So far (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/), 6 players are transferring out of the ECAC, mostly from the Ivies. Only 2 players have transferred in to the ECAC, one to Quinnipiac (surprise!) and the other to St. Lawrence.
i think this list is gonna grow pretty soon. is there a time limit on transferring out like there are in other D1 sports if you want to play next yr..
Quote from: dbilmesSo far (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/), 6 players are transferring out of the ECAC, mostly from the Ivies. Only 2 players have transferred in to the ECAC, one to Quinnipiac (surprise!) and the other to St. Lawrence.
RPI has lost 4 itself already: Ottoville Leppanen to Merrimack, Simon Kjellberg to NMU, Zach Dubinsky to Michigan State, and Nick Bowman to Canisius. Three others are in the transfer portal, but there are no reports of where they are going so far.
interesting no cornell kids in there yet?
Quote from: upprdeckinteresting no cornell kids in there yet?
Maybe if the IL doesn't screw things up this year, the guys will decide to stay where their hearts are.
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: dbilmesSo far (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/), 6 players are transferring out of the ECAC, mostly from the Ivies. Only 2 players have transferred in to the ECAC, one to Quinnipiac (surprise!) and the other to St. Lawrence.
RPI has lost 4 itself already: Ottoville Leppanen to Merrimack, Simon Kjellberg to NMU, Zach Dubinsky to Michigan State, and Nick Bowman to Canisius. Three others are in the transfer portal, but there are no reports of where they are going so far.
Make that 5, Jake Johnson is going to QU. That really hurts.
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: upprdeckinteresting no cornell kids in there yet?
Maybe if the IL doesn't screw things up this year, the guys will decide to stay where their hearts are.
Two Cornellians have entered the transfer portal (https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board): Nate McDonald and Joe Howe.
It's a testament to the goaltending this past year when the expected starter winds up transferring after his first year. I suppose Howe thought he'd be better off elsewhere with the new guy coming in next fall and Shane basically taking the starter role.
makes me appreciate Nate even more
Quote from: cbuckserQuote from: SwampyQuote from: upprdeckinteresting no cornell kids in there yet?
Maybe if the IL doesn't screw things up this year, the guys will decide to stay where their hearts are.
Two Cornellians have entered the transfer portal (https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board): Nate McDonald and Joe Howe.
As noted in a different thread, Nate McDonald has announced that he is transferring to Michigan State.
Quote from: cbuckserTwo Cornellians have entered the transfer portal (https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board): Nate McDonald and Joe Howe.
Hoo boy. It's a brave new world. Until this changes, if ever, we better start poaching too.
No loyalty in this world. Im angry
Quote from: blackwidowNo loyalty in this world. Im angry
C'mon, no reason college athletes shouldn't have the right to freely transfer like any other college student. Sometimes things just don't work out, and a change is just what they need.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: blackwidowNo loyalty in this world. Im angry
C'mon, no reason college athletes shouldn't have the right to freely transfer like any other college student. Sometimes things just don't work out, and a change is just what they need.
What, you don't think Howe should be a permanent bench fixture / healthy scratch because he got beat for a starting job? Why, if we allow him to transfer, he may yet have a hockey career, and his loyalty to Cornell should be more important than that.
Exactly this. Cornell loyalty >>> very unlikely pro hockey career
Quote from: blackwidowExactly this. Cornell loyalty >>> very unlikely pro hockey career
Delusional
I'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
Quote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
exactly this. It's not like cornell had high goaltending standards last season. maybe there was a fallout with the coaching staff.
Quote from: blackwidowQuote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
exactly this. It's not like cornell had high goaltending standards last season. maybe there was a fallout with the coaching staff.
Shane put up a .933 save percentage.
Again, didn't you say you were leaving?
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: blackwidowQuote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
exactly this. It's not like cornell had high goaltending standards last season. maybe there was a fallout with the coaching staff.
Shane put up a .933 save percentage.
Again, didn't you say you were leaving?
Shane had some terrific games but also gave up soft ones. I wouldnt call him an elite goalie yet. I changed my mind about leaving. Hopefully, the same happens to Howe.
Quote from: blackwidowQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: blackwidowQuote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
exactly this. It's not like cornell had high goaltending standards last season. maybe there was a fallout with the coaching staff.
Shane put up a .933 save percentage.
Again, didn't you say you were leaving?
Shane had some terrific games but also gave up soft ones. I wouldnt call him an elite goalie yet. I changed my mind about leaving. Hopefully, the same happens to Howe.
Shane had a higher freshman save percentage than Gillam, Iles, Scrivens, and McKee. He was a few points below Galadja and LeNeveu's freshman seasons.
You said we didn't have a "high bar." Now you're saying "oh maybe it was a high bar but it wasn't elite."
Stop it. Shane was tied for fourth in the entire country in save percentage (tied with Galadja, no less).
Go suggest that a COVID booster caused Schafer's heart condition somewhere else.
Quote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
He's already behind Shane and we have Koeppel coming in.
I'm OK with this from Cornell's POV, too. We can start to turn the wheels on the next goaltender in the pipeline. We're at least barely minimally compliant for goaltending with Shane, so we can recruit among the most highly sought after prospects with a clear conscience that if that takes a couple years we're still set, whereas if we strike gold quickly we won't have an embarrassing glut of goalies seeking minutes. As for Howe, it's ideal for him. He showed he's good enough, and somebody out there could probably use him as a #1.
QuoteAlso, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
They really do need to figure it out. I have always maintained that as long as we are admitting athletes who are remotely in the same intellectual ballpark as our real, er, unathletic students then all the rest of the Paraphernalia of Elitism (later start, shorter schedule, no athletic scholarship, ban on grad eligibility) is transparently cynical brand management. These idiots are every bit the students that the average rich frat bro is. Stop punishing them to maintain our fictional superiority among Long Island brood sows.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: blackwidowQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: blackwidowQuote from: BearLoverI'm not going to fault a kid for wanting to play elsewhere when he isn't getting playing time. These kids want to play hockey, not linger on the bench. With that said, it's a little surprising Howe is throwing in the towel so quickly. One would have thought he'd have a decent chance at winning the position next season.
Also, Cornell and the Ivies need to figure out what they are going to do about the transfer portal. The Ivies don't permit scholarships or graduate transfers, which limits the number of players who could transfer to their school. I do not know if the coaching staff has expressed a position on the transfer portal, but at the moment rival schools are scooping up players while the Ivies are getting no one.
exactly this. It's not like cornell had high goaltending standards last season. maybe there was a fallout with the coaching staff.
Shane put up a .933 save percentage.
Again, didn't you say you were leaving?
Shane had some terrific games but also gave up soft ones. I wouldnt call him an elite goalie yet. I changed my mind about leaving. Hopefully, the same happens to Howe.
Shane had a higher freshman save percentage than Gillam, Iles, Scrivens, and McKee. He was a few points below Galadja and LeNeveu's freshman seasons.
You said we didn't have a "high bar." Now you're saying "oh maybe it was a high bar but it wasn't elite."
Stop it. Shane was tied for fourth in the entire country in save percentage (tied with Galadja, no less).
Go suggest that a COVID booster caused Schafer's heart condition somewhere else.
I thought this forum was in agreement about shane being a rebound board in several games this season. I used high bar and elite interchangeably.
Also, my dad was advised not to take the vaccine because of his underlying heart conditions. Covid vaccine causing heart inflammation in rare cases i thought was factually correct. I believe vaccination across the vast majority of the population is the right thing to do \\-_-/
It's a weird thing with Shane. The numbers are great and stats don't lie, but he just doesn't make me as comfortable as some of those other goalies, even those with slightly worse numbers.
Maybe it's some sort of bias.
Quote from: CU2007It's a weird thing with Shane. The numbers are great and stats don't lie, but he just doesn't make me as comfortable as some of those other goalies, even those with slightly worse numbers.
Maybe it's some sort of bias.
If it is, I have it too.
Juicy rebounds. Maybe we also felt less comfortable with the defense's ability to control the play so any slip seemed critical.
Quote from: CU2007It's a weird thing with Shane. The numbers are great and stats don't lie, but he just doesn't make me as comfortable as some of those other goalies, even those with slightly worse numbers.
Maybe it's some sort of bias.
Good numbers, but small sample size. The jury is definitely still out.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: CU2007It's a weird thing with Shane. The numbers are great and stats don't lie, but he just doesn't make me as comfortable as some of those other goalies, even those with slightly worse numbers.
Maybe it's some sort of bias.
Good numbers, but small sample size. The jury is definitely still out.
The jury is not still out with me. IMO, the future of the team rests with the success of our incoming goalie(s), not Shane. Shane's glowing numbers? It's the system!
considering he went from not playing at all to starting and doing pretty well in the middle of a time where the team was not really even able to practice, i think we need to let it play out... some of the stuff he needs to improve on may come in time. rebound control can be improved easier than stopping the original shots
We have had goalies who made significant improvements over their careers (Bandurski, Skazyk, Underhill). The important thing is this time last year goaltending was a giant question mark. Now we know that we have, at worst, a good goalie who put up great numbers, and who seems to work well within The System (TM).
We are in so much better a position than last year at this time. We reset at 4th, not 7th or 10th. We have a young team but we do not face the assimilation of an enormous number of players with no prior playing time. We know we can score. Our big problem is probably defense which is the one thing we seem to always be able to reload and refine.
Oh, and by October Mike might not be needing intensive care quite so often.
Future's bright, folks. Now let's go steal some underclassmen in the portal! That's how you screw BU!
Quote from: blackwidowExactly this. Cornell loyalty >>> very unlikely pro hockey career
Not everyone expects to play in the bigs. We had a player a few years back whose plan was to play college hockey well enough to play pro hockey in Europe, because it would give him the opportunity to live in another country.
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: blackwidowExactly this. Cornell loyalty >>> very unlikely pro hockey career
Not everyone expects to play in the bigs. We had a player a few years back whose plan was to play college hockey well enough to play pro hockey in Europe, because it would give him the opportunity to live in another country.
I was joking there with a hint of resentment. just being resentful that he gave up on his cornell career when I shouldn't be.
Ben Tupker(?) in the portal. https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board
Quote from: Scersk '97Ben Tupker(?) in the portal. https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board
The fuck?
Looks like he didn't like his healthy scratches there near the end.
maybe ask yourself why he was a healthy scratch
Quote from: Scersk '97Ben Tupker(?) in the portal. https://www.therinklive.com/sports/college/the-2022-mens-college-hockey-transfer-board
Whats going on... (T.T)
Jerry York just retired at age 76.
Union Rink. (https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Proposed-Union-College-ice-rink-at-Mohawk-Harbor-17074751.php)
Quote from: martyUnion Rink. (https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Proposed-Union-College-ice-rink-at-Mohawk-Harbor-17074751.php)
Good to know there are no important problems (https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Census-data-highlights-inequality-13478031.php) in the Capital District.
"after receiving $10 million in state financing"
Great, so now I'm paying for Union's new arena on top of the Bills' new stadium (https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffalo/news/2022/04/14/hochul-defends-cost-of-new-bills-stadium-agreement).
Quote from: Give My Regards"after receiving $10 million in state financing"
Great, so now I'm paying for Union's new arena on top of the Bills' new stadium (https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffalo/news/2022/04/14/hochul-defends-cost-of-new-bills-stadium-agreement).
I know it makes me all warm & fuzzy..
It feels great to be fleeced!
https://twitter.com/Unionmhockey/status/1514997129382699010
"Good hair! No hair!"
Quote from: Trotsky"Good hair! No hair!"
I have a recollection, pretty sure it was from the 1985 ECAC Semis at the Gahden. We'd played in the first game, and Hahvahd and RPI were in the 2nd game. When the first of those teams skated out on the ice (Hahvahd?) , we started a chant with a point at their coach (Cleary?), "The coach is bald! The coach is bald". Then when RPI skated out, we changed it to pointing at their coach (Fridgen?) and saying "The coach is fat! The coach is fat!". And then we simply went back and forth "Fat - Bald - Fat - Bald".
Quote from: Chris H82Quote from: Trotsky"Good hair! No hair!"
Then when RPI skated out, we changed it to pointing at their coach (Fridgen?) and saying "The coach is fat! The coach is fat!
Mike Addesa. Fridgen wasn't there until the 90s.
That was the reference I was going for. The night Cornell fans took over the Gahden and we weren't even playing.
It was the 85 final. We had lost to RPI in our semi (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1985/box19850315.pdf) the prior night, then beaten Clarkson in the consy (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1985/box19850316.pdf). But we all hung around and dominated the barn, cheering for Cornell (who was already on their way back home) and razzing both teams. It was ecstasy.
That was also when RPI had a HUGE traveling fanbase (on their way to the NCAA title) and a band that had an electric bass.
LOL (https://www.usada.org/sanction/dryden-mckay-accepts-doping-sanction/).
He'll be suspended to the second week of October.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyUnion Rink. (https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Proposed-Union-College-ice-rink-at-Mohawk-Harbor-17074751.php)
Good to know there are no important problems (https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Census-data-highlights-inequality-13478031.php) in the Capital District.
White home ownership is ~2X that of Blacks in the region. Be good to also compare home ownership ratios by ethnicty and then by income level. There probably still is inequity,
some of it may be by income levels.
>>> The System (TM).
Good one. Have you used this before?
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyUnion Rink. (https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Proposed-Union-College-ice-rink-at-Mohawk-Harbor-17074751.php)
Good to know there are no important problems (https://www.timesunion.com/business/article/Census-data-highlights-inequality-13478031.php) in the Capital District.
White home ownership is ~2X that of Blacks in the region. Be good to also compare home ownership ratios by ethnicty and then by income level. There probably still is inequity, some of it may be by income levels.
Research on the subject finds differences at all income levels, and not just for ethnicity. Gender: at all income levels, female-headed households have lower home ownership rates than male-headed. Class: at all income levels, employer-headed households have higher home-ownership rates than employee-headed households, etc. In fact, in many cases persons in particular inter-sectional categories (e.g., black, female employers) are so rare that, in all but the largest social surveys (i.e., with sample sizes of several hundred thousand or more), one cannot even make statistically useful comparisons.
RPI's Ture Linden opts for PSU as scouts need eyeballs, too. (https://www.timesunion.com/sports/article/RPI-hockey-transfer-Ture-Linden-chooses-new-school-17124958.php)
AHCA (https://www.therinklive.com/mens-division-1/nchc/college-hockey-coaches-hear-about-the-potential-transformation-of-ncaa-sports).
Quote from: martyAHCA (https://www.therinklive.com/mens-division-1/nchc/college-hockey-coaches-hear-about-the-potential-transformation-of-ncaa-sports).
I can't find it right now, but I read something the other day that they were supposed to discuss increasing the maximum number of games in a season -- the logic being that this would encourage teams to schedule the new D1 programs. If they did that, would that be the tipping point for the Ivies to finally go beyond 29?
Quote from: WederQuote from: martyAHCA (https://www.therinklive.com/mens-division-1/nchc/college-hockey-coaches-hear-about-the-potential-transformation-of-ncaa-sports).
I can't find it right now, but I read something the other day that they were supposed to discuss increasing the maximum number of games in a season -- the logic being that this would encourage teams to schedule the new D1 programs. If they did that, would that be the tipping point for the Ivies to finally go beyond 29?
The purpose of the lower Ivy game limit is, like the scholarship ban, the late start, and graduating players losing eligibility, to market a discriminator between the Ivies and The Commoners to preserve The Brand. So, on the one hand, if the NC$$ increases the number of games by 4 we could too and still maintain that luxury niche. On the other, increasing the number
at all works against the premium of handicapping oneself for noblesse oblige.
If, in 1860, the average professional athlete salary jumps from $1000 to $2000, the amateur playboy athlete could start demanding $1000 and still be able to lord it over "those mere tradesmen." But the fact of taking any filthy lucre at all would subvert the image.
The courts killing the scholarship ban as a restraint of the athletes' fair value could be a best case for Ivy athletes. The schools have painted themselves into a corner. They can't shitcan the heraldry of privilege themselves; it brings in the cash. But if they are
forced to, legally, well, a terrible shame the Olde Club has been desegregated by those meddling courts, but (sigh) I suppose we must move with the times, my dear.
This (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
Quote from: TrotskyThis (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
No BU for Cornell? Or, is this only in-league or frequent opponent?
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: TrotskyThis (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
No BU for Cornell? Or, is this only in-league or frequent opponent?
I would not say BU is a factor over the range of all fans anymore. It's been 40 years. But by all means, nobody is DQed.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyQuote from: TrotskyThis (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
No BU for Cornell? Or, is this only in-league or frequent opponent?
I would not say BU is a factor over the range of all fans anymore. It's been 40 years. But by all means, nobody is DQed.
I think I'd put Colgate in instead of the deerticks. But YMMV.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyQuote from: TrotskyThis (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
No BU for Cornell? Or, is this only in-league or frequent opponent?
I would not say BU is a factor over the range of all fans anymore. It's been 40 years. But by all means, nobody is DQed.
I think I'd put Colgate in instead of the deerticks. But YMMV.
Yeah, I think #3 is always fluid. I said Q right now because of the power implications, in the way that it was Yale for a while. My personal 3 will always be SLU but, again, that's just frozen in amber from the 80s. There may be people who would stick Union or Princeton there.
It aint Brown, anyway.
Most hated for me is Dartmouth in a landslide, but I don't know that I'd call them a top three rival.
If you listen to the Big Red Sports Network podcasts from this season, nearly every current or recent alum player they talk with lists Q as one of their biggest/most hated rivals, right up there with Harvard.
I suspect every Ivy, probably every ECAC team, has Cornell has one of its top three rivals.
Cornell hates Harvard most, regardless of Harvard's competitiveness in the current year, because it's Harvard, some of us didn't get in, Love Story cemented the distate, etcetera. Quinnipiac is No. 2 currently because it's so good, the arena is gorgeous (my opinion) and we dislike fans who bail midway through the second period. Clarkson we admire because they're good a lot of years and imagine how much we'd hate them if we'd lost to them, not won, in the 1970 ECAC and NCAA finals. Although it's been a while.
When any other ECAC team does a senior-memories PR flashback, somebody always says, the most memorable road trip is Cornell.
Bye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Max Andreev says he's "not done yet" in a video where he's pulling on a Cornell jersey.
https://twitter.com/cornellmhockey/status/1524846412290215972
Was Andreev looking to leave??
it was not a done deal he would be allowed to come back.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: SwampyQuote from: TrotskyThis (https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/hu7vyy/top_3_biggest_rivals_of_every_nhl_team_fan_vote/) would be interesting to do for all the NC$$ teams (or at least the ECAC).
Some guesses (IMO)
Cornell:
1. Harvard
2. Clarkson
3. Quinnipiac
Harvard:
1. Yale
2. Cornell
3. Princeton
Clarkson:
1. SLU
2. Cornell
3. RPI
No BU for Cornell? Or, is this only in-league or frequent opponent?
I would not say BU is a factor over the range of all fans anymore. It's been 40 years. But by all means, nobody is DQed.
I think I'd put Colgate in instead of the deerticks. But YMMV.
Yeah, I think #3 is always fluid. I said Q right now because of the power implications, in the way that it was Yale for a while. My personal 3 will always be SLU but, again, that's just frozen in amber from the 80s. There may be people who would stick Union or Princeton there.
It aint Brown, anyway.
Even if Q is good, I don't really, like, care about them. I don't care how their fans, if they exist, care about beating us. Given that, I'd have to place Colgate at #3 because at least they derive some pleasure out of beating us, so I want to deprive them of that, in the way they were deprived of joy when college acceptances came and they had to live with the fact that the best they could do was Colgate.
Quote from: billhowardI suspect every Ivy, probably every ECAC team, has Cornell has one of its top three rivals.
Cornell was certainly one of RPI's top three rivals when I was in Troy starting in 1964, perhaps even #1, and if not, then #2 after Clarkson. This was in the main due to the perception that Cornell had stolen Ned Harkness. It led to the so-called "Game that Saved RPI Hockey" in December 1968. Now #1 is sUCk which didn't have a team when I was at RPI, and #2 is Clarkson. It's between Cornell and SLU for #3.
