NCAA Tournament

Jim Hyla

Trotsky

Scersk '97

underskill
I remember all the talk on this board a couple years ago about how well Yale's system would hold up on a national level, but seems to me regardless of the result today, that they have been skating evenly with both NoDak and Minnesota yesterday. Certainly no major shot disparities like some of the Cornell games against those teams.

This is their payback for 2011, when I thought they got jobbed a bit.

We'll see how well their system holds up next year with potentially shaky goaltending.

And without Miller.

They've lost a number of great players over the last few years.

Here's who they lose.

8 	Josh Balch 	F 	Sr. 	5-9 	180 	Wilmette, IL / Desmoines, Chicago (USHL)
21 	Colin Dueck 	D 	Sr. 	6-2 	220 	Calgary, AB / Nanaimo (BCHL)
28 	A. Laganiere 	F 	Sr. 	6-4 	215 	Ile Cadieux, QUE / Deerfield Academy
33 	Jeff Malcolm 	G 	Sr. 	6-2 	185 	Lethbridge, AB / Quesnel (BCHL)
31 	Nick Maricic 	G 	Sr. 	6-2 	212 	Alta Loma, CA / Tri-City (USHL)
17 	Andrew Miller 	F 	Sr. 	5-10 	180 	Bloomfield Hills, MI / Chicago (USHL)

Certainly Miller, but Malcolm has to be the toughest to replace.
[/code]

I meant the combined effect of the last 4 classes. I did a post on it a while ago, I don't remember the thread, but IIRC they've lost 6 guys > 100 pts with several > 150.

Q up 4-3. Q fans on their feet and slapping their thundersticks in excitement.

Q up 4-3 with 8 seconds to go.

Jesus, Canisius had a textbook chance with 1 second to go but Hartzell saves it and Q wins.

Trotsky
Q up 4-3 with 8 seconds to go.[/quote

And now they're done.

Scersk '97

BearLover
Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

So... "extended period of time" = 6 years? Troll, or too young to understand time?

The more accurate statement would be that Yale is better than Harvard right now, i.e., that they've replaced Harvard as the second-best Ivy.

Nope, they replaced Cornell as the best Ivy. Six years is forever in sports, and more than enough to show their success is more than one great player or a lucky recruiting class. Love the talking down to on these forums, though. It seems like I've been accused of being a troll or an idiot quite a few times in the past few days when it's been obvious I haven't been trolling and I've supported my arguments perfectly well.

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

Well, we're 1 game away from having two EZAC teams in the FF. That would be sort of cool.

Swampy

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

Well, we're 1 game away from having two EZAC teams in the FF. That would be sort of cool.

Would be the first time since the Great Divorce (last instance pre-formation of Hockey East was 1983, with Harvard and Providence).

It's pretty lame that a band at the UNH-UML game played "Hey Bâby." It's one thing when fans of other teams steal our cheers, but when they steal songs chosen because of their relations to our players, it just makes the other teams' bands look stupid.

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

I agree with all of this except the bolded part.

Any link for live stream of the Union vs BC game ?

BearLover

Scersk '97

BearLover
Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

So... "extended period of time" = 6 years? Troll, or too young to understand time?

The more accurate statement would be that Yale is better than Harvard right now, i.e., that they've replaced Harvard as the second-best Ivy.

Nope, they replaced Cornell as the best Ivy. Six years is forever in sports, and more than enough to show their success is more than one great player or a lucky recruiting class. Love the talking down to on these forums, though. It seems like I've been accused of being a troll or an idiot quite a few times in the past few days when it's been obvious I haven't been trolling and I've supported my arguments perfectly well.

Agree. Yale is the better program right now, no question, and the casual way people are tossing out the trolling accusation is silly and annoying in equal measure. Quite apart from the results, I much prefer Allain's brand of hockey to Schafer's, but I've also thought Yale has been flat out the better team during recent years. And it's been impressive to watch Yale not merely beat Minnesota and NoDak but hang with them, stride for stride, check for check. I would argue Schafer has some built-in recruiting advantages vis-a-vis Allain (the storied tradition, Lynah, the Ag School, the alumni support), but they're not translating into supremacy on the ice.

HockeyMan

BearLover

Scersk '97

BearLover
Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

So... "extended period of time" = 6 years? Troll, or too young to understand time?

The more accurate statement would be that Yale is better than Harvard right now, i.e., that they've replaced Harvard as the second-best Ivy.

Nope, they replaced Cornell as the best Ivy. Six years is forever in sports, and more than enough to show their success is more than one great player or a lucky recruiting class. Love the talking down to on these forums, though. It seems like I've been accused of being a troll or an idiot quite a few times in the past few days when it's been obvious I haven't been trolling and I've supported my arguments perfectly well.

Agree. Yale is the better program right now, no question, and the casual way people are tossing out the trolling accusation is silly and annoying in equal measure. Quite apart from the results, I much prefer Allain's brand of hockey to Schafer's, but I've also thought Yale has been flat out the better team during recent years. And it's been impressive to watch Yale not merely beat Minnesota and NoDak but hang with them, stride for stride, check for check. I would argue Schafer has some built-in recruiting advantages vis-a-vis Allain (the storied tradition, Lynah, the Ag School, the alumni support), but they're not translating into supremacy on the ice.

I saw nothing "reasoned" about BearLover's assertion, made in the manner of an overheated schoolboy, that Yale's program is "better," whatever that means, than ours is right now. Where is the support? Feel free to be pedantic.

I'll help you. Use Allain's tenure, since you love him so. We're 4-10-2 vs. them, with two very high profile losses. They've won 2 ECAC championships; we've won one. They've "won" two #1 seeds; we've won none. (But then, the RS "championship" is worth a warm bucket of piss.)

