Cornell-BU

I believe this is our first NCAA postseason matchup vs. BU since the 1972 national title game. BU has the best talent in the country. They have three first-round draft picks and another player (Brady Tkachuk) who is a projected top-5 overall pick in this year's draft. They have more drafted defensemen (7) than they can fit in a lineup. They also have tournament experience, having made it to the NCAAs the past three seasons. They are missing Patrick Harper, who suffered a season-ending injury in January and was at the time their leading scorer, but I believe the rest of their team is healthy.

Cornell played them evenly at MSG this year, hanging on for a 4-3 win. At the time, BU was struggling and was discombobulated at forward. They have since turned things around and now play a more Cornell-style physical puck possession/get pucks deep/grind you down game. Cornell is deeper than nearly every team in the country, but BU is deep too, especially at D. And despite what the stats say, (first-round pick) Oettinger is probably at least as good a goalie as Galajda. Cornell played one fewer game this past weekend and have an extra day of rest. If BU spent the night of their Hockey East championship win partying, make that two extra days of rest. It should be noted too that BU, despite beating BC and Providence to win the automatic bid, hasn't looked like juggernauts, having won their last four games by 1 goal, discounting the empty-netter last night.

This is a pseudo-home game for BU because the selection committee doesn't care about bracket integrity. A home game against what is probably the most talented team in the country isn't the "prize" we were thinking of when we clinched the 1-seed, but I'd probably rather play BU than a high-flying offensive team like Penn State or Northeastern (we can worry about the latter if we get past BU). Overall, Cornell is the underdog.

It sucks that we’re playing BU are essentially an away game... but on the other hand, that’s what BU gets for traveling well.

Allentown would have been worse, and obviously Sioux Falls too. Really, only Bridgeport would have been “neutral”...

BMac
It sucks that we’re playing BU are essentially an away game... but on the other hand, that’s what BU gets for traveling well.

Allentown would have been worse, and obviously Sioux Falls too. Really, only Bridgeport would have been “neutral”...

The NC$$ cares about the money. The best way to run up the cash register in Worcester was to schedule two home teams there. With only 4 #1s to choose from, their interests took second fiddle to putting local teams in Worcester.

Tom McGinnis, chair of the NCAA Men’s Ice Hockey Committee
McGinnis said. “We got three eastern teams in Worcester. Hopefully, that will create that environment that we’re looking for.”

The Cornell-BU matchup could be defended on several grounds, not the least of which were the losses to Princeton, Union and RPI down the stretch.

Hopefully our guys will remember the UML loss last year and bring their A game. Wins by Cornell & Michigan on Saturday will serve the committee right.

Swampy

BMac
It sucks that we’re playing BU are essentially an away game... but on the other hand, that’s what BU gets for traveling well.

Allentown would have been worse, and obviously Sioux Falls too. Really, only Bridgeport would have been “neutral”...

The NC$$ cares about the money. The best way to run up the cash register in Worcester was to schedule two home teams there. With only 4 #1s to choose from, their interests took second fiddle to putting local teams in Worcester.

Tom McGinnis, chair of the NCAA Men’s Ice Hockey Committee
McGinnis said. “We got three eastern teams in Worcester. Hopefully, that will create that environment that we’re looking for.”

The Cornell-BU matchup could be defended on several grounds, not the least of which were the losses to Princeton, Union and RPI down the stretch.

Hopefully our guys will remember the UML loss last year and bring their A game. Wins by Cornell & Michigan on Saturday will serve the committee right.

BU lines up with Cornell because we can't play Princeton in the first round. To make any other switch isn't fair to Notre Dame. Notre Dame is overall #2. They should not lose Michigan Tech because we can't play Princeton.

There was no decision to be made except whether we played BU or Michigan Tech. RPI seeding was followed when choosing all the 1 vs 4 seeds. (Overall 1-4 vs 13-16 seeds.)

Just gonna repeat here again that - the idea that BU got a "home game" is silly. BU doesn't draw like that anymore. At The Beanpot, there were more Northeastern fans than BU.

If Cornell fans can pack Lynah East every year, there's no reason they can't have as many people in Worcester as BU does.

adamw
Just gonna repeat here again that - the idea that BU got a "home game" is silly. BU doesn't draw like that anymore. At The Beanpot, there were more Northeastern fans than BU.

If Cornell fans can pack Lynah East every year, there's no reason they can't have as many people in Worcester as BU does.

Sure we might be able to get as many fans there, but the Lynah East analogy is false. That is something that many Boston area alums circle on their schedule every year. It's planned out months in advance and they go as much as a social event as for the hockey. I doubt very many go to any other area games, certainly they don't go to Brown.

BU has a home game because the casual fan can just decide on Sat to drive and go to it, not so for CU. BU students with limited budgets can pay for gas and a ticket, CU students need accommodations and 2 days away from school. I suspect that the NU fans will be rooting against us as well, but I'm not sure of that. I doubt UM fans will root for us. There is no comparison. I will be more than a little surprised if our fan base comes up to BU's.

