So I thought it might be nice to put the weekly polls and discussion all in one thread.
Here's todays USCHO Men's
October 15, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
(Place)
(Votes)
1 Minnesota (46) 2- 0-0 991 2
2 North Dakota ( 1) 0- 0-0 894 4
3 Boston College ( 2) 0- 1-0 878 1
4 Miami 2- 0-0 751 8
5 Michigan 1- 1-0 726 3
6 Cornell 0- 0-0 714 5
7 Denver 0- 0-0 690 7
8 Union ( 1) 2- 1-0 606 10
9 Notre Dame 2- 0-0 583 14
10 Massachusetts-Lowell 0- 0-1 576 6
11 Boston University 1- 0-0 549 12
12 Western Michigan 1- 1-0 422 9
13 Minnesota-Duluth 1- 1-0 308 13
14 Northeastern 2- 0-0 283 NR
15 New Hampshire 2- 0-0 273 NR
16 Ferris State 0- 1-1 218 11
17 Harvard 0- 0-0 213 17
17 Northern Michigan 2- 0-0 213 NR
19 Colorado College 2- 0-0 194 NR
20 Quinnipiac 2- 1-0 74 18
Others receiving votes: Air Force 47, Wisconsin 47, Maine 40, Rensselaer 40, Ohio State 39,
Nebraska-Omaha 37, Merrimack 33, Michigan State 17, Rochester Institute of Technology 12,
St. Cloud State 9, Lake Superior 7, St. Lawrence 6, Providence 4, Minnesota State 3, Yale 3.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz29PW96dnc
USA Today/Hockey Men's
Week 2: Men's College Hockey Poll
Men's Poll - Week 2: October 15, 2012
Team Points (First) 2011-12 Last Poll
(Place) Record
(Votes)
1 Minnesota 507 (30) 2-0-0 1
2 North Dakota 439 (1) 0-0-0 4
3 Boston College 421 (1) 0-1-0 2
4 Miami 343 2-0-0 8
5 Cornell 328 0-0-0 5
6 Michigan 316 1-1-0 3
7 Union College 276 (1) 2-1-0 9
8 Denver 273 0-0-0 10
9 UMass Lowell 241 0-0-1 6
10 Notre Dame 215 2-0-0 13
11 Boston Univ 178 1-0-0 14
12 Western Mich 153 1-1-0 7
13 Minn Duluth 75 1-1-0 12
14 Ferris State 53 0-1-1 11
15 Northern Mich 52 2-0-0 NR
Others receiving votes: Northeastern University, 49; University of New Hampshire, 45;
Colorado College, 38; Harvard University, 34; Quinnipiac University, 19;
University of Maine, 11; Ohio State University, 8; University of Nebraska-Omaha, 3;
United States Air Force Academy, 2, Rochester Institute of Technology, 1.
And Women's USCHO
October 15, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
(Place)
(Votes)
1 Minnesota (15) 6- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 0- 0-0 132 2
3 Boston University 3- 0-0 119 3
4 Boston College 0- 1-0 89 5
5 Clarkson 4- 0-0 81 7
6 Ohio State 5- 1-0 54 10
7 Mercyhurst 5- 0-1 48 9
8 Northeastern 4- 0-0 47 8
9 Wisconsin 3- 2-1 34 4
10 North Dakota 2- 2-0 33 6
Others receiving votes: Minnesota-Duluth 28, Harvard 10.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz29PWJfmy4
Last Week's Women's USA Today/Hockey
Week 3: Women's College Hockey Poll
Women's Poll - Week 3: Oct. 9, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last Poll
(Place) Record
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 4-0-0 1
2 Cornell 171 0-0-0 2
3 Wisconsin 136 3-0-1 3
4 Boston U 136 1-0-0 6
5 Boston C 103 0-1-0 4
6 North Dak 63 1-1-0 5
7 Clarkson 61 2-0-0 NR
8 Northeastern56 2-0-0 NR
9 Mercyhurst 53 3-0-1 10
10 Ohio State 35 4-0-0 NR
Others receiving votes:Harvard University, 32; University of Minnesota Duluth, 4;
Providence College, 3; University of New Hampshire, 1; Minnesota State University Mankato, 1.
So who gives Union a first place vote?
And if anyone has a link to an easily formatted USA Today/Hockey Poll let me know. I hope all my changes are correct.
This weeks USA Today/Hockey Poll:
Week 4: Women's College Hockey Poll
Women's Poll - Week 4: Oct. 16, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 6-0-0 1
2 Cornell 170 0-0-0 2
3 Boston Uni 150 3-0-0 T-3
4 Boston Col 118 0-1-0 5
5 Clarkson 88 4-0-0 7
6 Wisconsin 64 3-2-1 T-3
7 Ohio State 62 5-1-0 10
8 Mercyhurst 61 5-0-1 9
9 Northeastern 58 4-0-0 8
10 North Dakota 35 2-2-0 6
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 33; Harvard, 16.
This weeks:
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
October 22, 2012
Team (First Place Votes) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (27) 2- 1-0 962 3
2 Minnesota (12) 3- 1-0 908 1
3 Miami (4) 3- 0-1 831 4
4 North Dakota ( 1) 1- 1-0 828 2
5 Denver ( 3) 2- 0-0 800 7
6 Michigan 2- 1-0 769 5
7 Cornell ( 1) 0- 0-0 666 6
8 Union ( 1) 2- 1-0 635 8
9 Notre Dame 3- 1-0 587 9
10 Western Michigan 3- 1-0 519 12
11 Massachusetts-Lowell 1- 1-1 473 10
12 New Hampshire ( 1) 3- 0-0 466 15
13 Boston University 1- 1-0 357 11
14 Minnesota-Duluth 2- 2-0 331 13
15 Northeastern 2- 1-0 267 14
16 Northern Michigan 3- 1-0 210 17
17 Harvard 0- 0-0 185 17
18 Ferris State 1- 1-2 178 16
19 Colorado College 3- 1-0 147 19
20 Quinnipiac 3- 1-1 116 20
Others receiving votes: St. Lawrence 109, Minnesota State 39, Nebraska-Omaha 28, Michigan Tech 16,
St. Cloud State 12, Wisconsin 10, Lake Superior 9, Providence 8, Rensselaer 7, Michigan State 5,
Merrimack 4, Air Force 3, Alaska 3, Ohio State 3, Yale 3, Alaska-Anchorage 2, Massachusetts 2, Holy Cross 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2A39gsnUD
Look at all the stupid first place voters.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
October 22, 2012
Team (First Place Votes) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 8- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 1- 1-0 131 2
3 Boston University 5- 1-0 119 3
4 Clarkson 5- 1-0 103 5
5 Mercyhurst 6- 1-1 82 7
6 Boston College 1- 2-0 70 4
7 Northeastern 4- 1-0 50 8
8 North Dakota 4- 2-0 44 10
9 Harvard 0- 0-0 33 NR
10 Minnesota State 4- 2-2 15 NR
Others receiving votes: Ohio State 14, Wisconsin 7, Dartmouth 4, Minnesota-Duluth 1,
Providence 1, St. Lawrence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2A3AlbHcI
Week 3: USA Men's College Hockey Poll
Men's Poll - Week 3: October 22, 2012
Team Points(First) Record Last Poll
1 Boston College 477 (18) 2-1-0 3
2 Minnesota 461 (11) 3-1-0 1
3 Miami 405 (3) 3-0-1 4
4 North Dakota 387 1-1-0 2
5 Denver 358 (1) 2-0-0 8
6 Michigan 347 2-1-0 6
7 Cornell 269 0-0-0 5
8 Union College 260 (1) 2-1-0 7
9 Notre Dame 226 3-1-0 10
10 Western Michigan176 3-1-0 12
10 New Hampshire 176 3-0-0 NR
12 UMass Lowell 165 1-1-1 9
13 Boston University89 1-1-0 11
14 Minnesota Duluth 77 2-2-0 13
15 Northern Michigan56 3-1-0 15
Others receiving votes:Colorado College, 35; Harvard University, 32;
St. Lawrence University, 27; Northeastern University, 13; University of Nebraska-Omaha, 12;
Quinnipiac University, 12; Ferris State University, 8; Minnesota State University, 2;
United States Air Force Academy, 1.
Week 5: Women's College Hockey Poll- USA
Women's Poll - Week 5: Oct. 23, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 8-0-0 1
2 Cornell 165 1-1-0 2
3 Boston U 152 5-1-0 3
4 Clarkson 132 5-1-0 5
5 Mercyhurst 102 6-1-1 8
6 Boston C 80 1-2-0 4
7 Northeastern60 4-1-0 9
8 North Dakota53 4-2-0 10
9 Harvard 51 0-0-0 NR
10 Ohio State 24 5-3-0 7
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin, 20; Minnesota State, 13;
Bemidji State, 1; Minnesota Duluth, 1; Providence College, 1.
That first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html). It is the first pre-season first place vote in seven seasons.
Quote from: TrotskyThat first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
And further confirms how silly the polls are.
Quote from: Jordan 04Quote from: TrotskyThat first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
And further confirms how silly the polls are.
And I'll go back to my thought that polls shouldn't start until at least 1/3 of the season is over. It's too hard to displace teams starting highly ranked. If the poll was starting today, do you think SLU might be higher ranked than Harvard?
Quote from: Jordan 04Quote from: TrotskyThat first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
And further confirms how silly the polls are.
Not as silly as the PWR (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-men/).
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: Jordan 04Quote from: TrotskyThat first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
And further confirms how silly the polls are.
Not as silly as the PWR (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-men/).
But PWR usually seems to help the conference and Cornell, so it's all good.
Quote from: Jordan 04Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: Jordan 04Quote from: TrotskyThat first place vote is Cornell's first since 12/7/2009 (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
And further confirms how silly the polls are.
Not as silly as the PWR (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-men/).
But PWR usually seems to help the conference and Cornell, so it's all good.
Except when you don't have any games, then I like the polls better.:-D
This weeks Women's USA poll is up.
Quote from: Jim HylaAnd I'll go back to my thought that polls shouldn't start until at least 1/3 of the season is over. It's too hard to displace teams starting highly ranked.
It's far more forgivable now that the polls have no influence on the selection process. In college football it really is a traveshamockery.
So far this is it.USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
October 29, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (38) 4- 1-0 981 1
2 Minnesota ( 3) 4- 1-0 924 2
3 Denver ( 6) 4- 0-0 862 5
4 Miami 4- 1-1 792 3
5 North Dakota 2- 1-1 769 4
6 Cornell 2- 0-0 739 7
7 Notre Dame 5- 1-0 677 9
8 Michigan 3- 2-0 663 6
9 New Hampshire ( 2) 4- 0-1 597 12
10 Union ( 1) 3- 1-1 596 8
11 Western Michigan 3- 1-0 529 10
12 Boston University 3- 1-0 487 13
13 Harvard 1- 0-0 291 17
14 Massachusetts-Lowell 1- 3-1 239 11
15 Northeastern 2- 2-1 227 15
16 St. Lawrence 3- 1-0 180 NR
17 Minnesota-Duluth 2- 3-1 172 14
18 St. Cloud State 4- 2-0 162 NR
19 Ferris State 2- 2-2 146 18
20 Northern Michigan 3- 3-0 131 16
Others receiving votes: Providence 66, Colorado College 53, Quinnipiac 45, Wisconsin 44,
Yale 27, Holy Cross 23, Alaska 16, Dartmouth 15, Bemidji State 12, Lake Superior 7, Ohio State 5,
Michigan State 4, Michigan Tech 3, Nebraska-Omaha 3, Colgate 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2Ai3kbvyM
Who is this Union guy?
USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine 2012-13 Men's College Hockey Poll
(First-place votes in parentheses)
School Points (First) Prior Record Weeks in Top 15
1 Boston College 504 (28) 1 4-1-0 5
2 Minnesota 459 2 4-1-0 5
3 Denver 417 (5) 5 4-0-0 5
4 Miami 389 3 4-1-1 5
5 Cornell 355 7 2-0-0 5
6 North Dakota 345 4 2-1-1 5
7 Michigan 300 6 3-2-0 5
8 Notre Dame 277 9 5-1-0 5
9 Union 240 (1) 8 3-1-1 5
10 New Hampshire 204 11 4-0-1 2
11 West Michigan 194 10 3-1-0 5
12 Boston Univ 144 13 3-1-0 5
13 Harvard 77 NR 1-0-0 1
14 UMass Lowell 60 12 1-3-1 5
15 St. Lawrence 31 NR 3-1-0 1
Others receiving votes: Northeastern, 23; Minnesota Duluth, 21; Ferris State, 19;
St. Cloud State, 13; Northern Michigan, 3; Providence, 3; Quinnipiac, 1; Wisconsin, 1.
There's Union again???
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
October 29, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 10- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 4- 1-0 129 2
3 Boston University 7- 1-0 119 3
4 Clarkson 7- 1-0 105 4
5 Mercyhurst 8- 1-1 92 5
6 Harvard 2- 0-0 54 9
7 Northeastern 5- 1-1 53 7
8 Boston College 2- 3-0 45 6
9 North Dakota 4- 4-0 33 8
10 Ohio State 7- 3-0 20 NR
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin 12, Minnesota-Duluth 11, Providence 1, St. Lawrence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2Ak6dMMw8
Week 6:USA Women's College Hockey Poll
Women's Poll - Week 6: October 30, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 10-0-0 1
2 Cornell 160 4-1-0 2
3 Boston U 154 7-1-0 3
4 Clarkson 134 7-1-0 4
5 Mercyhurst 114 8-1-1 5
6 Harvard 90 2-0-0 9
7 Northeastern 71 5-1-1 7
8 Boston Coll 57 2-3-0 6
9 North Dakota 33 4-4-0 8
10 Ohio State 30 7-3-0 10
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 5; Quinnipiac, 4;
Dartmouth, 1; Providence, 1; Wisconsin, 1.
That's it for this week.
Quote from: Jim HylaWho is this Union guy?
Ken Schott, of course.
Quote from: CowbellGuyQuote from: Jim HylaWho is this Union guy?
Ken Schott, of course.
If he's being honest, then not really. He always posts his poll choices and is generally quite reasonable.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: CowbellGuyQuote from: Jim HylaWho is this Union guy?
Ken Schott, of course.
If he's being honest, then not really. He always posts his poll choices and is generally quite reasonable.
Does Ed Weaver from the Troy Record vote?
All 4 polls now up.
What's the direct link to the USA Today poll? (Old one doesn't work and searching seems to yield... nuttin.)
Not a poll, but:
https://twitter.com/chnews/status/263397914557177856
Last week was St. Lawrence. Article isn't up yet, as the tweet says.
Quote from: TrotskyWhat's the direct link to the USA Today poll? (Old one doesn't work and searching seems to yield... nuttin.)
After a lot of searching, I found this:
Women's: http://www.usahockey.com/College/WomensPollWeek6.aspx (http://www.usahockey.com/College/WomensPollWeek6.aspx)
Men's: http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek4.aspx (http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek4.aspx)
Each week I just change the week number to get the new one. Men's is out on Monday and Women's on Tuesday. It took a lot of searching as the links on USCHO didn't work for me, and there's not an easy link on the USA Hockey site.
Quote from: TrotskyWhat's the direct link to the USA Today poll? (Old one doesn't work and searching seems to yield... nuttin.)
I'll keep trying to post these links. I keep getting rejected as the server thinks I'm an automated bot.::banana::
USA Women - Comes out on Tuesday. (http://www.usahockey.com/College/WomensPollWeek6.aspx)
USA Men - Comes out on Monday. (http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek4.aspx)
You'll see on the link week_ , just change the week number to what you want to get that week. Current is week4 for men and week6 for women.
I finally got it posted. The problem I was having was in trying to have the description on the link be the same as the url. That way you could easily see how to change the week. I guess I'm better off not being an automatted bot.::smashfreak::
USCHO Men's has us at 4. Union still gets a first place vote????
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
November 05, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (48) 6- 1-0 998 1
2 Minnesota 5- 2-0 896 2
3 Denver ( 1) 5- 1-0 878 3
4 Cornell 3- 0-1 790 6
5 Miami 5- 2-1 765 4
6 North Dakota 3- 2-1 749 5
7 Notre Dame 6- 2-0 702 7
8 Union ( 1) 5- 1-1 661 10
9 New Hampshire 5- 1-1 625 9
10 Western Michigan 4- 2-0 532 11
11 Boston University 4- 2-0 513 12
12 Michigan 3- 3-1 480 8
13 St. Lawrence 5- 1-0 300 16
14 Harvard 2- 1-0 257 13
15 St. Cloud State 5- 3-0 256 18
16 Northern Michigan 4- 3-1 217 20
17 Massachusetts-Lowell 1- 3-1 169 14
18 Ferris State 3- 3-2 163 19
19 Colorado College 5- 3-0 143 NR
20 Minnesota-Duluth 2- 3-1 120 17
Others receiving votes: Dartmouth 102, Providence 35, Northeastern 28, Yale 24,
Nebraska-Omaha 23, Merrimack 21, Quinnipiac 15, Holy Cross 9, Alaska 7, Bemidji State 7,
Ohio State 4, Minnesota State 3, Niagara 3, Lake Superior 2, Massachusetts 2, Colgate 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2BNCIyrR4
Week 5: USA Men's College Hockey Poll
Men's Poll - Week 5: November 5, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last
1 Boston College 509 (33) 6-1-0 1
2 Minnesota 455 5-2-0 2
3 Denver 421 5-1-0 3
4 Cornell 372 3-0-1 5
5 Miami 361 5-2-1 4
6 North Dakota 351 3-2-1 6
7 Union College 297 (1) 5-1-1 9
8 Notre Dame 294 6-2-0 8
9 New Hampshire 238 5-1-1 10
10 Western Mich 200 4-0-1 11
11 Michigan 180 3-3-1 7
12 Boston Univ 178 4-2-0 12
13 Harvard 67 2-1-0 13
14 St. Lawrence 52 5-1-0 15
15 UMass Lowell 36 1-3-1 14
Others receiving votes: St. Cloud State University, 19; Northern Michigan University, 15;
Ferris State University, 14; Dartmouth College, 9; University of Minnesota Duluth, 6;
Colorado College, 4; Providence College, 1; Quinnipiac University, 1.
USCHO have the women at 2.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
November 05, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 12- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 6- 1-0 134 2
3 Clarkson 8- 2-0 109 4
4 Mercyhurst 10- 1-1 95 5
5 Boston University 7- 2-1 87 3
6 Harvard 4- 0-0 78 6
7 Boston College 3- 3-1 63 8
8 Northeastern 7- 1-1 50 7
9 Ohio State 9- 3-0 25 10
10 North Dakota 5- 5-0 20 9
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin 9, New Hampshire 2, Providence 2, St. Lawrence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2BODyhFFM
USA Week 7: Women's College Hockey Poll
Women's Poll - Week 7: Nov. 7, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 12-0-0 1
2 Cornell 170 6-1-0 2
3 Clarkson 138 8-2-0 4
4 Mercyhurst 123 10-1-1 5
5 Boston Univ 120 7-2-1 3
6 Harvard 100 4-0-0 6
7 Boston Coll 75 3-3-1 8
8 Northeastern 63 7-1-1 7
9 Ohio State 28 9-3-0 10
10 North Dakota 25 5-5-0 9
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin, 7; Minnesota Duluth, 5; Providence, 1.