Have they had our number lately? Yes. Are they unbeatable, no. Just show some perspective. For my part, I'm beginning to be... worried. Come back to me when we haven't beaten them in the regular season for 10 years or so. Come back to me when they've been in the final four multiple times, particularly if they win a championship. Come back to me in, well, three years or so. Then we'll have a discussion.

They've had the best of us, lately. So what? It probably won't last.

If Yale is worthy of emulation, we should recall in 2012 Yale was 16-16-3 overall and knocked out by Harvard in the QF.

Evidently one mediocre season does not signal the Eschaton.

profudge
Any link for live stream of the Union vs BC game ?

ESPN3

Swampy
It's pretty lame that a band at the UNH-UML game played "Hey Bâby." It's one thing when fans of other teams steal our cheers, but when they steal songs chosen because of their relations to our players, it just makes the other teams' bands look stupid.

Interesting if true. Do most here believe that the song wasn't used by colleges before we started for Bâby? I still sing the kill some one version whenever it's played.

I've heard it at NHL games and MLB games. Either we are very influential or it's a coincidence that we had the Bâby cheer.

Union up 2-0 early in the second. ECAC!

Union now 3-0.

If the ECAC is responsible for killing off Minnesota, North Dakota, and BC, the entire Free World, let alone the hockey world, owes the conference a beer.

Barry Melrose
It's a brain-crap by Milner.

Scersk '97

HockeyMan

BearLover

Scersk '97

BearLover
Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

So... "extended period of time" = 6 years? Troll, or too young to understand time?

The more accurate statement would be that Yale is better than Harvard right now, i.e., that they've replaced Harvard as the second-best Ivy.

Nope, they replaced Cornell as the best Ivy. Six years is forever in sports, and more than enough to show their success is more than one great player or a lucky recruiting class. Love the talking down to on these forums, though. It seems like I've been accused of being a troll or an idiot quite a few times in the past few days when it's been obvious I haven't been trolling and I've supported my arguments perfectly well.

Agree. Yale is the better program right now, no question, and the casual way people are tossing out the trolling accusation is silly and annoying in equal measure. Quite apart from the results, I much prefer Allain's brand of hockey to Schafer's, but I've also thought Yale has been flat out the better team during recent years. And it's been impressive to watch Yale not merely beat Minnesota and NoDak but hang with them, stride for stride, check for check. I would argue Schafer has some built-in recruiting advantages vis-a-vis Allain (the storied tradition, Lynah, the Ag School, the alumni support), but they're not translating into supremacy on the ice.

I saw nothing "reasoned" about BearLover's assertion, made in the manner of an overheated schoolboy, that Yale's program is "better," whatever that means, than ours is right now. Where is the support? Feel free to be pedantic.

I'll help you. Use Allain's tenure, since you love him so. We're 4-10-2 vs. them, with two very high profile losses. They've won 2 ECAC championships; we've won one. They've "won" two #1 seeds; we've won none. (But then, the RS "championship" is worth a warm bucket of piss.)

Have they had our number lately? Yes. Are they unbeatable, no. Just show some perspective. For my part, I'm beginning to be... worried. Come back to me when we haven't beaten them in the regular season for 10 years or so. Come back to me when they've been in the final four multiple times, particularly if they win a championship. Come back to me in, well, three years or so. Then we'll have a discussion.

They've had the best of us, lately. So what? It probably won't last.

A tad defensive, aren't we? Who said anything about Yale being unbeatable? We've won now and then against them in recent years, and we'll continue to do so; what's that got to with the issue at hand? When you say you don't want to have a discussion until after we go 0 for 20 against them in the RS in the next decade, you sound like, well, an overheated schoolboy.

HockeyMan
When you say you don't want to have a discussion until after we go 0 for 20 against them in the RS in the next decade, you sound like, well, an overheated schoolboy.

I think that was a reference to The Streak against Harvard from 1986-95, when we actually were 0-for-decade (0-17-3).

Schafer has followed that up by going 22-11-3 in the RS againsat Harvard.

I think it is a little silly to say that Yale has bypassed us as a program already. It is NOT silly to say that they have been our equal or better over the course of the last 5-6 years - though these have hardly been lean times for Cornell - nor that they are a real threat to bypass us in the coming years.

On the other hand, Cornell is still pulling in blue-chip recruits, played very good hockey at the end of the season, were a goal away from the Final Four 12 months ago... so I hardly think it is time to push the panic button.

and meanwhile, Union is up 3-0 over BC almost halfway through the second period

ugarte
I think it is a little silly to say that Yale has bypassed us as a program already. It is NOT silly to say that they have been our equal or better over the course of the last 5-6 years - though these have hardly been lean times for Cornell - nor that they are a real threat to bypass us in the coming years.

A: Games over .500 in ECAC RS, 2008-2013:

+36 Yale
+33 Union
+26 Cornell
+12 Quinnipiac
+02 Princeton
all others at or under .500


B: Games over .500 in ECAC RS, 2002-2007:

+63 Cornell
+29 Harvard
+29 Dartmouth
+19 Colgate
all others at or under .500


C: Games over .500 in ECAC RS, 1996-2001:

+61 Clarkson
+31 St. Lawrence
+22 Cornell
+17 Colgate
+13 RPI
all others at or under .500

Appearance (1 yes, 0 no) in Tables C, B, A:

111 Cornell
011 Colgate
100 Clarkson
100 St. Lawrence
100 RPI
010 Harvard
010 Dartmouth
001 Yale
001 Union
001 Quinnipiac
001 Princeton
000 Brown

Scersk '97
I saw nothing "reasoned" about BearLover's assertion, made in the manner of an overheated schoolboy, that Yale's program is "better," whatever that means, than ours is right now. Where is the support? Feel free to be pedantic.

