Generic Off Season Thread

Because I'm sick of seeing that score whenever anybody does a Reply.

I demand the name brand product. Dispense as written.

Grosenick returning to Union for junior season.

Jim Hyla
Grosenick returning to Union for junior season.

That's not the name I was looking for. But good for him.

Hey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?

KeithK
Hey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?

The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.

jtn27

KeithK
Hey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?

The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.

Maybe I'll have to post some relevant information about next season here come November.

marty
I demand the name brand product. Dispense as written.

Here you go.

KeithK

jtn27

KeithK
Hey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?

The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.

Maybe I'll have to post some relevant information about next season here come November.

I was thinking more along the lines of talking about a specific game from this past season, but I guess that works too.

I was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.

Jim Connelly
Penn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky’s team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school’s history.

Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.

Aaron M. Griffin
I was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.

Jim Connelly
Penn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky’s team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school’s history.

Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play. It happened when RIT moved to D1 (and the same is happening with RIT's women's team beginning this season).

RIT plans to play a Division I schedule beginning in the 2012–2013 season but will not play a full-league schedule. In 2013–2014, the Tigers would play a College Hockey America schedule, and in 2014–2015, RIT would be eligible for NCAA post-season play.

From the same article, it seems the CHA women's league is adding RIT, Penn State, and Lindenwood to the current membership of Syracuse, Niagara, Mercyhurst, and RMU. No BTHC in Women's Hockey, thanks to the lack of UM & MSU teams. Lindenwood is in St. Charles, Missouri, in case you were wondering as much as I was. They played their first D-1 schedule this past season.

(edit: Niagara announced this spring they are discontinuing their women's program.)

It's not often around here that somebody provides a straight answer to a direct question. That was kind of unsettling.

Trotsky
It's not often around here that somebody provides a straight answer to a direct question. That was kind of unsettling.

Sorry, I forgot to be in off-season mode. Here:

They should make a movie about the Burr-Hamilton duel. It should be titled anything but "The Duel."

RichH

Aaron M. Griffin
I was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.

Jim Connelly
Penn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky’s team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school’s history.

Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.

The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play. It happened when RIT moved to D1 (and the same is happening with RIT's women's team beginning this season).

RIT plans to play a Division I schedule beginning in the 2012–2013 season but will not play a full-league schedule. In 2013–2014, the Tigers would play a College Hockey America schedule, and in 2014–2015, RIT would be eligible for NCAA post-season play.

From the same article, it seems the CHA women's league is adding RIT, Penn State, and Lindenwood to the current membership of Syracuse, Niagara, Mercyhurst, and RMU. No BTHC in Women's Hockey, thanks to the lack of UM & MSU teams. Lindenwood is in St. Charles, Missouri, in case you were wondering as much as I was. They played their first D-1 schedule this past season.

(edit: Niagara announced this spring they are discontinuing their women's program.)

I recall RIT was also not eligible for Atlantic Hockey's conference tournament in their first season as a full member (second year in Div. 1). Was that a league rule?

Another question, does the Big Ten get an autobid in their first year?

nyc94
Another question, does the Big Ten get an autobid in their first year?

This page: [www.collegehockeynews.com]

The NCAA mandates that a conference receives an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament if it exists for at least two years and has at least six teams.

And this one: [www.ncaa.com]

The recommendation includes both the establishment of the inaugural Big Ten Men’s Ice Hockey Tournament in March of 2014, with the winner earning the conference’s automatic bid to the NCAA Men’s Ice Hockey Championship

are both non-definitive enough to not exactly answer the question. I can't remember what happened with the inception of MAAC/AHA and CHA, and am done researching for now, because of a silly thing like work.

RichH
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

jtn27

RichH
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

There are probably several reasons for it. One that comes to mind is to prevent teams from just jumping up and down between the Divisions for short periods of time based on their current talent level.

jtn27

RichH
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

Trotsky

jtn27

RichH
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

I skimmed through the NCAA rules and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament to participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large. Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.

edit:

NCAA
31.3.4.2 Requirements—National Collegiate Championship. [#] To be eligible for automatic qualifi-
cation in a National Collegiate Championship, a member conference must meet the following general require-
ments: (Adopted: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06)
(a) Have at least six active members that sponsor the applicable sport in any division (Note: A provisional
member in the process of becoming an NCAA member cannot be used to meet the requisite number.);
(b) The six active members must have conducted conference competition together for the preceding two
years in the applicable sport;
(c) There shall be no waivers of the two-year waiting period; and
(d) Any new member added to a conference that is eligible for an automatic bid shall be immediately eligible
to represent the conference as the automatic qualifier.

nyc94

Trotsky

jtn27

RichH
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.

What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.

Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.

Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?

I skimmed through the NCAA rules and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large. Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.

