If you were Phil Buttafuoco ...

... what would you do to get the ECAC back to national prominence like before the split in the 80s?

If you think that is a hopeless endeavor, do you think that there is anything that Cornell or Shafer can do to keep us nationally competitive in an ever weakening league? I don't suspect we'd ever push to join Hockey East or start a new conference, but I wished this would get talked about.

More out of conference games would certainly help.
This might be a better conversation to have after next weekend with the possibility of Harvard embarrassing themselves against Maine. Hopefully that won't happen, but if the only ECAC team in the tourney gets blown out in the first round it might give the ECAC another reason to try and build up the conference. I'm pulling for Harvard to represent the ECAC well.

Well, the simplest thing Cornell and other teams can do to bring the ECAC back to national prominence is win all of its out-of-conference games, including the NCAA tournament.

Barring that, the Ivies need to play more OOC games (and win them), and not just against AHA or CHA teams, either. They need to schedule more Minnesotas, Michigans, and Denvers, not to mention the BUs, BCs, and Maines. They need to show stronger at the holiday tournaments. Basically, they need to give hockey the attention we all know it deserves.

For those who made it to Woostah a few years back ... Hahvard(sucks) did everything to not embarrass themselves and the ECAC losing to Maine 4-3 in overtime and coming within inches of winning in regulation. Just might think to give'em some credit and maybe, dare I say, some support from a fellow Ivy and ECAC colleague ... even if it is Sucks.

just my $.02

[Q]ben03 Wrote:

For those who made it to Woostah a few years back ... Hahvard(sucks) did everything to not embarrass themselves and the ECAC losing to Maine 4-3 in overtime and coming within inches of winning in regulation. Just might think to give'em some credit and maybe, dare I say, some support from a fellow Ivy and ECAC colleague ... even if it is Sucks.
[/Q]
I'd love to see Hahvahd lose 4-3 to Maine, although I'd prefer they did it in regulation to cut down on Howard's minutes. Two 3-goal games would be enough to push his GAA back above Lenny's.

yes, I agree ... a repeat performance would be nice

[Q]Will Wrote:

Well, the simplest thing Cornell and other teams can do to bring the ECAC back to national prominence is win all of its out-of-conference games, including the NCAA tournament.

Barring that, the Ivies need to play more OOC games (and win them), and not just against AHA or CHA teams, either. They need to schedule more Minnesotas, Michigans, and Denvers, not to mention the BUs, BCs, and Maines. They need to show stronger at the holiday tournaments. Basically, they need to give hockey the attention we all know it deserves.
[/Q]

Agreed! I think performing well in the holiday tourneys is the way to do this in the short run. although I would love to see some stronger WCHA or CCHA teams play at Lynah. Right now there's not a lot of incentive for major powers in other leagues to schedule stronger teams from the ECAC and risk losing to them in individual matchups. There may be some exceptions. The old BU rivalry may still have a pulse and is worth reviving.

Since we only get 7 OOC games, playing two teams twice is not a good idea IMO. If you can coordinate with another relatively nearby school to play a Western team, that might help convince a team to come east. But, as we've learned, a road OOC win can be better than a home OOC win.

You also have to consider that Atlantic Hockey teams are also trying to bring their teams up in the spotlight and calling on nearby ECAC schools to do so and again, you only have seven games. You want to bring the ECAC to a more prominent position but deny another conference the chance to do that?

I'd say Cornell is doing it's part. They didn't win either game down in Florida last year, yet wound up #1 in the final USCHO poll and didn't embarass themselves at the Frozen Four. A player wins the Humanitarian Award and another is a Hobey Hat Trick winner. This year they played in a holiday tournament in which all three other teams are in the NCAA tournament and won the tournament and went 4-1 against NCAA tournament teams during the season. I think the non-Ivies who get more OOC games, need to win more of those games.

Anybody have a clue if UVM games will be replaced with OOC games when they ship out?

I'd love to see a Michigan home and home ... has the potential to develop into a good rivalry and would certainly make for an interesting road trip

[Q]Tom Pasniewski 98 Wrote:

You also have to consider that Atlantic Hockey teams are also trying to bring their teams up in the spotlight and calling on nearby ECAC schools to do so and again, you only have seven games. You want to bring the ECAC to a more prominent position but deny another conference the chance to do that? [/Q]

Yes I would, because our prominence is more important to me than their prominence. There would seem to be only a finite amount of prominence to go around--I'd rather take it from the Big Three, since they already have a lot of it. Atlantic Hockey doesn't have it right now, so there's not much to be gained for the ECAC by playing them...or worse yet, they'll take however little prominence we have left.

