Phil Kessel

Anyone know if Cornell is involved with him? He's from Madison so the chances of him not going to a CCHA or WCHA school are probably slim.

According to INCH, BU, Minn, Mich, and UW are the top contenders.

It's between Michigan and Minnesota last I heard. Cornell doesn't have a chance on players of Kessel's caliber.

Why not? Do you think it's the conference? The fact they play fewer games? They're only going to spend a couple of years, so the education doesn't really have an appeal?

All of the above. Cornell's program doesn't have the reputation that Michigan or Minnesota or North Dakota or Boston College have. I believe that Cornell could beat out any other school in Division I for players except for those four schools. So really the only players Cornell cannot get are the superstar types that are greatly covetted such as the Kessel's, Parise's, Vanek's, Tambelini's, etc. They could get superstar types that are as good if not better than those players, but the guys that are highly publicized and heralded will almost always end up at one of those four schools

A friend of mine, AD, went to VT for football and he described his recruiting experience to me. He was a top notch 200m sprinter that had one year of football under his belt after converting from soccer yet he was still recruited like a blue chipper. After meeting with a few coaches, his last concern became his degree and his main concern was getting to the NFL. In the end, if he didn't make it to the NFL and did get his degree, his degree wouldn't get him his first job, a booster would.

We have fewer games on national TV and almost none on regional tv. Other conferences play better competition. Our facilities and staff are good but are not at the level of a state school with a big time football program. Minnesota and Michigan have both won two NCAA titles in the past ten years. Minnesota and Michigan are both state schools (please don't jump on me for this but it's true, dammit) so they have crazy (more fun) campuses. Those are some of the things a blue chipper looks at and with Ivy league hockey, the recruit can look at the fewer games as another negative.

And you're right, if a guy like Phil Kessel is still considering Cornell and Harvard with Minnesota and Michigan after considering the above, then he might think that an ivy league school is too difficult and might hinder his hockey development.

Don't get me wrong; I live Cornell hockey. But we have serious handicaps in recruiting even with our packed house.

[Q]atb9 Wrote:
Don't get me wrong; I live Cornell hockey. But we have serious handicaps in recruiting even with our packed house.[/q]

Minnesota's Mariucci Arena (along with probably every other WCHA team outside of Michigan Tech) is always packed as well. The only difference is that there are about 7,000 more of them.

f Minnesota

If Schafer keeps getting the Murrays and LeNeveus and Vesces that aren't on everyone's radar, then I have no problem with not getting the Vaneks and Parises. He knows what he's doing and what circumstances he's dealing with.

If a player would choose not to come to Cornell because it is too demanding, then that is absolutely the best decision for both him and Cornell. The alternative would be for him to struggle academically and either be ruled ineligible or have a ton of off-ice difficulties that would very likely screw him up on-ice as well.

Schafer has said the first thing he looks for is the kind if player who would thrive in Cornell's environment. He doesn't even bother with the others because, even if he could somehow sneak them past admissions, they'd hate it and either leave early or stink up the joint, one way or another.

A very large portion of atheletes at all the Ivy league schools are "snuck past admissions"

That's okay - they offset the dorks like me who breezed through the admissions process and then walked onto a varsity sport that I'd never even SEEN before I got to Cornell.

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote: A very large portion of atheletes at all the Ivy league schools are "snuck past admissions"[/q]

You think? Or is it a couple wildcards who get in because they are so good ... plus a bunch of others who get a nice preferential boost ... and some who get a boost just like you'd get for playing tuba real well in the HS band.

Because for some of us the opposite is too sad to imagine, that the athletes are:
- better athletes than most all of us on the forum,
- they get better looking women to date them on campus,
- they're taller and in better shape physically (I think psychologists say that the attributes of male popularity in HS are sports, height, looks to some extent, and the ace in the hole for those of us who didn't qualify yet: sense of humor)
- they have decent social skills, and
- are able to carry Cornell's academic load more or less capably.

And a lot of them do well in life afterwards regardless of whether their average was 2.0 or 3.75.

let's take it easy here guys ... it's only been a week and we're already eating our own ...

If Schafer wants a player, he'll get him.

One of the prime recruits for 2005 has a B+ average and an 1180 SAT score. Would that be considered sneaking past admissions? Possibly. If he was a regular applicant, he would have little chance of being accepted, but he brings a special talent to the school. As long as he works hard, he should not have any problems academically. My guess is the majority of the Men's Hockey team would fall into the above category.

In the past the recruiting / admissions system was described as being in bands or layers of preference.