Quote from: Jim HylaUSCHO Men's has us at 4. Union still gets a first place vote????
In their defense, they didn't do anything last weekend to lose it.
I wonder if Dartmouth is the first team in history to be #1 in PWR and not appear in the top 20. :)
4 ECAC teams in the top 14? That would be nice, but I sincerely doubt it...
USA Men's, we're 4, and USCHO Women's, we're 2, are now posted above. USA Women's probably tomorrow.
That's it. I'm now on a mission to punch two voters in the throat.
Quote from: RichHThat's it. I'm now on a mission to punch two voters in the throat.
Go for it; just let the rest of us know who they are first. Maybe we can give you some cover.
Quote from: Robb4 ECAC teams in the top 14? That would be nice, but I sincerely doubt it...
Why not? I hear that if the season ended today Dartmouth would get a #1 seed.
USA Women's Poll posted, we're still 2.
Quote from: Jim HylaUSA Women's Poll posted, we're still 2.
It's interesting to note that teams 2-8 are all Eastern teams in the current polls. I don't remember a year since the NCAA Tournament started in 2000 where there's only one beast coming out of the WCHA. If the usual WCHA powers like UW, UMD, and UND are having down years, it could be a really entertaining season leading up to competitive and resurgent ECAC and HEA tournaments.
men drop to 10 on USCHO
Quote from: RichHThat's it. I'm now on a mission to punch two voters in the throat.
Union lost its #1 vote this week.
Finally
Women still 2. I'm at a meeting, will post polls later.
10? Generous, after last weekend.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
November 12, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (50) 8- 1-0 1000 1
2 Denver 7- 1-0 934 3
3 Minnesota 6- 2-1 890 2
4 Miami 6- 2-2 817 5
5 New Hampshire 6- 1-1 734 9
6 North Dakota 4- 3-1 696 6
7 Union 6- 2-1 665 8
8 Notre Dame 6- 3-0 646 7
9 Western Michigan 5- 2-1 605 10
10 Cornell 3- 2-1 525 4
11 Boston University 5- 3-0 514 11
12 Dartmouth 5- 0-1 385 NR
13 Michigan 4- 4-1 362 12
14 Colorado College 7- 3-0 343 19
15 St. Cloud State 6- 4-0 327 15
16 St. Lawrence 5- 2-1 228 13
17 Harvard 3- 2-0 211 14
18 Nebraska-Omaha 6- 3-1 149 NR
19 Northern Michigan 4- 4-2 130 16
20 Ferris State 4- 4-2 85 18
Others receiving votes: Massachusetts-Lowell 64, Alaska 36, Niagara 33, Yale 24,
Holy Cross 22, Quinnipiac 22, Ohio State 12, Providence 12, Massachusetts 7, Lake Superior 5,
Northeastern 5, Minnesota-Duluth 4, Merrimack 3, Michigan State 2, Minnesota State 1, Princeton 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2C2oiQpcz
USA Week 6: Men's College Hockey Poll
Men's Poll - Week 6: November 12, 2012
Team Points (First) 2011-12 Last
1 Boston College 510 (34) 8-1-0 1
2 Denver 461 7-1-0 3
3 Minnesota 441 6-2-1 2
4 Miami 402 6-2-2 5
5 North Dakota 317 4-3-1 6
6 New Hampshire 307 6-1-1 9
7 Notre Dame 280 6-3-0 8
8 Union College 275 6-2-1 7
9 Western Michigan 244 5-2-1 10
10 Cornell 192 3-2-1 4
11 Boston Univer 172 5-3-0 12
12 Dartmouth 127 5-0-1 NR
13 Michigan 126 4-4-1 11
14 Colorado College 65 7-3-0 NR
15 St. Cloud State 58 6-3-0 NR
Others receiving votes:Harvard University, 41; St. Lawrence University, 34;
University of Nebraska-Omaha, 12; Northern Michigan University, 7; College of the Holy Cross, 3;
UMass-Lowell, 3; Ferris State University, 1; Niagara University, 1; Yale University, 1.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
November 12, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 12- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 6- 1-0 134 2
3 Clarkson 10- 2-0 114 3
4 Mercyhurst 10- 1-1 103 4
5 Boston College 4- 3-1 70 7
6 Harvard 4- 0-0 69 6
7 Boston University 7- 3-1 58 5
8 Ohio State 9- 3-0 46 9
9 Northeastern 8- 1-2 45 8
10 North Dakota 5- 5-0 20 10
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin 14, New Hampshire 1, Providence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2C2pqftip
USA Week 8: Women's College Hockey Poll
Women's Poll - Week 8: Nov. 13, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 12-0-0 1
2 Cornell 169 6-1-0 2
3 Clarkson 148 10-2-0 3
4 Mercyhurst 122 10-1-1 4
5 Harvard 120 4-0-0 6
6 Boston Coll 100 4-3-2 7
7 Boston Univ 75 7-3-1 5
8 Northeastern 51 8-1-2 8
9 Ohio State 42 9-3-0 9
10 North Dakota 26 5-5-0 10
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin, 7; Minnesota Duluth, 5;
Dartmouth, 2; St. Lawrence, 2; Providence, 1.
Interesting to note that on the men's side that of the top 20 teams 7 of them are on our schedule and on the women's side of the top 10 teams Cornell will play 5 of them. In each teams case a very strong strength of schedule which should bode well come playoff time and NCAA seeding.
Quote from: Cop at LynahInteresting to note that on the men's side that of the top 20 teams 7 of them are on our schedule and on the women's side of the top 10 teams Cornell will play 5 of them. In each teams case a very strong strength of schedule which should bode well come playoff time and NCAA seeding.
Isn't it eight?
The four ECAC teams, Denver, Michigan, Colorado, and Ferris State?
Quote from: andyw2100Quote from: Cop at LynahInteresting to note that on the men's side that of the top 20 teams 7 of them are on our schedule and on the women's side of the top 10 teams Cornell will play 5 of them. In each teams case a very strong strength of schedule which should bode well come playoff time and NCAA seeding.
Isn't it eight?
The four ECAC teams, Denver, Michigan, Colorado, and Ferris State?
Not only is it 8, but they account for 14 of our 29 RS games. Not bad.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: andyw2100Quote from: Cop at LynahInteresting to note that on the men's side that of the top 20 teams 7 of them are on our schedule and on the women's side of the top 10 teams Cornell will play 5 of them. In each teams case a very strong strength of schedule which should bode well come playoff time and NCAA seeding.
Isn't it eight?
The four ECAC teams, Denver, Michigan, Colorado, and Ferris State?
Not only is it 8, but they account for 14 of our 29 RS games. Not bad.
That seems mainly a product of the relatively high ranking of the ECAC so far. FWIW, 17 of RPI's 34 are on the list, a slightly higher percentage. (10 ECAC games, 2*FSU, 2*SCSU, BU, UNH, and an OOC game vs. Union).
USA Polls up, not that it matters.
Hard to believe, but still ranked well.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
November 19, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (47) 9- 1-0 996 1
2 Denver ( 2) 9- 1-0 948 2
3 New Hampshire ( 1) 8- 1-1 865 5
4 Minnesota 7- 2-2 853 3
5 Miami 7- 2-3 781 4
6 Notre Dame 8- 3-0 731 8
7 North Dakota 5- 3-2 705 6
8 Union 6- 2-1 664 7
9 Western Michigan 6- 3-1 543 9
10 Boston University 6- 4-0 536 11
11 Dartmouth 5- 1-2 462 12
12 St. Cloud State 6- 4-0 377 15
13 Cornell 3- 3-2 322 10
14 Colorado College 7- 5-0 287 14
15 Nebraska-Omaha 6- 3-1 260 18
16 Ferris State 6- 4-2 211 20
17 Harvard 4- 3-0 201 17
18 Quinnipiac 7- 3-1 187 NR
19 Michigan 4- 6-1 160 13
20 Niagara 8- 2-3 112 NR
Others receiving votes: Alaska 79, Yale 66, St. Lawrence 57, Holy Cross 34,
Providence 23, Massachusetts-Lowell 14, Northern Michigan 12, Ohio State 9,
Northeastern 2, Colgate 1, Merrimack 1, Minnesota State 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2Ch7OsNqS
USA Men's Poll - Week 7: November 19, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Boston College 509 (33) 9-1-1 1
2 Denver 475 (1) 9-1-0 2
3 New Hampshire 420 8-1-1 6
4 Minnesota 405 7-2-2 3
5 Miami 376 6-4-2 4
6 Notre Dame 331 8-3-0 7
7 North Dakota 310 5-3-2 5
8 Union College 281 6-2-1 8
9 Western Michigan 208 6-3-1 9
10 Boston University 201 6-4-0 11
11 Dartmouth 144 5-1-2 12
12 St. Cloud St. 100 6-4-0 15
13 Cornell 97 3-3-2 10
14 Nebraska-Omaha 56 7-5-0 NR
15 Harvard 41 6-3-1 NR
Others receiving votes: Colorado College, 28; Quinnipiac University, 28;
University of Michigan, 21; Ferris State University, 19; Niagara University, 11;
St. Lawrence University, 6; University of Alaska, 5; Yale University, 4;
College of the Holy Cross, 3; UMass Lowell, 1.
Women still second.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
November 19, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 14- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 8- 1-0 134 2
3 Clarkson 12- 2-0 114 3
4 Mercyhurst 12- 1-1 102 4
5 Boston College 6- 3-2 90 5
6 Boston Univer 9- 3-1 80 7
7 Harvard 4- 1-0 51 6
8 Ohio State 10- 4-0 42 8
9 Northeastern 8- 3-2 25 9
10 North Dakota 7- 5-0 20 10
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin 16, Providence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2Ch88tKk2
USA Women's Poll - Week 9: Nov. 20, 2012
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 14-0-0 1
2 Cornell 170 8-1-0 2
3 Clarkson 149 12-2-0 3
4 Mercyhurst 126 12-1-1 4
5 Boston Uni 106 9-3-1 7
6 Boston College 103 6-3-2 6
7 Harvard 77 4-1-0 5
8 Ohio State 52 10-4-0 9
9 Northeastern 30 8-3-2 8
10 North Dakota 26 7-5-0 10
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin, 11; Minnesota-Duluth, 3; Dartmouth, 2.
Quote from: Jim HylaHard to believe, but still ranked well.
I wouldn't say hard to believe. I'd say "typical" / "jerk" / etc...
The Central Limit Theorem killed Joe Morgan a long time ago.
So is Michigan bad?
Quote from: Jordan 04So is Michigan bad?
Since the start of the season, we've dropped from 4th to 13th, not having a win in our last 5 games, but who'd have thought that despite this we'd be ranked 6 places higher than Michigan going into MSG.
Michigan has lost three in a row (after splitting a series with MSU, & two losses @ Yost to ND) but plays Bowling Green on Wednesday.
Since Trotsky mentioned the CLT, how does the law of averages apply here?
In any case, Saturday's game is going to be huge for both teams.
Michigan is not bad.............they always have a lot of speed and talent. They haven't come together yet, they have a young roster and the goaltending doesn't seem as good as normal (two freshman goalies but we all know that they usually have very good goalie recruits - I think they lost their top goalie recruit to the juniors this year). Their performance versus RIT and Northern Michigan is disappointing but otherwise I think their record is understandable although they can't be very happy with where they're at.
Should be a decent game with two teams who have a lot to prove after disappointing starts.
Michigan is not bad.............they always have a lot of speed and talent. They haven't come together yet, they have a young roster and the goaltending doesn't seem as good as normal (two freshman goalies but we all know that they usually have very good goalie recruits - I think they lost their top goalie recruit to the juniors this year). Their performance versus RIT and Northern Michigan is disappointing but otherwise I think their record is understandable although they can't be very happy with where they're at.
Should be a decent game with two teams who have a lot to prove after disappointing starts.
Quote from: RatushnyFanI think they lost their top goalie recruit to the juniors this year
This happened twice in recent years, but not this year. Jared Rutledge was their main recruit that they touted as their likely starter, but Steve Racine has delivered both better results and better numbers. A lot of Michigan fans and coaching staff saw the writing on the wall regarding Rutledge's overrating when Michigan lost its season-opening game to RIT at Yost.
USA Men's up. We're 13.
Quote from: SwampyIn any case, Saturday's game is going to be huge for both teams.
Winning would put Cornell in a weird position, pairwise-wise. The NC results will buoy then while the conference result will hurt them. The opposite of prior years.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyIn any case, Saturday's game is going to be huge for both teams.
Winning would put Cornell in a weird position, pairwise-wise. The NC results will buoy then while the conference result will hurt them. The opposite of prior years.
Winning solves everything.:-)At least with the conference we have a chance to recoup ourselves. The losses in conf aren't as critical as out of conf, where you can't as easily make up for your mistakes, no?
USA Women's now up.
USCHO has us up one to 12.
Michigan drops off and Yale debuts at 15.
#12 in USA Hockey (http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek8.aspx) as well.
OK, OK so I had to see a patient in the hospital and didn't get it posted right away. Here's what's up so far.
Women drop to third. USA Women's out tomorrow.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
November 26, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (49) 10- 1-0 999 1
2 New Hampshire ( 1) 9- 1-2 936 3
3 Minnesota 9- 2-2 880 4
4 Miami 7- 2-3 794 5
5 Denver 9- 3-0 786 2
6 Notre Dame 9- 4-0 737 6
7 North Dakota 6- 4-2 696 7
8 Union 8- 2-1 687 8
9 Boston University 7- 4-0 565 10
10 Western Michigan 6- 3-1 532 9
11 Dartmouth 5- 2-2 448 11
12 Cornell 4- 3-2 371 13
13 Nebraska-Omaha 8- 3-1 366 15
14 St. Cloud State 7- 5-0 347 12
15 Yale 5- 2-1 291 NR
16 Quinnipiac 8- 3-2 226 18
17 Ferris State 6- 4-2 205 16
18 Colorado College 7- 6-1 194 14
19 Harvard 4- 3-0 193 17
20 Niagara 8- 2-3 134 20
Others receiving votes: Providence 23, Michigan 22, Alaska 19, St. Lawrence 18,
Holy Cross 15, Northern Michigan 4, Ohio State 4, Massachusetts 3,
Minnesota State 2, Northeastern 2, Massachusetts-Lowell 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2DNIOSNig
USA Men's Poll - Week 8: November 26, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last
1 Boston College 509 (33) 10-1-0 1
2 New Hampshire 473 (1) 9-1-2 3
3 Minnesota 427 9-2-2 4
4 Miami 379 7-2-3 5
5 Denver 361 9-3-0 2
6 Notre Dame 325 9-4-0 6
7 Union College 314 8-2-1 8
8 North Dakota 267 6-4-2 7
9 Boston Univer 223 7-4-0 10
10 Western Michigan193 6-3-1 9
11 Dartmouth 157 5-2-2 11
12 Cornell 115 4-3-2 13
13 Yale 87 5-2-1 NR
14 Nebraska-Omaha 79 8-3-1 14
15 St. Cloud State 54 7-5-0 12
Others receiving votes: Quinnipiac University, 40; Harvard University, 33;
Colorado College, 13; Ferris State University, 12; Niagara University, 12;
St. Lawrence University, 4; Providence College, 2; University of Michigan, 1.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
November 26, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 16- 0-0 150 1
2 Clarkson 12- 2-0 121 3
3 Cornell 9- 2-0 108 2
4 Mercyhurst 12- 1-1 96 4
5 Boston College 8- 3-2 90 5
6 Harvard 6- 1-0 76 7
7 Boston University 9- 3-1 75 6
8 North Dakota 9- 5-0 34 10
9 Northeastern 8- 3-2 32 9
10 Wisconsin 10- 4-2 29 NR
Others receiving votes: Ohio State 12, Providence 1, St. Lawrence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2DNL9ZUXz
USA Women's Poll - Week 10: Nov. 27, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 16-0-0 1
2 Clarkson 164 12-2-0 3
3 Cornell 142 9-2-0 2
4 Mercyhurst 124 12-1-1 4
5 Harvard 113 6-1-0 7
6 Boston Coll 101 8-3-2 6
7 Boston Univ 90 9-3-1 5
8 North Dakota 42 9-5-0 10
9 Northeastern 39 8-3-2 9
10 Ohio State 22 11-5-0 8
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin, 18.
Women third in USA poll as well.
USCHO has UHN taking over first, I don't know that I agree, and we're 11.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
December 03, 2012
Team (First Place Votes) Record Points Last Poll
1 New Hampshire (31) 11- 1-2 977 2
2 Boston College (19) 11- 2-0 965 1
3 Miami 9- 2-3 883 4
4 Minnesota 10- 3-2 806 3
5 Notre Dame 11- 4-0 791 6
6 Denver 9- 4-1 674 5
7 Boston University 8- 5-0 644 9
7 Western Michigan 8- 3-1 644 10
9 North Dakota 7- 5-2 636 7
10 Dartmouth 6- 2-2 459 11
11 Cornell 6- 3-2 453 12
12 Union 8- 3-2 433 8
13 Quinnipiac 10- 3-2 418 16
14 Nebraska-Omaha 9- 4-1 411 13
15 Yale 6- 2-1 316 15
16 Ferris State 7- 4-3 254 17
17 St. Cloud State 8- 6-0 224 14
18 Niagara 10- 2-3 155 20
19 Colorado College 8- 7-1 145 18
20 Harvard 4- 3-0 123 19
Others receiving votes: Ohio State 59, Providence 15, Alaska 5, Michigan 3,
Minnesota State 2, St. Lawrence 2, Colgate 1, Holy Cross 1, Massachusetts 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2E2MxVTsD
Men's Poll - Week 9: December 3, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last Poll
1 New Hampshire 496 (24) 11-1-2 2
2 Boston College 487 (10) 11-2-0 1
3 Miami 432 9-2-3 4
4 Notre Dame 390 11-4-0 6
5 Minnesota 365 10-3-2 3
6 Denver 283 9-4-1 5
7 Boston University268 8-5-0 9
8 Western Michigan 258 8-3-1 10
9 North Dakota 233 7-5-2 8
10 Dartmouth 173 6-2-2 11
11 Quinnipiac 146 10-3-2 NR
12 Union College 140 8-3-2 7
13 Cornell 129 6-3-2 12
14 Nebraska-Omaha 117 9-4-1 14
15 Yale 106 6-2-1 13
Others receiving votes: Ferris State University, 30;
St. Cloud State University, 10, Niagara University, 9,
Colorado College, 4; Harvard University, 3; Ohio State University, 1.
USCHO have our Women at 3.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
December 03, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 18- 0-0 150 1
2 Clarkson 13- 3-0 110 2
3 Cornell 10- 3-0 105 3
4 Mercyhurst 14- 1-1 97 4
5 Harvard 8- 1-0 93 6
6 Boston College 10- 3-2 90 5
7 Boston University 11- 3-1 76 7
8 North Dakota 11- 5-0 47 8
9 Wisconsin 10- 6-2 27 10
10 Northeastern 9- 5-2 18 9
Others receiving votes: Ohio State 12.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2E2QhBj5G
USA Women's Poll - Week 11: Dec. 4, 2012
Team Points(First) Record Last
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 18-0-0 1
2 Clarkson 147 13-3-0 2
3 Cornell 144 10-3-0 3
4 Harvard 134 8-1-0 5
5 Mercyhurst 118 14-1-1 4
6 Boston Coll 99 10-3-2 6
7 Boston Univ 94 11-3-1 7
8 North Dakota 59 11-5-0 8
9 Wisconsin 25 10-6-2 NR
10Northeastern 20 8-3-2 9
Others receiving votes: Ohio State, 14; New Hampshire, 1.
