This year/next year

This year was just so disappointing. Next year, please hurry up and get here.

hypotenuse
This year was just so disappointing. Next year, please hurry up and get here.

So tell Age to pin next year's schedule to the top and we can pretend that this year didn't exist.

Jim Hyla

hypotenuse
This year was just so disappointing. Next year, please hurry up and get here.

So tell Age to pin next year's schedule to the top and we can pretend that this year didn't exist.

At the very least, tweet something so I don't have to see that 7-0 score line every time I come here.

Tom Lento

Jim Hyla

hypotenuse
This year was just so disappointing. Next year, please hurry up and get here.

So tell Age to pin next year's schedule to the top and we can pretend that this year didn't exist.

At the very least, tweet something so I don't have to see that 7-0 score line every time I come here.

Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Johnny 5
Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Our expectations will be lower?

But not really. Due to the '02-'12 run I always assume Mike will pull another rabbit out of the hat. A rebound would be a joy, but not a surprise, and that's the definition of being spoiled.

Trotsky

Johnny 5
Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Our expectations will be lower?

But not really. Due to the '02-'12 run I always assume Mike will pull another rabbit out of the hat. A rebound would be a joy, but not a surprise, and that's the definition of being spoiled.

I wouldn't call countless heartbreaking NCAA losses and our rivals coming out of nowhere and winning it all the last two years "spoiled." "Gut wrenching" or "snakebitten," maybe.

BearLover

Trotsky

Johnny 5
Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Our expectations will be lower?

But not really. Due to the '02-'12 run I always assume Mike will pull another rabbit out of the hat. A rebound would be a joy, but not a surprise, and that's the definition of being spoiled.

I wouldn't call countless heartbreaking NCAA losses and our rivals coming out of nowhere and winning it all the last two years "spoiled." "Gut wrenching" or "snakebitten," maybe.

We have a well above average winning percentage and three ECAC titles in that stretch. Given that every team but one ends their season with a loss (other than some scrub that misses their conference tourney. Are there any conferences that don't include all teams in the tourney?) heartbreaking NCAA losses are kind of the norm. A championship would be great, but it's not like teams left and right are winning them.

And some of us don't care as much about what rivals do. I, for one, really just don't mind Q or Yale or Union THAT much. I'd be miserable if Harvard won, and I'd spend an entire year continuously vomiting with rage if Dartmouth won, but that's about it.

BearLover

Trotsky

Johnny 5
Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Our expectations will be lower?

But not really. Due to the '02-'12 run I always assume Mike will pull another rabbit out of the hat. A rebound would be a joy, but not a surprise, and that's the definition of being spoiled.

I wouldn't call countless heartbreaking NCAA losses and our rivals coming out of nowhere and winning it all the last two years "spoiled." "Gut wrenching" or "snakebitten," maybe.

What I was trying to explain is that I still "assume," in some emotional way, that we're going to get back to being a top conference team that wins conference titles and goes to the NCAAs about half the time. Given the current state of the team, there's no rational reason to expect that, but I still do. I didn't have those expectations prior to Schafer. I used to, sight unseen, expect us to hover around .550; now I expect .650. If we keep falling short I'll adjust, but my feeling looking at us in 7th is: "that's unsustainable, we belong between 1 and 3" whereas in '02 my feeling looking at is in 1st was "that's unsustainable, we belong between 3 and 5."

That readjustment's persistence is what is "spoiled."

Dafatone

BearLover

Trotsky

Johnny 5
Don't mean to be da feet est, but what would lead us to suspect that next year won't be the same or worse??

Our expectations will be lower?

But not really. Due to the '02-'12 run I always assume Mike will pull another rabbit out of the hat. A rebound would be a joy, but not a surprise, and that's the definition of being spoiled.

I wouldn't call countless heartbreaking NCAA losses and our rivals coming out of nowhere and winning it all the last two years "spoiled." "Gut wrenching" or "snakebitten," maybe.

We have a well above average winning percentage and three ECAC titles in that stretch. Given that every team but one ends their season with a loss (other than some scrub that misses their conference tourney. Are there any conferences that don't include all teams in the tourney?) heartbreaking NCAA losses are kind of the norm. A championship would be great, but it's not like teams left and right are winning them.

And some of us don't care as much about what rivals do. I, for one, really just don't mind Q or Yale or Union THAT much. I'd be miserable if Harvard won, and I'd spend an entire year continuously vomiting with rage if Dartmouth won, but that's about it.

