Because I'm sick of seeing that score whenever anybody does a Reply.
I demand the name brand product. Dispense as written.
Grosenick returning to Union for junior season. (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/apr/19/grosenick-returning-to-union-for-junior-season/)
Quote from: Jim HylaGrosenick returning to Union for junior season. (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/apr/19/grosenick-returning-to-union-for-junior-season/)
That's not the name I was looking for. But good for him.
Hey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?
Quote from: KeithKHey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?
The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: KeithKHey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?
The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.
Maybe I'll have to post some relevant information about next season here come November.
Quote from: martyI demand the name brand product. Dispense as written.
Here you go (http://elf.elynah.com/list.php?5).
Quote from: KeithKQuote from: jtn27Quote from: KeithKHey, no fair! How can I take a generic thread off topic?
The opposite of a generic offseason thread would be a specific season thread. I'm not exactly sure what that would be, but good luck.
Maybe I'll have to post some relevant information about next season here come November.
I was thinking more along the lines of talking about a specific game from this past season, but I guess that works too.
I was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article (http://www.uscho.com/2012/04/20/offseason-takes-shape-issues-come-into-focus-with-coaches-meetings/) about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.
Quote from: Jim ConnellyPenn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky's team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school's history.
Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinI was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article (http://www.uscho.com/2012/04/20/offseason-takes-shape-issues-come-into-focus-with-coaches-meetings/) about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.
Quote from: Jim ConnellyPenn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky's team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school's history.
Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play. It happened when RIT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIT_Tigers_men%27s_ice_hockey#Division_I) moved to D1 (and the same is happening with RIT's women's team (http://www.rit.edu/news/story.php?id=48969) beginning this season).
QuoteRIT plans to play a Division I schedule beginning in the 2012–2013 season but will not play a full-league schedule. In 2013–2014, the Tigers would play a College Hockey America schedule, and in 2014–2015, RIT would be eligible for NCAA post-season play.
From the same article, it seems the CHA women's league is adding RIT, Penn State, and Lindenwood to the current membership of Syracuse,
Niagara, Mercyhurst, and RMU. No BTHC in Women's Hockey, thanks to the lack of UM & MSU teams. Lindenwood is in St. Charles, Missouri, in case you were wondering as much as I was. They played their first D-1 schedule this past season.
(edit: Niagara announced this spring they are discontinuing their women's program.)
It's not often around here that somebody provides a straight answer to a direct question. That was kind of unsettling.
Quote from: TrotskyIt's not often around here that somebody provides a straight answer to a direct question. That was kind of unsettling.
Sorry, I forgot to be in off-season mode. Here:
They should make a movie about the Burr-Hamilton duel. It should be titled anything but "The Duel."
Quote from: RichHQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI was curious about the reasoning behind a comment made in a recent USCHO article (http://www.uscho.com/2012/04/20/offseason-takes-shape-issues-come-into-focus-with-coaches-meetings/) about Penn State's transition to NCAA Division I.
Quote from: Jim ConnellyPenn State will play a season as an independent and will not be eligible for NCAA tournament play, but Guy Gadowsky's team will be playing against the big boys for the first time in the school's history.
Why will Penn State be ineligible next year? I doubt many think that they could actually achieve an at-large bid, but I was wondering which rule precludes even the opportunity.
The NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play. It happened when RIT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIT_Tigers_men%27s_ice_hockey#Division_I) moved to D1 (and the same is happening with RIT's women's team (http://www.rit.edu/news/story.php?id=48969) beginning this season).
QuoteRIT plans to play a Division I schedule beginning in the 2012–2013 season but will not play a full-league schedule. In 2013–2014, the Tigers would play a College Hockey America schedule, and in 2014–2015, RIT would be eligible for NCAA post-season play.
From the same article, it seems the CHA women's league is adding RIT, Penn State, and Lindenwood to the current membership of Syracuse, Niagara, Mercyhurst, and RMU. No BTHC in Women's Hockey, thanks to the lack of UM & MSU teams. Lindenwood is in St. Charles, Missouri, in case you were wondering as much as I was. They played their first D-1 schedule this past season.
(edit: Niagara announced this spring they are discontinuing their women's program.)
I recall RIT was also not eligible for Atlantic Hockey's conference tournament in their first season as a full member (second year in Div. 1). Was that a league rule?
Another question, does the Big Ten get an autobid in their first year?
Quote from: nyc94Another question, does the Big Ten get an autobid in their first year?
This page: http://www.collegehockeynews.com/info/?d=pwcrpi
QuoteThe NCAA mandates that a conference receives an automatic bid to the NCAA tournament if it exists for at least two years and has at least six teams.
And this one: http://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-men/2011-03-21/big-ten-add-mens-hockey-2013
QuoteThe recommendation includes both the establishment of the inaugural Big Ten Men's Ice Hockey Tournament in March of 2014, with the winner earning the conference's automatic bid to the NCAA Men's Ice Hockey Championship
are both non-definitive enough to not exactly answer the question. I can't remember what happened with the inception of MAAC/AHA and CHA, and am done researching for now, because of a silly thing like work.
Quote from: RichHThe NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.
What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: RichHThe NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.
What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.
There are probably several reasons for it. One that comes to mind is to prevent teams from just jumping up and down between the Divisions for short periods of time based on their current talent level.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: RichHThe NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.
What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.
Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.
Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtn27Quote from: RichHThe NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.
What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.
Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.
Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?
I skimmed through the NCAA rules (http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D112.pdf) and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament to participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large. Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.
edit:
Quote from: NCAA31.3.4.2 Requirements—National Collegiate Championship. - To be eligible for automatic qualifi-
cation in a National Collegiate Championship, a member conference must meet the following general require-
ments: (Adopted: 1/9/06 effective 8/1/06)
(a) Have at least six active members that sponsor the applicable sport in any division (Note: A provisional
member in the process of becoming an NCAA member cannot be used to meet the requisite number.);
(b) The six active members must have conducted conference competition together for the preceding two
years in the applicable sport;
(c) There shall be no waivers of the two-year waiting period; and
(d) Any new member added to a conference that is eligible for an automatic bid shall be immediately eligible
to represent the conference as the automatic qualifier.
Quote from: nyc94Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtn27Quote from: RichHThe NCAA requires teams moving to Division I to undergo a 2-year "transition" period where they are ineligible for NCAA post-season play.
What's the logic behind that rule? I highly doubt that a first or second year DI program could make the playoffs, but if they were good enough they should be eligible.
Not sure, but IIRC a consequence of the rule when RIT elevated was that games against RIT did not count towards PWR because the opponent was not tournament-eligible.
Is Penn State going to be ineligible for the BTHC tournament?
I skimmed through the NCAA rules (http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D112.pdf) and it sounds like a team does not have to be eligible for the NCAA tournament participate in a conference tournament. However, if an ineligible team wins the conference championship then the conference does not have an autobid for that year and all other teams are considered at-large. Maybe this is why Atlantic Hockey kept RIT out of their conference championship in their second year as no AH team was likely to get an at-large bid.
Thanks for answering, Rich. Also, I doubt that Penn State will win the B1G Hockey Championship its first year. It would be interesting if they won. It would seem like a huge snub to deny Penn State entry into the national tournament if they pulled it off as unlikely as it is that they will. So, I doubt that it will be an issue. I was curious about next season because it seems like Penn State has created a schedule that has at least some PWR potential if Penn State can manage a few upsets with Michigan State, RIT, Union, and Wisconsin announced as opponents already.
I refuse to remind others and myself of the results of a particular game that appears in the subject line of the previous thread where we discussed future ECAC venues, so, I moved the conversation to here. Adam Wodon had this to offer for where the ECACs should move: Lake Placid (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/04/24_ecac_should_return_to_lake.php).
Quote from: AWbut at least the brand name "Lake Placid" — and the "Herb Brooks 1980 Olympic Arena" — can stand on equal and proud footing with "Detroit's Joe Louis Arena", "St. Paul's Xcel Energy Center" and "Boston Garden."
Adam, what have you been smoking, my friend? No F'ing way!!
Quote from: AWYes it's hard to get to, yes hotels can be tough to secure. So what. Work it out.
I'll deal with it just like I did when it was in LP the last time.... Stay home or go elsewhere... Watching the HE playoffs on TV make them appear to be a much better option. Better hockey, better venue, and a great city. It's hard to
not make that choice. I've been leaning in that direction anyway. An ECACHL move to LP will seal the deal for me.
No, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.
We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.
Quote from: Jim HylaNo, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.
We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple. By the way what's the reformed WCHA going to do? They are probably facing the same problems we've gone through. Let's see how they work it out. There will be 3 major conferences, 2, and maybe 3, that are a step down. Accept it for what it is, enjoy it for what it is, and make it so that those of us who want to enjoy it, can enjoy it.
Steve Hagwell's backyard?
Quote from: Jim HylaNo, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.
We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families.
I loved Lake Placid, but I have to agree with Jim. Just move it back to Albany -- it's obvious, simple, and fair. If Union continues to be good or RPI ever returns from the dark side of the moon they'll get a good walk-up. Even in years neither makes it they'll still do better there than any of the other choices.
I've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed :)
Quote from: Jim HylaNo, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.
We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.
You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.
If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc... But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning. The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.
I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me :) Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaNo, no ,no no, no. So what we need is a place that looks good on our resume? WTF for? So we can stand up to North Dakota? The best, and only, way is to win. Look, we are never going to be them, nor should we try. We need a place where everyone can go, that means families, not AC; and where everyone can get to, meaning not LP. It's great for Clk and SLU, but for the rest of us, any of the others are easier. What about people who want to fly back, what about our alumni base, they aren't going to go there.
We'd do all of that just so when we talk to UND we sound good? Forget about it. Pick a place easy to get to, easy to stay at, both for singles and families. Forget about the prestige, we are never going to have it, so just keep it simple.
You say we'll never have the prestige - yet in the other paragraph, you say the only way to get it is to win. So - then - it's still possible, by that logic. At least to boost it somewhat.
If you say "just win" - it suggests that ECAC coaches are inferior. But that isn't true. It's the obstacles. Some of which will never change, of course, i.e. the academic differences, smaller schools, etc... But coaches will tell you that they need the "brand" of the ECAC to be out there in order to compete for recruits. That directly ties into winning. The "brand" suffered, obviously, by not being on TV. Another way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.
I understand and acknowledge all of the other points. No one has it worse than me :) Atlantic City is 75 minutes from my door. Lake Placid is 6 hours. It's worth it.
Why need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has? ECAC results during the 2012 NCAAs were fairly impressive. Union got into the Frozen Four and Cornell knocked off a team that many viewed as a favorite for a national title going into the tournament. Cornell was arguably an ill-timed, broken stick away from making the Frozen Four. I know that it requires more than one season to establish a trend, but I feel somewhat assured the Cornell, Sucks, and Union have a chance at being competitive next season. If RPI can right their course, then that would be one-third of the ECAC. The Ivies have become more competitive with the scholarship programs with their competitive financial aid offers. Why pretend it is like what it once was when it clearly is not? The ECAC has a chance to reassert itself as relevant during the coming transitional period. The ECAC should be able to pass WCHA Lite and Atlantic Hockey. Perhaps, I am an optimist about this. Winning is the only way to increase the appeal of our conference, that's a given. However, we cannot tie that sentiment with, "well, this is the best it will ever be." Also, I think Adam commented once that winning the ECAC was not "the thing" it once was. There's one certain way to make it "a thing" again and that is national success. I would counter that I was there in 2010, my senior year, when Cornell claimed its twelfth ECAC title and, certainly, it felt like a great accomplishment.
I am somewhat agnostic about Lake Placid. I would love to see Cornell play in Herb Brooks Arena, but all the problems that members on here have mentioned make me somewhat indifferent. I will go wherever the ECAC Championships are held on only the condition that Cornell is playing in them. However, Adam, you point out that the ECAC brand suffered by not being on television. I agree. Sadly, there are few outlets available that will air the ECAC Championships left (B1G on BTN, Hockey East on NBC Sports, and NCHC on CBS Sports) with the geographic breadth that the conference would need to rebrand itself. Also, would Lake Placid be the best locale for television exposure? Which networks would be willing to travel to what most describe as a helplessly remote location to broadcast the ECAC Championships? I think that Lake Placid might present unforeseen issues with television exposure.
I am not sure if the location of our tournament has much to do with our brand or how others view the ECAC. I might be wrong. I have friends who are CCHA and Hockey East fans and they seemed to think AC seemed like an interesting place to host the tournament. They also did not react with condescension about when it was held in Albany because it makes sense for the geographic footprint of the conference. These comments were made with no air of superiority. I know that this might not be the sentiments of recruits or administrators from other conferences. I am just curious if the location of the ECAC Championships is as much of an issue for others without the Conference as we think within the Conference. It seems like it is mostly ECAC fans who are upset and self-deprecatingly judgmental about the location of the championships.
Quote from: adamwI've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed :)
Grows wild in the Adirondacks?
On a more serious note, why does Bridgeport draw so well? Didn't the Union final draw better than BC in Worcester?
Mass-Lowell?
Don't be too agnostic about Lake Placid if the weather is bad. You'll need to say your prayers that you don't slide off the road.
Quote from: martyOn a more serious note, why does Bridgeport draw so well? Didn't the Union final draw better than BC in Worcester?
Mass-Lowell?
Bridgeport has drawn well solely because, in the 3 years it has hosted, the teams there have included Yale, Union, Lowell and Vermont ... all of which brought a ton of people there. If the bracket were BC-Miami-Duluth-Northern Michigan - no one would've been there.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinWhy need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has?
Not sure if you were referring to me, but ... not becoming complacent at all. The opposite, actually. That's why I said the ECAC should seize the momentum, and do something that will help even further.
BTW - Cornell has been even closer to the FF a bunch of times in the last 10 years - so using them as a yardstick is not saying much. Cornell has always been the standard bearer, sometimes by itself. Getting Union to the FF is the only thing different about this year compared to anything else in the last 10 years. Not much of a difference. There's no question that the ECAC has been "competitive" as a whole over the last decade, so I don't see that as an issue.
QuoteThe ECAC should be able to pass WCHA Lite and Atlantic Hockey.
I don't think there's any question that the ECAC will be above those two in future years, but I don't see that as the point of this discussion.
QuoteI think Adam commented once that winning the ECAC was not "the thing" it once was. There's one certain way to make it "a thing" again and that is national success.
That is not the reason why I said it wasn't a big deal. I don't perceive winning the ECACs as a huge thing unto itself, if NCAA success doesn't follow. In more parochial times, "the ECACs" was practically held in the same esteem as the national championship. Just like winning a Big Ten football title was to people. It's not the same anymore. It has nothing to do with the ECAC per se - it's the same for any conference in any sport these days.
QuoteAlso, would Lake Placid be the best locale for television exposure? Which networks would be willing to travel to what most describe as a helplessly remote location to broadcast the ECAC Championships? I think that Lake Placid might present unforeseen issues with television exposure.
I believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.
Quote from: adamwI believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.
On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: adamwI believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.
On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?
Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.
I was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: adamwI believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.
On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?
Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.
If we're talking about TV coverage, wouldn't Lake Placid, as a remote location, be more expensive to broadcast from?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: adamwQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: adamwI believe a company like CBSCS would be more willing to broadcast the event from Lake Placid than from Albany. That is just a theory though.
On what basis - that they'd get to say "Herb Brooks" and talk about the 1980 miracle on ice a few times?
Believe it or not, from my experience, yes.
If we're talking about TV coverage, wouldn't Lake Placid, as a remote location, be more expensive to broadcast from?
Sure, but it's all worth the expense. Go ahead, say "Herb Brooks" out loud. Try it just once, and tell me that's not worth thousands of dollars in travel expense, overtime, and telecom equipment investment.
Quote from: BeeeejSure, but it's all worth the expense. Go ahead, say "Herb Brooks" out loud. Try it just once, and tell me that's not worth thousands of dollars in travel expense, overtime, and telecom equipment investment.
mock if you must - I'm just telling you like it is. There are usually crews all over - and there would not be additional costs for those things.
Also - some buildings have union regulations that make broadcasting more expensive - something Lake Placid would not.
Quote from: martyI was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.
BC typically does not draw big crowds.
I just don't know what to say, but that won't stop me from trying.:-}We did LP once, a few times actually, and I don't see how it was some tremendous help back then. If the coaches were to say that it make their recruiting that much easier, I'd go along with it in a heartbeat. But if that were the case we wouldn't be discussing this, it would already be a done deal, wouldn't it? Why would the schools not be screaming, "Let's get back to LP.", if they felt it was so much better? All I've read is that they were ones to say no, I guess because of the sheet size. I just can't believe that a prospect would be turned to the ECAC because of LP, I just can't, can't can't. They will go with the coach that inspires them, assuming finances, facilities, etc. are up to snuff.
No, I just can't believe that the name LP is so strong that we'll get players because of it. Sorry.
Adam, I'd never imply that ECAC coaches are inferior. No that's why we lost a couple to other conferences, because they are good. Now why did they leave? Was Providence that much better than Union? He probably got more money, Union couldn't or wouldn't match it, felt that it would be easier to get students admitted, and easier to keep them in school, maybe PU has better facilities, I don't know. Why PSU? I'm sure the money is better, facilities are better, easier to get admissions, more athletic prestige. But none of the coaches left because we were in Albany, or AC, instead of LP. Those schools have things that we'll never have, and we can't match them, never. We have to do it another way, but I just don't see that LP adds that much, if any; and the negatives far out-way the positives, IMO.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinWhy need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has? ECAC results during the 2012 NCAAs were fairly impressive. Union got into the Frozen Four and Cornell knocked off a team that many viewed as a favorite for a national title going into the tournament. Cornell was arguably an ill-timed, broken stick away from making the Frozen Four. I know that it requires more than one season to establish a trend, but I feel somewhat assured the Cornell, Sucks, and Union have a chance at being competitive next season. If RPI can right their course, then that would be one-third of the ECAC. The Ivies have become more competitive with the scholarship programs with their competitive financial aid offers. Why pretend it is like what it once was when it clearly is not?
I don't think it's realistic to say that things are categorically different now than they were, say, five or ten years ago, based on the fact that the ECAC had one good year in the NCAA tournament. Maybe things will continue to improve, sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. This year's good showing notwithstanding, it's still 22 seasons and counting since an ECAC team even played in the championship game.
Quote from: adamwI've been smoking the same thing for 10 years. My opinion has never changed :)
I know... At least you're consistent, my friend. No offense intended. We'll just agree to disagree on this one. All is good!!
I will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!
Quote from: rediceI will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!
By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: rediceI will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!
By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?
No one can gild that turd.
Quote from: adamwAnother way the brand would improve is by having its name associated with Lake Placid. That's my premise. And I do think it would be very useful in that regard.
1980 is ancient history. This is a pipe dream. Play the games where people can easily go to see them.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: martyI was surprised that it did well this year compared to BC with Union and Mass-Lowell. Yale was more predictable.
BC typically does not draw big crowds.
That's too bad.
My recollection is that they drew will in Albany in 1998. Same memory of BC in 2003 at Providence when we beat them in OT.
Ancient history?
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: rediceI will say this, LP is the only ECAC tournament location where I can recall a constant drone of statements that it's a "WONDERFUL PLACE TO HOLD THIS TOURNAMENT" from the media and the league officials. That tells me that they don't really believe it and their trying to convince the world.
For example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals. They didn't have to make such claims. Why? Because it was!! No promotion was necessary!! And no, I am not proposing that we move back to Boston. We all know why that can't/won't happen. But, at the time that the tournament was held there, it was a terrific site. LP? Never!!
By that logic, why isn't anyone claiming AC is wonderful?
I don't know...You'll have to ask the ECACHL office. Tactics change, you know.
It's just an observation that I made while the tourney was in LP... I didn't buy it (that it was great location for the tourney) then and I don't buy it now. I just considered all that talk to be propaganda.
Quote from: rediceFor example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.
That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: rediceFor example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.
That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.
(http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/guns/big-machine-gun.gif) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R15068%2C_Leo_Dawidowitsch_Trotzki.jpg/220px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R15068%2C_Leo_Dawidowitsch_Trotzki.jpg)
More appropriate:
(http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/516/2447trot.jpg)
If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?
Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.
1993: ---- / 7867
1994: ---- / 6316
1995: ---- / 6562
1996: ---- / 8300
1997: ---- / 8081
1998: ---- / 5289
1999: ---- / 8469
2000: 5389 / 6790
2001: 4990 / 6256
2002: 5422 / 6518
2003: 6936 / 8296
2004: 5641 / 6489
2005: 7580 / 8637
2006: 6255 / 7093
2007: 4484 / 5565
2008: 5074 / 4851
2009: 3517 / 4857
2010: ???? / 6505
2011: 3351 / 4126
2012: 3462 / 4131
Quote from: adamwIf the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?
2000: 5389 / 6790
2001: 4990 / 6256
2002: 5422 / 6518
2003: 6936 / 8296
2004: 5641 / 6489
2005: 7580 / 8637
2006: 6255 / 7093
Attendance in Albany certainly declined in
recent years. But it's hard to see how you can look at the last three years in Lake Placid, and the first four in Albany, and say that attendance was "consistently" higher in the former than in the latter. That's especially true when you take into account the fact that
Cornell was in Lake Placid the last three years the tournament was there, yet attendance was significantly higher for Cornell's appearances in Albany in 2003, 2005, and 2006 (ETA: and Union and RPI weren't there in those three years to skew the numbers to local fans).
Nice cherry picking of data ... are you a lawyer or something?
Cornell was there - but 2003 and 2005 are equivalent in fan interest to 1996 and 1997 ... Attendance didn't wane in Lake Placid because it was Lake Placid. Attendance waned in Lake Placid because not as many Cornell fans went in those years as in 1996 and 1997.
Attendance waned in Albany at a faster clip.
And good job not including 1999 in your LP cherry picking :)
Quote from: adamwNice cherry picking of data ... are you a lawyer or something?
Cornell was there - but 2003 and 2005 are equivalent in fan interest to 1996 and 1997 ... Attendance didn't wane in Lake Placid because it was Lake Placid. Attendance waned in Lake Placid because not as many Cornell fans went in those years as in 1996 and 1997.
Attendance waned in Albany at a faster clip.
And good job not including 1999 in your LP cherry picking :)
First of all, 2003 felt like our year, but in the moment, 2002 felt like our year, too - mostly because 2003 hadn't happened yet. There was plenty of enthusiasm for Cornell being there, and being back in the title game - and unless people on this board are willing to come forward and say, "I wasn't excited about Cornell hockey in 2002, so I didn't go," I simply and straightforwardly doubt your premise.
Accuse me of cherry-picking all you want, but it's quite obvious to me and everyone else that attendance was at one level in Lake Placid, then after the tournament was moved to Albany, it was at a higher level. I didn't say that attendance was down because it was in Lake Placid, I simply said it was lower in Lake Placid for the few years before Albany, and higher in Albany for the few years after Lake Placid.
Your explanation for that is basically "Attendance was down because fewer people went."
Ya think?
Say what you will - but Lake Placid's numbers are higher than Albany's numbers - even with two big bumps caused by high enthusiasm over Cornell's 2003 and 2005 seasons.
I don't see how you can look at those two sets of numbers and conclude that people stayed away from Lake Placid because of its difficulty in getting there - or for reasons that demonstrably outweigh Albany's negatives.
I don't want to take sides or get involved in this discussion beyond noting that every year the tournament was in Lake Placid one or both of Clarkson and St. Lawrence was there. They had far fewer appearances in Albany.
Quote from: adamwSay what you will - but Lake Placid's numbers are higher than Albany's numbers - even with two big bumps caused by high enthusiasm over Cornell's 2003 and 2005 seasons.
I don't see how you can look at those two sets of numbers and conclude that people stayed away from Lake Placid because of its difficulty in getting there - or for reasons that demonstrably outweigh Albany's negatives.
Fine, then let's answer your actual question: "If the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?"
Because either Clarkson or St. Lawrence was always there.
And because Lake Placid made their entire town
become the ECAC tournament for three days every year - and hundreds of locals went to the games because that's what was going on that weekend. Mostly, Albany locals couldn't care less unless RPI and Union are there.
Lake Placid locals have no difficulty and no major time commitment getting there, no issue with absurdly high hotel prices, no problem with draconian hotel cancellation policies that could cost them hundreds of dollars if their team of choice doesn't win their quarterfinal round, and no need to wait for an hour to get a table at one of the five restaurants worth eating in. We did. And we do. Lake Placid is a magical hockey wonderland, and I pooped rainbows and danced jigs with cartoon bluebirds on my shoulders every time I went there for the tournament, but I still hated what was required of me to get there and be there.
So if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.
QuoteSo if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.
I never claimed that. It's the best of a set of mediocre-to-poor options, for reasons I've articulated, or tried to. In fact, I even said in the original article, that even if attendance in LP wasn't great either, it was still worth it, since it won't be great anywhere else anyway.
Quote from: adamwIf the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?
Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.
1993: ---- / 7867- CCT, B, H, RPI
1994: ---- / 6316- H, RPI, CCT, B
1995: ---- / 6562- RPI, PU, CCT, Cg
1996: ---- / 8300- CU, H, UVm, CCT
1997: ---- / 8081- CU, CCT, RPI, PU
1998: ---- / 5289- PU, CCT, H, Y, CU
1999: ---- / 8469- CCT, SLU, RPI, PU, Cg
2000: 5389 / 6790- SLU, RPI, Cg, CU, CCT
2001: 4990 / 6256- SLU, CU, H, D, UVm
2002: 5422 / 6518- H, CU, RPI, CCT, D
2003: 6936 / 8296- CU, H, D, B
2004: 5641 / 6489- H, CCT, Cg, D
2005: 7580 / 8637- CU, H, Cg, UVm
2006: 6255 / 7093- H, CU, D, Cg
2007: 4484 / 5565- CCT, Q, SLU, D
2008: 5074 / 4851- PU, H, CU, Cg
2009: 3517 / 4857- Y, CU, SLU, PU
2010: ???? / 6505- CU, U, C, SLU
2011: 3351 / 4126- Y, CU, D, Cg
2012: 3462 / 4131- U, H, CU, Cg
It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.
Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.
Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: rediceFor example, when it was in Boston before the ECAC & HE split, nobody wasted any time bragging about Boston being a great place to have the finals.
That's actually not true. People waxed rhapsodic about the wonders of Boston and the Garden until you'd swear Doris Kearns Goodwin was blowing them under the table.
From whom was that rhapsody coming? I don't recall hearing any of it from league officials. I know the average ECAC hockey fan was always
thrilled to be heading to Boston each March. And proud to tell their friends of it. After all, a trip to Boston was fun!! Remember, at that point, the idea of moving the tournament was not really on the table. It was held in Boston and that's the way it was!! So, hyping the Boston location was not necessarily a propaganda tool to convince the constituency that having the tournament there was/is a good idea. Now that the tournament seems to have no permanent home, we'll live with this constant salesmanship from the League office.
Quote from: adamwQuoteSo if a difference - and an arguable one, at that - in attendance because of local interest is worth it to the ECACHL to move the tournament back to Lake Placid, despite the horrorshow that it means for the actual fans of the actual teams that will be playing there, then have at it. If Lake Placid's Chamber of Commerce comes through with a financial guarantee that makes Albany's look like change from a shoeshine, marvelous, let's grab the brass ring and suck up our objections to the Olympic sheet. But let's not pretend that a Lake Placid tournament is a panacea for all that ails the ECACHL, or that we should get down on our hands and knees and beg them to take us back after we screwed them.
I never claimed that. It's the best of a set of mediocre-to-poor options, for reasons I've articulated, or tried to. In fact, I even said in the original article, that even if attendance in LP wasn't great either, it was still worth it, since it won't be great anywhere else anyway.
You're in a vanishingly small minority who feels that it's the best of our options.
Quote from: Chris '03It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.
Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.
Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.
All good points ... but I think my point is that, you're not growing interest beyond what it is already. That's been tried, and failed - it's like tilting at windmills. So might as well have it in a great place that brings a great connotation to the ECAC. And again, I understand the issues with getting there and hotels, etc... It's not like I haven't gone myself every year since 1995.
By the way - there may have been 5 teams in some years, but Princeton doesn't count :)
I would be more than happy, for logistical reasons, if the tournament was in Bridgeport or Albany too ... I've argued, at times, for both of those as well. Well, not so much "argued," as basically resigned myself to the fact that that's the best place for it, all things considered. There is no home run. There is no option that solves all ills, or most ills, or barely any ills. Lake Placid has the most potential to do some good for the league, as little as that potential might be. All other options are basically "let's have it in the most convenient place for hardcore fans to go, while also being in a respectable hockey building." And that's a perfectly good argument. But that's all it is.
Quote from: adamwLake Placid has the most potential to do some good for the league, as little as that potential might be. All other options are basically "let's have it in the most convenient place for hardcore fans to go, while also being in a respectable hockey building." And that's a perfectly good argument. But that's all it is.
Yes, that's all it is. But as arguments go, for most of us, it sounds an awful lot better than "Let's have it in the
least convenient place for hardcore fans to go."
I have no desire to spend time in Bridgeport, but I guarantee you it's an easier decision for me than Lake Placid.
Would the league consider a rotation (once every 3 years) among Albany, Bridgeport and Hartford/Providence (we could even put LP in here to make Adam happy)? The rationale is that each venue would get the ECACs once every 3 years, and free them up to bid for the "higher profile" NC$$ basketball first/second round games in the off years.
This would decrease the rate of venues gettting stale, and still keep the tourney within a decent (reasonable) drive for most of the ECAC teams and their fans.
I personally think they should move the tourney to Estero, but that is for totally selfish reasons :).
Quote from: BeeeejYes, that's all it is. But as arguments go, for most of us, it sounds an awful lot better than "Let's have it in the least convenient place for hardcore fans to go."
Well, "least convenient for most Cornell fans" perhaps ... but that's not everyone. Something tells me Atlantic City was "least convenient" for most people, among all recent options. Lake Placid would be more convenient than anything else for Clarkson and St. Lawrence fans. Something tells me it's their top choice. It would also be more convenient than, say, Providence for RPI and Union fans.
The only other fan base that really matters is Cornell's - and granted, of course, it's the biggest one. Yale, Quinnipiac, Dartmouth and Brown fans do exist in decent amounts - but they didn't exactly come to Albany anyway. They would all certainly go, moreso, to Providence/Bridgeport - but how much?
Quote from: adamwWell, "least convenient for most Cornell fans" perhaps ... but that's not everyone. Something tells me Atlantic City was "least convenient" for most people, among all recent options. Lake Placid would be more convenient than anything else for Clarkson and St. Lawrence fans. Something tells me it's their top choice.
"This location would be the most convenient option for that small portion of fans who already live in the middle of
fuc goshdarn nowhere" isn't exactly the most glowing recommendation, either.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: adamwIf the difficulty in getting to Lake Placid was such a problem, why was attendance in Lake Placid consistently higher than Albany?
Listed below, attendance for the semifinal (where possible) / final... Obviously, the years Cornell was in the final positively affected attendance in both places in just about the same way ... though for Albany, that only mattered early on - not in later years. None of those Lake Placid finals were ever nearly as bad as Albany's worst years. And this is in an 8500-seat arena, so it looks better -- something TV is interested in. NESN broadcast a few of those years, without issue - though with local production companies.
