I don't coach hockey because I don't need the aggravation. Brian
McCutcheon must be going out of his mind with frustration after this
weekend. But clearly, Cornell is blessedly lucky for getting two
points out of a road trip in which they played 1 great period (G), 2
acceptable periods (A), and 3 horrendous, awful, physically revolting
(R) periods.
 
(In case you're wondering: vs UVM: ARG, vs Drt: ARR.)
 
Friday, at Gutterson, the Big Red woke up in the third period,
trailing the best defense (sorry Harvard) in the ECAC, 3-1. The Cats
were coasting, and Cornell made them pay with 2 quick goals to tie
the score. Of course, then UVM woke up too, and the fans were
treated to the ten most exciting minutes of hockey I've seen in
recent seasons. Everybody's passes were connecting, both goalies were
outstanding. After Blair Ettles engineered the game winner, circling
at the right post and dropping a perfect pass to Ryan Hughes just
outside the circle, Vermont came on even harder, and only Bandurski's
outstanding work (and a good measure of luck) held the lead.
 
So, you figure after a huge win, in which the team demonstrates that
it can be *very* good when it works, they might show up in Hanover.
NOT! Losing to Dartmouth isn't as embarrassing as it used to be (just
ask Clarkson, UNH, Northeastern, Colgate, and now the Big Red), and
it's very nice to see a long-suffering program finally rewarded for
more than a decade in Hockey Hell, but... the Big Green didn't win
this particular game, Cornell just plain lost it.
 
Both teams played well enough in the first period, which ended 1-1.
Dartmouth was breaking out of their end well, passing well, and
setting up some good opportunities. Cornell wasn't doing much of
anything on offense, but their defense looked quite solid. It was
going to be a good game.
 
It wasn't. The seond period was a lesson in tedium. Both teams looked
like they'd rather be studying for finals. It was kind of funny: the
resistable force meets the movable object - like bad high school
hockey.
 
In the third period, Dartmouth caught a few breaks when referee John
Gallagher made some very creative calls, and they capitalized,
while Cornell continued to snooze. Brad Chartrand knocked in a loose
puck from in front with about 5 minutes to go to make things
"interesting", but that was about all the Red had. In fact, they had
precisely 3 good opportunities to score in the entire game: two
goals, and one post.
 
Looking over this, I haven't been very charitable to Dartmouth, so
let me qualify what I've said a tad: I saw the UNH game, and they
were solid; they're MUCH improved - they're almost, well, average
(and if you've been an ECAC fan for the past twelve years, you
know that that really IS an achievment worthy of applause). But
Cornell didn't even give them a game on Saturday. I'm looking forward
to the rematch in Ithaca, because I think the teams are a good
match amid the Sargasso Sea in the middle of the conference: Cornell,
Vermont, Brown, Dartmouth, Princeton (not Clarkson, they're just
slumming), and probably Colgate (they'll have to prove they're as bad
as their record).
 
Next Wednesday, Cornell finally plays a conference game at home,
after 6 on the road in which they hit the toughest buildings in the
league and still went 2-3-1. So it could've been 3-2-1, who cares?
The point is that they're not dead yet, despite inconsistency which
usually costs far more than the Big Red have paid. Consecutive home
games vs. Colgate, Union, and RPI bring them to the half-way mark,
and if they get there at .500, I for one will be well satisfied.
 
Note to Paulette: welcome to the list.
 
Greg
Somerville
Let's Go Red!