This group could have as easily been in Bridgeport. There, a substantial CU alumni and student base in NYC, remember we have a couple of campuses there, could take public transportation back and forth from NYC. That would have benefited the number 1 regional seed, but no, they chose to benefit the number 4 regional seed.

Jim Hyla

adamw
Just gonna repeat here again that - the idea that BU got a "home game" is silly. BU doesn't draw like that anymore. At The Beanpot, there were more Northeastern fans than BU.

If Cornell fans can pack Lynah East every year, there's no reason they can't have as many people in Worcester as BU does.

Sure we might be able to get as many fans there, but the Lynah East analogy is false. That is something that many Boston area alums circle on their schedule every year. It's planned out months in advance and they go as much as a social event as for the hockey. I doubt very many go to any other area games, certainly they don't go to Brown.

BU has a home game because the casual fan can just decide on Sat to drive and go to it, not so for CU. BU students with limited budgets can pay for gas and a ticket, CU students need accommodations and 2 days away from school. I suspect that the NU fans will be rooting against us as well, but I'm not sure of that. I doubt UM fans will root for us. There is no comparison. I will be more than a little surprised if our fan base comes up to BU's.

This group could have as easily been in Bridgeport. There, a substantial CU alumni and student base in NYC, remember we have a couple of campuses there, could take public transportation back and forth from NYC. That would have benefited the number 1 regional seed, but no, they chose to benefit the number 4 regional seed.

I doubt the UM - NU fans will care about our game, and for most of it they won't even be in the building. If anything they will probably be rooting against BU as a rival / traditionally strong program / PITA fanbase with whom they are familiar. Nobody outside the ECAC really even knows we exist anymore.

From looking at past attendance stories i wouldnt be surprised if cornell has more fans that the other teams unless BU decides to bus kids in I dont think they travel in droves to the game. Many kids dont have cars, dont need them in boston anyway.

adamw
Just gonna repeat here again that - the idea that BU got a "home game" is silly. BU doesn't draw like that anymore. At The Beanpot, there were more Northeastern fans than BU.

This. For those of us who went to Manchester last year, the building was DOMINATED during our game by faithful Lowell townies (not really many students), residents of a suburban city who had an easy drive. Only the most rabid BU fans will be bothered to make the trip out to Worcester, especially when a lower % of them have cars and one can just catch it on TV either at home or the neighborhood bars. Outside of the hub, I doubt you find many where "BU" is the default rooting interest. A casual fan local fan in Worcester might walk in and wind up rooting for the Mass schools, sure, but won't be dressed head-to-toe in scarlet (which is off-red) nor incredibly vocal.

I'm actually expecting there to be more of a Northeastern presence since their fans haven't had as much success, and are therefore hungrier and more excited about their current talent. An "all-hands on deck, because we don't know when this will happen again" rally for them.

As someone (I think billhoward) mentioned, the building holds over 12,000. If they get half that, I'd be impressed. Allentown may very well be the attendance leader this weekend.

upprdeck
From looking at past attendance stories i wouldnt be surprised if cornell has more fans that the other teams unless BU decides to bus kids in I dont think they travel in droves to the game. Many kids dont have cars, dont need them in boston anyway.

I thought every kid at BU was from Long Island?

Jim Hyla

This group could have as easily been in Bridgeport. There, a substantial CU alumni and student base in NYC, remember we have a couple of campuses there, could take public transportation back and forth from NYC. That would have benefited the number 1 regional seed, but no, they chose to benefit the number 4 regional seed.

There's a century-old perception of a Notre Dame connection to New York City because of some dusty Knute Rockne playing Army in leather football helmets legend bullshit. Most committee members probably have no clue about Cornell's influence in NYC. If they even know what state we're in, they probably only think of our Ag pedigree.

Since the only word of explanation I've heard from the NCAA is "atmosphere," (translates to ticket $ale$) they kept the Mass schools in Mass. As for Bridgeport? "I-95 connects to Providence" is the hope there and maybe there's enough of the ND football nutjobs in NYC who will hop MetroNorth.

Finally, I want to point out how great it is to finally be able to type "ND" and not have any confusion.

“Most committee members probably have no clue about Cornell's influence in NYC. If they even know what state we're in, they probably only think of our Ag pedigree.”

But Mike Schafer is on the Committee. Assume he’d make the point.

RichH

Jim Hyla

This group could have as easily been in Bridgeport. There, a substantial CU alumni and student base in NYC, remember we have a couple of campuses there, could take public transportation back and forth from NYC. That would have benefited the number 1 regional seed, but no, they chose to benefit the number 4 regional seed.

There's a century-old perception of a Notre Dame connection to New York City because of some dusty Knute Rockne playing Army in leather football helmets legend bullshit. Most committee members probably have no clue about Cornell's influence in NYC. If they even know what state we're in, they probably only think of our Ag pedigree.

Since the only word of explanation I've heard from the NCAA is "atmosphere," (translates to ticket $ale$) they kept the Mass schools in Mass. As for Bridgeport? "I-95 connects to Providence" is the hope there and maybe there's enough of the ND football nutjobs in NYC who will hop MetroNorth.