1993: ---- / 7867- CCT, B, H, RPI
1994: ---- / 6316- H, RPI, CCT, B
1995: ---- / 6562- RPI, PU, CCT, Cg
1996: ---- / 8300- CU, H, UVm, CCT
1997: ---- / 8081- CU, CCT, RPI, PU
1998: ---- / 5289- PU, CCT, H, Y, CU
1999: ---- / 8469- CCT, SLU, RPI, PU, Cg
2000: 5389 / 6790- SLU, RPI, Cg, CU, CCT
2001: 4990 / 6256- SLU, CU, H, D, UVm
2002: 5422 / 6518- H, CU, RPI, CCT, D
2003: 6936 / 8296- CU, H, D, B
2004: 5641 / 6489- H, CCT, Cg, D
2005: 7580 / 8637- CU, H, Cg, UVm
2006: 6255 / 7093- H, CU, D, Cg
2007: 4484 / 5565- CCT, Q, SLU, D
2008: 5074 / 4851- PU, H, CU, Cg
2009: 3517 / 4857- Y, CU, SLU, PU
2010: ???? / 6505- CU, U, C, SLU
2011: 3351 / 4126- Y, CU, D, Cg
2012: 3462 / 4131- U, H, CU, Cg
It's worth noting that LP lucked out to have a north country team there every year. I've added the participants above. 1999 had BOTH teams in the FINAL. Also, for five of those years, the championship weekend included five teams instead of four. With LP's hotel policies, that typically meant folks stuck there for the weekend like it or not, win or lose unless you day trip from Potsdam, Canton, or Burlington.
Finally, UVm used to be a "close" school to LP. They're not in the mix anymore as potential day trippers to a LP championship.
Don't get me wrong, I loved going to LP and the sense of community that developed when the whole town welcomed ECAC fans. I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.
This. It's fine to argue that Cornell has an attendance impact at any venue, but the '96-'97 tournaments also had the immense enthusiasm for that UVM team behind it as well. 2009 was the first year of this run for Union, and the recent success & local coverage would probably have driven a theoretical Albany tournament final back over 8k (IMO).
Another thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"
More interest in NCAA success means more people are going to save up their "travel chits" with their work/family/social/monetary lives for potential NCAA Regional and Frozen Four trips. If there's somewhere central (like Albany/Bridgeport/Hartford), that could be an easy/cheap drive/train, then it seems less like a trek & could keep those casual-to-moderate fans coming, while they wouldn't to Lake Placid OR Atlantic City.
Quote from: RichHAnother thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"
That's precisely what I meant, before Beeeej decided to mock me for it :)
Cornell fans were far more interested in the 1996 and 1997 ECACs than the later ones in L.P. - then there was a big bump in 2003 and 2005 - but not so much the later Albany ones. For the reasons you articulate, and that I referred to.
I don't think the "bump" in 2003 was because the tournament had moved to Albany. Put that year's tournament on the moon, and it would've gotten 8,000.
Wasn't one of the problems with LP the fact that the coaches felt, rightly or wrongly, that the olympic ice-size rink there hurt them in the NCAA tourney?
Quote from: ursusminorWasn't one of the problems with LP the fact that the coaches felt, rightly or wrongly, that the olympic ice-size rink there hurt them in the NCAA tourney?
Yes. And that would be a louder gripe now that the NCAA has moved away from olympic sheets for regionals.
Quote from: adamwThat's precisely what I meant, before Beeeej decided to mock me for it :)
Cornell fans were far more interested in the 1996 and 1997 ECACs than the later ones in L.P. - then there was a big bump in 2003 and 2005 - but not so much the later Albany ones. For the reasons you articulate, and that I referred to.
Again, I'll disagree, and I'll try not to mock you: Without having the perspective of the even better year we would have in 2003, we felt that absolutely ran away with the regular season in 2002, finishing so far ahead of Clarkson that they needed the Hubble telescope to see us. The expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?
Maybe it was Spring Break or something. Who really remembers that far back? :-)
Quote from: BeeeejThe expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?
Well, I recall things differently. Expectations may have been high in 2002 - but Cornell was ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03, and raised expectations even higher. The fever pitch was monumental. Anything short of a Frozen Four would've been considered a disaster. There was an enormous groundswell that built through the entire year. I suspect you don't know all 8,000 people who showed up, so perhaps the group we all know would've went to 2002 and 2003. But do you really believe there was not a huge upswing in interest that year from "the masses"?
I say we have Adam and Beeej fight in a cage match. Two men enter, one ECAC tournament location is chosen!
Lake Placid is in the middle of nowhere, reachable only by expedition. Fuck that. They may as well take the alternate-site venue that the Big 10 isn't using.
Adam, I'll address it to you since you seem to be the only one pushing LP, no one has talked about the housing problem that Beeeej mentioned. Some history for those who were not there. To get a room in town, at a convient place you had to put down a non-refundable payment. I don't remember how soon you had to do it, but it was certainly before the quarterfinal games. Therefore you had to put your money down when you didn't even know your team was going to be there. And if you took a place outside of town, finding an easy place to park in that town was not nice. If you thought you might just drive up for the finals since your team won the semi, good luck. Close hotel rooms were generally taken and as I said no easy parking. All in all, not an easy place for that last minute fan.
My daughter will be out of the house, so we'd probably book and pay for a room the year before, as we'd go even if CU didn't. However I don't think many would be happy with that. Thanks Beeeej, I'd forgotten how awful this was. No, LP seems worse all the time.
It sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in. You can decide a few days before that you want to go, and you can still find a reasonable room. In fact cheap if you don't mind driving a bit.
If Providence or Worcester wanted to bid, I'd give that a try, but please not LP.
Quote from: Jim HylaIt sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in.
And it is perfectly acceptable to use the Times Union rather than the Daily Sun during introductions. As for the Troy Record, the preferred method involves wadding it up almost as soon as the carrier makes his delivery.
Just for the Record (http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2012/03/01/sports/doc4f5059f85f762673670045.txt)
Quote from: martyQuote from: Jim HylaIt sounds like Albany really wants us back, let's give them a chance again. If Union stays up there, I have to think attendance will be good. With them, newsprint will be good, and the casual fan will drop in.
And it is perfectly acceptable to use the Times Union rather than the Daily Sun during introductions. As for the Troy Record, the preferred method involves wadding it up almost as soon as the carrier makes his delivery.
Just for the Record (http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2012/03/01/sports/doc4f5059f85f762673670045.txt)
I forgot, they used to give away free newspapers, didn't they. That proves we should go there, no complaints about the papers. Now if they'd only be as good about Snickers.:-D
Quote from: adamwQuote from: BeeeejThe expectations for that team were very high, and we hadn't won a title in five years after coming fairly close in 2000 and 2001. Again, I'll ask - did anyone on this board who went to Albany in 2003 decline to go to Lake Placid in 2002 because they weren't as excited about Cornell hockey?
Well, I recall things differently. Expectations may have been high in 2002 - but Cornell was ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03, and raised expectations even higher. The fever pitch was monumental. Anything short of a Frozen Four would've been considered a disaster. There was an enormous groundswell that built through the entire year. I suspect you don't know all 8,000 people who showed up, so perhaps the group we all know would've went to 2002 and 2003. But do you really believe there was not a huge upswing in interest that year from "the masses"?
First of all, you're kind of missing my point - I'm not saying attendance shouldn't have gone up in 2003. Of course it should have, I just don't believe that the entire increase can be attributed to the better season. What I'm saying, that you're misinterpreting, is that you need to look at 2002
in a vacuum, as if you're in 2002 now, without knowing what 2003 is going to be like. 2002 was an incredible year all on its own compared to 2000 and 2001, we had a much better shot than usual at a deep run, and attendance at the ECAC tournament should have increased from those previous couple of seasons, notwithstanding any objections to Lake Placid. It didn't.
I will say this for certain, though: You definitely recall things differently. Cornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half. And Cornell wasn't ranked No. 1 in the Pairwise until after winning the ECAC title game, either.
Tell you what - I'll ask Daina when she gets home why she didn't go to Lake Placid in 2002. ::woot::
Quote from: RichHAnother thing to think about when considering the "Cornell bump" in a historical sense is that from 1996-2001, Cornell didn't have much success past the ECACs. A league championship was all shiny and new to a decade's worth of fans. Since 2002, when Cornell started becoming a regular NCAA attendee, I feel there has been a de-emphasis on the importance of the ECAC tournament in the casual-to-moderate CU hockey fan. 1996-97 was such a cathartic eruption and I feel we valued those League Championships more than recent ones. The 2003 team drove a LOT of interest in the "we're here for the entire ride" sense. By 2005, I felt more people milled around saying "yeah, yeah, this is a nice cup...now, what regional are we going to?"
I think something related to this had been mentioned here sometime in the last year (note, I've lost all sense of time). There was a discussion about how we don't see as many traveling undergrads now as we used to. I think we picked up a lot of new fans in that period of time. After maybe 2005 (give or take), the number of new and more fanatical fans seemed to have tapered off. Maybe the championship was the shiny new toy. For the most part, I see a lot of the same people on this board posting but most of you are older than I am. There are probably only a handful on here that are very recent grads and are vocal here. The championship is no longer the shiny new toy, we expect to get to the NCAAs or the season sucked, and we'd been in Albany for a while. If Cornell makes it to the Frozen Four next year, I'm sure most of you reading would move heaven and earth to be in Pittsburgh. The average Cornellian, maybe not? Really, how many of us are willing to let 2-3 weeks of our lives be completely dictated by what a hockey team does?
As for ECAC location, maybe Albany was getting stale. I agree with Rita that maybe a rotation between Albany, Hartford/Bridgeport, and Providence might be a good solution. I used to be in the Lake Placid camp when we first moved to Albany but hey, life happens. My car has 160,000 miles on it because I drove it all over the east coast the first 5 years I had it, mostly to hockey games but now, you'd have a hard time to get me to be in it for more than an hour. This is why I'd rather go to Albany than AC. Geographically, AC is a hell of a lot closer to me but it means that I have to spend 4-5 hours in a car while I can hop on a plane to go to Albany. I'll probably go next year just to say that I've been but I'm not looking forward to the time in the car. At least it's not beach season.
Adam, I'll go to Lake Placid but you're going to have to drive me.
Quote from: BeeeejCornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half.
We were #4 or better for almost the whole season after December, and #2 from mid-Feb on (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html), though.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BeeeejCornell was ranked No. 1 for exactly ONE week in 2003 - March 24, after we beat Harvard in Albany. That was it. We actually bubbled around #7-9 for most of the first half.
We were #4 or better for almost the whole season after December, and #2 from mid-Feb on (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html), though.
Yes, absolutely. And that's a long way from being "ranked No. 1 for most of 2002-03."
Quote from: BeeeejTell you what - I'll ask Daina when she gets home why she didn't go to Lake Placid in 2002. ::woot::
Daina doesn't remember clearly exactly why, but she went home for spring break (which started the weekend of the ECACs). She went to the regionals in Worcester to see us beat Quinnipiac and lose to UNH at the end of spring break, but that's because it was pretty close to her home in West Hartford. Although she can't say for sure that she actually went through this thought process ten years ago, she says now that she doubts she would've wanted to drive to Lake Placid - and if the tournament had been in Albany that year, she almost certainly would have gone, because it was on the way home.
Jeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
Quote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
This isn't generic either. Please change the topic to "Arguing with adamw about the merits of Lake Placid".
Quote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
This isn't generic either. Please change the topic to "Arguing with adamw about the merits of Lake Placid".
Or "The relative mediocrity of ECAC tournament venue choices".
The other issue that hasn't been mentioned is (at least as of the ECAC's last trip) that the facilities are crap. Hot, nasty locker rooms that they won't let you put fans in, players sitting in the hallway, etc. I don't think you're going to get much love from the coaches for LP.
Quote from: judyQuote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?
Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: judyQuote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?
Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.
Bonus points if the poster starting it tells us he knows all about hockey and none of us understand it.
To maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?
Quote from: CASTo maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?
That's been suggested in other threads - I think the main reasons are 1) unusually expensive hotels, 2) difficulty traveling to NYC via car (plus the expense of safe parking), and 3) we'd probably get lost in the noise.
All true Beeeej, but think of how many alums of the ECAC schools live/work in the area and wouldn't need to travel at all. If Cornell can bring 12K fans to MSG, how many would attend an ECAC tourney game which is played in/near NYC?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: CASTo maximize attendance, why not bring ECAC tourney to NYC metro area - Barclay's, Izod, or Pru Center?
That's been suggested in other threads - I think the main reasons are 1) unusually expensive hotels, 2) difficulty traveling to NYC via car (plus the expense of safe parking), and 3) we'd probably get lost in the noise.
On March 16, the Knicks had a home game. On March 17, the Nets, Devils and Rangers were all at home. With all of the teams in the NY area, you can't expect a weekend where all teams that play in a venue are out of town on both days. The Nassau Coliseum was open for the weekend but I doubt that the arena would be willing (even if permitted) to tie the hands of the NHL schedulers by making a multi-year commitment to an event that will probably leave the arena half-empty at best (they already have to do that for the Islanders).
Quote from: French RageQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: judyQuote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
There's one topic that always gets beaten to death at this time of year that hasn't popped up at all! Maybe it's because we beat Michigan and exceeded expectations?
Yeah, I'm still waiting for the annual "Fire Schafer" post.
Bonus points if the poster starting it tells us he knows all about hockey and none of us understand it.
It also has to be couched in terms of "maybe you all are satisfied with the current performance, but I think we should aim higher!" puffery. Bonus points if the poster has a Boston team in their sig.
Quote from: Chris '03I just don't think it's practical to hold a championship in a remote location and expect to grow interest in the event beyond the hard core "I'd follow my team russia" type fans.
I fail to see a problem with selecting a venue to cater specifically to us. :-D
Quote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
That's not true, Union and Colgate both lost top-line forwards to the pros.
Quote from: CASAll true Beeeej, but think of how many alums of the ECAC schools live/work in the area and wouldn't need to travel at all. If Cornell can bring 12K fans to MSG, how many would attend an ECAC tourney game which is played in/near NYC?
Frankly? Probably a lot fewer. Cornell has by far the biggest alumni base of the twelve schools, and certainly the most NYC-centric. In a year Cornell doesn't make it (if such a year ever exists again, he said, knocking on wood), I suspect NYC would have
worse attendance than Lake Placid or Albany, not better.
Red Hot Hockey is special because it's against an old rival, and because it's on Thanksgiving weekend when a lot of kids are home anyway - the ECACs don't always fall during spring break, and spring break isn't always spent with Mom & Dad the way Thanksgiving usually is.
Plus, I think a good 40% or so of the fans at Red Hot Hockey have been BU fans.
But ugarte's point is probably a more important one.
Remember the Barclay and Pru Centers each have only 1 tenant next year. Izod has zero. You think an ECAC tourney in the NY metro area, with Cornell involved, will draw fewer than 5-6K? If fewer than half the Cornell fans for Red Hot Hockey attend, and none from the other 3 schools, attendance would be higher. The games should be played where the fans are!
Quote from: CASRemember the Barclay and Pru Centers each have only 1 tenant next year. Izod has zero. You think an ECAC tourney in the NY metro area, with Cornell involved, will draw fewer than 5-6K? If fewer than half the Cornell fans for Red Hot Hockey attend, and none from the other 3 schools, attendance would be higher. The games should be played where the fans are!
So get NYC to bid on it. I guarantee you I wouldn't complain about being able to take a ten-minute subway trip from my home to the ECACs. I just don't think it's as practical as you do.
Since this is a generic offseason thread and this debate is pointless and somewhat boring, here's an article by Ken Dryden (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7859529/gordie-howe-johnny-bower-raffi-torres-three-memorable-hits-stanley-cup-playoffs) about the violence in the first round of this year's NHL playoffs.
Quote from: CASRemember the Barclay and Pru Centers each have only 1 tenant next year. Izod has zero. You think an ECAC tourney in the NY metro area, with Cornell involved, will draw fewer than 5-6K? If fewer than half the Cornell fans for Red Hot Hockey attend, and none from the other 3 schools, attendance would be higher. The games should be played where the fans are!
Lynah!
OK - so, not No. 1 most of the year. Close enough for government work. As we've seen, my recall isn't great ... but ... I don't recall 2002 having such a buzz that it should've bumped Lake Placid's attendance accordingly.
NYC is a non-starter -- for all the reasons mentioned, and for another reason not mentioned ... It would cost the ECAC a lot of money to get into one of those buildings. Not gonna happen. Also, no building there has ever bid.
If the hotel issue is resolved - would that help?
I'll be interested in what the coaches say upon return from Naples.
@Judy -- no problem, but you have to drive yourself to Philly-ish first :)
I am not getting in a steel cage match with Beeeej. He's bigger than me. And angrier :)
Quote from: adamwIf the hotel issue is resolved - would that help?
It would certainly help if they didn't have their draconian seven-day cancellation policy, but that's not the entire problem. As someone else mentioned, the halfway-decent places are also quite expensive - and there aren't enough rooms in town, so if you're not quick, or if you can't afford the in-town ones, you're in Saranac Lake, Tupper Lake, Keene, or Wilmington (or that awful hostel in North Elba), and you have to find a place to park once you get into town.
QuoteI am not getting in a steel cage match with Beeeej. He's bigger than me. And angrier :)
YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: CASRemember the Barclay and Pru Centers each have only 1 tenant next year. Izod has zero. You think an ECAC tourney in the NY metro area, with Cornell involved, will draw fewer than 5-6K? If fewer than half the Cornell fans for Red Hot Hockey attend, and none from the other 3 schools, attendance would be higher. The games should be played where the fans are!
Lynah!
Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
Correct me if I'm wrong but the only rink large enough would be The Morgue in Troy at RIP. Ugh.
Quote from: RobbJeebus. Stop all this bickering! I hate coming to the forum in the offseason and seeing 32 new posts! There's never any good news in the offseason... ::help::
Fifty-plus posts in a day usually means the thread went sideways: the mediocrity that is Albany on weekends and the distance to Lake Place to the cost of driving long distances to why professors are dicks if they don't bicycle to class.
Boston's expensive, too, but everybody knows somebody they can crash with. In metro New York it might mean staying with your parents.
Quote from: billhowardBoston's expensive, too, .....
But there's so much to do in Boston, it's worth the price to go there. Even when we were younger & money was tighter, we never complained about the expense of Boston. That was just the price of a good time. We went nearly every year and had all year to prepare for it. Even though money was sometimes VERY tight, no big deal!! LP?? Not so much!!
Quote from: rediceQuote from: billhowardBoston's expensive, too, .....
But there's so much to do in Boston, it's worth the price to go there. Even when we were younger & money was tighter, we never complained about the expense of Boston. That was just the price of a good time. We went nearly every year and had all year to prepare for it. Even though money was sometimes VERY tight, no big deal!! LP?? Not so much!!
When I was an undergrad, old alums used to wax rhapsodic about beating Michigan. In football. And we thought how impossibly long ago that was. Telling today's undergrads about the glories of the ECACs in Boston is equally distant in the rear view mirror. Yes, it was wondrous. If ever Boston Garden held, say, a kickoff classic over Thanksgiving weekend in a year with no MSG tournament, Cornell should accept the invite. But I can't see the ECAC going back for hockey, because you know we'd get second billing to Hockey East. And Albany not Boston is the geographic center of ECAC hockey even if it's not as exciting. Still better than putting an event in the geographic center of country, Lebanon, Kansas, pop. 210.
Quote from: jtn27Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
Houston Field House (RPI): 4780
Thompson Arena (Dartmouth): 4500
Lynah Rink: 4267
Ingalls Rink (Yale): 3500
TD Banks Sports Center (Quinnipiac): 3386
Meehan Auditorium (Brown): 3100
Appleton Auditorium (SLU): 3000
Cheel Arena (Clarkson): 3000
Bright Hockey Center (Harvard): 2850
Starr Rink (Colgate): 2246
Messa Rink (Union: 2225
Hobey Baker Rink (Princeton): 2092
Without a Peer is a fan of this idea. It was the idea of B1G before they realized that there were two classes of arena size in the future B1G Hockey that made it an untenable and fan-unfriendly approach because there are arena haves (Minnesota, Ohio State, Wisconsin with 10,000+ capacity) and have-nots (Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State with around 6,500). The ECAC is more of a continuum than a punctuated distinction in rink size. Half have more than a capacity of 3,000, half have less. It still seems like an untenable option even for a tournament as sparsely attended as that of the ECAC.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: jtn27Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
TD Banks Sports Center (Quinnipiac): 3386
Puzzling that Q would build their new rink with such little capacity.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: jtn27Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
TD Banks Sports Center (Quinnipiac): 3386
Puzzling that Q would build their new rink with such little capacity.
Not really. They probably were not expecting to get many fans at the games. If I'm not mistaken, as it is now, they only sell out a few games a year. Building a significantly larger arena would have been a waste of money.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: jtn27Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
Houston Field House (RPI): 4780
Thompson Arena (Dartmouth): 4500
Lynah Rink: 4267
Ingalls Rink (Yale): 3500
TD Banks Sports Center (Quinnipiac): 3386
Meehan Auditorium (Brown): 3100
Appleton Auditorium (SLU): 3000
Cheel Arena (Clarkson): 3000
Bright Hockey Center (Harvard): 2850
Starr Rink (Colgate): 2246
Messa Rink (Union: 2225
Hobey Baker Rink (Princeton): 2092
Without a Peer is a fan of this idea. It was the idea of B1G before they realized that there were two classes of arena size in the future B1G Hockey that made it an untenable and fan-unfriendly approach because there are arena haves (Minnesota, Ohio State, Wisconsin with 10,000+ capacity) and have-nots (Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State with around 6,500). The ECAC is more of a continuum than a punctuated distinction in rink size. Half have more than a capacity of 3,000, half have less. It still seems like an untenable option even for a tournament as sparsely attended as that of the ECAC.
It might not be untenable. This year attendance for the ECAC Final was 4,131 according to ECAC's website. It was actually probably lower than that since the website says the attendance for the consolation game was 0, so that 4,131 was probably the total figure for both games. The 3 biggest rinks can hold more than that. Yale's rink probably is big enough too. In fact, you might be able to get away with holding it at any rink with seating over 3000 (though I would understand the league wanted to set the minimum number of seats at 3,500 or 4,000). To make sure that most people who want to go can go, instead of selling tickets good for both games (which leads to half the ticket holders only going to one game) or making fans guess whether they want to go to the consolation game or the championship game, they should sell tickets by team. For example, if you buy a Cornell ticket, you get to go to whatever game Cornell is in, but not the other one unless you bought a ticket for that one too.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: jtn27Yes, why not Lynah? They should hold it at the site of the highest seed, as long as that arena has a predetermined minimum number of seats. If the 1 seed doesn't have a big enough arena, then have it at the highest seed that does. If no arena has enough seats (How likely is this? What is the seating of each ECAC hockey rink?) then hold it at a neutral site (Lynah).
TD Banks Sports Center (Quinnipiac): 3386
Puzzling that Q would build their new rink with such little capacity.
Maybe Q is realistic about its odds of drawing 5,000-plus per game. If they had a huge rink and real success in the ECAC, they'd probably decamp for Hockey East. Q's basketball court in the same complex doesn't hold much more.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: rediceQuote from: billhowardBoston's expensive, too, .....
But there's so much to do in Boston, it's worth the price to go there. Even when we were younger & money was tighter, we never complained about the expense of Boston. That was just the price of a good time. We went nearly every year and had all year to prepare for it. Even though money was sometimes VERY tight, no big deal!! LP?? Not so much!!
When I was an undergrad, old alums used to wax rhapsodic about beating Michigan. In football. And we thought how impossibly long ago that was. Telling today's undergrads about the glories of the ECACs in Boston is equally distant in the rear view mirror. Yes, it was wondrous. If ever Boston Garden held, say, a kickoff classic over Thanksgiving weekend in a year with no MSG tournament, Cornell should accept the invite. But I can't see the ECAC going back for hockey, because you know we'd get second billing to Hockey East. And Albany not Boston is the geographic center of ECAC hockey even if it's not as exciting. Still better than putting an event in the geographic center of country, Lebanon, Kansas, pop. 210.
I wholeheartedly agree with that dose of reality, Bill. I have previously stated that, despite my fondness for tournaments in Boston, I know that the ECAC finals are not likely to be held there again. I am accepting of that. My point, while not well stated was that Boston was worth the price, LP is not.
I agree with you about desirability: Boston is one of America's truly great cities, maybe the best city if you're under 30, like hockey, and can handle winters. Because we can't go back 25+ years to Boston ECACs, I was wondering wistfully if there's a way to get Cornell involved in some kind of hockey in Boston beyond the one Harvard game. Christmas would be ideal except we're a founder of the Florida Classic. A Martin Luther King Day Hockey Classic? Unlikely for too many reasons. The one that remains is something over Thanksgiving in a year when we're not playing at MSG.
Quote from: billhowardBecause we can't go back 25+ years to Boston ECACs, I was wondering wistfully if there's a way to get Cornell involved in some kind of hockey in Boston beyond the one Harvard game. Christmas would be ideal except we're a founder of the Florida Classic. A Martin Luther King Day Hockey Classic? Unlikely for too many reasons. The one that remains is something over Thanksgiving in a year when we're not playing at MSG.
If we were going to start a new holiday tournament tradition, I'd prefer it be someplace we are looking to penetrate for recruiting. Like Vancouver. Or Prague.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: billhowardBecause we can't go back 25+ years to Boston ECACs, I was wondering wistfully if there's a way to get Cornell involved in some kind of hockey in Boston beyond the one Harvard game. Christmas would be ideal except we're a founder of the Florida Classic. A Martin Luther King Day Hockey Classic? Unlikely for too many reasons. The one that remains is something over Thanksgiving in a year when we're not playing at MSG.
If we were going to start a new holiday tournament tradition, I'd prefer it be someplace we are looking to penetrate for recruiting. Like Vancouver. Or Prague.
From afar, recruits could follow Cornell on Redc--never mind, point taken.
So Adam's article gets reprinted in the Lake Placid News. (http://www.lakeplacidnews.com/page/content.detail/id/509457/ECAC-hockey-tourney-belongs-in-Lake-Placid.html?nav=5007) Although it looks like they're not really sure about the author's authenticity.
QuoteBy ADAM?WODON
Quote from: Jim HylaSo Adam's article gets reprinted in the Lake Placid News. (http://www.lakeplacidnews.com/page/content.detail/id/509457/ECAC-hockey-tourney-belongs-in-Lake-Placid.html?nav=5007) Although it looks like they're not really sure about the author's authenticity.
QuoteBy ADAM?WODON
They resorted to the original Norse.
Quote from: Jim HylaSo Adam's article gets reprinted in the Lake Placid News. (http://www.lakeplacidnews.com/page/content.detail/id/509457/ECAC-hockey-tourney-belongs-in-Lake-Placid.html?nav=5007) Although it looks like they're not really sure about the author's authenticity.
QuoteBy ADAM?WODON
He's also "Special to the News." Nowhere does it mention that the article was published elsewhere.
Adam, I for one prefer Lake Placid. Maybe it's just you and me and a few others. I get gouged there for kids hockey tournaments and I still love it. It has a lot of charm and I like the rink, the restaurants, etc. I'm fairly close to Bridgeport in Northern NJ but I'll take LP any day.
I'm shocked at Q's rink capacity, I've been there and I would have guessed that it's much larger. It's certainly very yellow, maybe that's throwing me off.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinWhy need we become complacent with the level of success that the ECAC has?
BTW - Cornell has been even closer to the FF a bunch of times in the last 10 years - so using them as a yardstick is not saying much. Cornell has always been the standard bearer, sometimes by itself. Getting Union to the FF is the only thing different about this year compared to anything else in the last 10 years. Not much of a difference. There's no question that the ECAC has been "competitive" as a whole over the last decade, so I don't see that as an issue.
When were they closer? I am not being contrary, I am sincerely curious when since 2002 you think that Cornell was closer. The only time that comes to mind is 2006 with Wisconsin in triple overtime. Cornell made the tournament in that span in 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, and 2012. 2003 is out of contention for the "closer" category, unless you are going to say it is infinitely close because Cornell made it that year. I was a student during 2009 and 2010. So, I am very familiar with those contests and the disappointment that followed. Both of those years, especially 2010, Cornell
should have been closer, but it wasn't. That leaves 2002 and 2005, considering that we agree that taking the eventual national champion to three overtimes is closer than a goal induced from an inopportunely breaking stick.
2002, Cornell beats Quinnipiac to face UNH. Cornell loses to UNH, 4-3 in regulation. This involved Cornell beating a lower seeded Quinnipiac and losing to a higher seeded UNH.
2005, Cornell beats Ohio State to face Minnesota. Cornell loses to Minnesota in the first overtime, 2-1. This involved Cornell beating a lower seeded third seed and then advancing to face a one seed.
The reason why I would argue that this year
felt psychologically closer was because Cornell entered as the lowest seed in the bracket, knocked off a team that many had said would be the only legitimate challenger to BC in the title game, and advanced to play a lower seed than the opponent that Cornell had beaten already. Both in 2002 and 2005, Cornell defeated an opponent and advanced to play an opponent seeded higher than Cornell's previous opponent. This year, it seemed like the hardest part of getting out of the Midwestern Regional was accomplished by beating Michigan. Also, considering this is all subjective, there's the psychological effect of momentum when one beats a national college hockey brand, like Michigan. Cornell advanced to play brands in 2002 and 2005 after eliminating teams that have not established themselves as national brands in the sport.
Quote from: RatushnyFanAdam, I for one prefer Lake Placid. Maybe it's just you and me and a few others. I get gouged there for kids hockey tournaments and I still love it. It has a lot of charm and I like the rink, the restaurants, etc. I'm fairly close to Bridgeport in Northern NJ but I'll take LP any day.
I'm on board with Lake Placid too, as I have said. My only concerns are if it will allow the ECAC to rebrand and remarket itself to a national audience through television and other media. I am not a big fan of the it-is-what-it-is mantra.
Also, others have voiced concerns with the locker rooms and other amenities with which the players will have to cope. I don't know anything about that fact, but that might affect how much wisdom I think there is in an otherwise appealing idea.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinThe reason why I would argue that this year felt psychologically closer was because Cornell entered as the lowest seed in the bracket, knocked off a team that many had said would be the only legitimate challenger to BC in the title game, and advanced to play a lower seed than the opponent that Cornell had beaten already.
Another reason it may have felt "closer" is the overall decline in the "big three" conferences. I would say the odds of having an ECAC team go all the way over the next few seasons are far higher than at any time since the "super teams" out of Harvard and the North Country in the late 80's/early 90's.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Jim HylaSo Adam's article gets reprinted in the Lake Placid News. (http://www.lakeplacidnews.com/page/content.detail/id/509457/ECAC-hockey-tourney-belongs-in-Lake-Placid.html?nav=5007) Although it looks like they're not really sure about the author's authenticity.
QuoteBy ADAM?WODON
He's also "Special to the News." Nowhere does it mention that the article was published elsewhere.