If I were Phil Buttafuoco I'd do the ECAC a favor and jump off the top of Taughannock Falls. Adam W's articles on USCHO suggest that the ECAC is going absolutely nowhere with Buttafuoco at the helm. He's a control freak with a knack for burning bridges. He can't even get a decent TV contract for the playoffs, for crying out loud!

DISCLAIMER -- With most of my knowledge on the subject based exclusively on Adam's reporting, my opinions aren't entirely mine. But if you believe what he writes then the title of this thread ignores the real problem.

[www.uscho.com]
[www.uscho.com]
[www.uscho.com]

[Q]ben03 Wrote:

I'd love to see a Michigan home and home ... has the potential to develop into a good rivalry and would certainly make for an interesting road trip
[/Q]

I second this one. Would be a great matchup. Both teams are physical and have traditions of solid goaltending. Would be fun to see Schafer's defense first style matched up against Berenson's preference for speed, finesse, and offense (if he has the horses, which he hasn't recently). Makes sense geographically, and we all know their fans are cloned from ours.

[Q]Will Wrote:
[q]Tom Pasniewski 98 Wrote:
You also have to consider that Atlantic Hockey teams are also trying to bring their teams up in the spotlight and calling on nearby ECAC schools to do so and again, you only have seven games. You want to bring the ECAC to a more prominent position but deny another conference the chance to do that?[/q]
Yes I would, because our prominence is more important to me than their prominence. There would seem to be only a finite amount of prominence to go around--I'd rather take it from the Big Three, since they already have a lot of it. Atlantic Hockey doesn't have it right now, so there's not much to be gained for the ECAC by playing them...or worse yet, they'll take however little prominence we have left.
[/Q]

The problem with that, Will, is that the three conferences we want on our schedule to a large extent don't want ECAC teams on their schedules any more than we want AHA or MAAC teams on ours. You have to give a little to get a little.

Beeeej

[Q]Beeeej Wrote:
You have to give a little to get a little.
[/Q]

The western schools have more OOC games to schedule then we do so they have a little more to give. Even if they lose to an ECAC team it should do less damage to their RPI and Pairwise than a loss to an AHA team does to us. And they might even pick up "bonus points" with a win. Notre Dame's scheduling really paid off for them this year. Someone on USCHO said they won't schedule more road games because the rinks are smaller and therefore the financial incentive is much lower. Thoughts? Is it true they split the gate 60-40?

I agree with Tom that playing two games against the same opponent is not a great idea. I thought the Ohio State - Bowling Green set with Colgate was a great idea. With Colgate playing well this year this should be exploited. Get BU and BC or Maine and UNH in for a set.

When do they usually announce the OOC games for the next season? Anyone remember?

[Q]nyc94 Wrote:
The western schools have more OOC games to schedule then we do so they have a little more to give.[/Q]
Only if they play in Alaska, and only by "us" you mean the Ivies. Both Western leagues play 28-game schedules, which gives them 6 non-conference games to fill out the limit of 34. They can get an extra two games if they play twice in Alaska (since those don't count towards the 34, which is a relic of the days before the Alaska schools were in conferences when the NCAA needed to give teams an incentive to play them), as well as one or two by playing in an "exempt" tournament at the start of the season. So that's somewhere between 6 and 10 NC slots. The Ivies, with the 29-game limit and a 22-game ECAC schedule, have 7 NC slots. Non-Ivy ECAC teams have 12 NC slots they can fill, which is more than any of the other three major conferences.

Number of nonconference games this season:
North Dakota: 7 (incl Hall of Fame game)
Minnesota: 10 (incl Maverick Stampede; played two games in Anchorage)
UMD: 9 (incl Hall of Fame game and Ice Breaker)
Denver: 10 (incl Lefty McFadden Invitational; played two games in Anchorage)
Wisconsin: 10 (incl Maverick Stampede; played two games in Anchorage)
Ohio State: 8 (incl Lefty McFadden Invitational)
Michigan: 8 (played two games in Fairbanks)
Miami: 8 (incl Lefty McFadden Invitational)
Michigan State: 10 (incl Ice Breaker; played two games in Fairbanks)
Notre Dame: 6
Harvard: 7
Cornell: 7
Clarkson: 12
Colgate: 12

and with Jeff Lehman's relationship with Michagoon it could be a potental reality...
as i understand it the BU relationship is one year home, one year away, one year off. so shouldnt we be playing them next season?

