Cornell #15 in USCHO, behind Quinnipiac (8) and Harvard(14) in the ECAC. Seems high but glad to see that maybe others are more optimistic about our kids than we are.
https://twitter.com/NCAAIceHockey/status/1447600768673062920
USA Hockey (https://www.usahockey.com/college) from 10/4:
1 St. Cloud State University, 477 (16) 3 2-0-0 2
2 Minnesota State University, 470 (9) 5 2-0-0 2
3 University of Michigan, 452 (6) 2 0-0-0 2
4 University of Minnesota, 391 (3) 4 0-0-0 2
5 University of Minnesota Duluth, 366 6 0-0-0 2
6 University of Massachusetts, 313 1 0-2-0 2
7 University of North Dakota, 292 7 0-0-0 2
8 Boston College, 272 8 0-0-0 2
9 Quinnipiac University, 222 9 0-0-0 2
10 Boston University, 178 10 0-0-0 2
11 Providence College, 134 14 1-0-0 2
12 Harvard University, 100 11 0-0-0 2
13 University of Denver, 99 NR 0-0-0 1
14 University of Wisconsin, 90 12 0-0-0 2
15 University of Nebraska Omaha, 39 NR 1-0-1 1
19 Clarkson
19 Cornell
Final column is "weeks in the top 25."
Dropping 14/18 spots? What'd we do?!
We always slide a bit in a the several weeks the rest of the NC$$ gets a head start.
Quote from: TrotskyWe always slide a bit in a the several weeks the rest of the NC$$ gets a head start.
"What have you done for me late-ly?! Ooo-oo-oo-ooo-yeah!"
Quote from: TrotskyWe always slide a bit in a the several weeks the rest of the NC$$ gets a head start.
I'm thinking disappearing for a season didn't help either.
We went from 15 to 13 in USA Hockey.
November 1st, Week Six
Cornell is 14th, was 15th, 63 points. Only Cornall and #9 Harvard (was 14) have played just 2 games. St. Cloud and Minnesota State, both 6-2, remain 1-2. Quinnipiac is 5th.
Poll results: https://cdn4.sportngin.com/attachments/document/7c31-2555530/Week_Six_-_Nov._1.pdf#_ga=2.93527965.169901926.1635795013-1115046260.1635795011
Quote from: USA HockeyThe USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine College Hockey Poll is conducted each week in conjunction with the American Hockey Coaches Association. The poll includes input from coaches and journalists representing each of the NCAA Division I ice hockey conferences, as well as composite votes from officers of the AHCA and USA Hockey.
Not clear if "input" means they actually vote.
Quote from: billhowardNot clear if "input" means they actually vote.
I strongly suspect that a lot of them don't. I suspect "input" means that someone, not necessarily the coach, but someone who is (or may not be) affiliated with the team and who has time for such things sends the vote in.
Years ago, Cornell football got a first-place vote in a Div. I-AA poll. They were undefeated at the time, but still, the coach was quick to point out that it was some staffer, and not himself, who actually voted. I think he was trying not to piss off Cornell's next opponent. (IIRC they lost anyway)
Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: billhowardNot clear if "input" means they actually vote.
I strongly suspect that a lot of them don't. I suspect "input" means that someone, not necessarily the coach, but someone who is (or may not be) affiliated with the team and who has time for such things sends the vote in.
Years ago, Cornell football got a first-place vote in a Div. I-AA poll. They were undefeated at the time, but still, the coach was quick to point out that it was some staffer, and not himself, who actually voted. I think he was trying not to piss off Cornell's next opponent. (IIRC they lost anyway)
Not only did Cornell lose that week, they lost the following three weeks to close out the season. Unbeaten Penn was being ranked while unbeaten Cornell was not, so... I'm not convinced that someone other than Hofher cast that ballot.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: billhowardNot clear if "input" means they actually vote.
I strongly suspect that a lot of them don't. I suspect "input" means that someone, not necessarily the coach, but someone who is (or may not be) affiliated with the team and who has time for such things sends the vote in.
Years ago, Cornell football got a first-place vote in a Div. I-AA poll. They were undefeated at the time, but still, the coach was quick to point out that it was some staffer, and not himself, who actually voted. I think he was trying not to piss off Cornell's next opponent. (IIRC they lost anyway)
Not only did Cornell lose that week, they lost the following three weeks to close out the season. Unbeaten Penn was being ranked while unbeaten Cornell was not, so... I'm not convinced that someone other than Hofher cast that ballot.
Ugh, I remember that season. From undefeated to a losing Ivy record. And that was back when the Cornell football games were all on satellite, and the Cornell Club of Santa Barbara scheduled a viewing party for the Penn game at a sports bar in Santa Barbara, which kicked us off the TV in the 4th quarter so people could watch the start of some jock factory matchup. But didn't do the same thing to the people watching the Harvard-Yale game on the other of the bar's two feeds, because that game was special. ::cuss::
Quote from: jtwcornell91Ugh, I remember that season. From undefeated to a losing Ivy record. And that was back when the Cornell football games were all on satellite, and the Cornell Club of Santa Barbara scheduled a viewing party for the Penn game at a sports bar in Santa Barbara, which kicked us off the TV in the 4th quarter so people could watch the start of some jock factory matchup. But didn't do the same thing to the people watching the Harvard-Yale game on the other of the bar's two feeds, because that game was special. ::cuss::
"6 and 0! O and 4. 6 and 0! 0 and 4."
We went up by two in both USHO and USA Today this week!
https://twitter.com/NCAAIceHockey/status/1457762417853796357?s=20
Quote from: DuncWe went up by two in both USHO and USA Today this week!
https://twitter.com/NCAAIceHockey/status/1457762417853796357?s=20
6 more weekends of going one for two and we'll be ranked Number One.
CREEPING UP
https://twitter.com/ncaaicehockey/status/1460299005284417536?s=21
An 11-goal outburst will impress the voters!
Poll are basically 90% wrong this point in the year, and RPI was abysmally bad this weekend.
We probably should be somewhere lower like where we are on Pairwise. We also haven't played Quinnipiac, Clarkson, and ND.
That said, the performance has been above expectations so far. This is still among the top half of teams under Schafer era.
Quote from: ajh258Poll are basically 90% wrong this point in the year, and RPI was abysmally bad this weekend.
We probably should be somewhere lower like where we are on Pairwise. We also haven't played Quinnipiac, Clarkson, and ND.
That said, the performance has been above expectations so far. This is still among the top half of teams under Schafer era.
Given that Schafer teams have made the NCAA tourney in over half of his seasons as coach, I would gladly take that.
NDak would really help the PW this yr not much help from Alas/BU/Ariz st
Quote from: upprdeckNDak would really help the PW this yr not much help from Alas/BU/Ariz st
Does connectivity still mean anything? If so then that single game v BU might matter in close HE comparisons.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: upprdeckNDak would really help the PW this yr not much help from Alas/BU/Ariz st
Does connectivity still mean anything? If so then that single game v BU might matter in close HE comparisons.
Yep, for Pairwise reasons we want to beat BU and then have them tear through Hockey East
Quote from: CU2007Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: upprdeckNDak would really help the PW this yr not much help from Alas/BU/Ariz st
Does connectivity still mean anything? If so then that single game v BU might matter in close HE comparisons.
Yep, for Pairwise reasons we want to beat BU and then have them tear through Hockey East
As I understand it, the Pairwise tiebreaker is RPI, so unless both head to head AND common opponents add up to enough to beat out RPI, RPI is all that matters.
Which means that unless we play a team head to head, RPI is all that matters. So for all those Hockey East teams we don't play, if we win RPI and lose common opponents, we win.
Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: upprdeckNDak would really help the PW this yr not much help from Alas/BU/Ariz st
Does connectivity still mean anything? If so then that single game v BU might matter in close HE comparisons.
Yep, for Pairwise reasons we want to beat BU and then have them tear through Hockey East
As I understand it, the Pairwise tiebreaker is RPI, so unless both head to head AND common opponents add up to enough to beat out RPI, RPI is all that matters.
Which means that unless we play a team head to head, RPI is all that matters. So for all those Hockey East teams we don't play, if we win RPI and lose common opponents, we win.
Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.
Right, I meant the Pairwise rankings which I agree are essentially just an RPI ranking. But our RPI is better if BU does well except against us, right?
A win and an OT win did little for Cornell's poll standings Nov. 22
USCHO/Coaches: Cornell falls from 9 to 10. Notre Dame, winner of 2 from #1 Michigan (in OT, both), jumped from 15 to 8; Western Michigan went from 13 to 7 (swept #2 St. Cloud State); and Nebraska Omaha went from 10 to 9.
https://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/
USA Today/Hockey Magazine: Cornel remains at #10.
https://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/
Quote from: billhowardA win and an OT win did little for Cornell's poll standings Nov. 22
USCHO/Coaches: Cornell falls from 9 to 10. Notre Dame, winner of 2 from #1 Michigan (in OT, both), jumped from 15 to 8; Western Michigan went from 13 to 7 (swept #2 St. Cloud State); and Nebraska Omaha went from 10 to 9.
https://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/
USA Today/Hockey Magazine: Cornel remains at #10.
https://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/
Our drop in the polls may reflect the impressive showings by ND, WM, and NO more than Cornell's performance. I believe if we had beaten and tied Michigan we would have moved up.
we get our shot at UND. just a split will be good for us.
Hockey polls Monday 11/29/21
Cornell 9 was 9 -- USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll
Cornell 9 was 10 -- USCHO
Cornell is the only one-loss team in the top 20. Cornell is also one of only two schools without double-digit wins (St. Cloud is 9-5, Cornell is 8-1-0)
ECAC teams in the USCHO Top 20: Q , Cornell 9, Harvard 17, Clarkson 19. BU did not receive votes.
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/icehockey-men/d1/uschocom
Is there penalty for failure to succeed any more? Cornell's poll standings are unchanged for 12/5 in wake of the Saturday night collapse:
* 9th in USA Today/Hockey magazine was 9th
* 9th in USCHO was 9th
Quinnipiac meanwhile moves up to #2, behind Minnesota State.
Harvard deservedly loses a couple spots after losing to Brown.
Clarkson deservedly moves up a spot.