Right. Lake Placid residents like feeling this was written special for them. Last time I drove by, the world HQ of the LP paper was the size of a mom & pop liquor store. This is not the Murdoch empire.
Usually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
The locker rooms in Lake Placid (not Atlantic City)? They're okay for something used and overused by the youth hockey tournaments and CanAm camp in the summer. I couldn't imagine that being the deciding factor. Adam Wodon's point from his column remains key: We (ECAC) are no longer big stuff and we need to have realistic expectations for who'll welcome us and how many fans will show up for the tournament.
Quote from: RatushnyFanAdam, I for one prefer Lake Placid. Maybe it's just you and me and a few others. I get gouged there for kids hockey tournaments and I still love it. It has a lot of charm and I like the rink, the restaurants, etc. I'm fairly close to Bridgeport in Northern NJ but I'll take LP any day.
I'm shocked at Q's rink capacity, I've been there and I would have guessed that it's much larger. It's certainly very yellow, maybe that's throwing me off.
Nothing wrong with other people overspending. But how big should Q have built the arena? It's 3286 now and the mirror image basketball arena across the concours is 3586. (Only RPI and Cornell are above 4,000; Dartmouth is listed as 4500 but that's 3500 + 1000 standing.) Doubtful Q would let the hockey rink be 5000 without making hoops similarly large and the facility cost as built topped $50 million. Note photo of the rink as posted by the architects:
(http://www.centerbrook.com/media/projects/quinnipiac_university_td_banknorth_sports_center/large/1.jpg)[clear]
This could either be attendance-as-usual or the third period of a sellout game and the students left at the second intermission to get ready for the parties.
Quote from: billhowardUsually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
And you're bringing it up because nobody's brought it up?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardUsually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
And you're bringing it up because nobody's brought it up?
Conversation starter while waiting for more speculation on Rob Pannell's foot.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: RatushnyFanAdam, I for one prefer Lake Placid. Maybe it's just you and me and a few others. I get gouged there for kids hockey tournaments and I still love it. It has a lot of charm and I like the rink, the restaurants, etc. I'm fairly close to Bridgeport in Northern NJ but I'll take LP any day.
I'm shocked at Q's rink capacity, I've been there and I would have guessed that it's much larger. It's certainly very yellow, maybe that's throwing me off.
Nothing wrong with other people overspending. But how big should Q have built the arena? It's 3286 now and the mirror image basketball arena across the concours is 3586. (Only RPI and Cornell are above 4,000; Dartmouth is listed as 4500 but that's 3500 + 1000 standing.) Doubtful Q would let the hockey rink be 5000 without making hoops similarly large and the facility cost as built topped $50 million. Note photo of the rink as posted by the architects:
(http://www.centerbrook.com/media/projects/quinnipiac_university_td_banknorth_sports_center/large/1.jpg)[clear]
This could either be attendance-as-usual or the third period of a sellout game and the students left at the second intermission to get ready for the parties.
The student sections are still there, all wearing yellow in the back right of the photo. They don't sit in other parts of the arena. The visitor section is the one with the giant hole in it near the center of the image.
Hockey rinks have a lifespan of at least fifty years (see Houston, Lynah, and Ingalls as notable examples). I suspect when Lynah and Ingalls were built no one expected them to sell out consistently, and they certainly didn't during their first five years. But I'll bet today both Cornell and Yale wish they had an additional 1000 or so seats.
Fifty years ago Quinnipiac was a small commuter school offering little but a business curriculum with not much of a reputation (started life in the 1920s as Connecticut College of Commerce and subsequently changed its name to Junior College of Commerce). It actually shut down during World War II. In the 1950s when I was growing up in New Haven its teams were part of the NAIA, if anyone here has heard of that.
The University has grown dramatically and ambitiously in the past fifty years, now offering 52 undergraduate majors, 20 graduate programs, and a JD program. State-of-the-art facilities have been built for the law center and the communication and business programs. Its new medical school is scheduled to open next year. Its athletic programs are now NCAA Division I and it wasn't that many years ago that it moved up to ECACH from what was then viewed as the minor leagues. Given the ambitiousness Q has demonstrated in trying to make themselves a nationally-known institution it just seems to me that it was short-sighted to build a 50+ year asset at the size they did.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioFifty years ago Quinnipiac was a small commuter school offering little but a business curriculum with not much of a reputation (started life in the 1920s as Connecticut College of Commerce and subsequently changed its name to Junior College of Commerce). It actually shut down during World War II. In the 1950s when I was growing up in New Haven its teams were part of the NAIA, if anyone here has heard of that.
The University has grown dramatically and ambitiously in the past fifty years, now offering 52 undergraduate majors, 20 graduate programs, and a JD program. State-of-the-art facilities have been built for the law center and the communication and business programs. Its new medical school is scheduled to open next year. Its athletic programs are now NCAA Division I and it wasn't that many years ago that it moved up to ECACH from what was then viewed as the minor leagues.
Sounds great! How do I apply? You do work for the Quinnipiac admissions office, right?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinThe reason why I would argue that this year felt psychologically closer was because Cornell entered as the lowest seed in the bracket, knocked off a team that many had said would be the only legitimate challenger to BC in the title game, and advanced to play a lower seed than the opponent that Cornell had beaten already.
Another reason it may have felt "closer" is the overall decline in the "big three" conferences. I would say the odds of having an ECAC team go all the way over the next few seasons are far higher than at any time since the "super teams" out of Harvard and the North Country in the late 80's/early 90's.
I agree. I think the next few years will be interesting. Cornell, Harvard, and Union look like teams that will be able to challenge nationally next season and/or soon thereafter. Sucks's post-season propaganda has shown a certain level of, dare I say, pride, passion, and ambition.
Quote from: Ted DonatoIt was a year that, to me, really reestablished some of the greatness of Harvard hockey. I think that we certainly want to build upon it and take it to the next step...A lot of building blocks were put in place for the future and I think our guys that are coming back really have that taste of having some success, having a chance to make it the league championship game, and I think that we want to take it to the next level next year.
If you want to see the whole video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNEqJxU1V2Q&feature=player_embedded
I know that most on here wish Sucks ill in most things, but I just think back to Dryden's quote from
The Game and think that Cornell's primary rival doing well helps Cornell in the grand scheme:
Quote from: Ken DrydenThey were the necessary other side in many of my most fundamental moments, the inspiration and competitive prod for them, irrevocably and fondly associated with them...When a career ends, when the passion of the game subsides, towards a good opponent you only feel gratitude.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: billhowardQuote from: RatushnyFanAdam, I for one prefer Lake Placid. Maybe it's just you and me and a few others. I get gouged there for kids hockey tournaments and I still love it. It has a lot of charm and I like the rink, the restaurants, etc. I'm fairly close to Bridgeport in Northern NJ but I'll take LP any day.
I'm shocked at Q's rink capacity, I've been there and I would have guessed that it's much larger. It's certainly very yellow, maybe that's throwing me off.
Nothing wrong with other people overspending. But how big should Q have built the arena? It's 3286 now and the mirror image basketball arena across the concours is 3586. (Only RPI and Cornell are above 4,000; Dartmouth is listed as 4500 but that's 3500 + 1000 standing.) Doubtful Q would let the hockey rink be 5000 without making hoops similarly large and the facility cost as built topped $50 million. Note photo of the rink as posted by the architects:
(http://www.centerbrook.com/media/projects/quinnipiac_university_td_banknorth_sports_center/large/1.jpg)[clear]
This could either be attendance-as-usual or the third period of a sellout game and the students left at the second intermission to get ready for the parties.
The student sections are still there, all wearing yellow in the back right of the photo. They don't sit in other parts of the arena. The visitor section is the one with the giant hole in it near the center of the image.
Which isn't that surprising when you consider that they look to be playing Harvard.
(At first I thought it was vs. Cornell, but as far as I can tell, Cornell has never had a vertical stripe on the pants.)
Quote from: billhowardUsually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
Ohio State would just buy the woman and the motorcycle and give it to him, so that's why no one has said it. It's an unrealistic scenario.
Quote from: billhowardUsually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
And you had to go and say that... why? ::wtf::
Quote from: Josh '99(At first I thought it was vs. Cornell, but as far as I can tell, Cornell has never had a vertical stripe on the pants.)
Cornell did at one time. (http://d1l8737wcwfl1q.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/dryden.jpg)
Also, in the video I made before the ECAC Tournament, one can see the stripe still on the pants during the 1996 ECAC Championship Final footage.
However, you're right, it is Harvard.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Al DeFlorioFifty years ago Quinnipiac was a small commuter school offering little but a business curriculum with not much of a reputation (started life in the 1920s as Connecticut College of Commerce and subsequently changed its name to Junior College of Commerce). It actually shut down during World War II. In the 1950s when I was growing up in New Haven its teams were part of the NAIA, if anyone here has heard of that.
The University has grown dramatically and ambitiously in the past fifty years, now offering 52 undergraduate majors, 20 graduate programs, and a JD program. State-of-the-art facilities have been built for the law center and the communication and business programs. Its new medical school is scheduled to open next year. Its athletic programs are now NCAA Division I and it wasn't that many years ago that it moved up to ECACH from what was then viewed as the minor leagues.
Sounds great! How do I apply? You do work for the Quinnipiac admissions office, right?
Al graciously leaves unsaid that the J-school is the Ed McMahon School of Communications. Imagine a School with the motto, suitably done up in Latin, as "Right You Are, Johnny." Never sure if Ed's claim to fame was as Johnny Carson's sidekick, spokesmodel for Publisher's Clearing House, or for giving so much money to Q that he died broke. Another personal data point about Q: A friend's daughter partied her way through high school and then when at Q found there was too much partying. She departed. There's a running joke that the No. 1 Like for students attending Q is that it looks like a country club, and the No. 1 dislike is that it looks like a country club.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: billhowardUsually when the off-season thread loses steam, someone raises the spectre of Mike Schafer being recruited to the pros, or some cash-rich (before legal fees) places such as Penn State or The Ohio State offering him $500K and rights to hire the woman riding the back of Bobby Petrino's motorcycle.
And you had to go and say that... why? ::wtf::
The woofing gods are busy elsewhere. They saw a column on Amare Stoudemire's new maturity and work ethic and then strategically placed a few more fire extinguishers in MSG.
Ben Syer promoted to associate head coach
Quote from: Cop at LynahBen Syer promoted to associate head coach
Have we ever figured out exactly what that means? Is it like being tenure track?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Cop at LynahBen Syer promoted to associate head coach
Have we ever figured out exactly what that means? Is it like being tenure track?
It's an administrative difference; typically, "associate" positions are one pay band above "assistant" positions, which means that the minimum salary for the position is higher (though it's possible for someone in a lower band to be making more than someone in a higher band). They also typically have a little more repsonsibility, and sometimes a little more supervisory repsonsibility .
So, with the caveat that this is completely on a guessing/theoretical level, while the assistant and associate head coaches may both participate more or less the same way in practices and at games, the associate head coach may have greater recruiting responsibilities and may have the equipment manager and the trainer as his direct reports.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Jim HylaSo Adam's article gets reprinted in the Lake Placid News. (http://www.lakeplacidnews.com/page/content.detail/id/509457/ECAC-hockey-tourney-belongs-in-Lake-Placid.html?nav=5007) Although it looks like they're not really sure about the author's authenticity.
QuoteBy ADAM?WODON
He's also "Special to the News." Nowhere does it mention that the article was published elsewhere.
Really? They were supposed to do this as an express condition of reprinting.
Quote from: billhowardAdam Wodon's point from his column remains key: We (ECAC) are no longer big stuff and we need to have realistic expectations for who'll welcome us and how many fans will show up for the tournament.
That ... however, I believe most of the eLynah opponents of Lake Placid understand this point. ... So, my point was not just about having realistic expectations - but moreso, given those expectations, what's the only place that could actually boost the league's profile?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: Cop at LynahBen Syer promoted to associate head coach
Have we ever figured out exactly what that means? Is it like being tenure track?
It's an administrative difference; typically, "associate" positions are one pay band above "assistant" positions, which means that the minimum salary for the position is higher (though it's possible for someone in a lower band to be making more than someone in a higher band). They also typically have a little more repsonsibility, and sometimes a little more supervisory repsonsibility .
So, with the caveat that this is completely on a guessing/theoretical level, while the assistant and associate head coaches may both participate more or less the same way in practices and at games, the associate head coach may have greater recruiting responsibilities and may have the equipment manager and the trainer as his direct reports.
Thanks.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: billhowardAdam Wodon's point from his column remains key: We (ECAC) are no longer big stuff and we need to have realistic expectations for who'll welcome us and how many fans will show up for the tournament.
That ... however, I believe most of the eLynah opponents of Lake Placid understand this point. ... So, my point was not just about having realistic expectations - but moreso, given those expectations, what's the only place that could actually boost the league's profile?
And that's the part I've been struggling with slightly...that the main argument is...marketing? I'm just not buying that in exchange for the greater inconveniences for a good number of fans.
The benefits to the league are what? More eager television partnerships, I guess. I can't really believe that it would have that big an impact on recruitment. League tournament location is most likely far down the list of recruit concerns after hockey facilities, coaching, educational quality, financial benefits, consistent media exposure, geographic preferences, etc.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: jtn27Quote from: Al DeFlorioFifty years ago Quinnipiac was a small commuter school offering little but a business curriculum with not much of a reputation (started life in the 1920s as Connecticut College of Commerce and subsequently changed its name to Junior College of Commerce). It actually shut down during World War II. In the 1950s when I was growing up in New Haven its teams were part of the NAIA, if anyone here has heard of that.
The University has grown dramatically and ambitiously in the past fifty years, now offering 52 undergraduate majors, 20 graduate programs, and a JD program. State-of-the-art facilities have been built for the law center and the communication and business programs. Its new medical school is scheduled to open next year. Its athletic programs are now NCAA Division I and it wasn't that many years ago that it moved up to ECACH from what was then viewed as the minor leagues.
Sounds great! How do I apply? You do work for the Quinnipiac admissions office, right?
Al graciously leaves unsaid that the J-school is the Ed McMahon School of Communications. Imagine a School with the motto, suitably done up in Latin, as "Right You Are, Johnny." Never sure if Ed's claim to fame was as Johnny Carson's sidekick, spokesmodel for Publisher's Clearing House, or for giving so much money to Q that he died broke. Another personal data point about Q: A friend's daughter partied her way through high school and then when at Q found there was too much partying. She departed. There's a running joke that the No. 1 Like for students attending Q is that it looks like a country club, and the No. 1 dislike is that it looks like a country club.
Do you ever get tired of reading your own rambling?
Quote from: adamwSo, my point was not just about having realistic expectations - but moreso, given those expectations, what's the only place that could actually boost the league's profile?
Firstly, I think that's a pipe dream, and, secondly, I think it's much higher priority that fans of the participating teams are more easily able to see--in person--their teams play. The only thing that will "boost the league's profile" is to win games against other leagues--in the regular season and the post-season.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: adamwSo, my point was not just about having realistic expectations - but moreso, given those expectations, what's the only place that could actually boost the league's profile?
Firstly, I think that's a pipe dream, and, secondly, I think it's much higher priority that fans of the participating teams are more easily able to see--in person--their teams play. The only thing that will "boost the league's profile" is to win games against other leagues--in the regular season and the post-season.
Well, we're repeating what was already said way upthread ... but yes, winning boosts the league, clearly ... but coaches obviously believe that things like marketing and TV help recruiting, or they wouldn't be so hyped up about it all the time. And believe me, they are. So - in theory - there's a place out there that helps those things. My point being that, that place doesn't really exist - and the only place it *might* possibly exist is Lake Placid.
@Rich - league tournament location might be far down on the list - but it's not that, per se, as much it is the impression that it gives. Call it subconscious, or call me crazy - either way - your mileage may vary.
Quote from: adamw@Rich - league tournament location might be far down on the list - but it's not that, per se, as much it is the impression that it gives. Call it subconscious, or call me crazy - either way - your mileage may vary.
I agree with Rich. Unless the ECAC played in some destination city that was entirely outside the footprint of the conference and therefore warranted particular attention, I don't think that the location of the conference championships weighs that heavily in the choices of recruits. I would add to Rich's list of things that recruits consider passion of the fan base and winning traditions of the programs (there's a reason why we get better recruits than Sucks when drawing from the same pool of academically eligible athletes).
...waiting for the comment about how recently Sucks managed to get better rated recruits than Cornell has...
I do think that conference location may effect the opinions of fans and other non-players about the prestige of the conference.
Also, the NCHC was supposed to make some "big announcement" yesterday. I have not been able to find any reports of their announcement.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: adamwSo, my point was not just about having realistic expectations - but moreso, given those expectations, what's the only place that could actually boost the league's profile?
Firstly, I think that's a pipe dream, and, secondly, I think it's much higher priority that fans of the participating teams are more easily able to see--in person--their teams play. The only thing that will "boost the league's profile" is to win games against other leagues--in the regular season and the post-season.
That is it. If you don't have fans, what good is the tourney?
Unless LP can produce a much better package than they did last time, forget it. Yes the stores were fan friendly, much more so than either AC or Albany, but the hotels were not, and has been said the parking was terrible. None of those makes for a fan friendly tourney. Nice places to drink before and after the game, a better place than AC for families, but not enough easily accessible, and moderately priced hotel rooms. Not at all fan friendly. Forget it.
Why don't we spend this time seeing what Albany, who seem to want us back, has to offer. From the little bit we've heard they seem ready to show a better package. Maybe the sojurn to AC has had some benefit.
I'd bet that, if the league goes back to Lake Placid, they will address the hotel issue. If LP isn't willing to address it, it certainly won't get the bid.
Quote from: adamwI'd bet that, if the league goes back to Lake Placid, they will address the hotel issue. If LP isn't willing to address it, it certainly won't get the bid.
I'd bet that the hotel operators are independent of the venues and you are proposing "herding cats" as a condition of the bid at a time when the ECACHL is hardly in a position to be dictating much.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: adamwI'd bet that, if the league goes back to Lake Placid, they will address the hotel issue. If LP isn't willing to address it, it certainly won't get the bid.
I'd bet that the hotel operators are independent of the venues and you are proposing "herding cats" as a condition of the bid at a time when the ECACHL is hardly in a position to be dictating much.
Hotel operators are independent, of course ... However, they also have a vested interest in getting the business. If LP organizers don't get buy in from the hotels to relax how they operate - they won't get the bid. I can't guarantee that, but I'm pretty sure it will work something like that.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: ugarteQuote from: adamwI'd bet that, if the league goes back to Lake Placid, they will address the hotel issue. If LP isn't willing to address it, it certainly won't get the bid.
I'd bet that the hotel operators are independent of the venues and you are proposing "herding cats" as a condition of the bid at a time when the ECACHL is hardly in a position to be dictating much.
Hotel operators are independent, of course ... However, they also have a vested interest in getting the business. If LP organizers don't get buy in from the hotels to relax how they operate - they won't get the bid. I can't guarantee that, but I'm pretty sure it will work something like that.
It didn't work that way the last time LP hosted the tourney. Since the hotel policies were no more popular then than now, what makes you so sure that they will handle it differently? Wishful thinking, perhaps? ;-)
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: adamw@Rich - league tournament location might be far down on the list - but it's not that, per se, as much it is the impression that it gives. Call it subconscious, or call me crazy - either way - your mileage may vary.
I agree with Rich. Unless the ECAC played in some destination city that was entirely outside the footprint of the conference and therefore warranted particular attention, I don't think that the location of the conference championships weighs that heavily in the choices of recruits.
Isn't Adam's point that Lake Placid IS that "destination city"?
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: adamw@Rich - league tournament location might be far down on the list - but it's not that, per se, as much it is the impression that it gives. Call it subconscious, or call me crazy - either way - your mileage may vary.
I agree with Rich. Unless the ECAC played in some destination city that was entirely outside the footprint of the conference and therefore warranted particular attention, I don't think that the location of the conference championships weighs that heavily in the choices of recruits.
Isn't Adam's point that Lake Placid IS that "destination city"?
It is, but my point (in agreement with and in addition to Rich's point(s)) is that the choice of Lake Placid in itself is not so extraordinary because it is not both a destination city (which Lake Placid is) outside of the footprint of the league. I really doubt that any prospects will weigh heavily a venue for the championships if it "makes sense" in the fact that it is within the footprint of the league. Put it in Tampa (a destination city outside of the footprint), then prospects might consider it in their calculus whether to play in the ECAC.
Quote from: rediceQuote from: adamwQuote from: ugarteQuote from: adamwI'd bet that, if the league goes back to Lake Placid, they will address the hotel issue. If LP isn't willing to address it, it certainly won't get the bid.
I'd bet that the hotel operators are independent of the venues and you are proposing "herding cats" as a condition of the bid at a time when the ECACHL is hardly in a position to be dictating much.
Hotel operators are independent, of course ... However, they also have a vested interest in getting the business. If LP organizers don't get buy in from the hotels to relax how they operate - they won't get the bid. I can't guarantee that, but I'm pretty sure it will work something like that.
It didn't work that way the last time LP hosted the tourney. Since the hotel policies were no more popular then than now, what makes you so sure that they will handle it differently? Wishful thinking, perhaps? ;-)
It's not wishful thinking. I'm telling you, I'm all but certain LP won't get the bid if that doesn't change.
Has anyone checked out the Cornell hockey wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_Big_Red_men%27s_ice_hockey) recently? I stumbled upon it and was shocked that it contained no history as compared to those pages for Yale (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Bulldogs_men%27s_ice_hockey) and Sucks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Crimson_men%27s_ice_hockey).
Side note: after looking at the Harvard page, an outdoor game at Harvard Stadium seems like it would be a great idea.
Hockey Fans Throwing Weird Crap on the Ice
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2012/05/hockey-fans-throwing-weird-crap-ice-city-city-breakdown/1992/
small mention of the fish tradition.
Quote from: jkahnHockey Fans Throwing Weird Crap on the Ice
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2012/05/hockey-fans-throwing-weird-crap-ice-city-city-breakdown/1992/
small mention of the fish tradition.
Sucks does it once and gets a mention? Talk about throwing inflation.
Iles gets academic award. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/5/21/MICE_0521124921.aspx)
Penn State announced (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/052212aad.html) its first NCAA Division I schedule (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/sched/psu-m-hockey-sched.html) today. The Nittany Lions will be visiting our friends in Schenectady the weekend after Thanksgiving.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinPenn State announced (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/052212aad.html) its first NCAA Division I schedule (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/sched/psu-m-hockey-sched.html) today. The Nittany Lions will be visiting our friends in Schenectady the weekend after Thanksgiving.
That's a nice cupcake game for Union the same weekend we face Michigan.
Kris Mayotte is leaving Cornell to become an assistant coach at St. Lawrence (https://twitter.com/#!/SullivanHockey/status/204988160835457024). And, yet again, Cornell has no goalie coach. ::uhoh::
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinPenn State announced (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/052212aad.html) its first NCAA Division I schedule (http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/sched/psu-m-hockey-sched.html) today. The Nittany Lions will be visiting our friends in Schenectady the weekend after Thanksgiving.
That's a nice cupcake game for Union the same weekend we face Michigan.
I think that you might be a little too presumptuous about the Michigan game. I am losing faith that it will occur with the passage of time.
Union's OOC schedule is lackluster (http://www.unionhockeyblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/next-years-schedule.html). They've set up a schedule that they will all but need to win the Whitelaw to get into the NCAA Tournament. Their fans and bloggers are blissfully ignorant of that fact.
I think that Penn State has more of a chance against Union than most will admit. I've watched both teams (Penn State and Union) play. If Penn State gains dependable goaltending, they could defeat Union. Penn State has a new goaltender entering in the Fall too.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinUnion's OOC schedule is lackluster (http://www.unionhockeyblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/next-years-schedule.html).
Agreed. They'd best hope that Merrimack continues to be good and that LSSU doesn't return to sucking egregiously.
I'm a bit disappointed for Penn State that they couldn't get a bit more bling to visit their barn. Quite a lackluster—to overuse a word—first season in D-I, if you ask me.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinUnion's OOC schedule is lackluster (http://www.unionhockeyblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/next-years-schedule.html). They've set up a schedule that they will all but need to win the Whitelaw to get into the NCAA Tournament. Their fans and bloggers are blissfully ignorant of that fact.
Running their OOC (or close) and the Cleary Spitoon (even with a few losses) would be enough, too. KRACH might not be impressed, but the PWR would be kinder.
For those bored at work and needing a diversion. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/steve_rushin/05/23/sports.gods/index.html?xid=cnnbin)
I learned today that Quinnipiac fans (or at least some of them) begin counting down from 10 at 4:30 left in each period to 4:20.
Quote from: jtn27I learned today that Quinnipiac fans (or at least some of them) begin counting down from 10 at 4:30 left in each period to 4:20.
I am willing to bet that they stole it from Brown.
We spent the Memorial Day weekend in Lake Placid and Friday night in a sports bar next to the rink watching the Devils-Rangers final game. The owner says he and a lot of people would love to see the ECACs back in LP (naturally; what else is going on then other then watching snow turn to mud?) and that the LP business assn doens't have its act together and that might be hurting LP support for a bid (what business owner ever thinks a business assn is well run?). I noticed a couple new or renewed hotels, even more if you count ones like the Courtyard Marriott up since the last ECAC LP tournament. Once again on a prime weekend, most have vacancy signs hung out. I think the best thing going for Lake Placid, as Adam noted, is that it's the one rink and town in our region with some sense of history. Lake Placid, Albany, and metro NYC are all okay for the next ECAC site.
I missed this article about the senior awards banquet. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/5/22/GEN_0522123714.aspx?path=mhockey) This thread seems as good as any to post it on.
I think this classifies as an entirely generic and possibly random off-season question.
I know that there is the panorama entitled Anthem available on the main eLynah page. However, I graduated after the recent renovations, so the picture from 2004 does not resemble what Lynah looked like while I was a student nor what it looks like currently. I was wondering if anyone knows if any similar high quality images/prints exist of Lynah that I could obtain or purchase.
I don't know if there is a similar but more recent picture, but I do know that Anthem looks even better in print than it does in digital form and you really should get a copy.
Quote from: Josh '99I don't know if there is a similar but more recent picture, but I do know that Anthem looks even better in print than it does in digital form and you really should get a copy.
I will have to get a copy. Maybe my request was a little odd, but the picture is great even if it is not exactly what I experienced during my time there.
I've certainly given serious thought to doing a new version. After I did that one, I vowed never to do it again because it was north of 60 hours of work to stitch the images together and clean up the edges, not to mention all the test prints. However, the tools (and my gear) have gotten a lot better so it would be far less painful. I'd like to also choose a less auspicious game ;). So if you feel like waiting, I'll make an effort to do a new one next season.
Quote from: CowbellGuyI've certainly given serious thought to doing a new version. After I did that one, I vowed never to do it again because it was north of 60 hours of work to stitch the images together and clean up the edges, not to mention all the test prints. However, the tools (and my gear) have gotten a lot better so it would be far less painful. I'd like to also choose a less auspicious game ;). So if you feel like waiting, I'll make an effort to do a new one next season.
Thanks for everything, Age.
Latest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
Quote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
Quote from: CowbellGuyI've certainly given serious thought to doing a new version. After I did that one, I vowed never to do it again because it was north of 60 hours of work to stitch the images together and clean up the edges, not to mention all the test prints. However, the tools (and my gear) have gotten a lot better so it would be far less painful. I'd like to also choose a less auspicious game ;). So if you feel like waiting, I'll make an effort to do a new one next season.
:)Thanks! I have no problem with waiting. I was thinking long-term for something that I can keep and display proudly at my place. Any game you have in mind?
Quote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
My favorites include:
Quote from: Jim ConnellyThe committee will consider allowing goals that were scored as the defensive team dislodges the net. When Michigan State played Union in the NCAA regional tournament, an apparent Spartans goal was reviewed and disallowed when the officials determined the net, as the puck entered, was slightly raised off its pegs by a Union defender.
and
Quote from: Jim ConnellyAnother change would be to the criteria used for instant replay, particularly when it comes to the play being offside immediately as the goal is scored. Last season, Union scored an empty-net goal from center ice in the NCAA Northeast Regional final against Massachusetts-Lowell while a Dutchmen attacker was still in the attacking zone.
Despite clear evidence on video that the play was offside, current replay criteria does not allow the official to review whether a play is onside when the goal is scored.
It looks like Union's Frozen Four would have never been had it occurred but a year later.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
Whatever it takes, short of shootouts, cut down on the ties. The 5 min OT is just a bad idea. The two teams seem to spend 5 minutes trying not to lose. Bullshit. They should finding a way to win. That's the nature of sports!!
Quote from: rediceQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
Whatever it takes, short of shootouts, cut down on the ties. The 5 min OT is just a bad idea. The two teams seem to spend 5 minutes trying not to lose. Bullshit. They should finding a way to win. That's the nature of sports!!
It's all about incentives. If there is incentive to sit back and be careful that's what rational teams will do.
I'm with Rita though. I have no problem with ties. What I have a problem with is artificial rules intended to force a tiebreak. The reason shootouts are bad (IMNSHO) is that it turns a hockey game into a skills contest. 4 on 4 overtime is less bad but it turns the game into what amounts to a special teams contest.
If ties are such an issue I'd be in favor of going to 10 minute overtimes. An extra five minutes of ice time isn't going to kill anyone and then at least you're not changing the way the game is played on the ice, just playing longer.
If shootouts and 4x4 OT are good ideas ask yourself why the NHL doesn't use them in the playoffs.
Quote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
I love sudden death OT in lax. I see where you are coming from - and I'd think sudden death in basketball would be stupid for the same reason - but I can't get my mind to apply it to lacrosse.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
I love sudden death OT in lax. I see where you are coming from - and I'd think sudden death in basketball would be stupid for the same reason - but I can't get my mind to apply it to lacrosse.
Try thinking about it this way: since half of shots go in, and teams generate numerous shots per turnover, sudden death reduces OT lacrosse to a skills competition between face-off specialists. Bleah.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
I love sudden death OT in lax. I see where you are coming from - and I'd think sudden death in basketball would be stupid for the same reason - but I can't get my mind to apply it to lacrosse.
For many years college lacrosse OT consisted of two four-minute periods, with a change of goal in between. Cornell won the 1976 championship game by scoring the last four OT goals after Maryland scored the first. Some of us who grew up watching lacrosse played with that very sensible OT procedure "can't get our minds" around the current crap shoot.
Quote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I agree. If both teams have the same amount of goals after 65 minutes, neither team deserves to win. Nor lose.
Quote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: ugarteQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
I love sudden death OT in lax. I see where you are coming from - and I'd think sudden death in basketball would be stupid for the same reason - but I can't get my mind to apply it to lacrosse.
For many years college lacrosse OT consisted of two four-minute periods, with a change of goal in between. Cornell won the 1976 championship game by scoring the last four OT goals after Maryland scored the first. Some of us who grew up watching lacrosse played with that very sensible OT procedure "can't get our minds" around the current crap shoot.
I'm not saying it isn't sensible or that I'd oppose a change. I started watching lax in the sudden death era and it just doesn't seem that bad to me. Hell, we won the faceoff in the final against Syracuse IIRC.