I believe the ECAC allowed non-Ivies to play 2 more games giving them 34 starting a few years ago. Thus more OOC games.

Perhaps the incentive given to play Alaska teams and the RPI adjustment where a conference tournament victory over a weak team could not lower your RPI might be useful. Somebody at the NCAA could require scheduling of an AHA or ECAC team for say WCHA or CCHA teams but take away the chance of lowering their RPI if they win.

We know the ECAC performed stronger than the AHA based on their 13-1-3 record against AHA teams this year but the AHA went 0-2-0 against the WCHA meaning the Holy Cross-North Dakota game is just the third AHA-WCHA game of the season. How do we know the WCHA is better than the AHA if they play three games a season? The PWR says so only because conference strength breeds strength for the teams in the conference and conference weakness breeds weakness for the teams. They feed off each other, those blood-sucking WCHA teams....breathe.....and continue....

On the financial incentive front, at one point Alaska teams were required to pay travel costs for teams to fly out there. Anyone know if that's still the case?

[Q]Tom Pasniewski 98 Wrote:

How do we know the WCHA is better than the AHA if they play three games a season? The PWR says so only because conference strength breeds strength for the teams in the conference and conference weakness breeds weakness for the teams. They feed off each other, those blood-sucking WCHA teams....breathe.....and continue....
[/Q]

All the more reason why Cornell and the ECAC needs to schedule stronger OOC games, and then win them. Each team in any given conference will play the same set of teams (usually balanced, except in the case of the CCHA, I believe), so that will balance out in theory. In the end, it all comes down to the OOC games. The WCHA has the best OOC record this year, .713, and is over-.500 against every other conference; the AHA has the lowest at .250, and is below-.500 against every other conference. To use PWR terms, their H2H might not be that convincing, but their COp (sorta) comparison is rather striking.

As the expected, the ECAC comes in at #4 with .432, which IMHO, is pretty embarrassing. They need to do better. They need to do MUCH better. Sure, that's stating the obvious. I'm just trying to say, don't blame the WCHA's conference schedule making them all stronger--blame their excellent OOC play, and the ECAC's crappy OOC play.

[Q]The Rancor Wrote:
as i understand it the BU relationship is one year home, one year away, one year off. so shouldnt we be playing them next season? [/Q]
Would seem like it. "Here" in Boston, too. Will Agganis be ready?

[Q]Will Agganis be ready?[/Q]

I think they're shooting for a Jan. opening with Minn.

[Q]Pete Godenschwager Wrote:

[Q] Will Agganis be ready?[/Q]

I think they're shooting for a Jan. opening with Minn.
[/Q]
I wouldn't mind seeing one last weekend at WBA.

I think the plan was originally to have it ready for the home opener but like most other constructions projects in Boston, they're still under construction. So, the plan is to play the first Minnesota-BU game of a weekend pair at Walter Brown and the second at the new Agganis arena. Recently reading up on Agannis. There are parallels to the life of Hobey Baker - both very gifted athletes, both meeting untimely deaths in their 20's and soon, both to have rinks named after them.

Cornell showed last year that an exceptionally strong team can come out of the ECAC and rank #1 nationally despite that handicap. Let's look after our own yard -- unless the ECAC dramatically cleans up its act, we will not be getting any help from them.

winning a national championship ususaly helps bring a league back to the elite levels of D-1, definately if we do it 2 years in a row, and it might be nice to see more than 1 or 2 ECAC teams in the national tourny. money talks, bullshit walks as they say.

[Q]KenP Wrote:

If I were Phil Buttafuoco I'd do the ECAC a favor and jump off the top of Taughannock Falls. Adam W's articles on USCHO suggest that the ECAC is going absolutely nowhere with Buttafuoco at the helm. He's a control freak with a knack for burning bridges. He can't even get a decent TV contract for the playoffs, for crying out loud!