I'll help you. Use Allain's tenure, since you love him so. We're 4-10-2 vs. them, with two very high profile losses. They've won 2 ECAC championships; we've won one. They've "won" two #1 seeds; we've won none. (But then, the RS "championship" is worth a warm bucket of piss.)

Have they had our number lately? Yes. Are they unbeatable, no. Just show some perspective. For my part, I'm beginning to be... worried. Come back to me when we haven't beaten them in the regular season for 10 years or so. Come back to me when they've been in the final four multiple times, particularly if they win a championship. Come back to me in, well, three years or so. Then we'll have a discussion.

They've had the best of us, lately. So what? It probably won't last.

Since 2008-09, Yale is 10-2-0 against us (goals 46-26), have finished above us in four of the last five seasons (avg. finish 2.6 vs 3.8), have taken 146 ECAC points to our 133, two ECAC first-place finishes (none), two ECAC titles (one), four Ivy titles (one), four NCAA appearances (three), one Frozen four (none). That's a bit more comprehensive as a comparison than you gave. Last I checked, the goal of hockey is to win games by scoring more goals than your opponent, and Yale has done more of this than us in the last five seasons. I'm not going to let us get whupped for another five seasons before pointing out that there may be something wrong here. And why couldn't it last?

HockeyMan
A tad defensive, aren't we? Who said anything about Yale being unbeatable? We've won now and then against them in recent years, and we'll continue to do so; what's that got to with the issue at hand? When you say you don't want to have a discussion until after we go 0 for 20 against them in the RS in the next decade, you sound like, well, an overheated schoolboy.

Yale figured as unbeatable:

BearLover
They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

Otherwise, you just reiterated the point I'm trying to make. I'm perfectly willing to say that Yale has replaced Harvard, particularly until Harvard fires Teddy; Yale'll need to dominate us for a while before I'll crown them the Ivy All-Time Champeen!!!111

I might—might—entertain the notion that, recently, Yale has pulled even with us. I think that's temporary; BearLover seems not to think so.

As far as support and pedantry goes, though: Do you know to what I'm referring with 0 and 20? When that happened, we weren't the best Ivy... by a long shot. What about my list of stats? That's support, which I've seen none of from BearLover. How does he support his notion that Yale will continue to "have our number?"

And sure I'm defensive. What I wonder is why everyone else isn't? Many people on this forum seem ready to throw in the towel, throw the baby out with the bathwater, and/or [insert further homespun phrase here]. What I read here lately are the ramblings of a bunch of pretty fair-weather fans who lack perspective. As a '97 grad, it's something I'll never understand, probably because I saw much of '87–'93 as a townie, and all of '93–'95 as a student; indeed, I'm trying to bring some of that perspective to this discussion. Take it for what you will.

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

When the other teams in the ECAC do well it does directly help Cornell. There's the ranking effect - strength of schedule. There's the "playing quality opponents" effect. And there's the reputation effect (easier to recruit good players when they don't think they're going to play in some backwater league that won't help their hockey development.)

Not rooting for ECAC teams in the tournament is fine if 1) you want Cornell to be a big fish in a small pond and are happy for anything that keeps the pond smaller and 2)you like seeing the big name schools dominate and then bad mouth the less fortunate.

KeithK
When the other teams in the ECAC do well it does directly help Cornell. There's the ranking effect - strength of schedule. There's the "playing quality opponents" effect. And there's the reputation effect (easier to recruit good players when they don't think they're going to play in some backwater league that won't help their hockey development.)

This is especially important for the ECAC right now in its history. When a recruit is winnowing down his choices to the ECAC and, say, Hockey East, it's very hard to counter the argument that since the ECAC has not won an NCAA title since 1989, and has not even appeared in a NCAA Final since 1991, the league is inferior competition and not as strong for the recruit's development.

The ECAC needs to do well in the NCAA. We need championships. Once the ECAC tournament ends, the other 11 members become my second favorite team.

Union 4-0 over BC in the 2nd. This is great.

Ben
And why couldn't it last?

Oh, it could. I won't say that Yale's success, particularly against us, hasn't been a bit disturbing. I just think it won't last. Just a hunch, that's all.

A couple of months ago, forecasters predicted that we'd have a pretty quick end to winter. Turns out that the skiing has been great this spring. Maybe it'll be great next year too, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Predictions work like that.

Scersk '97

And sure I'm defensive. What I wonder is why everyone else isn't?

I dunno. I guess I think some good points are being made by the pro-Yale forces. I've disagreed where I thought it was relevant without getting defensive. You can start to sound a little unhinged when you get defensive.

Hypothetically.

2nd period in the books, Union up 4-0 and outshooting BC 2:1. This is an ass-whooping so far.

Scersk '97
And sure I'm defensive. What I wonder is why everyone else isn't? Many people on this forum seem ready to throw in the towel, throw the baby out with the bathwater, and/or [insert further homespun phrase here]. What I read here lately are the ramblings of a bunch of pretty fair-weather fans who lack perspective. As a '97 grad, it's something I'll never understand, probably because I saw much of '87–'93 as a townie, and all of '93–'95 as a student; indeed, I'm trying to bring some of that perspective to this discussion. Take it for what you will.

I hear this a lot in sports. Never question your own team and its leadership, or you're being a bad fan. It's as ridiculous to say that we're in a golden age of Cornell hockey because you were first exposed to it in the early '90s as it would be to say that we've been terrible for ages if you first watched in the late '60s and early '70s. Averaging out over a long period of time (mid-60s to now), I think it's reasonable to expect the following each season: between 5th and 3rd or above in the RS; first round playoff victory at home; ECAC last four and NCAA appearances every 2/3 years; ECAC title every 3-5 years. These aren't rigorous criteria, but a set of expectations over several years. While this season did not live up to any of those expectations, the more important concern is that it drags the program down from that set of expectations as a moving average, and may be the start of a downward trend. We may be the Faithful, but my faith doesn't involve being led around blind and unquestioning.

