Cornell 2024

[mfp]

In the last 9 quarters + overtime, Penn has held Cornell’s normally prolific offense to a total of 13 goals. 13 in almost two full games. Wow. (The outlier was the first quarter of the regular season game in which Cornell scored six goals.) There are always things to improve, but I don’t think Cornell played poorly. Credit to Penn for having an excellent defense that has figured out how to slow down the Cornell offense. Not having Long definitely hurts us (duh). Penn’s goalie steals goals and shuts down momentum. And Penn’s offense is underrated (at least against us). They don’t score tons of goals but that’s not their strategy. They’ve got the talent to put up bigger numbers. While I wish Knust had a higher save % last night, Penn was getting really good, open looks.

[CU 73]

If the favored Georgetown and Penn State can hold serve today, that makes tomorrow's s game at a quite empty Schoellkopf Field important for Big Red hopes. Will Big Red fans attend (I live in Tampa and cannot) to cheer on the Quakers so we might play another game this year?

[BigTurn]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

[Cornell95]

The solution might be to expand the number of Wednesday play-in games. The NCAA opposes expanding the number of playoff teams because, I understand, they feel that would include too high a percentage of all D1 teams. But it would be worth doing, in my opinion, to eliminate complaints from the "bubble out" teams currently excluded.

I agree the answer is probably more mid-week games.
Would personally be in favor of the season not starting till March, hopefully the Northern teams could schedule a couple road games and then generally have reasonable weather.

Cornell has plenty of non-league options that are geographically proximate (Army, Syracuse, Hobart, Lehigh, Colgate, Albany etc) for Tues or Wed night tilts. At the national level though, I am not sure that Utah, Air Force, Denver and Jacksonville are going to be able to find willing opponents though other than a couple Spring Break weeks.
Could goa couple directions with a mid-week NCAA tournament play-in. Field of 18 (2 play-in games) or 20 (4 play-in games)? Do the AQs avoid the play-in, or do based on RPI could they end up single elimination midweek and then potentially get thumped worse by a top seed on the weekend with shortened turnaround/prep?

[mfp]

Good thread from Lacrosse Reference on Cornell v. Yale qualifications: https://x.com/laxreference/status/17868 ... 4NsGOUnhaw

Here’s an excerpt: “Yale has 204.2 QW points; 203.7 for Cornell. Yale has a -17.3 bad loss factor; -17.4 for Cornell.

These are virtually indistinguishable resumes.”

[Chousnake]

Good thread from Lacrosse Reference on Cornell v. Yale qualifications: https://x.com/laxreference/status/17868 ... 4NsGOUnhaw

Here’s an excerpt: “Yale has 204.2 QW points; 203.7 for Cornell. Yale has a -17.3 bad loss factor; -17.4 for Cornell.

These are virtually indistinguishable resumes.”

Cornell beat Yale. That should be the determining factor here if it comes down to that. I don't see an argument for Yale getting a bid over Cornell other than these formulas that don't tell me more than a game between the teams did.

[faircornell]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

[tech37]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

"Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out." Seriously, CU fans don't believe this from a ND troll? I sure hope not.

[CU77]

I would have liked to see a lot more dodging from X by Goldstein.

[faircornell]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

"Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out." Seriously, CU fans don't believe this from an ND troll? I sure hope not.

Personally, I'd find it really hard to believe that Coach Murphy would endorse such a targeted attack on a player. However, when serious physical injury could result from a hit, and such hits are repetitive in the course of play, more punitive courses of action by referees are warranted.

[faircornell]

I would have liked to see a lot more dodging from X by Goldstein.

Agreed... his "soft hands" shot placement and wily shot selection seemed to be the key to beating Carroll.

[CU77]

Especially since nothing else was working.

In the dept of more bad news, Nova leads Gt 10-8 with 10 min to play, after trailing 8-1.

[Chousnake]

Does Georgetown drop below Cornell in RPI with a loss today? They are inept offensively right now. 8-1 is now 10-8. 9 straight goals for Villanova despite Georgetown's huge advantage in shots and face offs.

[BigTurn]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

"Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out." Seriously, CU fans don't believe this from a ND troll? I sure hope not.

I know that kind of scumbaggery flies at cuse as well, but go watch that hit from behind 3 seconds after Kirst gets rid of the ball and tell me they weren’t trying to take him out. You’re a clown.

[CU77]

Gonna wait for the end to run RPI.

Gt has tied it, but Nova's ball, 47 sec to go, time out, shot clock off

AND they're going to OT, 10-10

[Chousnake]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

"Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out." Seriously, CU fans don't believe this from a ND troll? I sure hope not.

I know that kind of scumbaggery flies at cuse as well, but go watch that hit from behind 3 seconds after Kirst gets rid of the ball and tell me they weren’t trying to take him out. You’re a clown.

That first hit from behind was as dirty a play as I've seen in a long time and warranted more than a two minute penalty. It should have been 3 minutes non-releasable and an ejection. There is no justification for that hit, from behind, that late. The second hit was bang/bang. It was a penalty, but it was a lacrosse play. The first hit took some premeditation and malice. There is no defending that play. No 18-22 year old should be hit like that. Think of how bad that hit in the back could have been and the injuries it could have caused. Just a terrible awful play.

[faircornell]

What a dirty play that was. No respect for Penn after that crap

I can't believe that Quint is defending thar hit as clean...

100% a penalty but I don’t think there’s anything dirty there. Kirst clearly trips into him.

I'm assuming this post was referring to the previous hit from behind. I don't think this hit was dirty so much as unfortunate. That said, still deserves the 2 minute unreleasable. Intent has nothing to do with it.

Talking about the hit on Kirst just now at the crease. Yes, definitely deserving of a penalty, but I don’t agree it was dirty or intentional. Think that’s what Chousnake was saying, unless he meant a different play.

After rewatching two of the hits from last night as posted recently on LacrosseNetwork, i was wrong. Those two hits on Kirst by #54 (3 seconds late and from behind), and by Leveille were complete BS. Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out.

As I noted on the Ivy thread, I thought that the hit from behind might have merited an ejection.

"Fairly obvious the game plan was to take Kirst out." Seriously, CU fans don't believe this from a ND troll? I sure hope not.

I know that kind of scumbaggery flies at cuse as well, but go watch that hit from behind 3 seconds after Kirst gets rid of the ball and tell me they weren’t trying to take him out. You’re a clown.

That first hit from behind was as dirty a play as I've seen in a long time and warranted more than a two minute penalty. It should have been 3 minutes non-releasable and an ejection. There is no justification for that hit, from behind, that late. The second hit was bang/bang. It was a penalty, but it was a lacrosse play. The first hit took some premeditation and malice. There is no defending that play. No 18-22 year old should be hit like that. Think of how bad that hit in the back could have been and the injuries it could have caused. Just a terrible awful play.

[FannOLax]

Gonna wait for the end to run RPI.

Gt has tied it, but Nova's ball, 47 sec to go, time out, shot clock off

AND they're going to OT, 10-10

Hoyas take it.

[laxfan1313]

Georgetown wins 11-10

[Chousnake]

Gonna wait for the end to run RPI.

Gt has tied it, but Nova's ball, 47 sec to go, time out, shot clock off

AND they're going to OT, 10-10

Hoyas take it.

OK. Let's go PSU.