Finally, I want to point out how great it is to finally be able to type "ND" and not have any confusion.

Notre Dame gets an invitation to the Pinstripe Bowl if one of the participating conferences can't send an eligible team.

Source: I read it somewhere and don't remember the details.

Relevance: None.

Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

Keplerian crickets.

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

Trotsky

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

That seems weird. ELynah is better anyway but I used to enjoy the Cornell thread on USCHO becaause it involved a mix of fans from other teams (as does ELynah--I just like reading fans' analysis, especially during NCAA time.)

djk26

Trotsky

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

That seems weird. ELynah is better anyway but I used to enjoy the Cornell thread on USCHO becaause it involved a mix of fans from other teams (as does ELynah--I just like reading fans' analysis, especially during NCAA time.)

I'd be the most likely person to start one there, and it seems pointless to me since we have eLynah. There is a poster who does Cornell game threads and some of us follow them, but that's about it.

It makes for the amusement that periodically some Yale or Union newbie numb nut will mouth off about Cornell not having enough fan support to even support a team thread. One of the RPI or Clarkson elders then politely posts the link to eLynah without comment. Similar things happen with the Clarkson Roundtable.

But if you like, start one. A lot of ECAC fans are on USCHO and some of them have a lot to say.

djk26

Trotsky

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

That seems weird. ELynah is better anyway but I used to enjoy the Cornell thread on USCHO becaause it involved a mix of fans from other teams (as does ELynah--I just like reading fans' analysis, especially during NCAA time.)

Nowadays it'd just be RPI, Colgate, and Union fans whining about Schafer and/or our band.

French Rage

djk26

Trotsky

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

That seems weird. ELynah is better anyway but I used to enjoy the Cornell thread on USCHO becaause it involved a mix of fans from other teams (as does ELynah--I just like reading fans' analysis, especially during NCAA time.)

Nowadays it'd just be RPI, Colgate, and Union fans whining about Schafer and/or our band.

Not RPI, they're a good contingent.

The ECAC whiners on USCHO are Yale, Colgate, and SLU. The contributors are RPI, Cornell, Clarkson. Nobody else makes any impression except for one particularly vapid fuckwit each from Union and Harvard.

Looks like we've been demoted

scoop85
Looks like we've been demoted

"Cloud State"? "North Dame"? I'd say the numerical error is the least of their problems.

Beeeej

scoop85
Looks like we've been demoted

"Cloud State"? "North Dame"? I'd say the numerical error is the least of their problems.

Looks like they fixed all the issues. I couldn't help myself, so I emailed the press contact.

Trotsky

French Rage

djk26

Trotsky

djk26
Anyone know what happened to Cornell's season thread on USCHO? I don't go there often, so maybe they never had one? I figure that would be a good place to see what fans of other teams are saying about Cornell/BU.

As far as I know there has never been one.

That seems weird. ELynah is better anyway but I used to enjoy the Cornell thread on USCHO becaause it involved a mix of fans from other teams (as does ELynah--I just like reading fans' analysis, especially during NCAA time.)

Nowadays it'd just be RPI, Colgate, and Union fans whining about Schafer and/or our band.

Not RPI, they're a good contingent.

The ECAC whiners on USCHO are Yale, Colgate, and SLU. The contributors are RPI, Cornell, Clarkson. Nobody else makes any impression except for one particularly vapid fuckwit each from Union and Harvard.

I’ll have to admit that there are a few RPI fans on USCHO whom I could easily live without.

When Tom Reale was starting up his Without-a-Peer blog, he considered starting a forum there, and I wrote to him that I preferred having input from other fan bases. This, however, was before two events, one being Tom having a child which apparently takes up a lot of his time , and two being an influx of Union fans who think that there was no college hockey before about ten years ago. Then again a couple of down years in Schenectady and they will all jump into the Mohawk River. (Please!)

BTW, Tom just posted his first WaP entry since last summer, an interesting and thought provoking post from the RPI viewpoint.

ursusminor
BTW, Tom just posted his first WaP entry since last summer, an interesting and thought provoking post from the RPI viewpoint.

Fantastic piece, and I really hadn't known about most of those numbers. I know my perspective is skewed, but I still keenly remember (and even feel) Ross Lemon failing to pot a penalty shot in a loss to RPI in the 1990 ECAC semifinals on his birthday. I still remember Cornell as the #8 winning a three-game series at #3 RPI in 1998, during the idiotic years of the 10-team ECAC playoffs (and we wouldn't have needed the third game if every single ref hadn't completely missed a puck actually going in, hitting the back of the goal, and springing right back out right in front of us visiting fans). But those are a long time ago by any reasonable measure, and it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

That said, I know Cornell has a relatively large amount of "hardware" in the past 48 years, but we're in that vanishingly small group with a longer national title drought than RPI's, and we have the second longest title drought (among those with any titles to begin with), period. I'd like to see us not be the last one in that group.