Thanks for answering, Rich. Also, I doubt that Penn State will win the B1G Hockey Championship its first year. It would be interesting if they won. It would seem like a huge snub to deny Penn State entry into the national tournament if they pulled it off as unlikely as it is that they will. So, I doubt that it will be an issue. I was curious about next season because it seems like Penn State has created a schedule that has at least some PWR potential if Penn State can manage a few upsets with Michigan State, RIT, Union, and Wisconsin announced as opponents already.

I refuse to remind others and myself of the results of a particular game that appears in the subject line of the previous thread where we discussed future ECAC venues, so, I moved the conversation to here. Adam Wodon had this to offer for where the ECACs should move: Lake Placid.

AW
but at least the brand name "Lake Placid" — and the "Herb Brooks 1980 Olympic Arena" — can stand on equal and proud footing with "Detroit's Joe Louis Arena", "St. Paul's Xcel Energy Center" and "Boston Garden."

Adam, what have you been smoking, my friend? No F'ing way!!

AW
Yes it's hard to get to, yes hotels can be tough to secure. So what. Work it out.

I'll deal with it just like I did when it was in LP the last time.... Stay home or go elsewhere... Watching the HE playoffs on TV make them appear to be a much better option. Better hockey, better venue, and a great city. It's hard to not make that choice. I've been leaning in that direction anyway. An ECACHL move to LP will seal the deal for me.

No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.

Jim Hyla
No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.

Steve Hagwell's backyard?

Jim Hyla
No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families.

I loved Lake Placid, but I have to agree with Jim. Just move it back to Albany -- it's obvious, simple, and fair. If Union continues to be good or RPI ever returns from the dark side of the moon they'll get a good walk-up. Even in years neither makes it they'll still do better there than any of the other choices.

I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed

Jim Hyla
No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.

You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.

If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc... But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning. The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.

I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.

adamw

Jim Hyla
No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.

We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.

You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.

If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc... But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning. The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.

I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.

Why need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has? ECAC results during the 2012 NCAAs were fairly impressive. Union got into the Frozen Four and Cornell knocked off a team that many viewed as a favorite for a national title going into the tournament. Cornell was arguably an ill-timed, broken stick away from making the Frozen Four. I know that it requires more than one season to establish a trend, but I feel somewhat assured the Cornell, Sucks, and Union have a chance at being competitive next season. If RPI can right their course, then that would be one-third of the ECAC. The Ivies have become more competitive with the scholarship programs with their competitive financial aid offers. Why pretend it is like what it once was when it clearly is not? The ECAC has a chance to reassert itself as relevant during the coming transitional period. The ECAC should be able to pass WCHA Lite and Atlantic Hockey. Perhaps, I am an optimist about this. Winning is the only way to increase the appeal of our conference, that's a given. However, we cannot tie that sentiment with, "well, this is the best it will ever be." Also, I think Adam commented once that winning the ECAC was not "the thing" it once was. There's one certain way to make it "a thing" again and that is national success. I would counter that I was there in 2010, my senior year, when Cornell claimed its twelfth ECAC title and, certainly, it felt like a great accomplishment.

I am somewhat agnostic about Lake Placid. I would love to see Cornell play in Herb Brooks Arena, but all the problems that members on here have mentioned make me somewhat indifferent. I will go wherever the ECAC Championships are held on only the condition that Cornell is playing in them. However, Adam, you point out that the ECAC brand suffered by not being on television. I agree. Sadly, there are few outlets available that will air the ECAC Championships left (B1G on BTN, Hockey East on NBC Sports, and NCHC on CBS Sports) with the geographic breadth that the conference would need to rebrand itself. Also, would Lake Placid be the best locale for television exposure? Which networks would be willing to travel to what most describe as a helplessly remote location to broadcast the ECAC Championships? I think that Lake Placid might present unforeseen issues with television exposure.

I am not sure if the location of our tournament has much to do with our brand or how others view the ECAC. I might be wrong. I have friends who are CCHA and Hockey East fans and they seemed to think AC seemed like an interesting place to host the tournament. They also did not react with condescension about when it was held in Albany because it makes sense for the geographic footprint of the conference. These comments were made with no air of superiority. I know that this might not be the sentiments of recruits or administrators from other conferences. I am just curious if the location of the ECAC Championships is as much of an issue for others without the Conference as we think within the Conference. It seems like it is mostly ECAC fans who are upset and self-deprecatingly judgmental about the location of the championships.

adamw
I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed

Grows wild in the Adirondacks?

On a more serious note, why does Bridgeport draw so well? Didn't the Union final draw better than BC in Worcester?

Mass-Lowell?

Don't be too agnostic about Lake Placid if the weather is bad. You'll need to say your prayers that you don't slide off the road.

marty
On a more serious note, why does Bridgeport draw so well? Didn't the Union final draw better than BC in Worcester?

Mass-Lowell?

