polls 1/30

1 Miami (20) 19- 4-4 777 3
2 Minnesota (15) 18- 6-4 767 4
3 Boston College ( 2) 17- 5-2 710 1
4 Wisconsin ( 3) 18- 6-2 675 2
5 Cornell 14- 4-3 615 5
6 Michigan 14- 9-3 544 6
7 Colorado College 17-10-1 543 9
8 Boston University 14- 8-2 437 13
9 Providence 13- 9-4 401 11
10 Denver 16-10-2 350 14
11 North Dakota 17-12-1 323 7
12 Maine 17- 9-0 321 12
13 Vermont 16- 8-2 312 8
14 Michigan State 14-10-7 267 16
15 Lake Superior 14- 7-5 256 19
16 New Hampshire 13- 9-4 227 10
17 Colgate 15- 6-5 199 18
18 St. Lawrence 15-10-1 165 14
19 St. Cloud State 14- 9-3 136 NR
20 Harvard 11- 8-2 112 17
Others Receiving Votes: Nebraska-Omaha 97, Ferris State 79, Ohio State 37, Northern Michigan 18, Alabama-Huntsville 12, Clarkson 7, Holy Cross 6, Bemidji State 4, Sacred Heart 2, Dartmouth 1

Stayed in 5th. Don't think we deserve it after that weekend but ill take it.

BIG BIG BIG BIG games against colgate this weekend.

LETS GO RED!!!!!

ha me and jmh posted at the same time.

Wayyy too close to Wisconsin in this one.

USA TODAY/American Hockey men's poll

Jan. 30, 2006
Team (first-place votes) Record Points LW
1. Miami (Ohio) (19) 19-4-4 493 3
2. Minnesota (13) 18-6-4 487 4
3. Boston College (2) 17-5-2 439 1
4. Wisconsin 18-6-2 399 2
5. Cornell 14-4-3 373 5
6. Michigan 14-9-3 307 8
7. Colorado College 17-10-1 296 9
8. Maine 17-9-0 194 11
9. Providence College 14-9-1 188 12
10. Boston University 14-8-2 185 14
11. Vermont 16-8-2 183 7
12. Denver 16-10-2 158 13
13. North Dakota 17-12-1 135 6
14. Michigan State 14-10-7 76 15
15. New Hampshire 13-9-4 58 10

Others receiving votes: Lake Superior State University, 38; Harvard University, 36; St. Lawrence University, 11; Colgate University, 9; College of the Holy Cross, 8; Ferris State University, 5; St. Cloud State University, 2.

We don't deserve the #5, but if we win/tie or sweep this weekend, I'd say we justify our position.

Our NCAA matchup hasn't changed either -- still M. State. That would be a tough tough tough game to pull out, not to mention EXTREMELY physical, which I don't know if we can handle after what Yale did to us.

Trustnduzt
Our NCAA matchup hasn't changed either -- still M. State. That would be a tough tough tough game to pull out, not to mention EXTREMELY physical, which I don't know if we can handle after what Yale did to us.

Still way too early to be worried about first-round opponents, in my opinion.

Colgate should be higher.

Just speculation

The way I tend to look at poll rankings (however naive it is) is to see if we could beat the teams that are below us in ranking. Frankly, at #5 I don't think we could take half the teams below us right now.

Gotta love that Miami team (OK, we don't really even have to like them, but...).

I went back to the early polls to see how they were viewed. Pre-season didn't even have them in the top 20. They finally crack it at #19 in late October. And now they sit at #1. Who'd have thunk?

There's already enough at stake this weekend against Colgate to worry about the effect on the poll. Cornell just doesn't have many more chance to play TUCs. So many of the pairwise comparisons are so close, this weekend could really help... or really screw them. And of course, the ECAC seeding will be greatly affected: [gregberge.blogspot.com]

jmh30
Colgate should be higher.

Not according to PWR. In fact, objectively, they're about 6 spots too high.

Trustnduzt
The way I tend to look at poll rankings (however naive it is) is to see if we could beat the teams that are below us in ranking. Frankly, at #5 I don't think we could take half the teams below us right now.

I know it may not be a popular sentiment on this board, since we have this collective tendency to worry like tiny grandmothers over our team, but why not?

Realistically, we have very little idea how this team would do against those teams. The effects of the weak out-of-conference schedule go both ways: while we clearly haven't played "anybody" and, therefore, our reasonably good out-of-conference record means nothing, we clearly haven't played "anybody" and may actually be pretty good when we come up against somebody.