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/icehockey-men/d1/uschocom
Quote from: billhowardIs there penalty for failure to succeed any more? Cornell's poll standings are unchanged for 12/5 in wake of the Saturday night collapse:
* 9th in USA Today/Hockey magazine was 9th
* 9th in USCHO was 9th
Quinnipiac meanwhile moves up to #2, behind Minnesota State.
Harvard deservedly loses a couple spots after losing to Brown.
Clarkson deservedly moves up a spot.
https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/icehockey-men/d1/uschocom
In a vacuum, losing in a shootout (which is a tie as far as out of conference stuff like rankings is concerned) on the road against a ranked team isn't bad. And the rest of NCAA hockey is more used to seeing last-minute comebacks than we are.
I know. There should still be a scarlet letter attached to blowing a 4 goal lead. In some cultures, the leader might turn to seppuku. (n/a to coaching football)
Quote from: billhowardI know. There should still be a scarlet letter attached to blowing a 4 goal lead. In some cultures, the leader might turn to seppuku. (n/a to coaching football)
Good idea. Maybe Mike can atone by knifing Archer.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: billhowardI know. There should still be a scarlet letter attached to blowing a 4 goal lead. In some cultures, the leader might turn to seppuku. (n/a to coaching football)
Good idea. Maybe Mike can atone by knifing Archer.
(https://www.awn.com/sites/default/files/styles/original/public/image/attached/1016190-julianna3-1200.jpg?itok=8kRNUcJk)
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyQuote from: billhowardI know. There should still be a scarlet letter attached to blowing a 4 goal lead. In some cultures, the leader might turn to seppuku. (n/a to coaching football)
Good idea. Maybe Mike can atone by knifing Archer.
(https://www.awn.com/sites/default/files/styles/original/public/image/attached/1016190-julianna3-1200.jpg?itok=8kRNUcJk)
The football coach is less competent than the spy. And that's saying something.
Elections have consequences (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/).
2 Quinnipiac
14 Cornell
19 Harvard
Quote from: TrotskyElections have consequences (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/).
2 Quinnipiac
14 Cornell
19 Harvard
So do losses.
Cornell back up to 9th in USCHO poll. Knocked NoDak down to 10th.
better goalie play the first 2 games and we might have gone 3-1 pretty easily and who knows where we would be now.
Quote from: upprdeckbetter goalie play the first 2 games and we might have gone 3-1 pretty easily and who knows where we would be now.
Preparing for the Yale-Brown roadtrip, I would hope.
one game this weekend.. i guess we see who starts that game now.. i would almost expect to roll with it after the last 2 efforts.
Quote from: upprdeckone game this weekend.. i guess we see who starts that game now.. i would almost expect to roll with it after the last 2 efforts.
Figure it has to be Shane. I wouldn't mind getting Howe some starts. Rest is good, and Howe looked great to start the year.
But for now at least, Shane must be the starter.
could also be a fact that not practicing for real after all this time, he has now improved from the start of the year. the other 2 have been seen quite a bit in game situations,
We get a chance to knock off the newly crowned No. 1 team, Quinnipiac, on Saturday night.
Princeton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Quote from: SwampyPrinceton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Q has 35 shots and a 6-0 lead.
After 2.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyPrinceton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Q has 35 shots and a 6-0 lead.
After 2.
Now 7-0, with 7 different goal scorers.
Quote from: RobbQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyPrinceton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Q has 35 shots and a 6-0 lead.
After 2.
Now 7-0, with 7 different goal scorers.
They're gonna be exhausted...
I don't know if the bottom rung of the ECAC has ever been weaker.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: RobbQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyPrinceton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Q has 35 shots and a 6-0 lead.
After 2.
Now 7-0, with 7 different goal scorers.
They're gonna be exhausted...
from high-fives?
Quote from: scoop85I don't know if the bottom rung of the ECAC has ever been weaker.
1989 called (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/rptStandings/rptStandings_1989.pdf).
Not to speak of (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/rptStandings/rptStandings_1985.pdf)...
Quote from: RobbQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyPrinceton & Quinnipiac are playing tonight at 7:00 PM (1/18). Should be on ESPN+. Let's hope they go to quadruple OT.
Q has 35 shots and a 6-0 lead.
After 2.
Now 7-0, with 7 different goal scorers.
Final: 9 by 9 (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20220118/prn/qui/). 17 different point scorers. Every skater with a positive +/- (16 of them at least +2).
Goals against Quinnipiac in conference games this year:
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Quinnipiac has outscored the opposition 38-2 in its last eight games, six of which were against ECAC teams and two against LIU.
Quote from: dbilmesQuinnipiac has outscored the opposition 38-2 in its last eight games, six of which were against ECAC teams and two against LIU.
Watched about ten minutes second half of first period. Princeton never was able to set up in the offensive zone. Was like watching late 60s Cornell teams. Q outshot Nodak 36-19 in Q's only loss.
Quote from: dbilmesQuinnipiac has outscored the opposition 38-2 in its last eight games, six of which were against ECAC teams and two against LIU.
But they didn't play Cornell in that streak!!! Things will change for them on Saturday!
So much for Newton's third law. Quinnipac drops 1 place in both polls to #1, but there's no equal and opposite reaction for Cornell, flat at 8th in USCHO, down one to 9th in USA Today/Coaches poll
[b]USA Today/USA Hockey - January 24, 2022[/b]
1. Minnesota State was 2
2. Quinnipiac 1
3. WMU
4. Michigan
5. Denver
6. St. Cloud
7 UMD
8. UMass
9. Cornell (was 8th)
Also got votes: No other ECAC team.
Link: https://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/
[b]USCHO[/b]
1. Minnesota State
2. Q was 1
...
8. Cornell (8)
Also got: Clarkson, Harvard
Link: https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/
the way things are playing out we would end up #1 and not make the ncaa cause our PWR is so bad. If harv or clark stumble we dont play a team in the top 25 until we play Quin again.
PWR guys are already playing what-if. We're the three-seed, going to Allentown.
Quote from: Evan Marinofsky, NCAA bracket predictions 1/24/22The more interesting matchup [than 1-overall Minnesota State vs. AIC] is Minnesota Duluth and Cornell. It can be argued that no team was hurt more by the 2019-20 COVID-19 shutdown than Cornell.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-men/article/2022-01-21/2022-ncaa-mens-hockey-tournament-bracket-predictions-2-months-selections
Q would go to Worcester. That's it for the ECAC.
The other sites are Albany and Loveland, Colorado. I think the NCAA knows Cornell no matter what the seed has to be within driving distance of Ithaca to help the gate. Allentown is 3-1/2 hours from Ithaca, 2 hours from Manhattan.
oh if only things open up by then and we make it that far..
Quote from: upprdeckoh if only things open up by then and we make it that far..
If we don't make it that far, the lone ECAC rep would be Quinni-PEE-yack, as we heard on the Saturday broadcast. Clarkson could be Golden Knights and Q could be Golden Showers. Unless that's the secret name of a Harvard Finals Club.
Harvard and Clarkson aren't in the top 20. Currently.
Quote from: upprdeckthe way things are playing out we would end up #1 and not make the ncaa cause our PWR is so bad.
Honestly I don't care; never have. Maybe because I was an 80s fan, for me the ECAC is always what matters. The NC$$ is dessert and if we advance, great, if not, whatevs.
Win in Placid. Every year. That is the goal. The rest takes cares of itself.
Quote from: TrotskyWin in Placid. Every year. That is the goal. The rest takes cares of itself.
Which has been rebranded to a 200x85 rink. If only Douglas Murray had that.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: TrotskyWin in Placid. Every year. That is the goal. The rest takes cares of itself.
Which has been rebranded to a 200x85 rink. If only Douglas Murray had that.
Or Sasha.
Slipping from 11th to 16th in one poll, DCU/USCHO. https://www.uscho.com/rankings/
Weren't we like 9-1-1 at one point? Sheesh
Quote from: billhowardSlipping from 11th to 16th in one poll, DCU/USCHO. https://www.uscho.com/rankings/
Weren't we like 9-1-1 at one point? Sheesh
6-1-4, which some referred to as 9-1-1.
If somebody saw 9-1-1, they should've picked up the phone and said, Mike, get help.
i can't believe we're still getting votes
Quote from: billhowardSlipping from 11th to 16th in one poll, DCU/USCHO. https://www.uscho.com/rankings/
Weren't we like 9-1-1 at one point? Sheesh
We're not the only big-name team struggling. With its Beanpot loss last night,BC is now on a 10-game winless streak (0-9-1). And their long-time coach, Jerry York, was Coach of the Year last year.
Cornell in the polls week of 2/14/22 https://collegehockeyinc.com/national-polls.php
USCHO 18 was 16 (3 spots back of Clarkson)
USAToday 1 vote received, not in the top 15, last of three Others Receiving Votes.
Pretty depressing. Cornell not in the top ten as of 2-22-22. Barely inside the top 20 for the poll that goes 20 teams deep, and still one place behind Clarkson (but way ahead of Harvard, an also ran). The other poll has us as an also-mention, just behind Harvard. Qunnipiac has slipped to fifth. See it here: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/icehockey-men/d1/uschocom
I also like to tell myself, the team barely in the top 20 that nobody in the top ten would like to play has to be Cornell. Every year, it brings some solace.
I guess being 5-0 against the teams we played in the polls means there is an upside. to get he ncaas we probably need to go 7-1 or 8-0 though.
Quote from: upprdeckI guess being 5-0 against the teams we played in the polls means there is an upside. to get he ncaas we probably need to go 7-1 or 8-0 though.
Harvard, Clarkson, Quinnipiac; pick any 2.
At this point I think there is an exactly equal chance we'll lose the QF as win in Placid.
the way the team is playing better chance of beating 2 of them than playing 2 lower teams and winning 2 games
USCHO poll Feb. 28 has Cornell 18 --> 17 (swapping with Clarkson). Also Quinnipiac 6th (-1) with 1 first place vote, Harvard also-receiving votes. Top Teams are Minnesota State, Minnesota, Denver, ND (Dakota not Dame), Michigan.
https://collegehockeyinc.com/national-polls.php
CHN's pairwise probability matrix has been posted. As usual, it assigns higher-ranked teams too high a chance of winning and lower-ranked teams too low a chance. And as usual, I will waste everyone's time complaining about this. This year I will keep it short and instead highlight a few examples to illustrate the aforementioned issue: the matrix gives Q a 54% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. That is to say, they are more likely to win it than the entire rest of the field combined. The matrix also gives Brown, Yale, Dartmouth, and Princeton a combined 0.0% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. Not even a 0.1% chance—they quite literally have a 0.0% chance of winning the tournament. Collectively, the bottom 8 seeds have a 2.1% chance of winning the ECAC tournament, according to the matrix.