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

That said, I know Cornell has a relatively large amount of "hardware" in the past 48 years, but we're in that vanishingly small group with a longer national title drought than RPI's, and we have the second longest title drought (among those with any titles to begin with), period. I'd like to see us not be the last one in that group.

While I feel dirty doing it, once Cornell gets eliminated each year, I quietly hope Colorado College doesn't win it, so we won't be "on the clock." After Maryland won lax last year, Cornell is now "on the clock" for that tournament.

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Oh, I did. WaP produces some of the best writing this league has seen. This article details wonderfully the breakdown of lengths of failure at the different tiers as a metric, but stops short of discussing any causes or possible remedies. For me, the major difference between RPI and Clarkson appears to lie in institutional support, but I'll let someone with more knowledge than my casual observance dive into that. It doesn't really matter the duration of a period of futility, because collegiate team performance has a very short memory. If you fix/change the underlying cause of such futility, you CAN make a turnaround happen quite quickly.

I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

RichH

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Oh, I did. WaP produces some of the best writing this league has seen. This article details wonderfully the breakdown of lengths of failure at the different tiers as a metric, but stops short of discussing any causes or possible remedies. For me, the major difference between RPI and Clarkson appears to lie in institutional support, but I'll let someone with more knowledge than my casual observance dive into that. It doesn't really matter the duration of a period of futility, because collegiate team performance has a very short memory. If you fix/change the underlying cause of such futility, you CAN make a turnaround happen quite quickly.

I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

That's a fair and reasonable analysis of Harvard's up and downswings. But even that also begs the question why a program like RPI's can't stumble on occasional good fortune as well. Their recruiting classes haven't sucked nearly as badly as their results, and the administration doesn't exactly ignore them. Anyway, I do hope they find some solutions soon.

RichH

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Oh, I did. WaP produces some of the best writing this league has seen. This article details wonderfully the breakdown of lengths of failure at the different tiers as a metric, but stops short of discussing any causes or possible remedies. For me, the major difference between RPI and Clarkson appears to lie in institutional support, but I'll let someone with more knowledge than my casual observance dive into that. It doesn't really matter the duration of a period of futility, because collegiate team performance has a very short memory. If you fix/change the underlying cause of such futility, you CAN make a turnaround happen quite quickly.

I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

RPI might want to get rid of the requirement that everyone in the school take freshman calculus and inflate their grades to an A- average. If Coach Smith can get by these two obstacles he is a near genius.

[www.cbsnews.com]

Good luck against BU. Make the ECAC proud. BU will be tough. A top seed has the best chance of making it to the F4. I think if you can get by BU you will make the F4.

That's a very well-written and well-researched article, but measuring relevance begs the question: "relevant to whom?" To me, a major metric of a team's relevancy is fan interest. If people are still interested in the team, then that team is relevant to those people. I do not know what RPI's crowds have been like lately, or what the level of student interest has been, but it sounds like RPI Hockey fan support is quite a bitter better than a lot of other teams'. Brown Hockey I'd say is teetering more closely to the edge of irrelevancy, because not only do they not win but they don't have any fans (or institutional support, which is another metric of relevancy the article doesn't cover--the fact RPI fired Seth Appert and hired away a coach from another school suggests the hockey team is at least somewhat relevant to the school administration as well).

marty

RichH

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Oh, I did. WaP produces some of the best writing this league has seen. This article details wonderfully the breakdown of lengths of failure at the different tiers as a metric, but stops short of discussing any causes or possible remedies. For me, the major difference between RPI and Clarkson appears to lie in institutional support, but I'll let someone with more knowledge than my casual observance dive into that. It doesn't really matter the duration of a period of futility, because collegiate team performance has a very short memory. If you fix/change the underlying cause of such futility, you CAN make a turnaround happen quite quickly.

I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

RPI might want to get rid of the requirement that everyone in the school take freshman calculus and inflate their grades to an A- average. If Coach Smith can get by these two obstacles he is a near genius.

[www.cbsnews.com]

[www.gradeinflation.com]
[www.gradeinflation.com]

marty

RichH

Beeeej

RichH

Beeeej
it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether RPI will someday have the ability to pull itself out of this hole.

Only three seasons ago, Clarkson had a 20-loss season and we were asking the same question of them. Harvard was the #11 ECAC team that same year and nobody was asking that question about them, because THEY BELONG IN THAT HOLE. Ahem, they obviously cheated their way to two ECAC titles since then and THEY SHOULD GO BACK IN THEIR HOLE.

My point is it's very possible these days to turn into an emergent power quickly, as long as you have the right recruiting magic and/or coaching. Remember, Schafer made a decision in 2015 to recruit older...or something? Even though we only kinda/sorta did? Anyway, we have a good team now.

If you haven't read the piece you really should - it provides some pretty solid context for looking at RPI differently than Clarkson, which has been good - and advanced in tournaments - much more recently and semi-reliably than RPI has in the last thirty years. As for Harvard, their genuine down years do seem to be an aberration, nothing lasting more than a couple of seasons. Yes, of course, any team can get better. The question is how long you should expect that to take, and why - and whether such a sustained record of failure can create a vicious cycle from which it may be much, much harder to emerge.