Bridgeport has drawn well solely because, in the 3 years it has hosted, the teams there have included Yale, Union, Lowell and Vermont ... all of which brought a ton of people there. If the bracket were BC-Miami-Duluth-Northern Michigan - no one would've been there.

Aaron M. Griffin
Why need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has?

Not sure if you were referring to me, but ... not becoming complacent at all. The opposite, actually. That's why I said the ECAC should seize the momentum, and do something that will help even further.

BTW - Cornell has been even closer to the FF a bunch of times in the last 10 years - so using them as a yardstick is not saying much. Cornell has always been the standard bearer, sometimes by itself. Getting Union to the FF is the only thing different about this year compared to anything else in the last 10 years. Not much of a difference. There's no question that the ECAC has been "competitive" as a whole over the last decade, so I don't see that as an issue.

The ECAC should be able to pass WCHA Lite and Atlantic Hockey.

I don't think there's any question that the ECAC will be above those two in future years, but I don't see that as the point of this discussion.

I think Adam commented once that winning the ECAC was not "the thing" it once was. There's one certain way to make it "a thing" again and that is national success.

That is not the reason why I said it wasn't a big deal. I don't perceive winning the ECACs as a huge thing unto itself, if NCAA success doesn't follow. In more parochial times, "the ECACs" was practically held in the same esteem as the national championship. Just like winning a Big Ten football title was to people. It's not the same anymore. It has nothing to do with the ECAC per se - it's the same for any conference in any sport these days.

Also, would Lake Placid be the best locale for television exposure? Which networks would be willing to travel to what most describe as a helplessly remote location to broadcast the ECAC Championships? I think that Lake Placid might present unforeseen issues with television exposure.

I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.

adamw
I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.

On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?

Beeeej

adamw
I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.

On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?

Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.

I was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.

adamw

Beeeej

adamw
I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.

On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?

Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.

If we're talking about TV coverage, wouldn't Lake Placid, as a remote location, be more expensive to broadcast from?

Trotsky

adamw

Beeeej

adamw
I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.

On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?

Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.

If we're talking about TV coverage, wouldn't Lake Placid, as a remote location, be more expensive to broadcast from?

Sure, but it's all worth the expense. Go ahead, say "Herb Brooks" out loud. Try it just once, and tell me that's not worth thousands of dollars in travel expense, overtime, and telecom equipment investment.

Beeeej
Sure, but it's all worth the expense. Go ahead, say "Herb Brooks" out loud. Try it just once, and tell me that's not worth thousands of dollars in travel expense, overtime, and telecom equipment investment.

mock if you must - I'm just telling you like it is. There are usually crews all over - and there would not be additional costs for those things.

Also - some buildings have union regulations that make broadcasting more expensive - something Lake Placid would not.

marty
I was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.

BC typically does not draw big crowds.

I just don't know what to say, but that won't stop me from trying.We did LP once, a few times actually, and I don't see how it was some tremendous help back then. If the coaches were to say that it make their recruiting that much easier, I'd go along with it in a heartbeat. But if that were the case we wouldn't be discussing this, it would already be a done deal, wouldn't it? Why would the schools not be screaming, "Let's get back to LP.", if they felt it was so much better? All I've read is that they were ones to say no, I guess because of the sheet size. I just can't believe that a prospect would be turned to the ECAC because of LP, I just can't, can't can't. They will go with the coach that inspires them, assuming finances, facilities, etc. are up to snuff.

No, I just can't believe that the name LP is so strong that we'll get players because of it. Sorry.

Adam, I'd never imply that ECAC coaches are inferior. No that's why we lost a couple to other conferences, because they are good. Now why did they leave? Was Providence that much better than Union? He probably got more money, Union couldn't or wouldn't match it, felt that it would be easier to get students admitted, and easier to keep them in school, maybe PU has better facilities, I don't know. Why PSU? I'm sure the money is better, facilities are better, easier to get admissions, more athletic prestige. But none of the coaches left because we were in Albany, or AC, instead of LP. Those schools have things that we'll never have, and we can't match them, never. We have to do it another way, but I just don't see that LP adds that much, if any; and the negatives far out-way the positives, IMO.

Aaron M. Griffin
Why need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has? ECAC results during the 2012 NCAAs were fairly impressive. Union got into the Frozen Four and Cornell knocked off a team that many viewed as a favorite for a national title going into the tournament. Cornell was arguably an ill-timed, broken stick away from making the Frozen Four. I know that it requires more than one season to establish a trend, but I feel somewhat assured the Cornell, Sucks, and Union have a chance at being competitive next season. If RPI can right their course, then that would be one-third of the ECAC. The Ivies have become more competitive with the scholarship programs with their competitive financial aid offers. Why pretend it is like what it once was when it clearly is not?