I'll start Pairwise, as bad as it is this time of year. After-all I have to have something from CHN.
After holiday tourneys it's probably a lot better. Pairwise that is, I'm not sure about CHN.:-DMen from CHN
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Boston College 25 11-2-0 .846 2 .6463 1
2 New Hampshire 24 11-1-2 .857 1 .6315 2
3 Dartmouth 23 6-2-2 .700 10 .6023 3
4 Yale 22 6-2-1 .722 8 .5940 4
5 Boston Univer 21 8-5-0 .615 15t .5750 5
6 Notre Dame 20 11-4-0 .733 5t .5734 6
7 Miami 19 9-2-3 .750 4 .5728 7
8 Quinnipiac 18 10-3-2 .733 5t .5707 8
9 Western Mich 17 8-3-1 .708 9 .5696 9
10 Denver 16 9-4-1 .679 12t .5600 10
11 Cornell 15 6-3-2 .636 14 .5582 11
12 Union 14 8-3-2 .692 11 .5547 12
13 North Dakota 13 7-5-2 .571 19t .5531 13
14 Harvard 12 4-3-0 .571 19t .5491 14
15 Minnesota 11 10-3-2 .733 5t .5474 15
16 Niagara 9 10-2-3 .767 3 .5430 16
17 Nebraska-Omaha 9 9-4-1 .679 12t .5329 17
18 Ohio State 8 7-4-3 .607 17t .5320 18
19 St. Cloud State 7 8-6-0 .571 19t .5283 19
20 Colorado College 6 8-7-1 .531 27 .5272 20
21 St. Lawrence 5 7-5-2 .571 19t .5261 21
22 Ferris State 4 7-4-3 .607 17t .5207 22
23 Massachusetts 3 5-6-2 .462 32t .5195 23
24 Colgate 3 7-7-2 .500 28t .5184 24
25 Minnesota State 1 7-5-2 .571 19t .5134 25
26 Providence 0 7-6-1 .536 26 .5039 26
Women from USCHO
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 18-0-0 1.000 1t .6814 1 8-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 8-1-0 .8889 4 .6421 2 2-1-0 .6667
3t Cornell 8 10-3-0 .7692 6 .6187 3 4-3-0 .5714
3t Clarkson 8 13-3-0 .8125 5 .6135 4 5-2-0 .7143
3t Boston Univer 8 11-3-1 .7667 7 .6132 5 3-2-1 .5833
6 Mercyhurst 6 14-1-1 .9062 3 .6086 6 1-1-0 .5000
7 Boston College 5 10-3-2 .7333 8 .6004 7 1-1-2 .5000
8 North Dakota 4 11-5-0 .6875 10 .5833 8 2-4-0 .3333
9 Ohio State 3 12-5-1 .6944 9 .5649 9 2-4-0 .3333
10 Dartmouth 2 4-3-2 .5556 16 .5412 10 0-2-1 .1667
11 Wisconsin 1 10-6-2 .6111 13 .5358 11 1-3-0 .2500
12 St. Lawrence 0 8-7-1 .5312 17 .5333 12 0-6-0 .0000
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2E2SrheZj
Quote from: Jim HylaUSCHO has UHN taking over first, I don't know that I agree, and we're 11.
Can we just call them the University of No Hardware instead? It keeps the letters in order and cuts deeper.
I find it interesting that both polls have ECAC teams ranked 10-13 and Yale at 15. It seems rare to me to have 5 ECAC teams in the top 15 (then again I did only graduate in 2011), but they are all sitting there at the bottom. After holiday tournaments everyone should have a better feeling who is really contending and maybe one or two ECAC teams can rise a bit higher.
Quote from: snert1288I find it interesting that both polls have ECAC teams ranked 10-13 and Yale at 15. It seems rare to me to have 5 ECAC teams in the top 15 (then again I did only graduate in 2011), but they are all sitting there at the bottom. After holiday tournaments everyone should have a better feeling who is really contending and maybe one or two ECAC teams can rise a bit higher.
It is quite rare. There have been times when there has been a bubble of ECAC in the 9-16 slots, but it has always shaken out by March, leaving us with at most three representatives.
If the NCAA tournament started today, by PWR the ECAC would have 6 teams in. That's... ridiculous. The prior ten seasons (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm) have yielded a total of 22 appearances (Cornell 6, Harvard 4, Yale 3, everybody else 9), with the most in any field being 3 (2005, 2009, 2011).
Quote from: TrotskyIf the NCAA tournament started today, by PWR the ECAC would have 6 teams in. That's... ridiculous. The prior ten seasons (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm) have yielded a total of 22 appearances (Cornell 6, Harvard 4, Yale 3, everybody else 9), with the most in any field being 3 (2005, 2009, 2011).
Of course, we'll see what shakes out after the holiday tournies, but, well, there are five ECAC teams in the top 15 (there will be one AHA representative) of KRACH (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/krach.php) too...
So maybe, just maybe, the ECAC is strong* this year? I, for one, would welcome a legitimate return to "big 4" status.
* (Or the other leagues are unusually and coherently weak.)
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: snert1288I find it interesting that both polls have ECAC teams ranked 10-13 and Yale at 15. It seems rare to me to have 5 ECAC teams in the top 15 (then again I did only graduate in 2011), but they are all sitting there at the bottom. After holiday tournaments everyone should have a better feeling who is really contending and maybe one or two ECAC teams can rise a bit higher.
It is quite rare. There have been times when there has been a bubble of ECAC in the 9-16 slots, but it has always shaken out by March, leaving us with at most three representatives.
If the NCAA tournament started today, by PWR the ECAC would have 6 teams in. That's... ridiculous. The prior ten seasons (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm) have yielded a total of 22 appearances (Cornell 6, Harvard 4, Yale 3, everybody else 9), with the most in any field being 3 (2005, 2009, 2011).
If, and it is a big if, the ECAC continues to perform well out of conference, they will get more than three representatives. Six is very unlikely since the league will beat each other in conference. That's what has typical happened to the WCHA when they have had even more than six projected as in the tourney at this time of year.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyIf the NCAA tournament started today, by PWR the ECAC would have 6 teams in. That's... ridiculous. The prior ten seasons (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm) have yielded a total of 22 appearances (Cornell 6, Harvard 4, Yale 3, everybody else 9), with the most in any field being 3 (2005, 2009, 2011).
Of course, we'll see what shakes out after the holiday tournies, but, well, there are five ECAC teams in the top 15 (there will be one AHA representative) of KRACH (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/krach.php) too...
So maybe, just maybe, the ECAC is strong* this year? I, for one, would welcome a legitimate return to "big 4" status.
* (Or the other leagues are unusually and coherently weak.)
Well I think last year was the last year in a long time the WCHA will be strong.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
December 10, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (35) 11- 2-1 981 2
2 New Hampshire ( 9) 11- 2-2 921 1
3 Notre Dame ( 3) 13- 4-0 902 5
4 Minnesota ( 3) 11- 3-3 815 4
5 Miami 10- 3-3 775 3
6 Boston University 10- 5-0 727 7
7 Western Michigan 10- 3-1 723 7
8 North Dakota 8- 5-3 630 9
9 Quinnipiac 12- 3-2 541 13
10 Dartmouth 7- 2-2 529 10
11 Denver 9- 5-2 519 6
12 Cornell 6- 3-2 438 11
13 Nebraska-Omaha 10- 5-1 389 14
14 Union 8- 3-4 385 12
15 Yale 6- 3-2 246 15
16 Niagara 10- 2-3 239 18
17 St. Cloud State 9- 7-0 234 17
18 Harvard 4- 3-1 126 20
19 Ferris State 7- 6-3 116 16
20 Minnesota State 9- 5-2 96 NR
Others receiving votes: Colorado College 63, Colgate 35, Providence 32, Holy Cross 19, Ohio State 14, Robert Morris 5.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2EfsKFume
Week 10: USA Men's College Hockey Poll
Men's Poll - Week 10: December 10, 2012
Team Points (First) 2012-13 Last Poll
1 Boston College 496 (22) 11-2-1 2
2 New Hampshire 472 (9) 11-2-2 1
3 Notre Dame 420 (1) 13-4-0 4
4 Minnesota 405 (3) 11-3-3 5
5 Miami 362 10-3-3 3
6 Boston University 325 10-5-0 7
7 Western Michigan 312 10-3-1 8
8 North Dakota 259 8-5-3 9
9 Quinnipiac 224 12-3-2 11
10 Denver 216 9-5-2 6
11 Dartmouth 212 7-2-2 10
12 Cornell 134 6-3-2 13
13 Union College 100 8-3-4 12
14 Nebraska-Omaha 67 10-5-1 14
15 Yale 31 6-3-2 15
Others receiving votes: Niagara University, 14; St. Cloud State University, 12;
Harvard University, 9; Providence, 5; Colorado College, 2;
Minnesota State University, 2; Ferris State University, 1.
Pairwise
Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Boston College 26 11-2-1 .821 1 .6165 1
2 New Hampshire 25 11-2-2 .800 2 .6082 2
3 Dartmouth 24 7-2-2 .727 8 .5940 3
4 Notre Dame 23 13-4-0 .765 4t .5849 4
5 Boston Univer 22 10-5-0 .667 10t .5808 5
6 Quinnipiac 21 12-3-2 .765 4t .5807 6
7 Western Mich 20 10-3-1 .750 6 .5765 7
8 Yale 19 6-3-2 .636 14t .5666 8
9 Cornell 18 6-3-2 .636 14t .5608 9
10 Miami 17 10-3-3 .719 9 .5586 10
11 North Dakota 16 8-5-3 .594 18 .5574 11
12 Minnesota 15 11-3-3 .735 7 .5525 12
13 Union 14 8-3-4 .667 10t .5517 13
14 Niagara 12 10-2-3 .767 3 .5504 14
15 Denver 12 9-5-2 .625 16t .5460 15
16 Harvard 11 4-3-1 .562 20t .5372 16
17 Colgate 11 9-7-2 .556 23 .5300 17
18 Nebraska-Omaha 9 10-5-1 .656 13 .5265 18
19 Ohio State 7 7-5-4 .562 20t .5264 19
20 St. Cloud State 7 9-7-0 .562 20t .5250 20
21 Minnesota State 6 9-5-2 .625 16t .5248 21
22 Colorado College 5 8-8-2 .500 26t .5180 22
23 Robert Morris 5 6-4-2 .583 19 .5178 23
24 Holy Cross 3 9-4-2 .667 10t .5141 24
25 Ferris State 2 7-6-3 .531 25 .5068 25
26 St. Lawrence 1 7-7-2 .500 26t .5056 26
27 Providence 0 7-6-2 .533 24 .5038 27
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
December 10, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 20- 0-0 150 1
2 Clarkson 15- 3-0 127 2
3 Cornell 10- 3-0 115 3
4 Harvard 9- 1-1 99 5
5 Boston College 11- 3-2 96 6
6 Boston University 11- 3-3 74 7
7 Mercyhurst 14- 3-1 54 4
8 Wisconsin 12- 6-2 47 9
9 Northeastern 10- 5-2 26 10
10 Ohio State 14- 5-1 17 NR
Others receiving votes: North Dakota 15, Robert Morris 5.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2EgjRAsPh
USA Women's Poll - Week 12: Dec. 11, 2012
Team Points(First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 20-0-0 1
2 Clarkson 156 15-3-0 2
3 Cornell 143 10-3-0 3
4 Harvard 137 9-1-1 4
5 Boston Coll 115 11-3-2 6
6 Boston Univer 97 11-3-3 7
7 Mercyhurst 76 14-3-1 5
8 Wisconsin 54 12-6-2 9
9 North Dakota 27 11-7-0 8
10Northeastern 25 10-5-2 10
Others receiving votes: Ohio State, 14; Minnesota Duluth, 4; Robert Morris, 3.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 20-0-0 1.000 1t .6734 1 6-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 9-1-1 .8636 3 .6274 2 2-1-0 .6667
3t Cornell 8 10-3-0 .7692 6 .6132 3 1-3-0 .2500
3t Clarkson 8 15-3-0 .8333 4 .6123 4 3-2-0 .6000
5t Boston Uni 7 11-3-3 .7353 8 .6049 5 5-2-1 .6875
5t Boston Coll 7 11-3-2 .7500 7 .6035 6 3-1-1 .7000
7 Mercyhurst 5 14-3-1 .8056 5 .5772 7 1-3-0 .2500
8 Ohio State 4 14-5-1 .7250 9 .5696 8 2-4-0 .3333
9 North Dakota 3 11-7-0 .6111 14 .5578 9 2-6-0 .2500
10 Wisconsin 2 12-6-2 .6500 11 .5563 10 3-3-0 .5000
11 Robert Morris1 9-3-2 .7143 10 .5533 11 2-1-1 .6250
12 Northeastern 0 10-5-2 .6471 12 .5351 12 0-4-1 .1000
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2EftNMgDF
Don't play, one poll we slip, one poll we move up a spot.
Gratifying to see The Ohio State University hasn't been doing squat lately in the polls.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
December 17, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Boston College (44) 11- 2-1 993 1
2 New Hampshire ( 4) 11- 2-2 938 2
3 Notre Dame ( 2) 14- 4-0 911 3
4 Minnesota 11- 3-3 816 4
5 Miami 11- 3-4 768 5
6 Boston University 10- 5-0 737 6
7 North Dakota 10- 5-3 675 8
8 Western Michigan 11- 4-1 648 7
9 Quinnipiac 12- 3-2 603 9
10 Dartmouth 7- 2-2 525 10
11 Cornell 6- 3-2 441 12
12 Nebraska-Omaha 11- 6-1 395 13
13 Union 8- 3-4 391 14
14 Denver 9- 6-3 343 11
15 Yale 7- 3-2 321 15
16 St. Cloud State 11- 7-0 296 17
17 Niagara 10- 2-4 248 16
18 Minnesota State 10- 6-2 204 20
19 Ferris State 7- 7-3 50 19
20 Colgate 9- 7-2 47 NR
20 Harvard 4- 4-1 47 18
Others receiving votes: Providence 43, Holy Cross 16, Robert Morris 15,
Ohio State 14, Colorado College 7, Lake Superior 4, Massachusetts-Lowell 2, Michigan 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2FM37ghah
USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll
December 17, 2012
Team Points (First) Last Record
1 Boston College 503 (28) 1 11-2-1
2 New Hampshire 473 (5) 2 11-2-2
3 Notre Dame 443 (1) 3 14-4-0
4 Minnesota 392 4 11-3-3
5 Miami University 366 5 11-3-4
6 Boston University 339 6 10-5-0
7 Western Michigan 285 7 11-4-1
8 North Dakota 284 8 10-5-3
9 Quinnipiac 247 9 12-3-2
10 Dartmouth 198 11 7-2-2
11 Cornell 148 12 6-3-2
12 Union 107 13 8-3-4
13 Nebraska-Omaha 90 14 11-6-1
14 Yale 67 15 7-3-2
15 Denver 62 10 9-6-3
Others receiving votes: St. Cloud State University 48, Niagara University 15,
Minnesota State University 10, Providence College 3.