EDIT: BTW, the matrix gives Cornell a 10% chance to win the ECAC tourney and a 0% chance at an at-large bid.
Quote from: BearLoverCHN's pairwise probability matrix has been posted. As usual, it assigns higher-ranked teams too high a chance of winning and lower-ranked teams too low a chance. And as usual, I will waste everyone's time complaining about this. This year I will keep it short and instead highlight a few examples to illustrate the aforementioned issue: the matrix gives Q a 54% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. That is to say, they are more likely to win it than the entire rest of the field combined. The matrix also gives Brown, Yale, Dartmouth, and Princeton a combined 0.0% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. Not even a 0.1% chance—they quite literally have a 0.0% chance of winning the tournament. Collectively, the bottom 8 seeds have a 2.1% chance of winning the ECAC tournament, according to the matrix.
EDIT: BTW, the matrix gives Cornell a 10% chance to win the ECAC tourney and a 0% chance at an at-large bid.
Importantly*, they give us a 0.0% chance at an at-large bid. The teams below us all have this field blank. I think this means our chances at an at-large bid are greater than zero but round down to 0.0%.
Quote from: BearLoverThe matrix also gives Brown, Yale, Dartmouth, and Princeton a combined 0.0% chance of winning the ECAC tournament.
Have them run an analysis where low-ranking BYDP makes the title game and opponent equals Cornell. Odds would change in a heartbeat. Or have we gotten that losing-to-the-losers syndrome behind us?
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: BearLoverCHN's pairwise probability matrix has been posted. As usual, it assigns higher-ranked teams too high a chance of winning and lower-ranked teams too low a chance. And as usual, I will waste everyone's time complaining about this. This year I will keep it short and instead highlight a few examples to illustrate the aforementioned issue: the matrix gives Q a 54% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. That is to say, they are more likely to win it than the entire rest of the field combined. The matrix also gives Brown, Yale, Dartmouth, and Princeton a combined 0.0% chance of winning the ECAC tournament. Not even a 0.1% chance—they quite literally have a 0.0% chance of winning the tournament. Collectively, the bottom 8 seeds have a 2.1% chance of winning the ECAC tournament, according to the matrix.
EDIT: BTW, the matrix gives Cornell a 10% chance to win the ECAC tourney and a 0% chance at an at-large bid.
Importantly*, they give us a 0.0% chance at an at-large bid. The teams below us all have this field blank. I think this means our chances at an at-large bid are greater than zero but round down to 0.0%.
Challenge accepted!
running numbers on just the known games over the next 7days or so in the matrix its hard to get Cornell much above the 17-19 range..
the issue is so many teams to jump this late.
We can beat Quin in the Tourney and flip 1 PWR, had we not screwed up the first Clark game would could have flipped that one as well.
but you have Conn/Merri/Prov/BU/Mass Low/NE all ahead of us hard to jump and entire league since they will play each other.. You need mass to beat one of them and then have BC/UNH/maine knock off a couple too. But jumping them all only gets you to 14-16 range..
its why the PWR hurts we beat Quin/Clark/BU all h2h but we dont own the PWR over any of them.
So you're telling me there's a chance!?
Knocking on the door at 21 (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2022-12-12/).
Give Princeton a vote, cowards!
9-10 Ariz st is getting votes?
a couple more weeks off and we can make it in.
For what it's worth, the ECAC not doing well in KRATCH rankings (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/krach.php). Q is ranked No. 2, while Harvard is 19 and Cornell 22. Dartmouth and Yale are two worst teams in the country.
Sisyphus is rolling, again.
18 in USCHO, 17 is USA.
What criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
Quote from: osorojoWhat criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
Google PWR, RPICH, KRACH, and PEBCAK.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: osorojoWhat criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
Google PWR, RPICH, KRACH, and PEBCAK.
There's some (slightly old, like pre-weird-OT-and-shootout-system) discussion at http://elynah.com/tbrw/2020/rankings.shtml
Is PEBCAK a new rating system, or did you just tell him to google GOATSE?
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrahhhhhhhhhhggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
if we get a system better at predicting outcomes let me know.. I have some money to spend.
Climb every mountain, ford every stream (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/). 15.
Q 1, Harvard 9.
BU 7.
Which rating system has most accurately predicted D-1 college hockey game winners so far this season?
Quote from: osorojoWhich rating system has most accurately predicted D-1 college hockey game winners so far this season?
Rankings/ratings/polls are not meant to predict future outcomes, ergo no one tracks how predictive they are.
Quote from: osorojoWhich rating system has most accurately predicted D-1 college hockey game winners so far this season?
Planning a flyer on DraftKings?
14 in USA.
Quote from: osorojoWhich rating system has most accurately predicted D-1 college hockey game winners so far this season?
Your mom.
If current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
Quote from: osorojoIf current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
As I wrote on the prior page, the intent of "current rating systems" is not to predict the outcomes of hockey games.
Quote from: osorojoIf current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
If by rating we mean PWR, RPICH, KRACH, the intent is to measure teams' relative prior performance to assess where they should be ranked for NC$$ selection. NC$$ hockey has a problem: there are tight sets with extremely good relative rankings (the conferences) but then only loose bounds between the sets, making relative ranking of members of different sets difficult. Metrics like PWR are an attempt to normalize all members against a common baseline. They are similar to the sabermetrics that attempt to adjust for differences in ballpark effects or era effects in MLB.
But those assessments only imply potential predictive likelihoods of future events. One would assume a team ranked higher in the metric will, on balance, beat a team ranked lower over a sufficiently large sample, but particularly in single elimination playoffs you get
one data point, so at best you are talking about a probability function. There is also not great confidence that prior results will predict future outcomes because team composition changes with injuries, and teams themselves tend to become better (or worse) as the season goes on.
It's the littany of reasons why social science correlation coefficients tend to be a lot lower than natural science. It's the nature of working with humans and not leptons, and of complex systems rather than simple machines.
Quote from: osorojoIf current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
I tried this. It doesn't work very well.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: osorojoIf current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
I tried this. It doesn't work very well.
Red beartrap?
Swampy: I'll let you borrow MY Aunt Beulah for a couple of predictions, you lucky dog. Don't worry about kickback from cranky posters. They aren't any better at predicting hockey game winners than my Aunt Beulah. [Maybe that's why they're so cranky?]
OK, I'm convinced. Somebody has put an AI/ML project here to pass the Turing Test.
It's the Townhall cadence and Ben Garrison humoriness that gave it away.
Quote from: osorojoSwampy: I'll let you borrow MY Aunt Beulah for a couple of predictions, you lucky dog. Don't worry about kickback from cranky posters. They aren't any better at predicting hockey game winners than my Aunt Beulah. [Maybe that's why they're so cranky?]
Quote from: TrotskyOK, I'm convinced. Somebody has put an AI/ML project here to pass the Turing Test.
It's the Townhall cadence and Ben Garrison humoriness that gave it away.
I tried. Chatgpt didn't help me respond to oso...
"I am a language model AI and I do not have the ability to predict any hockey games, neither I can borrow physical entities such as your Aunt Beulah or get kickback or interact with people or posters. My main function is to assist users in providing information, answering questions and generating human-like text based on the input provided to me."
Quote from: osorojoWhat criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
Quote from: GPTZero Your sentence with the highest perplexity is:
What criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
It has a perplexity of:
76
GPTZero has finished analyzing your text!
Your GPTZero score corresponds to the likelihood of the text being AI generated:
More data may be needed to determine if your text is human or AI generated. Try inputting more text.
Quote from: martyQuote from: osorojoWhat criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
Quote from: GPTZero Your sentence with the highest perplexity is:
What criteria are used to construct college hockey rankings, and which ranking system has most successfully predicted the winners of contests between ranked teams?
It has a perplexity of:
76
GPTZero has finished analyzing your text!
Your GPTZero score corresponds to the likelihood of the text being AI generated:
More data may be needed to determine if your text is human or AI generated. Try inputting more text.
There is also another similar site. (https://openai-openai-detector.hf.space/)
Thanks, for your your response to my question, Marty. Your explanation leaves little doubt about the methodology or accuracy of college hockey rankings.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: osorojoIf current rating systems are no better at predicting outcomes of upcoming hockey games than my Aunt Beulah is why not dig a hole, cover it with leaves and grass, and TRAP someone to predict outcomes of upcoming college hockey games?
If by rating we mean PWR, RPICH, KRACH, the intent is to measure teams' relative prior performance to assess where they should be ranked for NC$$ selection. NC$$ hockey has a problem: there are tight sets with extremely good relative rankings (the conferences) but then only loose bounds between the sets, making relative ranking of members of different sets difficult. Metrics like PWR are an attempt to normalize all members against a common baseline. They are similar to the sabermetrics that attempt to adjust for differences in ballpark effects or era effects in MLB.
But those assessments only imply potential predictive likelihoods of future events. One would assume a team ranked higher in the metric will, on balance, beat a team ranked lower over a sufficiently large sample, but particularly in single elimination playoffs you get one data point, so at best you are talking about a probability function. There is also not great confidence that prior results will predict future outcomes because team composition changes with injuries, and teams themselves tend to become better (or worse) as the season goes on.
It's the littany of reasons why social science correlation coefficients tend to be a lot lower than natural science. It's the nature of working with humans and not leptons, and of complex systems rather than simple machines.
You can analyze a bunch of predictions, though, and see if events you assigned a 60% probability to really happened 60% of the time. E.g., FiveThirtyEight does this to check their election forecasts. I wrote a paper (with Adam as a co-author) that, among other things, showed that using KRACH to assign probabilities for playoff games produced better predictions than cooking up a probability from the winning percentages, which in turn out-performed just calling every game a tossup: https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.04226
Declarative statements about future events can only imagine the likelihood of such events. Would-be sports gurus both professional and on-line, in print or in taverns, are chronic losers.