First of all, I agree completely. Second of all, Buttafucco had a tv contract for the playoffs and then screwed another company. He screwed the Olympic Development Authority, he's screwed almost every potential tv company, and in the end he has completely screwed the ECAC. The first and foremost item on the "Improve the ECAC" agenda is to start at the top!

In the end, if consistent appearances in the NCAA tournament, excellent recruiting successes, and solid performances against top-ranked teams - despite the hindrance of the Buttafucco problem - doesn't earn the respect of other leagues and people in the business, there's not much else we can do. When respect is only earned by multiple appearances in the NCAA final or mulitple NCAA titles, we can only win to earn that respect. On the other hand, who cares what anybody else thinks? We know that the best hockey in the country is being played at Lynah Rink season in and season out - screw them if they can't appreciate what we have to offer!

Interesting thread: thoughtful discussion, no digression, nobody using the F-world. Yet.

What could the ECAC do to better itself? (Other than stop using Cape Cod Regional HS for free Web design services?) And Cornell to help better the ECAC?

Cornell could have helped the ECAC cause a year ago by winning the NCAAs. As could Harvard by having held onto its three-goal third-period lead this year in the first round. I couldn't imagine a Cornell team ever blowing a three-goal lead in the NCAAs with 20 minutes to play. (Oh, wait, Wisconsin, 1973.)

The most effective tool would be to find a quality replacement for Vermont now that it's in Hockey East and once it goes off the Cornell schedule. OTOH Vermont remains a decent travel partner weekend with Dartmouth.

Already Cornell plays a decent non-conference schedule. The only non-conference pushover team was Mercyhurst this past year. (Oh, wait, 3-3 tie.) It's unfortunate we wound up playing Ohio State both in a regular game and in the Everblades Classic. (Which is a great venue for decent competition and a decent recruiting tool. Compare that to 25 years ago and playing holiday week in the Syracuse Hockey Invitational Tournament. Unfortunate touranment, unfortunate acronym.)

I like the idea of a home-and-home series with Michigan if president Lehman can help pull it off. Or better a dual home-and-home with Michaigan playing Cornell one night, Colgate the next. That either means you play only one game that weekend or you need to get four schools involved, say Western Michigan and Michigan, or Michigan-Michigan State. Or how about a Denver/Colorado College series?

It would help to play a Western team. But for students home on break, something in New England during intersession would be great. BU and BC, BU and Providence, BU and Maine? Probably not UNH; they have our number the way Maine has Harvard's.

There is of course the matter of what the coach and players see as best. Do more big games help in recruiting? Do more big games where you stand a chance of losing hurt you? There's also the small matter of the players having to pursue their studies and it can't be helped by more long road trips.

[Q]billhoward Wrote:
But for students home on break, something in New England during intersession would be great. BU and BC, BU and Providence, BU and Maine?
[/Q]
BU and BU worked pretty well over Thanksgiving 2001 and 2002. Wouldn't mind keeping that going.

What if the ECAC went to 10 teams, and kept a balanced schedule, instead of replacing Vermont. I say throw Union out with Vermont. Particularly now that their president has expressed the notion that Division 3 schools should not be able to play up in just one sport. With that kind of support from the administration, I cannot see Union ever having a competitive program.

With the remaining 10 teams, I think the league would be stronger. And it would allow for substantially more OOC matchups. That would reduce the Strength of Schedule drag of the weaker ECAC teams on the stronger ones.

[Q]Mike Nevin Wrote:
What if the ECAC went to 10 teams, and kept a balanced schedule, instead of replacing Vermont. I say throw Union out with Vermont. Particularly now that their president has expressed the notion that Division 3 schools should not be able to play up in just one sport. With that kind of support from the administration, I cannot see Union ever having a competitive program.
[/Q]

I disagree with Hulls decision and the way he did it, but it's completely inappropriate to retaliate against Union for it.

[Q]
With the remaining 10 teams, I think the league would be stronger. And it would allow for substantially more OOC matchups. That would reduce the Strength of Schedule drag of the weaker ECAC teams on the stronger ones.
[/Q]

Not the way RPI works, it wouldn't. The most important thing for Cornell's strength of schedule is the winning percentage of their opponents. So if Yale loses two more non-conference games, it'll just lower our strength of schedule, even if it raises Yale's.

Also, with 5 travel partnerships, one travel partnership would have to be idle or playing each other every weekend. 12 is a really convenient number of teams.