Men's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Boston College 26 11-2-1 .821 1 .6202 1
2 New Hampshire 25 11-2-2 .800 2 .6107 2
3 Dartmouth 24 7-2-2 .727 7 .5893 3
4 Notre Dame 23 14-4-0 .778 3 .5869 4
5 Boston University 22 10-5-0 .667 10t .5824 5
6 Quinnipiac 21 12-3-2 .765 4 .5789 6
7 Yale 20 7-3-2 .667 10t .5665 7
8 North Dakota 19 10-5-3 .639 14t .5631 8
9 Miami 18 11-3-4 .722 8 .5622 9
10 Western Michigan 17 11-4-1 .719 9 .5588 10
11 Cornell 16 6-3-2 .636 16 .5568 11
12 Minnesota 15 11-3-3 .735 6 .5557 12
13 Union 14 8-3-4 .667 10t .5485 13
14 St. Cloud State 13 11-7-0 .611 18t .5437 14
15 Niagara 11 10-2-4 .750 5 .5391 15
16 Denver 11 9-6-3 .583 20 .5296 16
17 Nebraska-Omaha 10 11-6-1 .639 14t .5293 17
18 Colgate 10 9-7-2 .556 22 .5279 18
19 Robert Morris 8 7-4-2 .615 17 .5254 19
20 Minnesota State 7 10-6-2 .611 18t .5232 20
21 Ohio State 6 7-6-5 .528 24 .5223 21
22 Harvard 5 4-4-1 .500 25t .5155 22
23 Mass.-Lowell 4 6-7-1 .464 31 .5127 23
24 Holy Cross 3 9-4-2 .667 10t .5123 24
25 Providence 2 7-6-2 .533 23 .5090 25
26 Colorado College 1 8-10-2 .450 32 .5019 26
27 Ferris State 0 7-7-3 .500 25t .5013 27
No new Women's Polls
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 20-0-0 1.000 1t .6745 1 6-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 9-1-1 .8636 3 .6296 2 2-1-0 .6667
3 Clarkson 8 15-3-0 .8333 4 .6154 4 4-2-0 .6667
4t Cornell 7 10-3-0 .7692 6 .6155 3 2-3-0 .4000
4t Boston Univ 7 11-3-3 .7353 8 .6044 5 4-2-1 .6429
4t Boston Coll 7 11-3-2 .7500 7 .6024 6 2-1-1 .6250
7 Mercyhurst 6 14-3-1 .8056 5 .5783 7 2-3-1 .4167
8 Ohio State 4 14-5-1 .7250 9 .5702 8 2-4-0 .3333
9 North Dakota 3 11-7-0 .6111 14 .5577 9 2-6-0 .2500
10 Wisconsin 2 12-6-2 .6500 11 .5574 10 3-3-0 .5000
11 Robert Morris 1 9-3-2 .7143 10 .5566 11 2-1-0 .6667
12 Quinnipiac 0 12-7-2 .6190 13 .5354 12 0-5-1 .0833
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2FV4eZEy6
It's been a while.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
December 31, 2012
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (35) 13- 3-3 977 4
2 Boston College ( 5) 12- 3-1 922 1
3 Notre Dame ( 9) 14- 4-0 913 3
4 New Hampshire 11- 3-2 843 2
5 Quinnipiac 14- 3-2 769 9
6 Miami 12- 4-4 730 5
7 North Dakota 10- 5-3 720 7
8 Dartmouth ( 1) 8- 2-2 661 10
9 Boston University 10- 6-0 612 6
10 Western Michigan 11- 5-2 513 8
11 Denver 10- 6-3 478 14
12 Cornell 7- 4-2 425 11
13 Union 9- 4-4 375 13
14 Minnesota State 12- 6-2 336 18
15 St. Cloud State 12- 8-0 291 16
16 Nebraska-Omaha 11- 8-1 276 12
17 Yale 7- 4-2 213 15
18 Niagara 10- 3-4 124 17
19 Robert Morris 9- 4-2 120 NR
20 Holy Cross 10- 4-2 65 NR
Others receiving votes: Colgate 50, Ferris State 47, Providence 12,
Harvard 10, Michigan Tech 5, Massachusetts 4, Massachusetts-Lowell 4,
Northern Michigan 4, Colorado College 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2Gf6izO1Y
Pairwise CHN
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Boston College 25 12-3-1 .781 2 .6055 1
2 Quinnipiac 24 14-3-2 .789 1 .5870 3
3 New Hampshire 23 12-3-2 .765 4 .6015 2
4 Dartmouth 21 8-3-2 .692 8 .5788 4
5 Notre Dame 21 14-4-0 .778 3 .5787 5
6 Boston Univ 19 10-6-0 .625 15 .5744 6
7 Minnesota 19 13-3-3 .763 5 .5704 7
8 North Dakota 18 10-5-3 .639 14 .5582 8
9 Miami 17 12-4-4 .700 7 .5568 9
10 Yale 16 7-4-2 .615 16t .5476 10
11 Robert Morris 15 9-4-2 .667 10t .5430 11
12 Cornell 14 7-4-2 .615 16t .5430 12
13 Denver 13 10-6-3 .605 18 .5408 13
14 Western Mich 12 11-5-2 .667 10t .5408 14
15 Union 11 9-4-4 .647 13 .5392 15
16 St. Cloud State 11 12-8-0 .600 19 .5392 16
17 Minnesota State 9 12-6-2 .650 12 .5347 17
18 Colgate 9 9-7-2 .556 22 .5268 18
19 Holy Cross 7 10-4-2 .688 9 .5253 19
20 Niagara 6 10-3-4 .706 6 .5251 20
21 Mass.-Lowell 5 7-7-1 .500 24t .5223 21
22 Nebraska-Omaha 4 11-8-1 .575 20 .5187 22
23 Providence 3 7-6-3 .531 23 .5171 23
24 Massachusetts 2 7-9-2 .444 32t .5166 24
25 Ohio State 1 7-8-5 .475 27 .5049 25
26 Colorado College 0 8-10-2 .450 30t .5029 26
Men's Division I PairWise Rankings USCHO
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Boston College 25 12-3-1 .7812 2 .6055* 1 8-2-1 .7727
2 Quinnipiac 24 14-3-2 .7895 1 .5870 3 8-2-2 .7500
3 New Hampshire 23 12-3-2 .7647 4 .6015* 2 8-3-1 .7083
4t Dartmouth 21 8-3-2 .6923 8 .5788 4 3-3-2 .5000
4t Notre Dame 21 14-4-0 .7778 3 .5787 5 3-3-0 .5000
6t Boston Univer 19 10-6-0 .6250 15 .5744 6 6-6-0 .5000
6t Minnesota 19 13-3-3 .7632 5 .5704 7 4-2-1 .6429
8 North Dakota 18 10-5-3 .6389 14 .5582 8 5-4-1 .5500
9 Miami 17 12-4-4 .7000 7 .5568 9 5-1-2 .7500
10 Yale 16 7-4-2 .6154 16t .5476 10 3-2-2 .5714
11 Robert Morris 15 9-4-2 .6667 10t .5430 11 4-2-2 .6250
12 Cornell 14 7-4-2 .6154 16t .5430 12 3-1-2 .6667
13 Denver 13 10-6-3 .6053 18 .5408 13 7-4-1 .6250
14 Western Mich 12 11-5-2 .6667 10t .5408 14 1-1-0 .5000
15t Union 11 9-4-4 .6471 13 .5392 15 0-2-1 .1667
15t St. Cloud State 11 12-8-0 .6000 19 .5392* 16 7-5-0 .5833
17t Minnesota State 9 12-6-2 .6500 12 .5347* 17 2-6-0 .2500
17t Colgate 9 9-7-2 .5556 22 .5268 18 5-4-1 .5500
19 Holy Cross 7 10-4-2 .6875 9 .5253* 19 1-1-1 .5000
20 Niagara 6 10-3-4 .7059 6 .5251* 20 1-1-0 .5000
21 Mass-Lowell 5 7-7-1 .5000 24t .5223 21 2-6-0 .2500
22 Nebraska-Omaha 4 11-8-1 .5750 20 .5187 22 3-6-0 .3333
23 Providence 3 7-6-3 .5312 23 .5171* 23 0-4-2 .1667
24 Massachusetts 2 7-9-2 .4444 32t .5166 24 3-8-1 .2917
25 Ohio State 1 7-8-5 .4750 27 .5049 25 0-4-3 .2143
26 Colorado Coll 0 8-10-2 .4500 30t .5029 26 1-10-2 .1538
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-men/#ixzz2Gj3KatW9
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 20-0-0 1.000 1t .6745 1 6-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 9-1-1 .8636 3 .6296 2 2-1-0 .6667
3 Clarkson 8 15-3-0 .8333 4 .6154 4 4-2-0 .6667
4t Cornell 7 10-3-0 .7692 6 .6155 3 2-3-0 .4000
4t Boston Univer 7 11-3-3 .7353 8 .6044 5 4-2-1 .6429
4t Boston College 7 11-3-2 .7500 7 .6024 6 2-1-1 .6250
7 Mercyhurst 6 14-3-1 .8056 5 .5783 7 2-3-1 .4167
8 Ohio State 4 14-5-1 .7250 9 .5702 8 2-4-0 .3333
9 North Dakota 3 11-7-0 .6111 14 .5577 9 2-6-0 .2500
10 Wisconsin 2 12-6-2 .6500 11 .5574 10 3-3-0 .5000
11 Robert Morris 1 9-3-2 .7143 10 .5566 11 2-1-0 .6667
12 Quinnipiac 0 12-7-2 .6190 13 .5354 12 0-5-1 .0833
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2Gf92EhPr
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 07, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (38) 13- 3-3 979 1
2 Notre Dame ( 8) 14- 4-0 915 3
3 Boston College ( 1) 12- 3-2 914 2
4 New Hampshire ( 1) 13- 3-2 854 4
5 Quinnipiac ( 2) 16- 3-2 812 5
6 Miami 12- 4-4 731 6
7 North Dakota 12- 5-3 707 7
8 Boston University 11- 6-0 636 9
9 Denver 12- 6-3 607 11
10 Western Michigan 12- 5-3 568 10
11 Minnesota State 14- 6-2 440 14
12 Dartmouth 8- 5-2 420 8
13 Nebraska-Omaha 13- 8-1 397 16
14 Yale 7- 4-3 290 17
15 Cornell 7- 6-2 264 12
16 Union 9- 6-4 231 13
17 Niagara 11- 3-4 210 18
18 St. Cloud State 12-10-0 166 15
19 Colgate 11- 7-2 125 NR
20 Massachusetts-Lowell 9- 7-1 64 NR
Others receiving votes: Robert Morris 61, Ferris State 50,
Lake Superior 26, Holy Cross 20, Michigan Tech 4, Providence 4,
Northern Michigan 3, Mercyhurst 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2HLNg1yNb
USA Men's Poll - Week 13: January 7, 2013
Team Points (First)Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 476 (21) 13-3-3 1
2 Boston College 462 (5) 12-3-2 3
3 Notre Dame 436 (2) 14-4-0 2
4 New Hampshire 417 (3) 13-3-2 4
5 Quinnipiac 398 (3) 16-3-2 5
6 Miami 327 12-4-4 6
7 North Dakota 306 12-5-3 7
8 Boston Univer 276 11-6-0 9
9 Denver 234 12-6-3 11
10 Western Mich 218 12-5-3 10
11 Minnesota State132 14-6-2 14
12 Dartmouth 120 8-5-2 8
13 Nebraska-Omaha 115 13-8-1 15
14 Yale 60 7-4-3 NR
15 Cornell 36 7-6-2 12
Others receiving votes: Niagara University, 29; Union College, 24;
Colgate University, 3; Ferris State University, 3; UMass Lowell, 3;
St. Cloud State University, 3; Lake Superior State University, 1;
Robert Morris University, 1.
Pairwise
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Boston College 27 12-3-2 .765 4 .5997 2
2 Quinnipiac 26 16-3-2 .810 1 .5892 3
3 New Hampshire 25 13-3-2 .778 2t .6005 1
4 Notre Dame 24 14-4-0 .778 2t .5871 4
5 Boston Univer 23 11-6-0 .647 11t .5788 5
6 Minnesota 22 13-3-3 .763 5 .5706 6
7 Miami 21 12-4-4 .700 7 .5610 8
8 North Dakota 20 12-5-3 .675 9t .5668 7
9 Denver 19 12-6-3 .643 13 .5547 9
10 Western Michigan18 12-5-3 .675 9t .5461 10
11 Dartmouth 16 8-5-2 .600 17t .5461 11
12 Minnesota State 15 14-6-2 .682 8 .5447 12
13 Yale 15 7-4-3 .607 16 .5419 13
14 Mass.-Lowell 13 9-7-1 .559 20t .5324 15
15 Nebraska-Omaha 12 13-8-1 .614 14 .5380 14
16 Niagara 11 11-3-4 .722 6 .5285 16
17 Robert Morris 11 10-5-2 .647 11t .5270 17
18 Colgate 11 11-7-2 .600 17t .5249 19
19 St. Cloud State 10 12-10-0 .545 22t .5253 18
20 Lake Superior 9 12-10-0 .545 22t .5155 21
21 Cornell 8 7-6-2 .533 24 .5213 20
22 Union 6 9-6-4 .579 19 .5126 22
23 Massachusetts 5 7-9-2 .444 33t .5125 23
24 Ohio State 5 7-8-5 .475 26 .5096 24
25 Ferris State 3 9-8-3 .525 25 .5059 25
26 Holy Cross 2 10-6-2 .611 15 .5053 26
27 Northern Michigan1 8-10-3 .452 32 .5020 27
28 Providence 0 7-8-3 .472 29t .5001 28
T U C L i n e
Colorado College 8-12-2 .409 45 .4935 29
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
January 07, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 20- 0-0 150 1
2 Harvard 11- 1-1 119 4
3 Boston College 13- 3-2 115 5
4 Cornell 10- 3-0 111 3
5 Clarkson 15- 5-0 87 2
6 Boston University 11- 3-3 83 6
7 Mercyhurst 14- 3-1 62 7
8 Wisconsin 12- 6-2 36 8
9 Northeastern 11- 6-2 29 9
10 Ohio State 14- 5-1 22 10
Others receiving votes: North Dakota 9, St. Lawrence 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2HLO9BqdD
USA Women's Poll - Week 13: Jan. 8, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 20-0-0 1
2 Harvard 166 11-1-1 4
3 Boston Coll 144 13-3-2 5
4 Cornell 131 10-3-0 3
5 Boston Univ 112 11-3-3 6
6 Clarkson 93 15-5-0 2
7 Mercyhurst 83 14-3-1 7
8 Wisconsin 36 12-6-2 8
9 Ohio State 33 14-5-1 NR
10 Northeastern 30 11-6-2 10
Others receiving votes: North Dakota, 27.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 20-0-0 1.000 1t .7246* 1 8-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 11-1-1 .8846 3 .6344* 2 2-1-0 .6667
3 Boston College 9 13-3-2 .7778 5 .6281* 3 5-1-1 .7857
4 Boston Univer 8 11-3-3 .7353 8 .6133* 5 4-2-1 .6429
5 Cornell 7 10-3-0 .7692 6 .6141* 4 3-3-0 .5000
6 Clarkson 6 15-5-0 .7500 7 .5898* 6 5-4-0 .5556
7 Mercyhurst 5 14-3-1 .8056 4 .5884* 7 1-1-0 .5000
8 Ohio State 4 14-5-1 .7250 9 .5781* 8 2-4-0 .3333
9 North Dakota 3 13-7-0 .6500 10t .5637* 9 2-6-0 .2500
10 Wisconsin 2 12-6-2 .6500 10t .5625* 10 3-3-0 .5000
11 Northeastern 1 11-6-2 .6316 12 .5423* 11 1-5-0 .1667
12 St. Lawrence 0 11-8-1 .5750 16 .5394 12 1-7-0 .1250
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2HLOIBwQW
Cornell falls to 16 in the USCHO poll (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/?data=national).
Finally found the overall link to the USA Hockey polls (http://www.usahockey.com/players/polls.aspx).
OK, I'll put them up now, and clean them up later.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 14, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (47) 16- 3-3 992 1
2 Boston College 13- 4-2 924 3
3 New Hampshire ( 1) 14- 4-2 875 4
4 Quinnipiac ( 2) 17- 3-3 847 5
5 Notre Dame 15- 6-0 829 2
6 North Dakota 13- 6-3 714 7
7 Denver 13- 6-4 667 9
8 Miami 12- 5-5 623 6
9 Boston University 12- 7-0 617 8
10 Western Michigan 13- 5-4 598 10
11 Dartmouth 9- 5-2 477 12
12 Yale 9- 4-3 432 14
13 Nebraska-Omaha 13- 9-2 359 13
14 Minnesota State 14- 8-2 348 11
15 Niagara 13- 3-4 242 17
16 Cornell 7- 6-2 220 15
17 Union 10- 7-4 219 16
18 Massachusetts-Lowell 11- 7-1 175 20
19 St. Cloud State 12-10-0 135 18
20 Colgate 11- 7-2 118 19
Others receiving votes: Wisconsin 19, Providence 15, Robert Morris 15,
Ferris State 12, Lake Superior 12, Holy Cross 5, Northern Michigan 5,
Princeton 4, Colorado College 1, Michigan Tech 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2HyQfPkLH
USA Week 14: Men's College Hockey Poll
Team Points (First) Record Last
1 Minnesota 507 (31) 16-3-3 1
2 Boston College 457 13-4-2 2
3 New Hampshire 430 14-4-2 4
4 Notre Dame 398 15-6-0 3
5 Quinnipiac 397 (3) 17-3-3 5
6 North Dakota 310 13-6-3 7
7 Denver 285 13-6-4 9
8 Miami 263 12-5-5 6
9 Boston Univer 258 12-7-0 8
10 Western Mich 225 13-5-4 10
11 Dartmouth 148 9-5-2 12
12 Yale 145 9-4-3 14
13 Nebraska-Omaha 71 13-9-2 13
14 Minnesota State 47 14-8-2 11
15 UMass-Lowell 38 11-7-1 NR
Others receiving votes:Niagara University, 32; Union College, 27;
Cornell University, 25; Colgate University, 12; St. Cloud State University, 3;
Ferris State University, 1; Lake Superior State University, 1.
Pairwise
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 New Hampshire 26 14-4-2 .750 3t .5935 1
2 Boston College 26 13-4-2 .737 5 .5899 2
3 Quinnipiac 26 17-3-3 .804 1 .5881 3
4 Minnesota 24 16-3-3 .795 2 .5827 4
5 Notre Dame 23 15-6-0 .714 6 .5700 5
6 Boston Univer 21 12-7-0 .632 12t .5672 6
7 North Dakota 21 13-6-3 .659 8t .5599 7
8 Denver 20 13-6-4 .652 11 .5565 8
9 Yale 19 9-4-3 .656 10 .5519 9
10 Miami 17 12-5-5 .659 8t .5512 10
11 Western Mich 17 13-5-4 .682 7 .5440 12
12 Dartmouth 16 9-5-2 .625 14t .5505 11
13 Mass.-Lowell 15 11-7-1 .605 16 .5435 13
14 Niagara 13 13-3-4 .750 3t .5350 14
15 Minnesota State 12 14-8-2 .625 14t .5302 16
16 Colgate 12 11-7-2 .600 17t .5237 18
17 Nebraska-Omaha 11 13-9-2 .583 19 .5311 15
18 St. Cloud State 9 12-10-0 .545 22 .5262 17
19 Cornell 9 7-6-2 .533 23 .5224 19
20 Robert Morris 8 11-6-2 .632 12t .5220 20
21 Northern Mich 7 9-10-4 .478 29 .5102 23
22 Lake Superior 7 12-11-1 .521 27 .5093 25
23 Union 6 10-7-4 .571 20 .5167 21
24 Ohio State 4 8-9-5 .477 30t .5095 24
25 Wisconsin 3 8-7-5 .525 24t .5114 22
26 Alaska-Fairbanks 3 8-8-4 .500 28 .5045 28
27 Providence 2 9-8-3 .525 24t .5087 26
28 Ferris State 1 10-9-3 .523 26 .5070 27
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
January 14, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 22- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 16- 3-2 128 3
3 Harvard 13- 1-1 122 2
4 Cornell 11- 4-0 97 4
5 Boston University 14- 3-3 91 6
6 Clarkson 17- 5-0 77 5
7 Wisconsin 14- 6-2 56 8
8 Mercyhurst 16- 3-1 54 7
9 Ohio State 14- 7-1 20 10
10 Northeastern 11- 8-2 17 9
Others receiving votes: North Dakota 6, St. Lawrence 5, Dartmouth 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2IBI55l3L
USA Women's Poll - Week 14: Jan. 15, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 22-0-0 1
2 Harvard 164 13-1-1 2
3 Boston Coll 159 16-3-2 3
4 Cornell 129 11-4-0 4
5 Boston Univ 112 14-3-3 5
6 Clarkson 91 17-5-0 6
7 Mercyhurst 76 16-3-1 7
8 Wisconsin 65 14-6-2 8
9 Ohio State 32 14-7-1 9
10 Northeastern 18 11-8-2 10
Others receiving votes:North Dakota, 9.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 22-0-0 1.000 1t .7442* 1 10-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 13-1-1 .9000 3 .6430* 2 2-1-0 .6667
3 Boston College 9 16-3-2 .8095 5 .6388* 3 4-1-2 .7143
4t Boston Univer 7 14-3-3 .7750 6 .6164* 4 3-2-1 .5833
4t Cornell 7 11-4-0 .7333 8 .6030* 5 4-4-0 .5000
6 Clarkson 6 17-5-0 .7727 7 .5921 6 5-3-0 .6250
7t Mercyhurst 5 16-3-1 .8250 4 .5884* 7 1-1-0 .5000
7t Wisconsin 5 14-6-2 .6818 9 .5785* 8 5-3-0 .6250
9 Ohio State 3 14-7-1 .6591 11 .5599* 9 2-6-0 .2500
10 North Dakota 2 13-9-0 .5909 14 .5541* 10 2-8-0 .2000
11 Dartmouth 1 11-5-2 .6667 10 .5472 11 0-2-1 .1667
12 St. Lawrence 0 13-8-1 .6136 12 .5460 12 0-7-0 .0000
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2HyThDcnT
We dropped off the USA Hockey poll (http://www.usahockey.com/players/polls.aspx) (it only lists the top 15):
1 Minnesota (31)
2 Boston College
3 New Hampshire
4 Notre Dame
5 Quinnipiac (3)
6 North Dakota
7 Denver
8 Miami
9 Boston University
10 Western Michigan
11 Dartmouth
12 Yale
13 Nebraska-Omaha
14 Minnesota State
15 UMass-Lowell
This is the first time Cornell is unranked on that poll (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) since November 7, 2011.
Quote from: TrotskyWe dropped off the USA Hockey poll (http://www.usahockey.com/players/polls.aspx) (it only lists the top 15):
1 Minnesota (31)
2 Boston College
3 New Hampshire
4 Notre Dame
5 Quinnipiac (3)
6 North Dakota
7 Denver
8 Miami
9 Boston University
10 Western Michigan
11 Dartmouth
12 Yale
13 Nebraska-Omaha
14 Minnesota State
15 UMass-Lowell
This is the first time Cornell is unranked on that poll (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) since November 7, 2011.
