard and Clarkson also have 4 incoming national team players each, so neither are particularly likely to just fade into the woodwork. Oh, and Minnesota and UMD? Even more incoming national team players. And everyone's heard about the two really high profile BU NWT transfers with a potential to also add the 2 top recruits in NA to that total. Can YOU deal with all that?
If you thought there was a lot of exciting hockey this year, I'd say you really ain't seen nothing yet.
Hey hockey genius
I hate to break it to you, but I don't think too many teams are likely to listen much to your advice any time soon...particularly where goaltending is concerned. Cornell's done pretty well with their goalie haven't they? Noticed her save percentage is >92%...as are the goalies for Harvard and Clarkson you've gone on record as saying should sit. Hmm. But wait, didn't you actually suggest too that Clarkson should be sitting her in favour of a goalie with a save percentage <85%? Yeah, right.
Cornell has certainly proven they are for real, and with 4 incoming/returning national level players they will get even better next year. But here's a news bulletin for ya. None of the other top teams are exactly standing still either. Harvard and Clarkson also have 4 incoming national team players each, so neither are particularly likely to just fade into the woodwork. Oh, and Minnesota and UMD? Even more incoming national team players. And everyone's heard about the two really high profile BU NWT transfers with a potential to also add the 2 top recruits in NA to that total. Can YOU deal with all that?
If you thought there was a lot of exciting hockey this year, I'd say you really ain't seen nothing yet.