KeithK

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

When the other teams in the ECAC do well it does directly help Cornell. There's the ranking effect - strength of schedule. There's the "playing quality opponents" effect. And there's the reputation effect (easier to recruit good players when they don't think they're going to play in some backwater league that won't help their hockey development.)

Not rooting for ECAC teams in the tournament is fine if 1) you want Cornell to be a big fish in a small pond and are happy for anything that keeps the pond smaller and 2)you like seeing the big name schools dominate and then bad mouth the less fortunate.

So right you are. That's why right now I'm ecstatic. Assuming U can hold on, we'll have a Frozen Four with 2 ECAC teams, 1 HE, and 1 WCHA or CCHA. How the hell can't you be happy with that. Go to the FF, wear your jersey with pride. See what those WCHA fans say now. Yes, it may only be one year, but as Keith said, it can be head a long distance when you go to recruit.

Jim Hyla
Assuming U can hold on, we'll have a Frozen Four with 2 ECAC teams, 1 HE, and 1 WCHA or CCHA. How the hell can't you be happy with that.

Ecstatic.

And for those of you wondering hypothetically, those two bracket entries do not intersect in the SF. Just sayin'.

Trotsky
And for those of you wondering hypothetically, those two bracket entries do not intersect in the SF. Just sayin'.

So you're saying we still could have no ECAC team in the finals? Lovely.

I'm rooting for 'em. That doesn't mean I'm counting chickens. (I'm still expecting BC to come roaring back in the 3rd.)

KeithK

Trotsky
And for those of you wondering hypothetically, those two bracket entries do not intersect in the SF. Just sayin'.

So you're saying we still could have no ECAC team in the finals? Lovely.

I'm rooting for 'em. That doesn't mean I'm counting chickens. (I'm still expecting BC to come roaring back in the 3rd.)

Of course. That bastard won't be dead until it's staked, exposed to sunlight, and drowned in running water.

Ben
I hear this a lot in sports. Never question your own team and its leadership, or you're being a bad fan.

"Fair-weather" may have gone a bit too far. Criticize the team and its leadership all you like. I have, but I don't tend to do so here, for whatever reason; indeed, I'm probably a bit more critical (and certainly more engaged) during better seasons. Just realize that it could be far worse.

But we were talking about—completely off-topic for this thread—the relative fortunes of Yale and Cornell. In a sense, we're arguing about the definition of "lately," that's all. Lately means something different for me now than it used to. We can agree to disagree.

5-0 Union

Trotsky
5-0 Union

"Knock, knock!"

Jim Hyla

KeithK

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

When the other teams in the ECAC do well it does directly help Cornell. There's the ranking effect - strength of schedule. There's the "playing quality opponents" effect. And there's the reputation effect (easier to recruit good players when they don't think they're going to play in some backwater league that won't help their hockey development.)

Not rooting for ECAC teams in the tournament is fine if 1) you want Cornell to be a big fish in a small pond and are happy for anything that keeps the pond smaller and 2)you like seeing the big name schools dominate and then bad mouth the less fortunate.

So right you are. That's why right now I'm ecstatic. Assuming U can hold on, we'll have a Frozen Four with 2 ECAC teams, 1 HE, and 1 WCHA or CCHA. How the hell can't you be happy with that. Go to the FF, wear your jersey with pride. See what those WCHA fans say now. Yes, it may only be one year, but as Keith said, it can be head a long distance when you go to recruit.

There are two obvious things here that have a direct bearing on the turn this thread has taken and the Should he Stay thread.

1. The ECAC's national performance this year is the best it's been in decades. Obviously the level of competition in the league has improved tremendously. So it may not be that Cornell has declined or that other teams have become dominant, but rather that the overall level of competition has improved so that no team is dominant year after year.

2. I'll grant that Yale has had Cornell's number the past few years. If this persists, Schafer has to adjust or die. I think he knows what he's doing, but for argument's sake let's assume he didn't see this coming but he's smart. So first he needed a few years to recognize the trend. Second, he needed to start to find a different style to counter the new best practice one. This may be entirely different, but more likely it would be a modified or hybrid version of the style his teams have played before. Instead of the big-bruiser, wear-them-down, lock-up defense and capitalize-on-mistakes style, he experiments with something more wide open. This might take a few years to work things out. Third, he'd have to recruit for the new system, and the system would have to adjust to the kinds of players he recruits successfully. In short, the game might get ahead of an excellent coach, but an excellent coach makes adjustments. With recruiting trends and constraints, the adjustments will take some time and won't happen overnight.

Swampy
2. I'll grant that Yale has had Cornell's number the past few years. If this persists, Schafer has to adjust or die. I think he knows what he's doing, but for argument's sake let's assume he didn't see this coming but he's smart. So first he needed a few years to recognize the trend. Second, he needed to start to find a different style to counter the new best practice one. This may be entirely different, but more likely it would be a modified or hybrid version of the style his teams have played before. Instead of the big-bruiser, wear-them-down, lock-up defense and capitalize-on-mistakes style, he experiments with something more wide open. This might take a few years to work things out. Third, he'd have to recruit for the new system, and the system would have to adjust to the kinds of players he recruits successfully. In short, the game might get ahead of an excellent coach, but an excellent coach makes adjustments. With recruiting trends and constraints, the adjustments will take some time and won't happen overnight.

Well said.

Grosenick playing well this period.