BTW, Ben Tupker is going to sUCk.:-D
Quote from: French RageEven if Q is good, I don't really, like, care about them. I don't care how their fans, if they exist, care about beating us. Given that, I'd have to place Colgate at #3 because at least they derive some pleasure out of beating us, so I want to deprive them of that, in the way they were deprived of joy when college acceptances came and they had to live with the fact that the best they could do was Colgate.
There are few comments to which I can just add a +1. This.
Quote from: upprdeckit was not a done deal he would be allowed to come back.
I still don't understand why Max had to ask for special dispensation from the Pope(s).
The biggest rivals to me are the conference opponents who have been winning recently. So, Q, Harvard, and Clarkson, in that order. To most players on the team I would assume the list is approximately the same. To students on campus it's probably Harvard, then some mix of Q, Colgate, Clarkson. Ten years ago the team I most wanted to beat was Yale.
That's the dog that saved Charleston.
Well fuck him.
Quote from: BearLoverThe biggest rivals to me are the conference opponents who have been winning recently. So, Q, Harvard, and Clarkson, in that order. To most players on the team I would assume the list is approximately the same. To students on campus it's probably Harvard, then some mix of Q, Colgate, Clarkson. Ten years ago the team I most wanted to beat was Yale.
One pox hovers above all (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzlZlSeuGDI).
Quote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Quote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Does Union offer graduate degrees?
Quote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Ben says in the tweet he is graduating. To my knowledge Zach has given no public indication he is going anywhere. The only other Cornell player in the transfer portal is Howe.
We are very fortunate Andreev is coming back. Of course, only in the Ivy League does one need to go through an opaque approval process from a mysterious governing body to exercise his fourth year of eligibility. Other schools across the country will once again be stocked with players exercising their fifth year of eligibility, no questions asked.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Ben says in the tweet he is graduating. To my knowledge Zach has given no public indication he is going anywhere. The only other Cornell player in the transfer portal is Howe.
We are very fortunate Andreev is coming back. Of course, only in the Ivy League does one need to go through an opaque approval process from a mysterious governing body to exercise his fourth year of eligibility. Other schools across the country will once again be stocked with players exercising their fifth year of eligibility, no questions asked.
Max is the only player left from his freshman class.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Ben says in the tweet he is graduating. To my knowledge Zach has given no public indication he is going anywhere. The only other Cornell player in the transfer portal is Howe.
We are very fortunate Andreev is coming back. Of course, only in the Ivy League does one need to go through an opaque approval process from a mysterious governing body to exercise his fourth year of eligibility. Other schools across the country will once again be stocked with players exercising their fifth year of eligibility, no questions asked.
Max is the only player left from his freshman class.
I would also like to include a huge Union logo in my response. Is there a way to do this?
Quote from: DafatoneMost hated for me is Dartmouth in a landslide, but I don't know that I'd call them a top three rival.
There's definitely a different between hatred and rivalry. I can't stand Quinnipiac, but they don't deserve to be anyone's rival. As a traditionalist, I'd say Cornell's biggest rivals would/should be
1. Harvard
2. BU
3. Clarkson
If we're limiting it to the ECAC, Colgate would probably be #3.
Surely Clarkson's are 1.SLU 2.RPI 3.Cornell?
Quote from: SwampyQuote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Does Union offer graduate degrees?
I've got another likely dumb question. Since Ben was a junior this year who only played 2 years at Cornell doesn't he have 2 years of eligibility which he can play out at fu%^ing Onion?
i would think he has 2 yrs left
Quote from: martyQuote from: SwampyQuote from: arugulaQuote from: blackwidowBye bye Ben
https://twitter.com/btupker_13/status/1524774856218247168?t=EM2d_NG1MyKX5ZewgSntLA&s=19
Forgive my ignorance, but to be clear, this means that Ben graduated in three years? Zach will be back? I understand Ben was ILR, those would be tough credits to transfer, so he must have graduated.
Does Union offer graduate degrees?
I've got another likely dumb question. Since Ben was a junior this year who only played 2 years at Cornell doesn't he have 2 years of eligibility which he can play out at fu%^ing Onion?
Apparently,3 years of eligibility
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_h_MN4DvI86jNnPQ56RS3xpQyS5Rj4WGwiS__v2nK9A/htmlview#gid=0
he can have 3 more years but he can only play 2 of them
ECAC alumni in the NHL conference finals (other than Riley Nash with Tampa):
Harvard: Alex Killorn, Tampa; Adam Fox, Rangers
Clarkson: Nico Sturm, Colorado
Union: Keith Kinkaid, Rangers
Quinnipiac: Devon Toews, Colorado
Nate found a new home. Good luck.
https://twitter.com/gryphonsmhky/status/1532332840087691265?t=TSqMIWqOfMS_qtfRKHmslQ&s=19
Quote from: blackwidowNate found a new home. Good luck.
https://twitter.com/gryphonsmhky/status/1532332840087691265?t=TSqMIWqOfMS_qtfRKHmslQ&s=19
Does culture beat strategy?
Good for Nate, otherwise.
Need to schedule Guelph for an exhib.
Who was the alum we played when he was in a CIAU program after graduation? Stu Smith maybe?
Guelph game is currently in discussion. tentative date would be October 20 or the 21st
Quote from: zanderman200Guelph game is currently in discussion. tentative date would be October 20 or the 21st
Great news! ::banana::
Michigan had 10 scratches due to illness last night. Tyler Shea is their third string goalie (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhzCZ5BXgAYSP9Z?format=jpg&name=900x900). They lost 5-2 to Minnesota.
With a few spectacular exceptions (eg: K.Dryden) college hockey players do not dominate the cream of professional hockey players - as athletes do in most other sports. How come?
Quote from: osorojoWith a few spectacular exceptions (eg: K.Dryden) college hockey players do not dominate the cream of professional hockey players - as athletes do in most other sports. How come?
Even the great Ken Dryden did some time in the minors before emerging as an NHL star.
Quote from: osorojoWith a few spectacular exceptions (eg: K.Dryden) college hockey players do not dominate the cream of professional hockey players - as athletes do in most other sports. How come?
Because hockey established the CHL as its feeder system, while the NFL and NBA use the factory ahem "colleges." It's the same reason most baseball players don't come up through college, though many do.
Quote from: rediceQuote from: osorojoWith a few spectacular exceptions (eg: K.Dryden) college hockey players do not dominate the cream of professional hockey players - as athletes do in most other sports. How come?
Even the great Ken Dryden did some time in the minors before emerging as an NHL star.
IIRC, Dryden finished the season, spent a few weeks at Montreal's AHL team, and then was called up for the first Stanley Cup series, which was against the Boston Bruins. At the time I was living in a communal house in Somerville, with one TV and almost 90% Bruins fans. I got home from work, as the first game was starting, and my housemates asked me, "Who's this guy Dryden?" They soon learned, and I had the last laugh. **]
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: osorojoWith a few spectacular exceptions (eg: K.Dryden) college hockey players do not dominate the cream of professional hockey players - as athletes do in most other sports. How come?
Because hockey established the CHL as its feeder system, while the NFL and NBA use the factory ahem "colleges." It's the same reason most baseball players don't come up through college, though many do.
Yeah players tend to get drafted out of junior leagues (Ex. CHL (OHL,WHL,QMJHL) or USHL). European Professional Leagues are also common
I think what turns a lot of teams away from NCAA is that unless someones talent level is through the roof, oftentimes the players coming out of the junior leagues will be younger and wont necessarily commit to playing in their junior league for long while most NCAA students that are drafted do usually stick around for the full 4 years of college, and a lot can happen in four years which creates a large risk associated with drafting them.
Year after year some universities have hockey teams in the top twenty, even the top ten, and neither the size of the school nor the endowment of the school nor the academic credentials of the school seem to be a predictor of their success in D-1 College Men's hockey?! It's reasonable to assume that these continually successful colleges and universities share some common condition(s) which contribute their winning ways. No-fair copping out with "They get better players". How do they continually get better players? Are some recruiters and coaches just lucky, year after year?
Quote from: osorojoYear after year some universities have hockey teams in the top twenty, even the top ten, and neither the size of the school nor the endowment of the school nor the academic credentials of the school seem to be a predictor of their success in D-1 College Men's hockey?! It's reasonable to assume that these continually successful colleges and universities share some common condition(s) which contribute their winning ways. No-fair copping out with "They get better players". How do they continually get better players? Are some recruiters and coaches just lucky, year after year?
Usually a combination of schools that prioritize hockey, have great facilities, and a tradition of excellence. Think North Dakota.
Quote from: osorojoYear after year some universities have hockey teams in the top twenty, even the top ten, and neither the size of the school nor the endowment of the school nor the academic credentials of the school seem to be a predictor of their success in D-1 College Men's hockey?! It's reasonable to assume that these continually successful colleges and universities share some common condition(s) which contribute their winning ways. No-fair copping out with "They get better players". How do they continually get better players? Are some recruiters and coaches just lucky, year after year?
Certain college coaches build symbiotic networks with CJHL and BCHL coaches. The juniors coach draws the attention of the college coach to certain players, the college makes offers to those players. The coaches probably have similar styles to make the transition from one level to the next easier. It's mutually advantageous if it results in a conveyor belt to the pros, since both coaches' reputations are bolstered.
The college name also has a lot to do with it, since the hockey community associates it with quality and trust. It is *very* hard to fuck up as coach of Minnesota, North Dakota, Denver, BU, BC, and Michigan. It's probably pretty hard to fuck up at Cornell, Harvard, and Clarkson, although some have worked at it.
A "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
Quote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
College hockey is different because it's not entirely driven by dollars, yet. In the Professional College Sports, money is everything. Winning coaches move to the most lucrative gig. The best players go to the schools that are on television to attract the hype that drives their professional careers (and the branding that generates their real money, which dwarfs their salaries). Academics factor at zero, since star students never crack a book or attend a class. The athlete is a marketing tool for the university, and the university is a vehicle for the athlete positioning himself to become a celebrity.
As college hockey gets bigger, that will be its future. The Big x and PAC y will eventually dominate and every existing hockey power not named Michigan or Minnesota will have the relative status of Ivy League football. That is unless the entire bubble bursts and professional athletics is severed from "education."
Quote from: TrotskyIt's probably pretty hard to fuck up at Cornell, Harvard, and Clarkson, although some have worked at it.
"Paging Brian McCutcheon and George Roll! Paging Mr. McCutcheon and Mr. Roll!"
Both lost control of their teams, i.e., the players just weren't willing to play for them anymore; they lost the plot.
Vide all previous discussion of the miraculous emergence of Brad Chartrand. (For what it's worth, I was very worried about this re: Schafer back in 2013.)
And then there's Mark Morris and, say, Mel Pearson. Good coaches, perhaps, but just not cut out for the college hockey ranks, where part of the job has always been to shepherd young men and to mold their habits.
Quote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
Some schools pick individual sports to highlight. Johns Hopkins emphasizes lacrosse, Providence College has basketball and, with much less emphasis, hockey, Clarkson & Q have hockey, Gonzaga has basketball, etc. Football is the most expensive sport for top-tier competitiveness, Basketball comes in second, but a strong program needs maybe 10 blue-chip players to compete, compared to, say, 50 in football.
Quote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
The number of teams playing D1 hockey is also a factor. We've got 60 something hockey teams vs. 350 D1 basketball teams or 250+ D1 football teams (125 FCS, 129 FBS). That makes for far less competition in recruiting.
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
The number of teams playing D1 hockey is also a factor. We've got 60 something hockey teams vs. 350 D1 basketball teams or 250+ D1 football teams (125 FCS, 129 FBS). That makes for far less competition in recruiting.
But the pool is likewise smaller; I think that balances.
if you people keep engaging with the low effort bullshit oso throws at you i'm going to lose my mind
Quote from: ugarteif you people keep engaging with the low effort bullshit oso throws at you i'm going to lose my mind
Bot? I'm beginning to wonder.
It's not as if the board is teeming with high quality content. If he's a fan, engage. If he's an AI, well, we're teaching it to be more civil, and someday maybe the Berserkers will spare us.
for what its worth we have dug ourselves into the top 40 in Pairwise. Sacred Heart is ahead of and Uconn is #3.
Quote from: ugarteif you people keep engaging with the low effort bullshit oso throws at you i'm going to lose my mind
This. Stop engaging with the stupid fucknugget.
Quote from: upprdeckfor what its worth we have dug ourselves into the top 40 in Pairwise. Sacred Heart is ahead of and Uconn is #3.
was wondering why we were so low since i didn't figure a pair of losses to UMD would be so harmful but UMD is 7-7 and behind us in the pairwise. yikes.
Quote from: French RageQuote from: ugarteif you people keep engaging with the low effort bullshit oso throws at you i'm going to lose my mind
This. Stop engaging with the stupid fucknugget.
I like the theory that we're all training the world's most crotchety bot.
the ivies should get their act together and stop digging them selves such a huge hole in the preseason. starting late then taking on teams that are 3-4 weeks into the season. Cornell playing UMD might be a different game in week 4.. even if its just let the teams start to practice like everyone else it would be a huge start..
Quote from: upprdeckthe ivies should get their act together and stop digging them selves such a huge hole in the preseason. starting late then taking on teams that are 3-4 weeks into the season. Cornell playing UMD might be a different game in week 4.. even if its just let the teams start to practice like everyone else it would be a huge start..
It's perplexing because certain Ivy sports, like basketball and soccer, begin play at the same time as their peers, while sports like football and hockey have these seemingly nonsensical late start dates.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: upprdeckthe ivies should get their act together and stop digging them selves such a huge hole in the preseason. starting late then taking on teams that are 3-4 weeks into the season. Cornell playing UMD might be a different game in week 4.. even if its just let the teams start to practice like everyone else it would be a huge start..
It's perplexing because certain Ivy sports, like basketball and soccer, begin play at the same time as their peers, while sports like football and hockey have these seemingly nonsensical late start dates.
I thought it was part of the deal where the Ivies started allowing freshmen to play in 1975-76. For the Fall sports, practice started later to give the freshmen more time to adjust to the academic workload. The Olds would know more.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Quote from: upprdeckthe ivies should get their act together and stop digging them selves such a huge hole in the preseason. starting late then taking on teams that are 3-4 weeks into the season. Cornell playing UMD might be a different game in week 4.. even if its just let the teams start to practice like everyone else it would be a huge start..
It's perplexing because certain Ivy sports, like basketball and soccer, begin play at the same time as their peers, while sports like football and hockey have these seemingly nonsensical late start dates.
I thought it was part of the deal where the Ivies started allowing freshmen to play in 1975-76. For the Fall sports, practice started later to give the freshmen more time to adjust to the academic workload. The Olds would know more.
I was on the freshman football team in the fall of '78. Freshmen weren't eligible for varsity football until at least the mid 80s.
Quote from: Chris H82Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Quote from: upprdeckthe ivies should get their act together and stop digging them selves such a huge hole in the preseason. starting late then taking on teams that are 3-4 weeks into the season. Cornell playing UMD might be a different game in week 4.. even if its just let the teams start to practice like everyone else it would be a huge start..
It's perplexing because certain Ivy sports, like basketball and soccer, begin play at the same time as their peers, while sports like football and hockey have these seemingly nonsensical late start dates.
I thought it was part of the deal where the Ivies started allowing freshmen to play in 1975-76. For the Fall sports, practice started later to give the freshmen more time to adjust to the academic workload. The Olds would know more.
I was on the freshman football team in the fall of '78. Freshmen weren't eligible for varsity football until at least the mid 80s.
I was going by hockey (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/rptCornell_Scoring_by_Year/rptCornell_Scoring_1976.pdf).
Completely unrelated but how is Harvard so high in Pairwise. Undefeated but against a terrible schedule. Last season we would win and lose spots in pairwise due to sos. Harvard has a weak schedule-no problem. Change in the system?
Quote from: arugulaCompletely unrelated but how is Harvard so high in Pairwise. Undefeated but against a terrible schedule. Last season we would win and lose spots in pairwise due to sos. Harvard has a weak schedule-no problem. Change in the system?
Probably that and being undefeated seems to carry quite a bit of weight in the pairwise during the fall. It's the case pretty much every year
Quote from: arugulaCompletely unrelated but how is Harvard so high in Pairwise. Undefeated but against a terrible schedule. Last season we would win and lose spots in pairwise due to sos. Harvard has a weak schedule-no problem. Change in the system?
The PWR is flukish and not really worth looking at this early in the season. There likely haven't been enough out of conference games for the model to accurately compare teams in difference conferences.
Quote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
I think osorojo's implication is that Cornell is not one of "these schools," and everyone is answering osorojo in good faith without regard to the fact the whole question was intended as a slight against Cornell.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
I think osorojo's implication is that Cornell is not one of "these schools," and everyone is answering osorojo in good faith without regard to the fact the whole question was intended as a slight against Cornell.
Agreed. My father-in-law got very crotchety and disagreeable when he got old. Fortunately, he didn't have the tech skills to be a pain in the ass online, so it was only a problem when we were together.
Quote from: upprdeckfor what its worth we have dug ourselves into the top 40 in Pairwise. Sacred Heart is ahead of and Uconn is #3.
Being in the top 40 is pretty good when it's D1 basketball with 350 teams. Being in the top 40 in hockey puts you ahead of just 20 other teams. Cornell will improve for sure.
First with have to get through the UConn (currently #6, USCHO poll) and Harvard (#9) games. The top New York team is RIT at #20. Clarkson 3 voting points and Cornell 1 also-mentions, at this stage. Sacred Heart is also in the noise-level voting, 4 points. Poll: https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/icehockey-men/d1/uschocom
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: osorojoA "tradition of excellence" sounds good, but how do these schools - many of them small and neither wealthy nor large, MAINTAIN this "tradition of excellence" in the face of other schools with many more students, much more money, and better facilities? Is there something unique about college hockey which enables teams from relatively small, relatively unknown colleges/universities to enjoy success in Division One men's ice hockey?
I think osorojo's implication is that Cornell is not one of "these schools," and everyone is answering osorojo in good faith without regard to the fact the whole question was intended as a slight against Cornell.
Agreed. My father-in-law got very crotchety and disagreeable when he got old. Fortunately, he didn't have the tech skills to be a pain in the ass online, so it was only a problem when we were together.
Social media: where every day is Thanksgiving.
Can't answer a question? Call its author a "bot"- an insect? The question stands by itself: "What are the necessary preconditions for Cornell to create a championship D-1 men's college hockey team?" (Hint - name calling isn't one of them) The only time questions are "disagreeable" is when the respondent is ashamed of or wants to obscure the answer. My question was asked to solicit suggestions as to how Cornell can improve its men's varsity hockey program. If you have no suggestions other than insults STF up!
Quote from: osorojoCan't answer a question? Call its author a "bot"- an insect? The question stands by itself: "What are the necessary preconditions for Cornell to create a championship D-1 men's college hockey team?" (Hint - name calling isn't one of them) The only time questions are "disagreeable" is when the respondent is ashamed of or wants to obscure the answer. My question was asked to solicit suggestions as to how Cornell can improve its men's varsity hockey program. If you have no suggestions other than insults STF up!
Whatever the necessary preconditions, Cornell has satisfied them. Cornell was a 1-seed going into the NCAA tournament in both 2018 and 2020. They were a 3-seed in 2017 and 2019. Clearly, they have multiple times in the very recent past fielded a team capable of becoming a "championship D-1 men's college hockey team." Your question is nonsensical because it relies on the premise that one of the top college hockey programs over the past five years is not a top college hockey program.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: osorojoCan't answer a question? Call its author a "bot"- an insect? The question stands by itself: "What are the necessary preconditions for Cornell to create a championship D-1 men's college hockey team?" (Hint - name calling isn't one of them) The only time questions are "disagreeable" is when the respondent is ashamed of or wants to obscure the answer. My question was asked to solicit suggestions as to how Cornell can improve its men's varsity hockey program. If you have no suggestions other than insults STF up!