I mean, no one would ever call 1990-93 Bills fans "spoiled."

And I still don't get why people here hate Dartmouth and Harvard but don't seem to mind Q, Union, or Yale...the latter three teams have dealt us many more crushing losses in past years than Harvard, and the reasons to hate Dartmouth (asshole coach, on-ice antics) are equally applicable to Q/U/Y.

BearLover
And I still don't get why people here hate Dartmouth and Harvard but don't seem to mind Q, Union, or Yale...the latter three teams have dealt us many more crushing losses in past years than Harvard, and the reasons to hate Dartmouth (asshole coach, on-ice antics) are equally applicable to Q/U/Y.

Who doesn't hate Q? For that matter, who doesn't hate U? The only thing more insufferable than U when they were losers is U when they're winners.

Trotsky

BearLover
And I still don't get why people here hate Dartmouth and Harvard but don't seem to mind Q, Union, or Yale...the latter three teams have dealt us many more crushing losses in past years than Harvard, and the reasons to hate Dartmouth (asshole coach, on-ice antics) are equally applicable to Q/U/Y.

Who doesn't hate Q? For that matter, who doesn't hate U? The only thing more insufferable than U when they were losers is U when they're winners.

I find them annoying. Very annoying given the title. But whatever. Ivy rivalries matter more to me than other ones. It's not like, on any level, I have any concerns or insecurities about comparing Cornell and Union or Q as schools. The rivalry with other Ivies is a school rivalry that goes well beyond hockey for me.

Plus, watching Dartmouth throw a constant stream of cheapshots at us is worse than being upset that Q or Union has beaten us for a few years.

Long story short, just losing to a team doesn't do THAT much to sway me, rivalrywise.

Dafatone
Long story short, just losing to a team doesn't do THAT much to sway me, rivalrywise.

I still haven't found an ECAC team I'd root against in the NCAAs, and if it didn't happen with Harvard in the 90s, it never will.

Dafatone

Trotsky

BearLover
And I still don't get why people here hate Dartmouth and Harvard but don't seem to mind Q, Union, or Yale...the latter three teams have dealt us many more crushing losses in past years than Harvard, and the reasons to hate Dartmouth (asshole coach, on-ice antics) are equally applicable to Q/U/Y.

Who doesn't hate Q? For that matter, who doesn't hate U? The only thing more insufferable than U when they were losers is U when they're winners.

I find them annoying. Very annoying given the title. But whatever. Ivy rivalries matter more to me than other ones. It's not like, on any level, I have any concerns or insecurities about comparing Cornell and Union or Q as schools. The rivalry with other Ivies is a school rivalry that goes well beyond hockey for me.

Plus, watching Dartmouth throw a constant stream of cheapshots at us is worse than being upset that Q or Union has beaten us for a few years.

Long story short, just losing to a team doesn't do THAT much to sway me, rivalrywise.

Q, Union, and Yale all have coaches who are complete assholes (or at least Schafer thinks so). Q ran up the score against us a few years ago. Q presumably wants to leave the ECAC. Plenty of reasons to root against them. I'm with you on Ivy rivalries being much greater than non-Ivy ones. I root against all of the ECAC schools in the NCAA's for the same reason UNC fans root against Duke and Red Sox fans root against the Yankees. I also think it can't possibly be good for Cornell for Yale to win the national championship, but that's not really why I hate them so much.

U's coach was suspended last year for trying to punch out Seth Appert after losing to RPI last year. Not a classy gesture

Perhaps someone can post the video of Union's Rick Bennett trying to punch out the RPI coach?

BearLover
I mean, no one would ever call 1990-93 Bills fans "spoiled."

I would, however, call Atlanta Braves fan of the '90s into the '00s spoiled. They only won one WS championship and lost a couple others. But b the endof their long run of division championships they couldn't even sell out a playoff game.

Current Yankee fans are spoiled. They rant and rave about how horrible the team is when it's been over .500 because the expectation is to have the best record in the league. Spoiled.

BearLover
And I still don't get why people here hate Dartmouth and Harvard but don't seem to mind Q, Union, or Yale...the latter three teams have dealt us many more crushing losses in past years than Harvard, and the reasons to hate Dartmouth (asshole coach, on-ice antics) are equally applicable to Q/U/Y.