Quote from: KeithKQuote from: rediceQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
Whatever it takes, short of shootouts, cut down on the ties. The 5 min OT is just a bad idea. The two teams seem to spend 5 minutes trying not to lose. Bullshit. They should finding a way to win. That's the nature of sports!!
It's all about incentives. If there is incentive to sit back and be careful that's what rational teams will do.
I'm with Rita though. I have no problem with ties. What I have a problem with is artificial rules intended to force a tiebreak. The reason shootouts are bad (IMNSHO) is that it turns a hockey game into a skills contest. 4 on 4 overtime is less bad but it turns the game into what amounts to a special teams contest.
If ties are such an issue I'd be in favor of going to 10 minute overtimes. An extra five minutes of ice time isn't going to kill anyone and then at least you're not changing the way the game is played on the ice, just playing longer.
If shootouts and 4x4 OT are good ideas ask yourself why the NHL doesn't use them in the playoffs.
Thanks Keith, I kind of thought you'd be with me on this and suspected Al would be too. ;-)
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
Quote from: css228But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
And adds 10+ minutes to the length of the game. Non-sudden death non-tv OT games would run 2:40 probably, which I don't think anyone is keen on seeing on a regular basis.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: css228But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
And adds 10+ minutes to the length of the game. Non-sudden death non-tv OT games would run 2:40 probably, which I don't think anyone is keen on seeing on a regular basis.
I was thinking of one sudden-death 20-minute OT period.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
"a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing" would make a lot of sense..
For me, if we can't make any other change, stop the 5-minute overtime nonsense. If a tie after 65 minutes is acceptable, Then grant them the tie after 60 minutes and sent everyone home earlier.
Not many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
Quote from: rediceQuote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
"a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing" would make a lot of sense..
For me, if we can't make any other change, stop the 5-minute overtime nonsense. If a tie after 65 minutes is acceptable, Then grant them the tie after 60 minutes and sent everyone home earlier.
Not many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
Because then teams would just revert to playing those 5 minutes of not-to-lose-hockey during the last 5 minutes of regulation. At least with the 5 min OT, you get 60 minutes of good hockey first.
Quote from: rediceNot many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
I'm curious whether the numbers actually back this up. I arbitrarily chose one extremely small sample, the 2011-12 Cornell season (25th nationally in scoring offense, 11th in scoring defense), and found that 11 games went into OT (not counting the 2OT QF game vs. Dartmouth or the Michigan game, even though it ended 3:35 into OT) and found that 7 ended in ties. Then I wondered whether that might be a result of the Schafer defense-first philosophy, so I looked at the 2011-12 BU season (4th nationally in scoring offense, 34th in scoring defense) and found that 8 games went into OT (not counting two 2OT playoff games vs. UNH) and only one ended in a tie. (BU also tied the USA U18 team, but that doesn't really count.) Two extremely small samples are still extremely small, of course, but it's enough to make me wonder whether maybe this group of people is predisposed to think teams are playing OT not to lose, and not many ties are being broken as a result, because of the specific hockey that we've watched.
To put it another way, we're hardly unique in observing that teams are playing not to lose in OT, but maybe we feel the effects of that style more acutely because the team we watch is
effective at playing not to lose?
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: rediceNot many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
I'm curious whether the numbers actually back this up. I arbitrarily chose one extremely small sample, the 2011-12 Cornell season (25th nationally in scoring offense, 11th in scoring defense), and found that 11 games went into OT (not counting the 2OT QF game vs. Dartmouth or the Michigan game, even though it ended 3:35 into OT) and found that 7 ended in ties. Then I wondered whether that might be a result of the Schafer defense-first philosophy, so I looked at the 2011-12 BU season (4th nationally in scoring offense, 34th in scoring defense) and found that 8 games went into OT (not counting two 2OT playoff games vs. UNH) and only one ended in a tie. (BU also tied the USA U18 team, but that doesn't really count.) Two extremely small samples are still extremely small, of course, but it's enough to make me wonder whether maybe this group of people is predisposed to think teams are playing OT not to lose, and not many ties are being broken as a result, because of the specific hockey that we've watched.
To put it another way, we're hardly unique in observing that teams are playing not to lose in OT, but maybe we feel the effects of that style more acutely because the team we watch is effective at playing not to lose?
Point taken.... Is that supposed to make me favor ties??? ;-)
Quote from: rediceQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: rediceNot many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
I'm curious whether the numbers actually back this up. I arbitrarily chose one extremely small sample, the 2011-12 Cornell season (25th nationally in scoring offense, 11th in scoring defense), and found that 11 games went into OT (not counting the 2OT QF game vs. Dartmouth or the Michigan game, even though it ended 3:35 into OT) and found that 7 ended in ties. Then I wondered whether that might be a result of the Schafer defense-first philosophy, so I looked at the 2011-12 BU season (4th nationally in scoring offense, 34th in scoring defense) and found that 8 games went into OT (not counting two 2OT playoff games vs. UNH) and only one ended in a tie. (BU also tied the USA U18 team, but that doesn't really count.) Two extremely small samples are still extremely small, of course, but it's enough to make me wonder whether maybe this group of people is predisposed to think teams are playing OT not to lose, and not many ties are being broken as a result, because of the specific hockey that we've watched.
To put it another way, we're hardly unique in observing that teams are playing not to lose in OT, but maybe we feel the effects of that style more acutely because the team we watch is effective at playing not to lose?
Point taken.... Is that supposed to make me favor ties??? ;-)
Frankly, I'm not sure it matters to anyone whether you favor ties or not. The question is: Why should it be a problem if two teams play 65 minutes of hockey and the game ends in a deserved tie? Why must one team have to win and the other lose?
Football worked that way for a hundred years and everyone seemed to survive. Now we have games decided through an arcane, contrived process (college) or a blatantly unfair process (NFL). What's the point, other than in elimination playoffs?
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
I'm with you, Rita. Even more so in lacrosse, where the ridiculous sudden-death resolution is simply dumb. In a sport where 20 scores is the norm and half the shots on goal go in, it's absurd to decide it on the first OT goal. Play eight or ten minutes, and most goals wins.
I love sudden death OT in lax. I see where you are coming from - and I'd think sudden death in basketball would be stupid for the same reason - but I can't get my mind to apply it to lacrosse.
In lacrosse, next-team-to-score-wins injects too much randomness into the outcome. In the NCAA title game in 1976, Cornell gave up the first goal in OT and scored the next four for a 16-13 win. Then there's the Syracuse game.
Quote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Let's colorize "Knute Rockne: All American" and do a voiceover so Ronald Reagan-as-George-Gipp on his deathbed says, "Some time, Rock, when the team is up against it, when things are wrong and the breaks are beating the boys, ask them to go in there with all they've got and tie just one for the Gipper."
Quote from: rediceQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: rediceNot many ties are being broken during these 5-miunute OT's. Both teams are playing to NOT lose. Which is boring hockey to watch. Let's cut out the nonsense & go home!!
I'm curious whether the numbers actually back this up. I arbitrarily chose one extremely small sample, the 2011-12 Cornell season (25th nationally in scoring offense, 11th in scoring defense), and found that 11 games went into OT (not counting the 2OT QF game vs. Dartmouth or the Michigan game, even though it ended 3:35 into OT) and found that 7 ended in ties. Then I wondered whether that might be a result of the Schafer defense-first philosophy, so I looked at the 2011-12 BU season (4th nationally in scoring offense, 34th in scoring defense) and found that 8 games went into OT (not counting two 2OT playoff games vs. UNH) and only one ended in a tie. (BU also tied the USA U18 team, but that doesn't really count.) Two extremely small samples are still extremely small, of course, but it's enough to make me wonder whether maybe this group of people is predisposed to think teams are playing OT not to lose, and not many ties are being broken as a result, because of the specific hockey that we've watched.
To put it another way, we're hardly unique in observing that teams are playing not to lose in OT, but maybe we feel the effects of that style more acutely because the team we watch is effective at playing not to lose?
Point taken.... Is that supposed to make me favor ties??? ;-)
No, I'm just saying that maybe the problem seems worse to us because of it.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Let's colorize "Knute Rockne: All American" and do a voiceover so Ronald Reagan-as-George-Gipp on his deathbed says, "Some time, Rock, when the team is up against it, when things are wrong and the breaks are beating the boys, ask them to go in there with all they've got and tie just one for the Gipper."
::bang::
Quote from: css228Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
Are you sure of that? I've not seen stats and I can come up with reasons why choppy ice might have more goals. I'm not saying you're wrong, just wonder if there are any stats.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: css228Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
Are you sure of that? I've not seen stats and I can come up with reasons why choppy ice might have more goals. I'm not saying you're wrong, just wonder if there are any stats.
I thought of that, too. More random things can happen to deflect the puck past the goalie. But on the way up ice to get in position to score, a smoother ice surface favors the attacking team getting the puck moved around so it can take a shot on goal.
Quote from: KeithKIf shootouts and 4x4 OT are good ideas ask yourself why the NHL doesn't use them in the playoffs.
They're good enough for RS games in the NHL and they might be good for college hockey, too. 4x4 opens up the ice and might put a team of big lugs ("defense oriented"?) at a disadvantage.
Sports Illustrated wrote on how players disliked the idea of shootouts to settle NHL RS games and now when an OT game goes to a shootout, they hustle around a TV to see the shootout. I've I've been snoozing through an NHL game or watching it out of the corner of my eye, I settle in for the five-minute OT knowing 4x4 gives a bit more chance for a goal, and I'm riveted by the shootout.
Quote from: billhowardThey're good enough for RS games in the NHL and they might be good for college hockey, too. 4x4 opens up the ice and might put a team of big lugs ("defense oriented"?) at a disadvantage.
The NHL overtime and shootout rules are gimmicks designed to get more highlights on SportsCenter. Play normal hockey for 60 minutes, if the scores are level, it's a tie.
Quote from: billhowardSports Illustrated wrote on how players disliked the idea of shootouts to settle NHL RS games and now when an OT game goes to a shootout, they hustle around a TV to see the shootout.
Skills competitions are interesting, and people find them fun to watch, but that doesn't mean they're a good way of settling the question of which team played better hockey. If you announced that two hockey teams were about to settle a tie game with bare-fisted, "Fight Club"-style boxing, I'm sure you'd get a ton of viewers, but it's still an idiotic way of determining who should move up in the standings.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: css228Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: css228Quote from: BenQuote from: RitaQuote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaLatest from USCHO on possible rules changes. (http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/05/visors-overtime-go-under-microscope-in-rules-committee-meetings/)
The NCAA wants fewer tie games but doesn't want to go to 4x4 in OT or have shootouts. So the only thing left is 10- or 20-minute OTs ... and more wear on players. If Cornell is a defense-minded team, then playing 4x4 in OT would seem like playing on an Olympic sheet and not be to our style.
What is wrong with a hard fought tie in a regular season game? I'm okay with the current 5 minute (5 v 5) sudden death OT period. I'm probably one of the few people (dinosaurs?) that don't mind ties. What is so awful about ties anyway?
Totally agree. There's an odd obsession with manufacturing results in North American (yup, I went there) sports. Teams can be evenly matched. I'd like to see the end of sudden death overtime as well, because it can reduce games to random bounces of the puck or ball.
Honestly though, a ten minute overtime where the ice is actually fresh probably wouldnt be a bad thing.
But I think the point of 10 minute overtimes is that they're the longest you can do without resurfacing first. (IIRC; it's been a while since I've seen one now that shootouts are so common.) I wouldn't mind a single 20-minute OT after resurfacing, but it would lead to any OT game taking significantly longer. Of course, now that non-televised games only last 2:10...
But if they're so against ties, resurfacing the ice makes goals more likely.
Are you sure of that? I've not seen stats and I can come up with reasons why choppy ice might have more goals. I'm not saying you're wrong, just wonder if there are any stats.
I don't have stats to back it up, but my intuition says that while the effects in even strength play (more difficult to make crisp passes and pucks that won't sit flat) might equally effect the offense and the defense, on the power play, i think bad ice would disproportionately affect the offense, by making goal scoring chances more difficult. I've been looking for a study on this for quite a while and can't seem to find one.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardSports Illustrated wrote on how players disliked the idea of shootouts to settle NHL RS games and now when an OT game goes to a shootout, they hustle around a TV to see the shootout.
Skills competitions are interesting, and people find them fun to watch, but that doesn't mean they're a good way of settling the question of which team played better hockey. If you announced that two hockey teams were about to settle a tie game with bare-fisted, "Fight Club"-style boxing, I'm sure you'd get a ton of viewers, but it's still an idiotic way of determining who should move up in the standings.
Sometimes reducing the argument to the absurd proves a point but it doesn't work so well here. "[Pros] Hustle around the TV to see the shootout" means this is something that draws in the players themselves. Cornell might have to change its recruiting mix. We could still have a cadre of slow, lumbering ("defense-oriented" ) players so long as four or five of them can place the puck accurately. And if we're known for goaltending, then Cornell has an advantage in shootouts.
When I see Cornell go to a 5-minute OT now, I suspecting nothing much will happen in 5 minutes to change the score.
[enough quoting of quoted quotes]
There must be stats on goals scored per minute of the period. Each minute of a 20-minute period should have 5% of the goals scored. If the scoring falls off late in the period, it could be the choppy ice we believe hurts offense more than defense. It might also be tired players make mistakes later in the period but, by the same logic as the choppy ice, unless the tired offense has the precision to get into scoring position, the tired defender or choppy ice doesn't come into play affecting shots the sneak by the goalie. The first minute probably has fewer goals scored because the first 5-10 seconds starts at center ice and it takes 5-15 seconds to set up most scoring chances. The last has more goals if you count EAGs and ENGs.
[add] Actually, there is some research on scoring vs. time into the period from Journal of Qualitative Analysis in sports. It seems to say NHL goal scoring is random (wait, is "random" a word that has a really specific meaning to statistics freaks?) or evenly distributed except in the first and last minute. http://hockeyanalytics.com/Research_files/Interarrival%20Times%20of%20Goals%20in%20Ice%20Hockey.pdf But I thought when I looked at the small charts about three pages in, showing goals by minute, there did seem to be a downward slope to the bars from minute 2 to minute 19. There also seemed to be more second-period goals. The author noted there are almost no power play goals in the first minute of the first period and hypothesized that you can't have a PPG until you have a penalty called. Slick deduction. The author is associated with Harvard. Is there an emoticon for invalid-on-its-face?
There's nothing wrong with ties. There is something wrong with artificially forcing their resolution in the name of... what? Short attention spans? Intolerance of ambiguity?
5 minutes is a workable compromise between the only two purely "rational" solutions: no overtime at all or playing every game to resolution. If you really can't handle ties, watch basketball.
Quote from: TrotskyThere's nothing wrong with ties. There is something wrong with artificially forcing their resolution in the name of... what? Short attention spans? Intolerance of ambiguity?
5 minutes is a workable compromise between the only two purely "rational" solutions: no overtime at all or playing every game to resolution. If you really can't handle ties, watch basketball.
There's the opposite: Hockey gets too exciting, switch allegiances to curling.
Quote from: TrotskyThere's nothing wrong with ties. There is something wrong with artificially forcing their resolution in the name of... what? Short attention spans? Intolerance of ambiguity?
5 minutes is a workable compromise between the only two purely "rational" solutions: no overtime at all or playing every game to resolution. If you really can't handle ties, watch basketball.
Remember now, Al has already pointed out that he's "not sure it matters to anyone whether you favor ties or not." So, your first statement must be considered irrelevant.
But, I do like your workable compromise....Either of your suggestions would work for me. The 5 minute OT's, leading to the inevitable tie is just a ridiculous exercise. Just call it a tie after 60 minutes and send everyone home.
I am in the minority regarding the tie/OT/shootout debate, but it has been reported (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/) that tomorrow the NCAA will announce that college hockey programs will transition to a half shield over two years.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am in the minority regarding the tie/OT/shootout debate, but it has been reported (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/) that tomorrow the NCAA will announce that college hockey programs will transition to a half shield over two years.
I guess that it may not be accurate (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/).
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am in the minority regarding the tie/OT/shootout debate, but it has been reported (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/) that tomorrow the NCAA will announce that college hockey programs will transition to a half shield over two years.
I guess that it may not be accurate (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/).
I thought half-shields were never being considered and they were thinking about 3/4 shields
Quote from: billhoward[enough quoting of quoted quotes]
I'm sorry, what?
Quote[add] something something That entire paragraph about Qualitative Analysis blah blah blah
Ah. Yeah. That. [add] should be automatically appended to a lot of things.
I'm fine with ties. The end.
Quote from: css228Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am in the minority regarding the tie/OT/shootout debate, but it has been reported (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/) that tomorrow the NCAA will announce that college hockey programs will transition to a half shield over two years.
I guess that it may not be accurate (http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/07/report-ncaa-hockey-to-transition-from-cages-to-visors/).
I thought half-shields were never being considered and they were thinking about 3/4 shields
That was my understanding too. I guess will we see tomorrow.
Also, Cornell Athletics responded to a comment of mine on Facebook that either news about the anticipated game against Michigan at MSG or Cornell's entire 2012-13 schedule will be announced "early next week at the latest."
Anything less than 13/16th shields is too dangerous.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardSports Illustrated wrote on how players disliked the idea of shootouts to settle NHL RS games and now when an OT game goes to a shootout, they hustle around a TV to see the shootout.
Skills competitions are interesting, and people find them fun to watch, but that doesn't mean they're a good way of settling the question of which team played better hockey. If you announced that two hockey teams were about to settle a tie game with bare-fisted, "Fight Club"-style boxing, I'm sure you'd get a ton of viewers, but it's still an idiotic way of determining who should move up in the standings.
Sometimes reducing the argument to the absurd proves a point but it doesn't work so well here. "[Pros] Hustle around the TV to see the shootout" means this is something that draws in the players themselves.
I knew what it meant, Bill. Pros are just as prone to being drawn to watch spectacle as fans. The fact that they gather around to watch the shootout still doesn't mean they think it's a good way to resolve a hockey game. I think my post worked just fine here, but thanks for your concern.
I am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in
all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
Playing sound defense is also a skill. This is essentially deciding the outcome of a game by playing an entirely different game. Baseball doesn't decide tie games after 9 innings by pulling the players off the field and staging a HR derby. That's essentially what the shootout is.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
It's "legitimate" because the governing body of the sport has installed it as the current method of deciding tie games in which overtime has not provided a resolution. Legitimacy does not preclude absurdity.
Hey, maybe when it comes time for medical students to take their board exams, they should be judged entirely on their skills in the differential diagnosis of syncope, and nothing else.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinSo, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism?
Because there is a choice (by the manager or the player) in whether to make the steal attempt. And the game doesn't entirely hinge on the outcome. Maybe they don't steal and the batter gets a hit. Maybe the runner is out but the batter hits a home run on the next pitch.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
Please. Don't respond to this any more. It is sophistry and not particularly well argued.
Quote from: nyc94Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinSo, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism?
Because there is a choice (by the manager or the player) in whether to make the steal attempt. And the game doesn't entirely hinge on the outcome. Maybe they don't steal and the batter gets a hit. Maybe the runner is out but the batter hits a home run on the next pitch.
In the bottom of the 9th, the runner got into position to steal home during the course of play, and with a runner on 3rd, stealing home is a legitimate option available to the team on offense.
Using it in extra innings/tie-breaking situations would require you to artificially set up a scenario to put the "stealing home skills" to the test, like ok, top of the 10th, we are going to give each team a runner at 3rd and 3 outs to get him to score. Kind of like college football's ot system in getting the ball at the 25 yd line and having 4 downs to score or advance 10 yds. Bogus.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
Please. Don't respond to this any more. It is sophistry and not particularly well argued.
Yes, but it's so damned funny and almost inspired me to inquire: "With respect to ties, how could you possibly be fine with them but find them dissatisfying?". I just LOL'ed and forgot about it......
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinAlso, the NCHC was supposed to make some "big announcement" yesterday. I have not been able to find any reports of their announcement.
NCHC tournament to be held at the Target Center.
http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/08/report-target-center-to-host-nchc-postseason-tournament/
Quote from: rediceQuote from: ugarteQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
Please. Don't respond to this any more. It is sophistry and not particularly well argued.
Yes, but it's so damned funny and almost inspired me to inquire: "With respect to ties, how could you possibly be fine with them but find them dissatisfying?". I just LOL'ed and forgot about it......
I think federal litigation in close cases should be resolved by which firm writes more comprehensible timesheets.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: rediceQuote from: ugarteQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinI am glad that so many people are alarmed about a shootout deciding a hockey game based upon a skills competition. It is unthinkable to desire the team with the more skilled players to win a sporting event. How outlandish an idea!
It is outlandish, because scoring on penalty shots is an infinitesimally small portion of the skills required of players and teams to win hockey games. In fact, if not for the current shootout-to-resolve-ties system, you'd almost never see a penalty shot - just like in college hockey right now.
Do you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
My qualm is not with the argument that shootouts are not the best way to solve the issue but the illogic of an argument that a sporting event cannot be resolved legitimately with what amounts to a skills competition because sports at their fundamental essence are nothing more than skills competition.
So, continuing with your baseball analogy, why is it any more legitimate for the game to be decided in the bottom of the ninth with a player stealing home than using that as a tie-breaking mechanism? Either way, the same set of skills will have decided the game. Those skills belong to an individual just as readily in your hypothetical overtime regime as they do during regulation. Your distinction is artificial.
It is absurd to claim that a sporting event being decided by a skills competition is illegitimate.
I am fine with ties, even though I find them dissatisfying. I am fine with even admitting that shootouts are not the best way to resolve competitions. However, the rationale that individual skills between a player one-on-one against the goaltender is somehow an illegitimate means to resolve a competition is nonsensical. Let's disallow all goals on breakaways! Better yet, let's penalize any team that leans upon one player too much, say a goaltender, because well, if the team does not support him well enough the game has devolved to a skills competition of the goaltender against the entire team.
It's true that if resolution must be achieved allowing both teams to continue to play until one teams wins is most just. However, sports are skills competitions. That is why we watch them. Situations change which skills are best suited to achieve a result. Who is to say that after 65 minutes a transition to a shootout is not legitimate? Various other scenarios, 4-on-4, etc. favor certain skills sets, but no one has qualms with them during regulation if they result when, much like shootouts, the play and conduct of the teams results in the situations.
Please. Don't respond to this any more. It is sophistry and not particularly well argued.
Yes, but it's so damned funny and almost inspired me to inquire: "With respect to ties, how could you possibly be fine with them but find them dissatisfying?". I just LOL'ed and forgot about it......
I think federal litigation in close cases should be resolved by which firm writes more comprehensible timesheets.
As long as state court disputes can still use the time honored coin flip.
Daily Sun article.(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/martytoo/ECACBan0001.jpg)
How long did that ban last? A year? A few games?
Quote from: ugarteHow long did that ban last? A year? A few games?
I think I'll let someone else from that era answer.
Elaborate hoax if I remember correctly!!!
Quote from: Larry72Elaborate hoax if I remember correctly!!!
Exactly. There were I think two issues per year with satirical hoax stories. This one coincided with IFC Fall Weekend - at least that is what I remember. Spring weekend spawned a similar Sun.
I was once fooled in the other direction. On a Friday that began a less important weekend there was an article about the campus police spying on the students during anti-war demonstrations. I incorrectly thought that was satire. ::blush::
Quote from: RichHQuote from: billhoward[enough quoting of quoted quotes]
I'm sorry, what?
Quote[add] something something That entire paragraph about Qualitative Analysis blah blah blah
Ah. Yeah. That. [add] should be automatically appended to a lot of things.
I'm fine with ties. The end.
In most instances I have no problem with ties.
There are exceptions:
(http://www.ivysport.com/img-product/2592_large.jpg)
Quote from: BeeeejDo you think a baseball game tied after nine innings should be decided by alternating attempts to steal home or triple play opportunities? Or should it be decided by continuing to play the game, so that the team that demonstrates superior abilities in all or most aspects of the game on that particular day ends up the winner?
The best way to end a ballgame. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5CXzPw6qco)
Quote from: Larry72Elaborate hoax if I remember correctly!!!
Here's how good the hoax was: I was SURE it was a hoax. I quickly googled to find the answer and the Cornell-Harvard rivalry wikipedia page memorializes the hoax as if it happened. I shrugged my shoulders and asked the question here EVEN THOUGH it was clear from the page that Ellenbas kept playing, so it couldn't have been true.
That's some quality hoaxin'.
CHN's take on rules changes reviewed here. (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/06/08_rules_committee_holds_off.php) Cages remain.
Quote from: College Hockey NewsFull cages were implemented in 1978 as a way to protect eyes and other serious facial injuries. It was not originally meant to protect against concussions, which weren't as prevalent at the time.
Perhaps concussions were more prevalent (less-protective helmets) and they weren't as well recognized.
Ahh, so that's what we're supposed to do with a 5 minute PP in an important playoff game.
Quote from: ugartethe Cornell-Harvard rivalry wikipedia page memorializes the hoax as if it happened.
Someone should fix that.
Quote from: French RageAhh, so that's what we're supposed to do with a 5 minute PP in an important playoff game.
yes... yes it is...
Quote from: nyc94Quote from: ugartethe Cornell-Harvard rivalry wikipedia page memorializes the hoax as if it happened.
Someone should fix that.
You're kidding, right? This is perfect.
Quote from: French RageAhh, so that's what we're supposed to do with a 5 minute PP in an important playoff game.
Dustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: French RageAhh, so that's what we're supposed to do with a 5 minute PP in an important playoff game.
Dustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
Maybe more along the lines of "Shoot the f**king puck!". Only without the asterisks.
Quote from: ugarteDustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
I suspect it will be (http://deadspin.com/5917627/dustin-brown-sums-up-joy-of-winning-stanley-cup-with-big-ol-f+bomb-on-live-tv?tag=losangeleskings).
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteDustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
I suspect it will be (http://deadspin.com/5917627/dustin-brown-sums-up-joy-of-winning-stanley-cup-with-big-ol-f+bomb-on-live-tv?tag=losangeleskings).
Utley's was better.
I was hoping for a Devils' Stanley Cup, Brodeur retires in glory, and Parise maybe gets re-signed. Instead, the sum of the season is that a team that almost didn't make the playoffs loses to a team that almost didn't make the playoffs ... and Devils fans now have their own Bill Buckner.
Quote from: billhowardI was hoping for a Devils' Stanley Cup, Brodeur retires in glory, and Parise maybe gets re-signed. Instead, the sum of the season is that a team that almost didn't make the playoffs loses to a team that almost didn't make the playoffs ... and Devils fans now have their own Bill Buckner.
I think that's a gross overstatement. I know that having the Kings score three goals on them in a four-minute span might have taken a certain amount of wind out of the Devils' sails, but the Kings still scored three other times last night, to the Devils' one goal total. I don't think the major was the only difference in last night's game, and I don't think Bernier is going to be nearly as reviled as Buckner has been. I guess time will tell.
(Granted, those who actually remember what happened in game 6 in 1986 also know that Bill Buckner making that play merely would've ended the inning with the score tied, not ended the game with a Red Sox win - and that before Kevin Mitchell tied the score on Bob Stanley's wild pitch, there were about a dozen separate pitches on which the Sox could have won the World Series outright - so Buckner's not the best guy to blame either, he was just the most visible and obvious scapegoat.)
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardI was hoping for a Devils' Stanley Cup, Brodeur retires in glory, and Parise maybe gets re-signed. Instead, the sum of the season is that a team that almost didn't make the playoffs loses to a team that almost didn't make the playoffs ... and Devils fans now have their own Bill Buckner.
I think that's a gross overstatement. I know that having the Kings score three goals on them in a four-minute span might have taken a certain amount of wind out of the Devils' sails, but the Kings still scored three other times last night, to the Devils' one goal total. I don't think the major was the only difference in last night's game, and I don't think Bernier is going to be nearly as reviled as Buckner has been. I guess time will tell.
But at least one of those 3 additional goals can probably be partially blamed on Bernier too. The 5th goal was an empty netter with 3:45 to go. If the Devils weren't down 3 goals at that point in the game, Brodeur probably still would have been in the net. And then on the 6th goal, to me it looked like the Devils had just given up. If we assume other than the 3 goals on the power play and the empty netter, everything would have happened the same way (yes I know that's a bit of a ridiculous assumption, but let's go with it for a minute), it would have been 1-1 with just a few minutes left in the game. Whether or not the Devils gave up on that last goal or not, it's still a close game (and if they did give up, they certainly wouldn't have with the game tied). So really Bernier takes more blame than it would initially appear. He very well could wind up as a Buckner figure.
I'm sure you'll see Buckner allusions from Devils fans who want a scapegoat and something to make the series memorable. Meanwhile in attempt at making the Devils the victims of uncalled LA infractions, the Newark Star-Ledger site is asking fans to vote on Which was the worst officiating moment of Game Six? (http://www.nj.com/devils/index.ssf/2012/06/devils_hot_topic_which_was_the.html). See, if the refs had called LA for maybe-boarding five seconds before Bernier's Andy Warhol moment, then the Devils wouldn't have gone into a funk, given up three goals, hit the crossbar when the penalty was over, and so really it wasn't their fault they lost. We're all victims here.
And we're almost at the point where the entire population that knows the name Bill Buckner believes he booted the ball in the bottom of the ninth of Game 7 that let the winning run score.
What a treat to have Mike Emrich calling the game. I think he said he'll be doing the Olympics, too. Water polo, I believe. Well, the kid has to start somewhere.
Quote from: billhowardAnd we're almost at the point where the entire population that knows the name Bill Buckner believes he booted the ball in the bottom of the ninth of Game 7 that let the winning run score.
I wonder, do more people believe that Bill Buckner let the winning run score in the bottom of the ninth in game seven, or that the U.S. victory over the U.S.S.R. in hockey in the 1980 Olympics won them the gold medal?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardAnd we're almost at the point where the entire population that knows the name Bill Buckner believes he booted the ball in the bottom of the ninth of Game 7 that let the winning run score.
I wonder, do more people believe that Bill Buckner let the winning run score in the bottom of the ninth in game seven, or that the U.S. victory over the U.S.S.R. in hockey in the 1980 Olympics won them the gold medal?
What about Ken Dryden leading the Cornell Big Red to its undefeated season? ::bolt::
Quote from: billhowardI'm sure you'll see Buckner allusions from Devils fans who want a scapegoat and something to make the series memorable. Meanwhile in attempt at making the Devils the victims of uncalled LA infractions, the Newark Star-Ledger site is asking fans to vote on Which was the worst officiating moment of Game Six? (http://www.nj.com/devils/index.ssf/2012/06/devils_hot_topic_which_was_the.html). See, if the refs had called LA for maybe-boarding five seconds before Bernier's Andy Warhol moment, then the Devils wouldn't have gone into a funk, given up three goals, hit the crossbar when the penalty was over, and so really it wasn't their fault they lost. We're all victims here.
The other thought I have on this issue - and then I'll leave it alone, as I have too much else to do - is that the Devils have won three Stanley Cups in the last twenty years. There's no "curse" that they were trying to overcome, no 78-year old drought in progress. I doubt the Devils' fans will give it nearly as much weight as the Red Sox's fans did.