Whatever the necessary preconditions, Cornell has satisfied them. Cornell was a 1-seed going into the NCAA tournament in both 2018 and 2020. They were a 3-seed in 2017 and 2019. Clearly, they have multiple times in the very recent past fielded a team capable of becoming a "championship D-1 men's college hockey team." Your question is nonsensical because it relies on the premise that one of the top college hockey programs over the past five years is not a top college hockey program.
and that's why i'm losing my mind that it's treated as good faith. people around here get mad at you but your objections have always been specific and supported even if others disagree with the conclusions. oso is all bait.
Discussions about the performance of the C.U. Men's Varsity Hockey team and questions about how it might improve are greeted here with name-calling and derision. I have been a C.U. hockey fan for 60 years, from a club team to national champions and beyond, from a sparsely attended Lynah Rink and opponents such as Susquehanna to yearly sellouts at Lynah, and back to a tepid interest in C.U. Hockey. Today C.U is ranked in 37th place in D-1 men's college ice hockey. Don't shoot the messenger - and my "bot" reference was to a robot - not a carrion fly. Drink ink.
Quote from: osorojoC.U. Men's Varsity Hockey team
Lol idk why but I find this level of specificity on a forum about Cornell hockey hilarious - like you don't need to type this out every time we know what you are referring to
Quote from: osorojoDiscussions about the performance of the C.U. Men's Varsity Hockey team and questions about how it might improve are greeted here with name-calling and derision. I have been a C.U. hockey fan for 60 years, from a club team to national champions and beyond, from a sparsely attended Lynah Rink and opponents such as Susquehanna to yearly sellouts at Lynah, and back to a tepid interest in C.U. Hockey. Today C.U is ranked in 37th place in D-1 men's college ice hockey. Don't shoot the messenger - and my "bot" reference was to a robot - not a carrion fly. Drink ink.
Minnesota-Duluth is ranked #39. Scrub program.
Quote from: DuncQuote from: osorojoC.U. Men's Varsity Hockey team
Lol idk why but I find this level of specificity on a forum about Cornell hockey hilarious - like you don't need to type this out every time we know what you are referring to
it's fake, if that helps?
Quote from: osorojoCan't answer a question? Call its author a "bot"- an insect? The question stands by itself: "What are the necessary preconditions for Cornell to create a championship D-1 men's college hockey team?" (Hint - name calling isn't one of them) The only time questions are "disagreeable" is when the respondent is ashamed of or wants to obscure the answer. My question was asked to solicit suggestions as to how Cornell can improve its men's varsity hockey program. If you have no suggestions other than insults STF up!
Sadly, cornell doesnt belong in the group of desired destinations for top tier talents for various reasons. 1.Our logistical support is not on par with premier hockey programs (money issue) 2. The track record of how our guys have fared after graduation in the last decade hasnt been all that great. I do think some of the 3rd round picks we had in recent years should not have been drafted that early though. Regardless, prospects may look at it as a red flag. I have talked to a junior hockey coach and his view is that cornell isnt regarded that highly. Being in the ecac hurts cornell quite a bit in this regard, to be fair. 3. No scholarships 4. Comparative lack of academic prestige (killorn comes to mind + the fact that matty beniers, son of two cornell alums was set on going to harvard and never considered cornell until covid got him to flip his commitment to umich). Im sure there are more...
I think we missed out on the window of opportunity to add more ncaa titles in the 70's through late 2000's. It has gotten so much harder to win the national title, as there are more programs now and college hockey is being taken more seriously and looked at as a genuine pipeline to the NHL.
I questioned whether Schaefer's a good coach on this forum before. I thought it was a fair question because he's gone to the frozen four only once (03) and generally loses in the first round (plus, no ecac championship since 10). But my question was looked at as so ridiculous that people thought I was joking. After thinking more about it, my view has shifted somewhat more in favor of mike schafer. I think he is probably the best coach available to cornell. Hard to imagine a head coach in charge of a D1 program elsewhere wanting to take the helm at cornell. Seeing Justin Ertel (3rd round draft pick) leave after one year and guys like jeff malott and jacob macdonald argubaly having greater success in pro hockey than college days does make me wonder if the cornell system stymies player development to some degree on an individual level.
To attract higher calibre talents, I would probably focus on improving the logistics. I know schafer once brought up not having a team chef or having to ride a bus when other programs would fly their players out. Having a famed skating coach could help as well. (similar to how NHL teams are nowadays spending more on hockey operations for competitive advantage)
blackwidow, to be fair you wouldn't know this, but one reason your remarks have been regarded unseriously is they are almost verbatim what we have relitigated a thousand times among ourselves over the last 20 years, here and on the predecessor forums going all the way back to hockey-l. And even in those bygone days the topics were cliche.
It isn't so much you are being ignored. It's that you arrive on the scene with a half dozen or so points all of which have been ground to dust, and worse you arrive utterly sure of your insights when we have all taken both sides on each a hundred times and examined all the strengths and weaknesses of each. There just isn't anything new in your criticisms, and there is certainly nothing dispositive in your claims -- all have been more or less accepted as points of view which are understandable but flawed, with many conditionals, and in some cases utterly beside the point as they are environmental and will never change.
Plus, you have been, and I don't think I'm speaking out of turn here, a dink about it.
I think as you age a bit on the forum you will recognize that while there's merit in some of your comments, they aren't very fertile ground for discussing the team. They are more like the admissions criteria one has to pass through to enjoy and/or suffer along with Cornell hockey. Ranting against the wind when you live in Kansas is, if not short sighted, at least unproductive.
Quote from: Trotskyblackwidow, to be fair you wouldn't know this, but one reason your remarks have been regarded unseriously is they are almost verbatim what we have relitigated a thousand times among ourselves over the last 20 years, here and on the predecessor forums going all the way back to hockey-l. And even in those bygone days the topics were cliche.
It isn't so much you are being ignored. It's that you arrive on the scene with a half dozen or so points all of which have been ground to dust, and worse you arrive utterly sure of your insights when we have all taken both sides on each a hundred times and examined all the strengths and weaknesses of each. There just isn't anything new in your criticisms, and there is certainly nothing dispositive in your claims -- all have been more or less accepted as points of view which are understandable but flawed, with many conditionals, and in some cases utterly beside the point as they are environmental and will never change.
Plus, you have been, and I don't think I'm speaking out of turn here, a dink about it.
I think as you age a bit on the forum you will recognize that while there's merit in some of your comments, they aren't very fertile ground for discussing the team. They are more like the admissions criteria one has to pass through to enjoy and/or suffer along with Cornell hockey. Ranting against the wind when you live in Kansas is, if not short sighted, at least unproductive.
Who are you and what have you done to [name redacted]?
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: Trotskyblackwidow, to be fair you wouldn't know this, but one reason your remarks have been regarded unseriously is they are almost verbatim what we have relitigated a thousand times among ourselves over the last 20 years, here and on the predecessor forums going all the way back to hockey-l. And even in those bygone days the topics were cliche.
It isn't so much you are being ignored. It's that you arrive on the scene with a half dozen or so points all of which have been ground to dust, and worse you arrive utterly sure of your insights when we have all taken both sides on each a hundred times and examined all the strengths and weaknesses of each. There just isn't anything new in your criticisms, and there is certainly nothing dispositive in your claims -- all have been more or less accepted as points of view which are understandable but flawed, with many conditionals, and in some cases utterly beside the point as they are environmental and will never change.
Plus, you have been, and I don't think I'm speaking out of turn here, a dink about it.
I think as you age a bit on the forum you will recognize that while there's merit in some of your comments, they aren't very fertile ground for discussing the team. They are more like the admissions criteria one has to pass through to enjoy and/or suffer along with Cornell hockey. Ranting against the wind when you live in Kansas is, if not short sighted, at least unproductive.
Who are you and what have you done to [name redacted]?
It takes a dink to know a dink. I have the finest qualifications.
among other things, we usually lose in the second round
Quote from: ugarteamong other things, we usually lose in the second round
LOL. That's what irritated me the most, too (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_Bargraph_NCAA_Playoff.html).
ECAC still looking like
Q/Harvard
[huge drop]
Cornell/Clarkson
[huge drop]
Everyone else
Q has too many fifth year seniors and Harvard has too much talent. The question is whether there will be more than two NCAA bids from the ECAC this year.
Quote from: BearLoverECAC still looking like
Q/Harvard
[huge drop]
Cornell/Clarkson
[huge drop]
Everyone else
To be fair, that's what everybody expected coming into the season.
SLU surviving so far against Providence.
Day 1 of the annual You're Not Helping is in the books, 1-4-1
Brown 3 Holy Cross 0
Niagara 3 Colgate 2
Providence 4 St. Lawrence 3
Vermont 4 RPI 3 (ot)
RIT 5 Princeton 3
Harvard 4 Michigan 4 (ot)
There was also Quinnipiac 5 Dartmouth 2
One fun out of conference result: (PWR #50) LIU 3 (#19) Ohio State 2
Quote from: TrotskyOne fun out of conference result: (PWR #50) LIU 3 (#19) Ohio State 2
"That's why they play the games"
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: TrotskyOne fun out of conference result: (PWR #50) LIU 3 (#19) Ohio State 2
"That's why they play the games"
St. Thomas also beat Lake State but that was chalk for PWR. Poor Lake State, how they have fallen.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: arugulaCompletely unrelated but how is Harvard so high in Pairwise. Undefeated but against a terrible schedule. Last season we would win and lose spots in pairwise due to sos. Harvard has a weak schedule-no problem. Change in the system?
The PWR is flukish and not really worth looking at this early in the season. There likely haven't been enough out of conference games for the model to accurately compare teams in difference conferences.
Not true ... 90% of all non-conference games have already been played.
Quote from: blackwidowI questioned whether Schaefer's a good coach on this forum before. I thought it was a fair question because he's gone to the frozen four only once (03) and generally loses in the first round
this is demonstrably false
Quote from: adamwQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: arugulaCompletely unrelated but how is Harvard so high in Pairwise. Undefeated but against a terrible schedule. Last season we would win and lose spots in pairwise due to sos. Harvard has a weak schedule-no problem. Change in the system?
The PWR is flukish and not really worth looking at this early in the season. There likely haven't been enough out of conference games for the model to accurately compare teams in difference conferences.
Not true ... 90% of all non-conference games have already been played.
The tweet I quoted was about Harvard. At the time of my tweet, Harvard had played one out of its seven OOC games. Harvard's opponents to that point had largely been Ivies who had collectively played less than 15% of their OOC games.
Apparently slew footing (https://youtu.be/h7gYUlZUo1w) is a thing. I am not a knowledgeable fan of hockey and I hadn't seen this called before the game tonight. The "Fridge" seemed baffled as he can be heard expecting the change from interference was going to be a 5 minute major for cross-checking. The game was close. RPI scored the game winning goal on a 5x3 advantage. Though this slew footing call was also parlayed into a 5x3 with a tripping minor being called 3 and a half minutes later, RPI held on winning 2-1. Watson had 41 saves for RPI.
Slew footing is definitely a thing and considered quite dirty in addition to being dangerous. It's not called often because it thankfully doesn't happen often but it's usually more than just a minor. Spearing is something that's in a similar realm as far as severity is concerned
Quote from: martyApparently slew footing (https://youtu.be/h7gYUlZUo1w) is a thing. I am not a knowledgeable fan of hockey and I hadn't seen this called before the game tonight. The "Fridge" seemed baffled as he can be heard expecting the change from interference was going to be a 5 minute major for cross-checking. The game was close. RPI scored the game winning goal on a 5x3 advantage. Though this slew footing call was also parlayed into a 5x3 with a tripping minor being called 3 and a half minutes later, RPI held on winning 2-1. Watson had 41 saves for RPI.
From USA hockey rulebook:
"(Note 4) Slew Footing is the act of a player using his leg or foot to knock or kick an opponent's feet from under him. This is done by pushing an opponent's upper body backwards with an arm or elbow at the same time using a forward motion of his leg causing the opponent to fall to the ice...The minimum penalty to be assessed for slew footing is a major plus game misconduct penalty."
Here's everybody's favorite POS (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThlP3tNVsWQ) not named "Ulf" demonstrating slew footing.
Last week our family gathered in Denver for Thanksgiving. Friday evening some of us went to the DU-UNO game Unranked Omaha beat Denver 3-0., so I was feeling a bit optimistic anticipating the MSG game. https://omavs.com/news/2022/11/25/hockey-mavericks-blank-defending-national-champion-and-no-1-denver-pioneers-in-road-series-opener.aspx
The DU rink seats about 6000 for hockey. Perhaps due the school being on vacation, I'd guess the stands were about 2/3 full. The place felt dead. I was quite disappointed that there was no pep band. I heard two chants all evening and declined to participate in one wave.
Omaha dominated the whole game, winding up with a 2-1 SOG advantage. It was 3-1 after the first period. The pace was furious until both teams tired in the third period. I was surprised that Denver didn't hold up better than Omaha with their advantage of living at the altitude.
I haven't seen much hockey in the last few decades beyond the games at MSG, so this may not be new, but I was interested in the tactic of what I would call the lob pass. A substantial fraction of the clears by both teams consisted of a player in the middle of the defensive zone lifting the puck perhaps 20 feet into the air to land somewhere in the neutral zone on the other side of the ice, usually in the neighborhood of a teammate. This mostly functioned like a jump ball. The high arc gave plenty of time for an opponent to get into the same neighborhood, so it didn't seem to be a very effective tactic for advancing the puck, though it did get the puck out without much risk of being intercepted in the defensive zone or going for icing.
The Harvard '89 team made the high lob clear into an art. I swear they never iced the puck.
A mob of apologists scream "Bot! Bot!" whenever a post suggests a sub-par performance by a C.U. hockey team and calls for improvement. Crowds were not nearly as forgiving during the decades when the team was expected to at LEAST win the Ivy league men's ice hockey championship. Today's C.U. Hockey fans are much less demanding - and Much less numerous . . .
Quote from: osorojoA mob of apologists scream "Bot! Bot!" whenever a post suggests a sub-par performance by a C.U. hockey team and calls for improvement. Crowds were not nearly as forgiving during the decades when the team was expected to at LEAST win the Ivy league men's ice hockey championship. Today's C.U. Hockey fans are much less demanding - and Much less numerous . . .
Do you actually follow the team or do you just log onto this forum to complain? Cornell regularly wins the Ivy League title. Three years straight from 2018-2020, for example. Harvard currently has 15 draft picks on their team, and I'm sorry that Cornell doesn't win the Ivy League literally every single season.
Colgate 6 - Harvard 4
Circle of Suck achieves closure for another season (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FjJNM7yWQAMpsoj?format=jpg&name=large).
B.L. - What do you consider to be a successful C.U. ice-hockey season? A half-full Lynah Rink for every home game? A top-five finish in the ECAC? What [in your opinion] would be a proper aspiration for a C.U. hockey fan, not too low and not too high?
And add in what kind of commitment from the school is required to get the level of success we want as fans.. Money drives the bus.. We still have pretty cheap tickets, parking is mostly free, The school does very little to promote the team being better and help recruiting.
The men's and women's teams were #1 in 2020 when the season was shut down by Covid. There was no 2021 for Cornell. 2022 was a recovery year. 2023 still has a long way to go. Incoming recruits look pretty solid. No reason to whine.
Yeah, and putting aside the thread drift for a bit. There are actually some in-conference and OOC games this weekend. It would be nice if the conference improved its overall record
Quote from: osorojoB.L. - What do you consider to be a successful C.U. ice-hockey season? A half-full Lynah Rink for every home game? A top-five finish in the ECAC? What [in your opinion] would be a proper aspiration for a C.U. hockey fan, not too low and not too high?
See, here's your problem. Every one of your posts is a straw-man. Literally no one on here is saying their metric for a successful season is Cornell finishing in the top five of the ECAC or Lynah being half-full. Just like no one on here said anything about the strength of a hockey team being correlated with the wealth of a university, or any of the various other fake arguments you've spent time disputing. You repeatedly prop up an exaggerated or straight up fake argument and then argue against it, and in so doing you talk past everyone on this forum because no one is actually arguing anything of the sort.
For the record, my metric for a successful CU hockey season is whether it makes the NCAA tournament. I.e., winning the ECAC tournament and/or finishing top ~14 in the Pairwise. Attendance-wise, I would like to see a sell-out or close to a sell out every game (other than intersession), with the student section heavily engaged. Clearly, your post completely missed how critically I judge the hockey team. But that would have been obviously if you'd paid any attention to my posts on here.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioThe men's and women's teams were #1 in 2020 when the season was shut down by Covid. There was no 2021 for Cornell. 2022 was a recovery year. 2023 still has a long way to go. Incoming recruits look pretty solid. No reason to whine.
osorojo would respond but he's too busy trying to find his comically small microdick.
Not so long ago every Lynah game played before a standing room only crowd. Cornell hockey teams are now frequently playing at home to at best a half-empty rink. The student body and the townies have spoken, while apologists make silly excuses and crude insults rather than consider improvements. Maybe lower the price of admission? Athletes frequently improve their game before a big home crowd.
when was the not so long ago sold out crowd thing? Back in the 90s? so like 35 yrs ago?
The crowd was as good for the Harvard game as any I have seen in 41 seasons.
The aims for the median Cornell season are:
1. Get to Lake Placid
2. Get an NC$$ invite
3. Win the Ivies
In around half of those seasons, the stars align and we can reasonably have higher aims:
1. Win the ECACs
2. Advance in the NC$$s
3. Crack the PWR top 10
Insisting we must be a national title contender every year isn't being Achievement Oriented or whatever it is you are claiming to be, it is delusional. Relative to the rest of the ECAC we are the pre-eminent team.
Quote from: osorojoNot so long ago every Lynah game played before a standing room only crowd. Cornell hockey teams are now frequently playing at home to at best a half-empty rink. The student body and the townies have spoken, while apologists make silly excuses and crude insults rather than consider improvements. Maybe lower the price of admission? Athletes frequently improve their game before a big home crowd.
Once again, it seems you do not actually watch any of the games. Lynah was sold out both nights this past weekend, with the most boisterous student section I have seen in 15 years. This season is certainly the most successful in terms of student tickets sold in recent memory. Last year attendance was halved due to COVID restrictions; otherwise, your post is completely incorrect. It's unclear why you continue to say things that are disproven by five seconds of Googling.
Quote from: TrotskyThe crowd was as good for the Harvard game as any I have seen in 41 seasons.
The aims for the median Cornell season are:
1. Get to Lake Placid
2. Get an NC$$ invite
3. Win the Ivies
In around half of those seasons, the stars align and we can reasonably have higher aims:
1. Win the ECACs
2. Advance in the NC$$s
3. Crack the PWR top 10
Insisting we must be a national title contender every year isn't being Achievement Oriented or whatever it is you are claiming to be, it is delusional. Relative to the rest of the ECAC we are the pre-eminent team.
Some just can't seem to forget the late 60s and early 70s when it was expected Cornell would win every time they skated onto the ice. The college hockey world has changed. The number of Division 1 teams has more than doubled. Canada is no longer virgin recruiting territory. American kids compete now on equal footing. The game is national, not regional. The NCAAs are in NHL rinks, not the Broadmoor World Arena.
The 60s and 70s won't happen again. Time to accept that and face today's reality.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: osorojoNot so long ago every Lynah game played before a standing room only crowd. Cornell hockey teams are now frequently playing at home to at best a half-empty rink. The student body and the townies have spoken, while apologists make silly excuses and crude insults rather than consider improvements. Maybe lower the price of admission? Athletes frequently improve their game before a big home crowd.
Once again, it seems you do not actually watch any of the games. Lynah was sold out both nights this past weekend, with the most boisterous student section I have seen in 15 years. This season is certainly the most successful in terms of student tickets sold in recent memory. Last year attendance was halved due to COVID restrictions; otherwise, your post is completely incorrect. It's unclear why you continue to say things that are disproven by five seconds of Googling.
Could Age limit the Spanish Red Teddy Bear to a 4th forum? Those that want to engage could follow it/him and spar with his wisdom.