I don't think it's realistic to say that things are categorically different now than they were, say, five or ten years ago, based on the fact that the ECAC had one good year in the NCAA tournament. Maybe things will continue to improve, sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. This year's good showing notwithstanding, it's still 22 seasons and counting since an ECAC team even played in the championship game.

adamw
I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed

I know... At least you're consistent, my friend. No offense intended. We'll just agree to disagree on this one. All is good!!

I will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.

For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!

redice
I will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.

For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!

By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?

jtn27

redice
I will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.

For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!

By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?

No one can gild that turd.

adamw
Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.

1980 is ancient history. This is a pipe dream. Play the games where people can easily go to see them.

adamw

marty
I was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.

BC typically does not draw big crowds.

That's too bad.

My recollection is that they drew will in Albany in 1998. Same memory of BC in 2003 at Providence when we beat them in OT.

Ancient history?

jtn27

redice
I will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.

For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!

By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?

I don't know...You'll have to ask the ECACHL office. Tactics change, you know.

It's just an observation that I made while the tourney was in LP... I didn't buy it (that it was great location for the tourney) then and I don't buy it now. I just considered all that talk to be propaganda.

redice
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.

That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.

Trotsky

redice
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.

That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.

More appropriate:

If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?

Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.


1993: ---- / 7867
1994: ---- / 6316
1995: ---- / 6562
1996: ---- / 8300
1997: ---- / 8081
1998: ---- / 5289
1999: ---- / 8469
2000: 5389 / 6790
2001: 4990 / 6256
2002: 5422 / 6518

2003: 6936 / 8296
2004: 5641 / 6489
2005: 7580 / 8637
2006: 6255 / 7093
2007: 4484 / 5565
2008: 5074 / 4851
2009: 3517 / 4857
2010: ???? / 6505

2011: 3351 / 4126
2012: 3462 / 4131

adamw
If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?

2000: 5389 / 6790
2001: 4990 / 6256
2002: 5422 / 6518

2003: 6936 / 8296
2004: 5641 / 6489
2005: 7580 / 8637
2006: 6255 / 7093

Attendance in Albany certainly declined in recent years. But it's hard to see how you can look at the last three years in Lake Placid, and the first four in Albany, and say that attendance was "consistently" higher in the former than in the latter. That's especially true when you take into account the fact that Cornell was in Lake Placid the last three years the tournament was there, yet attendance was significantly higher for Cornell's appearances in Albany in 2003, 2005, and 2006 (ETA: and Union and RPI weren't there in those three years to skew the numbers to local fans).

Nice cherry picking of data ... are you a lawyer or something?

Cornell was there - but 2003 and 2005 are equivalent in fan interest to 1996 and 1997 ... Attendance didn't wane in Lake Placid because it was Lake Placid. Attendance waned in Lake Placid because not as many Cornell fans went in those years as in 1996 and 1997.

Attendance waned in Albany at a faster clip.

And good job not including 1999 in your LP cherry picking

adamw
Nice cherry picking of data ... are you a lawyer or something?

Cornell was there - but 2003 and 2005 are equivalent in fan interest to 1996 and 1997 ... Attendance didn't wane in Lake Placid because it was Lake Placid. Attendance waned in Lake Placid because not as many Cornell fans went in those years as in 1996 and 1997.

Attendance waned in Albany at a faster clip.

And good job not including 1999 in your LP cherry picking

First of all, 2003 felt like our year, but in the moment, 2002 felt like our year, too - mostly because 2003 hadn't happened yet. There was plenty of enthusiasm for Cornell being there, and being back in the title game - and unless people on this board are willing to come forward and say, "I wasn't excited about Cornell hockey in 2002, so I didn't go," I simply and straightforwardly doubt your premise.

Accuse me of cherry-picking all you want, but it's quite obvious to me and everyone else that attendance was at one level in Lake Placid, then after the tournament was moved to Albany, it was at a higher level. I didn't say that attendance was down because it was in Lake Placid, I simply said it was lower in Lake Placid for the few years before Albany, and higher in Albany for the few years after Lake Placid.

Your explanation for that is basically "Attendance was down because fewer people went."

Ya think?

Say what you will - but Lake Placid's numbers are higher than Albany's numbers - even with two big bumps caused by high enthusiasm over Cornell's 2003 and 2005 seasons.

I don't see how you can look at those two sets of numbers and conclude that people stayed away from Lake Placid because of its difficulty in getting there - or for reasons that demonstrably outweigh Albany's negatives.

I don't want to take sides or get involved in this discussion beyond noting that every year the tournament was in Lake Placid one or both of Clarkson and St. Lawrence was there. They had far fewer appearances in Albany.

adamw
Say what you will - but Lake Placid's numbers are higher than Albany's numbers - even with two big bumps caused by high enthusiasm over Cornell's 2003 and 2005 seasons.

I don't see how you can look at those two sets of numbers and conclude that people stayed away from Lake Placid because of its difficulty in getting there - or for reasons that demonstrably outweigh Albany's negatives.