Oh, I did. WaP produces some of the best writing this league has seen. This article details wonderfully the breakdown of lengths of failure at the different tiers as a metric, but stops short of discussing any causes or possible remedies. For me, the major difference between RPI and Clarkson appears to lie in institutional support, but I'll let someone with more knowledge than my casual observance dive into that. It doesn't really matter the duration of a period of futility, because collegiate team performance has a very short memory. If you fix/change the underlying cause of such futility, you CAN make a turnaround happen quite quickly.

I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

RPI might want to get rid of the requirement that everyone in the school take freshman calculus and inflate their grades to an A- average. If Coach Smith can get by these two obstacles he is a near genius.

[www.cbsnews.com]

Management majors, which covers most of the hockey team, take a watered down version of calc these days. Also I cannot believe that article which you linked considering the yearly reports of grade point averages which I see for the hockey team and many other sports teams at RPI. That is unless most other schools inflate grades more than RPI does. From the source which Al gave [www.gradeinflation.com].

Institutional support does appear to be a problem. For whatever reason there seems to be more support for RPI's D-III teams these days than either hockey team. How can a football team win more games in a season than a hockey team? Although I certainly hope that Coach Smith has success, the search for Coach Appert's replacement did not appear to have been done well. They hired a search firm which had never done a search for a hockey coach before. They ignored the input of former players. I don't know whether or not that last item is good or bad.

I do agree that any program should be able to turn things around, but for whatever reason, RPI does not appear to have been able to do so.


Edit: It would not surprise me if Coach Donato has another generational talent entering in the fall in Oliver Wahlstrom. Do others remember him from when he was 9? [www.youtube.com]

Beeeej
I still remember Cornell as the #8 winning a three-game series at #3 RPI in 1998, during the idiotic years of the 10-team ECAC playoffs (and we wouldn't have needed the third game if every single ref hadn't completely missed a puck actually going in, hitting the back of the goal, and springing right back out right in front of us visiting fans).

Also known as Jeff Oates's career weekend. Good times. (Even if I was in a computer lab in Utah for most of them.)

jtwcornell91

Beeeej
I still remember Cornell as the #8 winning a three-game series at #3 RPI in 1998, during the idiotic years of the 10-team ECAC playoffs (and we wouldn't have needed the third game if every single ref hadn't completely missed a puck actually going in, hitting the back of the goal, and springing right back out right in front of us visiting fans).

Also known as Jeff Oates's career weekend. Good times. (Even if I was in a computer lab in Utah for most of them.)

Yep. IIRC (and I haven't checked TBRW?), he either scored 5 of Cornell's 10 goals that weekend, or scored 5 of his 10 career points that weekend. Maybe even both.

Beeeej

jtwcornell91

Beeeej
I still remember Cornell as the #8 winning a three-game series at #3 RPI in 1998, during the idiotic years of the 10-team ECAC playoffs (and we wouldn't have needed the third game if every single ref hadn't completely missed a puck actually going in, hitting the back of the goal, and springing right back out right in front of us visiting fans).

Also known as Jeff Oates's career weekend. Good times. (Even if I was in a computer lab in Utah for most of them.)

Yep. IIRC (and I haven't checked TBRW?), he either scored 5 of Cornell's 10 goals that weekend, or scored 5 of his 10 career points that weekend. Maybe even both.

4 of his 19 career goals.

Trotsky

Beeeej

jtwcornell91

Beeeej
I still remember Cornell as the #8 winning a three-game series at #3 RPI in 1998, during the idiotic years of the 10-team ECAC playoffs (and we wouldn't have needed the third game if every single ref hadn't completely missed a puck actually going in, hitting the back of the goal, and springing right back out right in front of us visiting fans).

Also known as Jeff Oates's career weekend. Good times. (Even if I was in a computer lab in Utah for most of them.)

Yep. IIRC (and I haven't checked TBRW?), he either scored 5 of Cornell's 10 goals that weekend, or scored 5 of his 10 career points that weekend. Maybe even both.

4 of his 19 career goals.

Thanks. And 4 of Cornell's 10 goals.

RichH
I'm under the opinion that Ted Donato is a bad coach and simply got lucky with two generational talents, one of which happens to have his genes. He's 219-200-52 and racked up six losing seasons until Vesey stepped his skates into Allston. And his early title years were a result of excellent recruiting scraps leftover from Mazzolini. I argue that Donato's successful years are the aberration. And to tie into my earlier comment, I think Harvard gives the hockey program(s) some of the strongest institutional support in the league, even if the Harvard community can't be bothered to do the same.

If you want to look for reasons why Harvard improved in recent years, it has less to do with Vesey/Donato (because they always got good recruits) and more to do with Paul Pearl becoming an assistant coach there after leaving Holy Cross.

More than just CU-BU, but here's USCHO's take on the regional.