Even more appropriate would be an auto-bot to answer his questions.
Prior to the renovations
The BU @ BC game is worth watching. 6-5 BC late in the 2nd.
Quote from: martyThe BU @ BC game is worth watching. 6-5 BC late in the 2nd.
Q-RPI isn't, it's 8-3. Where is the BU game on?
Brown tied at Cheel, late. What is wrong with the Knights?
Also fun, Princeton up on Union 1-0 on a third period shorty.
OT in Potsdam, Cheel is empty. Brown had two good chances to win in the final minute. Short bus hockey coming up.
3x3 is a disgrace to Brown hockey, and Brown hockey sucks.
Brown goes to shootout, Princeton has won.
If there is a penalty at the end of the overtime and before the shootout, what happens?
They Zamboni before the shootout, I did not remember that.
Brown wins the booby prize coming all the way back from 0-2. Huh.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: martyThe BU @ BC game is worth watching. 6-5 BC late in the 2nd.
Q-RPI isn't, it's 8-3. Where is the BU game on?
Hockey East is available bon ESPN+ this year.
bu-bc game was on espnu as well last night.
Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Quote from: scoop85Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Did either team have defensemen?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Did either team have defensemen?
Not great defense but both teams have plenty of future NHL talent at forward
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Did either team have defensemen?
Not great defense but both teams have plenty of future NHL talent at forward
Not in net.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Did either team have defensemen?
Not great defense but both teams have plenty of future NHL talent at forward
Not in net.
BC's goalie was Mitch Benson, who last year at Colgate pretty much by himself won the quarterfinal series against us.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: scoop85Such a fun game, if you could put up with Buccigross's play-by-play
Did either team have defensemen?
Not great defense but both teams have plenty of future NHL talent at forward
Not in net.
BC's goalie was Mitch Benson, who last year at Colgate pretty much by himself won the quarterfinal series against us.
Han Solo: I know (http://www.tbrw.info/?/tbrw_Info/tbrwAwards.html).
I think a RPI player just got ejected for grabbing the face mask of a Princeton guy during a post-whistle scrum that was only noticed upon a Princeton challenge. And shortly afterwards Princeton scores within 20 seconds of the major power play to make it 5-2. I can't think of last time I've seen that kind of penalty called
Terrible weekend for Clarkson, which has to be biggest disappointment in ECAC so far. Playing at home, it tied both Yale and Brown and lost the shootout both time. Yale has scored 8 goals all season, while Q scored 16 goals this weekend, basically scoring as many goals in each of its games as Yale has scored all season.
Quote from: IcebergI think a RPI player just got ejected for grabbing the face mask of a Princeton guy during a post-whistle scrum that was only noticed upon a Princeton challenge. And shortly afterwards Princeton scores within 20 seconds of the major power play to make it 5-2. I can't think of last time I've seen that kind of penalty called
I recall facemasking being called against Cornell fiveish years ago.
I've never seen biting. I would like to see biting.
This (https://www.icydata.hockey/vizzes/penalties-dashboard/7) is fun.
Dartmouth lost to Lowell on Friday night and they're currently down 3-0 at UVM. They haven't won a single OOC game this season and still have at least one more. Geez
Quote from: IcebergDartmouth lost to Lowell on Friday night and they're currently down 3-0 at UVM. They haven't won a single OOC game this season and still have at least one more. Geez
Dartmouth has only won one game all season, so it's not a surprise that it's lost all of its OOC games.
Quote from: IcebergDartmouth lost to Lowell on Friday night and they're currently down 3-0 at UVM. They haven't won a single OOC game this season and still have at least one more. Geez
How'd we beat them? We're suckers for falling to teams like this. Or see it has seemed.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: IcebergDartmouth lost to Lowell on Friday night and they're currently down 3-0 at UVM. They haven't won a single OOC game this season and still have at least one more. Geez
How'd we beat them? We're suckers for falling to teams like this. Or see it has seemed.
Selective perception. I have never heard a fanbase that isn't sure their team always plays down to lesser opponents.
The last shag (https://www.uscho.com/2022/12/23/longtime-ecac-hockey-commissioner-hagwell-to-retire-at-end-of-2022-23-season/).
Maybe Clarkson has turned a corner? They quite convincingly took out UMass last night after being down 3-0 and have Wisconsin later.
Quote from: IcebergMaybe Clarkson has turned a corner? They quite convincingly took out UMass last night after being down 3-0 and have Wisconsin later.
4 goals in the third on 7 shots. Ufda.
The final Clarkson goal is listed as ppg 5x5 but is not listed as an eng.
Quote from: Clarkson PRClarkson will play in the Kwik Trip Holiday Face-Off Championship tomorrow thanks to an epic comeback over UMass tonight at the FISERV Forum in Milwaukee, WI.
Those
names. When Cornell played in Florida, 2000-2016, it was the Everblades Classic and the arena until a year before the tournament began was simply Everblades Arena, later Germain Arena (automotive group), TECO Arena (energy), now Hertz Arena (when company relocated from NJ to Estero, FL).
While Clarkson may be on fire as of late, it is in seventh place with 11 points in 8 games (under the 3W 2OTW 1OTL 0L schema) with Colgate-Cornell in 3/4 with 16 points, also in 8 games played. With Quinnipiac unbeaten (10 ECAC GP) and 30 points, they're odds-on the RS champion and the team no one wants to play post-season until the ECAC final game in Lake Placid.
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: Clarkson PRClarkson will play in the Kwik Trip Holiday Face-Off Championship tomorrow thanks to an epic comeback over UMass tonight at the FISERV Forum in Milwaukee, WI.
Those names. When Cornell played in Florida, 2000-2016, it was the Everblades Classic and the arena until a year before the tournament began was simply Everblades Arena, later Germain Arena (automotive group), TECO Arena (energy), now Hertz Arena (when company relocated from NJ to Estero, FL).
While Clarkson may be on fire as of late, it is in seventh place with 11 points in 8 games (under the 3W 2OTW 1OTL 0L schema) with Colgate-Cornell in 3/4 with 16 points, also in 8 games played. With Quinnipiac unbeaten (10 ECAC GP) and 30 points, they're odds-on the RS champion and the team no one wants to play post-season until the ECAC final game in Lake Placid.
#42 Clarkson takes care of business with a 2-1 win over #29 Wisconsin in the Kwik Trip title game... with no effect whatsoever on Cornell's post-AIC-game-1 #16 position.
EDIT TO ADD: 3-1 with an ENG, sorry.
And Clarkson wins that tourney with a 3-1 win over Wisconsin.
Beat me to it.
the PWR is gonna touch and go all yr for Cornell.. Just winning one of the MD games would have been huge for us.. Cant really afford a slip up down the stretch but I doubt we can expect to run the table and lose only to QUin/Harv/BU. It would be nice to get one of those 3 wins.
The Drunkards' Walk of ECAC results actually pulled Cornell back to 16th in the PWR eddies. It was not a terrible holiday week for the conference, for once:
28 Clk W UMass
29 Clk W UMass
29 RPI L BGSU
29 Cor W AIC
30 Drt L Mer
30 Yal L Prv
30 Cgt W Mai
30 SLU W UNO
30 Hvd L BU
30 Uni W UNH
30 Cor T AUC
30 RPI L BGSU
30 Qpc W HC
30 Prn L CC
31 SLU L UNO
31 Cgt T Mai
31 Uni W UNH
31 Prn W CC
9-7-2
some crazy reviews going canadas way vs the us tonight in the worlds. If this was a Cornell game it would have create 2 pages of complaints
Harvard trailing at Hobey Baker 3-0 after 2!
Quote from: martyHarvard trailing at Hobey Baker 3-0 after 2!
Princeton's come on a bit of late and will be a tough out in most games.
Yale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Tigers holding that 3 goals lead against the Crimson halfway through the third.
Quote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
And that's how it ends...without a shootout.
Meanwhile, Harvard comes back from 3-0 down and wins late in overtime 4-3
Welp, Q gonna be #1 (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/box/final/20230106/akf/den/).
it is settnig up for a pretty intersesting next set up games.. BU next week then Quin the next game and Harvard 3 games later.
Quin/Harv tonight
So I was thinking during our shoot-out with AIC, is it correct that there is zero impact on PWR/RPI and obviously no standings, so is a non-conference shootout entirely pointless?
Quote from: CU2007So I was thinking during our shoot-out with AIC, is it correct that there is zero impact on PWR/RPI and obviously no standings, so is a non-conference shootout entirely pointless?
Yes. Literally no meaning. Just masturbating the non-fans.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: CU2007So I was thinking during our shoot-out with AIC, is it correct that there is zero impact on PWR/RPI and obviously no standings, so is a non-conference shootout entirely pointless?
Yes. Literally no meaning. Just masturbating the non-fans.
For what it's worth, the players seemed to be into it.
UConn loses, so we drop to 13. But probably temporary...Sparty is getting crushed by THE.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: CU2007So I was thinking during our shoot-out with AIC, is it correct that there is zero impact on PWR/RPI and obviously no standings, so is a non-conference shootout entirely pointless?
Yes. Literally no meaning. Just masturbating the non-fans.
For what it's worth, the players seemed to be into it.
OK that is worth something. Before anything else the game belongs to them.
Colgate up on Union 2-1 with 10 minutes left in the 3rd.
Whistle at exactly 10 minutes and no shovel time out. I second too soon, I guess.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82UConn loses, so we drop to 13. But probably temporary...Sparty is getting crushed by THE.
Yep, after the OSU/MSU game goes final, we're back to 12.
Quote from: martyColgate up on Union 2-1 with 10 minutes left in the 3rd.
Whistle at exactly 10 minutes and no shovel time out. I second too soon, I guess.
From ECAC Policies and Procedures:
"There will be one (1) TV Timeout (TVTO), 90 seconds
in length, each period - not to include any overtime
period. The TVTO shall occur at the first permissible
stoppage of play under the 10-minute mark"
Union holds Gate to 2 so... good sign in comparing us with the Red Raiders? Maybe?
Yeah, I know.
Brown leading Merrimack 5-1 in the second
Love to see it
Except for Clarkson, who tied an opponent with lower PWR, every ECAC team playing a OOC game won tonight. Also, Q pounds Harvard so I don't think there's much question as to who will be #1 in the conference at the end of February.
And we move up to 10 in the PWR.
ECAC in PWR now:
2. Qpc
9. Hvd
10. Cor
(Look out below)
36. Clk
37. Prn
38. Cgt
ECAC Winning Percentage, including the Derp Points:
1.000 Qpc
.733 Cor
.700 Hvd
.633 Cgt
[hr]
.625 SLU
.513 Prn
.458 Clk
.333 RPI
[hr]
.300 Uni
.233 Brn
.185 Drt
.167 Yal
Yale overachieved this weekend.
Tie with pwr#10 Merrimack
1-1 tie with uvm pwr#50 (won the non counting shootout)
the good news is right now losing the first 2 games has almost been removed from a PWR issue for us in where we are now..
right now a split would be the same as if we had beaten Harvard.
Beating BU would be a good one to bag going forward. Just beating Bu or Harvard flips a few things for us.
losing all 3 of the good teams left though might knock us right back down out of the top 15 or so.
#2 at home, #8 and #9 on the road. I hope we can get a win out of those 3 games and then feast on the rest of the schedule.
The Goal is top 3 in the ECAC to avoid Q until the Placid final, and then top 12 in the PWR to avoid a regional 1-seed (Who knows? Maybe Q again.) until the NC$$ QF.
Regionals and hosts (with current PWR) FIXED
N Manchester (UNH #49)
E Bridgeport (Yale #56)
M St. Louis (Lindenwood #55)
W Fargo (NoDak #16)
It would be very nice if NoDak fails to make the tourny to get rid of that nonsense.
Quote from: upprdeckthe good news is right now losing the first 2 games has almost been removed from a PWR issue for us in where we are now..
right now a split would be the same as if we had beaten Harvard.
As I understand the pairwise, swapping outcomes with a different game in the schedule should have almost no effect on our ranking. For example, winning one or the games vs UMD instead of losing would have been equivalent to turning any other loss this season (Q or Clarkson) into a win. Pairwise is a function of win% and strength of schedule. The ranking is agnostic as to whether your wins come versus the easy or hard part of the schedule.
So, losing the two games vs UMD will continue to hurt us, but if we had won those games and instead lost to Yale and Brown, we'd be in virtually the same position. Right?
Quote from: Trotsky#2 at home, #8 and #9 on the road. I hope we can get a win out of those 3 games and then feast on the rest of the schedule.
The Goal is top 3 in the ECAC to avoid Q until the Placid final, and then top 12 in the PWR to avoid a regional 1-seed (Who knows? Maybe Q again.) until the NC$$ QF.
Regionals and hosts (with current PWR)
N Manchester (UNH #49)
E Allentown (Pedo State #4)
M St. Louis (Lindenwood #55)
W Fargo (NoDak #16)
It would be very nice if NoDak fails to make the tourny to get rid of that nonsense. That would free up the eastern regionals as Allentown (Pedo as a forced home 1 or 2) and Manchester (Q as a 1). I can see any of BU, Harvard, Merrimack, Cornell, UConn getting either 3-band in that case.
The NCAA site says Bridgeport (Yale) has a regional, not St. Louis.
Quote from: WederThe NCAA site says Bridgeport (Yale) has a regional, not St. Louis.
I suck (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/reports/ncaa/futuresites.php).
Fixed above.
FWIW, I did a bracketology this weekend. I had us in Allentown with Penn State, Denver, and Michigan Tech.
If you simply layout the numerical pairings, Western Michigan would wind up in the 3rd slot against Denver, but since they can't play Denver in the 1st round, I swapped us and Western (and sent Western to Manchester). Other than that, everything went straight by the numbers with the Goofers in Fargo, Quinny in Bridgeport, and St. Cloud in Manchester.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: CU2007So I was thinking during our shoot-out with AIC, is it correct that there is zero impact on PWR/RPI and obviously no standings, so is a non-conference shootout entirely pointless?
Yes. Literally no meaning. Just masturbating the non-fans.
Not pointless. Was listening to the Vermont radio feed yesterday when they went to a shootout vs. Yale. Announcing crew said that home team I'm an OOC game chooses whether there's a shootout or not, and that uvm coach prefers shootouts literally for their practice value. Shootouts that Matter dont happen too often, so it's a chance to let the guys experience the pressure.
Makes sense to me.
I think shootouts make teams practice that skill more so things like Penalty shots become more normal to the guys..
I have no idea how much time we spend on that skill vs 10 yrs ago though.
Alls I know is I want Zach in the rotation for penalty shots for the rest of his career. He looked like he knew what he was doing.
Quote from: TrotskyAlls I know is I want Zach in the rotation for penalty shots for the rest of his career. He looked like he knew what he was doing.
getting the goalie doing the splits and sliding the puck 5 hole was nice. would have been slick even if it didn't make it through, but nobody would have given him credit for it.
Other than shoot-outs, how many penalty shots are taken each year?
Not many.
The keeeds will never know how intense a penalty shot was before the NHL shat itself.
Just another thing of beauty gone through sheer stupidity.
Quote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
And that's how it ends...without a shootout.
Meanwhile, Harvard comes back from 3-0 down and wins late in overtime 4-3
We did the exact same thing to Harvard in the Lance Nethery era. Down 3-0 midway in the 3rd, come back win it 4 - 3. I don't remember if it was OT or regulation. If I really stretch between the ears, I think Pete Stornik might have gotten the hat trick to tie it.
Quote from: TroyfanQuote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
And that's how it ends...without a shootout.
Meanwhile, Harvard comes back from 3-0 down and wins late in overtime 4-3
We did the exact same thing to Harvard in the Lance Nethery era. Down 3-0 midway in the 3rd, come back win it 4 - 3. I don't remember if it was OT or regulation. If I really stretch between the ears, I think Pete Stornik might have gotten the hat trick to tie it.
I believe Stornik's first name was John....
Quote from: TroyfanQuote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
And that's how it ends...without a shootout.
Meanwhile, Harvard comes back from 3-0 down and wins late in overtime 4-3
We did the exact same thing to Harvard in the Lance Nethery era. Down 3-0 midway in the 3rd, come back win it 4 - 3. I don't remember if it was OT or regulation. If I really stretch between the ears, I think Pete Stornik might have gotten the hat trick to tie it.
2/23/78 (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1978/box19780223.pdf)
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: TroyfanQuote from: IcebergQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: IcebergYale also leading at Merrimack 3-1 well into the 3rd. That would be a huge upset to the benefit of the rest of the ECAC
Merrimack 2 third period goals, now 3-3.
And that's how it ends...without a shootout.
Meanwhile, Harvard comes back from 3-0 down and wins late in overtime 4-3
We did the exact same thing to Harvard in the Lance Nethery era. Down 3-0 midway in the 3rd, come back win it 4 - 3. I don't remember if it was OT or regulation. If I really stretch between the ears, I think Pete Stornik might have gotten the hat trick to tie it.
2/23/78 (http://www.tbrw.info/seasons/1978/box19780223.pdf)
There were a combined 85 shots on goal in that game. Those high-scoring games in the 1970s were so much fun to watch!
Is Lindenwood #55 a college or a barrel-aged California Chardonnay?
Quote from: billhowardIs Lindenwood #55 a college or a barrel-aged California Chardonnay?
Unsure, but I think Stonehill may be a fake school invented by Dartmouth to keep them out of last place.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: billhowardIs Lindenwood #55 a college or a barrel-aged California Chardonnay?
Unsure, but I think Stonehill may be a fake school invented by Dartmouth to keep them out of last place.
Stonehill actually sounds like a prep school where they get their date rapists from.
Clarkson up 1-0 at Harvard and there sure look like a lot of opposing fans in attendance
Harvard 4 Clarkson 1, final.
Clarkson down to 9-9-3; 3-6-0 (3+2+0). That's pretty unhealthy for a consensus top 4.
Quote from: TrotskyHarvard 4 Clarkson 1, final.
Clarkson down to 9-9-3; 3-6-0 (3+2+0). That's pretty unhealthy for a consensus top 4.
Harvard just dominated the final two periods of this game. It's also undefeated at home, something Cornell can hopefully do something about in a few weeks. As for Clarkson, the announcers kept pointing out that since starting the season 2-6, Clarkson had only lost twice since November 5.
Princeton overcame multiple minor penalties and then drew a major late in the 3rd to tie Providence 2-2.
OT about to begin with 1:28 left in the major.
And the Tigers win 3x3 in OT.
I think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
Quote from: chimpfoodI think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
RPI hasn't won a game away from the HFH this season.
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: chimpfoodI think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
RPI hasn't won a game away from the HFH this season.
And Union has won just once in regulation while away.
I just noticed that every conference leader is in the top 16.
I don't know if this has ever happened before.
I am pretty sure no season has ended this way for NCAA selections.
Quote from: nshapiroI just noticed that every conference leader is in the top 16.
I don't know if this has ever happened before.
I am pretty sure no season has ended this way for NCAA selections.
Seems like RIT is really quite good this season, as KRACH agrees somewhat with the pairwise. One can only imagine how their program might develop if they were in a better conference... ::whistle::
we will see how the go as the scholie things comes into play more for them
If cornell sweeps this weekend they move into 1st-2nd. the question is who will be in first. as Quin then plays Dartmouth sat
If harvard wins in Reg. it would be
Harv 37
Cornell 37
Quin 36 so Quin could be 36-37-38-39 after Sat.
If Harv wins in ot
QUin 37 Quin could be 37-40 after sat
Cornell 37
Harv 36
If quin wins in Reg
Quin 39 could be 39-42
cornell 37
Harv 34
If Quin wins in OT
QUin 38 could be 38-41 after Sat
Cornell 37
Harv 35
After the weekend Cornell/Quin will still have a game in hand with Harvard
1st place is not out of play. But Harvard winning probably brings it more into play
Quote from: nshapiroI just noticed that every conference leader is in the top 16.
I don't know if this has ever happened before.
I am pretty sure no season has ended this way for NCAA selections.