Quote from: RitaQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardAnd we're almost at the point where the entire population that knows the name Bill Buckner believes he booted the ball in the bottom of the ninth of Game 7 that let the winning run score.
I wonder, do more people believe that Bill Buckner let the winning run score in the bottom of the ninth in game seven, or that the U.S. victory over the U.S.S.R. in hockey in the 1980 Olympics won them the gold medal?
What about Ken Dryden leading the Cornell Big Red to its undefeated season? ::bolt::
I was going to mention that, too, but there aren't nearly enough people who know about Cornell's undefeated season
at all to make it a contender with the other two.
Quote from: BeeeejThe other thought I have on this issue - and then I'll leave it alone, as I have too much else to do - is that the Devils have won three Stanley Cups in the last twenty years. There's no "curse" that they were trying to overcome, no 78-year old drought in progress. I doubt the Devils' fans will give it nearly as much weight as the Red Sox's fans did.
When someone posts something stupid, and they will, there's always time for a reply.
I don't feel bad about a team winning its first cup, or first title in a long-long time. It's part of
The Rule of Rooting When Your Team's OutRoot for the better team academically (the Ivy Rule).
Root for the team from your league, your region, your state.
Root for the team hasn't won in a long time.
Root for the team whose presence annoys the NCAA (e.g. Union being too small to be a proper D1 hockey power)
Root for teams with smoking hot cheerleaders (the Rule of SEC football schools)
Root for teams playing the team you can't stand
What else?
There is an exception to the Ivy Rule.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: BeeeejThe other thought I have on this issue - and then I'll leave it alone, as I have too much else to do - is that the Devils have won three Stanley Cups in the last twenty years. There's no "curse" that they were trying to overcome, no 78-year old drought in progress. I doubt the Devils' fans will give it nearly as much weight as the Red Sox's fans did.
When someone posts something stupid, and they will, there's always time for a reply.
I don't feel bad about a team winning its first cup, or first title in a long-long time. It's part of
The Rule of Rooting When Your Team's Out
Root for the better team academically (the Ivy Rule).
Root for the team from your league, your region, your state.
Root for the team hasn't won in a long time.
Root for the team whose presence annoys the NCAA (e.g. Union being too small to be a proper D1 hockey power)
Root for teams with smoking hot cheerleaders (the Rule of SEC football schools)
Root for teams playing the team you can't stand
What else?
There is an exception to the Ivy Rule.
These two contradict each other.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: billhowardAnd we're almost at the point where the entire population that knows the name Bill Buckner believes he booted the ball in the bottom of the ninth of Game 7 that let the winning run score.
I wonder, do more people believe that Bill Buckner let the winning run score in the bottom of the ninth in game seven, or that the U.S. victory over the U.S.S.R. in hockey in the 1980 Olympics won them the gold medal?
I like it on sites or shows where they correct people thinking that USSR was the gold medal game by saying that Finland was the gold medal game.
Quote from: billhowardRoot for teams playing the team you can't stand
With the exception of rooting for the Kings because I wanted Gagne and Hexy to get a cup, this pretty much dictates my rooting once my team is out.
Quote from: css228Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteDustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
I suspect it will be (http://deadspin.com/5917627/dustin-brown-sums-up-joy-of-winning-stanley-cup-with-big-ol-f+bomb-on-live-tv?tag=losangeleskings).
Utley's was better.
Meh. I prefer the spontaneous to the premeditated. But I'm biased, too.
Quote from: billhowardI'm sure you'll see Buckner allusions from Devils fans who want a scapegoat and something to make the series memorable.
I know a lot of Devils fans, and you're the only one who's making Bill Buckner comparisons. Maybe that's because neither the game situations (extra innings vs. first period) nor the historic scenarios (70-year drought vs. 3 titles in the last 20 years) were in any way comparable.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: css228Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteDustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
I suspect it will be (http://deadspin.com/5917627/dustin-brown-sums-up-joy-of-winning-stanley-cup-with-big-ol-f+bomb-on-live-tv?tag=losangeleskings).
Utley's was better.
Meh. I prefer the spontaneous to the premeditated. But I'm biased, too.
If Dustin Brown had the equivalent of a Jayson Werth (as much as I dislike him, probably Jeff Carter) sitting behind him and jumping up fists in the air when he said it I'd agree. Either way I love it when athletes curse on live TV out of pure exuberance.
So will Dustin be bringing the Cup to Ithaca this summer?
Quote from: Jordan 04So will Dustin be bringing the Cup to Ithaca this summer?
He said he would on Leno last night.
Quote from: css228Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: css228Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteDustin should come talk to the team when he's visiting family. Hopefully the advice will be better than "Shooooooooooooooooooooooooooot!"
I suspect it will be (http://deadspin.com/5917627/dustin-brown-sums-up-joy-of-winning-stanley-cup-with-big-ol-f+bomb-on-live-tv?tag=losangeleskings).
Utley's was better.
Meh. I prefer the spontaneous to the premeditated. But I'm biased, too.
If Dustin Brown had the equivalent of a Jayson Werth (as much as I dislike him, probably Jeff Carter) sitting behind him and jumping up fists in the air when he said it I'd agree. Either way I love it when athletes curse on live TV out of pure exuberance.
I agree, but then I'm also a firm believer in the George Carlin line of thinking that "bad words" are a silly concept.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: billhowardI'm sure you'll see Buckner allusions from Devils fans who want a scapegoat and something to make the series memorable.
I know a lot of Devils fans, and you're the only one who's making Bill Buckner comparisons. Maybe that's because neither the game situations (extra innings vs. first period) nor the historic scenarios (70-year drought vs. 3 titles in the last 20 years) were in any way comparable.
It was also a different sport, it happened on the road, etcetera. The common thread was that it was a monumental error and it was a turning point of the game and the outcome of the championship. Google, the lazy person's way to prove a point, shows 23,000 hits on "steve bernier bill buckner," so maybe it's not an isolated thought. Here's one Devils fan http://www.nj.com/devils/index.ssf/2012/06/politi_steve_bernier_will_fore.html:
Quote from: Steve Politi, Newark Star-LedgerWherever he goes, the replay will follow him [Bernier] the way Bill Buckner has forever watched that baseball bounce under his glove. He was charging down the ice 10 minutes into the game, sizing up Kings defenseman Rob Scuderi for a hit along the boards.
Quote from: Beeeej(Granted, those who actually remember what happened in game 6 in 1986 also know that Bill Buckner making that play merely would've ended the inning with the score tied, not ended the game with a Red Sox win - and that before Kevin Mitchell tied the score on Bob Stanley's wild pitch, there were about a dozen separate pitches on which the Sox could have won the World Series outright - so Buckner's not the best guy to blame either, he was just the most visible and obvious scapegoat.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-GgbP9C9Zk
Quote from: billhowardGoogle, the lazy person's way to prove a point, shows 23,000 hits on "steve bernier bill buckner," so maybe it's not an isolated thought.
Accounting for your authoring 22,000 of them, it's still pretty negligible.
This (http://www.gophersports.com/blog/2012/06/top-moments-of-2011-12-gophers-sweep-north-dakota.html) came across my twitter-feed earlier. Minnesota, like most B1G schools, invests a lot of time in media surrounding its programs. So, they've been counting down the top-ten goals of the last season. This led me to two ideas.
Why does not Cornell do something similar? It does not involve much time. The video edits and collection would take no more than half an hour. That is assuming the worst case scenario. I think it would be interesting to produce a series of these with Arthur Mintz. He narrated the Cornell-Providence Hockey 1979 Quarterfinal video, so it seems not outside the realm of possibilities.
The second idea was which goals would we include on such a list for the 2011-12 season for Cornell hockey. My rough idea of which goals I would put in the top ten are:
10. Gotovets's goal against Yale at Ingalls
9. D'Agostino's goals against Sucks at Bright
8. Miller's goal against Union at Lynah
7. McCarron's goal against Colgate in the ECAC Consolation Game
6. Jillson's goal against BU at Red Hot Hockey
5. Mowrey's goal against Ferris State in NCAA Regional Final
4. Craig's goal against Union at Lynah
3. Whitney's OT-winning goal against Dartmouth in ECAC Quarterfinal Game 1
2. McCarron's goal against Michigan in NCAA Regional Semifinal
1. Craig's OT-winning goal against Michigan in NCAA Regional Semifinal
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinWhy does not Cornell do something similar? It does not involve much time. The video edits and collection would take no more than half an hour. That is assuming the worst case scenario. I think it would be interesting to produce a series of these with Arthur Mintz. He narrated the Cornell-Providence Hockey 1979 Quarterfinal video, so it seems not outside the realm of possibilities.
It doesn't involve much of
your time. I suspect Minnesota has a slightly larger Sports Information staff than Cornell does.
Quote from: Tom LentoQuote from: Beeeej(Granted, those who actually remember what happened in game 6 in 1986 also know that Bill Buckner making that play merely would've ended the inning with the score tied, not ended the game with a Red Sox win - and that before Kevin Mitchell tied the score on Bob Stanley's wild pitch, there were about a dozen separate pitches on which the Sox could have won the World Series outright - so Buckner's not the best guy to blame either, he was just the most visible and obvious scapegoat.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-GgbP9C9Zk
Age, can you bring back the +1?
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinWhy does not Cornell do something similar? It does not involve much time. The video edits and collection would take no more than half an hour. That is assuming the worst case scenario. I think it would be interesting to produce a series of these with Arthur Mintz. He narrated the Cornell-Providence Hockey 1979 Quarterfinal video, so it seems not outside the realm of possibilities.
It doesn't involve much of your time. I suspect Minnesota has a slightly larger Sports Information staff than Cornell does.
Cornell U probably has better video editing skills than us duffers here. But if someone here did it, the intro would not be the Big Red Bear-head rotating, bobbing and weaving for 30 seconds.
We could do an April 1 video showing 10 Cornell breakaways as the player crosses the blue line, the view from the camera obscured by heads, the sound of the crowd erupting, and the Big Red Bear returning with "Goal!" overlaid.
Quote from: Tom LentoQuote from: Beeeej(Granted, those who actually remember what happened in game 6 in 1986 also know that Bill Buckner making that play merely would've ended the inning with the score tied, not ended the game with a Red Sox win - and that before Kevin Mitchell tied the score on Bob Stanley's wild pitch, there were about a dozen separate pitches on which the Sox could have won the World Series outright - so Buckner's not the best guy to blame either, he was just the most visible and obvious scapegoat.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-GgbP9C9Zk
Broad cultural ramifications:
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=g0AzDpXLn_E[/video]
http://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/hockey_east/2011-12/UMass_coach_Cahoon_steps_down
Quote from: Hockey JournalAfter 12 seasons behind the bench, Don "Toot" Cahoon (Lynn, Mass.) is stepping down from his position as head coach of the UMass men's hockey team. ... "Through the course of our recent conversations, coach Cahoon and I mutually agreed that it would be in the program's best interest for him to take this action at this time," [athletic director JOhn] McCutcheon said. During his dozen seasons in Amherst, Cahoon compiled a 166-225-42 record. His 166 wins are the most in program history. Cahoon's best season came back in 2006-07, when the Minutemen were led by this year's Conn Smythe winner and Stanley Cup champion with the L.A. Kings, Jonathan Quick (Hamden, Conn.), and finished with a 21-13-5 record. The sophomore netminder helped UMass reach the second round in their first-ever trip to the NCAA tournament.
13-18-5 last year
Quote from: billhowardhttp://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/hockey_east/2011-12/UMass_coach_Cahoon_steps_down
Quote from: Hockey JournalAfter 12 seasons behind the bench, Don "Toot" Cahoon (Lynn, Mass.) is stepping down from his position as head coach of the UMass men's hockey team. ... "Through the course of our recent conversations, coach Cahoon and I mutually agreed that it would be in the program's best interest for him to take this action at this time," [athletic director JOhn] McCutcheon said. During his dozen seasons in Amherst, Cahoon compiled a 166-225-42 record. His 166 wins are the most in program history. Cahoon's best season came back in 2006-07, when the Minutemen were led by this year's Conn Smythe winner and Stanley Cup champion with the L.A. Kings, Jonathan Quick (Hamden, Conn.), and finished with a 21-13-5 record. The sophomore netminder helped UMass reach the second round in their first-ever trip to the NCAA tournament.
13-18-5 last year
And 6-23-6 the year before. 12 years, 3 winning seasons. 1 NCAA appearance, courtesy of one Mr. J. Quick. With the the face of HEA altering slightly after this season, it was probably a good time for a break.
Entere=RichH]
Quote from: billhowardhttp://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/hockey_east/2011-12/UMass_coach_Cahoon_steps_down
Quote from: Hockey JournalAfter 12 seasons behind the bench, Don "Toot" Cahoon (Lynn, Mass.) is stepping down from his position as head coach of the UMass men's hockey team. ... "Through the course of our recent conversations, coach Cahoon and I mutually agreed that it would be in the program's best interest for him to take this action at this time," [athletic director JOhn] McCutcheon said. During his dozen seasons in Amherst, Cahoon compiled a 166-225-42 record. His 166 wins are the most in program history. Cahoon's best season came back in 2006-07, when the Minutemen were led by this year's Conn Smythe winner and Stanley Cup champion with the L.A. Kings, Jonathan Quick (Hamden, Conn.), and finished with a 21-13-5 record. The sophomore netminder helped UMass reach the second round in their first-ever trip to the NCAA tournament.
13-18-5 last year
And 6-23-6 the year before. 12 years, 3 winning seasons. 1 NCAA appearance, courtesy of one Mr. J. Quick. With the the face of HEA altering slightly after this season, it was probably a good time for a break.[/quote]
Toot needs a hug.
Has there been any news on this front?
QuoteJohn Foote '74, who wrote Touchdown: The Story of the Cornell Bear, wants to build a monument on campus to honor the original four Touchdowns — black bear cubs that were brought to Cornell beginning in 1915.
From Cornellians Push for Bear's Place on Campus (http://cornellsun.com/node/47908)
QuoteA group of Cornell alumni have proposed building a statue to commemorate Touchdown the Bear -- Cornell's unofficial mascot -- by 2015
From Burning Question: Touchdown the Bear (http://cornellsun.com/node/48088)
Quote from: RichHQuote from: billhowardhttp://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/hockey_east/2011-12/UMass_coach_Cahoon_steps_down
Quote from: Hockey JournalAfter 12 seasons behind the bench, Don "Toot" Cahoon (Lynn, Mass.) is stepping down from his position as head coach of the UMass men's hockey team. ... "Through the course of our recent conversations, coach Cahoon and I mutually agreed that it would be in the program's best interest for him to take this action at this time," [athletic director JOhn] McCutcheon said. During his dozen seasons in Amherst, Cahoon compiled a 166-225-42 record. His 166 wins are the most in program history. Cahoon's best season came back in 2006-07, when the Minutemen were led by this year's Conn Smythe winner and Stanley Cup champion with the L.A. Kings, Jonathan Quick (Hamden, Conn.), and finished with a 21-13-5 record. The sophomore netminder helped UMass reach the second round in their first-ever trip to the NCAA tournament.
13-18-5 last year
And 6-23-6 the year before. 12 years, 3 winning seasons. 1 NCAA appearance, courtesy of one Mr. J. Quick. With the the face of HEA altering slightly after this season, it was probably a good time for a break.
"Despite reports that he was leaving to take the head coach position at Massachusetts, Quinnipiac coach Rand Pecknold is staying put, a source close to the situation said Monday."
http://www.uscho.com/2012/07/02/source-pecknold-turns-down-massachusetts-offer-will-stay-at-quinnipiac/#ixzz1zV4pgEBH
Quote from: nyc94Quote from: RichHQuote from: billhowardhttp://www.hockeyjournal.com/news/colleges/hockey_east/2011-12/UMass_coach_Cahoon_steps_down
Quote from: Hockey JournalAfter 12 seasons behind the bench, Don "Toot" Cahoon (Lynn, Mass.) is stepping down from his position as head coach of the UMass men's hockey team. ... "Through the course of our recent conversations, coach Cahoon and I mutually agreed that it would be in the program's best interest for him to take this action at this time," [athletic director JOhn] McCutcheon said. During his dozen seasons in Amherst, Cahoon compiled a 166-225-42 record. His 166 wins are the most in program history. Cahoon's best season came back in 2006-07, when the Minutemen were led by this year's Conn Smythe winner and Stanley Cup champion with the L.A. Kings, Jonathan Quick (Hamden, Conn.), and finished with a 21-13-5 record. The sophomore netminder helped UMass reach the second round in their first-ever trip to the NCAA tournament.
13-18-5 last year
And 6-23-6 the year before. 12 years, 3 winning seasons. 1 NCAA appearance, courtesy of one Mr. J. Quick. With the the face of HEA altering slightly after this season, it was probably a good time for a break.
"Despite reports that he was leaving to take the head coach position at Massachusetts, Quinnipiac coach Rand Pecknold is staying put, a source close to the situation said Monday."
http://www.uscho.com/2012/07/02/source-pecknold-turns-down-massachusetts-offer-will-stay-at-quinnipiac/#ixzz1zV4pgEBH
Seems UMass offered and Quinnipiac countered to keep him.
Cornell's press release on incoming class. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/6/26/MICE_0626123209.aspx)
Quote from: Jim HylaCornell's press release on incoming class. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/6/26/MICE_0626123209.aspx)
Wow, we got a few trees in there!
Quote from: Jim HylaCornell's press release on incoming class. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/6/26/MICE_0626123209.aspx)
Is it just me or do Finns have the coolest names?
Quote from: Roy 82Quote from: Jim HylaCornell's press release on incoming class. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/6/26/MICE_0626123209.aspx)
Is it just me or do Finns have the coolest names?
Dibs on the Tiitinen jersey.
There's going to be at least one update to that list of incoming freshmen. It looks like Vince Marozzi has signed with Asiago HC of the Italian League.
http://eurohockey.com/club/315-asiago-hockey.html
https://twitter.com/VinnyPaolo01/status/220276923350265860
http://asiagohockeynews.blogspot.com/2012/07/capitolo-portierearriva-vincenzo.html
I imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Also, Ferlin standing out at the Bruins development camp:
http://www.csnne.com/hockey-boston-bruins/bruins-talk/Ferlin-standing-out-again-at-Bruins-Deve?blockID=735174&feedID=3352
Quote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
Quote from: css228Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
Really. You couldn't? You would root for Cornell to lose then, because of some relation? What if he's a great kid? And a talented player?
I could root for him if he went to Cornell.
But it would be so much more fun to root against him.
Quote from: css228Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
You'd root for him and love it if he gets drafted by the Rangers. Don't kid yourself. Just like I'll be rooting hard for Stephane Matteau's son (who's named Stefan Matteau, not Stephane Matteau Jr.) if he ever makes it to the NHL.
Quote from: Ronald '09Quote from: css228Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
You'd root for him and love it if he gets drafted by the Rangers. Don't kid yourself. Just like I'll be rooting hard for Stephane Matteau's son (who's named Stefan Matteau, not Stephane Matteau Jr.) if he ever makes it to the NHL.
I'm from Philadelphia... so no... I'd definitely not root for him if he were drafted by the Rangers
Quote from: css228Quote from: Ronald '09Quote from: css228Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: pfibigerI imagine this means Mitch Gillam will accelerate and come in this year instead of next (assuming he's already been admitted and deferred).
Very interesting. Gillam is the second-oldest of the non-Fall prospects (after Woody). He turns 20 in September and is almost 2 years younger than Willcox and Stoick.
This in turn sets up the recruiting for the next goaltending "blue chippah" for Fall 2014 rather than 2015. And on the wheels turn.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
What better school is there for a goalie to attend than Cornell? Anthony Brodeur will be a senior at Shattuck-St. Mary's during the 2012-13 season (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/07/09/martin_brodeur_son_anthony_draft_class_2013_new_jersey/).
Is that Uncle Daddy's son with his first wife, or from after he cheated on her with her sister-in-law and then married her?
(From the "realism instead of vitriol" department, a blue chip recruit attending Shattuck isn't all that likely to wind up at Cornell.)
Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
You'd root for him and love it if he gets drafted by the Rangers. Don't kid yourself. Just like I'll be rooting hard for Stephane Matteau's son (who's named Stefan Matteau, not Stephane Matteau Jr.) if he ever makes it to the NHL.
I'm from Philadelphia... so no... I'd definitely not root for him if he were drafted by the Rangers
Huh. So you
will boo him no matter where he ends up.
https://twitter.com/MattSlovin/status/222371576815943680
For those who don't know, Matt Slovin is at the center of a controversy regarding OHL player poaching. He reported an anonymous source's statement that the Kitchener Rangers have offered Michigan blue-chip recruit Jacob Trouba $200,000 (http://www.michigandaily.com/blog/hot-commodity-trouba-5050-between-michigan-ohl). The Kitchener Rangers, the team that signed Cornell-recruit Ben Thomson, has taken steps to sue The Michigan Daily for libel (http://www.guelphmercury.com/sports/article/757933--rangers-sue-michigan-student-newspaper-reporter).
Rumors of under-the-table payments by OHL teams, especially the Kitchener Rangers, have been rampant, but it has never been proven (http://www.thestar.com/article/653667--ohl-plans-crackdown-on-teams-breaking-rules).
Since February, I have gotten to know Matt Slovin and his work. His reporting has appeared impeccable, and I cannot fathom that he and The Michigan Daily would run that article without believing the source was sharing reliable information.
That said, I have my own anti-CHL biases regarding this controversy.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: css228Yeah... I couldn't root for a Broduer.
Really. You couldn't? You would root for Cornell to lose then, because of some relation? What if he's a great kid? And a talented player?
You'd do what I do with alex Rodriguez. You root for the jersey, not the player.
Quote from: RichHReally. You couldn't? You would root for Cornell to lose then, because of some relation? What if he's a great kid? And a talented player?
I'm sure Brodeur is a BC/BU kinda guy, but I'd have no problem rooting for him in a Cornell sweater. Hell, I'd have no problem rooting for a
Cleary if he came to Cornell (actually, that would be extra funny).
Wasn't the son who fooled around.
Thread drift...........two of my boys went to Cornell hockey camp this past week. Espo is still in an air cast, he did not skate all week (with the kids at least). High ankle sprain, right? Obviously takes a long time to heal fully, must be frustrating for him.
Topher Scott was there. He was very enthusiastic with the kids (and the parents!). Nice to see him back on campus, I have to believe with his approach he'll be a good recruiter. I love his attitude.
Joe Nieuwendyk was there the last day, he was kind enough to sign a lot of jerseys for the kids. He seemed relaxed, no expressions that would indicate "I just paid those 40+ year old guys how much??" or "Sure he can put up points with Claude Giroux, but so could I!!" ::asshole::
I didn't pester him with any such questions, that would be rude to do in his old barn.
The Chicago Park District, proprietors of Soldier Field have lined up Notre Dame, Miami (Ohio), Minnesota, and Wisconsin for a double-header on February 17, Hockey City Classic (http://www.hockeycityclassic.com/). They hope it leads to an NHL Winter Classic game in the future, having lost out to Wrigley Field as the Chicago site in 2009. Chicago Tribune story here (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-park-district-ceo-hockey-city-classic-can-lead-to-nhl-winter-classic-20120711,0,1541040.story).
Quote from: RatushnyFanThread drift...........
I think this has already been addressed on this thread, but can a "generic" thread drift?
Yes it can. Simply by changing topics. See p. 47 of Strunk & White's new book on posting on the Internet.
Quote from: RatushnyFanYes it can. Simply by changing topics. See p. 47 of Strunk & White's new book on posting on the Internet.
The most recent edition notes how most media have abandoned the historical convention of capitalizing "internet" when referring to "the Internet." The word internet, without capitalization, is now the preferred form of the noun.
It's the Internet...........without it, I have nothing. I choose to capitalize.
Quote from: RatushnyFanIt's the Internet...........without it, I have nothing. I choose to capitalize.
Intern_t to the truly observant.
Brown's top recruit, Kevin Roy, has recently decommitted (http://www.voy.com/152805/105077.html), along with his brother. Bummer for them.
Quote from: scoop85Brown's top recruit, Kevin Roy, has recently decommitted (http://www.voy.com/152805/105077.html), along with his brother. Bummer for them.
Wouldn't surprise me if he ends up at Northeastern. Their new coach is a very impressive guy.
Cole Bardreau invited to US WJ Camp. nhl.com (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=639118)
Quote from: The RancorCole Bardreau invited to US WJ Camp. nhl.com (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=639118)
As is Joakim Ryan. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/3/MICE_0803120848.aspx)
And article and video on D'Agostino with Penquins at NHL.com. (http://penguins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=639047&cmpid=rss-kasan)
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: The RancorCole Bardreau invited to US WJ Camp. nhl.com (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=639118)
As is Joakim Ryan. (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/3/MICE_0803120848.aspx)
Cole Bardreau made the roster of 22 (http://collegehockeyinc.com/articles/22-make-cut-us-junior-camp) out of the United States World Junior camp.
Looks like we're in the market for another defenseman, as Mathieu Brisson has decided to leave school:
https://twitter.com/cfortier23/status/232792010547949570
Quote from: pfibigerLooks like we're in the market for another defenseman, as Mathieu Brisson has decided to leave school:
https://twitter.com/cfortier23/status/232792010547949570
That's too bad. Given the depth and talent on the blue line, he must have figured he wasn't going to be a regular in the rotation this year. Best of luck to him.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: pfibigerLooks like we're in the market for another defenseman, as Mathieu Brisson has decided to leave school:
https://twitter.com/cfortier23/status/232792010547949570
That's too bad. Given the depth and talent on the blue line, he must have figured he wasn't going to be a regular in the rotation this year. Best of luck to him.
After playing in 17 games his freshman year, he was down to 10 as a sophomore, so he probably had reason to figure that.
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: scoop85Quote from: pfibigerLooks like we're in the market for another defenseman, as Mathieu Brisson has decided to leave school:
https://twitter.com/cfortier23/status/232792010547949570
That's too bad. Given the depth and talent on the blue line, he must have figured he wasn't going to be a regular in the rotation this year. Best of luck to him.
After playing in 17 games his freshman year, he was down to 10 as a sophomore, so he probably had reason to figure that.
How come the CU site lists him as GP 15, for last year?
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: scoop85Quote from: pfibigerLooks like we're in the market for another defenseman, as Mathieu Brisson has decided to leave school:
https://twitter.com/cfortier23/status/232792010547949570
That's too bad. Given the depth and talent on the blue line, he must have figured he wasn't going to be a regular in the rotation this year. Best of luck to him.
After playing in 17 games his freshman year, he was down to 10 as a sophomore, so he probably had reason to figure that.
How come the CU site lists him as GP 15, for last year?
Because I'd apparently been looking at the wrong stat - ECAC regular season games only. :) But that means he was down from
27 his freshman year to 15, so that's pretty drastic as well.
Seeing as the siting of the ECAC championship weekend composed much of the discussion on this thread, I'll put this here:
https://twitter.com/chnews/status/233983776705892352
Well, shit. I know some people are happy - and since I couldn't even be bothered to go to AC me and my opinion can go pound sand - but... shit. At least if it were in AC I could go if the stars aligned properly.
https://twitter.com/chnews/status/233983776705892352
Per Adam Wodon, "Lake Placid won out in a tight vote that included Providence and Albany."
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/08/10_ecac_returning_to_lake_placid.php
Quote from: ugarteWell, shit. I know some people are happy - and since I couldn't even be bothered to go to AC me and my opinion can go pound sand - but... shit. At least if it were in AC I could go if the stars aligned properly.
ECAC stupidity increases one more notch. Boneheads. Ridiculous freak-sized rink.
Wow. Very surprised. I'm glad a new generation will get to enjoy Lake Placid.
Is Mud Puddles still in business? :)
Too bad. Doubtful I'd ever make the trip up to LP.
Quote from: Jordan 04Too bad. Doubtful I'd ever make the trip up to LP.
For all my bitching about the distance, the expense, and the hotel cancellation policies, it really is a beautiful place, and they certainly have a better handle than Atlantic City does on how to host a hockey tournament weekend.
I might complain about it, but if Cornell makes it, I'll probably go.
So, do we start making hotel reservations now, so we can get a room in the town, and then kiss that money goodbye if we don't make it? Or will Adam be correct that the policy will change? This is ridiculous. The only good thing is that I might be able to ski a half day at Whiteface. Let's hope that it's a short stay. I wonder how much money they got with this move. I can come up with more negatives, but will save them for later.::bang::
Quote from: jkahnhttps://twitter.com/chnews/status/233983776705892352
Per Adam Wodon, "Lake Placid won out in a tight vote that included Providence and Albany."
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/08/10_ecac_returning_to_lake_placid.php
Well, that's news that Providence submitted a formal bid, it seems. That was always an intriguing option, in my eye. I would have preferred there or Albany, but anything to get us out of AC.
Since I'm fond of non-car transportation for hockey trips, I just learned that Amtrak does service Lake Placid (bus transfer off the Adirondack route from Westport), so one could travel from NYC or Albany without a car.
I'm one of those people who think this is probably the best of a miserable set of options.
For me, LP always had more going for it than the tournament. The birdwatching is great up there (and on the way home), and if they open the bobsled run, that is a blast.
Now hopefully the hotel deposit situation got fixed. If that happened, nothing will stop me from going if we're in the tourney.
Al, that stupidity includes the schools that voted for it, so you'll have to be sure you want to call them all stupid.
Mudpuddles is no longer Mudpuddles ... The building is there, but now called Wiseguys. I haven't been in it...I only know this because I'm coincidentally in town for the World Junior Evaluation Camp, and noticed.
I'm going to be writing another article on this soon, but I know that one counter-argument to my April article that advocated for LP was that the mystique of the place meant nothing, or less, to "kids today." I can say this is universally untrue. Every player I've spoken to at camp, most without prompting, have talked about the incredible feeling of being there. They all know the history, they've all seen the movie, they all get the significance, and, most importantly, they all personally feel the significance.
Jim ... I haven't been able to ask yet about hotels. I don't know if there was a guarantee on that yet or not. I will be asking. If the answer is no, then I will certainly be critical of that component of it.
Quote from: adamwAl, that stupidity includes the schools that voted for it, so you'll have to be sure you want to call them all stupid.
I'm quite sure, Adam. Trust me.
Quote from: RichHSince I'm fond of non-car transportation for hockey trips, I just learned that Amtrak does service Lake Placid (bus transfer off the Adirondack route from Westport), so one could travel from NYC or Albany without a car.
Given that I have recently done the non-car trip to Placid, I will opine that your best option, and a reasonably comfortable one at that, is actually to chop short at Albany and take Adirondack Trailways there and back. The Westport shuttle is convenient but slow and expensive; the trip from Albany is longer (bus-wise) but cheaper when combined with a discount ticket via Amtrak to Albany. I hate cabs, but cab is your best option between the bus station and the Amtrak station across the river—it's only about $10. Still cheaper overall than the Westport shuttle.
Nitwits!! Fucking nitwits!!
Oh well, at least with this much advance notice it's easy to develop more worthwhile activities for that weekend of March over the next few years.