Neither your moving finger nor your wit will make you a seer or a winner - only a guesser. Soup kitchens are packed with living proof.
Quote from: osorojoDeclarative statements about future events can only imagine the likelihood of such events. Would-be sports gurus both professional and on-line, in print or in taverns, are chronic losers.
Neither your moving finger nor your wit will make you a seer or a winner - only a guesser. Soup kitchens are packed with living proof.
Thank you.
Quote from: osorojoDeclarative statements about future events can only imagine the likelihood of such events. Would-be sports gurus both professional and on-line, in print or in taverns, are chronic losers.
Neither your moving finger nor your wit will make you a seer or a winner - only a guesser. Soup kitchens are packed with living proof.
inspiring. osorojo for president
Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Quote from: JasonN95Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Might Q only have fallen to #2 if they hadn't blown a 2-0 lead at Colgate and lost 3-2 the day after losing to us?
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: JasonN95Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Might Q only have fallen to #2 if they hadn't blown a 2-0 lead at Colgate and lost 3-2 the day after losing to us?
I was pulling for Q to beat Colgate. Cornell isn't going to catch Q, but Colgate is nipping at Cornell's heels. Plus Q losing to Colgate took a bit of the shine off of Cornell's win.
Quote from: JasonN95I was pulling for Q to beat Colgate. Cornell isn't going to catch Q, but Colgate is nipping at Cornell's heels. Plus Q losing to Colgate took a bit of the shine off of Cornell's win.
Cornell is closer to Q (.079) than Colgate (.084) in ECAC winning percentage. Do not give up the 1 seed yet.
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: billhowardQuote from: JasonN95Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Might Q only have fallen to #2 if they hadn't blown a 2-0 lead at Colgate and lost 3-2 the day after losing to us?
I was pulling for Q to beat Colgate. Cornell isn't going to catch Q, but Colgate is nipping at Cornell's heels. Plus Q losing to Colgate took a bit of the shine off of Cornell's win.
Colgate winning is good news for Cornell. There is not much of a difference between finishing 2nd and 3rd in the ECAC. The goal is to (1) get a bye and (2) minimize the number of times we have to play Q and/or Harvard during the ECAC tournament. At the moment, (1) looks very likely, so I'm focusing on (2). A great outcome would be Q as the 1-seed, Cornell and Colgate as the 2-/3-seeds, and Harvard as the 4-seed. Then we wouldn't have to play Q/Harvard until the final.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: billhowardQuote from: JasonN95Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Might Q only have fallen to #2 if they hadn't blown a 2-0 lead at Colgate and lost 3-2 the day after losing to us?
I was pulling for Q to beat Colgate. Cornell isn't going to catch Q, but Colgate is nipping at Cornell's heels. Plus Q losing to Colgate took a bit of the shine off of Cornell's win.
Colgate winning is good news for Cornell. There is not much of a difference between finishing 2nd and 3rd in the ECAC. The goal is to (1) get a bye and (2) minimize the number of times we have to play Q and/or Harvard during the ECAC tournament. At the moment, (1) looks very likely, so I'm focusing on (2). A great outcome would be Q as the 1-seed, Cornell and Colgate as the 2-/3-seeds, and Harvard as the 4-seed. Then we wouldn't have to play Q/Harvard until the final.
Only if you assume chalk.
And I have to think that at this point, there are a lot of teams looking at ways to avoid *us* in the playoffs.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: JasonN95Quote from: billhowardQuote from: JasonN95Cornell up to 11th in 1/23/23 USCHO poll. Has me wondering where the team would be ranked if it had gotten a tie at BU seeing BU with some first place votes. I thought Q would drop a bit further than 3rd.
Might Q only have fallen to #2 if they hadn't blown a 2-0 lead at Colgate and lost 3-2 the day after losing to us?
I was pulling for Q to beat Colgate. Cornell isn't going to catch Q, but Colgate is nipping at Cornell's heels. Plus Q losing to Colgate took a bit of the shine off of Cornell's win.
Colgate winning is good news for Cornell. There is not much of a difference between finishing 2nd and 3rd in the ECAC. The goal is to (1) get a bye and (2) minimize the number of times we have to play Q and/or Harvard during the ECAC tournament. At the moment, (1) looks very likely, so I'm focusing on (2). A great outcome would be Q as the 1-seed, Cornell and Colgate as the 2-/3-seeds, and Harvard as the 4-seed. Then we wouldn't have to play Q/Harvard until the final.
Only if you assume chalk.
And I have to think that at this point, there are a lot of teams looking at ways to avoid *us* in the playoffs.
There are of course a lot of different ways things can go. But there are only two teams in the league that are (IMO) better than us, and if we want to win the ECAC it's easier if we only have to beat one of them. If Q and Harvard get the 1 and 4 seeds, then we don't have to beat them both. It's not the biggest concern in the world, but it's a tiebreaker when choosing who to root for in in-conference games.
Quote from: BearLoverThere are of course a lot of different ways things can go. But there are only two teams in the league that are (IMO) better than us, and if we want to win the ECAC it's easier if we only have to beat one of them. If Q and Harvard get the 1 and 4 seeds, then we don't have to beat them both. It's not the biggest concern in the world, but it's a tiebreaker when choosing who to root for in in-conference games.
In your scenario above, if Colgate loses in the quarter-finals we could still get Harvard in the semi-finals.
Also, one advantage for us with Q winning rather than losing games is the higher they rank in PWR, the more Quality Wins Bonus points we get.
Quote from: jkahnQuote from: BearLoverThere are of course a lot of different ways things can go. But there are only two teams in the league that are (IMO) better than us, and if we want to win the ECAC it's easier if we only have to beat one of them. If Q and Harvard get the 1 and 4 seeds, then we don't have to beat them both. It's not the biggest concern in the world, but it's a tiebreaker when choosing who to root for in in-conference games.
In your scenario above, if Colgate loses in the quarter-finals we could still get Harvard in the semi-finals.
Also, one advantage for us with Q winning rather than losing games is the higher they rank in PWR, the more Quality Wins Bonus points we get.
That's a good point re: Colgate losing in the quarterfinals. Still, I think Colgate winning has the most upside for us. More than anything, I hate Quinnipiac.
Quote from: BearLoverMore than anything, I hate Quinnipiac.
So say we all.
The 4th-place finisher will have a difficult QF. Let's all agree to finish top 3 and then worry about the ordering above that.
Draft picks per team by Pairwise ranking (top three round picks in parentheses):
1. Minnesota—14 (7)
2. Quinnipiac—3 (0)
3. Boston University—12 (8)
4. Michigan—12 (7)
5. St. Cloud—4 (2)
6. Penn State—2 (0)
7. Denver—12 (6)
8. Ohio State—3 (2)
9. Harvard—15 (4)
10. Western Michigan—4 (0)
11. Cornell—3 (1)
Didn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
Quote from: TrotskyDidn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
This year or last year?
Quote from: martyQuote from: TrotskyDidn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
This year or last year?
I dunno, man, it all blends together.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyQuote from: TrotskyDidn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
This year or last year?
I dunno, man, it all blends together.
Luke Hughes is still there. Waiting on him joining his brother in Newark.
Quote from: martyQuote from: TrotskyDidn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
This year or last year?
That would've been last year's roster, which featured Owen Power, Matt Berniers, Luke Hughes, and Kent Johnson, all of whom were the top 5 picks. I don't know if we'll ever again see anything like it.
Was Berniers a Cornell decommit or am I hallucinating?
Edit: oh, wait, maybe he was a Harvard decommit.
Quote from: TrotskyWas Berniers a Cornell decommit or am I hallucinating?
Edit: oh, wait, maybe he was a Harvard decommit.
He was a Harvard signee originally, but switched to Michigan (https://www.hockeyjournal.com/matt-beniers-shifts-from-harvard-to-michigan-hockey-east-targets-november-start/) once it became uncertain that the Ivies would have a hockey season in 2020-21.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: martyQuote from: TrotskyDidn't Michigan have something like 1, 2, 4, and 5 overall at some point? Are they all still there?
This year or last year?
That would've been last year's roster, which featured Owen Power, Matt Berniers, Luke Hughes, and Kent Johnson, all of whom were the top 5 picks. I don't know if we'll ever again see anything like it.
Last year's Michigan team had 7 first round draft picks. This year's team isn't quite as talented, but still has 4 first round picks, including Luke Hughes, who returned for his sophomore year. The other three top five picks from last year are now all having successful rookie seasons in the NHL. Now that the best players from the US are almost always going to the NCAAs, we are seeing a lot more elite NHL talent in the college ranks.
i wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
Quote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
I think there's very little chance a college hockey player will get that kind of money. According to this site, in the first year of NIL, men's hockey didn't even register in terms of compensation, and women's hockey accounted for 0.2% of NIL compensation. If it's not football or basketball, there doesn't seem to be much interest in NIL deals. The vast majority of NIL deals amount to pizza money.
https://businessofcollegesports.com/name-image-likeness/all-the-stats-for-year-1-of-nil/
Quote from: WederQuote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
I think there's very little chance a college hockey player will get that kind of money. According to this site, in the first year of NIL, men's hockey didn't even register in terms of compensation, and women's hockey accounted for 0.2% of NIL compensation. If it's not football or basketball, there doesn't seem to be much interest in NIL deals. The vast majority of NIL deals amount to pizza money.
https://businessofcollegesports.com/name-image-likeness/all-the-stats-for-year-1-of-nil/
That's good. Cornell would have absolutely no shot of competing with bigger schools if NIL ever became a thing in hockey and lacrosse. Still, all it takes is one rich booster of Michigan hockey to promise recruits huge paydays if they come.
there are two kinds of NIL deals: future recruiting scandals* and money going to people who are already social media influencers. the top NIL deals in the country are going to, like, women's volleyball players of no particular athletic distinction who had a million followers on IG before** graduating high school
* i support this, for the record, i'm just saying
** i also support this. get that money (with a caveat about social media and body comparison issues)
So this report says there is more money being spent on money for womens hockey than mens?