The rest is here: http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek14.aspx.aspx Cornell is essentially 18th.
Quote from: Chris 02Quote from: TrotskyWe dropped off the USA Hockey poll (http://www.usahockey.com/players/polls.aspx) (it only lists the top 15):
1 Minnesota (31)
2 Boston College
3 New Hampshire
4 Notre Dame
5 Quinnipiac (3)
6 North Dakota
7 Denver
8 Miami
9 Boston University
10 Western Michigan
11 Dartmouth
12 Yale
13 Nebraska-Omaha
14 Minnesota State
15 UMass-Lowell
This is the first time Cornell is unranked on that poll (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) since November 7, 2011.
The rest is here: http://www.usahockey.com/College/MensPollWeek14.aspx.aspx Cornell is essentially 18th.
Cool beans. :)
Quote from: TrotskyCool beans. :)
::wtf::
Quote from: TimVQuote from: TrotskyCool beans. :)
::wtf::
Cool beans in the sense of "Also Ran data captured," not "yay for 18th."
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: TimVQuote from: TrotskyCool beans. :)
::wtf::
Cool beans in the sense of "Also Ran data captured," not "yay for 18th."
::rock::
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 21, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (48) 17- 3-4 998 1
2 Quinnipiac ( 2) 17- 3-3 920 4
3 Boston College 14- 5-2 913 2
4 New Hampshire 14- 5-2 857 3
5 North Dakota 13- 7-4 746 6
6 Miami 13- 6-5 700 8
7 Notre Dame 15- 9-0 640 5
8 Yale 11- 4-3 619 12
9 Western Michigan 14- 6-4 577 10
10 Denver 13- 8-4 545 7
11 Boston University 12- 9-0 479 9
12 Dartmouth 10- 6-2 456 11
13 Nebraska-Omaha 13- 9-2 358 13
14 Minnesota State 15- 8-3 356 14
15 Massachusetts-Lowell 13- 7-1 346 18
16 St. Cloud State 14-10-0 336 19
17 Niagara 14- 4-4 183 15
18 Cornell 8- 7-2 154 16
19 Union 11- 8-4 120 17
20 Wisconsin 9- 8-5 66 NR
Others receiving votes: Ferris State 39, Alaska 27, Providence 24,
Northern Michigan 22, Holy Cross 10, Colgate 6, Robert Morris 3.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2IdMwqQkA
USA Men's Poll - Week 15: January 21, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 507 (31) 17-3-4 1
2 Quinnipiac 457 (3) 17-3-3 5
3 Boston College 453 14-5-2 2
4 New Hampshire 403 14-5-2 3
5 North Dakota 329 13-7-4 6
6 Miami 326 13-6-5 8
7 Yale 293 11-4-3 12
8 Notre Dame 242 15-9-0 4
9 Western Mich 232 14-6-4 10
10 Boston Univer 160 12-9-0 9
11 Denver 157 13-8-4 7
12 UMass-Lowell 151 13-7-1 15
13 Dartmouth 138 10-6-2 11
14 Nebraska-Omaha 68 13-9-2 13
15 St. Cloud State 64 14-10-0 NR
Others receiving votes: Minnesota State University, 57; Niagara
University, 17; Cornell University, 14; Union College, 7; Ferris State
University, 3; University of Alaska, 1; University of Northern Michigan, 1.
Pairwise
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Quinnipiac 28 17-3-3 .804 1 .5874 1
2 Minnesota 27 17-3-4 .792 2 .5801 2
3 Boston College 26 14-5-2 .714 4t .5758 4
4 New Hampshire 25 14-5-2 .714 4t .5794 3
5 Yale 24 11-4-3 .694 6 .5652 5
6 North Dakota 22 13-7-4 .625 11t .5510 6
7 Mass.-Lowell 22 13-7-1 .643 9 .5499 7
8 Miami 21 13-6-5 .646 8 .5468 9
9 Dartmouth 19 10-6-2 .611 14 .5470 8
10 Notre Dame 19 15-9-0 .625 11t .5425 10
11 Denver 18 13-8-4 .600 15 .5406 12
12 Western Mich 17 14-6-4 .667 7 .5389 14
13 Boston Univer 16 12-9-0 .571 19 .5422 11
14 St. Cloud State 14 14-10-0 .583 17t .5396 13
15 Minnesota State 13 15-8-3 .635 10 .5354 15
16 Northern Mich 13 11-10-4 .520 28 .5212 18
17 Niagara 12 14-4-4 .727 3 .5341 16
18 Alaska-Fairbank 12 10-8-4 .545 23t .5191 19
19 Nebraska-Omaha 9 13-9-2 .583 17t .5278 17
20 Cornell 9 8-7-2 .529 25 .5184 20
21 Ferris State 8 12-9-3 .562 21 .5184 21
22 Robert Morris 7 12-7-2 .619 13 .5180 22
23 Lake Superior 7 13-12-1 .519 29 .5040 27
24 Union 5 11-8-4 .565 20 .5176 23
25 Colgate 5 11-9-2 .545 23t .5108 25
26 Wisconsin 4 9-8-5 .523 26t .5120 24
27 Providence 2 10-9-3 .523 26t .5090 26
28 Holy Cross 1 12-8-2 .591 16 .5037 28
29 Massachusetts 1 8-11-2 .429 43 .5014 29
T U C L i n e
Rensselaer 8-10-5 .457 36 .4998 30
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
January 21, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 24- 0-0 150 1
2 Harvard 16- 1-1 128 3
3 Boston College 17- 4-2 120 2
4 Cornell 14- 4-0 103 4
5 Boston University 15- 3-3 95 5
6 Mercyhurst 17- 4-1 68 8
7 Clarkson 18- 6-0 58 6
8 Wisconsin 15- 7-2 52 7
9 Ohio State 15- 7-2 23 9
10 North Dakota 14-10-0 20 NR
Others receiving votes: Northeastern 6, Minnesota-Duluth 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2IkLz2tyU
USA Women's Poll - Week 15: Jan. 22, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 24-0-0 1
2 Harvard 165 16-1-1 2
3 Boston Coll 150 17-4-2 3
4 Cornell 126 14-4-0 4
5 Boston Univer123 15-3-3 5
6 Mercyhurst 98 17-4-1 7
7 Clarkson 71 18-6-0 6
8 Wisconsin 64 15-7-2 8
9 North Dakota 26 14-10-0 NR
10 Ohio State 23 15-7-2 9
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 4;
Northeastern, 4; Dartmouth, 1.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 24-0-0 1.000 1t .7404* 1 10-0-0 1.000
2 Harvard 10 16-1-1 .9167 3 .6486* 2 2-1-0 .6667
3 Boston Coll 9 17-4-2 .7826 6 .6328* 3 5-3-2 .6000
4 Boston Univer 8 15-3-3 .7857 5 .6239* 4 3-2-3 .5625
5 Mercyhurst 7 17-4-1 .7955 4 .5904* 6 2-2-0 .5000
6 Cornell 6 14-4-0 .7778 7 .6220* 5 3-4-0 .4286
7 Wisconsin 5 15-7-2 .6667 10t .5761* 8 6-6-0 .5000
8 Clarkson 4 18-6-0 .7500 8 .5875* 7 3-4-0 .4286
9 Ohio State 3 15-7-2 .6667 10t .5569* 9 4-6-0 .4000
10 North Dakota 2 14-10-0 .5833 13t .5526* 10 5-9-0 .3571
11 Minn-Duluth 1 11-8-3 .5682 15 .5500 11 3-7-2 .3333
12 Dartmouth 0 12-5-3 .6750 9 .5476 12 0-2-1 .1667
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2IkOLpfSt
All Men's and Women's now up.
We're 24 in USCHO and 27 in PWR. I'll post them later.
Edit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
Quote from: Jim HylaEdit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
And say a prayer for those who went to both Cornell and Michigan.......
Quote from: RatushnyFanQuote from: Jim HylaEdit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
And say a prayer for those who went to both Cornell and Michigan.......
Jim and I would be in that club.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 28, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (28) 18- 4-4 975 1
2 Quinnipiac (22) 18- 3-3 967 2
3 New Hampshire 15- 6-2 871 4
4 Miami 15- 6-5 835 6
5 Boston College 14- 7-2 771 3
6 Western Michigan 16- 6-4 723 9
7 North Dakota 13- 8-5 633 5
8 Yale 12- 5-3 605 8
9 Notre Dame 16-10-0 564 7
10 Denver 13- 8-4 506 10
11 Boston University 13- 9-1 479 11
12 St. Cloud State 15-10-1 446 16
13 Massachusetts-Lowell 14- 7-2 416 15
14 Nebraska-Omaha 15- 9-2 406 13
15 Minnesota State 16- 9-3 393 14
16 Dartmouth 11- 7-2 302 12
17 Niagara 15- 4-5 180 17
18 Union 13- 8-4 151 19
19 Wisconsin 11- 8-5 127 20
20 Alaska 12- 8-4 69 NR
Others receiving votes: Ferris State 42, Colgate 19, Providence 11,
Cornell 5, Holy Cross 2, Merrimack 1, Northern Michigan 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2JJJkqWrm
USA Men's Poll - Week 16: January 28, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 497 (23) 18-4-4 1
2 Quinnipiac 485 (11) 18-3-3 2
3 Miami 420 15-6-5 6
4 New Hampshire 417 15-6-2 4
5 Boston College 369 14-7-2 3
6 Western Mich 330 16-6-4 9
7 Yale 290 12-5-3 7
8 North Dakota 239 13-8-5 5
9 Boston Univer 182 13-9-1 10
10 Denver 174 13-8-4 11
11 Notre Dame 169 16-10-0 8
12 UMass-Lowell 145 14-7-2 12
13 St. Cloud 141 15-10-1 15
14 Nebraska-Omaha 77 15-9-2 14
15 Minnesota State 65 16-9-3 NR
Others receiving votes: Dartmouth College, 43; Niagara University, 17;
University of Alaska, 10; Union College, 6; University of Wisconsin, 3;
Ferris State University, 1.
PWR
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Quinnipiac 28 18-3-3 .812 1 .5870 1
2 Minnesota 27 18-4-4 .769 2 .5724 2
3 New Hampshire 25 15-6-2 .696 4 .5672 3
4 Miami 25 15-6-5 .673 7 .5546 4
5 Yale 24 12-5-3 .675 6 .5538 5
6 Boston Coll 24 14-7-2 .652 8t .5521 6
7 Western Mich 22 16-6-4 .692 5 .5457 7
8 Mass.-Lowell 21 14-7-2 .652 8t .5456 8
9 St. Cloud 19 15-10-1 .596 16t .5433 9
10 North Dakota 18 13-8-5 .596 16t .5415 10
11 Boston Univer 17 13-9-1 .587 18 .5404 11
12 Alaska-Fairbk 17 12-8-4 .583 19t .5331 18
13 Denver 16 13-8-4 .600 13t .5396 12
14 Notre Dame 15 16-10-0 .615 11t .5384 13
15 Dartmouth 15 11-7-2 .600 13t .5365 14
16 Minnesota St 13 16-9-3 .625 10 .5350 15
17 Niagara 12 15-4-5 .729 3 .5346 16
18 Union 10 13-8-4 .600 13t .5259 19
19 Colgate 10 13-9-2 .583 19t .5221 20
20 Northern Mich 10 11-12-4 .481 32 .5123 23
21 Nebraska-Om 8 15-9-2 .615 11t .5334 17
22 Ferris State 8 13-10-3 .558 24 .5183 22
23 Wisconsin 7 11-8-5 .562 23 .5210 21
24 Ohio State 4 10-11-5 .481 33 .5087 24
25 Providence 4 10-10-4 .500 28t .5072 25
26 Robert Morris 4 12-9-2 .565 22 .5046 26
27 Cornell 2 8-9-2 .474 36t .5044 27
28 Merrimack 1 10-10-5 .500 28t .5022 28
29 Holy Cross 0 13-9-2 .583 19t .5021 29
T U C L i n e
St. Lawrence 11-10-3 .521 27 .4978 30
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
January 28, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 26- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 19- 4-2 128 3
3 Harvard 17- 2-1 110 2
4 Boston University 17- 3-3 100 5
5 Cornell 16- 4-0 99 4
6 Clarkson 20- 6-0 78 7
7 Mercyhurst 19- 4-1 68 6
8 Wisconsin 15- 9-2 39 8
9 North Dakota 16-10-0 26 10
10 Minnesota-Duluth 13- 8-3 22 NR
Others receiving votes: Northeastern 5.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2JJPz6swf
USA Women's Poll - Week 16: Jan. 29, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 26-0-0 1
2 Boston Coll 167 19-4-2 3
3 Boston Univ 135 17-3-3 5
4 Harvard 125 17-2-1 2
5 Cornell 120 16-4-0 4
6 Clarkson 97 20-6-0 7
7 Mercyhurst 84 19-4-1 6
8 Wisconsin 48 15-9-2 8
9 North Dakota 44 16-10-0 9
10 Minn Duluth 26 13-8-3 NR
Others receiving votes: Northeastern, 9.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 26-0-0 1.000 1t .7351* 1 12-0-0 1.000
2 Boston College 10 19-4-2 .8000 6t .6334* 2 8-3-1 .7083
3 Harvard 9 17-2-1 .8750 3 .6288* 3 2-2-0 .5000
4 Boston Univer 8 17-3-3 .8043 5 .6266* 4 5-2-3 .6500
5t Cornell 6 16-4-0 .8000 6t .6237* 5 3-4-0 .4286
5t Clarkson 6 20-6-0 .7692 8 .5969* 6 4-5-0 .4444
5t Mercyhurst 6 19-4-1 .8125 4 .5951* 7 2-2-0 .5000
8 Wisconsin 4 15-9-2 .6154 9t .5653* 8 6-8-0 .4286
9 North Dakota 3 16-10-0 .6154 9t .5596* 9 5-9-0 .3571
10 Minnesota-Duluth 2 13-8-3 .6042 13 .5588 10 5-7-2 .4286
11 Ohio State 1 15-9-2 .6154 9t .5444* 11 4-8-0 .3333
12 Northeastern 0 14-9-2 .6000 14t .5413* 12 1-7-0 .1250
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2JJQUWA5k
Quote from: martyQuote from: RatushnyFanQuote from: Jim HylaEdit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
And say a prayer for those who went to both Cornell and Michigan.......
Jim and I would be in that club.
Me too :(
Quote from: Jim HylaUSCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 28, 2013
...
Others receiving votes: ...
Cornell 5
We're still receiving votes after that atrocious weekend and going 1-5 in the last six? And 5 votes to boot?
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: Jim HylaUSCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
January 28, 2013
...
Others receiving votes: ...
Cornell 5
We're still receiving votes after that atrocious weekend and going 1-5 in the last six? And 5 votes to boot?
5 voters believe Rob Pannell skates. Or maybe just faith that Cornell will bounce back from another horrible January. Statistics aside, it feels as if Cornell has a bad January every year. Or maybe lack of faith in everyone rated below Cornell.
Quote from: RatushnyFanQuote from: Jim HylaEdit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
And say a prayer for those who went to both Cornell and Michigan.......
... especially if you lived through the Bo Schembechler era. Something like 0-6-4 (W-L-DNP) in Michigan's first 10 years in bowl games, 5-12 overall, and immortalized in The Big Chill for its big game futility.
There. I feel a little better about the Syracuse lax game.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: RatushnyFanQuote from: Jim HylaEdit: If we feel bad think about those Michigan fans.
And say a prayer for those who went to both Cornell and Michigan.......
... especially if you lived through the Bo Schembechler era. Something like 0-6-4 (W-L-DNP) in Michigan's first 10 years in bowl games, 5-12 overall, and immortalized in The Big Chill for its big game futility.
There. I feel a little better about the Syracuse lax game.
So they went to 6 bowl games in 10 years and that was when going to a bowl game was a big thing. You needed more than just a non-losing record to get to a game then. Yeah they lost, but they got there; that's more than most other NCAA teams could say. No, I was happy to "live through the Bo Schembechler era". At least I had a team to cheer for on New Year's Day.::cheer::
Quote from: billhowardStatistics aside, it feels as if Cornell has a bad January every year.
January 2000: 3-3-1
January 2001: 3-2-2
January 2002: 5-1-0
January 2003: 6-1-0
January 2004: 2-5-1
January 2005: 7-1-0
January 2006: 5-1-1
January 2007: 1-4-2
January 2008: 5-2-1
January 2009: 6-2-1
January 2010: 5-1-1
January 2011: 5-1-2
January 2012: 3-2-3
January 2013: 1-5-0
So, yes, the last two haven't been great, but in games played in January 2___, Cornell is 57-31-15, a winning percentage of 0.626. Over those 14 (well, 13 2/3) entire regular seasons, Cornell is 225-119-50, a winning percentage of .635. In other wods, Cornell plays almost exactly the same in January as they do every other month. If Miller (I think that's who it was anyway) tips that puck a couple of inches to the right in OT on Friday, the January number would be .636.
Quote from: Josh '99Quote from: billhowardStatistics aside, it feels as if Cornell has a bad January every year.
January 2000: 3-3-1
January 2001: 3-2-2
January 2002: 5-1-0
January 2003: 6-1-0
January 2004: 2-5-1
January 2005: 7-1-0
January 2006: 5-1-1
January 2007: 1-4-2
January 2008: 5-2-1
January 2009: 6-2-1
January 2010: 5-1-1
January 2011: 5-1-2
January 2012: 3-2-3
January 2013: 1-5-0
So, yes, the last two haven't been great, but in games played in January 2___, Cornell is 57-31-15, a winning percentage of 0.626. Over those 14 (well, 13 2/3) entire regular seasons, Cornell is 225-119-50, a winning percentage of .635. In other wods, Cornell plays almost exactly the same in January as they do every other month. If Miller (I think that's who it was anyway) tips that puck a couple of inches to the right in OT on Friday, the January number would be .636.
Hey now, he did say "statistics aside" so he's entitled to make whatever wild claims he'd like. That's how it works, right? It's covered by the same sports conversation rule that covers adulation over
's ability to hit a baseball.
More seriously, I note a similarity to 2007, a year in which Cornell was unable to execute the puck possession game and never seemed to stay at home on defense. From postings around here it sounds like this team has some of the same problems.
Has any Schafer team had meaningful success - in league or out - without being able to play the eternal cycle puck possession game we (ok, fine, I) love to watch?
Quote from: Tom LentoHas any Schafer team had meaningful success - in league or out - without being able to play the eternal cycle puck possession game we (ok, fine, I) love to watch?
I think you know the answer already. The Schafer offense is a one trick pony. When it works it is a good trick, when it does not it is pretty poor. Unfortuneately, it has not been all that successful in the past few years. Everyone in college hockey is familiar with our version of the trick and they know that is all we have in the bag.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: Tom LentoHas any Schafer team had meaningful success - in league or out - without being able to play the eternal cycle puck possession game we (ok, fine, I) love to watch?
I think you know the answer already. The Schafer offense is a one trick pony. When it works it is a good trick, when it does not it is pretty poor. Unfortuneately, it has not been all that successful in the past few years. Everyone in college hockey is familiar with our version of the trick and they know that is all we have in the bag.