Swampy
1. The ECAC's national performance this year is the best it's been in decades. Obviously the level of competition in the league has improved tremendously.

Counting the current teams, best performance since 1980. Jeez! Break up the ECAC!

This will be the first time ever that three ECAC teams have won NCAA games.

And that's it. 5-1 Union wins, ECAC teams now 4-0.

Trotsky
And that's it. 5-1 Union wins, ECAC teams now 4-0.

The ECAC will be 5–1 after tomorrow. Slackers.

I'm picking Union, but then I would always pick the streaking tournament champ over the "regular-season champion."

Go Union/Quinnipac. Go Yale. Show us how it's done.

The USCHO Forum is something to behold right now.

Trotsky
The USCHO Forum is something to behold right now.

It is! And it's hilarious!

Fantastic, I am guessing this is a bit of a surprise to the BC fans. Go U.

Scersk '97
Whereas, while we're on this line of inquiry, RPI loses practically nobody. Casey continues to rebuild at Clarkson. Perhaps Harvard finally fires Teddy?

I have to think that next year is the year that the traditional powers of the ECAC (RPI, SLU, Clarkson, Harvard, and, well, us) reassert themselves.

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

It's too bad that RPI doesn't do cheers like Cornell does of "Good Goalie, Bad Goalie" and the like. I'd love to see "Parker Reno, Janet Reno" when playing Cornell.

Thank you.

An intersting observation: During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs. My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!

Jeff Hopkins '82
An intersting observation: During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs. My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!

Maybe you wouldn't if you were the incorrect.

Now we've done it, this thread has been permanently damaged.

Jeff Hopkins '82
An intersting observation: During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs. My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!

I don't think we should be using words like hate. It is far too offesive to the tender souls which are it's object. I think what you really meant was "I have some mild ambivilence about political correctness but I understand that my ambivilence might cause the oppression of someone, so I will not express it in any terms that could be percieved as negative."

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

We want Yale, Union and Quinnipiac to keep winning until one of them poses for the winner's photo in two weeks. A competitive league breeds respect and draws better players. Some will go to the other schools. Enough will go to Cornell. We (Cornell and the ECAC) have been down far too long on the national scene where down means "didn't win the NCAA title." (OK, feel free to argue about how having 2 of 4 in the FF makes us look good. It's a start.)

Six years is enough to know if you've got a good program, four years is enough to have a dynasty if they coincide with your four years at Cornell, and you need a decade to tell if the program and coach are going to be legendary. Odds are if you have a coach who's on his way to being a legend, he'll get poached in less then 10 by Hopkins, Penn State, BC or someone with an offer of more dollars.

The flip side is it takes about that long for the school to know if your program is in trouble. (Fans will say they know after back to back losses.) So players and fans suffer for too long.

billhoward

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

We want Yale, Union and Quinnipiac to keep winning until one of them poses for the winner's photo in two weeks. A competitive league breeds respect and draws better players. Some will go to the other schools. Enough will go to Cornell. We (Cornell and the ECAC) have been down far too long on the national scene where down means "didn't win the NCAA title." (OK, feel free to argue about how having 2 of 4 in the FF makes us look good. It's a start.)

Six years is enough to know if you've got a good program, four years is enough to have a dynasty if they coincide with your four years at Cornell, and you need a decade to tell if the program and coach are going to be legendary. Odds are if you have a coach who's on his way to being a legend, he'll get poached in less then 10 by Hopkins, Penn State, BC or someone with an offer of more dollars.

The flip side is it takes about that long for the school to know if your program is in trouble. (Fans will say they know after back to back losses.) So players and fans suffer for too long.

As my brain was working overnight, it came up with what might be the strongest reason, at least for next season, to want all ECAC teams to do well. Maybe, just maybe, the players and coaches will see what can be done and be encouraged to start a strong off-season program.

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.

A rising tide lifts all boats. I'm sick and tired of Cornell playing down to an also-ran league. And guess what? That isn't the case right now, and hopefully the ECAC can keep it up and continue to embarrass Hockey Least.

Suck it, BC.

Jim Hyla
So right you are. That's why right now I'm ecstatic. Assuming U can hold on, we'll have a Frozen Four with 2 ECAC teams, 1 HE, and 1 WCHA or CCHA. How the hell can't you be happy with that. Go to the FF, wear your jersey with pride. See what those WCHA fans say now. Yes, it may only be one year, but as Keith said, it can be head a long distance when you go to recruit.

I'm considering making a t-shirt with a giant "Z" on it to wear around Pittsburgh.

Yesterday was a historic day for us long-time ECAC fans...I think everybody gets this. And while it's true that the league could get wiped in the semis, the teams remaining aren't distasteful at all. In the last year of the current conference layout, all the SuperPowers are dead. No BC, BU, Maine, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, North Dakota, Denver, Wisconsin. They're all gone.

[Edit] Some research: There has been two previous FF without at least one of: BU, BC, Mich, NoDak, or Minn. 1969 and 1970.

I'm going to enjoy the hell out of this Frozen Four.

Jim Hyla
Maybe, just maybe, the players and coaches will see what can be done and be encouraged to start a strong off-season program.

I've wondered whether there might be a little bit of a "5 minute mile" mental barrier. From the mid-80s through mid-90s the ECAC Championship was like that for Cornell: we tried to get in position in the final four and hoped that everything would break exactly right (like 1986).

When Schafer came along and won it in his first two years, that completely demythologized the ECACs. From 2 finals in the prior 14 years we went to 10 in the next 16. It was still great to win, but it was no longer supernatural.