Anyone else notice a conference with only 7 teams that had 6 of them ranked in the top 20? This is a conference that has had much trouble gaining traction in the Frozen Four since its (rather recent) inception.
Quote from: martyQuote from: nshapiroI just noticed that every conference leader is in the top 16.
I don't know if this has ever happened before.
I am pretty sure no season has ended this way for NCAA selections.
Anyone else notice a conference with only 7 teams that had 6 of them ranked in the top 20? This is a conference that has had much trouble gaining traction in the Frozen Four since its (rather recent) inception.
Yep. It reminds me of the ACC lax league of 15-20 years ago. So much weight was put into SoS that just playing a league schedule made sure a majority of teams made the ncaas.
Notre Dame risks finishing in the top 16 with a losing record and being ineligible.
Quote from: RichHQuote from: martyQuote from: nshapiroI just noticed that every conference leader is in the top 16.
I don't know if this has ever happened before.
I am pretty sure no season has ended this way for NCAA selections.
Anyone else notice a conference with only 7 teams that had 6 of them ranked in the top 20? This is a conference that has had much trouble gaining traction in the Frozen Four since its (rather recent) inception.
Yep. It reminds me of the ACC lax league of 15-20 years ago. So much weight was put into SoS that just playing a league schedule made sure a majority of teams made the ncaas.
Notre Dame risks finishing in the top 16 with a losing record and being ineligible.
That's what I hate about pairwise. So much is out into strength of schedule when that's the one thing that schools can't control. Teams can't choose how strong or weak their conference is each year and a lot of the time schools with a worse record from the strong conferences struggle in the tournament.
Quote from: chimpfoodI think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
I don't think anyone is computing KASA any more, but I wonder how hard it would be for Adam to turn it on for CHN.
Quote from: chimpfoodI think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
It's actually a 50% bonus compared with a home win, since home wins are .8 wins vs. road wins being 1.2. I think that all conference games should just be straight 1.0. Right now, if we were to split with a team while winning at home. it's .8 W and .8L. If we split with a team by winning on the road, it's 1.2W and 1.2L. The extra, .4W and .4L actually brings down the win percentage for any team over .500. It shouldn't matter which way the split happened. I know that in some other conferences teams may play an opponent an odd number of times, but the # of home and road games generally even out for the entire conference schedule The 1.2 W in non-conference helps give teams an incentive to schedule home and road series with opponents like Arizona Stae or Lindenwood,
Just. Win.
Why (https://www.union.edu/communications/nickname)? It is quite literally the only good thing about them
Quote from: TrotskyWhy (https://www.union.edu/communications/nickname)? It is quite literally the only good thing about them
Can we stuff the ballot box for #26?
Quote from: TrotskyWhy (https://www.union.edu/communications/nickname)? It is quite literally the only good thing about them
The non-gendered alternative is sitting right there! Just like Syracuse has taken to referring to themselves most often as "the Orange," Union can just start referring to themselves as "the Dutch." It's fine. We'll all go on hating them in much the same way as we always have.
Or go with "Garnet" or "Big Garnet." Or the "Chesters."
But what's going to happen is the "branding team" (ugh) is going to come up with some awful "—hawk" alternative and another little piece of distinctive weirdness—not even a bad piece of distinctive weirdness—will fade away.
Skating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
Quote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
Weird Hans Brinker mascot should have been installed years ago.
Could've been a contender to dethrone this:
https://content.sportslogos.net/logos/33/808/full/owrbh7sxgug3x64geprr.gif
Quote from: Scersk '97But what's going to happen is the "branding team" (ugh) is going to come up with some awful "—hawk" alternative and another little piece of distinctive weirdness—not even a bad piece of distinctive weirdness—will fade away.
All contemporary branding is boring pablum that ages like milk. The only new team image I can think of in the last 30 years that was an improvement is Guardians, because (1) Jesus fuck did you see the old one (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Logo_of_the_Cleveland_Indians_%281946-1950%29.png/220px-Logo_of_the_Cleveland_Indians_%281946-1950%29.png)?, and (2) it has potential for when they really start to exploit the Art Deco theme (https://www.roadsideamerica.com/attract/images/oh/OHCLEguardians_chrisjones1.jpg) after ChildWorld (the consumerist aesthetic of the last 30 years (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkTDARZWoAAsisR.jpg)) is finally flushed down the toilet.
GenZers, save us. Your parents and grandparents are vacuous idiots with
no style.
Quote from: RichH(https://hockeyeastonline.com/images/toplogos20/prv.png)
The only thing about this logo that sucks is the aspect ratio, which is even worse than Michigan. Otherwise it's okay.
Quote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
Are they allowed to call themselves "Orange (https://www.goal.com/en-us/news/why-netherlands-wear-orange-dutch-oranje-tradition-explained/blt4876b1216a779cb5)," or the "Dutch Orange," or the "Orange Dutch, or the "Original Orange," or the "Orange you glad I didn't add a fifth name? Orange"?
After all, Union is Division III in everything but hockey, and Syracuse doesn't have a varsity, D-I hockey team."
I don't think you can use Orange anymore because it gives the Catholics a sad or something. I have lost track of whose feewies are hurt by that one.
Ah, the sad image-linking quirks of a 20 year-old forum code.
Quote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
There's an easy solution - just go with Das Fliegende Holländers, in the plural neuter form.
Of course then you have to have a conversation about Wagner's desire to drive the Jews out of Germany, but at least you're no longer talking about stupid manufactured branding controversies.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyWhy (https://www.union.edu/communications/nickname)? It is quite literally the only good thing about them
The non-gendered alternative is sitting right there! Just like Syracuse has taken to referring to themselves most often as "the Orange," Union can just start referring to themselves as "the Dutch." It's fine. We'll all go on hating them in much the same way as we always have.
Or go with "Garnet" or "Big Garnet." Or the "Chesters."
But what's going to happen is the "branding team" (ugh) is going to come up with some awful "—hawk" alternative and another little piece of distinctive weirdness—not even a bad piece of distinctive weirdness—will fade away.
Too soon I fear we'll be known as "The Red". Big is such a non-inclusive adjective. Shouldn't we worry that the likes of Topher, Jack O. and Nick D. might take the name as a micro aggression?
Edit: I'd also be fine with "The Big Red Angry Armenians". ;-)
I think Union should go with "Garnet." Turns out in long-ago time, garnets and other red gemstones were called "carbuncles." This seems very appropriate.
Quote from: BeeeejThere's an easy solution - just go with Das Fliegende Holländers, in the plural neuter form.
Of course then you have to have a conversation about Wagner's desire to drive the Jews out of Germany
The term dates from the 17th century; Das Rhiendick (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SfVA1W_3xE) doesn't own it.
Quote from: Give My RegardsI think Union should go with "Garnet." Turns out in long-ago time, garnets and other red gemstones were called "carbuncles." This seems very appropriate.
According to Union's website that was linked above, Union once went by "Garnet" before "Dutchmen" was used by the press (whatever press it was that covered Union back in the day I suppose)
Quote from: jtwcornell91Quote from: chimpfoodI think it's time for the pairwise to give more than a 20 percent bonus for away games. If you look around the ncaa this year there are some tremendous differences in home vs away record. Just in the ECAC harvard and Q are undefeated at home, we have one loss at home and are below .500 away. Even Yale is hovering around .500 at home.
I don't think anyone is computing KASA any more, but I wonder how hard it would be for Adam to turn it on for CHN.
Somewhere it IS on. And JTW - if you ever answered any of my emails, we could discuss a bunch of things. ::crazy::
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
There's an easy solution - just go with Das Fliegende Holländers, in the plural neuter form.
Of course then you have to have a conversation about Wagner's desire to drive the Jews out of Germany, but at least you're no longer talking about stupid manufactured branding controversies.
There is no plural neuter form in German; it's Die fliegenden Holländer for the Flying Dutchmen in the nominative case. If they are all women, it would be Die fliegenden Holländerinnen.
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
There's an easy solution - just go with Das Fliegende Holländers, in the plural neuter form.
Of course then you have to have a conversation about Wagner's desire to drive the Jews out of Germany, but at least you're no longer talking about stupid manufactured branding controversies.
There is no plural neuter form in German; it's Die fliegenden Holländer for the Flying Dutchmen in the nominative case. If they are all women, it would be Die fliegenden Holländerinnen.
Ah
THERE'S the random thread drift I come here for.
Quote from: French RageQuote from: ursusminorQuote from: BeeeejQuote from: TrotskySkating Dutchmen could be the greatest logo in history if they used their imaginations. Just adapt this to a goddamn skater and you have something spectacular:
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/lNMgBxjegQc/hqdefault.jpg)
There's an easy solution - just go with Das Fliegende Holländers, in the plural neuter form.
Of course then you have to have a conversation about Wagner's desire to drive the Jews out of Germany, but at least you're no longer talking about stupid manufactured branding controversies.
There is no plural neuter form in German; it's Die fliegenden Holländer for the Flying Dutchmen in the nominative case. If they are all women, it would be Die fliegenden Holländerinnen.
Ah THERE'S the random thread drift I come here for.
Damn, he beat me to it. But I can add "die fliegenden Holländer*innen" which is how it would usually be written these days.
importantly, we must stamp our feet whenever anyone indicates an interest in moving past an ethnic team name because anyone who cares more than me is a scold. at the same time, anyone who cares less than me is a bigot. also, brands are stupid, except for THIS brand, which i don't care about except that i've decided to adopt a principle that means i care about it A LOT.
Quote from: ugarteimportantly, we must stamp our feet whenever anyone indicates an interest in moving past an ethnic team name because anyone who cares more than me is a scold. at the same time, anyone who cares less than me is a bigot. also, brands are stupid, except for THIS brand, which i don't care about except that i've decided to adopt a principle that means i care about it A LOT.
Okay folks, that's all for eLynah. No post will ever be better. G'night!
Quote from: BeeeejQuote from: ugarteimportantly, we must stamp our feet whenever anyone indicates an interest in moving past an ethnic team name because anyone who cares more than me is a scold. at the same time, anyone who cares less than me is a bigot. also, brands are stupid, except for THIS brand, which i don't care about except that i've decided to adopt a principle that means i care about it A LOT.
Okay folks, that's all for eLynah. No post will ever be better. G'night!
A rant in search of a strawman that nobody has posted, but, it hammers the one note we all can reach.
you don't have to respond every time but if you do, so will i! the only one-note being played is "everything is too woke!" sorry if you thought the joke was about you. it was only *in part* about you.
Quote from: ugarteyou don't have to respond every time but if you do, so will i! the only one-note being played is "everything is too woke!"
None of this is about being woke, but as a man with only a hammer go to it, lad. You can't lose. AFAIK, the Catholics *did (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-18769781)* squeal about references to the Orangemen. If it's "woke" to object to a bunch of white Brits acting offended then the term which was about recognizing systemic racism and police brutality has lost all meaning.
I see somebody who calls people out but woe betide anyone does it back.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteyou don't have to respond every time but if you do, so will i! the only one-note being played is "everything is too woke!"
None of this is about being woke, but as a man with only a hammer go to it, lad. You can't lose.
you're the one talking about "feewings"! listen to yourself! you said you can't keep track of who was offended but now apparently you know damn well who, because you sure didn't sound like you were taking the Catholics' side before! Maybe you need a refresher on which side the Brits are in the whole green/orange thing.
in all of this your biggest crime is the self-delusion that it's other people lacking a sense of humor when it's your joke-writing that's the biggest offense. i may be a hammer, but i work because you're a nail.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteyou don't have to respond every time but if you do, so will i! the only one-note being played is "everything is too woke!"
None of this is about being woke, but as a man with only a hammer go to it, lad. You can't lose.
you're the one talking about "feewings"!
My mistake. You have a hammer
and a shovel.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteyou don't have to respond every time but if you do, so will i! the only one-note being played is "everything is too woke!"
None of this is about being woke, but as a man with only a hammer go to it, lad. You can't lose.
you're the one talking about "feewings"!
My mistake. You have a hammer and a shovel.
my bad
Word is that with 2.8 seconds left in the 2nd period and down 1-0, Colgate pulled its goalie with a faceoff in the Union zone. Union won the faceoff and a shot down the ice hit the Colgate net with 0.3 seconds left, leaving Union up 2-0 after 2.
Quote from: scoop85Word is that with 2.8 seconds left in the 2nd period and down 1-0, Colgate pulled its goalie with a faceoff in the Union zone. Union won the faceoff and a shot down the ice hit the Colgate net with 0.3 seconds left, leaving Union up 2-0 after 2.
well... lol
Quote from: scoop85Word is that with 2.8 seconds left in the 2nd period and down 1-0, Colgate pulled its goalie with a faceoff in the Union zone. Union won the faceoff and a shot down the ice hit the Colgate net with 0.3 seconds left, leaving Union up 2-0 after 2.
Woof.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: scoop85Word is that with 2.8 seconds left in the 2nd period and down 1-0, Colgate pulled its goalie with a faceoff in the Union zone. Union won the faceoff and a shot down the ice hit the Colgate net with 0.3 seconds left, leaving Union up 2-0 after 2.
well... lol
Lousy camerawork, but
https://twitter.com/Unionmhockey/status/1621681459600703488
The official box score currently lists the goal scored at 19:60.
Quote from: ugarteimportantly, we must stamp our feet whenever anyone indicates an interest in moving past an ethnic team name because anyone who cares more than me is a scold. at the same time, anyone who cares less than me is a bigot. also, brands are stupid, except for THIS brand, which i don't care about except that i've decided to adopt a principle that means i care about it A LOT.
Having punished myself by reading their FAQ, it seems like the objection is not that it's an ethnic name, but that somebody other than them made it up, which sort of fits in with the idea that this is an opportunity for a branding exercise, which universities love so much. Of course, the FAQ itself mentions wokeness in an attempt to generate backlash to any backlash. ("Isn't this just a bunch of woke liberals yada yada" = "Isn't anyone who thinks this isn't a good idea just complaining about woke liberals"; it's a bad-faith attempt to characterize opposition as bad-faith culture warriors.)
This is more attention than we should ever be paying to Union given we're past that one random four year stretch where they were ever relevant in anything.
Quote from: French RageThis is more attention than we should ever be paying to Union given we're past that one random four year stretch where they were ever relevant in anything.
The team better pay them attention tonight. They beat RPI 6-0 in the non-league Mayor's Cup last Saturday.
Skating SchenectadIans.
Just rolls off the tongue....
They should be able to do something with The Electric City.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_kzwbC0HewQ/ToNQRTL-GLI/AAAAAAAAAJo/ukQHbMXT3Ek/s1600/LightsHauls003.jpg)
I knew about GE but TIL:
(https://donsdepot.donrossgroup.net/dr1401/tm089.jpg)
Amazing industrial porn:
(https://www.schenectadyhistory.org/pictures/wfdawson/american_locomotive_works_erecting_floor-300.jpg)
Would someone mind reminding me? For conference tournaments and the ncaa tournament does it follow the same regular season way of 5 minutes of 3x3 OT then a shootout or is it 5x5 OT periods until there's a winner?
Quote from: chimpfoodWould someone mind reminding me? For conference tournaments and the ncaa tournament does it follow the same regular season way of 5 minutes of 3x3 OT then a shootout or is it 5x5 OT periods until there's a winner?
Sudden death full strength the way the Eldritch Gods intended.
Thank god
1-1 tie in Hanover with a full period still to go
The Quinnipiac-Dartmouth feed has a commercial for... Cleveland?
cornell sweeps, harvard loses and we go backwards in the PWR
Quote from: upprdeckcornell sweeps, harvard loses and we go backwards in the PWR
The night is young and last I saw there were three dead ties in PWR, at 5, 8, and 10.
Tens of people in attendance at Thompson.
Welp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
Quote from: TrotskyWelp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
That big goalie they've got is a problem.
If the Green actually held on*, we would be 2 points behind Q, 39-37.
( * They will not. )
Note also: Cornell currently has 37 derp points, with 6 games and 18 potential points remaining. We had 39 all last season.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyWelp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
That big goalie they've got is a problem.
Q's defense is playing terribly this period. Did they have an injury?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyWelp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
That big goalie they've got is a problem.
Q's defense is playing terribly this period. Did they have an injury?
Don't know, but I'm impressed with Dartmouth's speed and pressing. They're playing to win, that's for sure.
Reid Cashman is starting to look like Roy Kent.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyWelp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
That big goalie they've got is a problem.
Q's defense is playing terribly this period. Did they have an injury?
Don't know, but I'm impressed with Dartmouth's speed and pressing. They're playing to win, that's for sure.
Dartmouth has had a ton of close losses. I don't know if they're good, but they're better than their (hilariously bad) record.
Quote from: TrotskyTens of people in attendance at Thompson.
I assume many are still hungover from preparing to throw tennis balls last night during the losing effort against Princeton
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: TrotskyWelp. Dartmouth up, 2-1. 15 mins to go. Katy bar the door.
That big goalie they've got is a problem.
Q's defense is playing terribly this period. Did they have an injury?
Don't know, but I'm impressed with Dartmouth's speed and pressing. They're playing to win, that's for sure.
Yeah, I'm enjoying it. This is definitely their YOLO moment.
There is no possible way they can pull this off, right?
Uh... right?
Under 5 minutes now.
Glad to be rooting for Chisholm for once. That guy is good.
It was only a matter of time, unfortunately. :-( Shots are close to 50-20.
Q up 3-2 now after a nice set up in the slot
I appreciate Dartmouth continuing to let me hate them.
Quote from: DafatoneI appreciate Dartmouth continuing to let me hate them.
And after they graduate they all go into finance.
It's a vertical monopoly of disgust.
Quote from: TrotskyThey should be able to do something with The Electric City.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_kzwbC0HewQ/ToNQRTL-GLI/AAAAAAAAAJo/ukQHbMXT3Ek/s1600/LightsHauls003.jpg)
Scranton is The Electric City, not Schenectady.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Scranton is The Electric City, not Schenectady.
Take it up with Edison (https://dailygazette.com/2021/02/20/electric-evermore-longtime-schenectady-moniker-is-firmly-rooted-in-history/).
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Scranton is The Electric City, not Schenectady.
Take it up with Edison (https://dailygazette.com/2021/02/20/electric-evermore-longtime-schenectady-moniker-is-firmly-rooted-in-history/).
(https://assets.simpleviewinc.com/simpleview/image/fetch/c_limit,q_75,w_1200/https://assets.simpleviewinc.com/simpleview/image/upload/crm/lackawannapa/218-3-2284_jpeg-9f97015d5056a36_9f973218-5056-a36a-07e8fba70cd04764.jpg)
(https://i0.wp.com/travelingtwogether.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/f85004da-d80d-42a2-98f7-ba3fd1c3ee81.jpg?fit=2048%2C1536&ssl=1)
Does anyone know how the Ivy standings are decided? Is it 3 for regulation, 2 for overtime like ECAC? If so, we stand a good shot of at least tying for the league because of H's 3 ot wins. Minor point but would be nice.
Quote from: arugulaDoes anyone know how the Ivy standings are decided? Is it 3 for regulation, 2 for overtime like ECAC? If so, we stand a good shot of at least tying for the league because of H's 3 ot wins. Minor point but would be nice.
The official Ivy site (https://ivyleague.com/standings.aspx?path=mhockey) appears to use derp points, but NOT the ECAC's derp points. Princeton's record (4-4 .562) doesn't track for either straight nor derp points (ether .500 or .542). Likewise Cornell 6-2 .812 vs .750 or .792.
After wrestling with it for a bit, my conclusion is the Ivy site is just fucked up.
.792 is correct for Cornell. 6 wins equals 18 points plus one loser point. So 19 out of a possible 24 equals .792
I'm not finding any percentages on the Ivy site. Not sure where you are looking.
Quote from: arugulaI'm not finding any percentages on the Ivy site. Not sure where you are looking.
https://ivyleague.com/standings.aspx?path=mhockey
Quote from: arugula.792 is correct for Cornell. 6 wins equals 18 points plus one loser point. So 19 out of a possible 24 equals .792
Yes that's my point. The site lists Cornell as .812, which makes no sense. It is either .750 using real points or .792 using ECAC derp points.