Jim Hyla
More than just CU-BU, but here's USCHO's take on the regional.

And USCHO Live! Discussion. North East region discussion starts at 59:10. Although Jaffe picks BU and Northeastern, he is very torn.
[www.uscho.com]

On ESPN none of the predictions had us winning the regional. Of course it's ESPN so I wouldn't assume they studied college hockey in depth.

eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

scoop85

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

As did all but BU in this regional. Only BU even got past the semis. So everybody craps on us, but not the others? I'm not referring to you.

scoop85

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

I don't think Cornell played that badly against Princeton, to be totally honest. And I also don't think BU really blew anyone away during their Hockey East playoff run (four one-goal wins). There are reasons to think we are the underdog on Saturday, but the last few games I don't think tell us all that much, even if the prognosticators act like they do.

Jim Hyla

scoop85

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

As did all but BU in this regional. Only BU even got past the semis. So everybody craps on us, but not the others? I'm not referring to you.

Michigan lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 1 seed. Northeastern lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 2 seed. Cornell lost to a team that would have hit the links if it hadn't won its tournament. Ugarte expressed it perfectly.

Al DeFlorio

Jim Hyla

scoop85

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

As did all but BU in this regional. Only BU even got past the semis. So everybody craps on us, but not the others? I'm not referring to you.

Michigan lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 1 seed. Northeastern lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 2 seed. Cornell lost to a team that would have hit the links if it hadn't won its tournament. Ugarte expressed it perfectly.

Fair point; while I never like to put too much stock in a single game, I can see why the prognosticators might be down on us. We'll see how things play out.

Al DeFlorio

Jim Hyla

scoop85

Al DeFlorio

ugarte
eating shit in the conference semis against princeton is not going to endear us to the prognosticators.

You have a way with words.

[And I completely agree with these.]

I'm hanging my hat on the fact that when Yale and Providence won their recent NC's they both flamed-out in their conference playoffs. Hopefully we got our "bad" game out of the way (in which we didn't play terribly truth be told).

As did all but BU in this regional. Only BU even got past the semis. So everybody craps on us, but not the others? I'm not referring to you.

Michigan lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 1 seed. Northeastern lost in OT to an eventual NCAA 2 seed. Cornell lost to a team that would have hit the links if it hadn't won its tournament. Ugarte expressed it perfectly.

it's not like i'm counting us out. what i'm saying is that i think we were eyed with suspicion all year and that game was enough to hang their hat on, and to choose a team that has played a tougher SOS or has a stronger "prospect" pedigree.

i'd think it was weird if the professional wags were picking us tbh.

Cornell's preview:

[cornellbigred.com]

We played more than okay against Princeton. Just didn't put the puck in the net. FWIW: The last time we played BU in the NCAAs, we beat BU 3-2 in the RS in Ithaca in 1972. John Danby of BU, their stud forward that year, said, "I think we played a better game. We just didn't get the goals. We'll see what happens if we play again." That line stuck with me. We played BU for the ECAC title and lost 4-1, came back a week later and blew apart Denver (thought to be the tourney favorite) in the NCAA semis by 7-2. and then reverted to norm the next night losing to BU 4-0 for the title. [www.tbrw.info]

billhoward
We played more than okay against Princeton. Just didn't put the puck in the net. FWIW: The last time we played BU in the NCAAs, we beat BU 3-2 in the RS in Ithaca in 1972. John Danby of BU, their stud forward that year, said, "I think we played a better game. We just didn't get the goals. We'll see what happens if we play again." That line stuck with me. We played BU for the ECAC title and lost 4-1, came back a week later and blew apart Denver (thought to be the tourney favorite) in the NCAA semis by 7-2. and then reverted to norm the next night losing to BU 4-0 for the title. [www.tbrw.info]

Agree. The PU game was not terrible play, just not as good as we can do, starting in the second period. Even with that it took some luck on the first couple of goals that PU got. Who knows what would have happened if that didn't occur. I've certainly seen the team get thru a bad period and then come back strong.

But that's past tense, let's hope they show how well they can bounce back. Certainly in the post-game press conference after PU, neither the players, nor coach, were hanging their heads low. Rather, they seemed to feel they didn't play as well as they could and they'll do better.

The only thing I didn't like from that conference was coach saying the bench was quiet once they got behind. We need our captains and better players to step up at those times. I'm "confident" that they will.

Beeeej
Cornell's preview:

[cornellbigred.com]

Some very interesting numbers from that article.

"Need-To-Know Numbers:

• Cornell has been particularly dominant at even strength, leading the nation with a team rating of plus-49. The Big Red has surrendered just a paltry 30 even-strength goals so far. For perspective, the next two lowest totals in the nation are Clarkson at 50, and Northeastern and Minnesota State at 57.

• The Big Red has three players in the top 10 nationally in rating, all junior defensemen. Matt Nuttle and Brendan Smith are tied for third at plus-22, while Alec McCrea — typically paired with Smith — is tied for sixth at plus-21. Junior forward Anthony Angello (plus-18) is tied for sixth among forwards.

