NCAA Champion 1967, 1970
ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018
Um- it was YOUR comment that started all this. You didn't expect a heaping serving of crow on your plate?
A neg.rep on this thread is a badge of honor.....troyboy March 7 2011
Last night's game does nothing to change any of the above. If Cornell fans want to get a hard on for beating this Harvard team, go for it. I hate to say it but it just is not a statement win.
1) Harvard is not a great team this year
2) Cornell has not played anyone this year (completely untested) - likely played 1 tournament team thus far (Clarkson) and lost 4-0 at home
3) The last 5 minutes at Lynah saw Donato hooked on a breakaway (Cornell stick in midsection which is an automatic whistle reardless if tugged. Phantom call on Harvard D to give Cornell PP. Bench minor on a coach who is hardly known as a hot head in the ECAC because he did go nuts because of the series of horrendous calls and no calls by the stripes.
Harvard played 2 @Minny this year and while the scores may indicate decent games, Harvard was completely outclassed. Outshot almost 2x1 and Minnesota, while turning it on a bit as of late, is a fairly mediocre team this year out West. Minny also took care of Clarkson twice as well this year, but at least Clarkson played Providence, Western Michigan, etc and not Alabama Huntsville. I hate to rain on your parade (and maybe Cornell will ride that goalie to the top of the mountain), but I just don't see it. This is not the Cornell team circa 2003 (I think that was the year you guys lost to Wisco). Not even close.
Call it sour grapes. Call it hot air. Call it whatever you want. And I will be rooting hard for Cornell in the NCAAs like I always have.
Last edited by bothman; 01-27-2018 at 12:32 PM.
No matter that we may have outplayed and certainly outshot Cornell; what matters is the final score and we lost. So sour grapes or not, all that counts is on the scoreboard. I'm not pro on anyone in the ECAC going anywhere in the NCAAs this year. The conference just doesn't look all that strong.
As Both has pointed out, Harvard is average to mediocre. We haven't beaten a top team all year unless you count the Union OT win. What's disappointing to me is our D and goaltending. They were supposed to be the bulwark of the team and yet they have been subpar. Hard to understand what's going on. And given that Lackey started last night, I'm assuming that if Madsen isn't injured, that the coaching staff has seen enough and will go with Lackey down the stretch. At least we'll find out if he is worthy of being our #1 next year.
I said from the beginning of the year that we would be offensively challenged and that has proven to be the case. When Ryan leaves for South Korea, it could get ugly. I have no idea who is going to step up at this point. Krusko, Zerter-Gossage, Pelton-Byce, Floodstrand? A lot will fall on Badini's shoulders. I guess we just have to look at this season as a bridge to the next two years when more talent arrives.
Even with Clarkson having played a tough schedule we are bound to struggle at the national tournament IMO, with early season games it's tough to get a read on your team and Clarkson definitely took advantage of that. Clarkson has 4 losses on the year, Lowell at home, Minnesota on the road x2, Dartmouth at home, Dartmouth is the exception here, they were the only team that didn't press our defense on the forecheck and make them turn it over consistently (Clarkson just did that themselves). Teams like Cornell and Western Michigan give you space and try to keep you to the outside, those teams Clarkson will be successful against as long as the PP is clicking. The first half showed Clarkson playing at an extremely high level but the difference was when you're clicking at 30% on the PP and just under 90% on the PK you're going to be successful more times than not, that was not sustainable and we've seen a noticeable drop off. Clarkson also has an advantage over Cornell this year but that's only when special teams comes into play, for years under Casey we play Cornell tough nearly every game but when it comes down to crunch time Cornell has made the extra play and has ended up ending our season multiple times, those Cornell teams were better by a significant margin, I don't believe that's the case now. I'd say Cornell has the better defense and the better depth, Clarkson has the better goaltending (when Kielly is 100%) and the better top 6, a 5x5 dominated game Cornell probably has the better chance to win but that's usually not the case between those 2 teams.
