Commentary: College Hockey (Still) Has a COVID Problem

Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Good article. This shocked me:

Forfeits don't count towards the Pairwise. At least they haven't in the past, when it comes to things like using illegal players.

The fuck is the ostensible reason for that?

cornell would probably have had an issue playing if this was 2-3 weeks ago too.. As it is we will be short several players this weekend.

Somewhat amusingly, Michigan tied Michigan Tech last night.

jeff '84
Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Hey, the world of online is more demanding than print by far, in terms of how much copy one must produce. It's finite, the number of in-depth or investigative articles you can do, sourced via 25, 50 or 100 interviews, determining the rankings of teams that pulled the plugs vs. wanted to play on, etcetera. Sometimes it's useful to offer up some specifics and insights, get it published while the topic is current, and in doing so, shake the tree and make more nuts and monkeys fall out.

world juniors getting cancelled helps mich solve one problem.

hopefully the wave goes thru by jan and we see less issues going towards spring end of the season.

upprdeck
as it is we will be short several players this weekend.

Oh?

Trotsky

upprdeck
as it is we will be short several players this weekend.

Oh?

From Coach’s Happy Holidays Letter

…I am sure that many of you had a similar holiday as our team. Some of you were able to be with family, a few were quarantined from family and friends, and many had a mixture of both. It is during these days we are reminded how important family is, as people rightfully gravitate towards family both during celebration and during tough times. Cornell Hockey is very similar. On campus the bond the players develop over a four year period is very close. Our close college friends know who we really are because they have seen us celebrate our highs, and help us through our lows as we mature during our college years. That bond is enhanced through college athletics and the pressure that exists to perform and improve and reach our team and individual goals. I think we have all appreciated our college friends on a much different level.

Our team has done well in the first half of the season, going 9-1-1. We have started to develop that bond already. We can look inconsistent at times, as we face new situations almost every game, with 14 players who have never played college hockey and 9 more who are in their second year. As we enter the next half of the season, we will need to overcome the inactivity since our last game. We had a few practices in early December and then gave our team 4 days off to prepare for exams. As many of you know, after the spike of Covid hit much of Cornell’s student population around December 11th, we didn’t have much of an opportunity to practice as a team. Our team wasn’t able to fully avoid the increase in cases, and several team members tested positive. Fortunately many of us experienced mild or no symptoms.

Now comes the fun of preparing for Arizona State and North Dakota on the road. We will be missing some players for Arizona, but hopefully will have everyone ready to take on North Dakota. I have a feeling that this team could evolve over the second half of our season but they will need to work hard at it during practice in the New Year. I have been very impressed with the composure of this group to stay with our process when things are going to plan. This trait will serve us well in the 2022!

Slightly off-topic, but how does one get added to the coach's mailing list?

I was thinking it was a STH thing?

Trotsky
Good article. This shocked me:

Forfeits don't count towards the Pairwise. At least they haven't in the past, when it comes to things like using illegal players.

The fuck is the ostensible reason for that?

That's pretty much always been the case in college sports. Some years ago, Penn retroactively forfeited a bunch of football games, including one to us, and all that happened was the loss disappeared from our record. I think the logic is that if you managed to win an unfair game, you should get credit for that, but if you lost you just don't get penalized for it. (I don't know how that applies to ties and overtime wins.) The team doing the forfeiting has to drop their wins but keep their losses, so they usually get eliminated.

Also, when UVM cancelled their season because of the Elephant Walk, the unplayed games just disappeared from the schedule, and did not count as forfeit wins for their would-be opponents.

laserwhisperer
Slightly off-topic, but how does one get added to the coach's mailing list?

I assume I'm on it because I donate money to the team.

jtwcornell91

Trotsky
Good article. This shocked me:

Forfeits don't count towards the Pairwise. At least they haven't in the past, when it comes to things like using illegal players.

The fuck is the ostensible reason for that?

That's pretty much always been the case in college sports. Some years ago, Penn retroactively forfeited a bunch of football games, including one to us, and all that happened was the loss disappeared from our record. I think the logic is that if you managed to win an unfair game, you should get credit for that, but if you lost you just don't get penalized for it. (I don't know how that applies to ties and overtime wins.) The team doing the forfeiting has to drop their wins but keep their losses, so they usually get eliminated.

Also, when UVM cancelled their season because of the Elephant Walk, the unplayed games just disappeared from the schedule, and did not count as forfeit wins for their would-be opponents.