The Hockey East tournament is looking better all the time. A slightly better brand of hockey and there's always BOSTON to enjoy during the off-hockey hours!! Easy choice to make...
There ought to be a way to "timeshare" reservations between fans of the teams that play in the QF. It's the internet age. Somebody can make a tidy sum with a 5% markup that insures against getting stuck with tickets if your team is eliminated.
Quote from: adamwAl, that stupidity includes the schools that voted for it, so you'll have to be sure you want to call them all stupid.
Mudpuddles is no longer Mudpuddles ... The building is there, but now called Wiseguys. I haven't been in it...I only know this because I'm coincidentally in town for the World Junior Evaluation Camp, and noticed.
I'm going to be writing another article on this soon, but I know that one counter-argument to my April article that advocated for LP was that the mystique of the place meant nothing, or less, to "kids today." I can say this is universally untrue. Every player I've spoken to at camp, most without prompting, have talked about the incredible feeling of being there. They all know the history, they've all seen the movie, they all get the significance, and, most importantly, they all personally feel the significance.
Jim ... I haven't been able to ask yet about hotels. I don't know if there was a guarantee on that yet or not. I will be asking. If the answer is no, then I will certainly be critical of that component of it.
Adam, I assume that the Camp you were at was for an American team. I would think that the Canadian players don't have a similar feeling overall.
IMO, there are two problems with LP that make either Albany or Providence better -- the ice size and the difficulty to make last-minute plans for attendance. To me that outways the benefits of LP as a recruiting tool and the fact that the town historically has supported the tourney. JMHO.
Quote from: ursusminorIMO, there are two problems with LP that make either Albany or Providence better -- the ice size and the difficulty to make last-minute plans for attendance. To me that outways the benefits of LP as a recruiting tool and the fact that the town historically has supported the tourney. JMHO.
A way to keep the LP/ECAC connection and alleviate some of the drawbacks is to use LP for some king of ECAC Invitational, sort of like the old GLI. Every year 3 ECAC teams and a guest play a two day tournament in November(?). Every ECAC players gets to do it once. The large ice isn't impacting league titles and folks can book well in advance because the field will be set well in advance. Only issue is attendance but that's going to be an issue in LP Round 2 without Vermont and if Clarkson and SLU don't make it anyway. If you keep CU, SLU, and CCT apart in the rotation you can get some balance...
I don't know, it's something. I enjoyed going to Lake Placid as a student and would like for younger fans to get that experience too but I would almost certainly not make the trip now due to the distance and expense. I fear that with Cornell's recent, prolonged, success and national expectations, the Red contingent will not be as strong in LP this time around. As has been kicked around here repeatedly, with sights set on NCAAs and more at large bids available, the ECAC tournament has taken a diminished role in a lot of fans' minds it seems.
Quote from: ursusminorAdam, I assume that the Camp you were at was for an American team. I would think that the Canadian players don't have a similar feeling overall.
True, of course, however I'm sure Canadian players also appreciate its significance, and the overall point is that the ECAC being associated with Lake Placid gives it some credibility that the other places don't. To someone in Canada, you can't compare Joe Louis Arena with Albany. But compared to Lake Placid, at least it's something. It doesn't feel as much like an admission of defeat that "we are too small for big arenas" ...even though they are. It feels more like, "we are good enough to have our own cool place too."
QuoteIMO, there are two problems with LP that make either Albany or Providence better -- the ice size and the difficulty to make last-minute plans for attendance. To me that outways the benefits of LP as a recruiting tool and the fact that the town historically has supported the tourney. JMHO.
Some good news on this front. They are in the middle of constructing a brand new Hampton Inn here near the arena. Should alleviate things at least a little, we can hope.
Quote from: Chris '03I fear that with Cornell's recent, prolonged, success and national expectations, the Red contingent will not be as strong in LP this time around. As has been kicked around here repeatedly, with sights set on NCAAs and more at large bids available, the ECAC tournament has taken a diminished role in a lot of fans' minds it seems.
I hope that's not the case. As much as I like the NCAAs, they will always be the cherry on top. The ECAC tourney is
our tourney. I'm glad to see it back closer to where it belongs.
Now they just need a 15k facility in downtown Ithaca... :)
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: Jordan 04Too bad. Doubtful I'd ever make the trip up to LP.
For all my bitching about the distance, the expense, and the hotel cancellation policies, it really is a beautiful place, and they certainly have a better handle than Atlantic City does on how to host a hockey tournament weekend.
I might complain about it, but if Cornell makes it, I'll probably go.
Yes. It's lovely. That's about it. I enjoyed my trips there; of course, that was when I didn't have to worry about transportation, accommodation, or other expenses. Or using vacation days.
But now it makes pretty much zero sense for me. I'm not sure how a town is evaluated on "how to host a hockey tournament weekend". Personally, as long as there's a rink and a way to buy tickets to see the game, I couldn't care less what else happens around it. In fact, I know it's blasphemy 'round these parts, but I found gambling, shopping, and strolling the boardwalk to be the most enjoyable pre- and post- game activities I've had at an ECAC tournament. (Aside from the year we made our Sweet 16 run, but that was obviously uncorrelated to the location of the ECAC's).
Adam, I'm sure you feel good about this; just as I'm sure you know I hate the choice. So let's look at the positives and negatives.
Positives:
1: We get to talk about something related to hockey in the summer.
2: It's got mystique.
3: The town loves us. Why shouldn't they, we bring money.
4: Maybe there is one, but I can't think of another.
Negatives:
1: It's difficult to get to, especially for the casual fan. Does anyone really think someone, at the last minute, will just decide to go.
2: Not enough easy and reasonable rooms. Maybe the Hampton Inn will help, but if the 7 day cancelation remains, it should be a deal breaker. I went to all LP tourneys. My wife didn't mind, and my daughter was too young to have a say. If it had been the last few years, there would have been no way I could have paid for a hotel a year in advance, and then thrown that money away if CU wasn't there.
3: No easy parking. If you didn't get there early, no place to park.
4: It all leads up to not great crowds, unless SLU +/or CCT makes it. Go Casey.
5: Too big an ice surface. Why in the world would we want to pick a champion based upon who does best on Olympic ice, when the NCAAs can't be on that.
6: Will we get TV coverage? Albany had TW, especially with Union now a force.
7: The best newspaper coverage is the Watertown Times, wow. In Albany we at least had the 3 local papers, 2 of whom had strong ties to ECAC schools, and the third has the name of the rink.
That's it for now, but I can't emphasize more how difficult it will be for the less than aggressive fan.
EDIT: If anyone wants a view of attendance at all 3 recent venues, here's Ken Schott's column. (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/aug/10/ecac-hockey-tournament-moving-back-to-lake-placid/)
1. Difficult, but worth it :)
2. Difficult, but hopefully better than last time around...we'll see
3. Better than paying up the wazoo at other venues...minor inconvenience
4. Crowds have not been, nor would they be, great anywhere
5. From everyone I've ever spoken to, including players, coaches, etc..., it's only a handful of coaches who care about this. The players don't mind at all. They say they adjust quickly. That said, ideally it would be better at 200x85, but again, not enough to offset the plusses, IMO
6. As I said months ago, I don't see this as any better or worse a possibility. I've spoken to people about this. Stay tuned for Hagwell quotes on the issue. Nobody would be in better position to know than him.
7. There's a local daily, the Adirondack Daily...and the Lake Placid weekly. And the Albany papers will come if their teams are in it. And I don't think it matters anyway. The best coverage is on College Hockey News :) ... Non-issue.
The one truth that we all should realize after going through all of this whining/bitching back in the 90's. There is absolutely nobody in the ECACHL office or the athletic depts of any of the schools who give a damn about our opinions, pro or con, and justifications.
It is all a pointless exercise here.
To those who like it: Enjoy!!!
To those who do not: Make the best of it.
Back to planning my alternate March activities. Carry on.......
I think they do ... But each athletic dept. cares only about their own fan base, and even within that, opinions are all over the map.
In terms of policy, does the ECAC even exist separate from the agendas of the 12 ADs?
Quote from: adamwI think they do ... But each athletic dept. cares only about their own fan base, and even within that, opinions are all over the map.
I think you're fooling yourself on that.. Perhaps because this went that way you wanted.
Whatever. If the athletic dept. cared about only their own fan base, just what evidence do we have that they reached out to their fan base for opinions. If they were foolish enough to sample ELF opinion, it would seem that CU athletic dept. would have voted against it. Opinions here seemed to favor NOT going to LP. Of course, it's silly to think that this is a good sampling of opinion for the Cornell fan base.
Heading to Boston in March is going to be so much fun...
Quote from: rediceWhatever. If the athletic dept. cared about only their own fan base, just what evidence do we have that they reached out to their fan base for opinions.
I'm not saying any of them specifically reached out to ask ... But I can tell you this - they acted in the way they thought their fan bases wanted. Perhaps they were wrong in their assumption - but I'm sure that's what they did. At least most of them.
Quote from: TrotskyIn terms of policy, does the ECAC even exist separate from the agendas of the 12 ADs?
Not really ... the 12 ADs (or their reps - asst. AD Anita Brenner in Cornell's case) decide on each matter based on a simple vote. Though there are the usual assortment of committees that can recommend things to the whole.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: rediceWhatever. If the athletic dept. cared about only their own fan base, just what evidence do we have that they reached out to their fan base for opinions.
I'm not saying any of them specifically reached out to ask ... But I can tell you this - they acted in the way they thought their fan bases wanted. Perhaps they were wrong in their assumption - but I'm sure that's what they did. At least most of them.
It seems like assumptions are being made and not all by athletic depts........
Quote from: rediceIt seems like assumptions are being made and not all by athletic depts........
meaning?
Do we know which site Cornell favored? Are the votes secret? It's not exactly national security.
Quote from: TrotskyDo we know which site Cornell favored? Are the votes secret? It's not exactly national security.
The collective we does not know, no :) ... Funny, the line about national security was exactly what I said ... but they won't officially say who voted for what. We'll see what comes out over the coming weeks. To the extent that I know, I can't say ... sorry for the tease - I'm only saying that so you don't think I'm talking completely out my rear :)
Quote from: adamwQuote from: rediceIt seems like assumptions are being made and not all by athletic depts........
meaning?
It sure reads to me that you are making certain assumptions on how the process was handled by the athletic depts. On what do you base these assumptions?
Read your earlier posting:
Quote from: adamwI'm not saying any of them specifically reached out to ask ... But I can tell you this - they acted in the way they thought their fan bases wanted. Perhaps they were wrong in their assumption - but I'm sure that's what they did. At least most of them.
How can you possibly pretend to be in the heads of these people to know the nature of their thought processes?
I'm just sayin.......
Quote from: rediceHow can you possibly pretend to be in the heads of these people to know the nature of their thought processes?
I'm just sayin.......
How do you know what I know and don't know?
Quote from: adamwQuote from: rediceHow can you possibly pretend to be in the heads of these people to know the nature of their thought processes?
I'm just sayin.......
How do you know what I know and don't know?
Yawn....
Adam, the point is, how can you know, or think you know, what your fan base wants if you don't ask them? If their concern was attendance, then they should have hired a polling company to ask. Otherwise you've just got 12 men, whoops people, in a room; and we should know how fair that can be.
Oh God. Let the season start soon. PLEASE!
Quote from: Jim HylaAdam, the point is, how can you know, or think you know, what your fan base wants if you don't ask them? If their concern was attendance, then they should have hired a polling company to ask. Otherwise you've just got 12 men, whoops people, in a room; and we should know how fair that can be.
I didn't say you were wrong ... I just said that I know that the ADs voted how they *thought* their fan bases would want it, in most cases. I was challenged on that statement. I didn't say their thought process was correct. I don't think any of us knows what the entirety of the fan base wants for sure.
Ultimately, the actual attendance will tell what the fanbases want.
The far more important fact is that Cornell now has only one chance to win in Atlantic City. Given that Cornell has won in every ECAC host city, that makes 2012-13 a must win season! :)
Quote from: TrotskyThe far more important fact is that Cornell now has only one chance to win in Atlantic City. Given that Cornell has won in every ECAC host city, that makes 2012-13 a must win season! :)
That's what I have been saying for some time now.
13 in '13.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: TrotskyThe far more important fact is that Cornell now has only one chance to win in Atlantic City. Given that Cornell has won in every ECAC host city, that makes 2012-13 a must win season! :)
That's what I have been saying for some time now. 13 in '13.
Agreed!
And in case anyone cares about the hotel situation (which it seems all of you do...) a quick check on Priceline reveals the cancellation policy for a stay from March 22-24 of this year:
QuoteFor the room type you've selected, you can cancel your reservation for a full refund up until noon on Friday, March 15th (local hotel time). If you decide to cancel your reservation anytime between noon on Friday, March 15th and noon on Friday, March 22nd (local hotel time), the hotel requires payment for the first night's stay. You will be charged for the first night's stay including taxes and fees. Any remaining amount will be refunded to you. Refunds or cancellations are not available after noon local hotel time on your day of arrival (Friday, March 22nd).
This is the Lakeview Inn.
Depending on the room type with the Courtyard by Marriot, you get either:
QuoteGood news! This reservation qualifies for free cancellation up until 11:59 PM local hotel time on Monday, March 18, 2013. If cancelled or modified up to 3 days before date of arrival, no fee will be charged. If cancelled or modified later or in case of no-show, 100 percent of the first night will be charged. Any cancellation and/or change fees described here are charged directly by the hotel.
or
QuoteFor the room type you've selected, you can cancel your reservation for a full refund up until noon on Thursday, March 21st (local hotel time). If you decide to cancel your reservation anytime between noon on Thursday, March 21st and noon on Friday, March 22nd (local hotel time), the hotel requires payment for the first night's stay. You will be charged for the first night's stay including taxes and fees. Any remaining amount will be refunded to you. Refunds or cancellations are not available after noon local hotel time on your day of arrival (Friday, March 22nd).
Another one...
QuoteGood news! This reservation qualifies for free cancellation up until 11:59 PM local hotel time on Monday, March 18, 2013. If cancelled or modified up to 3 days before date of arrival, no fee will be charged. If cancelled or modified later or in case of no-show, 100 percent of the first night will be charged. Any cancellation and/or change fees described here are charged directly by the hotel.
That hardly sounds Draconian. That is the Northwoods Inn.
The EconoLodge Lake Placid has an even more flexible cancellation policy:
QuoteFor the room type you've selected, you can cancel your reservation for a full refund up until noon on Thursday, March 21st (local hotel time). If you decide to cancel your reservation anytime between noon on Thursday, March 21st and noon on Friday, March 22nd (local hotel time), the hotel requires payment for the first night's stay. You will be charged for the first night's stay including taxes and fees. Any remaining amount will be refunded to you. Refunds or cancellations are not available after noon local hotel time on your day of arrival (Friday, March 22nd).
The Town and Country Motor Inn allows cancellation 10 days prior or elsetotal reservation fee will be charged.
Depending on the room type in the Crowne Plaza Resort Hotel, it is either non-refundable or
QuoteThis reservation qualifies for free cancellation up until 11:59 PM local hotel time on Tuesday, March 19, 2013. If cancelled or modified up to 2 days before date of arrival, no fee will be charged. If cancelled or modified later or in case of no-show, 100 percent of the first night will be charged. Any cancellation and/or change fees described here are charged directly by the hotel.
Least notice goes to the Whiteface Lodge:
QuoteThis reservation qualifies for free cancellation up until 11:59 PM local hotel time on Tuesday, February 19, 2013. If cancelled or modified up to 30 days before date of arrival, no fee will be charged. If cancelled or modified later or in case of no-show, 100 percent of the first night will be charged.
The Lake Placid Summit Hotel and Kiwassa Lake B&B and Cabins allow for no cancellation/refunds whatsoever.
So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Quote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaAdam, the point is, how can you know, or think you know, what your fan base wants if you don't ask them? If their concern was attendance, then they should have hired a polling company to ask. Otherwise you've just got 12 men, whoops people, in a room; and we should know how fair that can be.
I didn't say you were wrong ... I just said that I know that the ADs voted how they *thought* their fan bases would want it, in most cases. I was challenged on that statement. I didn't say their thought process was correct. I don't think any of us knows what the entirety of the fan base wants for sure.
Adam, I wrote my statement poorly. I didn't mean what you, meaning Adam, know, rather how can the ADs think they know what their fans want, if they never ask? Sorry that I made it sound like I was referring to you.
edit: And I'm glad CHN has links to the articles in the "Lake Placid News" and "Adirondack Daily Enterprise", the same article in each. It's so good to know that we've got those great papers publicizing it.:-D
Quote from: kingpin248Seeing as the siting of the ECAC championship weekend composed much of the discussion on this thread, I'll put this here:
https://twitter.com/chnews/status/233983776705892352
Huh. So THAT'S why there were 43 new posts in the offseason thread over an otherwise uneventful weekend.
Quote from: RichHSince I'm fond of non-car transportation for hockey trips, I just learned that Amtrak does service Lake Placid (bus transfer off the Adirondack route from Westport), so one could travel from NYC or Albany without a car.
But you lose the fun of getting a ticket if you drive 36 MPH on Rt 73.
Crowne Plaza has a decent bar with a nice view and the rink is just a stumble down a (huge) hill...........decent place. I stayed there in March while attending my son's tournament. One of my high school buddies is married to a woman whose family owns the hotel.
I like going to LP even though it is a hike. The restaurants, bars, shops, I think it's just fun. I was < 2 hours from Albany near NYC so I won't get to go as much with my own kids playing most weekends. But I can hope and sometimes good things happen. Just ask Douglas Murray.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Quote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
I see LP is winning the eLynah poll up top ... guess they really did listen to the fan base :)
Quote from: adamwI see LP is winning the eLynah poll up top ... guess they really did listen to the fan base :)
Exactly how many shell accounts do you have to stuff the eLynah ballot box? ;)
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
Life. Hotels. Basic common sense?
I'm saying given that we are living in 2012, where social media is incredibly influential in our lives and people are living on the web, that things have likely changed in the last decade. Things have changed in the last four years and to think that hotel policies are somehow magically free of this is naive.
Quote from: bnr24Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
Life. Hotels. Basic common sense?
I'm saying given that we are living in 2012, where social media is incredibly influential in our lives and people are living on the web, that things have likely changed in the last decade. Things have changed in the last four years and to think that hotel policies are somehow magically free of this is naive.
Look, no one is saying you are wrong, just that the policies in the past were crap and we wait to see if the ECAC has convinced them to change. Maybe they have and you are correct, but we don't have any hard evidence that you are right. Yes things change, they change every year, but they never changed during all the years we were there before. Not even Adam seems able to say that things will be different. Having lived through the past, we don't want to experience it again.
You can give all the reasons that you want, and the seem to be good ones, but that doesn't change our worry. Maybe it will happen in a few more hours.
Quote from: bnr24Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
Life. Hotels. Basic common sense?
I'm saying given that we are living in 2012, where social media is incredibly influential in our lives and people are living on the web, that things have likely changed in the last decade. Things have changed in the last four years and to think that hotel policies are somehow magically free of this is naive.
"Naive" is thinking things will "magically" change because you'd like them to.
LP is a one-horse town...and barely that. When that one horse shows up, they milk attendees for all they can get. Big difference between a hick place in the boonies like LP and an accessible, attractive city like Providence.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioLP is a one-horse town...and barely that. When that one horse shows up, they milk attendees for all they can get.
Doesn't that make it a "one cow town"?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Al DeFlorioLP is a one-horse town...and barely that. When that one horse shows up, they milk attendees for all they can get.
Doesn't that make it a "one cow town"?
I'm not one for mixed metaphors, but I think it would be only a one-cow town if Harvard were the only team in town. Considering in Al's metaphor, the attendees are the cow(s) and hockey is the one "dog and pony show" that Lake Placid can do, according to him.
The athletic website article (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/14/MICE_0814124138.aspx) references the following in its recent comments about the move to Lake Placid:
QuoteThe Big Red holds an 11-9 all-time record at Herb Brooks Olympic Arena...
Leaving out the fact that it was not "Herb Brooks Arena" until 2005 when the ECAC was no longer a tenant, what other games account for the alleged 11-9-0 record? The Arena hosted the 1994-2002 ECAC Championships. Cornell did not appear in the ECAC Championships in 1994, 1995, 1998, and 1999. Cornell finished fourth in the ECAC Tournament in 2000, this accounts for a record of
0-2-0 at Lake Placid. Cornell finished second in 2000 and 2001, which accounts for a
2-2-0 record. Cornell won the ECAC Championship in 1996 and 1997, this accounts for a record of
4-0-0. The cumulative record of Cornell in the ECAC Championships during its tenure from 1994 to 2002 would then be
6-4-0. This creates a deficit record of 5-5-0. Now, even if one assumes incorrectly that the 1970 NCAA Championship series that was played in Lake Placid, but played in the Shea Arena from the 1932 Olympic Games, was played in the Herb Brooks Arena, the deficit record would become 3-5-0 for games played in Herb Brooks Arena. When did those eight other games that the athletic site references occur? Or, is it just another error in a post that implies that Cornell appeared in the ECAC Championship game last season?
We also lost a play-in game in 1998 and won a play-in game in 2000, so those are two of the "missing" games. Not sure about the other 2-4-0 record, though - was there ever a regular season tournament held there?
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinThe athletic website article (http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/14/MICE_0814124138.aspx) references the following in its recent comments about the move to Lake Placid:
QuoteThe Big Red holds an 11-9 all-time record at Herb Brooks Olympic Arena...
Leaving out the fact that it was not "Herb Brooks Arena" until 2005 when the ECAC was no longer a tenant, what other games account for the alleged 11-9-0 record? The Arena hosted the 1994-2002 ECAC Championships. Cornell did not appear in the ECAC Championships in 1994, 1995, 1998, and 1999. Cornell finished fourth in the ECAC Tournament in 2000, this accounts for a record of 0-2-0 at Lake Placid. Cornell finished second in 2000 and 2001, which accounts for a 2-2-0 record. Cornell won the ECAC Championship in 1996 and 1997, this accounts for a record of 4-0-0. The cumulative record of Cornell in the ECAC Championships during its tenure from 1994 to 2002 would then be 6-4-0. This creates a deficit record of 5-5-0. Now, even if one assumes incorrectly that the 1970 NCAA Championship series that was played in Lake Placid, but played in the Shea Arena from the 1932 Olympic Games, was played in the Herb Brooks Arena, the deficit record would become 3-5-0 for games played in Herb Brooks Arena. When did those eight other games that the athletic site references occur? Or, is it just another error in a post that implies that Cornell appeared in the ECAC Championship game last season?
The Big Red's record in the 1993-2002 ECAC championships in Lake Placid is actually 7-5. Your accounting omits the 1998 (loss) and 2000 (win) "preliminary games." From 1998 to 2002, five teams advanced to championship weekend, with the two lowest seeds playing off on Thursday night; the loser of the game went home right away. That still does leave one four wins and four losses short.
Quote from: RobbWe also lost a play-in game in 1998 and won a play-in game in 2000, so those are two of the "missing" games. Not sure about the other 2-4-0 record, though - was there ever a regular season tournament held there?
Quote from: kingpin248The Big Red's record in the 1993-2002 ECAC championships in Lake Placid is actually 7-5. Your accounting omits the 1998 (loss) and 2000 (win) "preliminary games." From 1998 to 2002, five teams advanced to championship weekend, with the two lowest seeds playing off on Thursday night; the loser of the game went home right away. That still does leave one four wins and four losses short.
Thanks for those corrections. The five-team set-up was before my time, so I overlook that historic setup occasionally considering it's not as easy to research/recognize as historic games like national title games or even ECAC Championship games before my time.
I was wondering if there was a regular-season tournament there too in which Cornell participated. I know that RPI and Union have had Halloween and Festivus events there recently, but Cornell did not participate in those in recent years.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: RobbWe also lost a play-in game in 1998 and won a play-in game in 2000, so those are two of the "missing" games. Not sure about the other 2-4-0 record, though - was there ever a regular season tournament held there?
Quote from: kingpin248The Big Red's record in the 1993-2002 ECAC championships in Lake Placid is actually 7-5. Your accounting omits the 1998 (loss) and 2000 (win) "preliminary games." From 1998 to 2002, five teams advanced to championship weekend, with the two lowest seeds playing off on Thursday night; the loser of the game went home right away. That still does leave one four wins and four losses short.
Thanks for those corrections. The five-team set-up was before my time, so I overlook that historic setup occasionally considering it's not as easy to research/recognize as historic games like national title games or even ECAC Championship games before my time.
I was wondering if there was a regular-season tournament there too in which Cornell participated. I know that RPI and Union have had Halloween and Festivus events there recently, but Cornell did not participate in those in recent years.
It would seem there was such a tournament in the early 1980's. From the all-time score archive (http://cornellbigred.com/documents/2010/5/11/Results.pdf?id=2960), the Big Red participated from 1981-82 through 1984-85, going 1-1 in each of those four years - add that to the ECAC Tournament results and you get 11-9.
CHN's story on the move (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/08/14_ecac_makes_it_official_moving.php) | CHN's column on the move (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/08/14_ecac_makes_the_right_move.php), both authored by Adam.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
Life. Hotels. Basic common sense?
I'm saying given that we are living in 2012, where social media is incredibly influential in our lives and people are living on the web, that things have likely changed in the last decade. Things have changed in the last four years and to think that hotel policies are somehow magically free of this is naive.
Look, no one is saying you are wrong, just that the policies in the past were crap and we wait to see if the ECAC has convinced them to change. Maybe they have and you are correct, but we don't have any hard evidence that you are right. Yes things change, they change every year, but they never changed during all the years we were there before. Not even Adam seems able to say that things will be different. Having lived through the past, we don't want to experience it again.
You can give all the reasons that you want, and the seem to be good ones, but that doesn't change our worry. Maybe it will happen in a few more hours.
My main point (to both Jim and Al) is that we have no reason to think that it will NOT change when so many other things have and to worry about this before we can know anything for certain is pointless. Those who are going to go will go regardless of the policies, given that it is not a cheap thing to do in the first place. As someone who wasn't around last time it was played there, I am personally excited to see it go back. ::popcorn::
As someone who wasn't alive when the miracle happened, I have to say I'm really excited that we're going to be in LP my senior year if we make the ECAC Final Four. However I'm glad it starts in my senior year because I really don't want to make that trip twice. Well that and I want to be making another trip in the general direction of AC in early April, and not just to see the folks.
Quote from: css228As someone who wasn't alive when the miracle happened, I have to say I'm really excited that we're going to be in LP my senior year if we make the ECAC Final Four. However I'm glad it starts in my senior year because I really don't want to make that trip twice. Well that and I want to be making another trip in the general direction of AC in early April, and not just to see the folks.
Interesting that the newest generation of fans (of which I am part) does not just assume that Cornell is going to the ECAC Championships. Especially considering that Cornell has made it seven out of the last eight seasons.
Quote from: css228As someone who wasn't alive when the miracle happened, I have to say I'm really excited that we're going to be in LP my senior year if we make the ECAC Final Four. However I'm glad it starts in my senior year because I really don't want to make that trip twice. Well that and I want to be making another trip in the general direction of AC in early April, and not just to see the folks.
Frozen Four in Philly?? :-D
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: css228As someone who wasn't alive when the miracle happened, I have to say I'm really excited that we're going to be in LP my senior year if we make the ECAC Final Four. However I'm glad it starts in my senior year because I really don't want to make that trip twice. Well that and I want to be making another trip in the general direction of AC in early April, and not just to see the folks.
Interesting that the newest generation of fans (of which I am part) does not just assume that Cornell is going to the ECAC Championships. Especially considering that Cornell has made it seven out of the last eight seasons.
It has less to do with my experiences as a Cornell fan than with my lifelong experiences as Philadelphia sports fan. The moment you assume that you've got something in the bag, thats when the sucker punch is coming. Well that or Bud Selig will wait until the Rays tie the game to call a rain delay and you'll have to wait another 3 days to win. But point is I really should have realized when Stevens basically ended Lindros's career (or the useful portion of it at least), that we don't all get to grow up being yankees fans.
Quote from: bnr24Quote from: css228As someone who wasn't alive when the miracle happened, I have to say I'm really excited that we're going to be in LP my senior year if we make the ECAC Final Four. However I'm glad it starts in my senior year because I really don't want to make that trip twice. Well that and I want to be making another trip in the general direction of AC in early April, and not just to see the folks.
Frozen Four in Philly?? :-D
No, I just really want a cheese steak from Jim's ;-).
Quote from: css228But point is I really should have realized when Stevens basically ended Lindros's career (or the useful portion of it at least), that we don't all get to grow up being yankees fans.
Hey, even Yankees fans have lean years. The fact that you may not have been alive during the last stretch is beside the point. :-P
[
Ed: Come on, everyone reading the board was alive during the terrible trauma of 2008 when the Yanks missed the playoffs!]
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: bnr24Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: bnr24So yes, some still have these rules in place, but a Bed and Breakfast or a Lodge are places which have these rules typically regardless of location. If you want to go only for our team though, there are more than enough options that allow for cancellation with as little as 3 days. And these are only the hotels in Lake Placid, proper. Once you go SLIGHTLY outside of Lake Placid, they are all refundable. So the hotel argument to me seems to be invalid.
Not really, you're going to need to know the policy during ECAC week. What they do now doesn't mean what they will do then. Many hotels have different policies for major events. Certainly those were not the policies when the ECAC was there before. Hopefully it will all be explained tomorrow.
What makes you think that it will not be made even better a year later than that and during a weekend when demand will be high? They will make even MORE money if they are able to make better cancellation policies during that weekend. Besides, since when have hotels gotten MORE draconian in their policies into the future when it is already almost unheard of for places which are not B&Bs or Resorts.
Ummm. Past experience?
Life. Hotels. Basic common sense?
I'm saying given that we are living in 2012, where social media is incredibly influential in our lives and people are living on the web, that things have likely changed in the last decade. Things have changed in the last four years and to think that hotel policies are somehow magically free of this is naive.
"Naive" is thinking things will "magically" change because you'd like them to.
LP is a one-horse town...and barely that. When that one horse shows up, they milk attendees for all they can get. Big difference between a hick place in the boonies like LP and an accessible, attractive city like Providence.
Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Here's the realization I had earlier: dedicated alumni fans, like we who read these boards, will be around forever, and, as much as we claim otherwise, I think a lot of us will probably schlep to Lake Placid or Atlantic City or Providence or whatever other random place the ECAC picks. But we
become] that kind of fan because of the experiences we have in our formative years, i.e. (for most of us) as undergrads or recent alumni. For many of you folks from the national championship era, that means the great memories you have of tournaments at the old Boston Garden before the Divorce; for people from my era, it's the back-to-back championships in 1996 and 1997, the improbable playoff run of 2000, the heartbreak of the 2002 championship game, and the eventual successes of 2003. To some extent, the team is the team, and our school is our school, and those games could have taken place anywhere; but on the flip side, having had many of those experiences in a unique setting like Lake Placid, in my view made them memories with more resonance than if they'd happened somewhere conveniently located but generic like the Times-Union Center. Reasonable minds may differ on this point, of course, but I think trips to someplace "special" like LP will cultivate the next generation of hockey-mad Faithful in a way that Albany or Providence won't.