Clarkson has a top 6 that consists of 4 sophomores and 2 freshmen, they will lose their 2 top defensemen next season and could lose more to the professional ranks but with a really good freshman class coming in Clarkson should only get better. Cornell has a few crucial seniors in Rauter and Yates but for the most part they're going to be returning basically everyone, Cornell seems to always replace big senior classes and be consistently successful, now they are going to be returning mostly everyone. I understand what bothman is getting at with the weak schedule, I also understand the Florida tournament messed a lot of things up with the schedule and not much could be done this year, with that said I do think it would benefit a team like Cornell who is ALWAYS consistently a top 4 ECAC team to really test themselves in the non-conference with teams they could potentially meet up with in March-April.
Cornell fans obviously are going to gloat over a sweep of Harvard, I still don't think you will want to meet this Harvard team on the big ice in Placid. I talked about the immediate future of Clarkson and Cornell and I believe those two teams will continue to be good for a long time. When you're talking about the future of Harvard then it may come down to admissions, if they somehow turn into a team with a lot of high end NHL draft picks balanced with some older leaders they will be a national threat until Donato calls it quits. He's a great coach with a lot of respect from NHL organizations who are starting to trust the college development process more and more. I also believe it could in the best interest for Donato to come back one more season and pick his NHL destination, the Bruins are loaded with young talent and ultimately you have to do what is best for your professional career.
You are right, Harvard generally competes. But when I say pedestrian, I mean based on a very large sample set. I have watched / followed Harvard since 1979 roughly. And over that time period, there have been some great teams and some god awful ones (see late 90s). And this team is average /pedestrian relatively. Certainly not as good as the past 2 years, not as good as the Noah Welch teams in the early to mid 2000s, and certainly not as good as the 80s run.
Harvard brings in a lot next year on offense. 3 forwards in the Top 10 in USHL scoring, arguably the best finisher in the world for his age group and projected to be a Top 10 1st round pick, and a high end, puck moving defenseman. If Donato stays, could be a team poised for a run.
But again, even if Harvard plays its way into the tourney, expecting a win would be a major stretch. Harvard and the ECAC (and all of Eastern Hockey) is not where it has been the last few years.
please tell mookie that is one of y'all flippin' the L to the colgate boys as they are celebrating out on the uscho front page!!!!
a legend and an out of work bum look a lot alike, daddy.
Perhaps Donato leaving the team for a few weeks will be a good thing. Less dangle and more pay dirt. This team needs to get into the tough areas and not be so willing to settle for shots from the cheap seats.
In some ways the current season reminds me of Jimmy Vesey’s senior season. That year it seemed the team depended too much on his play-making and scoring ability. The following season, i.e., last year multiple players such as Malone, Moy, Kerfoot, Criscuolo all stepped up to fill the void. Seems this year there is a similar, somewhat subconscious, reliance on Ryan to do the heavy lifting. Ryan’s absence presents an opportunity to test this theory with the current cast. BTW, seems Bowlby will return as soon as he is able. He is not withdrawing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A couple of other thoughts after watching both games this weekend:
1) The D is really struggling to get shots through in general, but especially on the PP. A part of this may be because the forwards are so stationary. It seems like all of the shots are blocked or are are wide/high. I also have noticed that the D is not moving forward in the offensive zone to shorten the pass and allow them to fire the puck from closer in. They seem to stay at the blue line and not cheat in on the PP, forcing the opposing PK unit to collapse as well.
2) The PP is 100% broken. It's as bad as it has been in 5 years. It has become so easy to defend and while the personnel is not what existed last year, there is too much talent on this PP for it to be as anemic as it is. I don't like Donato playing up high. I prefer him to play down low (like Vesey did) and either cut across and shoot or pass to the slot for a one-timer. The puck is staying on the perimeter for much too long. Harvard seems lucky to get 1-2 SOGs on the PP these days when they used to get 5-6 over the past few years
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)