It was a rhetorical question, yes, but there might have been a couple of seasons in there where Cornell won primarily on the strength of superb special teams rather than puck possession. Hard to say, though - winning possession battles tends to give you more PP chances.
Also, since you bring it up, let's play the "What have you done for me lately, Coach Schafer?" game. Over the past 4 full seasons, 78-43-18, 1 ECAC title, 2 NCAA QF appearances and 1 NCAA first-round loss. You assert that Cornell's game plan isn't working, and I do see a mediocre season and a 2-3 NCAA record in there. Ok, maybe we should overhaul our style to be more like Yale, they were a lot better - best in league, in fact - in those years. Well, a touch over 3 points per year and 1 ECAC title better (89-41-9, with 2 ECAC titles, 2 NCAA QF appearances, and 1 NCAA first-round loss). I'm not sure that justifies drastic measures. Ok, maybe Yale's style is too extreme in the other direction, let's find more of a middle ground. What about Union? 92-47-21 with 1 ECAC title, 1 FF appearance, and 1 NCAA first-round loss. The Frozen Four is great, and because that's so special I'd probably take Union's results over the other two even though, objectively speaking, Yale has had the best run. But Cornell is not far behind, and this in a 4-year window where the ECAC has, for the first time in ages, had 3 legitimately strong teams.
I see people on these boards - possibly even you - saying we should look at what the coach has accomplished recently and call him to account for his performance over the last several years. So I just took a look, and if I were Andy Noel looking at this in the last off-season I'd have given him a raise. Maybe I'd regret it now, but probably not - one bad season doesn't erase years of success, especially not when the past 4 seasons have been, objectively speaking, great.
I don't think stylistic gripes about Cornell's system are all that useful. Perhaps this is because I like defensively oriented hockey, so I think Cornell's approach is great. Even so, there are legitimate complaints about Schafer's teams. I've listed some of them in past seasons, and honestly I think they still hold. I've never really liked the insistence on keeping the umbrella on the PP year in and year out, assuming they're still doing that. Some years it's great, but when the personnel isn't there it looks like a perimeter passing drill hoping for a lucky bounce. Others have complained about a poor breakout, and while I believed the main issue was with inconsistency and lack of offensive depth among the defensemen I'm starting to think there's an adjustment the coaches need to make. It really seems like we're dependent on having 4, if not 6, d-men who are great with the puck, and I don't think that's tractable, at least not at the national level. Another common complaint when things are going poorly is the quality of the team's passing game. I don't think Cornell has *ever* been a great passing team under Schafer, although in the early 2000s they were pretty good. Is that coaching, recruiting, or both? I honestly have no idea, but that might be an interesting Monday morning QB kind of conversation.
Anyway, here's hoping this team gets its house in order and starts executing, otherwise we're in for a long second half and a short post-season.
It takes a special fan to recall all the years Michigan went to bowl games as the highlight and not the outcomes. Lot of Patriots fans right now aren't recalling who has been the most dominant team in pro football since 2000.
Quote from: billhowardIt takes a special fan to recall all the years Michigan went to bowl games as the highlight and not the outcomes. Lot of Patriots fans right now aren't recalling who has been the most dominant team in pro football since 2000.
Thanks, I'll take special in a positive light, but I think if you eliminate OSU (The, if you like), the rest of the Big Ten fans would have jumped at the chance to have had Bo's record. As I said before, we had someone to cheer for in December and Jan 1 and that means a lot. I'd rather go to tht FF and lose every year, than never go.
Quote from: Tom LentoQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: Tom LentoHas any Schafer team had meaningful success - in league or out - without being able to play the eternal cycle puck possession game we (ok, fine, I) love to watch?
I think you know the answer already. The Schafer offense is a one trick pony. When it works it is a good trick, when it does not it is pretty poor. Unfortuneately, it has not been all that successful in the past few years. Everyone in college hockey is familiar with our version of the trick and they know that is all we have in the bag.
It was a rhetorical question, yes, but there might have been a couple of seasons in there where Cornell won primarily on the strength of superb special teams rather than puck possession. Hard to say, though - winning possession battles tends to give you more PP chances.
Also, since you bring it up, let's play the "What have you done for me lately, Coach Schafer?" game. Over the past 4 full seasons, 78-43-18, 1 ECAC title, 2 NCAA QF appearances and 1 NCAA first-round loss. You assert that Cornell's game plan isn't working, and I do see a mediocre season and a 2-3 NCAA record in there. Ok, maybe we should overhaul our style to be more like Yale, they were a lot better - best in league, in fact - in those years. Well, a touch over 3 points per year and 1 ECAC title better (89-41-9, with 2 ECAC titles, 2 NCAA QF appearances, and 1 NCAA first-round loss). I'm not sure that justifies drastic measures. Ok, maybe Yale's style is too extreme in the other direction, let's find more of a middle ground. What about Union? 92-47-21 with 1 ECAC title, 1 FF appearance, and 1 NCAA first-round loss. The Frozen Four is great, and because that's so special I'd probably take Union's results over the other two even though, objectively speaking, Yale has had the best run. But Cornell is not far behind, and this in a 4-year window where the ECAC has, for the first time in ages, had 3 legitimately strong teams.
I see people on these boards - possibly even you - saying we should look at what the coach has accomplished recently and call him to account for his performance over the last several years. So I just took a look, and if I were Andy Noel looking at this in the last off-season I'd have given him a raise. Maybe I'd regret it now, but probably not - one bad season doesn't erase years of success, especially not when the past 4 seasons have been, objectively speaking, great.
I don't think stylistic gripes about Cornell's system are all that useful. Perhaps this is because I like defensively oriented hockey, so I think Cornell's approach is great. Even so, there are legitimate complaints about Schafer's teams. I've listed some of them in past seasons, and honestly I think they still hold. I've never really liked the insistence on keeping the umbrella on the PP year in and year out, assuming they're still doing that. Some years it's great, but when the personnel isn't there it looks like a perimeter passing drill hoping for a lucky bounce. Others have complained about a poor breakout, and while I believed the main issue was with inconsistency and lack of offensive depth among the defensemen I'm starting to think there's an adjustment the coaches need to make. It really seems like we're dependent on having 4, if not 6, d-men who are great with the puck, and I don't think that's tractable, at least not at the national level. Another common complaint when things are going poorly is the quality of the team's passing game. I don't think Cornell has *ever* been a great passing team under Schafer, although in the early 2000s they were pretty good. Is that coaching, recruiting, or both? I honestly have no idea, but that might be an interesting Monday morning QB kind of conversation.
Anyway, here's hoping this team gets its house in order and starts executing, otherwise we're in for a long second half and a short post-season.
This is a good post. Thank you for taking the time to compose it.
Quote from: Tom LentoAlso, since you bring it up, let's play the "What have you done for me lately, Coach Schafer?" game. Over the past 4 full seasons, 78-43-18, 1 ECAC title, 2 NCAA QF appearances and 1 NCAA first-round loss. You assert that Cornell's game plan isn't working, and I do see a mediocre season and a 2-3 NCAA record in there. Ok, maybe we should overhaul our style to be more like Yale, they were a lot better - best in league, in fact - in those years. Well, a touch over 3 points per year and 1 ECAC title better (89-41-9, with 2 ECAC titles, 2 NCAA QF appearances, and 1 NCAA first-round loss). I'm not sure that justifies drastic measures. Ok, maybe Yale's style is too extreme in the other direction, let's find more of a middle ground. What about Union? 92-47-21 with 1 ECAC title, 1 FF appearance, and 1 NCAA first-round loss. The Frozen Four is great, and because that's so special I'd probably take Union's results over the other two even though, objectively speaking, Yale has had the best run. But Cornell is not far behind, and this in a 4-year window where the ECAC has, for the first time in ages, had 3 legitimately strong teams.
Tom
It is interesting that you asked this question, I did too. If you look at how consistently a team plays in the NCAA tournament as the ultimate measure of how good a program is the answer is interesting. I took the last 5 tournaments and made a spreadsheet of the number of games and wins each participant had over the 5 years. If you rank teams by the number of tournament wins and then by the winning percentage Cornell comes in tied with Yale at #16. (5 appearances, 2 wins).
I think #16 is probably a reasonable rank for Cornell year in and year out. Our program is not one of the elite programs (only from a hockey perspective) in the country. It is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list. I am not calling for the coaches head, anyone can have a bad year. I bleed as RED as you but, I have reached the point where I am skeptical that Cornell will reach the promised land with the program that we have now.
I share your hope for a better result but the logical part of my brain says not to invest in it.
LGR
Quote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Not really, as I posted on another thread about Mich football and the Bo Schembechler era, there are a lot of teams below us who would love to be like us. In fact, I think many Harvard fans, all 2, would trade with us. Which is why I can't understand why they continue to get such good talent, and it goes to waste. But that's a topic for a different thread.
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Not really, as I posted on another thread about Mich football and the Bo Schembechler era, there are a lot of teams below us who would love to be like us. In fact, I think many Harvard fans, all 2, would trade with us. Which is why I can't understand why they continue to get such good talent, and it goes to waste. But that's a topic for a different thread.
Harvard has 2 fans? That means they doubled their fan base.
Perhaps the better way to state the case is, "If you were a middling team with an institutional mandate to improve would you choose to emulate Cornell or some team on the top 10 of my list?"
Another way to ask the question is: Is there anyone on the top 10 list that plays the same sort of defense first, endless cycle, puck control hockey we want to play? I am asking for real here if they do we might reasonably ask what they are doing better than we are.
Quote from: RichHI would have used CHN's history page
AHEM (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/report_Generator.html)!
Edit: oh shit, that is incomplete too. :) But still...
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RichHI would have used CHN's history page
AHEM (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/report_Generator.html)!
Edit: oh shit, that is incomplete too. :) But still...
Sorry, I only go there when I'm in the mood to spend a lot of time wading through your "data goulash." :-D
Quote from: Jim HylaQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Not really, as I posted on another thread about Mich football and the Bo Schembechler era, there are a lot of teams below us who would love to be like us. In fact, I think many Harvard fans, all 2, would trade with us. Which is why I can't understand why they continue to get such good talent, and it goes to waste. But that's a topic for a different thread.
I can name that thread in two words.
TWO words? You mean it's not pronounced "Harvardsucks"????::doh::
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: Jim HylaQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Not really, as I posted on another thread about Mich football and the Bo Schembechler era, there are a lot of teams below us who would love to be like us. In fact, I think many Harvard fans, all 2, would trade with us. Which is why I can't understand why they continue to get such good talent, and it goes to waste. But that's a topic for a different thread.
Harvard has 2 fans? That means they doubled their fan base.
Perhaps the better way to state the case is, "If you were a middling team with an institutional mandate to improve would you choose to emulate Cornell or some team on the top 10 of my list?"
Another way to ask the question is: Is there anyone on the top 10 list that plays the same sort of defense first, endless cycle, puck control hockey we want to play? I am asking for real here if they do we might reasonably ask what they are doing better than we are.
In broad strokes, Wisconsin, for sure. 2006 was like watching an intra-squad scrimmage with ridiculously high stakes, and the handful of more recent NCAA games I was able to catch suggested that they haven't changed their M.O. They are a lot better through the neutral zone than Cornell, but I don't know if that's game plan or talent. By reputation Notre Dame and UMD might qualify, but I've only seen parts of games featuring those teams.
What those teams are doing is they're giving scholarships and getting better talent, not necessarily in that order (although of course the former helps with the latter). It's possible that Cornell could do a better job of developing the talent it has, but what I saw up through about 2010 suggests otherwise. I haven't seen enough of the current Cornell teams to be able to comment on their development.
If the goal is to make Cornell a team with a legitimate national title shot every 2-4 years, it just won't happen. Cornell would have to leave the Ivy League first, and that's a lot bigger than hockey. Consistent title hopes are difficult to sustain for the Minnesotas of the world. Add in Ivy restrictions and you're looking at a real long shot before anybody has even gone out recruiting. I'm not saying Cornell Hockey has been performing at its absolute peak over the last 10-15 years, but it's pretty darn close.
I would love to see Schafer catch lightning in a bottle and get a national title run.
Quote from: Tom LentoQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: Jim HylaQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
Yes. Let's strive to be like Ferris St. They are truly a historical juggernaut of a program (http://www.uscho.com/stats/history/ferris-state/mens-hockey/2012-2013/) every school looks to emulate. What with all those NCAA tournament apparances. Both of them. With FSU sitting at 21 in the PWR, I treat their nice run last year as a "lightning in a bottle" tournament. Good for them, but wanting to trade CU's record for Ferris's is just silly. (NB: I would have used CHN's history page (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/teamHistory.php?td=21), but FSU hasn't been credited with their 2012 performance. Adam.)
Sorry, I didn't want to undercut your point, but I just had to comment on what a short-term memory people have about what constitutes a dominant, always-near-the-top national program. Ten years ago, everybody in the East wanted to be like UNH. Six years ago it was Maine, now it's BC. Teams hit cycles.
Yeah, Ferris was probably not the best example but by the metric I used they ranked higher (3 wins, 67% beats 2 wins and 40%). Here is the top 20 in order.
BC
Minn Duluth
Miami
Notre Dame
N. Dak
Mich
BU
Wisc.
Ferris
UNH
RIT
VT
Union
Minn.
Bemidgi
Yale
Cornell
Lowell
Denver
St Cloud
Let's face the facts, it has been 40 years since anyone has wanted to be like us.
Not really, as I posted on another thread about Mich football and the Bo Schembechler era, there are a lot of teams below us who would love to be like us. In fact, I think many Harvard fans, all 2, would trade with us. Which is why I can't understand why they continue to get such good talent, and it goes to waste. But that's a topic for a different thread.
Harvard has 2 fans? That means they doubled their fan base.
Perhaps the better way to state the case is, "If you were a middling team with an institutional mandate to improve would you choose to emulate Cornell or some team on the top 10 of my list?"
Another way to ask the question is: Is there anyone on the top 10 list that plays the same sort of defense first, endless cycle, puck control hockey we want to play? I am asking for real here if they do we might reasonably ask what they are doing better than we are.
In broad strokes, Wisconsin, for sure. 2006 was like watching an intra-squad scrimmage with ridiculously high stakes, and the handful of more recent NCAA games I was able to catch suggested that they haven't changed their M.O. They are a lot better through the neutral zone than Cornell, but I don't know if that's game plan or talent. By reputation Notre Dame and UMD might qualify, but I've only seen parts of games featuring those teams.
What those teams are doing is they're giving scholarships and getting better talent, not necessarily in that order (although of course the former helps with the latter). It's possible that Cornell could do a better job of developing the talent it has, but what I saw up through about 2010 suggests otherwise. I haven't seen enough of the current Cornell teams to be able to comment on their development.
If the goal is to make Cornell a team with a legitimate national title shot every 2-4 years, it just won't happen. Cornell would have to leave the Ivy League first, and that's a lot bigger than hockey. Consistent title hopes are difficult to sustain for the Minnesotas of the world. Add in Ivy restrictions and you're looking at a real long shot before anybody has even gone out recruiting. I'm not saying Cornell Hockey has been performing at its absolute peak over the last 10-15 years, but it's pretty darn close.
I would love to see Schafer catch lightning in a bottle and get a national title run.
I think we are roughly on the same page. The logical parts of our respective brains says that Cornell is and will continue to be roughly #15 in the country if we keep doing what we are doing. The reality is we are Tournament fodder.
Our hearts of course dream of a Championship.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
I don't really think a new coach and staff is a steep price to pay for more success. In fact, I think it's about the cheapest way to get more success. Obviously, the other stuff ranges from somewhat to completely objectionable (or impossible in the case of the last one), but think a lot of people would be more than happy if firing Schafer resulted in a national success (for the record, I don't think it would).
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
I don't really think a new coach and staff is a steep price to pay for more success. In fact, I think it's about the cheapest way to get more success. Obviously, the other stuff ranges from somewhat to completely objectionable (or impossible in the case of the last one), but think a lot of people would be more than happy if firing Schafer resulted in a national success (for the record, I don't think it would).
Thanks for adding that. Keeping a good/great coach in the ECAC, say nothing of Ivy, is tough. Just look at Union. The first year of great sucess, he's off to Providence. Where he's doing a good job, so far.
We are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Quote from: jtn27Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: TowerroadIt is an open question in my mind as to whether we want to pay the price to move up on the list.
I am curious what you mean by this.
Here are a few. I think you will see why I made the comment
New Coach and Staff
Build a Hockey Pleasure Palace
Lower Academic Standards for Recruits
Leave the Ivy League
Offer Athletic Scholarships
Dig up Ned and see if we could get a little DNA
So, we are what we are a middling good hockey program. In a good year we are Tournament fodder. I am not sure we want to pay the price to be like N.DAK or BU or Ferris.
I don't really think a new coach and staff is a steep price to pay for more success. In fact, I think it's about the cheapest way to get more success. Obviously, the other stuff ranges from somewhat to completely objectionable (or impossible in the case of the last one), but think a lot of people would be more than happy if firing Schafer resulted in a national success (for the record, I don't think it would).
Yep. It's a simple equation, really. New coaching staff = instant success. Just ask the Cornell football team.
Quote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
We seem very schizophrenic, we want to be thought of as a serious program with national ambitions but when we compare our selves we always look at the ECAC. There is nobody from the ECAC on my top 10 list. Union is the highest at #13. If we want to be honest with ourselves AND want to think about Cornell Hockey as a serious national program then we need to start comparing ourselves to the best programs in the nation and that those are not the ones we play against in our league.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
We seem very schizophrenic, we want to be thought of as a serious program with national ambitions but when we compare our selves we always look at the ECAC. There is nobody from the ECAC on my top 10 list. Union is the highest at #13. If we want to be honest with ourselves AND want to think about Cornell Hockey as a serious national program then we need to start comparing ourselves to the best programs in the nation and that those are not the ones we play against in our league.
Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs. I just hope we can win a game.
Quote from: TowerroadIf we want to be honest with ourselves AND want to think about Cornell Hockey as a serious national program then we need to start comparing ourselves to the best programs in the nation and that those are not the ones we play against in our league.
It doesn't follow that if we compare ourselves against the ECAC we can't also compare ourselves against the NCAA. We are 8-9 against opponents in the NCAAs since 1996.
None of those teams were from the ECAC. That's a rough 50/50 against the very best opposition college hockey can provide. Not dominant, but not shabby by any stretch.
The comparison with the rest of the ECAC, and with the other Ivies in particular, provides the only meaningful standard for what is possible given the additional academic hurdles for those subsets of teams. We will never be North Dakota and accept every athlete who can sign his name. We will never be BC and hand every freshman a degree. The only other schools with the degree of rigor that we impose on our student-athletes are the other ECAC members, and you get an idea of what's possible when you look at their success. We are blowing that standard out of the water.
I'd LOVE to see us win an NCAA title -- I'm one of the oldest people on the board who hasn't seen that, and note to team: I'm not getting any younger! :( But I also don't think that sticking your chest out and bellowing "We can do better!" constitutes a CONOPS, and I have not seen one tangible suggestion about what we could be doing that we are not, short of turning the meteorology students loose on improving the Ithaca weather.