All that being said, I hope the hotel operators in LP ease up on their cancellation policies this time around, because that was asinine.
Quote from: KeithKQuote from: css228But point is I really should have realized when Stevens basically ended Lindros's career (or the useful portion of it at least), that we don't all get to grow up being yankees fans.
Hey, even Yankees fans have lean years. The fact that you may not have been alive during the last stretch is beside the point. :-P
[Ed: Come on, everyone reading the board was alive during the terrible trauma of 2008 when the Yanks missed the playoffs!]
Terrible trauma? 2008? The year the Phillies won the series? No trauma whatsoever. ::banana::
Quote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
You're a sweet guy Al.
As for what's there to do? It's all in the eye of the beholder. Depends on what you want to do. Suggesting there's nothing to do in LP however, is completely ridiculous. There's more to do there than Providence and Albany, as far as I'm concerned. And unless you're gambling, more than A.C. too.
Quote from: adamwYou're a sweet guy Al.
As for what's there to do? It's all in the eye of the beholder. Depends on what you want to do. Suggesting there's nothing to do in LP however, is completely ridiculous. There's more to do there than Providence and Albany, as far as I'm concerned. And unless you're gambling, more than A.C. too.
Like what? Besides the bobsled and ski jump? Golf? Horseback riding? In March? A spa? How many hockey fans go to a spa? It's a one-street town with nothing to offer but overpriced hotels and restaurants, and a hockey rink that's the wrong size and not nearly as comfortable as the ones in Albany and Providence. Then, of course, there's the weather.
Like I said, it's in the eye of the beholder. If you want to be cranky about it, have a blast. Not gonna affect me. It's pretty useless for me to try to convince anyone, you in particular.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioLike what? Besides the bobsled and ski jump? Golf? Horseback riding? In March? A spa? How many hockey fans go to a spa? It's a one-street town with nothing to offer but overpriced hotels and restaurants, and a hockey rink that's the wrong size and not nearly as comfortable as the ones in Albany and Providence. Then, of course, there's the weather.
Having been there over last New Year's, I can say, from recent firsthand experience, that your characterization of the town is either out of whack or out of date. Perhaps both. My special lady and I are not made of money, yet we spent a great, somewhat economical four days in Placid.
Ummm... Sliding, skating, jumping, and hockey are not the only winter sports up to which one might get in Lake Placid, even in mid-March. You may have heard of these things called skis? And [inserting reference to favorite humorous Placid memory] if your team's victory parade to the rink doesn't get rescheduled, you pretty much have all of Saturday's daylight free. To be more blunt: there's the enormous speed skating oval, there's the cross-country course, there's Whiteface. Look around.
We went skiing. Was it cheap? No, but skiing isn't anywhere. I am not God's great gift to athletics, and it was my first downhill experience. On Whiteface, commonly nicknamed Iceface. Not known as a beginner's hill. But it was important to my ladyfriend for me to give it a try, so I got over my chittering fear and clipped in. Know what? I guess they've opened a lot of terrain lately, and a bunch of that for kids and beginners. And ski technology has changed. I learned, didn't die, and, even on the last, iciest of our days, got pretty far up the mountain. Even started to enjoy the difficulty. Ich habe viel Spass gemacht. I'm itching for the summit next time, but ya gotta work up to Whiteface blues.
We stayed at a very well-run motel, if slightly too economical for my delicate nasal mucosa. (I hate combination heater/air conditioners.) There was the pretty great brewpub with the good happy hour. There was the excellent, edgy restaurant with strikingly imaginative cocktails and cuisine down by the old mill. Not cheap, but worth it. And I'm hard on restaurants. There was the welcoming, cheap breakfast place. There was even nearly edible Mexican. In the North Country. You can find what you want at the price point you're looking for if you do some legwork.
So, it's time to give Placid another chance. Hopefully we'll all have a few years of having a reason to go.
Quote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
I don't buy the accessibility/geography argument. According to Google Maps, these are the driving times from ECACHL locations to Lake Placid & Providence:
LPBrown: 5:19; Clarkson: 2:32; Colgate: 3:41; Cornell: 4:52; Dartmouth: 3:22; Harvard: 5:26; Princeton: 5:45; Quinnepeac: 5:00; RPI: 2:27; St. L: 1:46; Union: 2:32; Yale: 5:06
ProvidenceBrown: 0; Clarkson: 6:39; Colgate: 4:53; Cornell: 5:47; Dartmouth: 3:04; Harvard: 1:10; Princeton: 4:30; Quinnepeac: 1:56; RPI: 2:59; St. L: 6:38; Union: 3:10; Yale: 1:48
So the average travel time to LP is 3:59 but to Providence it's only 3:32. At that's by car! The last I heard, Providence is served by Amtrak, Southwest, and Jet Blue. So I'd presume public transportation would be even more in Providence's favor.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
I don't buy the accessibility/geography argument. According to Google Maps, these are the driving times from ECACHL locations to Lake Placid & Providence:
LP
Brown: 5:19; Clarkson: 2:32; Colgate: 3:41; Cornell: 4:52; Dartmouth: 3:22; Harvard: 5:26; Princeton: 5:45; Quinnepeac: 5:00; RPI: 2:27; St. L: 1:46; Union: 2:32; Yale: 5:06
Providence
Brown: 0; Clarkson: 6:39; Colgate: 4:53; Cornell: 5:47; Dartmouth: 3:04; Harvard: 1:10; Princeton: 4:30; Quinnepeac: 1:56; RPI: 2:59; St. L: 6:38; Union: 3:10; Yale: 1:48
So the average travel time to LP is 3:59 but to Providence it's only 3:32. At that's by car! The last I heard, Providence is served by Amtrak, Southwest, and Jet Blue. So I'd presume public transportation would be even more in Providence's favor.
All right you lunatic Aspies. I want these travel times weighted by Fan Travel Impact by COB.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
I don't buy the accessibility/geography argument. According to Google Maps, these are the driving times from ECACHL locations to Lake Placid & Providence:
LP
Brown: 5:19; Clarkson: 2:32; Colgate: 3:41; Cornell: 4:52; Dartmouth: 3:22; Harvard: 5:26; Princeton: 5:45; Quinnepeac: 5:00; RPI: 2:27; St. L: 1:46; Union: 2:32; Yale: 5:06
Providence
Brown: 0; Clarkson: 6:39; Colgate: 4:53; Cornell: 5:47; Dartmouth: 3:04; Harvard: 1:10; Princeton: 4:30; Quinnepeac: 1:56; RPI: 2:59; St. L: 6:38; Union: 3:10; Yale: 1:48
So the average travel time to LP is 3:59 but to Providence it's only 3:32. At that's by car! The last I heard, Providence is served by Amtrak, Southwest, and Jet Blue. So I'd presume public transportation would be even more in Providence's favor.
Well, it's clearly much more convenient to Harvard's and Brown's 9 combined fans anyway.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
You can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Quote from: Jim HylaYou can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Like I've said, clearly in the eye of the beholder. I mean, talking about finding parking ... yikes :)
Hey, I love Boston - but driving an hour back and forth from Providence to Boston ... vs. taking a stroll down Main Street in LP ... I'll take the latter.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaYou can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Like I've said, clearly in the eye of the beholder. I mean, talking about finding parking ... yikes :)
Hey, I love Boston - but driving an hour back and forth from Providence to Boston ... vs. taking a stroll down Main Street in LP ... I'll take the latter.
I know this comes as quite a shock, but I'm with Jim & Al on this one...
This discussion is shaping up as a generational divide. It's not unlike the ones I have with my son... I keep reminding him: "remember, you're heading where I am, I'm not headed where you are." So, let's just respect the fact that, even though we're all college hockey fans, we have differences in exactly how we enjoy that sport. It's not difficult to understand that 20-30 year olds enjoy different after-hour activities than 60-70 year olds, is it?
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaYou can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Like I've said, clearly in the eye of the beholder. I mean, talking about finding parking ... yikes :)
Hey, I love Boston - but driving an hour back and forth from Providence to Boston ... vs. taking a stroll down Main Street in LP ... I'll take the latter.
And that's about all you can do on Main Street in LP: stroll.
Quote from: rediceQuote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaYou can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Like I've said, clearly in the eye of the beholder. I mean, talking about finding parking ... yikes :)
Hey, I love Boston - but driving an hour back and forth from Providence to Boston ... vs. taking a stroll down Main Street in LP ... I'll take the latter.
I know this comes as quite a shock, but I'm with Jim & Al on this one...
This discussion is shaping up as a generational divide. It's not unlike the ones I have with my son... I keep reminding him: "remember, you're heading where I am, I'm not headed where you are." So, let's just respect the fact that, even though we're all college hockey fans, we have differences in exactly how we enjoy that sport. It's not difficult to understand that 20-30 year olds enjoy different after-hour activities than 60-70 year olds, is it?
The interesting, or perhaps ironic, thing about the generational divide is that opinions on either side of the divide are the opposite of what many predicted they would be when Lake Placid as host was more a musing than a reality. Most thought the younger fanbase and alumni would not be lured or attracted to the aura of Lake Placid because we were not alive during the 1980 Lake Placid games, but the elder generation would be. The opposite has played out on here.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
Yeah, the whole "what are we going to do there?" complaint can be used by somebody for just about any host. I know I heard it upon moving to Albany: ("So I guess just spend the day at Crossgates? Great." ) and Atlantic City ("Unless you gamble, there's nothing to do there in March" ). Personally, growing up in a town about 1/3 the size of Ithaca, I've never had the "Whatever shall we do to pass the time??" complaint. Almost every place has some interesting nook to discover or Kuraltian local exploration/conversation to undertake. Or you can make your own fun, given the right companions and/or creative inspiration. Or go see a movie or find a cafe to read and watch life.
As far as Providence goes, I've had a chance to spend some time in the downtown area, and there are a lot of cool things there, compared to the hill on which Brown sits.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
I have no idea whatsoever what you like or dislike to do, and you probably aren't going to find much in the way of culture in Providence AFTER a 7pm game at Brown. For one thing, that afternoon you might try the Rhode Island School of Design Art Museum (#1 in this article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/travel/36-hours-in-providence-ri.html )
TimV and I can vouch for the gustatory quality of #6, by the way.::cheer::
Quote from: RichHPersonally, growing up in a town about 1/3 the size of Ithaca, I've never had an issue with the "Whatever shall we do to pass the time??" complaint.
That's overly generous. ;)
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: rediceQuote from: adamwQuote from: Jim HylaYou can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Like I've said, clearly in the eye of the beholder. I mean, talking about finding parking ... yikes :)
Hey, I love Boston - but driving an hour back and forth from Providence to Boston ... vs. taking a stroll down Main Street in LP ... I'll take the latter.
I know this comes as quite a shock, but I'm with Jim & Al on this one...
This discussion is shaping up as a generational divide. It's not unlike the ones I have with my son... I keep reminding him: "remember, you're heading where I am, I'm not headed where you are." So, let's just respect the fact that, even though we're all college hockey fans, we have differences in exactly how we enjoy that sport. It's not difficult to understand that 20-30 year olds enjoy different after-hour activities than 60-70 year olds, is it?
The interesting, or perhaps ironic, thing about the generational divide is that opinions on either side of the divide are the opposite of what many predicted they would be when Lake Placid as host was more a musing than a reality. Most thought the younger fanbase and alumni would not be lured or attracted to the aura of Lake Placid because we were not alive during the 1980 Lake Placid games, but the elder generation would be. The opposite has played out on here.
Not necessarily correct. The first time was nice. The second time barely outweighed the inconvenience of getting there. Now no desire to do it a third time. Been there. Done that.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
You can spend the day in Boston. Beats LP any day.
Eh. A) Though this isn't the case for everybody, I already live in a large city, so that doesn't hold a lot of appeal to me. If I want to spend a day in a large city, I can stay home. That's the case for a lot of alumni who, as Al points out, mainly live in and around the large cities in the Northeast.
B) As Adam pointed out, parking in Boston can be expensive and/or hard to find, making a short trip not worthwhile.
C) There's only so much you can do in Boston if you need to be back in Providence for a hockey game at 4pm.
D) The point here was that Providence is an attractive city; if it's best selling point is "an hour away from somewhere interesting," I don't know that it says much about Providence itself.
My 2 cents: I'm going for the hockey. if Cornell is in the tourney, I'm going, whether it's Providence, Albany, Boston or Placid. That said, once I'm there, which one will give me the most to do during the daylight hours when there is no hockey?
Not Albany. Maybe Providence for a year or two, until I've seen whatever there is to see in Providence. Hell, activities around AC weren't bad, even though I don't drink or gamble. But AC itself is such a shit hole. And even when the tournament was in Boston, we didn't do much to take advantage of Boston during the day - we just hung out waiting for the hockey to start, because we'd all been to Boston lots of times in our life. But the outdoor activities in LP keep giving until I can no longer get myself out the front door.
It's no question for me.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82But the outdoor activities in LP keep giving until I can no longer get myself out the front door.
Jeff, I'm glad to hear you take advantage of the outdoor activities in LP. I'm interested in which ones you do? Ski jumping with Adam? Speed-skating on your skates with two-foot long blades on the LP oval? Luge (single or two-man)? Bobsledding (two-man or four-man)? Snowboarding? Skiing? I keep hearing how wonderful all these winter activities are, but I'm curious as to which ones people here really do when they go to LP.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
I have no idea whatsoever what you like or dislike to do, and you probably aren't going to find much in the way of culture in Providence AFTER a 7pm game at Brown. For one thing, that afternoon you might try the Rhode Island School of Design Art Museum (#1 in this article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/travel/36-hours-in-providence-ri.html )
TimV and I can vouch for the gustatory quality of #6, by the way.::cheer::
The same series of travel articles would seem to suggest that there are things to do in Lake Placid as well:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/travel/36-hours-lake-placid-ny.html?pagewanted=all
I think what these two links illustrate is that, as RichH mentioned upthread, if you're with people whose company you enjoy and you put your mind to it, there are fun things to do wherever you go. For a while you've been saying "there's nothing to do in Lake Placid" when what you really should be saying is "I don't enjoy the things there are to do in Lake Placid". That's unfortunate, and nobody can tell you you'll enjoy yourself next time if you haven't in the past, but I don't think "there's nothing to do in Lake Placid" is nearly as universal a fact as you assert it to be. (In fairness, the annoying hotel policies and potentially unsafe roads are equaly problematic to all.)
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
I have no idea whatsoever what you like or dislike to do, and you probably aren't going to find much in the way of culture in Providence AFTER a 7pm game at Brown. For one thing, that afternoon you might try the Rhode Island School of Design Art Museum (#1 in this article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/travel/36-hours-in-providence-ri.html )
TimV and I can vouch for the gustatory quality of #6, by the way.::cheer::
A big part of the question concerns March weather. LP is clearly better for outdoor winter sports. If it's a cold March, Lake Placid has a real advantage, at least for outdoor types. If March is mild, and that seems to be the trend (Al Gore smiley), Providence wins. Either way, Providence is likely to put on a WaterFire (http://waterfire.org/) for the ECAC's, and there's lots to do in nearby Newport (http://www.gonewport.com/).
I don't see how this is a generational divide. What, are we suggesting that the young'ns are headed to Lake Placid for all that stellar nightlife??? On the contrary, I would think that, stereotypically, the older folk would enjoy the quaint charm of LP more. But let's forget all of the stereotyping. Once again, as Josh points out and I have too...it's all on what you enjoy. To say there's nothing to do in LP is simply a non-serious comment. It's all a matter of taste. There is plenty to do for those who enjoy those things. Plenty of outdoor stuff, or shops, or museums, or just enjoying the scenery. Or you can just enjoy hanging and schmoozing with the people you go with and sharing stories of hockey lore for the umpteenth time with an Adirondack backdrop. Whatever. To each their own.
There are also revolutionary things called "books." :-}
Quote from: SwampyA big part of the question concerns March weather. LP is clearly better for outdoor winter sports. If it's a cold March, Lake Placid has a real advantage, at least for outdoor types. If March is mild, and that seems to be the trend (Al Gore smiley), Providence wins. Either way, Providence is likely to put on a WaterFire (http://waterfire.org/) for the ECAC's, and there's lots to do in nearby Newport (http://www.gonewport.com/).
Last year, in one of the worst winters we've had recently, Whiteface closed (http://www.whiteface.com/mountain/index.php) on March 25th, so I expect them to be open, if marginally, every mid-March and some years for the skiing to be great. They normally stay open until mid-April.
Quote from: Josh '99I think what these two links illustrate is that, as RichH mentioned upthread, if you're with people whose company you enjoy and you put your mind to it, there are fun things to do wherever you go. For a while you've been saying "there's nothing to do in Lake Placid" when what you really should be saying is "I don't enjoy the things there are to do in Lake Placid". That's unfortunate, and nobody can tell you you'll enjoy yourself next time if you haven't in the past, but I don't think "there's nothing to do in Lake Placid" is nearly as universal a fact as you assert it to be. (In fairness, the annoying hotel policies and potentially unsafe roads are equaly problematic to all.)
Honestly, one of the things I always enjoyed when we went to Lake Placid for the ECAC tournament was the VFW's pancake breakfast fundraiser on Saturday morning. Friendly small-town people, fresh local real maple syrup, and basically an all-you-can-eat breakfast for $5. Can't go wrong there.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82But the outdoor activities in LP keep giving until I can no longer get myself out the front door.
Jeff, I'm glad to hear you take advantage of the outdoor activities in LP. I'm interested in which ones you do? Ski jumping with Adam? Speed-skating on your skates with two-foot long blades on the LP oval? Luge (single or two-man)? Bobsledding (two-man or four-man)? Snowboarding? Skiing? I keep hearing how wonderful all these winter activities are, but I'm curious as to which ones people here really do when they go to LP.
I'm no expert, but I think there may be some sarcasm in this post.
Quote from: French RageQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82But the outdoor activities in LP keep giving until I can no longer get myself out the front door.
Jeff, I'm glad to hear you take advantage of the outdoor activities in LP. I'm interested in which ones you do? Ski jumping with Adam? Speed-skating on your skates with two-foot long blades on the LP oval? Luge (single or two-man)? Bobsledding (two-man or four-man)? Snowboarding? Skiing? I keep hearing how wonderful all these winter activities are, but I'm curious as to which ones people here really do when they go to LP.
I'm no expert, but I think there may be some sarcasm in this post.
Well, for the record, I have gone down the bobsled run (five man for what it's worth), but as Al hints, I'm long past my adrenalin junkie days. Hell, it's been 17 years since my last bungee jump.
For me the outdoor activity is birdwatching and just being out in nature. Lake Placid is firmly in the boreal zone, so the species there are less likely to be found where most of us live. When the tournament was in LP before, I always took advantage of that opportunity to do a long birding session Saturday morning.
And for the record, Al, my post wasn't intended to try to sell you or anyone else on LP. I was just expressing my feelings.
Quote from: TrotskyThere are also revolutionary things called "books." :-}
Yeah, like you have to be in LP to that? It's a real reason to go there.::screwy::
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: TrotskyThere are also revolutionary things called "books." :-}
Yeah, like you have to be in LP to that? It's a real reason to go there.::screwy::
*throws up hands*
This is turning into a circular argument, (or an Abbott & Costello routine) at this point.
Lou: Why do we have to go to Lake Placid?
Bud: That's where the hockey tournament is.
Lou: Well, what am I going to do there between games to prevent myself from dying of boredom?
Bud: Lots of outdoor activities
Lou: Well, I don't like doing those.
Bud: You could read?
Lou: Psshhh. I could do that anywhere. Why do we have to go there to read?
Bud: We're not going there to read. We're going there because of the hockey tournament.
Lou: But what will I DO between games???
Disclaimer: I have an excessive amount of patience for a lot of things. People who get bored when they travel is not one of them. YMMV. An anecdote I use involves some NYC guys from my freshman dorm floor. They complained endlessly about how there was "nothing to do" in podunk, little Ithaca, and that they all should have just gone to Columbia. I tried to suggest restaurants, movies, & nightlife spots, and just got eyerolls. After college, I visited a couple of them in NYC, and what did we do? Got dinner, saw a movie, and went to a bar. My point isn't to say NYC (or other exciting destination) isn't anything special. Just that what people find they do most often in their day-to-day leisure time isn't that much different from place to place.
Quote from: RichHDisclaimer: I have an excessive amount of patience for a lot of things. People who get bored when they travel is not one of them. YMMV. An anecdote I use involves some NYC guys from my freshman dorm floor. They complained endlessly about how there was "nothing to do" in podunk, little Ithaca, and that they all should have just gone to Columbia. I tried to suggest restaurants, movies, & nightlife spots, and just got eyerolls. After college, I visited a couple of them in NYC, and what did we do? Got dinner, saw a movie, and went to a bar. My point isn't to say NYC (or other exciting destination) isn't anything special. Just that what people find they do most often in their day-to-day leisure time isn't that much different from place to place.
Well, sure, but at least in NYC your evening out was significantly more expensive.
Rich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
I'm one of the younger ones, Class of '09, and I'm not thrilled with the LP choice. I would much rather Providence. Currently I live in Boston, but I'll be in DC starting April 2013, so getting to LP will be a pain. Providence, as many have stated, has an abundance of transit options. As for during the day - same thing we did in Detroit, find a restaurant for a late brunch, then beer pong in the room before the early game. It's the people that really matter for not being bored. and I agree with Al's statement:
Quote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
Because it's a great place that's worth it. Again, your mileage may vary.
Oh and just for total disclosure, between the time I go birdwatching and the start of the early game on Saturday, I either watch the NCAA basketball tournament or curling on Canadian TV (or take a nap).
Quote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
They tried having in a relatively easy to get to place: Atlantic City. Most people hated it (for the record, I didn't think it was as bad as everyone made it out to be). I've come to the conclusion that no matter where the tournament is, a sizable amount of people will be unhappy. Every location is out of the way for someone and one person's fun activity bores someone else.
Quote from: RichHDisclaimer: I have an excessive amount of patience for a lot of things. People who get bored when they travel is not one of them. YMMV. An anecdote I use involves some NYC guys from my freshman dorm floor. They complained endlessly about how there was "nothing to do" in podunk, little Ithaca, and that they all should have just gone to Columbia. I tried to suggest restaurants, movies, & nightlife spots, and just got eyerolls. After college, I visited a couple of them in NYC, and what did we do? Got dinner, saw a movie, and went to a bar. My point isn't to say NYC (or other exciting destination) isn't anything special. Just that what people find they do most often in their day-to-day leisure time isn't that much different from place to place.
So what you're saying is, whether it's Lake Placid, Albany, Atlantic City, Providence, Boston, or anywhere else, we're just going to go drink?
I can live with that. ::drunk::
Quote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
I was attempting to dismiss the "there's nothing to do" complaint, which I don't think is a valid one. The remoteness/accessibility concern is a different point altogether, and has more merit for discussion.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
Because it's a great place that's worth it. Again, your mileage may vary.
Come on Adam, that's the best you can do?
And Adam, I'm still waiting to hear about any change in hotel policies. Any news?
Rich, you missed, or purposely turned around my point. You can read everywhere, so that's not a reason to hold it in LP, end of point.
edit: I had typed this before your recent post, but didn't post it quickly, so I retract my "purposely" point.
Personally, I'd like to have tried Providence, and see how many fans we might get. I think there might be a few from Boston that would have come down. We draw well in Allston, so who knows? But from the article in the Providence Journal (http://news.providencejournal.com/sports/college/2012/08/dunkin-donuts-centers-bid-for-ecac-hockey-tourney-fails.html) it doesn't look like that was ever possible.
QuoteThe ECAC was looking for a monetary guarantee that Providence was unwilling to offer, said Jim Bennett, the director of economic development for the City of Providence and the chairman of the board of the Rhode Island Convention Center Authority, which oversees the Dunk.
So money was a factor. Not surprising, but not the only factor, as Ken Schott reports that Albany had the best package. Too bad they didn't have that 3 years ago, as it was said that money was a reason for jumping to AC.
Quote from: Jim HylaCome on Adam, that's the best you can do?
C'mon Jim ... you've been reading this thread all along, and read my stuff, you know everything I think. I expect more from you than someone like, oh, say, Al. You know full well I was giving Al the short answer. Clearly, as we've been saying, if you feel like being miserable about Lake Placid, to each their own. Some people love it and find plenty to do. Otherwise, at this point, making remarks like that is just trolling.
re: hotels ... whatever I know was in the recent articles.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: adamwQuote from: Al DeFlorioRich, your Abbott and Costello routine is a good send-up, but Lou's second question should be: Why does it have to be in such an out-of-the-way place? That's the crux of the issue.
Because it's a great place that's worth it. Again, your mileage may vary.
Come on Adam, that's the best you can do?
Why does he have to do better, three pages into this discussion? It's fine that people disagree about this. I find the entire argument TODAY ridiculous because the decision has already been made. Stop grousing and read a Rough Guide book if you think you'll be bored during the day. If you aren't going to go at all because it is too far away - like me - stop making it about your* own inability to entertain yourself while waiting for the game.
* I don't mean you specifically, Jim, this just happens to be the post where I've finally had enough of the back-and-forth without any value added. "YMMV" is a perfect way to sum up the argument and would have been a good button on the whole thing.
According to USCHO, the Div. III championships in 2014 (http://www.uscho.com/2012/08/20/mens-division-iii-title-game-planned-to-coincide-with-philadelphia-frozen-four-in-2014/) will be in Philly on Friday of the Div I championships. And to get another dig in:-D, here's what they say about LP:
QuoteIt would be a big change for the D-III tournament, which, until 2008, had been almost exclusively played on campus sites. Lake Placid, N.Y., was the site of the semifinals and finals in four of the last five seasons and is scheduled to host again in 2013.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/2012/08/20/mens-division-iii-title-game-planned-to-coincide-with-philadelphia-frozen-four-in-2014/#ixzz24BCe1txC
Quote from: Jim HylaAccording to USCHO, the Div. III championships in 2014 (http://www.uscho.com/2012/08/20/mens-division-iii-title-game-planned-to-coincide-with-philadelphia-frozen-four-in-2014/) will be in Philly on Friday of the Div I championships. And to get another dig in:-D, here's what they say about LP:
QuoteIt would be a big change for the D-III tournament, which, until 2008, had been almost exclusively played on campus sites. Lake Placid, N.Y., was the site of the semifinals and finals in four of the last five seasons and is scheduled to host again in 2013.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/2012/08/20/mens-division-iii-title-game-planned-to-coincide-with-philadelphia-frozen-four-in-2014/#ixzz24BCe1txC
Love it! I don't know that I'll actually GO to the DIII title game, but it'll be great to have the option.
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/238399201929728000
Thoughts?
Quote from: bnr24https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/238399201929728000
Thoughts?
It's actually a pretty nice mural. And good for them. They made the Frozen Four. They have the right to (and should) commemerate it in as many ways as possible.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: bnr24https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/238399201929728000
Thoughts?
It's actually a pretty nice mural. And good for them. They made the Frozen Four. They have the right to (and should) commemerate it in as many ways as possible.
Yeah. Why would this raise anybody's hackles? It's one thing when their uh...fans(?) act like entitled pricks, but that's the hockey locker room. Their players accomplished a lot of things that their program can (and should) be proud of, finally. Why not commemorate them?
Quote from: RichHQuote from: jtn27Quote from: bnr24https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/238399201929728000
Thoughts?
It's actually a pretty nice mural. And good for them. They made the Frozen Four. They have the right to (and should) commemerate it in as many ways as possible.
Yeah. Why would this raise anybody's hackles? It's one thing when their uh...fans(?) act like entitled pricks, but that's the hockey locker room. Their players accomplished a lot of things that their program can (and should) be proud of, finally. Why not commemorate them?
I don't know, my issue with them had to do with the fact that they made a big to-do about not celebrating athletics in the locker room. I don't want to take away from their accomplishments (seriously, props to the Frozen Four), but I respected them more for their stance before. Idk, guess it is easy to say before you win anything significant.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: jtn27Quote from: bnr24https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/238399201929728000
Thoughts?
It's actually a pretty nice mural. And good for them. They made the Frozen Four. They have the right to (and should) commemerate it in as many ways as possible.
Yeah. Why would this raise anybody's hackles? It's one thing when their uh...fans(?) act like entitled pricks, but that's the hockey locker room. Their players accomplished a lot of things that their program can (and should) be proud of, finally. Why not commemorate them?
I will even concede that with a more recent Frozen Four appearance, Union
finally has something about which they can have an attitude toward Cornell. It is a real accomplishment of theirs. However, I do think there is an element of hypocrisy about the mural and comments that Bennett has made several times, including those made during the Jell-O Mold awarding ceremony in Schenectady last season, in the past.
The one reason that it might be appropriate to be critical of their choice is because of Bennett's incessancy about how while he is coach, Union College will never put anything celebrating anything other than academic achievements in the locker room. He pointed to how players post typically which players make the dean's list on the walls of the locker room. He followed these comments up on several occasions with not-so-veiled allusions to the well-known tradition of Schafer that has players polish trophies and place trophies in the locker rooms as being practices Bennett critiqued as emphasizing the wrong side of the sport and something that programs that deprioritize academics do.
The first time I heard the comment, I took it as a slight to Cornell. Then, when I thought about it, I decided that if Union stayed loyal to that tradition it would be one of which I was jealous. Certainly, it would remain a hallmark and a point of pride for a self-proclaimed proud liberal arts school. However, Bennett has proven to be a mere hypocrite on this issue when his program and he could have shown great character with choosing that they would continue on as they had before, when they had nothing to display or commemorate in their locker room. Perhaps I am too sensitive to hypocrisy, but hypocritical arrogance strikes me as something mock-worthy.
https://twitter.com/BThomasIthaca/status/239001135439024128
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/239006325391110144
I wonder if Willcox knows already the history of his chosen number. He has much to live up to now, I guess.
Matt Underhill is among the folks going into the CU Athletic Hall of Fame this year (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/22/fb_0822125150.aspx).
Quote from: WederMatt Underhill is among the folks going into the CU Athletic Hall of Fame this year (http://www.cornellbigred.com/news/2012/8/22/fb_0822125150.aspx).
Good for him.
Taking a look at the other inductees - If I were more of a cynic I would say somehting like "I had no idea that philanthropy was an intercollegiate sport". :-D
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Josh '99Accessible? I guess, though not as much so as Albany; however, this to some extent disregards the fact that the ECAC is no longer, and in all likelihood never will again be, a Boston-centered league. Providence is at one end of the league's geographic footprint as much so as Lake Placid is, and for the schools with sizable student/townie fan bases, Lake Placid is comparably convenient (Capital District schools) or much more so (Cornell, North Country schools).
As for attractiveness, one thing the Lake Placid region certainly has going for it is natural beauty out the wazoo (albeit, in fairness, much of it snow-covered even into March), if that's a major concern.
Well, there are trains--with frequent service--and interstate highways that go right into downtown Providence from all major northeast cities, where many alumni live (How many Clarkson alums live in Potsdam?) Albany is also much more accessible than LP, but, in my opinion (sorry, Tim) is not as attractive a city as Providence. As far as attractiveness goes, what else is there to do in LP other than a bogus bobsled ride? A ski jump? [I'll go if Adam promises to jump for us.]