• Cornell is the only team in the NCAA tournament field that has not surrendered more than four goals in a game this season.

• The Big Red is the youngest team in ECAC Hockey and the seventh-youngest team in the country. Despite playing fewer games than everyone else, the Big Red rank fifth among the 16 NCAA tournament teams in freshman scoring (24-54–78)."

What a future, I hope.

Being so good at even strength scoring means we need to do better on special teams. It's been a while since we went into a season where our power play scared the other guys. It has been disappointing when we give up a goal on penalty kill; if we're good with five skaters on the ice, we should be pretty good also with our four best remaining skaters.

I don't think we played poorly but I think there were long stretches when we played without intensity, or at least with less intensity than the Tigers. Princeton was beating us to the puck, coming out of the corners with possession, and in the later stages suffocating our transition and standing us up at the blue line.

Princeton played a fantastic weekend, except the first period of our game when I thought we thoroughly outplayed them and would have had them down for the count with just one more Cornell goal. But I wouldn't say we played all that well the next two periods. We were meh and they were really on top of their game, and we got what we deserved. It's nothing to commit suicide over but this weekend is really the test of the whole season: play the way we can and we have a legitimate 1-seed's chance of going to St. Paul.

This has been a solid team to watch all year, and even though I'm too old and cynical to fall in love I believe this is our best bet since '05. I believe this team should be in the Frozen Four. Usually in the NC$$s I feel like if we can just keep it close we have a puncher's chance, but no, this year I feel like if all goes according to plan we ought to advance. In 38 seasons I've only felt that on two other occasions, '03 and '05. Now here we are, 20 games over .500, and I feel like this is qualitatively a better team than all but those two.



I really want this and I am allowing myself to hope for it because I feel like we have a serious, non-delusional, non-miracle shot.

From the normally good CHN in their preview:
[www.collegehockeynews.com]

The Terriers met Cornell at Madison Square Garden in November and took an early-season win — one of just five teams to beat Cornell this season — and now becomes the question of whether or not they can do it again. Cornell, a little older, isn’t over-the-top physical as it has been in prior years. The Big Red have more skill and are considerably smaller than they were three years ago.

The fascinating matchup here is Cornell stud freshman goaltender Matthew Galajda (.940 save percentage) going up against a star-studded BU roster, which includes freshman first-round pick Shane Bowers and future first-round pick Brady Tkachuk.

“They have had a heck of a season,” BU coach David Quinn said. “They are a No. 1 seed for a reason. We had a great game with them in New York City in November. But we are two completely different teams now, as are most teams in the tournament. When you are in the national tournament you are playing a great team.”

BU was able to steal a win from the Big Red in November after two late goals in the third period. Schafer said that his team learned plenty on that November night.

I had to look again at our results to make sure I hadn’t had a Mandela Effect moment.

I saw that as well and nearly shit a brick.

coz
I saw that as well and nearly shit a brick.

Talk about no respect. If they can't get a win, say nothing about the score, correct, well maybe that helps to explain why they don't think we got a bad deal in going to Worcester.

“It is nice getting (Worcester) because the last few years we’ve been out west,” Quinn said this week. “It will be great for us to have some fan support and hopefully we’ll get a big crowd.”

Do they deserve it?

Normally, I just tell Adam about these things privately as a courtesy, but this is just a bridge too far. Sloppiness in the extreme. So instead...

Apparently, @MikeMcMahonCHN is now the Sean Spicer/Sarah Huckabee Sanders of college hockey.

"BU took an early season win from Cornell in November... before a capacity crowd of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND in the ROMAN COLOSSEUM!!"#NCAA #ECACHockey #LetsGoRed @CUBigRedHockey [t.co]

— Beeeej (@BeeeejEsq) March 23, 2018

To get a result wrong in passing is one thing. But to mention it several times, count it in reference to the team’s record, and then to provide details exactly how that wrong result came about, is really something.

I mean, remember how frustrated Stewart looked when he gave up the tying goal? And what about that stick-check in the 2nd period? I mean...WHOA.

This is what I get for going to bed and letting the writer post it himself at 2 a.m. Sorry folks - fixed now.

adamw
This is what I get for going to bed and letting the writer post it himself at 2 a.m. Sorry folks - fixed now.

Mostly. ("Galadja" - "supress" )

Beeeej

adamw
This is what I get for going to bed and letting the writer post it himself at 2 a.m. Sorry folks - fixed now.

Mostly. ("Galadja" - "supress" )

bring it

RichH
I had to look again at our results to make sure I hadn’t had a Mandela Effect moment.

It's the Mengele Effect.

Now I am totally jonesing for us to play in the Roman Colosseum.

Trotsky
Now I am totally jonesing for us to play in the Roman Colosseum.

Outdoor games are gimmicks.

The story is also wrong that Cornell is "considerably smaller than they've been in recent years." Cornell is the second-tallest team in the country.

BearLover
The story is also wrong that Cornell is "considerably smaller than they've been in recent years." Cornell is the second-tallest team in the country.