Quote from: css228Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
We seem very schizophrenic, we want to be thought of as a serious program with national ambitions but when we compare our selves we always look at the ECAC. There is nobody from the ECAC on my top 10 list. Union is the highest at #13. If we want to be honest with ourselves AND want to think about Cornell Hockey as a serious national program then we need to start comparing ourselves to the best programs in the nation and that those are not the ones we play against in our league.
Playoffs? Don't talk about playoffs. I just hope we can win a game.
You play. To win. The game.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
By that definition half of every Frozen Four is taken up by "tournament fodder." I know it's a cliche, but once you get to the NCAA, "anything can happen." That time of year, luck matters more. Those "bounces of the puck" happen more. Just about all the players/teams are playing at the top of their game and emptying the tank. You regularly see an RIT or Bemidji or Ferris slip in. 2003 is considered to be matter-of-factly "of course we made it that year," but I bet BC fans see 2003 differently. One weird bounce in either OT, and that's just another regional failure. I bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
You make it sound like all we have is a regional final "ceiling" because that's all the coaching can give us. Since Schafer took the reins, Cornell has made seven NCAA regional finals. In six of them, the score has been tied in the 3rd period. Additionally, they've played in six overtime periods with a trip to the FF on the line, but the hypothesis is that it's a coaching problem? Think about it...a Schafer team advances to the regional final in 40% of his seasons here. I would bet every team in the country would sign up for that opportunity from this day forward. All I can ask of a coach is give a team the opportunity to go that deep, then it's up to the players to come through.
Look, my freshman year, we didn't even make the conference playoffs (one of three teams that didn't). Most of my college career, I dreamed about how amazing it would be just to MAKE the NCAAs. This coach has done that over half the time. How many coaches can say that?
Quote from: RichHI bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
Indeed. And if that had been the case, but Cornell went on to lose the national semifinals in both of those years, then merely making the Frozen Four would be the "new normal" and people would be beeatching that Schafer couldn't break THAT ceiling to win the title.
Quote from: RobbQuote from: RichHI bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
Indeed. And if that had been the case, but Cornell went on to lose the national semifinals in both of those years, then merely making the Frozen Four would be the "new normal" and people would be beeatching that Schafer couldn't break THAT ceiling to win the title.
No, right now I'm beeatching that he is presiding over a team that nearly made the Frozen Four last year, but is now all but in the bottom four of the ECAC, despite only losing four players to graduation.
Quote from: css228Quote from: RobbQuote from: RichHI bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
Indeed. And if that had been the case, but Cornell went on to lose the national semifinals in both of those years, then merely making the Frozen Four would be the "new normal" and people would be beeatching that Schafer couldn't break THAT ceiling to win the title.
No, right now I'm beeatching that he is presiding over a team that nearly made the Frozen Four last year, but is now all but in the bottom four of the ECAC, despite only losing four players to graduation.
I think you mean "a team that barely made the ncaa tournament, got lucky to have beat a no. 1 seed before losing a regional final few thought they would make and us now struggling in a conference with a few teams that are at least as good if not clearly better than they are."
Last year's team wasn't exactly the second coming of 1970.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
By that definition half of every Frozen Four is taken up by "tournament fodder." I know it's a cliche, but once you get to the NCAA, "anything can happen." That time of year, luck matters more. Those "bounces of the puck" happen more. Just about all the players/teams are playing at the top of their game and emptying the tank. You regularly see an RIT or Bemidji or Ferris slip in. 2003 is considered to be matter-of-factly "of course we made it that year," but I bet BC fans see 2003 differently. One weird bounce in either OT, and that's just another regional failure. I bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
You make it sound like all we have is a regional final "ceiling" because that's all the coaching can give us. Since Schafer took the reins, Cornell has made seven NCAA regional finals. In six of them, the score has been tied in the 3rd period. Additionally, they've played in six overtime periods with a trip to the FF on the line, but the hypothesis is that it's a coaching problem? Think about it...a Schafer team advances to the regional final in 40% of his seasons here. I would bet every team in the country would sign up for that opportunity from this day forward. All I can ask of a coach is give a team the opportunity to go that deep, then it's up to the players to come through.
Look, my freshman year, we didn't even make the conference playoffs (one of three teams that didn't). Most of my college career, I dreamed about how amazing it would be just to MAKE the NCAAs. This coach has done that over half the time. How many coaches can say that?
I have a particular aversion to the "anything can happen", "bounce of the puck" argument. Sure there is a random component and there is a reason why the games are played. The random component works in our favor just as much as it works against us. I do not believe in bad luck or good luck. Every bad bounce for us is a good bounce for our opponent and vice versa.
The reason I did the analysis was to try and understand where our program stands in the recent past. I come to the following conclusions:
1. The definition of a successful Cornell season is making it to the regional championship game.
2. Our program in recent years is reasonably ranked at about #15 nationally. We are not among college hockey's elites.
3. The only other comparable team that plays under the same constraint we do is Yale and they have the same 5 yr NCAA record we do.
4. The Coach may in fact be doing as well as can be reasonably be expected given the constraints (Academic, Scholarship, Number of Games, League) that he operates under. Certainly there is no example of any other coach in the Ivy's in recent time that has produced more.
This years team performance to date is well off where our long term expectations should be. Since the Coach recruits the players, trains the players, sets the roster and lines, determines the style of play, and is paid to produce results he should be held accountable for this deviation from our longer term performance.
Like everyone on this page I hope the coach rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
By that definition half of every Frozen Four is taken up by "tournament fodder." I know it's a cliche, but once you get to the NCAA, "anything can happen." That time of year, luck matters more. Those "bounces of the puck" happen more. Just about all the players/teams are playing at the top of their game and emptying the tank. You regularly see an RIT or Bemidji or Ferris slip in. 2003 is considered to be matter-of-factly "of course we made it that year," but I bet BC fans see 2003 differently. One weird bounce in either OT, and that's just another regional failure. I bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
You make it sound like all we have is a regional final "ceiling" because that's all the coaching can give us. Since Schafer took the reins, Cornell has made seven NCAA regional finals. In six of them, the score has been tied in the 3rd period. Additionally, they've played in six overtime periods with a trip to the FF on the line, but the hypothesis is that it's a coaching problem? Think about it...a Schafer team advances to the regional final in 40% of his seasons here. I would bet every team in the country would sign up for that opportunity from this day forward. All I can ask of a coach is give a team the opportunity to go that deep, then it's up to the players to come through.
Look, my freshman year, we didn't even make the conference playoffs (one of three teams that didn't). Most of my college career, I dreamed about how amazing it would be just to MAKE the NCAAs. This coach has done that over half the time. How many coaches can say that?
I have a particular aversion to the "anything can happen", "bounce of the puck" argument. Sure there is a random component and there is a reason why the games are played. The random component works in our favor just as much as it works against us. I do not believe in bad luck or good luck. Every bad bounce for us is a good bounce for our opponent and vice versa.
The reason I did the analysis was to try and understand where our program stands in the recent past. I come to the following conclusions:
1. The definition of a successful Cornell season is making it to the regional championship game.
2. Our program in recent years is reasonably ranked at about #15 nationally. We are not among college hockey's elites.
3. The only other comparable team that plays under the same constraint we do is Yale and they have the same 5 yr NCAA record we do.
4. The Coach may in fact be doing as well as can be reasonably be expected given the constraints (Academic, Scholarship, Number of Games, League) that he operates under. Certainly there is no example of any other coach in the Ivy's in recent time that has produced more.
This years team performance to date is well off where our long term expectations should be. Since the Coach recruits the players, trains the players, sets the roster and lines, determines the style of play, and is paid to produce results he should be held accountable for this deviation from our longer term performance.
Like everyone on this page I hope the coach rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.
The people near me in section M at Lynah are starting to make noises that a new coach should be brought in. I don't really have a strong feeling either way, but my question to them when considering a coaching change is: "Who can Cornell get that would do a better job?"
Seriously, who can CU lure in that would deal with the restrictions mentioned, accept the pay that would be offered (I assume that the compensation would be much less the say BU, Michigan, etc.) and can be reasonably expected do a better job? I can't think of anyone off the top of my head that I think would be willing to accept the job and that I would prefer to be the coach.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: css228Quote from: RobbQuote from: RichHI bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
Indeed. And if that had been the case, but Cornell went on to lose the national semifinals in both of those years, then merely making the Frozen Four would be the "new normal" and people would be beeatching that Schafer couldn't break THAT ceiling to win the title.
No, right now I'm beeatching that he is presiding over a team that nearly made the Frozen Four last year, but is now all but in the bottom four of the ECAC, despite only losing four players to graduation.
I think you mean "a team that barely made the ncaa tournament, got lucky to have beat a no. 1 seed before losing a regional final few thought they would make and us now struggling in a conference with a few teams that are at least as good if not clearly better than they are."
Last year's team wasn't exactly the second coming of 1970.
How about "a team that missed out on the regular season title by two points last season and will be lucky to get a home playoff game if they keep as they have been". Other teams have gotten better, and we've gotten worse.
Quote from: MattSThe people near me in section M at Lynah are starting to make noises that a new coach should be brought in. I don't really have a strong feeling either way, but my question to them when considering a coaching change is: "Who can Cornell get that would do a better job?"
Seriously, who can CU lure in that would deal with the restrictions mentioned, accept the pay that would be offered (I assume that the compensation would be much less the say BU, Michigan, etc.) and can be reasonably expected do a better job? I can't think of anyone off the top of my head that I think would be willing to accept the job and that I would prefer to be the coach.
This is why I'm in the "Schafer, what happened? Figure it out" camp and not the "Schafer out" camp.
Quote from: TowerroadQuote from: RichHQuote from: TowerroadQuote from: TrotskyWe are not "tournament fodder." During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs (http://www.tbrw.info/?/games/cornell_Playoff_Games.html). The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Records_by_Team.htm).
Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.
By that definition half of every Frozen Four is taken up by "tournament fodder." I know it's a cliche, but once you get to the NCAA, "anything can happen." That time of year, luck matters more. Those "bounces of the puck" happen more. Just about all the players/teams are playing at the top of their game and emptying the tank. You regularly see an RIT or Bemidji or Ferris slip in. 2003 is considered to be matter-of-factly "of course we made it that year," but I bet BC fans see 2003 differently. One weird bounce in either OT, and that's just another regional failure. I bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.
You make it sound like all we have is a regional final "ceiling" because that's all the coaching can give us. Since Schafer took the reins, Cornell has made seven NCAA regional finals. In six of them, the score has been tied in the 3rd period. Additionally, they've played in six overtime periods with a trip to the FF on the line, but the hypothesis is that it's a coaching problem? Think about it...a Schafer team advances to the regional final in 40% of his seasons here. I would bet every team in the country would sign up for that opportunity from this day forward. All I can ask of a coach is give a team the opportunity to go that deep, then it's up to the players to come through.
Look, my freshman year, we didn't even make the conference playoffs (one of three teams that didn't). Most of my college career, I dreamed about how amazing it would be just to MAKE the NCAAs. This coach has done that over half the time. How many coaches can say that?
I have a particular aversion to the "anything can happen", "bounce of the puck" argument. Sure there is a random component and there is a reason why the games are played. The random component works in our favor just as much as it works against us. I do not believe in bad luck or good luck. Every bad bounce for us is a good bounce for our opponent and vice versa.
The reason I did the analysis was to try and understand where our program stands in the recent past. I come to the following conclusions:
1. The definition of a successful Cornell season is making it to the regional championship game.
2. Our program in recent years is reasonably ranked at about #15 nationally. We are not among college hockey's elites.
3. The only other comparable team that plays under the same constraint we do is Yale and they have the same 5 yr NCAA record we do.
4. The Coach may in fact be doing as well as can be reasonably be expected given the constraints (Academic, Scholarship, Number of Games, League) that he operates under. Certainly there is no example of any other coach in the Ivy's in recent time that has produced more.
This years team performance to date is well off where our long term expectations should be. Since the Coach recruits the players, trains the players, sets the roster and lines, determines the style of play, and is paid to produce results he should be held accountable for this deviation from our longer term performance.
Like everyone on this page I hope the coach rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.
I really like the points you've raised throughout this thread. Most years, and this one in particular, the rhetoric at the start of the year is "Watch out NCAA. We had an amazing recruiting class, our key players are back, and THIS is the year we will make a big splash." And things go well at first. And then the wheels fall off and we're forced to admit to our team's continued status as non-elite.
Do we have a good team? Sure! And I won't be surprised if we make it to the ECAC Semis or maybe the finals, or gods-be-willing even further. Are they playing up to and beyond their potential, showing the excitement, commitment and passion required of a Top5 or Top10 team? Absolutely not.
That's what I saw when Douglas anchored our D and we rivaled Minnesota, Wisconsin, BC, UNH etc, and is what's been missing in Ithaca the past xx years.
Quote from: TowerroadLike everyone on this page I hope the coach [Schafer] rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.
Tough crowd.
I went to TBRW and noticed the absence of a needed but missing set of data: number of elf.elynah posts plotted against points recorded the past 1, 2, or 3 weekends. There are way more posts and the knives come out when we're playing less than .667 hockey. Otherwise, the site is pretty complete.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: TowerroadLike everyone on this page I hope the coach [Schafer] rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.
Tough crowd.
I went to TBRW and noticed the absence of a needed but missing set of data: number of elf.elynah posts plotted against points recorded the past 1, 2, or 3 weekends. There are way more posts and the knives come out when we're playing less than .667 hockey. Otherwise, the site is pretty complete.
An action passed is an action completed (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanDumb).
We are below the TUC line (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/ncaapwcr.php) and falling.::help::
Cornell has dropped out of even the Also Receiving Votes ranks this week. A long fall from the first post of the thread that has us No. 6 just behind the Wolverines. Quinnipiac, No. 20 then, is a solid No. 2 this week with 20 of the 50 first place votes.
The Cornell women are No. 4 in USCHO, No. 5 in coaches/USA Today.
http://www.uscho.com/rankings/ USCHO 2/4/13
http://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/ Coaches
Quote from: Jim HylaWe are below the TUC line (http://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/ncaapwcr.php) and falling.::help::
In the "game of inches" department, if you flip one DU game and the Yale game to wins, Cornell would be 17th in PW....
For what it's worth I'll continue to post them.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
February 04, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (30) 18- 4-4 978 1
2 Quinnipiac (20) 19- 3-4 967 2
3 Miami 17- 6-5 876 4
4 New Hampshire 16- 7-2 804 3
5 Boston College 15- 7-2 798 5
6 Western Michigan 17- 6-5 770 6
7 North Dakota 14- 8-6 659 7
8 St. Cloud State 17-10-1 603 12
9 Denver 15- 8-4 596 10
10 Yale 13- 6-3 587 8
11 Minnesota State 16- 9-3 421 15
11 Notre Dame 16-11-1 421 9
13 Boston University 13-10-1 412 11
14 Nebraska-Omaha 16-10-2 352 14
15 Niagara 17- 4-5 328 17
16 Massachusetts-Lowell 14- 9-2 280 13
17 Dartmouth 11- 8-3 190 16
18 Union 13- 8-5 168 18
19 Wisconsin 11- 9-6 97 19
20 Merrimack 12-10-5 61 NR
Others receiving votes: Alaska 46, Colgate 46, Ferris State 17,
Providence 13, Ohio State 4, St. Lawrence 2, Bowling Green 1, Holy Cross 1, Northern Michigan 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2JyoS3xIe
USA Men's Poll - Week 17: February 4, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 494 (21) 18-4-4 1
2 Quinnipiac 488 (13) 19-3-4 2
3 Miami 427 17-6-5 3
4 Boston College 400 15-7-2 5
5 New Hampshire 375 16-7-2 4
6 Western Mich 337 17-6-5 6
7 North Dakota 274 14-8-6 8
8 Denver 240 15-8-4 10
9 Yale 238 13-6-3 7
10 St. Cloud St 233 17-10-1 13
11 Boston Univer 149 13-10-1 9
12 Notre Dame 104 16-11-1 11
13 Minnesota St 98 16-9-3 15
14 Niagara 85 17-4-5 NR
15 Nebraska-Omaha 63 16-10-2 14
Others receiving votes: UMass-Lowell, 39; Union College, 12;
University of Alaska, 7; Dartmouth College, 7;
Ferris State University, 6; Merrimack College, 3; Ohio State University, 1.
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Quinnipiac 30 19-3-4 .808 1 .5846 1
2 Minnesota 29 18-4-4 .769 2 .5693 2
3 Miami 27 17-6-5 .696 4t .5623 3
4 Boston College 27 15-7-2 .667 7 .5525 5
5 New Hampshire 26 16-7-2 .680 6 .5580 4
6 Western Mich 25 17-6-5 .696 4t .5491 7
7 Yale 23 13-6-3 .659 8 .5497 6
8 St. Cloud State 22 17-10-1 .625 10t .5443 8
9 Niagara 21 17-4-5 .750 3 .5427 9
10 North Dakota 21 14-8-6 .607 12t .5393 11
11 Denver 18 15-8-4 .630 9 .5420 10
12 Minnesota State 17 16-9-3 .625 10t .5349 12
13 Boston Univer 17 13-11-1 .540 22 .5251 18
14 Alaska-Fairbanks17 12-10-4 .538 23t .5247 19
15 Dartmouth 16 11-8-3 .568 20 .5302 13
16 Notre Dame 16 16-11-1 .589 17 .5299 14
17 Colgate 15 13-9-4 .577 18t .5215 20
18 Mass.-Lowell 14 14-9-2 .600 14t .5294 15
19 Union 13 13-8-5 .596 16 .5266 17
20 Northern Mich 13 11-12-4 .481 31 .5128 23
21 Nebraska-Omaha 11 16-10-2 .607 12t .5289 16
22 Wisconsin 9 11-9-6 .538 23t .5167 21
23 Merrimack 8 12-10-5 .537 26 .5139 22
24 Ferris State 8 13-11-4 .536 27 .5126 24
25 Ohio State 6 11-11-6 .500 29t .5122 25
26 Providence 5 10-10-5 .500 29t .5081 26
27 Robert Morris 5 14-9-2 .600 14t .5080 27
28 St. Lawrence 3 12-10-4 .538 23t .5052 28
29 Rensselaer 2 10-11-5 .481 32t .5045 29
30 Holy Cross 1 14-10-2 .577 18t .5024 30
31 Massachusetts 0 10-12-2 .458 36 .5014 31
T U C L i n e
Brown 8-9-5 .477 34 .4950 32
Yeah, OK, no double entendre.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
February 04, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 28- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 20- 4-2 132 2
3 Boston University 18- 3-3 109 4
4 Cornell 19- 4-0 104 5
5 Harvard 17- 2-2 98 3
6 Clarkson 21- 7-0 67 6
7 Mercyhurst 21- 5-1 60 7
8 Wisconsin 15- 9-2 46 8
9 North Dakota 18-10-0 39 9
10 Minnesota-Duluth 13-10-3 14 10
Others receiving votes: Northeastern 3, St. Lawrence 2, Providence 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2JysU8inU
Week 17: Women's College Hockey Poll
USA Women's Poll - Week 17: Feb. 5, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 28-0-0 1
2 Boston College 170 20-4-2 2
3 Boston Univer 139 18-3-3 3
4 Cornell 130 19-4-0 5
5 Harvard 125 17-2-2 4
6 Clarkson 91 21-7-0 6
7 Mercyhurst 80 21-5-1 7
8 North Dakota 52 18-10-0 9
9 Wisconsin 43 15-9-2 8
10 Minn Duluth 14 13-10-3 10
Others receiving votes: St. Lawrence University, 7;
Northeastern University, 3; Providence College, 1.