I would be very happy to have seen the ECACs return to Albany, but if the brilliant ADs who chose Atlantic City over Albany felt a continuing need for an alternative to Albany, Providence would be a much more desirable location than LP.
OK, so clearly you don't like the wintry options in Lake Placid; what is there to do in Providence? I've never felt much of a desire to do anything after a game at Meehan except skip town, but maybe I'm missing out.
I have no idea whatsoever what you like or dislike to do, and you probably aren't going to find much in the way of culture in Providence AFTER a 7pm game at Brown. For one thing, that afternoon you might try the Rhode Island School of Design Art Museum (#1 in this article:
http://travel.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/travel/36-hours-in-providence-ri.html )
TimV and I can vouch for the gustatory quality of #6, by the way.::cheer::
A big part of the question concerns March weather. LP is clearly better for outdoor winter sports. If it's a cold March, Lake Placid has a real advantage, at least for outdoor types. If March is mild, and that seems to be the trend (Al Gore smiley), Providence wins. Either way, Providence is likely to put on a WaterFire (http://waterfire.org/) for the ECAC's, and there's lots to do in nearby Newport (http://www.gonewport.com/).
And if it is cold and icy then the mortician may win. My biggest problem with LP is the drive from I-87 to the town. I don't really enjoy it in the summer in daylight. Since I will be driving home after the games the weather may coax me into a ditch.
If the weather is terrible, I'll be hoping that RPI TV or Time Warner will be broadcasting the games.::worry::
Could someone more learned in NCAA rules explain what constitutes a coach-led practice and what constitutes a captain-led voluntary practice? Union and Quinnipiac both play games on the first day that the NCAA allows coach-led practices and then Appert tweeted this to make the distinction more convoluted in my mind.
https://twitter.com/SethAppert/status/240251475396292610
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinCould someone more learned in NCAA rules explain what constitutes a coach-led practice and what constitutes a captain-led voluntary practice? Union and Quinnipiac both play games on the first day that the NCAA allows coach-led practices and then Appert tweeted this to make the distinction more convoluted in my mind.
Coaches are allowed to "attend" captain's practices for safety and observation purposes, but they are not allowed to "lead" the practices. Good luck splitting those hairs in your NCAA violation review....
Quote from: RobbQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinCould someone more learned in NCAA rules explain what constitutes a coach-led practice and what constitutes a captain-led voluntary practice? Union and Quinnipiac both play games on the first day that the NCAA allows coach-led practices and then Appert tweeted this to make the distinction more convoluted in my mind.
Coaches are allowed to "attend" captain's practices for safety and observation purposes, but they are not allowed to "lead" the practices. Good luck splitting those hairs in your NCAA violation review....
And everypne knows that captain's practices are "voluntary". As in, you can voluntarily choose to be kicked off the team.
Do the Ivies, ECAC and NCAA each have different dates on which captain and coach practices are permitted? (i.e., 6 different dates)
Quote from: TrotskyDo the Ivies, ECAC and NCAA each have different dates on which captain and coach practices are permitted? (i.e., 6 different dates)
Ivies and ECAC are all definitely different, so that's 4. I suspect that the ECAC dates match the NCAA dates, though, since 6 ECAC members start playing games in early October like the rest of the NCAA. The sport I played (fencing) was not in the ECAC, so we only dealt with Ivy and NCAA rules.
I never knew you could sword fight. I'm going to be a lot more polite in future.
Apologies if it was reported elsewhere: Hockey East to expand playoffs to include all teams starting in 2013-2014.
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/09/10_hockey_east_to_expand_playoffs.php
Quote from: nyc94Apologies if it was reported elsewhere: Hockey East to expand playoffs to include all teams starting in 2013-2014.
http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2012/09/10_hockey_east_to_expand_playoffs.php
Once that's in effect, every single conference will allow all of their teams to make the conference playoff tournament.
Sorry, UAH.
Quote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Roll Tide
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Yes. Alabama has an ACHA team. I am not sure which division it plays in. A significant number of Southern state schools do including the University of Oklahoma that has an ACHA Division I program that is quite competitive in that division. Most observers claim that the level of play at ACHA Division I is approximate among the best ACHA Division I teams to NCAA Division III. I watched almost all of Penn State's last season at the ACHA Division I level and I think that is a good approximation, but there's a lot less parity in ACHA Division I. The best programs are NCAA Division III-like and the worst can be quite bad,
Once upon a time, UAB joined UAH as a serviceable D-1 hockey program. I don't know why UAB dropped down so much earlier.
Note: this was also a time when Northern Arizona (Flagstaff) had a D-1 program. Times have changed.
ACHA Standings:
D-1 (http://achahockey.org/standings.php?league_id=1059&schedule_id=94220)
D-2 (http://achahockey.org/standings.php?league_id=1061&schedule_id=94216)
D-3 (http://achahockey.org/standings.php?league_id=1063&schedule_id=94217)
The Northern Virginia Community College Raiders has some issues in net (http://ncrha.org/team.php?team_id=170&area=stats).
This may be why (http://ncrha.org/profile.php?player_id=3056). He has just become my favorite hockey player on Earth.
Edit: Link follow fail. The latter two lines are from the NVCC ROLLER hockey team, which is a juggernaut compared to the NVCC HOCKEY team.
RPI blog Without a Peer post about Cornell http://www.withoutapeer.com/2012/09/know-your-enemy-cornell.html.
I have no connection to WaP except as a reader.
Quote from: TrotskyOnce upon a time, UAB joined UAH as a serviceable D-1 hockey program. I don't know why UAB dropped down so much earlier.
Note: this was also a time when Northern Arizona (Flagstaff) had a D-1 program. Times have changed.
I don't recall UAB playing D-I. I do remember Northern Arizona. Are you sure about UAB?
Quote from: ursusminorI don't recall UAB playing D-I. I do remember Northern Arizona. Are you sure about UAB?
I remember there were two Alabamas. I am pretty sure the other one was Birmingham, but I will check tonight. It may have been before there was a formal "D-1" (as in the days when USC and Lake Forest State had ostensible NCAA programs).
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Roll Tide
The Frozen Tide (http://bamahockey.net/) is a great name.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ursusminorI don't recall UAB playing D-I. I do remember Northern Arizona. Are you sure about UAB?
I remember there were two Alabamas. I am pretty sure the other one was Birmingham, but I will check tonight. It may have been before there was a formal "D-1" (as in the days when USC and Lake Forest State had ostensible NCAA programs).
Not in the memory-banks of the Historical Archives. That doesn't mean it's a complete list, of course.
http://www.augenblick.org/chha/info_chn.html
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ursusminorI don't recall UAB playing D-I. I do remember Northern Arizona. Are you sure about UAB?
I remember there were two Alabamas. I am pretty sure the other one was Birmingham, but I will check tonight. It may have been before there was a formal "D-1" (as in the days when USC and Lake Forest State had ostensible NCAA programs).
I guess that I didn't understand your previous comment. I thought that you said that it was the same time as Northern Arizona played D-I which was in the 1980s.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtn27Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Roll Tide
The Frozen Tide (http://bamahockey.net/) is a great name.
How can a frozen tide roll?
Quote from: Ronald '09Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtn27Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Roll Tide
The Frozen Tide (http://bamahockey.net/) is a great name.
How can a frozen tide roll?
It's more of a gradual creep over the course of 10,000 years.
Nope, I'm wrong, I am unable to find any UAB reference. The College Hockey Reference Manual lists the following teams as Independents in 1988-89:
Merrimack
Michigan-Dearborn
UAF
Lake Forest
UAH
UAA
Air Force
St. Cloud State
Notre Dame
I think I probably misremembered the three UAs as two Alabamas (I wasn't even aware the Alaska programs were D-1 at that time).
In other news, I'm old.
Quote from: French RageQuote from: Ronald '09Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: jtn27Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Alabama? Like, University of?
Roll Tide
The Frozen Tide (http://bamahockey.net/) is a great name.
How can a frozen tide roll?
It's more of a gradual creep over the course of 10,000 years.
Like Union's path to winning a playoff series.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHSorry, UAH.
UAH's home opponents (http://www.uahchargers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mhockey&) this season:
Alabama
Mankato
US Under 18
Finlandia
Adrian
Sorry, UAH.
Yikes. They play 22 games against D-1 teams, including two against Penn State. That's just barely enough to be eligible for the NCAA.
Quote from: TrotskyNope, I'm wrong, I am unable to find any UAB reference. The College Hockey Reference Manual lists the following teams as Independents in 1988-89:
Merrimack
Michigan-Dearborn
UAF
Lake Forest
UAH
UAA
Air Force
St. Cloud State
Notre Dame
I think I probably misremembered the three UAs as two Alabamas (I wasn't even aware the Alaska programs were D-1 at that time).
In other news, I'm old.
That's news?::dribble::
Via Ken Schott, NCAA video on rules changes. (http://s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/web_video/ice_hockey/2012/2012-13PreseasonRulesVideo.html)
Quote from: Jim HylaVia Ken Schott, NCAA video on rules changes. (http://s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/web_video/ice_hockey/2012/2012-13PreseasonRulesVideo.html)
The lead-in and music are hysterical. What if Herb Tarlick gave a presentation at the Orange County Realtors Convention?
Quote from: Jim HylaVia Ken Schott, NCAA video on rules changes. (http://s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/web_video/ice_hockey/2012/2012-13PreseasonRulesVideo.html)
Didn't have time to watch the video yet, but I will guiltily miss the smug eye-rolling opportunity whenever some newbie screams "HAND PASS!" in the defensive zone.
http://insidehockey.com/ncaa-rules-all-hand-passes-illegal
Quote from: RichHQuote from: Jim HylaVia Ken Schott, NCAA video on rules changes. (http://s3.amazonaws.com/ncaa/web_video/ice_hockey/2012/2012-13PreseasonRulesVideo.html)
Didn't have time to watch the video yet, but I will guiltily miss the smug eye-rolling opportunity whenever some newbie screams "HAND PASS!" in the defensive zone.
http://insidehockey.com/ncaa-rules-all-hand-passes-illegal
I agree with the criticism of this change in the linked article.
Quote from: KeithKQuote from: RobbQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinCould someone more learned in NCAA rules explain what constitutes a coach-led practice and what constitutes a captain-led voluntary practice? Union and Quinnipiac both play games on the first day that the NCAA allows coach-led practices and then Appert tweeted this to make the distinction more convoluted in my mind.
Coaches are allowed to "attend" captain's practices for safety and observation purposes, but they are not allowed to "lead" the practices. Good luck splitting those hairs in your NCAA violation review....
And everypne knows that captain's practices are "voluntary". As in, you can voluntarily choose to be kicked off the team.
On the same topic, Ken Schott posted videos of Union hockey practice with this article (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/sep/15/union-hockey-has-first-practice-of-season-with-two/) from last week. In the Grosenick interview (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1147/), Schott in his question and Grosenick in his answer imply that the practices that began are no longer captain-led practices when they highlight the differences in tone and conducting of each practice, but are coach-led. They note how different it is with the coaches there. Also, in the other video (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1146/), one can clearly tell at the end that Bennett is leading the practice. I do not think that any reasonable person assumes that Union would be heading into a match-up with Merrimack on October 6, the first day on which official coach-led practices are allowed, without any formal coaching. But, October 6 is the first day on which coach-led practices are allowed under NCAA rules. Is Union engaging in an NCAA violation? Or, is this just a standard no one follows? I've always found this standard peculiar.
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinOn the same topic, Ken Schott posted videos of Union hockey practice with this article (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/sep/15/union-hockey-has-first-practice-of-season-with-two/) from last week. In the Grosenick interview (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1147/), Schott in his question and Grosenick in his answer imply that the practices that began are no longer captain-led practices when they highlight the differences in tone and conducting of each practice, but are coach-led. They note how different it is with the coaches there. Also, in the other video (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1146/), one can clearly tell at the end that Bennett is leading the practice. I do not think that any reasonable person assumes that Union would be heading into a match-up with Merrimack on October 6, the first day on which official coach-led practices are allowed, without any formal coaching. But, October 6 is the first day on which coach-led practices are allowed under NCAA rules. Is Union engaging in an NCAA violation? Or, is this just a standard no one follows? I've always found this standard peculiar.
Where did you see that October 6th is the first day that's allowed? That isn't correct. The first date was last week, thus Ken Schott's article and video.
Youth hockey still allows a hand pass in the defensive zone to my knowledge. I'm guessing that junior hockey still allows hand passes in the defensive zone as well. Strange decision regardless of your views on newbies.
Quote from: adamwQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinOn the same topic, Ken Schott posted videos of Union hockey practice with this article (https://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2012/sep/15/union-hockey-has-first-practice-of-season-with-two/) from last week. In the Grosenick interview (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1147/), Schott in his question and Grosenick in his answer imply that the practices that began are no longer captain-led practices when they highlight the differences in tone and conducting of each practice, but are coach-led. They note how different it is with the coaches there. Also, in the other video (http://www.dailygazette.com/videos/2012/sep/15/1146/), one can clearly tell at the end that Bennett is leading the practice. I do not think that any reasonable person assumes that Union would be heading into a match-up with Merrimack on October 6, the first day on which official coach-led practices are allowed, without any formal coaching. But, October 6 is the first day on which coach-led practices are allowed under NCAA rules. Is Union engaging in an NCAA violation? Or, is this just a standard no one follows? I've always found this standard peculiar.
Where did you see that October 6th is the first day that's allowed? That isn't correct. The first date was last week, thus Ken Schott's article and video.
Is 10/6 the Ivy date, or 10/13?
Quote from: adamwWhere did you see that October 6th is the first day that's allowed? That isn't correct. The first date was last week, thus Ken Schott's article and video.
Quote from: NCAA Rules of Ice Hockey 17.12.2Preseason Practice:
In men's ice hockey, an institution shall not commence practice sessions prior to the Saturday of the 25th full weekend prior to the start of the NCAA Division I Men's Ice Hockey Championship.
The 2013 NCAA Regionals in men's ice hockey are March 29-31. That would make October 6, 2012 the first date on which a formal, coached practice is allowed.
If you don't trust my math, Adam.
Quote from: The GazetteThe first true practice won't happen until Oct. 6 and the first exhibition game will be the next evening.
From: http://www.gazette.com/sports/first-144466-season-hockey.html
Gadowsky on September 11, 2012 cited that Penn State was "about a month away from [NCAA-allowed, coach-led] practice." From here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KfPV8uUiTwg) at 1:00.
Quote from: Wisconsin BadgersThe Badgers begin their final season as members of the WCHA with the first official practice on Saturday, Oct. 6.
From: http://www.uwbadgers.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/052312aad.html
Another Wisconsin source:
Quote from: Madtown BadgersThe first day of sanctioned practice is on October 6.
From: http://www.madtownbadgers.com/articles/hockey/2012-13-mens-hockey-schedule-released.html
Well, if I am not correct, it seems that a lot of other people from different conferences, from different vantage points, and with different interests agree with me. The text of the NCAA Rules does as well. You like to write about NCAA violations, perhaps you should look into this.
I believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.
Quote from: adamwI believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.
Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.
A new article with the same conclusion:
Quote from: Penn State AthleticsThe practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.
Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: adamwI believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.
Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.
A new article with the same conclusion:
Quote from: Penn State AthleticsThe practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.
Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html
The question isn't whether teams cheat. The question is "do teams cheat openly and talk about it in the press". I'm with Adam that it is unlikely that they do. I think Adam's point is that "organized team practices" may be defined more loosely than you are defining it with respect to the involvement or attendance of the coaches.
All I'm saying is that Adam's view can be reconciled with your calendar checking.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: adamwI believe you, But there's a discrepancy, because I've talked to coaches this week that have been with players at practice, and there have been many other public statements from coaches about it. I'm sure they're not breaking rules. I believe they're allowed contact with them for a limited amount of time per day, and then the oct. 6 date would be another level of contact that's allowed.
Cheating? In sports? Never. I figured that someone else or you might know the specific rule, but until I can be disproven, I am assuming it is a violation to which the NCAA will just turn a blind eye.
A new article with the same conclusion:
Quote from: Penn State AthleticsThe practice will be the team's first official session as NCAA rules stipulate Oct. 6 as the first day for organized team practices.
Source: http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/092112aaf.html
The question isn't whether teams cheat. The question is "do teams cheat openly and talk about it in the press". I'm with Adam that it is unlikely that they do. I think Adam's point is that "organized team practices" may be defined more loosely than you are defining it with respect to the involvement or attendance of the coaches.
All I'm saying is that Adam's view can be reconciled with your calendar checking.
I totally agree with your interpretation, but why is it so hard to get the exact rule? It must be defined somewhere. Adam, when you talk to a couple of coaches, can't you resolve this? Does anyone else have contact with a coach?
I will try to pin down the exact definition of what's going on. I can virtually guarantee nobody is openly flaunting the breaking of NCAA rules. I'm sure there's just some leeway to the book definition that allows some semblance of contact in September...I just don't know what it is precisely. Or some second tier type of definition...like, no contact prior to sept. 1, then limited contact until oct. 6. I don't know. I just made that up. But something like that.
Quote from: adamwI will try to pin down the exact definition of what's going on. I can virtually guarantee nobody is openly flaunting the breaking of NCAA rules. I'm sure there's just some leeway to the book definition that allows some semblance of contact in September...I just don't know what it is precisely. Or some second tier type of definition...like, no contact prior to sept. 1, then limited contact until oct. 6. I don't know. I just made that up. But something like that.
Thanks.
There is ample opportunity for the staff to interact with the players before "offical" practices. Here are the rules that I found (see the last sentence, it is a very large fig leaf. It walks and quacks but is not a duck)
7.02.13 Voluntary Athletically Related Activities. Effective Date: Aug 01, 2004 In order for any athletically related activity to be considered "voluntary," all of the following conditions must be met: (Adopted: 4/18/01)
(a) The student-athlete must not be required to report back to a coach or other athletics department staff member (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) any information related to the activity. In addition, no athletics department staff member who observes the activity (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) may report back to the student-athlete's coach any information related to the activity;
(b) The activity must be initiated and requested solely by the student-athlete. Neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may require the student-athlete to participate in the activity at any time. However, it is permissible for an athletics department staff member to provide information to student-athletes related to available opportunities for participating in voluntary activities (e.g., times when
the strength and conditioning coach will be on duty in the weight room or on the track). In addition, for students who have initiated a request to engage in voluntary activities, the institution or an athletics department staff member may assign specific times for student-athletes to use institutional facilities for such purposed and inform the student-athletes of the time in advance;
(c) The student-athlete's attendance and participation in the activity (or lack thereof) may not be recorded for the purposes of reporting such information to coaching staff members or other student-athletes; and
(d) The student-athlete may not be subjected to penalty if he or she elects not to participate in the activity. In addition, neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may provide recognition or incentives (e.g., awards) to a student-athlete based on his or her attendance or performance in the activity.
[Note: Coaching staff members may be present during permissible skill-related instruction pursuant to Bylaw 17.1.5.2.1] (Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04)
Thanks, Towerroad. That rule pretty much says, in dry statutory form, what Adam assumed.
Quote from: TowerroadThere is ample opportunity for the staff to interact with the players before "offical" practices. Here are the rules that I found (see the last sentence, it is a very large fig leaf. It walks and quacks but is not a duck)
7.02.13 Voluntary Athletically Related Activities. Effective Date: Aug 01, 2004 In order for any athletically related activity to be considered "voluntary," all of the following conditions must be met: (Adopted: 4/18/01)
(a) The student-athlete must not be required to report back to a coach or other athletics department staff member (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) any information related to the activity. In addition, no athletics department staff member who observes the activity (e.g., strength coach, trainer, manager) may report back to the student-athlete's coach any information related to the activity;
(b) The activity must be initiated and requested solely by the student-athlete. Neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may require the student-athlete to participate in the activity at any time. However, it is permissible for an athletics department staff member to provide information to student-athletes related to available opportunities for participating in voluntary activities (e.g., times when
the strength and conditioning coach will be on duty in the weight room or on the track). In addition, for students who have initiated a request to engage in voluntary activities, the institution or an athletics department staff member may assign specific times for student-athletes to use institutional facilities for such purposed and inform the student-athletes of the time in advance;
(c) The student-athlete's attendance and participation in the activity (or lack thereof) may not be recorded for the purposes of reporting such information to coaching staff members or other student-athletes; and
(d) The student-athlete may not be subjected to penalty if he or she elects not to participate in the activity. In addition, neither the institution nor any athletics department staff member may provide recognition or incentives (e.g., awards) to a student-athlete based on his or her attendance or performance in the activity.
[Note: Coaching staff members may be present during permissible skill-related instruction pursuant to Bylaw 17.1.5.2.1] (Revised: 4/29/04 effective 8/1/04)
The highlighted clauses all imply that the head coach is not involved, with the broadest interpretation, and is not initiating the practice, with the narrowest interpretation. Union's players all imply that Bennett mandated, planned, initiated, and conducted these practices. The interpretation of the clauses you cite above that I have heard most often, and which is in accord with what Colorado College, Wisconsin, and Penn State are doing, is that coaches, usually assistant and strength coaches, sometimes coaches from the opposite gender program, are allowed to watch practice for safety reasons to ensure that no players injure themselves. However, the coaches's role are more analogous to those of lifeguards rather than those assumed of coaches. Also, if we assume that the above clauses that you and I have cited must not be read with their plain meaning that the coach cannot mandate and lead practice, Union is in violation still of one more clause regarding skills-based practice.
Quote from: 17.1.6.2.2 Skill Instruction - Sports Other Than Baseball and FootballParticipation by student- athletes in skill-related instruction in sports other than baseball and football is permitted outside the institu- tion's declared playing season, from the institution's first day of classes of the academic year or September 15, whichever occurs earlier, to one week prior to the beginning of the institution's final examination period at the conclusion of the academic year [see Bylaw 17.1.6.2-(a)]. More than four student-athletes from the team may be involved in skill-related instruction with their coaches from September 15 through April 15. Prior to September 15 and after April 15, not more than four student-athletes from the same team may be involved in skill-related instruction with their coaches at any one time in any facility. Skill-related instruction shall not be publicized and shall not be conducted in view of a general public audience.
I think posts on twitter and a write-up from Ken Schott indicate both publication and the practice's being in view of the general public. I find the rule monumentally stupid. Logically, I would see why Union would not want to abide by any of this, but the rules are the rules. To abridge them, is to gain a competitive advantage. The only legitimate statutory purview of the NCAA. What if Merrimack does not break them? The Warriors will be headed then into a clash with a team that has been coached for three weeks while they will not have had a single day of coach-led practice.
If there is some definitive and comprehensive interpretations that reconciles what could be internal contradictions of the rules, I am curious to read them. No one on here has proffered one. The clearest interpretations allow coaches on the ice, but not coaches leading practice. Were this program a flashier, more prestigious program (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/michigan-gets-third-year-of-probation-rich-rodriguez-avoids-major-penalty.html), we would probably not be waiving it all off as "they can't be breaking the rules." This is one of the rules taken most seriously in other sports.
Arron
I suspect that there is very little real difference between a voluntary practice and a formal practice. Do you really think that players can blow off this practice. Do you really think that the coaches who can be there and can provide skill instruction don't know who is there or not there even if they do now write it down?
When the coaching staff arranges for ice time for "voluntary practice" do you think the expectation is that only a part of the team will show up? When you make a facility available the you might just as well announce a practice schedule.
I suspect that these rules are just NC$$ window dressing particularly for money sports. The difference between a voluntary practice and an official practice is the difference between damn and swearing.
Quote from: TowerroadArron
I suspect that there is very little real difference between a voluntary practice and a formal practice. Do you really think that players can blow off this practice. Do you really think that the coaches who can be there and can provide skill instruction don't know who is there or not there even if they do now write it down?
When the coaching staff arranges for ice time for "voluntary practice" do you think the expectation is that only a part of the team will show up? When you make a facility available the you might just as well announce a practice schedule.
I suspect that these rules are just NC$$ window dressing particularly for money sports. The difference between a voluntary practice and an official practice is the difference between damn and swearing.
This. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the head coach (or any other coach, for that matter) is not allowed to attend voluntary practices. Nowhere does it say that the captain or other team members are not allowed to report back to the head coach about the practice (it only bans other staff members from doing so). The coaches are there, they know who was there, and participation in voluntary practice sessions definitely will affect your standing on the team, despite any contortions the lawyers want to dream up. I haven't seen or heard anything that leads me to believe that Union is breaking any of the rules. To convince me, you'd have to provide a copy of the email where the coach tells the players that they have to be at practice, or provide a copy of the attendance log that the coach took at the practices, etc. The coach's simply being at an organized practice session where the ice was reserved for the varsity team members to use is NOT, in and of itself, a violation.
Speculation, speculation, speculation...
I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::
Quote from: Jim HylaSpeculation, speculation, speculation...
I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::
I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384
Quote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: Jim HylaSpeculation, speculation, speculation...
I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::
I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384
If we are arguing about the arcane corners of the NCAA rules then the Red and White game cannot come quick enough.
LGR!
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: Jim HylaSpeculation, speculation, speculation...
I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::
I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384
If we are arguing about the arcane corners of the NCAA rules then the Red and White game cannot come quick enough.
LGR!
Agreed. I can't wait to retire the "Off Season" thread.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: Aaron M. GriffinQuote from: Jim HylaSpeculation, speculation, speculation...
I hope Adam can help us, otherwise we are just whistling Dixie.::whistle::
I hope he responds. But, in the meantime...
https://twitter.com/CornellWAFT/status/250295493870096384
If we are arguing about the arcane corners of the NCAA rules then the Red and White game cannot come quick enough.
LGR!
Agreed. I can't wait to retire the "Off Season" thread.
Looking forward to lighting a candle in memory of the thread...
(http://elf.elynah.com/file.php/1/543/candle.jpg)
USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Preseason Poll
Team Points 2011-12 Record
1 Boston College 476 (20) 33-10-1
2 Minnesota 476 (12) 28-14-1
3 Michigan 408 (2) 24-13-4
4 North Dakota 407 26-13-3
5 Union College 295 26-8-7
6 Cornell 233 19-9-7
7 UMass-Lowell 221 24-13-1
8 Denver 220 25-14-4
9 Miami 203 24-15-2
10 Notre Dame 186 19-18-3
11 Western Michigan 182 21-14-6
12 Minnesota Duluth 176 25-10-6
13 Boston University 158 23-15-1
14 Ferris State 123 26-12-5
15 Wisconsin 99 17-18-2
Others receiving votes: Harvard University, 58; University of Maine, 24; Quinnipiac University, 24; Michigan State University, 19; Colorado College, 19; University of New Hampshire, 17; Ohio State University, 17; St. Cloud (Minn.) State University, 15; Merrimack College, 7; Providence College, 6; Yale University, 6; United States Air Force Academy, 3; Northern Michigan University, 1; Michigan Tech University, 1.
Quote from: nyc94USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Preseason Poll
Team Points 2011-12 Record
1 Boston College 476 (20) 33-10-1
2 Minnesota 476 (12) 28-14-1
3 Michigan 408 (2) 24-13-4
4 North Dakota 407 26-13-3
5 Union College 295 26-8-7
6 Cornell 233 19-9-7
7 UMass-Lowell 221 24-13-1
8 Denver 220 25-14-4
9 Miami 203 24-15-2
10 Notre Dame 186 19-18-3
11 Western Michigan 182 21-14-6
12 Minnesota Duluth 176 25-10-6
13 Boston University 158 23-15-1
14 Ferris State 123 26-12-5
15 Wisconsin 99 17-18-2
Others receiving votes: Harvard University, 58; University of Maine, 24; Quinnipiac University, 24; Michigan State University, 19; Colorado College, 19; University of New Hampshire, 17; Ohio State University, 17; St. Cloud (Minn.) State University, 15; Merrimack College, 7; Providence College, 6; Yale University, 6; United States Air Force Academy, 3; Northern Michigan University, 1; Michigan Tech University, 1.
That means we have 6 games against ranked opponents (7 if we face Minnesota-Duluth) and 8 more against teams that also received votes. That's nearly half the regular season schedule.
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: nyc94USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Preseason Poll
Team Points 2011-12 Record
1 Boston College 476 (20) 33-10-1
2 Minnesota 476 (12) 28-14-1
3 Michigan 408 (2) 24-13-4
4 North Dakota 407 26-13-3
5 Union College 295 26-8-7
6 Cornell 233 19-9-7
7 UMass-Lowell 221 24-13-1
8 Denver 220 25-14-4
9 Miami 203 24-15-2
10 Notre Dame 186 19-18-3
11 Western Michigan 182 21-14-6
12 Minnesota Duluth 176 25-10-6
13 Boston University 158 23-15-1
14 Ferris State 123 26-12-5
15 Wisconsin 99 17-18-2
Others receiving votes: Harvard University, 58; University of Maine, 24; Quinnipiac University, 24; Michigan State University, 19; Colorado College, 19; University of New Hampshire, 17; Ohio State University, 17; St. Cloud (Minn.) State University, 15; Merrimack College, 7; Providence College, 6; Yale University, 6; United States Air Force Academy, 3; Northern Michigan University, 1; Michigan Tech University, 1.
That means we have 6 games against ranked opponents (7 if we face Minnesota-Duluth) and 8 more against teams that also received votes. That's nearly half the regular season schedule.
Which is not really that big a deal considering that half the teams in College Hockey recieved votes in the poll.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Looking forward to lighting a candle in memory of the thread...
Don't get hung up on it.
(http://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/5125611/il_570xN.1456153.jpg)
Also, I believe Notre Dame started last year ranked number 1 and feel significantly throughout the year. Some of those ranked opponents we're scheduled to play will likely move down (though I could certainly see QU or CC moving up).
Just curious. I was checking out the twitter account of RPI coach Seth Appert which linked to that of Julie Robenhymer (http://twitter.com/JulieRobenhymer). Who is in Cornell's net in her tweet from yesterday?
Edit: direct link to picture http://pics.lockerz.com/s/247668979.
Quote from: ursusminorJust curious. I was checking out the twitter account of RPI coach Seth Appert which linked to that of Julie Robenhymer (http://twitter.com/JulieRobenhymer). Who is in Cornell's net in her tweet from yesterday?
Edit: direct link to picture http://pics.lockerz.com/s/247668979.
Think it was Ben Scrivens based on other twitter activity I vaguely remember seeing recently.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: ursusminorJust curious. I was checking out the twitter account of RPI coach Seth Appert which linked to that of Julie Robenhymer (http://twitter.com/JulieRobenhymer). Who is in Cornell's net in her tweet from yesterday?
Edit: direct link to picture http://pics.lockerz.com/s/247668979.
Think it was Ben Scrivens based on other twitter activity I vaguely remember seeing recently.
That was my guess too.
https://twitter.com/DAGwood6/status/250391512511291392
The founder of both the 1989 and Still Waiting... Blog and the Union Hockey Blog created a blog network dedicated exclusively to covering ECAC programs. It launched today. It should be a good platform for increased exposure of the league.
http://ecachockeyblognetwork.blogspot.com/