Think of it this way.. If you are a mich alum and you want to see your school win.. why would you spend money on a sport other than fball/bball or hockey?
its also not really explaining the stats very well.
if you gave every kid across the board 5K fball would by far have the most compensation.
baseball is interesting though
Also interesting in that Ala had 25% of the kids actually earn a deal in fball.
I don't think it sways recruiting, but if you're, say, East Hill Car Wash, why not throw Sam Malinski $500 to sing a verse?
Quote from: DafatoneI don't think it sways recruiting, but if you're, say, East Hill Car Wash, why not throw Sam Malinski $500 to sing a verse?
"Vot a difference in this generation, tovarish." -- Max Andreev
Quote from: TrotskyWas Berniers a Cornell decommit or am I hallucinating?
Edit: oh, wait, maybe he was a Harvard decommit.
His parents are both Cornell grads — his dad played football.
Quote from: pfibigerQuote from: TrotskyWas Berniers a Cornell decommit or am I hallucinating?
Edit: oh, wait, maybe he was a Harvard decommit.
His parents are both Cornell grads — his dad played football.
oh i see. he's a HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneI don't think it sways recruiting, but if you're, say, East Hill Car Wash, why not throw Sam Malinski $500 to sing a verse?
"Vot a difference in this generation, tovarish." -- Max Andreev
These guys have had injuries. Maybe let them talk about their medical treatments and give poor RC Holmes from Watkins Glen a break from reliving how he tore his patellar tendon.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneI don't think it sways recruiting, but if you're, say, East Hill Car Wash, why not throw Sam Malinski $500 to sing a verse?
"Vot a difference in this generation, tovarish." -- Max Andreev
These guys have had injuries. Maybe let them talk about their medical treatments and give poor RC Holmes from Watkins Glen a break from reliving how he tore his patellar tendon.
i don't remember which game it was but i was watching a cornell road game (brown maybe?) and they had a local commercial that reminded me of the Cayuga Medical Center commercial so much I started laughing uncontrollably
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: pfibigerQuote from: TrotskyWas Berniers a Cornell decommit or am I hallucinating?
Edit: oh, wait, maybe he was a Harvard decommit.
His parents are both Cornell grads — his dad played football.
oh i see. he's a HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT
Yeah, that's about right. Likewise Ian Moore's dad was also a Cornellian (Ian was drafted in the 3rd round last year by the Ducks and is a sophomore defenseman for Harvard)
We have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Quote from: TrotskyWe have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Manderville's a nice player—I would compare him with Tukper. But Moore and especially Berniers are at a different level.
Quote from: TrotskyWe have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Ethan Manderville and Jackson Nieuwendyk are two recent sons of Cornell legends who chose to play hockey at other schools. Neither put up great junior hockey numbers, and the schools they committed to (Colgate and Niagara) suggest they weren't heavily recruited. They could turn out to be fine players, and I'm sure the Cornell coaching staff did their due diligence, but as scoop85 said, they aren't on the same level as Moore and especially Beniers. For whatever reason, we've been about to stack up "good" recruits, but the true blue chip recruits don't seem to view Cornell Hockey in the way they view BC, BU, Minnesota, Michigan, Denver, NoDak, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and, unfortunately, Harvard.
Quote from: BearLoverFor whatever reason, we've been about to stack up "good" recruits, but the true blue chip recruits don't seem to view Cornell Hockey in the way they view BC, BU, Minnesota, Michigan, Denver, NoDak, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and, unfortunately, Harvard.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/eb/83/3b/eb833bb4a2a8d1e82598e61b1e01c050--funny-cartoons-funny-comics.jpg)
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyWe have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Ethan Manderville and Jackson Nieuwendyk are two recent sons of Cornell legends who chose to play hockey at other schools. Neither put up great junior hockey numbers, and the schools they committed to (Colgate and Niagara) suggest they weren't heavily recruited. They could turn out to be fine players, and I'm sure the Cornell coaching staff did their due diligence, but as scoop85 said, they aren't on the same level as Moore and especially Beniers. For whatever reason, we've been about to stack up "good" recruits, but the true blue chip recruits don't seem to view Cornell Hockey in the way they view BC, BU, Minnesota, Michigan, Denver, NoDak, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and, unfortunately, Harvard.
or it could just come down to cost of attendance..
Harvard happens to be in MA so I'm sure that helps for some recruits. That's not to say Cornell hasn't gotten its fair share of good players from MA over the years, but still
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverFor whatever reason, we've been about to stack up "good" recruits, but the true blue chip recruits don't seem to view Cornell Hockey in the way they view BC, BU, Minnesota, Michigan, Denver, NoDak, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and, unfortunately, Harvard.
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/eb/83/3b/eb833bb4a2a8d1e82598e61b1e01c050--funny-cartoons-funny-comics.jpg)
I mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
Quote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
Quote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
That's all true. Though, the premium on size should lead to Cornell having more, now fewer, players drafted.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
That's all true. Though, the premium on size should lead to Cornell having more, now fewer, players drafted.
Interestingly, we've stayed big even as we've gotten more skilled, but our big guys don't play as big. Which is why I think we struggle sometimes with less talented physical teams (more last year than this year).
Our guys aren't as used to having to use their size.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
That's all true. Though, the premium on size should lead to Cornell having more, now fewer, players drafted.
Perhaps that already has increased the number of Cornell drafted players. I don't really care. We seem to secure a certain type of player, who can fit and buy into a...how do you say...system. I'm not claiming to know how the staff recruits, but they seem to have found a fairly consistent level of success no matter who they bring in. Spend time chasing blue-chippers or pieces that fit a puzzle, that's the choice you often have to make, since I'm guessing their resources are quite a bit more limited compared to the big jock factories.
As for the one that sparks this...like it or not, "My boy is going to Harvard" just has a lot more weight to ma & pa than anything the Cornell brand can offer.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, te.
As for the one that sparks this...like it or not, "My boy is going to Harvard" just has a lot more weight to ma & pa than anything the Cornell brand can offer.
Harvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyWe have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Ethan Manderville and Jackson Nieuwendyk are two recent sons of Cornell legends who chose to play hockey at other schools. Neither put up great junior hockey numbers, and the schools they committed to (Colgate and Niagara) suggest they weren't heavily recruited. They could turn out to be fine players, and I'm sure the Cornell coaching staff did their due diligence, but as scoop85 said, they aren't on the same level as Moore and especially Beniers. For whatever reason, we've been about to stack up "good" recruits, but the true blue chip recruits don't seem to view Cornell Hockey in the way they view BC, BU, Minnesota, Michigan, Denver, NoDak, Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and, unfortunately, Harvard.
Do you have some stats for all Ivy's?
Wondering where we fall on the Blue Chip count vs. our peers.
Quote from: abmarksHarvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Not at all. I like Boston.
I hate Bostonians. The students and transplants are great. Just drag everybody born there out into the ocean on a garbage scow and sink it.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksHarvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Not at all. I like Boston.
I hate Bostonians. The students and transplants are great. Just drag everybody born there out into the ocean on a garbage scow and sink it.
Why do you hate Bostonians so much that you wish to murder them?
Quote from: Roy 82Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksHarvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Not at all. I like Boston.
I hate Bostonians. The students and transplants are great. Just drag everybody born there out into the ocean on a garbage scow and sink it.
Why do you hate Bostonians so much that you wish to murder them?
Ever eaten with them?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksHarvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Not at all. I like Boston.
I hate Bostonians. The students and transplants are great. Just drag everybody born there out into the ocean on a garbage scow and sink it.
While I strongly support location-based hatred, I'm curious what parts of the country have residents you do like.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksHarvard's also in Boston. Yeah, yeah, Trotsky hates Boston, but for many recruits (and their parents) Boston > Ithaca (or any small college town).
Not at all. I like Boston.
I hate Bostonians. The students and transplants are great. Just drag everybody born there out into the ocean on a garbage scow and sink it.
While I strongly support location-based hatred, I'm curious what parts of the country have residents you do like.
Hah!
Quote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
That's all true. Though, the premium on size should lead to Cornell having more, now fewer, players drafted.
Perhaps that already has increased the number of Cornell drafted players. I don't really care. We seem to secure a certain type of player, who can fit and buy into a...how do you say...system. I'm not claiming to know how the staff recruits, but they seem to have found a fairly consistent level of success no matter who they bring in. Spend time chasing blue-chippers or pieces that fit a puzzle, that's the choice you often have to make, since I'm guessing their resources are quite a bit more limited compared to the big jock factories.
As for the one that sparks this...like it or not, "My boy is going to Harvard" just has a lot more weight to ma & pa than anything the Cornell brand can offer.
By this logic one would expect Princeton & Yale to be perennial powers and Quinnipiac, a perennial doormat. Yale did catch lightning in a bottle in 2013, but not consistently, and I don't recall a plethora of first round picks on that team.
While you may be right about the Harvard name being part of the explanation, I think the evidence suggests this is not the whole story.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverI mean, there are all sorts of very reasonable explanations for why blue chippers don't come to Cornell. But the fact we get so many players who are just a step or two below the blue chippers makes me wonder why we can't snag a first- or second-rounder from time to time. We were getting them every so often in the early 2000s.
There's also the case of an NHL team/GM making unusual or unexpected decisions based on needs, team control considerations, or developmental expectations. Sasha Pokulok and Reilly Nash went much higher than their rankings, IIRC. There are teams that feel much more comfortable drafting from the collegiate pool than others. There's historically been a premium on size, and smaller, more talented skaters could slip a lot down the draft board, or off it altogether. (See St. Louis, Martin)
That's all true. Though, the premium on size should lead to Cornell having more, now fewer, players drafted.
Perhaps that already has increased the number of Cornell drafted players. I don't really care. We seem to secure a certain type of player, who can fit and buy into a...how do you say...system. I'm not claiming to know how the staff recruits, but they seem to have found a fairly consistent level of success no matter who they bring in. Spend time chasing blue-chippers or pieces that fit a puzzle, that's the choice you often have to make, since I'm guessing their resources are quite a bit more limited compared to the big jock factories.
As for the one that sparks this...like it or not, "My boy is going to Harvard" just has a lot more weight to ma & pa than anything the Cornell brand can offer.