Now something similar may be happening with the ECAC in the NCAAs. In the 15 years prior to 2012 the ECAC sent just 2 teams to the Frozen Four: SLU in 2000 and Cornell in 2003. Now we will have sent 3 teams in 2 seasons. We still regard actually winning the national title as an occult act, but maybe that mental barrier will fall as well.

Kyle Rose
Suck it, BC.

Every time a BC fan cries an angel gets his wings.

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

A Yale/Union or Yale/Quinnipiac final is the best proof there could be that 1) Schafer is done, his time has passed 2) he and the rest of the staff are being out-coached by many other teams in league, and 3) a team can be razed and rebooted in less time than it takes to try and retool a system THAT NO LONGER WORKS.

You can talk about how many times Schafer has led us into the NCAAs, but he has only led us into the Frozen Four ONCE, and NEVER into the title game. Reframed another way: there are now three ECAC teams (two after tomorrow) that will have gone as far as we ever have in his too-long tenure. The two remaining ECAC teams will have a pretty good shot at doing what coach Schafer has NEVER done, get into a title game.

You people have gone past blind allegiance into delusion, you can say whatever you want but if you look objectively at the situation you will see how far this program has fallen.

And let me repeat again, because it's really important, these programs have been built from the ground up while Cornell sat by and did NOTHING, even though the signs were there. Congratulations, we're Blackberry (or Palm.) You call every negative poster a troll, and that's fine, but it's the program that pays the price, we are now a punchline---"Look at all these ECAC teams, what happened to Cornell?" Indeed.

ScrewBU

BearLover
Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning. It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now. I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program. They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

A Yale/Union or Yale/Quinnipiac final is the best proof there could be that 1) Schafer is done, his time has passed 2) he and the rest of the staff are being out-coached by many other teams in league, and 3) a team can be razed and rebooted in less time than it takes to try and retool a system THAT NO LONGER WORKS.

You can talk about how many times Schafer has led us into the NCAAs, but he has only led us into the Frozen Four ONCE, and NEVER into the title game. Reframed another way: there are now three ECAC teams (two after tomorrow) that will have gone as far as we ever have in his too-long tenure. The two remaining ECAC teams will have a pretty good shot at doing what coach Schafer has NEVER done, get into a title game.

You people have gone past blind allegiance into delusion, you can say whatever you want but if you look objectively at the situation you will see how far this program has fallen.

And let me repeat again, because it's really important, these programs have been built from the ground up while Cornell sat by and did NOTHING, even though the signs were there. Congratulations, we're Blackberry (or Palm.) You call every negative poster a troll, and that's fine, but it's the program that pays the price, we are now a punchline---"Look at all these ECAC teams, what happened to Cornell?" Indeed.

Maybe I shouldn't even answer, but here goes. Yale and Union have built good programs, yes. The jury is still out on Q. They really haven't done much this year, unless you say winning the regular season and then folding would be great. If they get to FF, OK. But this is just 1 year and they may fold next year after losing a lot of talent.

I've said that Yale and U are our equals or more right now. But who else? So far of the 3 teams you mention, they have been led to the FF a total of 3 times, or ave 1 per team. That's hardly soooo much better. And the rest of the league?

I know you'll never be convinced that there isn't a pot of gold (i.e. coach) right out there at the end of your rainbow, but until you can show me what would be better (meaning who) and that it's feasible, then I'm not going to go running after that rainbow.

Cornell alumnus Darren Eliot doing the color for the St. Cloud - Miami game.

To show how different college hockey used to be, Eliot was First Team All-American in 1983 with a GAA of 3.74 and a save percentage of .892.

I just posted this on USCHO where it will probably get buried, but I figured it would interest some people here, and this is IMO as good a place as any. Here are three tweets from RPI coach Seth Appert who will be the ECAC's representative to the NCAA starting either next season or at this year's FF (don't know when the terms start).

"6 WCHA teams that qualified for NCAAs played 35 non conference games at home and only 10 on road thats a joke/criteria needs adjusting"
"I grew up WCHA fan/coached in league for 9 years-not blaming programs-systematic issue we need to address w weight NC games carry in PWR"
"issue has nothing to do w us not getting in-we lost in playoffs that's on me n team but we need to weight road wins in NC w more importance"

ursusminor
I just posted this on USCHO where it will probably get buried, but I figured it would interest some people here, and this is IMO as good a place as any. Here are [URL="[url]https://twitter.com/SethAppert"[/url];]three tweets[/URL] from RPI coach Seth Appert who will be the ECAC's representative starting either next season or at this year's FF (don't know when the terms start).

"6 WCHA teams that qualified for NCAAs played 35 non conference games at home and only 10 on road thats a joke/criteria needs adjusting"
"I grew up WCHA fan/coached in league for 9 years-not blaming programs-systematic issue we need to address w weight NC games carry in PWR"
"issue has nothing to do w us not getting in-we lost in playoffs that's on me n team but we need to weight road wins in NC w more importance"

great

SCSU in the final four

St. Cloud beats Miami. Some words from the CCHA's attending physician:

Q ripping Union. 5-0 after two.

jeff '84
Q ripping Union. 5-0 after two.

Maybe they'll beat someone else 10-0.

Interesting Union took 2 five-minute majors and game disqualifications in the game. Is it the coach's fault?

Scersk '97

Trotsky
5-0 Union

"Knock, knock!"

Unless I had a really bad browser malfunction, THIS one needs you badly.

ursusminor

Scersk '97
Whereas, while we're on this line of inquiry, RPI loses practically nobody. Casey continues to rebuild at Clarkson. Perhaps Harvard finally fires Teddy?

I have to think that next year is the year that the traditional powers of the ECAC (RPI, SLU, Clarkson, Harvard, and, well, us) reassert themselves.

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

It's too bad that RPI doesn't do cheers like Cornell does of "Good Goalie, Bad Goalie" and the like. I'd love to see "Parker Reno, Janet Reno" when playing Cornell.