Fine, then let's answer your actual question: "If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?"

Because either Clarkson or St. Lawrence was always there.

And because Lake Placid made their entire town become the ECAC tournament for three days every year - and hundreds of locals went to the games because that's what was going on that weekend. Mostly, Albany locals couldn't care less unless RPI and Union are there.

Lake Placid locals have no difficulty and no major time commitment getting there, no issue with absurdly high hotel prices, no problem with draconian hotel cancellation policies that could cost them hundreds of dollars if their team of choice doesn't win their quarterfinal round, and no need to wait for an hour to get a table at one of the five restaurants worth eating in. We did. And we do. Lake Placid is a magical hockey wonderland, and I pooped rainbows and danced jigs with cartoon bluebirds on my shoulders every time I went there for the tournament, but I still hated what was required of me to get there and be there.

So if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.

So if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.

I never claimed that. It's the best of a set of mediocre-to-poor options, for reasons I've articulated, or tried to. In fact, I even said in the original article, that even if attendance in LP wasn't great either, it was still worth it, since it won't be great anywhere else anyway.

adamw
If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?

Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.


1993: ---- / 7867- CCT, B, H, RPI
1994: ---- / 6316- H, RPI, CCT, B
1995: ---- / 6562- RPI, PU, CCT, Cg
1996: ---- / 8300- CU, H, UVm, CCT
1997: ---- / 8081- CU, CCT, RPI, PU
1998: ---- / 5289- PU, CCT, H, Y, CU
1999: ---- / 8469- CCT, SLU, RPI, PU, Cg
2000: 5389 / 6790- SLU, RPI, Cg, CU, CCT
2001: 4990 / 6256- SLU, CU, H, D, UVm
2002: 5422 / 6518- H, CU, RPI, CCT, D

2003: 6936 / 8296- CU, H, D, B
2004: 5641 / 6489- H, CCT, Cg, D
2005: 7580 / 8637- CU, H, Cg, UVm
2006: 6255 / 7093- H, CU, D, Cg
2007: 4484 / 5565- CCT, Q, SLU, D
2008: 5074 / 4851- PU, H, CU, Cg
2009: 3517 / 4857- Y, CU, SLU, PU
2010: ???? / 6505- CU, U, C, SLU

2011: 3351 / 4126- Y, CU, D, Cg
2012: 3462 / 4131- U, H, CU, Cg

It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.

Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.

Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.

Trotsky

redice
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.

That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.

From whom was that rhapsody coming? I don't recall hearing any of it from league officials. I know the average ECAC hockey fan was always thrilled to be heading to Boston each March. And proud to tell their friends of it. After all, a trip to Boston was fun!! Remember, at that point, the idea of moving the tournament was not really on the table. It was held in Boston and that's the way it was!! So, hyping the Boston location was not necessarily a propaganda tool to convince the constituency that having the tournament there was/is a good idea. Now that the tournament seems to have no permanent home, we'll live with this constant salesmanship from the League office.

adamw

So if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.

I never claimed that. It's the best of a set of mediocre-to-poor options, for reasons I've articulated, or tried to. In fact, I even said in the original article, that even if attendance in LP wasn't great either, it was still worth it, since it won't be great anywhere else anyway.

You're in a vanishingly small minority who feels that it's the best of our options.

Chris '03
It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.

Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.

Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.

All good points ... but I think my point is that, you're not growing interest beyond what it is already. That's been tried, and failed - it's like tilting at windmills. So might as well have it in a great place that brings a great connotation to the ECAC. And again, I understand the issues with getting there and hotels, etc... It's not like I haven't gone myself every year since 1995.

By the way - there may have been 5 teams in some years, but Princeton doesn't count

I would be more than happy, for logistical reasons, if the tournament was in Bridgeport or Albany too ... I've argued, at times, for both of those as well. Well, not so much "argued," as basically resigned myself to the fact that that's the best place for it, all things considered. There is no home run. There is no option that solves all ills, or most ills, or barely any ills. Lake Placid has the most potential to do some good for the league, as little as that potential might be. All other options are basically "let's have it in the most convenient place for hardcore fans to go, while also being in a respectable hockey building." And that's a perfectly good argument. But that's all it is.

adamw
Lake Placid has the most potential to do some good for the league, as little as that potential might be. All other options are basically "let's have it in the most convenient place for hardcore fans to go, while also being in a respectable hockey building." And that's a perfectly good argument. But that's all it is.

Yes, that's all it is. But as arguments go, for most of us, it sounds an awful lot better than "Let's have it in the least convenient place for hardcore fans to go."

I have no desire to spend time in Bridgeport, but I guarantee you it's an easier decision for me than Lake Placid.

Would the league consider a rotation (once every 3 years) among Albany, Bridgeport and Hartford/Providence (we could even put LP in here to make Adam happy)? The rationale is that each venue would get the ECACs once every 3 years, and free them up to bid for the "higher profile" NC$$ basketball first/second round games in the off years.