Quote from: Trotsky(https://i0.wp.com/travelingtwogether.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/f85004da-d80d-42a2-98f7-ba3fd1c3ee81.jpg?fit=2048%2C1536&ssl=1)
Except my picture is real - that sign actually exists. The picture above with Dunder-Mifflin is TV fake.
Just holding onto OT vs BU and we go back to 10th in pwr..
Schadenfreude reminder: 5pm Harvard vs BC
Watching the Beanpot, they just showed a graphic of the coaches of the 4 teams. Donato is coaching in his 18th Beanpot. He's won the title once!
Quote from: dbilmesWatching the Beanpot, they just showed a graphic of the coaches of the 4 teams. Donato is coaching in his 18th Beanpot. He's won the title once!
Was there a goal waved off early in the 1st? I don't get NESN but have the NCAA live play-by-play up and there's an entry for a goal, but the score stayed 0-0 (until just now as Harvard has apparently scored at the 8:35 mark).
Quote from: JasonN95Quote from: dbilmesWatching the Beanpot, they just showed a graphic of the coaches of the 4 teams. Donato is coaching in his 18th Beanpot. He's won the title once!
Was there a goal waved off early in the 1st? I don't get NESN but have the NCAA live play-by-play up and there's an entry for a goal, but the score stayed 0-0 (until just now as Harvard has apparently scored at the 8:35 mark).
Harvard scored in the first minute, but the goal was disallowed. I'm not sure why since I turned the game just after play resumed.
I guess it's better for us if Harvard wins, but I just can't. Listening to the WHRB stream. I have a soft spot for WHRB as an old friend worked on the station but man these kids are smug.
Quote from: arugulaI guess it's better for us if Harvard wins, but I just can't. Listening to the WHRB stream. I have a soft spot for WHRB as an old friend worked on the station but man these kids are smug.
There's a decent chance Harvard losing winds up being better for us, if we end up neck and neck with them in RPI. So, hang your hat on that while rooting against them.
Good. I'll go with that. Not looking good for BC though.
Quote from: dbilmesWatching the Beanpot, they just showed a graphic of the coaches of the 4 teams. Donato is coaching in his 18th Beanpot. He's won the title once!
Northeastern failed to win the Beanpot the first 30 years. I think they only even played in the final something like 5 times.
Quote from: arugulaI guess it's better for us if Harvard wins, but I just can't. Listening to the WHRB stream. I have a soft spot for WHRB as an old friend worked on the station but man these kids are smug.
I
always root for the ECAC in NC games.
If it makes it any easier, BC fans are a hundred times worse than Harvard fans, and Harvard fans suck.
Crimson up 3-1, exactly on track for a signature third period collapse to fuck up our RPI.
Quote from: arugulaGood. I'll go with that. Not looking good for BC though.
Harvard beating or tying BU would make it harder for us to flip our comparison against them. We need to maintain our RPI lead and either win common opponents or beat them head to head one more time.
We can win common opponents if we keep winning, but Harvard beating or tying BU makes that tougher.
And regardless of whether Harvard wins, they still have to go up to Hanover this weekend and Dartmouth has kept many games close this year.
Harvard outshot 22-2 in 3rd period, and went over 16 minutes without a shot, as BC scores twice in final three minutes to tie game and send it to OT. Then Harvard scores with 1.5 seconds left to pull it out.
Quote from: dbilmesHarvard outshot 22-2 in 3rd period, and went over 16 minutes without a shot, as BC scores twice in final three minutes to tie game and send it to OT.
(https://2kgamer.s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/uploads/original/3X/3/1/31ddf686135d1d0443b1d85bc0d2be067310aeba.jpeg)
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: arugulaDoes anyone know how the Ivy standings are decided? Is it 3 for regulation, 2 for overtime like ECAC? If so, we stand a good shot of at least tying for the league because of H's 3 ot wins. Minor point but would be nice.
The official Ivy site (https://ivyleague.com/standings.aspx?path=mhockey) appears to use derp points, but NOT the ECAC's derp points. Princeton's record (4-4 .562) doesn't track for either straight nor derp points (ether .500 or .542). Likewise Cornell 6-2 .812 vs .750 or .792.
After wrestling with it for a bit, my conclusion is the Ivy site is just fucked up.
The Ivy site for last year uses derp points correctly but doesn't record OWs and OLs correctly. My assumption is someone just typed in the points and whatever else they scraped up.
But, going by that, we and Harvard should end up tied if we both win out, since both teams will have failed to claim 5 derp points.
Quote from: dbilmesHarvard outshot 22-2 in 3rd period, and went over 16 minutes without a shot, as BC scores twice in final three minutes to tie game and send it to OT. Then Harvard scores with 1.5 seconds left to pull it out.
For such a talented team (I'm told) they get pushed to OT an awful lot. That's their 7th OT, winning 5 of them. 3x3 shinny benefits a team that has a Coronado line.
I don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
Quote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
Thanks. CHN box has the GWG at 4:59 currently.
Quote from: RichH3x3 shinny benefits a team that has a Coronado line.
Mike said when they put Coronato and Farrell out to start our overtime he thought "Oh well."
maybe just play it like a 3-3 PK and dont chase them. at least then to score they need to take a shot from a decent way out.
FWIW in PWR, BU is letting us down.
Quote from: TrotskyFWIW in PWR, BU is letting us down.
That's fine. At the risk of getting too arcane, Harvard beating BU would've been very bad for us. So BU losing takes care of that.
On the other hand, one of Northeastern or Harvard is going to win the Beanpot. What a world.
Apparently Northeastern won three in a row recently. Mind blown.
Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
No. It was 3x3 for five minutes. Apparently due to an NCAA requirement. Harvard scored at 4:58.5.
Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
No. It was 3x3 for five minutes. Apparently due to an NCAA requirement. Harvard scored at 4:58.5.
Just watched it. 3x3 overtime remains incredibly dumb.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
No. It was 3x3 for five minutes. Apparently due to an NCAA requirement. Harvard scored at 4:58.5.
Just watched it. 3x3 overtime remains incredibly dumb.
Having any overtime at all is Reagan. Fun and inane and popular so, meh, whatevs.
3x3 is Dubya. Nobody asked for or needed this but creeping meatballism is entropic.
Shootout is Dump. A defilement and sheer malevolence.
The announcers talked about how in previous years, Beanpot games would be played out in sudden death overtime for as long as it took for someone to score, but the new NCAA rules mandate that regular season games can only have a 5-minute overtime.
Quote from: dbilmesThe announcers talked about how in previous years, Beanpot games would be played out in sudden death overtime for as long as it took for someone to score, but the new NCAA rules mandate that regular season games can only have a 5-minute overtime.
Interesting question my mind conjures, then: if at the end of the NCAA-mandated 5 minute OT of a tied game, can an independent tournament playing for beans or whatever, decide to play 8x8, non-sudden death, 20 minutes, cumulative goals super-bonus OT to determine the finalists?
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: Chris '03Quote from: Give My RegardsQuote from: RichHI don't pay close attention to little regional tournaments like this. Was this also a 5-min 3x3 OT w/ shootout format? Or do they play real hockey in Bostontown?
20-minute OT (Harvard scored at 19:59)
No. It was 3x3 for five minutes. Apparently due to an NCAA requirement. Harvard scored at 4:58.5.
Just watched it. 3x3 overtime remains incredibly dumb.
Having any overtime at all is Reagan. Fun and inane and popular so, meh, whatevs.
3x3 is Dubya. Nobody asked for or needed this but creeping meatballism is entropic.
Shootout is Dump. A defilement and sheer malevolence.
I somehow like the shootout better than 3x3. At least the shootout doesn't pretend to be hockey.
Quote from: dbilmesThe announcers talked about how in previous years, Beanpot games would be played out in sudden death overtime for as long as it took for someone to score, but the new NCAA rules mandate that regular season games can only have a 5-minute overtime.
- 3x3 is hockey. Just not what quote purists think of hockey as.
- In Boston, the Beanpot is seen as more than hockey; they probably think it deserves a 20-minute OT.
- Would have been nice to see a Harvard-BU final but that wasn't to happen.
CHN mentioned in an article that Cornell already has players in the transfer portal for the off-season, anyone know who?
looking at the portal
joe howe from last april
peter muzyka from a couple weeks ago
thats all i see
Quote from: chimpfoodCHN mentioned in an article that Cornell already has players in the transfer portal for the off-season, anyone know who?
According to this, defenseman Peter Muzyka. He played 6 games last season as a junior, afaik, no games this season.
https://gopherpucklive.com/transfer-portal/
Brown wins 3-2 over RPI.
Harvard also hangs on in Hanover, so no real surprises tonight
All beans tonight. 2-2 final and a shiitout.
Hate to say it, but that was some really exciting 3x3 hockey in tonight's Beanpot final. Watching Sucks go 0-for in the shootout was icing on the cake.
As the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Quote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
The one opining his wish for two 3x3 overtimes was less a fan of hockey than scoring. It was a great game to watch and Harvard's shooting was on display for much of it.
Since they claimed this was the first shootout I wonder what the OT history is. Wikipedia has a 3 OT listed with Harvard over NE in the play in game of 1963 and another for BU over NE in 1965.
As recently as 2020 there were two 2 OT games including NE's won in the final. Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
Quote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
Quote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Quote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
That's a strange takeaway given both of Harvard's goals were scored by 1st round draft pick Coronato.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
To be fair Levi is the best goaltender in college hockey and will himself almost certainly be in the NHL in a few years.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
That's a strange takeaway given both of Harvard's goals were scored by 1st round draft pick Coronato.
That's a strange takeaway given I was writing about the shootout.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
That's a strange takeaway given both of Harvard's goals were scored by 1st round draft pick Coronato.
That's a strange takeaway given I was writing about the shootout.
OK, just don't really understand the point here. In the NHL, a shootout attempt succeeds about 30% of the time. I.e., every individual shootout attempt is a lot more likely to fail than succeed. Harvard took only three attempts, which is an inconsequential sample size, and all were against the best goalie in college hockey. In the third attempt, it looked like Laferriere had made a good move, but the puck hit Levi's arm and deflected away from the net. So I don't really think last night's shootout means much of anything.
Regarding Levi, he's considered the best college goalie, but he's under 6 feet tall. At the moment, there are few or zero NHL goalies under 6' receiving regular playing time. It will be interesting to see if Levi makes it in spite of his smaller size.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesQuote from: martyQuote from: dbilmesAs the 5-minute OT came to an end, one of the announcers said he wished they would just keep playing 3-on-3 overtime instead of going to a shootout. He noted that with all of the open ice in 3-on-3, it wouldn't take that much time for one of the teams to score a goal. It sounded like neither one of the broadcasters was a fan of deciding the tournament title in a shootout.
Is the NCAA mandating the OT rules in this tournament?
The announcers said last Monday that the NCAA isn't allowing teams to play more than a 5-minute overtime during the regular season.
That's what I remembered hearing recently too. We bow to their authority.
Also mentioned in the CHN game article. Harvard's slick, heralded draft choices failed in the shoot-out.
To be fair Levi is the best goaltender in college hockey and will himself almost certainly be in the NHL in a few years.
To be fair!
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv7jcciKB_s[/video]
With Colgate's win over SLU, we will end up in either 2nd or 3rd, since we win the tiebreaker with Colgate.
Check out shots on goal in Schenectady.
13-0 after 1.
SLU couldn't count...twice in the first period!
A UConn loss here would be really bad as we might lose our quality win bonus.
Quote from: chimpfoodA UConn loss here would be really bad as we might lose our quality win bonus.
It looks like the quality win bonus is a sliding scale based on the team's rank. So there isn't a cliff that you fall off of if a team goes from the bottom of the quality win bracket to out of it.
if uconn loses and you adjust our PWR in real time we lose about .04 pts.. It may move more later after other games. Winning tonight is probably bigger deal for us because Uconn in theory could also steal a bid.. really want BU to run the table in HE..
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: chimpfoodA UConn loss here would be really bad as we might lose our quality win bonus.
It looks like the quality win bonus is a sliding scale based on the team's rank. So there isn't a cliff that you fall off of if a team goes from the bottom of the quality win bracket to out of it.
Oh, I thought it went from 0.0025 points if they were in 20th to none if they fell out of the top 20. Not such a huge game in that case.
Quote from: chimpfoodQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: chimpfoodA UConn loss here would be really bad as we might lose our quality win bonus.
It looks like the quality win bonus is a sliding scale based on the team's rank. So there isn't a cliff that you fall off of if a team goes from the bottom of the quality win bracket to out of it.
Oh, I thought it went from 0.0025 points if they were in 20th to none if they fell out of the top 20. Not such a huge game in that case.
It does, but it's also .05 if they were in 1st. So the difference between 19th and 20th is equal to the difference between 20th and 21st.
Still better for us if Uconn wins, but no cliff.
Chippiness at the end of the game at Harvard but the home team leading 6-1.
Q advances as expected.
SLU making it interesting as they're now down 3-2. SLU color guy sounds drunk
And now I have to admit that the Saints announcers are getting me a bit misty. What else do they have in Canton? They're obviously crushed, the team's crushed, but there's always next year.
I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
NE lost
Msu lost
COnn lost
Omaha lost
Looks like if Minn St loses to North mich they would fall behind us as well and keep that A 2 Bid League
Still want BU to run the table and BC to win tonight to knock Merrimack out and keep that 1 bid league
Quote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
Beat Harvard and fuck the Homecoming Queen. Or King. No judgments.
HE could steal a bid
ECAC could steal a bid
Atlantic will steal a bid
CCHA will get 2
NCHA could steal a bid
I dont think we can fall below like 13/14 but that still might not be safe Best to stay at 12.. and thats still on the edge.
root for denver and st cloud
root for BU
Root for Quin if we have too
Quote from: upprdeckHE could steal a bid
ECAC could steal a bid
Atlantic will steal a bid
CCHA will get 2
NCHA could steal a bid
I dont think we can fall below like 13/14 but that still might not be safe Best to stay at 12.. and thats still on the edge.
root for denver and st cloud
root for BU
Root for Quin if we have too
If NMU wins over MTU, maybe CCHA gets 3?
According to chn we have a 100% chance of a bid.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
I don't think Merrimack would pass us in that scenario. But I'm not certain. If they would, then it's possible that UMass Lowell could beat BU, then beat Merrimack in the finals and maybe Hockey East gets three bids. But I don't think so.
Otherwise, yeah, you summed it up well.
Otherwise yeah, I think that's right.
Minn St- Nmich is a wash now.. 1 gets in either way But NMich winning helps us seeing wise if we get in.
WMich losing is bad if st cloud loses today as well because then it's a 1 game deal for a bid steal. St cloud winning today would mean someone has to upset 2 top 10 teams. And In CCs case they would have had to beat 3 of them and if they do that, I guess the deserve it.
HE is coming down to 1 shot to steal.
ECAC Colgate has beaten all 3 teams left so they have to feel like they can do it again.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
The statement that the probabilities are too high has not been demonstrated empirically. They may be, they may not, but "feeling" they are too high is not a mathematical argument.
Easy enough to run the numbers. If people want to put some reality behind their gut feelings, they should.
The better way to look at 99.7% is that there are very few scenarios where Cornell doesn't get it. You are then free to argue about Cornell's true "probability" academically.
The alternative is to play out every permutation and combination of results, as opposed to 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations. In that case, however, you'd probably see wrongly worse "odds" because so many of those scenarios are unlikely.
But again, saying the Probability Matrix is useless and flawed, really misses the point. Lather, rinse, repeat.
It should be noted that - indeed the Probability Matrix is bad at things like this ... St. Cloud State has been mediocre (at best) lately, because it lost 3 defensemen, including its best one. So they are limping into the NCAAs, and could easily lose today, and/or next week -- which gives a below-15 NCHC team much better odds of winning that tournament than the Matrix is presenting.
My hope for the future of it is to weight recent results more heavily, on a sliding scale. But that requires math knowledge that I don't have - because I don't want to just do it arbitrarily.
Quote from: TrotskyThe statement that the probabilities are too high has not been demonstrated empirically. They may be, they may not, but "feeling" they are too high is not a mathematical argument.
Easy enough to run the numbers. If people want to put some reality behind their gut feelings, they should.
Actually, jfeath17 demonstrated that KRACH-based win percentages over 65% were too high empirically five years ago. He looked at results for 1,129 games in 2016 and 2017. here (http://elf.elynah.com/read.php?1,213740).
IMO, applying this kind of "translation" of KRACH-based win percentages to empirically-based ones is probably the best way to improve the Pairwise Probability Matrix. The frustrating thing is that potential outcomes have changed since jfeath17 did this analysis (OT wins count different than regulation wins).
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
I don't think Merrimack would pass us in that scenario. But I'm not certain. If they would, then it's possible that UMass Lowell could beat BU, then beat Merrimack in the finals and maybe Hockey East gets three bids. But I don't think so.
Otherwise, yeah, you summed it up well.
Otherwise yeah, I think that's right.
Lowell is playing Merrimack in the semis. It would have to be Providence beating BU in the semis then Merrimack in the finals. But I don't think Merrimack will get in that scenario. Time for YATC.
SCSU beat Duluth, so the NCHC now only has two teams outside the top 16 out of the four remaining semifinalists. On the other hand, one of those teams is NoDak, who beat Omaha tonight to move on. With NoDak's level of talent, seems quite possible for them to steal an at-large bid. None of this really matters too much as long as Colgate doesn't win the ECAC.
NDaK has to beat St cloud and then probably Denver unless they barf it up..
Quote from: upprdeckNDaK has to beat St cloud and then probably Denver unless they barf it up..
They'd be an underdog to Denver, but I'd guess the matchup vs. St. Cloud is about a coin-flip.
By the way, You Are the Committee is up on CHN. I haven't found a way for Merrimack to pass Cornell without Merrimack winning the Hockey East tournament. I.e., from Cornell's perspective, the only thing we care about in Hockey East is whether BU wins or not. Hockey East cannot get 2 teams ahead of Cornell without a non-BU team winning the tourney. (Though, if Merrimack wins the semis and then loses to BU in the finals, i they get very close to us, so maybe someone else can figure out a way for them to pass us.)
Assuming Merrimack can't pass us without winning HE, that makes things simple. We are in if one of the following four events occurs:
1. We beat Harvard
2. BU wins HE
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC
4. Colgate does not win ECAC
Yea we need just like 1 good thing to happen.
You can see a path to #7-9 seed as well
Whether thats a good thing or not hard to tell. It would mean No harvard in the our Bracket I would think
Quote from: upprdeckYea we need just like 1 good thing to happen.
You can see a path to #7-9 seed as well
Whether thats a good thing or not hard to tell. It would mean No Harvard in the our Bracket I would think
I don't want 8 or 9. That means Fargo.
I've never been to North Dakota. How bad can it be? I've been to Potsdam.
Quote from: TrotskyI've never been to North Dakota. How bad can it be? I've been to Potsdam.
I really liked Fargo for the two nights I was there. Couple fun bars, surprisingly good sushi.
The drive there was pretty desolate, and that's coming from someone who lives in a pretty desolate place.
Quote from: TrotskyI've never been to North Dakota. How bad can it be? I've been to Potsdam.
Never been to Fargo but had a nice steak dinner in Minot (https://visitminot.org/businesses/homesteaders-restaurant/) while otherwise not stopping in the state at all.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: TrotskyI've never been to North Dakota. How bad can it be? I've been to Potsdam.
I really liked Fargo for the two nights I was there. Couple fun bars, surprisingly good sushi.
The drive there was pretty desolate, and that's coming from someone who lives in a pretty desolate place.
How did you end up there?
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: TrotskyI've never been to North Dakota. How bad can it be? I've been to Potsdam.
I really liked Fargo for the two nights I was there. Couple fun bars, surprisingly good sushi.
The drive there was pretty desolate, and that's coming from someone who lives in a pretty desolate place.
How did you end up there?