Can someone check the bylaws and see if we can confer an Honorary Lynah Faithful status on ursusminor? Or at least a "Spirit of Lynah" award?

ursusminor

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

I think you also have to worry about a defection to another Division One school. Word was that Appert was looking for a position at Northeastern a couple years ago after his NCAA appearance. Hopefully he's growing to love the hot dogs at Famous Lunch, but I wouldn't bet a quart of zippy sauce on it.

TimV

ursusminor

Scersk '97
Whereas, while we're on this line of inquiry, RPI loses practically nobody. Casey continues to rebuild at Clarkson. Perhaps Harvard finally fires Teddy?

I have to think that next year is the year that the traditional powers of the ECAC (RPI, SLU, Clarkson, Harvard, and, well, us) reassert themselves.

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

It's too bad that RPI doesn't do cheers like Cornell does of "Good Goalie, Bad Goalie" and the like. I'd love to see "Parker Reno, Janet Reno" when playing Cornell.

Can someone check the bylaws and see if we can confer an Honorary Lynah Faithful status on ursusminor? Or at least a "Spirit of Lynah" award?

I must have said something wrong.

marty

ursusminor

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

I think you also have to worry about a defection to another Division One school. Word was that Appert was looking for a position at Northeastern a couple years ago after his NCAA appearance. Hopefully he's growing to love the hot dogs at Famous Lunch, but I wouldn't bet a quart of zippy sauce on it.

I am concerned about that, but even people here have said that he has to win something first.

ursusminor

marty

ursusminor

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

I think you also have to worry about a defection to another Division One school. Word was that Appert was looking for a position at Northeastern a couple years ago after his NCAA appearance. Hopefully he's growing to love the hot dogs at Famous Lunch, but I wouldn't bet a quart of zippy sauce on it.

I am concerned about that, but even people here have said that he has to win something first.

Denver has a sudden opening, with George Gwozdecky unexpectedly departing after 19 seasons.

kingpin248

ursusminor

marty

ursusminor

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

I think you also have to worry about a defection to another Division One school. Word was that Appert was looking for a position at Northeastern a couple years ago after his NCAA appearance. Hopefully he's growing to love the hot dogs at Famous Lunch, but I wouldn't bet a quart of zippy sauce on it.

I am concerned about that, but even people here have said that he has to win something first.

Denver has a sudden opening, with George Gwozdecky unexpectedly departing after 19 seasons.

I've started my stopwatch for the overly-sanctimonious "Denver has the guts to do what Cornell didn't..." post from ScrewBU.

+1.

Love this quote from their AD:

CHN article
“We certainly wish George the best in his future endeavors and we are thankful for his 19 years at the helm of our hockey program,” said Denver athletic director Peg Bradley-Doppes. “He certainly had his fair share of success, returning the program to the pinnacle of the collegiate hockey world during our great run in the middle of the previous decade."

Interesting word choices in this article. Looks like it wasn't mutual...

BMac
+1.

Love this quote from their AD:

CHN article
“We certainly wish George the best in his future endeavors and we are thankful for his 19 years at the helm of our hockey program,” said Denver athletic director Peg Bradley-Doppes. “He certainly had his fair share of success, returning the program to the pinnacle of the collegiate hockey world during our great run in the middle of the previous decade."

Interesting word choices in this article. Looks like it wasn't mutual...

Quite a surprise to me. I have to think there was more going on there than wins and losses.

RichH

kingpin248

ursusminor

marty

ursusminor

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

I think you also have to worry about a defection to another Division One school. Word was that Appert was looking for a position at Northeastern a couple years ago after his NCAA appearance. Hopefully he's growing to love the hot dogs at Famous Lunch, but I wouldn't bet a quart of zippy sauce on it.

I am concerned about that, but even people here have said that he has to win something first.

Denver has a sudden opening, with George Gwozdecky unexpectedly departing after 19 seasons.

I've started my stopwatch for the overly-sanctimonious "Denver has the guts to do what Cornell didn't..." post from ScrewBU.

What I expected was "here's the qualified, available coach you've been saying doesn't exist." Because... it's hard to argue with that.

Also, don't fire Schafer.

Scersk '97

Swampy
1. The ECAC's national performance this year is the best it's been in decades. Obviously the level of competition in the league has improved tremendously.

Counting the current teams, best performance since 1980. Jeez! Break up the ECAC!

Clearly, being the only league untouched by the coming apocalypse has left us at the Power Conference.

This is a pretty amazing Frozen Four field. Just about the only way it could be better is if MankatoMinnesota State had come out of the Midwest instead of SCSU. I know Penn State and the Big T6n caused the whole mess, but I still blame the NCHC schools for bolting the established Western conferences and leaving them to collapse like a house of cards.

scoop85

BMac
+1.

Love this quote from their AD:

CHN article
“We certainly wish George the best in his future endeavors and we are thankful for his 19 years at the helm of our hockey program,” said Denver athletic director Peg Bradley-Doppes. “He certainly had his fair share of success, returning the program to the pinnacle of the collegiate hockey world during our great run in the middle of the previous decade."

Interesting word choices in this article. Looks like it wasn't mutual...

Quite a surprise to me. I have to think there was more going on there than wins and losses.

Sounds like it. Gwod was probably asking for more money (there are references to "contract demands" and the administration might have gotten fed up with him.

BMac
+1.

Love this quote from their AD:

CHN article
“We certainly wish George the best in his future endeavors and we are thankful for his 19 years at the helm of our hockey program,” said Denver athletic director Peg Bradley-Doppes. “He certainly had his fair share of success, returning the program to the pinnacle of the collegiate hockey world during our great run in the middle of the previous decade."