Women's Division I PairWise Rankings
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 28-0-0 1.000 1 .7391* 1 14-0-0 1.000
2 Boston College 10 20-4-2 .8077 6 .6322* 2 9-3-1 .7308
3 Boston Univer 9 18-3-3 .8125 5 .6296* 4 6-2-3 .6818
4 Cornell 8 19-4-0 .8261 4 .6308* 3 7-4-0 .6364
5 Harvard 7 17-2-2 .8571 3 .6215* 5 3-2-0 .6000
6 Clarkson 6 21-7-0 .7500 8 .5936* 6 7-6-0 .5385
7 Mercyhurst 5 21-5-1 .7963 7 .5835* 7 2-3-0 .4000
8 North Dakota 4 18-10-0 .6429 9 .5653* 8 4-8-0 .3333
9 Wisconsin 3 15-9-2 .6154 10 .5636* 9 3-7-0 .3000
10 Minnesota-Duluth 2 13-10-3 .5577 17 .5539 10 3-7-2 .3333
11 St. Lawrence 1 15-11-2 .5714 16 .5435 11 2-10-0 .1667
12 Northeastern 0 14-10-2 .5769 15 .5370 12 1-9-0 .1000
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2JysyDCUG
Q is first in USCHO poll. (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/) I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.
Quote from: Jim HylaQ is first in USCHO poll. (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/) I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.
Be nice if an ECAC team brought glory to the ECAC in the NCAAs (say, by winning it). Yale and Union had their chances. Cornell last year.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: Jim HylaQ is first in USCHO poll. (http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/) I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.
Be nice if an ECAC team brought glory to the ECAC in the NCAAs (say, by winning it). Yale and Union had their chances. Cornell last year.
Be even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
Quote from: martyBe even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
These are the years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Overall_Over_500.html) that make the other ones so great.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyBe even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
These are the years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Overall_Over_500.html) that make the other ones so great.
Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?
Quote from: Kyle RoseQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyBe even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
These are the years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Overall_Over_500.html) that make the other ones so great.
Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?
The pages include the following javascript in the header that puts them back inside the top frame to ensure that the menubar is displayed. Perhaps Chrome doesn't support it? (I would think it would.)
...
I'm also using Chrome and it goes to the Games Over/Under .500 page for me. I'm on Chrome on OSX 10.8 - not sure if that makes a difference compared to what Kyle's running.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
February 11, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac (41) 21- 3-4 983 2
2 Minnesota ( 9) 19- 5-4 949 1
3 Miami 18- 7-5 874 3
4 Boston College 16- 7-2 819 5
5 New Hampshire 16- 7-3 779 4
6 Western Michigan 18- 7-5 748 6
7 North Dakota 16- 8-6 720 7
8 St. Cloud State 18-11-1 657 8
9 Minnesota State 18- 9-3 559 11
10 Yale 13- 6-3 557 10
11 Denver 15- 9-5 495 9
12 Notre Dame 18-11-1 478 11
13 Boston University 13-11-1 331 13
14 Massachusetts-Lowell 14- 9-2 317 16
15 Niagara 18- 5-5 299 15
16 Nebraska-Omaha 16-12-2 274 14
17 Dartmouth 11- 8-4 216 17
18 Wisconsin 12- 9-7 158 19
19 Merrimack 13-10-5 151 20
20 Alaska 13-11-4 57 NR
Others receiving votes: Union 40, Providence 16, Ferris State 12,
Northern Michigan 5, Colgate 2, St. Lawrence 2, Holy Cross 1, Rensselaer 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2Kdn9kF7G
USA Men's Poll - Week 18: February 11, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac 503 (28) 21-3-4 2
2 Minnesota 470 (6) 19-5-4 1
3 Miami 424 18-7-5 3
4 Boston College 402 16-7-2 4
5 New Hampshire 377 16-7-3 5
6 Western Michigan 338 18-7-5 6
7 North Dakota 316 16-8-6 7
8 St. Cloud State 259 18-11-1 10
9 Yale 238 13-6-3 9
10 Minnesota State 185 18-9-3 13
11 Denver 164 15-9-5 8
12 Notre Dame 136 18-11-1 12
13 Boston University 78 13-11-1 11
14 Niagara 70 18-5-5 14
15 UMass-Lowell 55 14-9-2 NR
Others receiving votes:University of Nebraska-Omaha, 29;
Dartmouth College, 13; Merrimack College, 9; University of Alaska, 7;
University of Wisconsin, 7.
PWR
Rk Team PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Quinnipiac 30 21-3-4 .821 1 .5884 1
2 Minnesota 29 19-5-4 .750 2 .5680 2
3 Miami 27 18-7-5 .683 4t .5577 3
4 Boston College 27 16-7-2 .680 6 .5524 5
5 New Hampshire 26 16-7-3 .673 7 .5548 4
6 North Dakota 25 16-8-6 .633 10 .5466 7
7 Western Michigan24 18-7-5 .683 4t .5459 8
8 Yale 23 13-6-3 .659 8 .5502 6
9 St. Cloud State 23 18-11-1 .617 11t .5451 9
10 Minnesota State 19 18-9-3 .650 9 .5412 10
11 Niagara 19 18-5-5 .732 3 .5381 11
12 Denver 18 15-9-5 .603 13 .5348 12
13 Notre Dame 17 18-11-1 .617 11t .5340 13
14 Alaska-Fairbanks17 13-11-4 .536 23t .5237 16
15 Boston Univer 17 13-12-1 .519 28 .5175 18
16 Dartmouth 14 11-8-4 .565 18 .5287 14
17 Mass.-Lowell 14 14-9-2 .600 14 .5286 15
18 Northern Mich 12 12-13-4 .483 33 .5117 24
19 Nebraska-Omaha 11 16-12-2 .567 17 .5189 17
20 Merrimack 11 13-10-5 .554 19t .5172 19
21 Union 11 13-10-5 .554 19t .5152 21
22 Wisconsin 9 12-9-7 .554 19t .5164 20
23 Rensselaer 9 12-11-5 .518 29 .5142 22
24 Ferris State 8 14-12-4 .533 27 .5135 23
25 Colgate 7 13-11-4 .536 23t .5116 25
26 Ohio State 6 12-12-6 .500 30t .5111 26
27 Providence 4 10-10-6 .500 30t .5086 27
28 St. Lawrence 4 13-11-4 .536 23t .5060 28
29 Holy Cross 2 14-10-2 .577 15 .5045 29
30 Robert Morris 2 15-11-2 .571 16 .5013 30
31 Colorado College 0 11-14-5 .450 37t .5002 31
T U C L i n e
Brown 8-9-5 .477 35 .4967 32
Princeton 9-10-4 .478 34 .4958 33
Massachusetts 10-13-2 .440 43 .4948 34
Mercyhurst 14-11-3 .554 19t .4941 35
Bowling Green 11-14-5 .450 37t .4923 36
Air Force 12-10-7 .534 26 .4879 37
Lake Superior 13-16-1 .450 37t .4845 38
Connecticut 12-12-3 .500 30t .4841 39
Cornell 8-13-2 .391 47 .4815 40
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
February 11, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 30- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 21- 4-2 134 2
3 Boston University 18- 4-3 109 3
4 Cornell 20- 5-0 104 4
5 Harvard 17- 3-2 82 5
6 Clarkson 23- 7-0 76 6
7 Wisconsin 17- 9-2 50 8
8 North Dakota 20-10-0 49 9
9 Mercyhurst 22- 6-1 43 7
10 Northeastern 15-10-2 17 NR
Others receiving votes: Minnesota-Duluth 9, Quinnipiac 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2Kdqdr5Af
USA Women's Poll - Week 18: Feb. 12, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 30-0-0 1
2 Boston Coll 171 21-4-2 2
3 Boston Univ 139 18-4-3 3
4 Cornell 126 20-5-0 4
5 Harvard 107 17-3-2 5
6 Clarkson 101 23-7-0 6
7 North Dakota 63 20-10-0 8
8 Mercyhurst 61 22-6-1 7
9 Wisconsin 43 17-9-2 9
10 Northeastern 18 15-10-0 NR
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 10; Quinnipiac, 6.
Rank Team PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 30-0-0 1.000 1 .7310* 1 12-0-0 1.000
2 Boston College 10 21-4-2 .8148 4 .6353* 2 10-3-1 .7500
3 Boston Univer 9 18-4-3 .7800 6 .6173* 3 6-3-3 .6250
4 Cornell 8 20-5-0 .8000 5 .6167* 4 5-5-0 .5000
5 Harvard 7 17-3-2 .8182 3 .6108* 5 4-3-0 .5714
6 Clarkson 6 23-7-0 .7667 8 .5943* 6 5-5-0 .5000
7 Mercyhurst 5 22-6-1 .7759 7 .5770* 7 3-3-1 .5000
8 North Dakota 4 20-10-0 .6667 9 .5676* 8 4-8-0 .3333
9 Wisconsin 3 17-9-2 .6429 10 .5675* 9 3-7-0 .3000
10 Minnesota-Duluth 2 14-11-3 .5536 17 .5488 10 3-7-2 .3333
11 Quinnipiac 1 17-9-3 .6379 11 .5464* 11 1-6-1 .1875
12 Northeastern 0 15-10-2 .5926 14 .5462* 12 2-8-0 .2000
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2Kdr2qQEk
Chrome for PC and Mac both work fine for me.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Kyle RoseQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyBe even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
These are the years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Overall_Over_500.html) that make the other ones so great.
Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?
The pages include the following javascript in the header that puts them back inside the top frame to ensure that the menubar is displayed. Perhaps Chrome doesn't support it? (I would think it would.)
...
I see something different:
That "Uncaught ReferenceError" is an inline exception notification in the Chrome debugger. The problem is the script is being run before the TBRWViewer frame is available. I think you might be onloading from the wrong point (the frameset instead of the frame)? I'm not sure: this crap is tricky.
That said, writing Javascript directly to the browser's terrible event interface is frowned upon these days. You may want to look into replacing what you have with jQuery: it'll do exactly what you want on every browser without any tweaking, and it will greatly simplify whatever code you have in there. It also has plugins and modules to do some neat visualization that I think you in particular would love.
Quote from: Kyle RoseThat said, writing Javascript directly to the browser's terrible event interface is frowned upon these days. You may want to look into replacing what you have with jQuery: it'll do exactly what you want on every browser without any tweaking, and it will greatly simplify whatever code you have in there. It also has plugins and modules to do some neat visualization that I think you in particular would love.
Thank you, I will check it out.
Quote from: Kyle RoseQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyBe even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.
These are the years (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Overall_Over_500.html) that make the other ones so great.
Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?
On my Windows 8 with Chrome, I get both the front page showing for a half second and then the page that you linked to. Same thing with my Android tablet and Chrome but the switch to the correct page takes just a bit longer.**]
Quote from: martyOn my Windows 8 with Chrome, I get both the front page showing for a half second and then the page that you linked to. Same thing with my Android tablet and Chrome but the switch to the correct page takes just a bit longer.**]
There is a
very brief flash in the frame transition on my set up (Windows 8 with either Firefox or Chrome).
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Kyle RoseThat said, writing Javascript directly to the browser's terrible event interface is frowned upon these days. You may want to look into replacing what you have with jQuery: it'll do exactly what you want on every browser without any tweaking, and it will greatly simplify whatever code you have in there. It also has plugins and modules to do some neat visualization that I think you in particular would love.
Thank you, I will check it out.
Better yet, use MooTools (http://mootools.net). I'm sure there's something Kyle and I agree on. Just haven't found it yet. Even better yet, don't use frames. ;)
Quote from: CowbellGuyEven better yet, don't use frames. ;)
I didn't want to be the person to say it...
Quote from: CowbellGuyEven better yet, don't use frames. ;)
I am only a caveman. Your HTML5 frightens and confuses me.
Quote from: CowbellGuyBetter yet, use MooTools (http://mootools.net). I'm sure there's something Kyle and I agree on. Just haven't found it yet. Even better yet, don't use frames. ;)
I'm sure MooTools is fine; I'm just familiar with jQuery from having used it for several projects. I think we probably both agree that writing directly to the browser's API is a bad idea.
Quote from: CowbellGuyI'm sure there's something Kyle and I agree on. Just haven't found it yet.
I thought of one. (http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,28999)
Polls out, Q first and in PWR. Women are fourth in poll and third in PWR. I'll post them later, or tomorrow.
So I decided to post the polls even though they mean nothing to us.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
February 18, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac (34) 22- 4-4 974 1
2 Minnesota (15) 20- 6-4 958 2
3 Miami 19- 8-5 889 3
4 Boston College ( 1) 17- 8-3 826 4
5 New Hampshire 16- 8-4 757 5
6 North Dakota 16- 8-6 740 7
7 St. Cloud State 18-11-1 684 8
8 Western Michigan 18- 8-6 657 6
9 Minnesota State 20- 9-3 651 9
10 Denver 15- 9-5 510 11
11 Notre Dame 19-12-1 491 12
12 Massachusetts-Lowell 16- 9-2 410 14
13 Yale 13- 9-3 352 10
14 Nebraska-Omaha 18-12-2 333 16
15 Boston University 14-12-2 299 13
16 Niagara 19- 6-5 243 15
17 Merrimack 14-10-6 230 19
18 Wisconsin 13-10-7 175 18
19 Dartmouth 12- 9-4 130 17
20 Union 15-10-5 97 NR
Others receiving votes: Rensselaer 34, St. Lawrence 20, Providence 19,
Ferris State 9, Ohio State 7, Alaska 4, Colgate 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2012-2013/poll,0218/february-18,-2013/#ixzz2MOi5aHbR
USA Men's Poll - Week 19: February 18, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac 502 (26) 22-4-4 1
2 Minnesota 480 (8) 20-6-4 2
3 Miami 430 19-8-5 3
4 Boston College 407 17-8-3 4
5 New Hampshire 361 16-8-4 5
6 North Dakota 324 16-8-6 7
7 Western Mich 276 18-7-5 6
8 St. Cloud State 269 18-11-1 8
9 Minnesota State 266 20-9-3 10
10 Denver 186 15-9-5 11
11 Notre Dame 164 19-12-1 12
12 UMass-Lowell 112 16-9-2 15
13 Boston Univer 80 14-12-2 13
14 Yale 76 13-6-3 9
15 Niagara 44 19-6-5 14
Others receiving votes:Merrimack College, 37; University of Nebraska-Omaha, 28;
Union College, 19; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 9; Dartmouth College, 6;
University of Wisconsin, 3; Providence College, 1.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
February 18, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 32- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 23- 5-2 127 2
3 Cornell 21- 5-1 116 4
4 Boston University 20- 5-3 95 3
5 Harvard 19- 4-2 92 5
6 Wisconsin 19- 9-2 66 7
7 Clarkson 24- 8-0 57 6
8 North Dakota 22-10-0 54 8
9 Mercyhurst 24- 6-1 39 9
10 Northeastern 18-10-2 28 10
Others receiving votes: Minnesota-Duluth 1.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/2012-2013/poll,0218/february-18,-2013/#ixzz2MOkvHh1i
USA Women's Poll - Week 18: Feb. 19, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 32-0-0 1
2 Boston Col 168 23-5-2 2
3 Cornell 146 21-5-1 4
4 Boston Univ 119 20-4-3 3
5 Harvard 115 19-4-2 5
6 Clarkson 78 24-8-0 6
7 North Dakota 75 22-10-0 7
8 Wisconsin 69 19-9-2 9
9 Mercyhurst 53 24-6-1 8
10 Northeastern 31 18-10-2 10
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 1.
USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
February 25, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac (37) 23- 4-5 975 1
2 Minnesota (10) 21- 6-5 948 2
3 Miami ( 2) 21- 8-5 907 3
4 Boston College ( 1) 18- 8-3 835 4
5 New Hampshire 17- 8-5 770 5
6 North Dakota 17- 9-6 734 6
7 St. Cloud State 19-12-1 670 7
8 Western Michigan 18- 8-8 650 8
9 Minnesota State 20- 9-3 635 9
10 Denver 16-10-5 515 10
11 Notre Dame 19-12-3 489 11
12 Massachusetts-Lowell 18- 9-2 487 12
13 Nebraska-Omaha 18-12-2 356 14
14 Niagara 21- 6-5 335 16
15 Yale 14-10-3 323 13
16 Wisconsin 14-10-7 237 18
17 Merrimack 14-11-6 199 17
18 Dartmouth 13-10-4 119 19
19 Boston University 14-14-2 112 15
20 Providence 13-10-7 80 NR
Others receiving votes: Rensselaer 57, St. Lawrence 36,
Union 14, Ferris State 12, Alaska 3, Robert Morris 2.
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2MOmatZiM
USA Men's Poll - Week 20: February 25, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Quinnipiac 506 (30) 23-4-5 1
2 Minnesota 471 (3) 21-6-5 2
3 Miami 447 (1) 21-8-5 3
4 Boston College 406 18-8-3 4
5 New Hampshire 368 17-8-5 5
6 North Dakota 333 17-9-6 6
7 Minnesota State 261 20-9-3 9
8 Western Michigan 260 18-8-8 7
9 St. Cloud State 257 19-12-1 8
10 UMass-Lowell 179 18-9-2 12
11 Denver 166 16-10-5 10
12 Notre Dame 134 19-12-3 11
13 Niagara 107 21-6-5 15
14 Yale 82 14-10-3 14
15 Nebraska-Omaha 50 18-12-2 NR
Others receiving votes:Merrimack College, 24; Providence College, 12;
Dartmouth College, 8; University of Wisconsin, 6; Boston University, 2;
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1.
USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
February 25, 2013
Team (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 34- 0-0 150 1
2 Cornell 23- 5-1 127 3
3 Boston College 25- 5-3 125 2
4 Boston University 23- 5-3 98 4
5 Clarkson 26- 8-0 84 7
6 Wisconsin 21- 9-2 65 6
7 Harvard 20- 5-3 62 5
8 North Dakota 23-10-1 49 8
9 Mercyhurst 26- 6-1 38 9
10 Northeastern 21-10-2 27 10
Others receiving votes:
Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2MOpNxlzu
Women's Poll - Week 20: Feb. 26, 2013
Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1 Minnesota 190 (19) 34-0-0 1
2 Cornell 163 23-5-1 3
3 Boston Coll 159 25-5-3 2
4 Boston Univer 118 23-4-3 4
5 Clarkson 104 26-8-0 6
6 Harvard 82 20-5-3 5
7 Wisconsin 77 21-9-2 8
8 North Dakota 64 23-10-1 7
9 Mercyhurst 50 26-6-1 9
10 Northeastern 35 21-10-2 10
Others receiving votes: Minnesota Duluth, 2; Quinnipiac, 1.
There, I'm done. Two weeks worth. Don't ask why.::screwy:: I need ::help::
Men are still unranked going into Quinnipiac. I expected a stray vote or two.
And yet Michigan got 3 votes?
The men's polls have marched forward through 3/25 without any votes for Cornell. I was kinda hoping for a stray vote just for the hell of it.