Moved to South Dakota for graduate school, went to Fargo for a regional conference in my (then) field.
I'm still here. There are some major issues, but as someone who grew up in east coast suburban sprawl, I like the openness.
If the West captures your soul, you won't be genuinely happy anywhere else.
Once I felt that openness, everywhere else feels like living under a low, grubby ceiling.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/108/306605332_d37e3a3f32_z.jpg)
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
The 1 and 4 conditions are loosely related (Gate has a slightly higher chance of winning the tournament if we beat Harvard) so you can't just multiply out the probabilities as if they were independent.
Quote from: TrotskyThe 1 and 4 conditions are loosely related (Gate has a slightly higher chance of winning the tournament if we beat Harvard) so you can't just multiply out the probabilities as if they were independent.
I know.
I thought about accounting for that, but then decided that it wasn't worth it given the completely arbitrary (but hopefully reasonable) estimates I made for everything. I figured doing the simple calculation I did was sufficient to make my point.
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: TrotskyThe 1 and 4 conditions are loosely related (Gate has a slightly higher chance of winning the tournament if we beat Harvard) so you can't just multiply out the probabilities as if they were independent.
I know.
I thought about accounting for that, but then decided that it wasn't worth it given the completely arbitrary (but hopefully reasonable) estimates I made for everything. I figured doing the simple calculation I did was sufficient to make my point.
I was being purposefully obnoxious. A little something I like to call my brand.
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
I just realized that beating Hahvahd is not sufficient. We could be 12th in PWR but there might be as many as 5 bid stealers below us if we lose to Colgate in the final
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
I just realized that beating Hahvahd is not sufficient. We could be 12th in PWR but there might be as many as 5 bid stealers below us if we lose to Colgate in the final
I'll be damned. Beat Harvard, lose to Colgate, everything else goes wrong, and we are still out.
I'm not even sure our next game matters.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
I just realized that beating Hahvahd is not sufficient. We could be 12th in PWR but there might be as many as 5 bid stealers below us if we lose to Colgate in the final
I'll be damned. Beat Harvard, lose to Colgate, everything else goes wrong, and we are still out.
I'm not even sure our next game matters.
I just ran a YATC which had us at 13th and out. It had Merrimack winning HE, and all bid-stealers elsewhere.
QUin/Colgat kicks this off Friday.. I think it becomes a bit clearer before we even go on the ice.
Quote from: upprdeckQUin/Colgat kicks this off Friday.. I think it becomes a bit clearer before we even go on the ice.
So I have to root for Q? Argh!
Wow. Okay. So really the key is Colgate not winning the ECAC.
Quote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: upprdeckQUin/Colgat kicks this off Friday.. I think it becomes a bit clearer before we even go on the ice.
So I have to root for Q? Argh!
Gotta root for Q, then if the unthinkable happens, gotta root for Sucks. I hate it.
Also, anyone else think it's funny that, in a year where the ECAC was very bad, we are getting 2 to 3 NCAA spots while Hockey East might only get 1 spot or at most 2, CCHA is getting 2, and NCHC is getting 2 or 3?
Big Ten taking up all the spots with 4.
Per nshapiro's assumptions, that gives us a 98.2% chance of making the NCAAs. The vast majority of that probability comes from Colgate not winning the ECAC. BTW, CHN's model, which gives Cornell a 99.7% shot, was quoted in the Daily Sun even though Cornell's chances of making the tournament are probably around six times lower than what the model says.
If colgate were to win and the other bid stealers fall short the ECAC could get 4.. But why play with fire; First goal is get Cornell in.
Quote from: upprdeckIf colgate were to win and the other bid stealers fall short the ECAC could get 4.. But why play with fire; First goal is get Cornell in.
Let's go Q!
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: upprdeckIf colgate were to win and the other bid stealers fall short the ECAC could get 4.. But why play with fire; First goal is get Cornell in.
Let's go Q!
I'll roll the dice and bet some other bid stealers fail.
I'm rooting for an upstate NY ECAC final.
Quote from: BearLoverPer nshapiro's assumptions, that gives us a 98.2% chance of making the NCAAs. The vast majority of that probability comes from Colgate not winning the ECAC. BTW, CHN's model, which gives Cornell a 99.7% shot, was quoted in the Daily Sun even though Cornell's chances of making the tournament are probably around six times lower than what the model says.
I love that you are quoting my numbers, but you do know that conference final four win percentages were picked out of the air, just to prove that the Massey number was not unreasonable, and were further disproved by my realization that winning our semifinal was not sufficient. Also, you should quote my BS number accurately - it was 98.92%, not 98.2%
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: BearLoverPer nshapiro's assumptions, that gives us a 98.2% chance of making the NCAAs. The vast majority of that probability comes from Colgate not winning the ECAC. BTW, CHN's model, which gives Cornell a 99.7% shot, was quoted in the Daily Sun even though Cornell's chances of making the tournament are probably around six times lower than what the model says.
I love that you are quoting my numbers, but you do know that conference final four win percentages were picked out of the air, just to prove that the Massey number was not unreasonable, and were further disproved by my realization that winning our semifinal was not sufficient. Also, you should quote my BS number accurately - it was 98.92%, not 98.2%
I meant that our odds are down to 98.2% now that we know Cornell beating Harvard is not sufficient. Right?
Quote from: nshapiroQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: upprdeckIf colgate were to win and the other bid stealers fall short the ECAC could get 4.. But why play with fire; First goal is get Cornell in.
Let's go Q!
I'll roll the dice and bet some other bid stealers fail.
I'm rooting for an upstate NY ECAC final.
This!
I like our chances in the Championship game, if we get there, over Colgate a lot better than our chances over Quinnipiac. I'm rooting hard for Colgate in the early game.
the only reason to care about the other semifinal is to make the path to a bid easier. the final is one game, that we have to get to in the first place, and we can beat any of the three remaining teams if we get there. we can lose to any of them too, of course, but for all of bearlover's quixotic complaining about people quoting a forecast number he hates as if he's 1-800-GAMBLER the fact is we can win the game in front of us and our agenda for the rest of the world should be "make our path to the NCAA tournament as independent of our own success as possible."
if we are playing Colgate in the finals I dont know that its clear they will be the easier team to beat. they will have beaten Q twice this yr and be playing at a pretty high level.
I don't know that I want to make a claim about who I'd rather play in the game after the game we are currently on, but I will say that "in the finals against Q, in the NCAAs if we lose" is more pleasant and relaxing for me, personally, than "in the finals against Colgate, season over if we lose."
Hopefully Denver and SCSU both win their semi games and we can breathe a bit easier. Also hopefully we win our next six games.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: Al DeFlorioQuote from: upprdeckQUin/Colgat kicks this off Friday.. I think it becomes a bit clearer before we even go on the ice.
So I have to root for Q? Argh!
Gotta root for Q, then if the unthinkable happens, gotta root for Sucks. I hate it.
Not interested in seeing Harvard pull even with 12 titles and four since Cornell's most recent title thank you very much. Would rather see the Quinnipiac win if I had to choose in this fictitious game.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
I just realized that beating Hahvahd is not sufficient. We could be 12th in PWR but there might be as many as 5 bid stealers below us if we lose to Colgate in the final
I'll be damned. Beat Harvard, lose to Colgate, everything else goes wrong, and we are still out.
I'm not even sure our next game matters.
Which do you prefer, beating Harvard and missing the tournament or losing to Harvard and making the tournament? I think the latter. Hate wins out
Quote from: arugulaQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: nshapiroQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: scoop85Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: CU2007I assume after this weekend's games are all complete, someone smarter than I am could figure out what needs to happen for us to get in IF we were to lose to Harvard?
We are currently 12th in the pairwise. Minnesota State is 13th. They're on to the CCHA finals. They'll only pass us if they win and we lose next round, in which case they get an autobid anyway. Alaska is 14th. They're done playing for the season, and we have enough of an RPI lead that we should remain ahead of them if we lose next round.
15th is Merrimack. They're in OT against BC right now, but I think they fall into the same "gotta win their tourney to pass us" territory that Minnesota State does, though maybe not. Let's go BC.
16th is Michigan State, they're losing to Minnesota. Same deal, they'd have to win two at which point they are in anyway.
Where I'm going with this is that we are likely finishing 12th, with some possible autobids finishing ahead of us to push us backwards which is a wash. If we lose next round, it all comes down to how many teams outside the top 16 get autobids. Atlantic Hockey is a given. CCHA hurts us cause it's either Northern Michigan stealing a spot or Minnesota State likely passing us and stealing a spot. So we're rooting for favorites everywhere else.
Go Denver. EDIT: Or Saint Cloud State. Root for BU (if we can stomach it). Root for Colgate to not win the ECAC. Root for Minnesota to beat MSU or, if they lose, Michigan to beat MSU. I think if two of those four things happen, we are in good shape.
Or we could just win a game or two next weekend.
MSU lost, so there will be no autobid outside the top 12 from the Big 10. Seems like at this point, for Cornell to miss, all the following would need to occur:
(1) Cornell loses to Harvard
(2) Colgate wins the ECAC
(3) BU does not win Hockey East*
(4) Denver/SCSU does not win the NCHC
*maybe this could also be satisfied by Merrimack winning the semis and then losing to BU in the finals, i.e. they pass us for an at-large bid. So we want Merrimack to lose next round to be sure.
CHN's probability matrix today gives us a 99.7% chance of making the NCAAs based on 20,000 Monte Carlo simulations
Not sure if trolling.
Don't look at the matrix.
It severely overestimates the likelihood of higher seeds winning (i.e., auto-bids outside the top 16). Our chances are high, but not that high.
No, not trolling. I'm not a stats guy but 20,000 Monte Carlo simualtions, I presume, accounts for all types of outcomes. But it does seem anecdotally to be too high.
Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you of trolling. This has been discussed in some other threads in the last week or so. The issue is that the model relies on KRACH rankings to predict the likelihood of different outcomes. So the 20,000 simulations are based on flawed probabilities.
Sure, the data coming out is only as good as the data going in.
I don't think that the 99.7% probability is so crazy.
If we just set some simple assumptions:
Probability of
#1 seed winning tournament = 40%
#2 seed winning tournament = 30%
#3 seed winning tournament = 20%
#4 seed winning tournament = 10%
#2 seed beating #3 seed = 60%
then the probability of each of these failing is:
1. We beat Harvard 60%
2. BU wins HE 60%
3. Denver or SCSU wins NCHC 30%
4. Colgate does not win ECAC 10%
so probability of all failing is .6 * .6 * .3 * .1 = .0108 = 1.08%
so probability of Cornell advancing = 100 - 1.08 = 98.92%
Which is 0.78% off of the Monte Carlo result...
of course, it also gives Cornell almost 3x the odds that we miss the tournament than the Monte Carlo does,
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
I just realized that beating Hahvahd is not sufficient. We could be 12th in PWR but there might be as many as 5 bid stealers below us if we lose to Colgate in the final
I'll be damned. Beat Harvard, lose to Colgate, everything else goes wrong, and we are still out.
I'm not even sure our next game matters.
Which do you prefer, beating Harvard and missing the tournament or losing to Harvard and making the tournament? I think the latter. Hate wins out
I think I'd take an NCAA bid and a Harvard loss over the opposite, if I had to pick. Can't win it all if you don't play.
Quote from: Chris '03Not interested in seeing Harvard pull even with 12 titles and four since Cornell's most recent title thank you very much. Would rather see the Quinnipiac win if I had to choose in this fictitious game.
Flaming pile of asteroid-obliterated rubble it is, then!
Quote from: TrotskyIf the West captures your soul, you won't be genuinely happy anywhere else.
How true. I grew up in the West, came to Cornell and then stayed east for 3 years (so many great friends from Cornell). But the West called, and I came back. In Montana now, where it is REALLY open.
https://chris-h-stuff.smugmug.com/Bozeman-Panorama/n-q43J5M/i-9x45TMN/A
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: Chris '03Not interested in seeing Harvard pull even with 12 titles and four since Cornell's most recent title thank you very much. Would rather see the Quinnipiac win if I had to choose in this fictitious game.
Flaming pile of asteroid-obliterated rubble it is, then!
Exactly.
FTR, I just did a YATC with Colgate losing to Q, us losing to Sucks, Q beating Sucks, and all the other bid-stealers winning. We make the tourney at #12.
If we beat Sucks and lose to Q, and all the other bid-stealers win, we make the tourney at #10.
If we win out and all the other bid-stealers win, we finish at #7.
If we win out and all favorites win, we finish at #8 (which means Fargo). Meh.
Quote from: arugulaWhich do you prefer, beating Harvard and missing the tournament or losing to Harvard and making the tournament? I think the latter. Hate wins out
The former.
The ECACs will always be the pinnacle for me. The NC$$s are like the Pro Bowl. Cute and all, but extraneous to the real season.
Now, ideally, we beat Harvard in Placid
and Tampa.
Hate has a home here.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: arugulaWhich do you prefer, beating Harvard and missing the tournament or losing to Harvard and making the tournament? I think the latter. Hate wins out
The former.
Even though it's just the semifinal?* Man, I like to win the conference tournament but ...
* I know that facing Harvard in the final doesn't present a dilemma because of the autobid. Put that aside. Thank you.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: Chris '03Not interested in seeing Harvard pull even with 12 titles and four since Cornell's most recent title thank you very much. Would rather see the Quinnipiac win if I had to choose in this fictitious game.
Flaming pile of asteroid-obliterated rubble it is, then!
Exactly.
FTR, I just did a YATC with Colgate losing to Q, us losing to Sucks, Q beating Sucks, and all the other bid-stealers winning. We make the tourney at #12.
If we beat Sucks and lose to Q, and all the other bid-stealers win, we make the tourney at #10.
If we win out and all the other bid-stealers win, we finish at #7.
If we win out and all favorites win, we finish at #8 (which means Fargo). Meh.
and chalk across the board puts us at 13.
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: arugulaWhich do you prefer, beating Harvard and missing the tournament or losing to Harvard and making the tournament? I think the latter. Hate wins out
The former.
Even though it's just the semifinal?* Man, I like to win the conference tournament but ...
* I know that facing Harvard in the final doesn't present a dilemma because of the autobid. Put that aside. Thank you.
My crossover line: (fixed)
NCAA F4 > ECAC Champion > NCAA QF > ECAC Finalist > NCAA Bid > ECAC F4
i assume that was supposed to start with NCAA final
Quote from: ugartei assume that was supposed to start with NCAA final
Order
within category is assumed. I'm perceptive, not perverse.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugartei assume that was supposed to start with NCAA final
Order within category is assumed. I'm perceptive, not perverse.
No, I mean you have both NCAA SF and NCAA F4. I was setting you up to edit and reply "what do you mean?"
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugartei assume that was supposed to start with NCAA final
Order within category is assumed. I'm perceptive, not perverse.
No, I mean you have both NCAA SF and NCAA F4. I was setting you up to edit and reply "what do you mean?"
Oh shit. I suck. Fixed.
Evidently I'm not perceptive either.
Here's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
Michael Hodge (F, Union)
Reid Leibold (F, RPI)
James McIsaac (F, RPI)
Henri Schreifels (F, RPI)
Matthew Hubbarde (F, Dartmouth)
Greg Japchen (D, Union)
Quote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
Michael Hodge (F, Union)
Reid Leibold (F, RPI)
James McIsaac (F, RPI)
Henri Schreifels (F, RPI)
Matthew Hubbarde (F, Dartmouth)
Greg Japchen (D, Union)
Not a great look for Kathy Hochul
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
Michael Hodge (F, Union)
Reid Leibold (F, RPI)
James McIsaac (F, RPI)
Henri Schreifels (F, RPI)
Matthew Hubbarde (F, Dartmouth)
Greg Japchen (D, Union)
Not a great look for Kathy Hochul
The Great Route 7 Massacre!
Quote from: ugarteQuote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
Michael Hodge (F, Union)
Reid Leibold (F, RPI)
James McIsaac (F, RPI)
Henri Schreifels (F, RPI)
Matthew Hubbarde (F, Dartmouth)
Greg Japchen (D, Union)
Not a great look for Kathy Hochul
But seriously, the lasting legacy of Shirley Jackson.
I suspect that these three Engineers entered the portal because they got little playing time at RPI, and they probably wouldn't next year either. A matter of fact, Leibold left Troy in midseason. Ryan Mahshie is the biggest loss of those who entered the portal so far from RPI in my opinion.
Quote from: martyQuote from: ugarteQuote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
Michael Hodge (F, Union)
Reid Leibold (F, RPI)
James McIsaac (F, RPI)
Henri Schreifels (F, RPI)
Matthew Hubbarde (F, Dartmouth)
Greg Japchen (D, Union)
Not a great look for Kathy Hochul
But seriously, the lasting legacy of Shirley Jackson.
A haunting, if you will.
Quote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
I thought I had read that Peter Muzyka entered the portal.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: dbilmesHere's a list of ECAC players in Transfer Portal that was posted on Twitter earlier today.
I thought I had read that Peter Muzyka entered the portal.
He did, but he did not enter yesterday.
The full (https://gopherpucklive.com/transfer-portal/) portal. It's... extensive.
Totals for ECAC teams:
Qpc 0
Hvd 0
Cor 1
SLU 2
Cgt 0
Clk 0
RPI 5
Uni 4
Prn 3
Yal 3
Brn 7
Drt 4
If you go into the portal and nobody picks you up can you play for your old school or are you DQed?
On the Women's List there are some massive groups. Is using the portal a premeditated hopping strategy?
12 Post
10 Franklin Pierce
9 Maine
9 Syracuse
7 St. Cloud
7 SLU
6 Merrimack
You can always withdraw your name and stay at your school.
Quote from: scoop85You can always withdraw your name and stay at your school.
i think the primary effect/purpose of entering the portal is allowing other coaches to contact you
Quote from: scoop85You can always withdraw your name and stay at your school.
Only partially true.
If you go into the portal the school does not have to hold your scholie for you if they dont want to.
Quote from: upprdeckQuote from: scoop85You can always withdraw your name and stay at your school.
Only partially true.
If you go into the portal the school does not have to hold your scholie for you if they dont want to.
Fair point. I was thinking with Ivy brain where scholarships aren't an issue
I wonder if the ivy school could pull the financial aid package deal as part of this if they wanted?
Quote from: TrotskyThe full (https://gopherpucklive.com/transfer-portal/) portal. It's... extensive.
Totals for ECAC teams:
Qpc 0
Hvd 0
Cor 1
SLU 2
Cgt 0
Clk 0
RPI 5
Uni 4
Prn 3
Yal 3
Brn 7
Drt 4
If you go into the portal and nobody picks you up can you play for your old school or are you DQed?
I don't know what list you are looking at, but RPI has 6, the three mentioned by Dbilmes, Klee, Mahshie, and Walsh.
Quote from: upprdeckI wonder if the ivy school could pull the financial aid package deal as part of this if they wanted?
i think crossing the streams of theoretically objective "need-based aid" and athletic department concerns about the transfer portal would cause more problems than it would solve
Quote from: upprdeckI wonder if the ivy school could pull the financial aid package deal as part of this if they wanted?
Wouldn't that be saying the quiet part out loud?
Quote from: ursusminorI don't know what list you are looking at, but RPI has 6, the three mentioned by Dbilmes, Klee, Mahshie, and Walsh.
I can't count.
Farrell to Harvard: Drop Dead (https://www.uscho.com/2023/03/26/harvards-farrell-leaves-crimson-after-two-seasons-signs-nhl-deal-with-canadiens/).
QuoteThe Montreal Canadiens have announced that the team has agreed to terms on a three-year, entry-level contract with Harvard sophomore forward Sean Farrell.
Farrell gives up his remaining eligibility with the Crimson.
Coronato watch (https://flamesnation.ca/news/what-to-expect-from-a-matt-coronato-contract-with-the-calgary-flames) now begins.
So next year's Harvard-Cornell games are going to be our high-powered offense, with our drafted and likely to be drafted group coming in, against their shut-down defense. Wild.