Interesting word choices in this article. Looks like it wasn't mutual...

According to the USCHO article:

Gwozdecky, 59, was to complete a 12-year contract after next season and told the Denver Post before the season was over that he thought an extension was on the way. Instead, according to two Post sources, Gwozdecky was fired and the school will pay the remaining year on his contract.

Read more: [www.uscho.com]

Not too mutual.

From USCHO - Time to give ECAC its due:

[www.uscho.com]

Quinnipiac goaltender Eric Hartzell is in the Hobey Hat Trick.

[www.uscho.com]

Nice article from USCHO on the '51 and '52 Yale teams and getting to the NCAAs.

Many things don't change with time:

“I think the ’51 and ’52 teams were equally good. The ’51 team had a better record, but we didn’t go out West that year at Christmas,” explained Larry Noble Jr., who captained the 1953 edition of the Bulldogs icers. “In ’52, we went out and played Denver, Colorado College and Minnesota — two games each

the selection committee — I’m not sure who it was made up of — was highly influenced by the Boston sportswriters. They were always pushing [Boston College] and BU to go out as the two [Eastern] representatives,”

That 1951 team had only one loss at the time the selection committee was supposed to meet. With a tough decision looming, the group delayed the vote until the Harvard-Yale game, the penultimate of Yale’s regular season. Harvard won.

“Two hours later, they selected two other teams,” Noble said.

But much like with CU Lax, a tournament, or lack thereof, allowed them to get in.

“They decided that BC, BU, Yale and St. Lawrence were the four best teams, and they really couldn’t decide among them,” Noble said, “so they decreed that there would be a playoff among these four teams. BC and BU thought they deserved to be picked, like they always did, and refused to play in the playoff. So, I think to their huge surprise, the selection committee picked Yale and St. Lawrence.”

nyc94
Quinnipiac goaltender Eric Hartzell is in the Hobey Hat Trick.

[www.uscho.com]

Another year, another "Well, if LeNeveu didn't..."

Jordan 04

nyc94
Quinnipiac goaltender Eric Hartzell is in the Hobey Hat Trick.

[www.uscho.com]

Another year, another "Well, if LeNeveu didn't..."

LeNeveu was up against a guy with 80 points. No one in this bunch is anywhere close. That's the difference.

We're all victims of circumstances, right? That said Lenny's 2002-2003 #s look a little better than Hartzell's. Re. 80 points, Jeff Panzer had 81 points for UND the year that Ryan Miller won (UND was 29-8-9 in 2000-01). Perhaps the fact that Miller had just won the award two years prior biased voters against Lenny. Miller is only the second goalie ever to win the Hobey.

Perhaps Hartzell's numbers alongside of Q's emergence as a true national contender will help him. The top scorers on Q have only 30 points and I think the team averages only about 3 goals a game so he'll get a lot of credit.

RatushnyFan
We're all victims of circumstances, right? That said Lenny's 2002-2003 #s look a little better than Hartzell's.

That was a "JUUUUST a bit outside" kind of "a little", not a literal "a little", right?

Josh '99

RatushnyFan
We're all victims of circumstances, right? That said Lenny's 2002-2003 #s look a little better than Hartzell's.

That was a "JUUUUST a bit outside" kind of "a little", not a literal "a little", right?

[db.elynah.com]

LeNeveu - 1.20 GAA (1st in nation), 0.940 SV% (1st in nation)
Hartzell - 1.55 GAA (3rd in nation), 0.933 SV% (8th in nation)

But, you know, it's the system and all that...

this two weeks between regionals and frozen 4 BS is annoying. total buzzkill from the excitement of last weekend.

gomestar
this two weeks between regionals and frozen 4 BS is annoying. total buzzkill from the excitement of last weekend.

What is the reasoning behind the week off?

marty

gomestar
this two weeks between regionals and frozen 4 BS is annoying. total buzzkill from the excitement of last weekend.

What is the reasoning behind the week off?

Let the Super Bowl like media hype rise to a crescendo?

I thought it was to avoid "competing" with the F4, which is pretty silly.

Trotsky

marty

gomestar
this two weeks between regionals and frozen 4 BS is annoying. total buzzkill from the excitement of last weekend.

What is the reasoning behind the week off?

Let the Super Bowl like media hype rise to a crescendo?

I thought it was to avoid "competing" with the F4, which is pretty silly.

Makes the tournament a marathon, but it would be pretty easy to slip a best-of-three quarterfinal round into that off week, wouldn't it?

Scersk '97

Trotsky

marty

gomestar
this two weeks between regionals and frozen 4 BS is annoying. total buzzkill from the excitement of last weekend.

What is the reasoning behind the week off?

Let the Super Bowl like media hype rise to a crescendo?

I thought it was to avoid "competing" with the F4, which is pretty silly.

Makes the tournament a marathon, but it would be pretty easy to slip a best-of-three quarterfinal round into that off week, wouldn't it?

That would be onerous for the student-athletes.

(Pause for laughter.)

Trotsky

marty
What is the reasoning behind the week off?

I thought it was to avoid "competing" with the F4, which is pretty silly.

This. It is less silly when you consider the NCAA doesn't want to cannibalize itself. It has two high-profile events. There is not-insignificant overlap between the potential audiences, the antipathy to basketball here notwithstanding.

ugarte

Trotsky

marty
What is the reasoning behind the week off?

I thought it was to avoid "competing" with the F4, which is pretty silly.

This. It is less silly when you consider the NCAA doesn't want to cannibalize itself. It has two high-profile events. There is not-insignificant overlap between the potential audiences, the antipathy to basketball here notwithstanding.

As long as we're never called an "appetizer" to the F4 ever again...