This would decrease the rate of venues gettting stale, and still keep the tourney within a decent (reasonable) drive for most of the ECAC teams and their fans.

I personally think they should move the tourney to Estero, but that is for totally selfish reasons .

Beeeej
Yes, that's all it is. But as arguments go, for most of us, it sounds an awful lot better than "Let's have it in the least convenient place for hardcore fans to go."

Well, "least convenient for most Cornell fans" perhaps ... but that's not everyone. Something tells me Atlantic City was "least convenient" for most people, among all recent options. Lake Placid would be more convenient than anything else for Clarkson and St. Lawrence fans. Something tells me it's their top choice. It would also be more convenient than, say, Providence for RPI and Union fans.

The only other fan base that really matters is Cornell's - and granted, of course, it's the biggest one. Yale, Quinnipiac, Dartmouth and Brown fans do exist in decent amounts - but they didn't exactly come to Albany anyway. They would all certainly go, moreso, to Providence/Bridgeport - but how much?

adamw
Well, "least convenient for most Cornell fans" perhaps ... but that's not everyone. Something tells me Atlantic City was "least convenient" for most people, among all recent options. Lake Placid would be more convenient than anything else for Clarkson and St. Lawrence fans. Something tells me it's their top choice.

"This location would be the most convenient option for that small portion of fans who already live in the middle of fuc goshdarn nowhere" isn't exactly the most glowing recommendation, either.

Chris '03

adamw
If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?

Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.


1993: ---- / 7867- CCT, B, H, RPI
1994: ---- / 6316- H, RPI, CCT, B
1995: ---- / 6562- RPI, PU, CCT, Cg
1996: ---- / 8300- CU, H, UVm, CCT
1997: ---- / 8081- CU, CCT, RPI, PU
1998: ---- / 5289- PU, CCT, H, Y, CU
1999: ---- / 8469- CCT, SLU, RPI, PU, Cg
2000: 5389 / 6790- SLU, RPI, Cg, CU, CCT
2001: 4990 / 6256- SLU, CU, H, D, UVm
2002: 5422 / 6518- H, CU, RPI, CCT, D

2003: 6936 / 8296- CU, H, D, B
2004: 5641 / 6489- H, CCT, Cg, D
2005: 7580 / 8637- CU, H, Cg, UVm
2006: 6255 / 7093- H, CU, D, Cg
2007: 4484 / 5565- CCT, Q, SLU, D
2008: 5074 / 4851- PU, H, CU, Cg
2009: 3517 / 4857- Y, CU, SLU, PU
2010: ???? / 6505- CU, U, C, SLU

2011: 3351 / 4126- Y, CU, D, Cg
2012: 3462 / 4131- U, H, CU, Cg

It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.

Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.

Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.

This. It's fine to argue that Cornell has an attendance impact at any venue, but the '96-'97 tournaments also had the immense enthusiasm for that UVM team behind it as well. 2009 was the first year of this run for Union, and the recent success & local coverage would probably have driven a theoretical Albany tournament final back over 8k (IMO).

Another thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"

More interest in NCAA success means more people are going to save up their "travel chits" with their work/family/social/monetary lives for potential NCAA Regional and Frozen Four trips. If there's somewhere central (like Albany/Bridgeport/Hartford), that could be an easy/cheap drive/train, then it seems less like a trek & could keep those casual-to-moderate fans coming, while they wouldn't to Lake Placid OR Atlantic City.

RichH
Another thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"

That's precisely what I meant, before Beeeej decided to mock me for it

Cornell fans were far more interested in the 1996 and 1997 ECACs than the later ones in L.P. - then there was a big bump in 2003 and 2005 - but not so much the later Albany ones. For the reasons you articulate, and that I referred to.

I don't think the "bump" in 2003 was because the tournament had moved to Albany. Put that year's tournament on the moon, and it would've gotten 8,000.

Wasn't one of the problems with LP the fact that the coaches felt, rightly or wrongly, that the olympic ice-size rink there hurt them in the NCAA tourney?

ursusminor
Wasn't one of the problems with LP the fact that the coaches felt, rightly or wrongly, that the olympic ice-size rink there hurt them in the NCAA tourney?

Yes. And that would be a louder gripe now that the NCAA has moved away from olympic sheets for regionals.

adamw
That's precisely what I meant, before Beeeej decided to mock me for it

Cornell fans were far more interested in the 1996 and 1997 ECACs than the later ones in L.P. - then there was a big bump in 2003 and 2005 - but not so much the later Albany ones. For the reasons you articulate, and that I referred to.

Again, I'll disagree, and I'll try not to mock you: Without having the perspective of the even better year we would have in 2003, we felt that absolutely ran away with the regular season in 2002, finishing so far ahead of Clarkson that they needed the Hubble telescope to see us. The expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?