I don't want to sound like an apologist, but I think teams are packing in their defenses versus us, especially at Lynah, and trying "not to lose" rather than to win. These tactics expose an offense that--5x5--is not as much of a grinding offense as we're used to and does better with a bit more open ice. With our power play not clicking right now, something which I'm sure will not last, we'll have difficulty in these "grind it out" type games.

When a team looks to win, like Clarkson and St. Lawrence did, the results are much more to our liking. Tell it not in Gath, but this year's version of the Big Red is a skating team, not a grinding team. Skating teams may have trouble once in a while versus the goons (the Browns of the world, and this year's Yale) but are much more likely to win when playing the better teams.

Myself, I'm cautiously optimistic regarding the rest of this season and the postseason. There's only one more grinding team left on the schedule (I'm looking at you, Union), otherwise, if we can get past whatever team we're paired with in the quarters, it's skating teams from here on out.

Scersk '97

Trustnduzt
I don't want to sound like an apologist, but I think teams are packing in their defenses versus us, especially at Lynah, and trying "not to lose" rather than to win. These tactics expose an offense that--5x5--is not as much of a grinding offense as we're used to and does better with a bit more open ice. With our power play not clicking right now, something which I'm sure will not last, we'll have difficulty in these "grind it out" type games.

When a team looks to win, like Clarkson and St. Lawrence did, the results are much more to our liking. Tell it not in Gath, but this year's version of the Big Red is a skating team, not a grinding team. Skating teams may have trouble once in a while versus the goons (the Browns of the world, and this year's Yale) but are much more likely to win when playing the better teams.

I've been thinking along these same lines after watching the games since Christmas. I hope there's something to this view of the world.

 

___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65

From the evolution of the team style, speed, and size, it's not absurd to think that Schafer took away a few lessons from the back-to-back losses to UNH.

To wit:

1) You can't hit what you can't catch.
2) When you spend the game chasing after the other team, you tire out a lot faster than they.

WCHA dominance in the NCAAs seems to ratify that, at the highest level, great offense will beat great defense. There hasn't been a Lake Superior State "grind it out" national champion in over a decade, and it hasn't been for a lack of D-oriented teams being represented in the tourny.

Now that the NHL has seemingly begun to gradually pull its head out of its ass and punish obstruction and encourage scoring, this should become an even more popular (and successful) style.

Al DeFlorio
I've been thinking along these same lines after watching the games since Christmas. I hope there's something to this view of the world.

I think it's amusing that we used to be those teams.

On an only slightly-related note, am I alone in thinking that not only are the Cornell teams we watch today much more talented, driven, and better coached than the teams from the mid-to-late 90's, but that this has coincided (whether causality is involved or not is another story) with a similar increase in the general skill level of our ECAC opponents as well?

I have been amazed at watching the Cornell teams of the past three years, thinking that if they were able to play the 1995-96 squad, those guys would have been completely wrecked. The Cornell teams of the past few years have been markedly faster, have passed the puck much more effectively, know how to break out, and seem to know what to do in the corners and behind the net much better than the teams I remember watching as a student.

Furthermore, the competition seems to be better also: you rarely see a top-half ECAC team get destroyed by a western opponent anymore, for instance.

Then again, I could simply be remembering differently, or learning to play has caused me to concentrate on the details I missed while an undergrad.

Deep thoughts.

Cheers,
Kyle

Trustnduzt
Our NCAA matchup hasn't changed either -- still M. State. That would be a tough tough tough game to pull out, not to mention EXTREMELY physical, which I don't know if we can handle after what Yale did to us.

That might be a tough game to pull out, but if anything we'd have the edge with physical play. MSU was not a physical team when they came to Lynah earlier this year. We would most certainly outhit them.

DeltaOne81

jmh30
Colgate should be higher.

Not according to PWR. In fact, objectively, they're about 6 spots too high.

The flaws in the PWR have been rehashed over and over on this board and elsewhere.

In any case, I think Colgate is a better team than their poor nonconference indicates. (Yes, I know there's an easy counter-argument that a team is only as good as their record, but the small sample size of the NCAA schedule weakens that.)

Trotsky
Cornell just doesn't have many more chance to play TUCs.

We must be looking at different schedules. The one I see has 6 of the last 8 RS games against TUCS, and with a win or two even the RPI game will be against a TUC. Assuming a first round bye we'd probably play Clarkson or RPI in the weekend playoff set, and either of those would more likely than not be TUC by then. Then the two in Albany are almost for sure TUCs. That's about 10 out of 12 against TUCs. Not too many other teams looking at more, if any. Among close competitors, NoDak has only 4 of 8 in RS, BU 5 of 9, and MSU is about like us, 6 of 8.