I don't want the forfeit wins to count. I want the forfeit losses to.

laserwhisperer
Slightly off-topic, but how does one get added to the coach's mailing list?

Boosters are on it. I thought season ticket holders too.

Jim Hyla

jeff '84
Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a “Just the facts, ma’am” article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn’t have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we’ve seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it’s up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don’t do.

In this sense, Adam’s article discusses a larger truth.

Swampy

Jim Hyla

jeff '84
Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a “Just the facts, ma’am” article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn’t have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we’ve seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it’s up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don’t do.

In this sense, Adam’s article discusses a larger truth.

No you can't just quote random people. Otherwise it would be true that Trump won the election. If you can't get the people who made the decision, then you try to find people who know about the decision making. If they won't talk "on the record", then you have to put the disclaimer "from someone who knows of the discussion, but can't speak on the record". The more people that can affirm what you find, the more you can believe it.

This type of reporting is done all the time. Someone in government leaks something, but can't be quoted. Finding others who substantiate that "fact" makes it more likely. That's how you have to read investigative journalism. Your skepticism gets diminished as the number of your sources goes up. But it's never 100% true.

But if your sources are people who have no knowledge of the decision process, they are meaningless, just like I am.

Jim Hyla

Swampy

Jim Hyla

jeff '84
Subheading: But It's Not (Only) What You Think

Great article by Adam:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

Good opinion piece. Unfortunately, judging from the comments, some people think that it's an investigative article, based upon facts, and is true.

Well it might be true, but what is written is opinion.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have been written. Sometimes stating your opinion in an article shakes the trees and gets the facts exposed.

Let's hope that happens this time, but for now what we have is opinion.

Jim,

Read Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. All Adam needed to do for a “Just the facts, ma’am” article would be to find people who share his perspective, which wouldn’t have been difficult, and quote them on the points he makes instead of voicing them himself.

Facts never speak for themselves.

Adam is clear that only Michigan knows its true motives but Michigan is silent on the subject. As we’ve seen elsewhere, stonewalling can hide nefarious motives, and it’s up to regulatory bodies to cut through the the BS, which they often don’t do.

In this sense, Adam’s article discusses a larger truth.

No you can't just quote random people. Otherwise it would be true that Trump won the election. If you can't get the people who made the decision, then you try to find people who know about the decision making. If they won't talk "on the record", then you have to put the disclaimer "from someone who knows of the discussion, but can't speak on the record". The more people that can affirm what you find, the more you can believe it.

This type of reporting is done all the time. Someone in government leaks something, but can't be quoted. Finding others who substantiate that "fact" makes it more likely. That's how you have to read investigative journalism. Your skepticism gets diminished as the number of your sources goes up. But it's never 100% true.

But if your sources zare people who have no knowledge of the decision process, they are meaningless, just like I am.

I didn’t mean quoting randoms. I meant quoting knowledgeable people who hold similar views. Herman & Chomsky’s exemplars are MSM journalists quoting Pentagon spokespeople with no counter views from opposing spokespeople or other investigative journalism. This way the journalist’s “impartial” reporting becomes a megaphone for the Pentagon. In Adam’s case, he could have hid his opinion by reporting on the “controversy” by quoting coaches, respected sports journalists, comparable issues in other sports, etc.

upprdeck
world juniors getting cancelled helps mich solve one problem.

I couldn't find a WJC thread, so I'll put this here:

[www.dw.com]

have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv

perhaps everyone would like to read the follow up article - with a beloved Cornell coach quoted:

[www.collegehockeynews.com]

adamw
a beloved Cornell coach quoted

You got Dick Bertrand?!

adamw
have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv

First, tell me where I criticized you.

Second, how can you not know what my point was. I said it more than once. What you were writing was opinion, not fact. I wrote it because the comments were implying that it was true that UM called off the game because of PWR.

Not that there was anything wrong with writing it, I said that as well.

A little too sensitive are we?

Be nice to each other, we are all Red here.

Jim Hyla

adamw
have no idea what Jim's point is - I think he's just trying to find a way to criticize me ... ymmv

First, tell me where I criticized you.

Second, how can you not know what my point was. I said it more than once. What you were writing was opinion, not fact. I wrote it because the comments were implying that it was true that UM called off the game because of PWR.

Not that there was anything wrong with writing it, I said that as well.

A little too sensitive are we?

was all tongue in cheek anyway Jim.