Maybe it was Spring Break or something. Who really remembers that far back?

Beeeej
The expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?

Well, I recall things differently. Expectations may have been high in 2002 - but Cornell was ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03, and raised expectations even higher. The fever pitch was monumental. Anything short of a Frozen Four would've been considered a disaster. There was an enormous groundswell that built through the entire year. I suspect you don't know all 8,000 people who showed up, so perhaps the group we all know would've went to 2002 and 2003. But do you really believe there was not a huge upswing in interest that year from "the masses"?

I say we have Adam and Beeej fight in a cage match. Two men enter, one ECAC tournament location is chosen!

Lake Placid is in the middle of nowhere, reachable only by expedition. Fuck that. They may as well take the alternate-site venue that the Big 10 isn't using.

Adam, I'll address it to you since you seem to be the only one pushing LP, no one has talked about the housing problem that Beeeej mentioned. Some history for those who were not there. To get a room in town, at a convient place you had to put down a non-refundable payment. I don't remember how soon you had to do it, but it was certainly before the quarterfinal games. Therefore you had to put your money down when you didn't even know your team was going to be there. And if you took a place outside of town, finding an easy place to park in that town was not nice. If you thought you might just drive up for the finals since your team won the semi, good luck. Close hotel rooms were generally taken and as I said no easy parking. All in all, not an easy place for that last minute fan.

My daughter will be out of the house, so we'd probably book and pay for a room the year before, as we'd go even if CU didn't. However I don't think many would be happy with that. Thanks Beeeej, I'd forgotten how awful this was. No, LP seems worse all the time.

It sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in. You can decide a few days before that you want to go, and you can still find a reasonable room. In fact cheap if you don't mind driving a bit.

If Providence or Worcester wanted to bid, I'd give that a try, but please not LP.

Jim Hyla

It sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in.

And it is perfectly acceptable to use the Times Union rather than the Daily Sun during introductions. As for the Troy Record, the preferred method involves wadding it up almost as soon as the carrier makes his delivery.

Just for the Record

marty

Jim Hyla

It sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in.

And it is perfectly acceptable to use the Times Union rather than the Daily Sun during introductions. As for the Troy Record, the preferred method involves wadding it up almost as soon as the carrier makes his delivery.

Just for the Record

I forgot, they used to give away free newspapers, didn't they. That proves we should go there, no complaints about the papers. Now if they'd only be as good about Snickers.

adamw

Beeeej
The expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?

Well, I recall things differently. Expectations may have been high in 2002 - but Cornell was ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03, and raised expectations even higher. The fever pitch was monumental. Anything short of a Frozen Four would've been considered a disaster. There was an enormous groundswell that built through the entire year. I suspect you don't know all 8,000 people who showed up, so perhaps the group we all know would've went to 2002 and 2003. But do you really believe there was not a huge upswing in interest that year from "the masses"?

First of all, you're kind of missing my point - I'm not saying attendance shouldn't have gone up in 2003. Of course it should have, I just don't believe that the entire increase can be attributed to the better season. What I'm saying, that you're misinterpreting, is that you need to look at 2002 in a vacuum, as if you're in 2002 now, without knowing what 2003 is going to be like. 2002 was an incredible year all on its own compared to 2000 and 2001, we had a much better shot than usual at a deep run, and attendance at the ECAC tournament should have increased from those previous couple of seasons, notwithstanding any objections to Lake Placid. It didn't.

I will say this for certain, though: You definitely recall things differently. Cornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half. And Cornell wasn't ranked No. 1 in the Pairwise until after winning the ECAC title game, either.

Tell you what - I'll ask Daina when she gets home why she didn't go to Lake Placid in 2002.

RichH
Another thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"

I think something related to this had been mentioned here sometime in the last year (note, I've lost all sense of time). There was a discussion about how we don't see as many traveling undergrads now as we used to. I think we picked up a lot of new fans in that period of time. After maybe 2005 (give or take), the number of new and more fanatical fans seemed to have tapered off. Maybe the championship was the shiny new toy. For the most part, I see a lot of the same people on this board posting but most of you are older than I am. There are probably only a handful on here that are very recent grads and are vocal here. The championship is no longer the shiny new toy, we expect to get to the NCAAs or the season sucked, and we'd been in Albany for a while. If Cornell makes it to the Frozen Four next year, I'm sure most of you reading would move heaven and earth to be in Pittsburgh. The average Cornellian, maybe not? Really, how many of us are willing to let 2-3 weeks of our lives be completely dictated by what a hockey team does?