If you played the sport in HS four years and started, good for you, it's like playing the tuba in the band, but you still better take the Princeton Review to make sure the SATs are as good as possible. (That would have been me.) It's points toward your being a diverse student, if not quite the admissions office ideal of the gay Native American Eagle Scout from South Dakota with a decent jump shot brought up by a single mother whose great-great-grandfather roomed with but did not matriculate with Ezra Cornell, making the kid the first in his family to attend college but who will be bring a scholarship package with him. (Harvard probably has the Harvard Corporation Gulfstream warmed up and ready to take the kid to the Cambridge summer enrichment program.)

If you have the potential to earn a spot on the Cornell varsity, that's to your credit and has some additonal positive effect on admissions.

If you could star for the team, better still, and worth even more. Your potential could be couched in terms of past honors, say all-league mention in high school.

If you have the potential to be all-league, possibly All-America, at Cornell, then the coach has a couple near-wildcards he can use that help overcome hurdles of borderline grades or SATs. I think it's these people who fit the mold of "if Schafer wants a player, he'll get him [in]."

I don't think Schafer each year can ramrod five to eight marginally qualified recruits past the admissions committees. A couple, yes, and I think the coach has to vouch for their ability to be able to do the work. And then there are the players who are genuine students, too. That happens.

Sports is not the only place where Cornell takes a chance on admissions. That's one facet of affirmative action - admitting people who might not be 100% qualified based on the norms of the rest of the student body. Then there are the offspring of trustees and the grandchildren of people who've donated buildings or endowed professorships. I'd say if the daughter of the speaker of the New York State assembly has her eyes set on Cornell and she has a B-minus average, the only question I'd be asking would be, "Does she prefer North or West Campus?"

And lastly there's the protective camouflage of the student body as a whole. What is it, a quarter don't finish in four years and some fraction of that quarter don't finish at all? For the admissions people, every admission carries the risk the student can't or won't take the pressure. Not just the athletes.

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

I'd say if the daughter of the speaker of the New York State assembly has her eyes set on Cornell and she has a B-minus average, the only question I'd be asking would be, "Does she prefer North or West Campus?"
[/q]

FYI, these days, all the freshmen live on North Campus. West Campus is strictly an upperclassmen community now. So maybe the question you should be asking is, "Does she prefer Balch Hall or Mews Hall?"

35+ years ago a Harvard alumnus came to my high school to talk with prospective applicants. When asked about the preference given to children of alumni, his response was that 1/10 of all students at Harvard would be in the botton 10% of their class. It made sense, he said, to spare students who had been top-notch academically in high school the emotional turmoil of doing poorly in college by filling those slots with students who had other assests to bring to the university.

[Q]David Harding Wrote:

35+ years ago a Harvard alumnus came to my high school to talk with prospective applicants. When asked about the preference given to children of alumni, his response was that 1/10 of all students at Harvard would be in the botton 10% of their class. It made sense, he said, to spare students who had been top-notch academically in high school the emotional turmoil of doing poorly in college by filling those slots with students who had other assests to bring to the university.[/q]

Did the Harvard alum make sense when you heard him then?

Today it's more PC to say one is in the upper 90% of one's class.

Someone who's in the upper 90% of his or her Harvard class might still be doing okay academically, just not against the curve. But wait, didn't Harvard provide for that embarrassment by giving just about everyone A's anyway?

More seriously, everyone who gets into Cornell or Harvard is *capable* of doing the work. Just that some won't do the work, and others who do the work find 90% of their fellow students are doing it better, or getting graded better. I know Forbes or the WSJ uses this argument, perhaps effectively, in opposition to affirmative action, saying someone who just *can not* do the work should see no embarrassment in stepping back from, say, a Cal to go to a Fresno State and actually learn something. I think the article implied "minority students" in this instance.

I like the quote from the head of Enterprise (car rental), who said he prefers kids who had to hustle to make it. I think the quote was, "We're hire students in the half of the graduating class that makes the upper half possible." I have never been treated more politely at a rental car desk than by the Enterprise kids, although I wonder if it annoys them to have to wear ties when the Avis and Hertz people get by with logo'd Lands End polo shirts.

[Q]David Harding Wrote:
...his response was that 1/10 of all students at Harvard would be in the botton 10% of their class..[/q]

Wow - with math skills like that, he's a threat to graduate with honors!

[Q]David Harding Wrote:
Today it's more PC to say one is in the upper 90% of one's class.[/q]
Somebody in the bottom 10% of his class is not in the top 90% of his class. Even at Harvard.

[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:

David Harding Wrote:
Today it's more PC to say one is in the upper 90% of one's class.[/Q]
Somebody in the bottom 10% of his class is not in the top 90% of his class. Even at Harvard.[/q]
That's not what David Harding wrote. That's what Bill Howard wrote.