Some of it is a time horizon thing. Yale may have beaten us a lot more recently than Harvard but over the 20+ years I've been following CU hockey that hasn't been the case. Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom. I dislike Union but more because they were the perenial cellar dwellawho always seemed to give good Cornell teams trouble than their recent success.

CAS
Perhaps someone can post the video of Union's Rick Bennett trying to punch out the RPI coach?

video: [www.youtube.com]

There are others.

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

CAS
U's coach was suspended last year for trying to punch out Seth Appert after losing to RPI last year. Not a classy gesture

You make this sound like it was a bad thing.

BearLover
Q, Union, and Yale all have coaches who are complete assholes (or at least Schafer thinks so).

I'm pretty sure a poll of the 12 coaches would put Mike in the top 3 of asshole coaches, depending where Pecknold and Gaudet placed.

Mike might even vote for Mike.

Trotsky

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

Strangely enough, Clarkson might be my favorite other team in the conference. They have a hockey following and tradition, they have neat enough colors, and their teams tend to be not complete assholes all the time. I guess I'm partial to NY teams, generally, too (with exceptions, such as Union and Colgate).

Dafatone

Trotsky

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

Strangely enough, Clarkson might be my favorite other team in the conference. They have a hockey following and tradition, they have neat enough colors, and their teams tend to be not complete assholes all the time. I guess I'm partial to NY teams, generally, too (with exceptions, such as Union and Colgate).

An opponent can be a rival without being a hated rival.

KeithK

Dafatone

Trotsky

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

Strangely enough, Clarkson might be my favorite other team in the conference. They have a hockey following and tradition, they have neat enough colors, and their teams tend to be not complete assholes all the time. I guess I'm partial to NY teams, generally, too (with exceptions, such as Union and Colgate).

An opponent can be a rival without being a hated rival.

Good point. Of course, I can't think of any professional sports rivals I don't hate.

Thanks ursusminor for posting the video of Rick Bennett throwing haymakers. Watching it never gets tiresome.

Dafatone

KeithK

Dafatone

Trotsky

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

Strangely enough, Clarkson might be my favorite other team in the conference. They have a hockey following and tradition, they have neat enough colors, and their teams tend to be not complete assholes all the time. I guess I'm partial to NY teams, generally, too (with exceptions, such as Union and Colgate).

An opponent can be a rival without being a hated rival.

Good point. Of course, I can't think of any professional sports rivals I don't hate.

I'm just missing that gene. I don't hate the Yankees or Rangers, I don't care about the former and will even root for the latter. Having been away from NY for 30 years probably helps, since I never have to listen to their fans.

But I don't even hate Harvard, and that worries me. The only rival I have truly ever been able to hate is the Braves.

Trotsky

Dafatone

KeithK

Dafatone

Trotsky

KeithK
Perceptions of rivals can often be fixed early in fandom.

Absolutely. AFAIC, we have two rivals: Harvard and Clarkson. The wogs begin at Hamilton.

Strangely enough, Clarkson might be my favorite other team in the conference. They have a hockey following and tradition, they have neat enough colors, and their teams tend to be not complete assholes all the time. I guess I'm partial to NY teams, generally, too (with exceptions, such as Union and Colgate).

An opponent can be a rival without being a hated rival.

Good point. Of course, I can't think of any professional sports rivals I don't hate.

I'm just missing that gene. I don't hate the Yankees or Rangers, I don't care about the former and will even root for the latter. Having been away from NY for 30 years probably helps, since I never have to listen to their fans.

But I don't even hate Harvard, and that worries me. The only rival I have truly ever been able to hate is the Braves.

As long as you hate the Braves, you're good.

CAS
Thanks ursusminor for posting the video of Rick Bennett throwing haymakers. Watching it never gets tiresome.

My blood pressure always rises 20 or 30 mmHg watching Mongo attempting to get at Seth Appert.

ursusminor

CAS
Thanks ursusminor for posting the video of Rick Bennett throwing haymakers. Watching it never gets tiresome.

My blood pressure always rises 20 or 30 mmHg watching Mongo attempting to get at Seth Appert.

Mongo only pawn in game of life.

Calling CU hockey spoiled is like calling the Flyers spoiled for losing like 7 cups in a row even though this will be the 2nd time they've missed the playoffs in 20 years.