By this logic one would expect Princeton & Yale to be perennial powers and Quinnipiac, a perennial doormat. Yale did catch lightning in a bottle in 2013, but not consistently, and I don't recall a plethora of first round picks on that team.
While you may be right about the Harvard name being part of the explanation, I think the evidence suggests this is not the whole story.
Yale was consistently great during that period. They were not a flash in the plan. Yale made the NCAAs in '09, '10, '11, '13, '15, '16. But you're correct that they didn't have many players drafted. It looks like the 2013 team only had a single draft pick on its roster (John Hayden, third round).
Quote from: DafatoneWhile I strongly support location-based hatred, I'm curious what parts of the country have residents you do like.
West of Interstate 77 + North of Interstate 40.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyWe have lost a lot of Cornell brats over the years. Ethan by Kent out of Kim comes to mind.
Manderville's a nice player—I would compare him with Tukper. But Moore and especially Berniers are at a different level.
About week ago, RPI received a commitment from legacy Landen Hilditch, son of Todd Hilditch '92. If he does show up, he will be RPI's first legacy to play for the 'Tute since Ken Kearns, son of Garry Kearns '58, played one game in 1980-1. Garry was also RPI's coach. The only other RPI legacy at RPI whom I know about is John Magadini who played on the 1954 NCAA championship team. His father was A. J. Magadini, captain in 1929-30.
RPI has had many legacies of other schools. E.g., Dan Peace '08 whose father played for Cornell and at least three on the current roster. I am sure that Cornell wasn't interested in Peace. :-P It also has had many play elsewhere.
Quote from: ursusminorI am sure that Cornell wasn't interested in Peace.
I mean (https://researchservices.cornell.edu/resources/dod-current-opportunities)...
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneWhile I strongly support location-based hatred, I'm curious what parts of the country have residents you do like.
West of Interstate 77 + North of Interstate 40.
Kentucky?!
If that was your attempt to delineate the beginning of the Midwest, you are way off target. I always say anything west of the Appalachians and north of the Ohio. Conversations full of the Northern Cities Shift, with all those nasal flat As. Buffalonians, for example, are VERY midwestern. It's the transplants from downstate that sour the batch. Pittsburgh is a special case, phonologically, but it fits. Places like Syracuse, Ithaca, Binghamton, and Scranton are tough to place.
Quote from: Scersk '97If that was your attempt to delineate the beginning of the Midwest
It was my answer. I am not responsible for your reaction.
Also do not conflate the political livability of a place with whether its people are tolerable. Those are different axes.
Good politics, good people: Oregon
Bad politics, good people: Utah
Good politics, bad people: New York
Bad politics, bad people: Mississippi
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97If that was your attempt to delineate the beginning of the Midwest
It was my answer. I am not responsible for your reaction.
Also do not conflate the political livability of a place with whether its people are tolerable. Those are different axes.
Good politics, good people: Oregon
Bad politics, good people: Utah
Good politics, bad people: New York
Bad politics, bad people: Mississippi
My obvious response is that it was at best an incomplete answer. Your perceptions are your own, of course. How could I doubt your lived experience? But boundaries delineated by highways are specious. They haven't really been around long enough to be part of the "geography," in the Caesarian "geography is destiny" sense.
Again, Kentucky? And what of the personal tolerability of Michiganders?
But your further point is valid. Wisconsin and Wisconsonians are generally great. The political climate in Wisconsin is off-the-chart wacko.
EDIT: Oh, and also, Missouri? Whoa.
Quote from: Scersk '97But boundaries delineated by highways are specious.
Possibly I'm not entirely serious.
Possibly.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97But boundaries delineated by highways are specious.
Possibly I'm not entirely serious.
Possibly.
Occasionally, I poke people's unserious answers for my own unserious enjoyment, because drilling down into specifics highlights the hilarity and futility of the search for knowledge.
Occasionally.
But, seriously, southern Missouri is the South—I mean, the SOUTH in the old sense. You won't catch me summering in the Ozarks unchaperoned, and I generally know how to handle myself around—let's be delicate—parochial rural folk. I'm staying above US-50, thanks.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97But boundaries delineated by highways are specious.
Possibly I'm not entirely serious.
Possibly.
Occasionally, I poke people's unserious answers for my own unserious enjoyment, because drilling down into specifics highlights the hilarity and futility of the search for knowledge.
Occasionally.
But, seriously, southern Missouri is the South—I mean, the SOUTH in the old sense. You won't catch me summering in the Ozarks unchaperoned.
The South is 50 miles outside every city in America.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97But boundaries delineated by highways are specious.
Possibly I'm not entirely serious.
Possibly.
Occasionally, I poke people's unserious answers for my own unserious enjoyment, because drilling down into specifics highlights the hilarity and futility of the search for knowledge.
Occasionally.
But, seriously, southern Missouri is the South—I mean, the SOUTH in the old sense. You won't catch me summering in the Ozarks unchaperoned.
The South is 50 miles outside every city in America.
Sorry I edited over you, but you may have a point.
But one's "south" highly depends on how one grew up. I am not threatened at all by people 50 miles outside anyplace I'm familiar with, like in upstate or the true Midwest. But 50 miles outside, say, Pocatello, Idaho or Lubbock, Texas? I don't speak their language, so I've learned to tread lightly.
I could go on here about the decline of railroads, but that would require day drinking.
The South is WHCU listeners when the game's not on. The term is broadly inclusive. Which is ironic.
Quote from: TrotskyThe South is WHCU listeners when the game's not on. The term is broadly inclusive. Which is ironic.
From what I heard the other day frustratingly waiting for the internet feed to switch over, the non-game programming of WHCU is indeed not filled with the kind of conservatives, i.e., those who at this point are former Republicans and not welcome within their former circles because they refuse to genuflect to the Orange Idol, who provide any sort of useful voice in our politics. What I heard was programming meant for the nihilist fringe, a kind of anti-VOA broadcast from within.
Any wonder that I can often pick up WHCU best over-the-air in the backwoods of the 'Dacks and Greens when I'm on my typical road trips these days? Yet WHCU listeners aren't a majority in those areas either. There is still a current of rationality out there in them thar hills.
Quote from: ursusminorRPI has had many legacies of other schools. E.g., Dan Peace '08 whose father played for Cornell and at least three on the current roster. I am sure that Cornell wasn't interested in Peace. :-P It also has had many play elsewhere.
Dave Peace wasn't happy about that, but you are correct.
Polls as of Monday, Feb. 6, after beating RPI and Union, no improvement
USCHO Cornell 11 unchanged
1 Minnesota
2 Quinnipiac
3 BU
10 Harvard
HM Colgate (last team mentioned)
USA Today coaches-writers Cornell 11 --> unchanged
1 Minnesota
2 Quinnipiac
3 BU
8 Harvard was 10th
HM Colgate
Pairwise
1 Minnesota
2 Quinnipiac
3 BU
10 Harvard was 6
12 Cornell was 9
...
36 Colgate was 27
...
60 Lindenwood
60 Dartmouth
Quote from: billhoward60 Lindenwood
60 Dartmouth
TFW you've been playing top rung hockey since the Austro-Hungarian Empire existed, the Coaching Heisman Trophy is named after your coach, and you're as bad as a school nobody had heard of before last summer.
USCHO 2/27: 2 Qpc, 5 Hvd, 12 Cor
USA 2/27: 2 Qpc, 5 Hvd, 13 Cor
March 6 USCHO
Rnk Team (1st) Record Points Last
1 Minnesota (38) 25-8-1 988 1
2 Quinnipiac (12) 28-3-3 955 2
3 Denver 28-8-0 906 3
4 Michigan 22-11-3 820 4
5 Boston University 24-10-0 760 7
6 Harvard 21-6-2 754 5
7 Western Michigan 23-12-1 685 8
8 St. Cloud 20-11-3 663 6
9 Ohio State 20-14-3 605 9
10 Michigan Tech 24-9-4 517 11
11 Penn State 21-15-1 510 10
[color=#d61616]12 Cornell 18-9-2 447 12[/color]
13 Minnesota State 23-12-1 436 13
14 Merrimack 21-12-1 300 16
15 Northeastern 17-12-5 242 15
16 Alaska 22-10-2 237 18
17 Omaha 18-13-3 189 14
18 Michigan State 18-17-2 170 20
19 Connecticut 20-11-3 169 17
20 RIT 24-11-1 56 NR
Others receiving votes: Notre Dame 41, North Dakota 27, UMass Lowell 16, Boston College 4, Northern Michigan 3
Quote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
Until I read this article, I hadn't realized how out-of-hand NIL (https://rochesterdemocrat-ny.newsmemory.com/?publink=0fa78ab14_134aada) has become. I think it's just a matter of time before it filters down to B1G hockey, if it hasn't already.
Call me naive, but this just floored me, "Nijel Pack's two-year, $800,000 contract with Miami booster John Ruiz is the most publicized NIL deal since the NCAA began allowing college athletes to make money off their popularity. ACC player of the year Isaiah Wong's $100,000 deal with Ruiz also became public knowledge."
I like to think our well-heeled alumni have more important priorities. I think we can soon forget about a third NC$$ championship. I'll settle for a Cleary Cup and ECAC Championship.
.
Quote from: George64Quote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
Until I read this article, I hadn't realized how out-of-hand NIL (https://rochesterdemocrat-ny.newsmemory.com/?publink=0fa78ab14_134aada) has become. I think it's just a matter of time before it filters down to B1G hockey, if it hasn't already.
Call me naive, but this just floored me, "Nijel Pack's two-year, $800,000 contract with Miami booster John Ruiz is the most publicized NIL deal since the NCAA began allowing college athletes to make money off their popularity. ACC player of the year Isaiah Wong's $100,000 deal with Ruiz also became public knowledge."
I like to think our well-heeled alumni have more important priorities. I think we can soon forget about a third NC$$ championship. I'll settle for a Cleary Cup and ECAC Championship.
.
I agree. Things are trending in a bad direction. 2020 felt like our last great opportunity. Let's root for the ECAC to start to suck again so we can actually win a trophy of some kind.
Wow fascinating article.
Hockey is very different from football and bball- franchises have ALREADY drafted these kids, so what's stopping them from paying their big prospects via an NIL contract?