As for ECAC location, maybe Albany was getting stale. I agree with Rita that maybe a rotation between Albany, Hartford/Bridgeport, and Providence might be a good solution. I used to be in the Lake Placid camp when we first moved to Albany but hey, life happens. My car has 160,000 miles on it because I drove it all over the east coast the first 5 years I had it, mostly to hockey games but now, you'd have a hard time to get me to be in it for more than an hour. This is why I'd rather go to Albany than AC. Geographically, AC is a hell of a lot closer to me but it means that I have to spend 4-5 hours in a car while I can hop on a plane to go to Albany. I'll probably go next year just to say that I've been but I'm not looking forward to the time in the car. At least it's not beach season.

Adam, I'll go to Lake Placid but you're going to have to drive me.

Beeeej
Cornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half.

We were #4 or better for almost the whole season after December, and #2 from mid-Feb on, though.

Trotsky

Beeeej
Cornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half.

We were #4 or better for almost the whole season after December, and #2 from mid-Feb on, though.

Yes, absolutely. And that's a long way from being "ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03."

Beeeej
Tell you what - I'll ask Daina when she gets home why she didn't go to Lake Placid in 2002.

Daina doesn't remember clearly exactly why, but she went home for spring break (which started the weekend of the ECACs). She went to the regionals in Worcester to see us beat Quinnipiac and lose to UNH at the end of spring break, but that's because it was pretty close to her home in West Hartford. Although she can't say for sure that she actually went through this thought process ten years ago, she says now that she doubts she would've wanted to drive to Lake Placid - and if the tournament had been in Albany that year, she almost certainly would have gone, because it was on the way home.

Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

This isn't generic either. Please change the topic to "Arguing with adamw about the merits of Lake Placid".

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?

ugarte

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

This isn't generic either. Please change the topic to "Arguing with adamw about the merits of Lake Placid".

Or "The relative mediocrity of ECAC tournament venue choices".

The other issue that hasn't been mentioned is (at least as of the ECAC's last trip) that the facilities are crap. Hot, nasty locker rooms that they won't let you put fans in, players sitting in the hallway, etc. I don't think you're going to get much love from the coaches for LP.

judy

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?

Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.

Beeeej

judy

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?

Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.

Bonus points if the poster starting it tells us he knows all about hockey and none of us understand it.

To maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?

CAS
To maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?

That's been suggested in other threads - I think the main reasons are 1) unusually expensive hotels, 2) difficulty traveling to NYC via car (plus the expense of safe parking), and 3) we'd probably get lost in the noise.

All true Beeeej, but think of how many alums of the ECAC schools live/work in the area and wouldn't need to travel at all. If Cornell can bring 12K fans to MSG, how many would attend an ECAC tourney game which is played in/near NYC?

Beeeej

CAS
To maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?

That's been suggested in other threads - I think the main reasons are 1) unusually expensive hotels, 2) difficulty traveling to NYC via car (plus the expense of safe parking), and 3) we'd probably get lost in the noise.

On March 16, the Knicks had a home game. On March 17, the Nets, Devils and Rangers were all at home. With all of the teams in the NY area, you can't expect a weekend where all teams that play in a venue are out of town on both days. The Nassau Coliseum was open for the weekend but I doubt that the arena would be willing (even if permitted) to tie the hands of the NHL schedulers by making a multi-year commitment to an event that will probably leave the arena half-empty at best (they already have to do that for the Islanders).

French Rage

Beeeej

judy

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?

Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.

Bonus points if the poster starting it tells us he knows all about hockey and none of us understand it.

It also has to be couched in terms of "maybe you all are satisfied with the current performance, but I think we should aim higher!" puffery. Bonus points if the poster has a Boston team in their sig.

Chris '03
I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.

I fail to see a problem with selecting a venue to cater specifically to us.

Robb
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason...

That's not true, Union and Colgate both lost top-line forwards to the pros.

CAS
All true Beeeej, but think of how many alums of the ECAC schools live/work in the area and wouldn't need to travel at all. If Cornell can bring 12K fans to MSG, how many would attend an ECAC tourney game which is played in/near NYC?

Frankly? Probably a lot fewer. Cornell has by far the biggest alumni base of the twelve schools, and certainly the most NYC-centric. In a year Cornell doesn't make it (if such a year ever exists again, he said, knocking on wood), I suspect NYC would have worse attendance than Lake Placid or Albany, not better.

Red Hot Hockey is special because it's against an old rival, and because it's on Thanksgiving weekend when a lot of kids are home anyway - the ECACs don't always fall during spring break, and spring break isn't always spent with Mom & Dad the way Thanksgiving usually is.

Plus, I think a good 40% or so of the fans at Red Hot Hockey have been BU fans.

But ugarte's point is probably a more important one.

Remember the Barclay and Pru Centers each have only 1 tenant next year. Izod has zero. You think an ECAC tourney in the NY metro area, with Cornell involved, will draw fewer than 5-6K? If fewer than half the Cornell fans for Red Hot Hockey attend, and none from the other 3 schools, attendance would be higher. The games should be played where the fans are!