Both could be true.

Trotsky

BearLover
The story is also wrong that Cornell is "considerably smaller than they've been in recent years." Cornell is the second-tallest team in the country.

Both could be true.

This says Cornell is 6th in average weight, which might even be artificially low given the ten freshmen on the team who will likely get bigger: [www.collegehockeynews.com]

Two of several USCHO columnists pick Cornell to emerge from our Regional:

[www.uscho.com]

Drew Claussen is smoking crack.

Beeeej
Two of several USCHO columnists pick Cornell to emerge from our Regional:

[www.uscho.com]

Drew Claussen is smoking crack.

Several CHN folks pick Cornell to beat BU, but none pick us to emerge:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Josh Seguin is also smoking crack.

Beeeej

Several CHN folks pick Cornell to beat BU, but none pick us to emerge:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Josh Seguin is also smoking crack.

Had Boulay not made his picks yet?

ugarte

Beeeej

Several CHN folks pick Cornell to beat BU, but none pick us to emerge:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Josh Seguin is also smoking crack.

Had Boulay not made his picks yet?

Whoops! Somehow I missed that.

BearLover

Trotsky

BearLover
The story is also wrong that Cornell is "considerably smaller than they've been in recent years." Cornell is the second-tallest team in the country.

Both could be true.

This says Cornell is 6th in average weight, which might even be artificially low given the ten freshmen on the team who will likely get bigger: [www.collegehockeynews.com]

I heard from a western hockey fan that Cornell was heavier this Spring due to their cupcake schedule.

4 of 8 CHN columnists pick Cornell to beat BU. Only Boulay picks Cornell to beat Notheastern (which beats Michigan).

0 of 8 have the west regional picked correctly.

Correction - one still has a shot.

can someone post a link that will work if i dont get espnnews
thanks

Illegal stream enthusiasts: [www.firstonetv.net]

This place is a mausoleum and cornell fans significantly outnumber bu fans.

Not even close to a bu "home game"

I think you're at a different game than I am. I'd say there are clearly more BU fans here, and they have a bigger, louder student section.

abmarks
This place is a mausoleum and cornell fans significantly outnumber bu fans.

Not even close to a bu "home game"

jhib
I think you're at a different game than I am. I'd say there are clearly more BU fans here, and they have a bigger, louder student section.

Watching on TV the broadcast is showing Cornell fans significantly more than they are showing BU fans. In fact I'm not sure I've seen any shots of BU fans.

Crap

Ah well. Hell of a year, and we should be right back in the thick of it next season.

That's just unfortunate. Both teams played well and the game was pretty even but BU got the key goals in a game that mattered, which seems to happen a lot for them.


And I don't know if it was just me, but the ESPN feed was garbage and kept freezing frequently.

The tying goal from BU 36 seconds after Cornell scored was a killer. It killed any momentum.

Shoot... I wish we really landed one of those many chances we had to score.

I sure will miss this very talented senior class. They improved a lot over the course of their time here at Cornell and have a bright future ahead of them.

Hopefully no early departures like Angello too

Anything can happen in a single-elimination tournament. I thought we played pretty well in an evenly-played game but didn't get the bounces we needed. Better luck next year.

These are the times, I wish Cornell had a player who can score 20 goals in a season. Someone like Matt Moulson who can come through in the playoffs.

Having depth is great and all, but you usually need that one playmaker who helps pull you through and make the special plays.

Cornell outshot the most talented team in the country and played well enough to win. That's all you can really asked for in the NCAA tournament.

Outshot the "most talented" team? Moral victories in the post season are meaningless. I agree with the poster about a go to guy. This team did not have that.

If this team were less balanced by replacing some of our bottom two lines with scrubs, we'd be calling angello, vanderlaan, and Yates go to.

Would be nice to have a 20 goal scorer, but I'm nothing but excited for the future.

Lurking behind my joy of watching this year's team was a feeling that there is still a talent gap between what we have and what it takes to win a title. Does Jeff Teat play hockey?

several pucks thru the crease down the stretch, just couldnt put one home.. the first BU goal on a wild swinging pass that the cameras never really got a good luck at. the 2nd thru crazy traffic out in front.. i thought BU did a good job of throwing bodies out front, but other than that we really controlled them to going wide all game.. we came thru the blue line with speed more, and cycled several times really well. pretty even game,

Tough to lose, but a great season nonetheless. Far better than anyone envisioned. LGR

George64
Tough to lose, but a great season nonetheless. Far better than anyone envisioned. LGR

Well 61% said preseason that the team had to get to the Regionals to meet their expectations

Our guys played great. So did theirs. This looked like a good NCAA game between two really strong teams. Too bad it went the wrong way. Great season, hope eveybody’s back next year and we can build on this.

A couple of years ago the basketball team made it a point to play some really top flight programs for the experience. Yes they lost to Syracuse and Kansas but they did make it to the Sweet 16.
Perhaps there is still time to set up some quality non ECAC opponents so the schedule will not be called "cupcake". Fun year - we'll lick 'em next year!