Quote from: BMacWow fascinating article.
Hockey is very different from football and bball- franchises have ALREADY drafted these kids, so what's stopping them from paying their big prospects via an NIL contract?
I doubt they can do that (at least directly) without the player being under contract.
Why can some booster pay but their future employee no? NHL rules?
Quote from: BMacWhy can some booster pay but their future employee no? NHL rules?
Why would a NHL team want to pay a drafted player? They already have the kid locked up, no?
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: BMacWhy can some booster pay but their future employee no? NHL rules?
Why would a NHL team want to pay a drafted player? They already have the kid locked up, no?
If they don't sign out of college then they will become a free agent, so if they were permitted to do an NIL deal with a drafted player I imagine that could help lock them up.
Exactly. Also, why would a "booster" pay $800k for Nijel Pack to pay bball at Miami?
I can also imagine agents paying kids just for the HOPE they'd sign with them after school.
Do you suppose that some unsavory Ivy alum might use NIL to get around our athletic "scholarship" ban? Bob Kane '34, former Dean of Athletics and Physical Education at Cornell and president of the USOC, must be turning over in his grave. He was a true gentleman (and great writer), who truly believed in the now antiquated ideal of amateurism.
Quote from: George64Do you suppose that some unsavory Ivy alum might use NIL to get around our athletic "scholarship" ban? Bob Kane '34, former Dean of Athletics and Physical Education at Cornell and president of the USOC, must be turning over in his grave. He was a true gentleman (and great writer), who truly believed in the now antiquated ideal of amateurism.
Yeah, but amateurism was just a gatekeeping device to keep the Poors out.
Pay them in tequila, coke, and Quinnipiac cheerleaders. Know your market.
Quote from: George64Quote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
Until I read this article, I hadn't realized how out-of-hand NIL (https://rochesterdemocrat-ny.newsmemory.com/?publink=0fa78ab14_134aada) has become. I think it's just a matter of time before it filters down to B1G hockey, if it hasn't already.
Call me naive, but this just floored me, "Nijel Pack's two-year, $800,000 contract with Miami booster John Ruiz is the most publicized NIL deal since the NCAA began allowing college athletes to make money off their popularity. ACC player of the year Isaiah Wong's $100,000 deal with Ruiz also became public knowledge."
I like to think our well-heeled alumni have more important priorities. I think we can soon forget about a third NC$$ championship. I'll settle for a Cleary Cup and ECAC Championship.
.
Probably is already in big10
From https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/03/24_The-Big-Tens-Big-Day.php
Michigan Tech coach Joe Shawhan:
"There's a side of this that you're starting to see — I probably shouldn't even get into this — you're starting to see the emergence of the (transfer) portal and the NIL and the Alston money (Name, Image and Likeness rights) and all those things," Shawhan said. "The Big Ten is flexing a little muscle right now, and how to do you compete with players who are getting paid. And things like that. And they're jumping ship, jumping ship, jumping ship. You're putting your team together, and people can put their team together out of the portal now.
"And I'm not complaining about it. I just think college hockey's such a beautiful sport, and the parity, the opportunity for schools like St. Cloud, Michigan Tech, Mankato, Duluth — all Division II schools that have one a lot of national championships — you look at their roster and you say, 'Well, I could use that guy, I could use that guy.' You see it everywhere. To take the parity out of it, all of a sudden you get the SEC and the Big Ten in football, that's all you get, and lose everybody else.
"Even coaches will be jumping ship. Tough way to go through life when you're trying to teach life lessons and develop men. But ... we're not at that point yet. I was just digressing."
Quote from: George64Quote from: upprdecki wonder if the NIL game will trickle into college hockey or maybe it already has for those bigger schools.. play college make 500K is pretty good for the high level talent.
Until I read this article, I hadn't realized how out-of-hand NIL (https://rochesterdemocrat-ny.newsmemory.com/?publink=0fa78ab14_134aada) has become. I think it's just a matter of time before it filters down to B1G hockey, if it hasn't already.
Call me naive, but this just floored me, "Nijel Pack's two-year, $800,000 contract with Miami booster John Ruiz is the most publicized NIL deal since the NCAA began allowing college athletes to make money off their popularity. ACC player of the year Isaiah Wong's $100,000 deal with Ruiz also became public knowledge."
I like to think our well-heeled alumni have more important priorities. I think we can soon forge about a third NC$$ championship. I'll settle for a Cleary Cup and ECAC Championship.
.
Just another example of how big-time college athletes have become de facto professionals — "University of Minnesota athletic department and its exclusive multimedia rightsholder, LEARFIELD's Gopher Sports Properties, announced today that Dinkytown Athletes is the Official NIL Collective of Gopher Athletics.
Dinkytown Athletes launched in 2022 and is affectionately named after the historic and adjacent neighborhood to campus. It had previously operated as an independent collective with the mission to support student-athletes at Minnesota with name, image and likeness (NIL) opportunities, educational resources and post-graduation career opportunities."
Come to Minnesota, play hockey, get free tuition, room and board, AND make money. You don't even have to make your own NIL deals, we'll do it for you!
.
Good. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
Quote from: TrotskyGood. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
If NIL money became a thing in college hockey, Cornell's chances of competing nationally would go to zero.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyGood. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
If NIL money became a thing in college hockey, Cornell's chances of competing nationally would go to zero.
Yeah, fuck the players because of who I root for.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyGood. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
If NIL money became a thing in college hockey, Cornell's chances of competing nationally would go to zero.
Yeah, fuck the players because of who I root for.
I wasn't making any sort of normative claim about whether the system is good or better than what came before. I'm just saying—the more NIL becomes a thing, the more winning is a function of how much money boosters dump into a program.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyGood. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
If NIL money became a thing in college hockey, Cornell's chances of competing nationally would go to zero.
Yeah, fuck the players because of who I root for.
I wasn't making any sort of normative claim about whether the system is good or better than what came before. I'm just saying—the more NIL becomes a thing, the more winning is a function of how much money boosters dump into a program.
And I was saying if it's the right thing to do who cares?
Quote from: TrotskyGood. Everybody got rich off these guys except them. Now they're getting a piece and it's a travesty?
Now they should unionize. Fuck the schools.
I agree that with some limits, athletes like other students should be allowed to profit from their notoriety. If a math major proves, say the Riemann Hypothesis, he/she cannot be prevented from pitching computers. My concern is the degree of university complicity. Can the local auto dealership show Minnesota's leading scorer in his or her uniform? Should the university be allowed, even at arm's length (Dinkytown Athletes), to broker NIL deals for its athletes? This reminds me of PACs, but that's a whole other annoyance.
And, BTW, Minnesota benefits from NIL deals - their athletes get paid by third parties. The university doesn't have to pay them out of the athletic department budget or contribute to their 401(k)s.
.
The difference is that the math major made the money after they did something.
Should we start giving all math majors 500K a yr and hope 1 does solve some major hypothesis?
Quote from: upprdeckThe difference is that the math major made the money after they did something.
Should we start giving all math majors 500K a yr and hope 1 does solve some major hypothesis?
Touché
.
Quote from: upprdeckThe difference is that the math major made the money after they did something.
Should we start giving all math majors 500K a yr and hope 1 does solve some major hypothesis?
they did what they needed to do in high school to make themselves valuable. why does everyone believe in the market until it leads to results they don't understand / like?
because thats now how NIL is working
a person playing for Cornell might have X value promoting NIL but if a booster wants cornell to win he spends Y value to bring in a better player(s). There is no attempt to recoop the NIL value.
AMAZON makes oodles of money.. They pay well. the local place in Ithaca makes didly, so they pay little. But they dont direct compete against each other to make the same profits
in the current NIL world both have to compete against each other and pay the same.
Minn/Mich paying 500K a yr in NIL and cornell paying 5K where are the best players going to go? and in both cases the money being spent on NIL is a loss leader.
NIL is not paying the value of the player to the team its the value of a person that wants the team to win.
if a billionaire is a fan he can pay crazy money to a teams NIL since there is no cap and its not really a function of the value returned,
I'm generally in favor of redistributing wealth, but it's silly to pretend there aren't downsides to unchecked NIL. It would make Cornell and the vast majority of other college athletic programs totally uncompetitive nationally. I and many here would stop seriously following if we had no chance to win. I hope college hockey never turns into what college football and basketball have become.
this is all the short term goal.. if these sports become about the 10-15 who can actually win it then why do the others bother to play the game and when that happens 90% of the kids lose scholies and chances to perform and make pro money.
While even now NCAAF is really about the top 10 who can win it all there are still 20-30 who can compete but given the non level playing field that NIL creates how long before they decide to bail. And then all the investment in stadiums and all the TV Money goes away.
In hockey you have the top few but even the bottom 30% can still win games and a team like Colgate can get to the playoffs.
I just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
Quote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Quote from: upprdeckbecause thats now how NIL is working
a person playing for Cornell might have X value promoting NIL but if a booster wants cornell to win he spends Y value to bring in a better player(s). There is no attempt to recoop the NIL value.
the satisfaction of winning IS the NIL value
yup.. so team like mich/osu/tex/ok that are spending 5-10-15 million on NIL how long does that go on.. I suppose with enough money it goes on for awhile..
Quote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Quote from: French RageQuote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Jake from State Farm and his NFL/NBA buddies are East Hill Car Wash on a larger stage. The stupefying dullness of onetime sports legends, current legends, annoying people (Flo, the Mayhem Guy, the Farmers' Insurance man in brown), the Lemu Emu, they all say: Insurance is a commodity, may as well shop on price and fallback to having a lawyer ready if a major claim doesn't get paid.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: French RageQuote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Jake from State Farm and his NFL/NBA buddies are East Hill Car Wash on a larger stage. The stupefying dullness of onetime sports legends, current legends, annoying people (Flo, the Mayhem Guy, the Farmers' Insurance man in brown), the Lemu Emu, they all say: Insurance is a commodity, may as well shop on price and fallback to having a lawyer ready if a major claim doesn't get paid.
The Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Quote from: TimVQuote from: billhowardQuote from: French RageQuote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Jake from State Farm and his NFL/NBA buddies are East Hill Car Wash on a larger stage. The stupefying dullness of onetime sports legends, current legends, annoying people (Flo, the Mayhem Guy, the Farmers' Insurance man in brown), the Lemu Emu, they all say: Insurance is a commodity, may as well shop on price and fallback to having a lawyer ready if a major claim doesn't get paid.
The Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Maybe it's generational. I like him, too. And yet I've been of the belief that Allstate is a borderline criminal enterprise. Great timing and a great face for the role.
Quote from: TimVThe Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Lifetime pass for being in John Wick.
Numerous D-1 college athletic programs have ignored academic standards while enrolling athletes, yet their school's academic programs have survived. College athletes generate piles of cash to fund higher education, and seldom is there any mention of academic failure of students recruited for their physical rather than mental ability.
Quote from: TimVThe Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Agreed!
.
Quote from: osorojoNumerous D-1 college athletic programs have ignored academic standards while enrolling athletes, yet their school's academic programs have survived. College athletes generate piles of cash to fund higher education, and seldom is there any mention of academic failure of students recruited for their physical rather than mental ability.
But the Ivies fetishized it.
Anybody who taught or even TAed at Duke and Stanford knows how laughable their claims are that their athletes are serious students. They survive in large part because the gen pop does not care and ESPN et al willingly repeat bullshit stories of them "doing it the right way" uncritically because, again, they don't care.
The Ivies have a lot less room because undercutting their athletes is a tangible part of their designer label. It would be much harder for us to get away with cheating because, unlike those other factory schools, there is a lot of media interest in catching us out when we are hypocritical.
Which is good. It just makes it harder for us to sneak absolute derps through our athletic programs.
Not that we haven't -- we just do it maybe 20% of the time as opposed to the "quality" schools where it's 50% or the SEC where it's an admission requirement.
Mostly we cheat for daddy's money, not a blue chippah slap shot. Dammit.
Quote from: osorojoNumerous D-1 college athletic programs have ignored academic standards while enrolling athletes, yet their school's academic programs have survived. College athletes generate piles of cash to fund higher education, and seldom is there any mention of academic failure of students recruited for their physical rather than mental ability.
I'm not sure how accurate this is. University of Florida's football team's budget is over $90M (https://www.on3.com/teams/florida-gators/news/florida-increases-football-spending-nearly-5m-recruiting-budget-up-55-percent/), yet ordinary students complain about their facilities:
Quote from: https://www.alligator.org/article/2022/09/football-complexOlivia Giovenco, a 19-year-old English sophomore, recalls hearing about the horrors of living in disheveled dorms like Rawlings Hall. In her view, it's unfair that the university prioritizes the well-being of a small percentage of students over the entire student body, she said.
And to extrapolate Trotsky's statement about Duke and Stanford, anybody who's even sat it a classroom at a factory school that's not among the so-called "elite," like Duke or Stanford -- "weathervane schools," for example -- knows how laughable their claims are that
even the majority of their ordinary students are serious students.
The quality or lack of in Olivia Giovenco's dorm at U Florida is not going to lure prospective students. There were problems with mold related sickness. Other students said they were happy with that diagnosis b/c it meant: We don't have Covid.
Maybe Gov. DiSantis can allocate more funds for better residential living there.
Quote from: SwampyAnd to extrapolate Trotsky's statement about Duke and Stanford, anybody who's even sat it a classroom at a factory school that's not among the so-called "elite," like Duke or Stanford -- "weathervane schools," for example -- knows how laughable their claims are that even the majority of their ordinary students are serious students.
OTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking
want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
Quote from: TrotskyOTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
I can think of quite a few people at Cornell who came from a CC, were fine students, and are doing quite well for themselves now
Quote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyOTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
I can think of quite a few people at Cornell who came from a CC, were fine students, and are doing quite well for themselves now
I was gonna say, another reason CCs are full of serious students is that many of them are working up to transfer to a four-year college for the last two years of a bachelor's degree.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyOTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
I can think of quite a few people at Cornell who came from a CC, were fine students, and are doing quite well for themselves now
I was gonna say, another reason CCs are full of serious students is that many of them are working up to transfer to a four-year college for the last two years of a bachelor's degree.
It's also really smart from a financial standpoint!
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyAnd to extrapolate Trotsky's statement about Duke and Stanford, anybody who's even sat it a classroom at a factory school that's not among the so-called "elite," like Duke or Stanford -- "weathervane schools," for example -- knows how laughable their claims are that even the majority of their ordinary students are serious students.
OTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
Do you think this is also true of someone studying marketing?
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyAnd to extrapolate Trotsky's statement about Duke and Stanford, anybody who's even sat it a classroom at a factory school that's not among the so-called "elite," like Duke or Stanford -- "weathervane schools," for example -- knows how laughable their claims are that even the majority of their ordinary students are serious students.
OTOH, the most serious students I've ever seen at any school are Community College students, because they're paying out of their own pocket. If you're studying Philosophy at a CC it's because you fucking want it. it's not just a credential you're picking up between frat parties on your way to working at Dad's firm.
Do you think this is also true of someone studying marketing?
No. They suck.
so many myths in this thread ...
at the risk of being accused of being a shill for the NCAA ... the average NCAA athlete's academic performance is superior to the general population.
As I've said high and wide everywhere I can and will continue to say it ...
Those advocating for "students rights" and "fu** those who have been hoarding the money" -- ought to be VERY careful what they wish for. The entire system of college sports is about to fall apart -- in particular once the Supreme Court rules that athletes are "employees" ... a preposterous notion to me. You may say "great, the NCAA sucks" -- except that it doesn't suck for 99% of the athletes across all sports and divisions whose programs aren't making any money, and whose student-athletes are getting great opportunities.
If you want that all to go away in the name of "students rights to make money"" -- have at it. But know what you're wishing for.
Quote from: adamwthe average NCAA athlete's academic performance is superior to the general population.
Huh. Where there is great institutional pressure to keep athletes eligible, they get better grades than other students. Go figure.
Next you'll be saying Prep School kids get better grades than students at public high schools. I just
cannot imagine why.
Quote from: adamwso many myths in this thread ...
at the risk of being accused of being a shill for the NCAA ... the average NCAA athlete's academic performance is superior to the general population.
As I've said high and wide everywhere I can and will continue to say it ...
Those advocating for "students rights" and "fu** those who have been hoarding the money" -- ought to be VERY careful what they wish for. The entire system of college sports is about to fall apart -- in particular once the Supreme Court rules that athletes are "employees" ... a preposterous notion to me. You may say "great, the NCAA sucks" -- except that it doesn't suck for 99% of the athletes across all sports and divisions whose programs aren't making any money, and whose student-athletes are getting great opportunities.
If you want that all to go away in the name of "students rights to make money"" -- have at it. But know what you're wishing for.
On one hand, I'm generally on the side you describe. At the very least, I think we don't need rules for what students can do, and if that means the richest schools shovel piles of money at the best athletes, so be it. Cracking down on students because they tried to release a rap album or whatever is bad.
On the other hand, as I understand it, the NCAA isn't really a "thing." They're just the schools. Every time you hear someone describing the NCAA as greedy, they're just talking about the schools. I don't think there's a big vault full of cash that belongs to the NCAA.
Quote from: DafatoneOn the other hand, as I understand it, the NCAA isn't really a "thing." They're just the schools. Every time you hear someone describing the NCAA as greedy, they're just talking about the schools. I don't think there's a big vault full of cash that belongs to the NCAA.
I think of it as an industry lobby like the AMA, NRA, or the Chamber of Commerce. The NC$$ was formed to evade federal regulation, and like any trade organization they exist to further the interests of their most powerful brokers while fucking the life out of everyone else involved. So while it's true that the NC$$ is not itself a thing that is getting rich, it is the sock puppet of those who are getting very rich. And as such an entity, it is utterly without conscience or morals or any other guidance than the benefit of those who can swing it as a cudgel.
Quote from: DafatoneOn the other hand, as I understand it, the NCAA isn't really a "thing." They're just the schools. Every time you hear someone describing the NCAA as greedy, they're just talking about the schools. I don't think there's a big vault full of cash that belongs to the NCAA.
I agree - I tell people this all the time as well. "The NCAA" is shorthand. If you know it's shorthand, it's fine. When people seem to think there's some "college sports poobah out there doing evil things" - that's when it's wrong.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: adamwthe average NCAA athlete's academic performance is superior to the general population.
Huh. Where there is great institutional pressure to keep athletes eligible, they get better grades than other students. Go figure.
Next you'll be saying Prep School kids get better grades than students at public high schools. I just cannot imagine why.
This is all true. It doesn't take away from the point, however.
Quote from: TimVQuote from: billhowardQuote from: French RageQuote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Jake from State Farm and his NFL/NBA buddies are East Hill Car Wash on a larger stage. The stupefying dullness of onetime sports legends, current legends, annoying people (Flo, the Mayhem Guy, the Farmers' Insurance man in brown), the Lemu Emu, they all say: Insurance is a commodity, may as well shop on price and fallback to having a lawyer ready if a major claim doesn't get paid.
The Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Can we all just agree that the Geico Hump Day commercial is one of the greatest of all time? It makes me laugh everytime. Hump Daaaaay!
Quote from: Roy 82Quote from: TimVQuote from: billhowardQuote from: French RageQuote from: shaferQuote from: DafatoneI just want to hear a few players sing the East Hill Car Wash jingle on whcu. Is that so wrong?
THIS
Yeah I mean ignoring the actual moral/financial/other-meaningful implications of NIL stuff, I would probably feel a lot different about it if it meant a LOT more college players involved in low-budget local commercials nationwide, rather than just a bunch of NIL collectives where they don't do anything appearance-wise for it.
Jake from State Farm and his NFL/NBA buddies are East Hill Car Wash on a larger stage. The stupefying dullness of onetime sports legends, current legends, annoying people (Flo, the Mayhem Guy, the Farmers' Insurance man in brown), the Lemu Emu, they all say: Insurance is a commodity, may as well shop on price and fallback to having a lawyer ready if a major claim doesn't get paid.
The Mayhem Guy doesn't belong in that list. He's the best.
Can we all just agree that the Geico Hump Day commercial is one of the greatest of all time? It makes me laugh everytime. Hump Daaaaay!
The best part is they didn't beat it to death. One commercial, one gag. No sequels.