More (https://flamesnation.ca/news/friedman-calgary-flames-putting-full-court-press-on-matt-coronato) on Coronato and the Flames.
Quote from: Scersk '97So next year's Harvard-Cornell games are going to be our high-powered offense, with our drafted and likely to be drafted group coming in, against their shut-down defense. Wild.
Harvard will be less talented next year. But in terms of drafted forwards, they'll still be crushing us. With Stienburg and Malone graduating, the only drafted forward on next year's team may be freshman Luke Devlin, as compared to maybe seven or so for Harvard.
Today reminds us blue chippahs are a double-edged sword.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: Scersk '97So next year's Harvard-Cornell games are going to be our high-powered offense, with our drafted and likely to be drafted group coming in, against their shut-down defense. Wild.
Harvard will be less talented next year. But in terms of drafted forwards, they'll still be crushing us. With Stienburg and Malone graduating, the only drafted forward on next year's team may be freshman Luke Devlin, as compared to maybe seven or so for Harvard.
I don't care about the draft.
But, if you want to see it that way, I guess Harvard can crush us with all their 5th- and 6th-rounders that Teddy will surely bring to full flower as he has in the past. And, anyway, a few of our guys are going to be drafted, obviously Walsh.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: Scersk '97So next year's Harvard-Cornell games are going to be our high-powered offense, with our drafted and likely to be drafted group coming in, against their shut-down defense. Wild.
Harvard will be less talented next year. But in terms of drafted forwards, they'll still be crushing us. With Stienburg and Malone graduating, the only drafted forward on next year's team may be freshman Luke Devlin, as compared to maybe seven or so for Harvard.
I don't care about the draft.
But, if you want to see it that way, I guess Harvard can crush us with all their 5th- and 6th-rounders that Teddy will surely bring to full flower as he has in the past. And, anyway, a few of our guys are going to be drafted, obviously Walsh.
You're the one who brought up the draft, not I. But it sounds like we are in agreement that Harvard's talent advantage is going to take a dip.
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: Scersk '97So next year's Harvard-Cornell games are going to be our high-powered offense, with our drafted and likely to be drafted group coming in, against their shut-down defense. Wild.
Harvard will be less talented next year. But in terms of drafted forwards, they'll still be crushing us. With Stienburg and Malone graduating, the only drafted forward on next year's team may be freshman Luke Devlin, as compared to maybe seven or so for Harvard.
I don't care about the draft.
But, if you want to see it that way, I guess Harvard can crush us with all their 5th- and 6th-rounders that Teddy will surely bring to full flower as he has in the past. And, anyway, a few of our guys are going to be drafted, obviously Walsh.
Walsh is an older guy, so I don't think he'll be drafted. Our most likely draftees will be Hoyt Stanley and Jonathan Castagna, neither of whom I'd expect to see next fall.
Quote from: TrotskyToday reminds us blue chippahs are a double-edged sword.
Farrell was only a 4th rounder, so probably doesn't fit the definition of blue chipper by draft status.
Every player from Massachusetts who goes to Harvard, BC, or BU is, by definition, a blue chippah. They all have little halos.
Quote from: TrotskyEvery player from Massachusetts who goes to Harvard, BC, or BU is, by definition, a blue chippah. They all have little halos.
The outcasts get banished to Northeastern, UMass, and god forbid, Merrimack.
Quote from: TrotskyToday reminds us blue chippahs are a double-edged sword.
Only if you don't have another blue-chipper coming in next year.
"Next blue chipper up!"
Quote from: scoop85Quote from: TrotskyToday reminds us blue chippahs are a double-edged sword.
Farrell was only a 4th rounder, so probably doesn't fit the definition of blue chipper by draft status.
Quote from: TrotskyEvery player from Massachusetts who goes to Harvard, BC, or BU is, by definition, a blue chippah. They all have little halos.
Farrell is from hopkinton, mass. I assume Trotsky knew that...
Q 2-1 over OSU with 8 min left. OSU outshooting Q 23-3 in periods 2 and 3.
As much as I dislike Q, they played a really solid 3rd period. Kept OSU on the perimeter for much of the period and game. Wonder where they learned that from ...
BU?
Quinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
Quote from: BearLoverQuinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
Maybe we should get cheerleaders for our team, too.
Coronado signed with Calgary this evening. Rough week for Harvard
::banana::::banana::::banana::
Quote from: BearLoverQuinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
Same number of titles, and we eliminated them once. But yes, that was before they decided to run their program like an ECHL franchise both in entertainment value and academic integrity. There's a reason every coach in the league hates Rand.
Quote from: BearLoverQuinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
And between 1980 and 2003, Harvard made it five times and won a championship. And between 2003 and now, Union made it twice, and Harvard and Yale made it once each, and Yale and Union won championships. And there was a once a stretch in which the ECAC very rarely had more than two teams in the tournament, and two times (2001 and 2004) we only had one. This year we had four, and we recently commonly get three, with 2021 as an obvious aberration.
So, what exactly is your point? It's not an exact fucking science. There are ups and downs. But in no way is how this program has performed at any time during Schafer's tenure a disgrace. I loved the team when I was in school; we play much better hockey at a consistently higher level now. I would have loved for us to win a championship when I was young, but it was a pipe dream; it's basically never a pipe dream now.
I only engage because your analysis in other situations warrants it. Go touch some grass and get some fucking perspective.
(And anyway, QU was lucky to escape that one. I expect them to get blasted at the Frozen Four.)
Quote from: Scersk '97Quote from: BearLoverQuinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
And between 1980 and 2003, Harvard made it five times and won a championship. And between 2003 and now, Union made it twice, and Harvard and Yale made it once each, and Yale and Union won championships. And there was a once a stretch in which the ECAC very rarely had more than two teams in the tournament, and two times (2001 and 2004) we only had one. This year we had four, and we recently commonly get three, with 2021 as an obvious aberration.
So, what exactly is your point? It's not an exact fucking science. There are ups and downs. But in no way is how this program has performed at any time during Schafer's tenure a disgrace. I loved the team when I was in school; we play much better hockey at a consistently higher level now. I would have loved for us to win a championship when I was young, but it was a pipe dream; it's basically never a pipe dream now.
I only engage because your analysis in other situations warrants it. Go touch some grass and get some fucking perspective.
(And anyway, QU was lucky to escape that one. I expect them to get blasted at the Frozen Four.)
In my opinion, it is disgraceful that a totally random school no one has ever heard of with zero hockey tradition and zero academic standards went division 1 like 25 years ago and surpassed the Cornell hockey program. It was demoralizing when Yale and Union won, too.
Quote from: BearLoverIn my opinion, it is disgraceful that a totally random school no one has ever heard of with zero hockey tradition and zero academic standards went division 1 like 25 years ago and surpassed the Cornell hockey program. It was demoralizing when Yale and Union won, too.
Whatever, dude.
Quote from: BearLoverIn my opinion, it is disgraceful that a totally random school no one has ever heard of with zero hockey tradition and zero academic standards went division 1 like 25 years ago and surpassed the Cornell hockey program. It was demoralizing when Yale and Union won, too.
Hope you enjoyed a first round draft pick win the OT game and Clay Mouth-man overlook our 1 goal loss.
BL, I hope you enjoy mowing your lawn this summer and if there's one thing I'm not looking forward to next fall...
Quote from: martyQuote from: BearLoverIn my opinion, it is disgraceful that a totally random school no one has ever heard of with zero hockey tradition and zero academic standards went division 1 like 25 years ago and surpassed the Cornell hockey program. It was demoralizing when Yale and Union won, too.
Hope you enjoyed a first round draft pick win the OT game and Clay Mouth-man overlook our 1 goal loss.
BL, I hope you enjoy mowing your lawn this summer and if there's one thing I'm not looking forward to next fall...
I always enjoy mowing my lawn. Thank you :-)
School with lowest admissions standards in conference that has repeatedly bent recruiting rules has advantage in getting players.
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: Scersk '97Quote from: BearLoverQuinnipiac has now made the frozen four three times since the last time Cornell did. What a disgrace.
And between 1980 and 2003, Harvard made it five times and won a championship. And between 2003 and now, Union made it twice, and Harvard and Yale made it once each, and Yale and Union won championships. And there was a once a stretch in which the ECAC very rarely had more than two teams in the tournament, and two times (2001 and 2004) we only had one. This year we had four, and we recently commonly get three, with 2021 as an obvious aberration.
So, what exactly is your point? It's not an exact fucking science. There are ups and downs. But in no way is how this program has performed at any time during Schafer's tenure a disgrace. I loved the team when I was in school; we play much better hockey at a consistently higher level now. I would have loved for us to win a championship when I was young, but it was a pipe dream; it's basically never a pipe dream now.
I only engage because your analysis in other situations warrants it. Go touch some grass and get some fucking perspective.
(And anyway, QU was lucky to escape that one. I expect them to get blasted at the Frozen Four.)
In my opinion, it is disgraceful that a totally random school no one has ever heard of with zero hockey tradition and zero academic standards went division 1 like 25 years ago and surpassed the Cornell hockey program. It was demoralizing when Yale and Union won, too.
Semantics issue here
Is it demoralizing to see this? Yes.
Disgraceful? If your perspective is that it's gross to be in a system where low academic standards and piles of money let a school spend their way to the top then I take your point.
But you know as well as anyone that we aren't on a level playing field, athletically speaking, with Q. Not just the scholarships and low standards; they have superior facilities with their arena and are geographically better located to population centers as well. And it's not like they just tossed money at the problem...pecknold has coached them up pretty well. Plenty of coaches have flopped or underachieved with even more talented rosters.
I hate that a rival has managed that, too. But let's get real here, we are what we are. Without scholarships, expanded game schedule, and a lot more academic latitude, anytime we reach a frozen four or somehow win it all we will have tremendously overachieved reasonable expectations.
Harvard's top 4 scorers—Farrell, Laferriere, Coronato, and Thrun—have all signed NHL deals. And goalie Gibson is out of eligibility. Meanwhile, Clarkson is getting wrecked by the transfer portal. Very nice! Just need Michigan to smoke Quinnipiac in the frozen four and I will consider this a successful couple of weeks.
Quote from: BearLoverMeanwhile, Clarkson is getting wrecked by the transfer portal.
I know they lost players but were they good players?
From the Harvard team thread on USCHO:
QuoteI wish the Harvard players who left the best in the NHL, always root for them. That said, I don't understand how a player like Coronato can make it in the NHL. He took a big hit against Princeton in the ECAC playoffs, afterwards didn't go into the corners or dig. Has not looked like the same players since, gun-shy and gets testy with contact. How will he survive in the NHL?
Myself, I wish Harvard would recruit players who are not as flashy, but good solid workers, who are committed to the team rather than their own careers after playing a few years. The kind of players the Cornells recruit.
Quote from: TrotskyFrom the Harvard team thread on USCHO:
QuoteI wish the Harvard players who left the best in the NHL, always root for them. That said, I don't understand how a player like Coronato can make it in the NHL. He took a big hit against Princeton in the ECAC playoffs, afterwards didn't go into the corners or dig. Has not looked like the same players since, gun-shy and gets testy with contact. How will he survive in the NHL?
Myself, I wish Harvard would recruit players who are not as flashy, but good solid workers, who are committed to the team rather than their own careers after playing a few years. The kind of players the Cornells recruit.
Wow. The Harvard hockey version of me.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverMeanwhile, Clarkson is getting wrecked by the transfer portal.
I know they lost players but were they good players?
Clarkson players in the portal include Ethan Haider (starting goalie and fifth round draft pick) and Alex Campbell (one of Clarkson's leading scorers and third round draft pick, who is transferring to Northeastern).
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyFrom the Harvard team thread on USCHO:
QuoteI wish the Harvard players who left the best in the NHL, always root for them. That said, I don't understand how a player like Coronato can make it in the NHL. He took a big hit against Princeton in the ECAC playoffs, afterwards didn't go into the corners or dig. Has not looked like the same players since, gun-shy and gets testy with contact. How will he survive in the NHL?
Myself, I wish Harvard would recruit players who are not as flashy, but good solid workers, who are committed to the team rather than their own careers after playing a few years. The kind of players the Cornells recruit.
Wow. The Harvard hockey version of me.
Now if only there were a trading window for forum-posters. ;)
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverMeanwhile, Clarkson is getting wrecked by the transfer portal.
I know they lost players but were they good players?
Clarkson players in the portal include Ethan Haider (starting goalie and fifth round draft pick) and Alex Campbell (one of Clarkson's leading scorers and third round draft pick, who is transferring to Northeastern).
Yikes. Sorry, Casey.
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyFrom the Harvard team thread on USCHO:
QuoteI wish the Harvard players who left the best in the NHL, always root for them. That said, I don't understand how a player like Coronato can make it in the NHL. He took a big hit against Princeton in the ECAC playoffs, afterwards didn't go into the corners or dig. Has not looked like the same players since, gun-shy and gets testy with contact. How will he survive in the NHL?
Myself, I wish Harvard would recruit players who are not as flashy, but good solid workers, who are committed to the team rather than their own careers after playing a few years. The kind of players the Cornells recruit.
Wow. The Harvard hockey version of me.
Now if only there were a trading window for forum-posters. ;)
Trust me on this: we do not want any of the folks who post to the Harvard USCHO thread. BearLover is Foster Hewitt compared to them.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: abmarksQuote from: BearLoverQuote from: TrotskyFrom the Harvard team thread on USCHO:
QuoteI wish the Harvard players who left the best in the NHL, always root for them. That said, I don't understand how a player like Coronato can make it in the NHL. He took a big hit against Princeton in the ECAC playoffs, afterwards didn't go into the corners or dig. Has not looked like the same players since, gun-shy and gets testy with contact. How will he survive in the NHL?
Myself, I wish Harvard would recruit players who are not as flashy, but good solid workers, who are committed to the team rather than their own careers after playing a few years. The kind of players the Cornells recruit.
Wow. The Harvard hockey version of me.
Now if only there were a trading window for forum-posters. ;)
Trust me on this: we do not want any of the folks who post to the Harvard USCHO thread. BearLover is Foster Hewitt compared to them.
I'd make the trade and then cut the other poster before their contact was guaranteed.
Clarkson also already got one player in from the portal. The Alex Campbell one I don't get - the others are no big deal. Haider wasn't that great.
Quote from: adamwClarkson also already got one player in from the portal. The Alex Campbell one I don't get - the others are no big deal. Haider wasn't that great.
Two of their everyday defenseman, and one everyday forward, are in the portal too. They did pick up a good forward from the portal, though.
Quote from: adamwClarkson also already got one player in from the portal. The Alex Campbell one I don't get - the others are no big deal. Haider wasn't that great.
IIRC he was pretty darn good against us. ::pissed::
I understand the antipathy toward Q, but what is the alternative -
Q leaving the ECAC, having our SOS (and indirectly, RPI and pairwise) suffer, and all of Q's accomplishments credited to another conference?
I don't miss the EZAC days, and I don't want them back.
Jack Malone entered the portal.
Quote from: ursusminorJack Malone entered the portal.
Can I just say I love this terminology? Very foreboding sci-fi vibe.
I assume Stienburg and Malinski sign pro deals. That leaves Malone, Berard, Dirven, Malinski, and Tupker to decide whether they want to use their last year of eligibility somewhere else, or sign a pro deal, or retire from hockey. If the Ivy League allowed graduate student athletes, I bet most or all of them would be back in Ithaca next year.
I can't see it ever happening. The Presidents are protecting the brand by creating this discriminator with all other conferences and hoping it keeps up the patina of prestige. If the Ivies ever lose that perceived aura of being Above It All then Pollack, Paxson, Hanlon et al. lose their brand advantage and alumni lose bragging rights and stop giving.
This is purely a business decision, like the Brits keeping the monarchy.
Quote from: ursusminorJack Malone entered the portal.
He'll be a nice addition for someone, hopefully in another conference.
https://twitter.com/SwampRabbits/status/1636388005857624067?t=GI9nwz7_AlBkU3RQdLXt9Q&s=19
Teams across the country are announcing that seniors will be coming back for their graduate season. For example, Minnesota-Duluth just announced that three NHL draft pick seniors and key contributors will be returning for a fifth year. Meanwhile, a team like BC coming off of a disappointing season can recognize it is short a player on defense and pull a top fifth year player out of the portal. Cornell and the Ivies are at a huge disadvantage here.
I actually think the transfer portal may indirectly help the Ivies going forward. Players move so freely now in large part because they do not value getting a degree at their current school. Ivies have an advantage where it is much harder to justify leaving school and giving up the degree. We may not get many/any transfers, but at least we will retain the players we do have and not see mass defections like at Clarkson, Union, etc.
But first we need to make it through the next two years, the final couple of seasons of fifth year COVID eligibility. We will be at a huge disadvantage until then, but at that time I think things will even out.
Quote from: BearLoverTeams across the country are announcing that seniors will be coming back for their graduate season. For example, Minnesota-Duluth just announced that three NHL draft pick seniors and key contributors will be returning for a fifth year. Meanwhile, a team like BC coming off of a disappointing season can recognize it is short a player on defense and pull a top fifth year player out of the portal. Cornell and the Ivies are at a huge disadvantage here.
I actually think the transfer portal may indirectly help the Ivies going forward. Players move so freely now in large part because they do not value getting a degree at their current school. Ivies have an advantage where it is much harder to justify leaving school and giving up the degree. We may not get many/any transfers, but at least we will retain the players we do have and not see mass defections like at Clarkson, Union, etc.
But first we need to make it through the next two years, the final couple of seasons of fifth year COVID eligibility. We will be at a huge disadvantage until then, but at that time I think things will even out.
Even ChatGPT thinks you are long-winded.
Quote from: ChatGPTSure! Here's a shorter and more concise version of the essay:
"Seniors returning for their graduate season is impacting college teams. Some teams benefit while others, like Cornell and the Ivies, are disadvantaged. The transfer portal may help the Ivies as players value their degrees and are less likely to leave. The Ivies will be disadvantaged for two years due to COVID eligibility but things will even out after that."
Quote from: abmarksQuote from: BearLoverTeams across the country are announcing that seniors will be coming back for their graduate season. For example, Minnesota-Duluth just announced that three NHL draft pick seniors and key contributors will be returning for a fifth year. Meanwhile, a team like BC coming off of a disappointing season can recognize it is short a player on defense and pull a top fifth year player out of the portal. Cornell and the Ivies are at a huge disadvantage here.
I actually think the transfer portal may indirectly help the Ivies going forward. Players move so freely now in large part because they do not value getting a degree at their current school. Ivies have an advantage where it is much harder to justify leaving school and giving up the degree. We may not get many/any transfers, but at least we will retain the players we do have and not see mass defections like at Clarkson, Union, etc.
But first we need to make it through the next two years, the final couple of seasons of fifth year COVID eligibility. We will be at a huge disadvantage until then, but at that time I think things will even out.
Even ChatGPT thinks you are long-winded.
Quote from: ChatGPTSure! Here's a shorter and more concise version of the essay:
"Seniors returning for their graduate season is impacting college teams. Some teams benefit while others, like Cornell and the Ivies, are disadvantaged. The transfer portal may help the Ivies as players value their degrees and are less likely to leave. The Ivies will be disadvantaged for two years due to COVID eligibility but things will even out after that."
Thanks for this completely needless post which serves absolutely no purpose other than to insult me
Quote from: BearLoverQuote from: abmarksQuote from: BearLoverTeams across the country are announcing that seniors will be coming back for their graduate season. For example, Minnesota-Duluth just announced that three NHL draft pick seniors and key contributors will be returning for a fifth year. Meanwhile, a team like BC coming off of a disappointing season can recognize it is short a player on defense and pull a top fifth year player out of the portal. Cornell and the Ivies are at a huge disadvantage here.
I actually think the transfer portal may indirectly help the Ivies going forward. Players move so freely now in large part because they do not value getting a degree at their current school. Ivies have an advantage where it is much harder to justify leaving school and giving up the degree. We may not get many/any transfers, but at least we will retain the players we do have and not see mass defections like at Clarkson, Union, etc.
But first we need to make it through the next two years, the final couple of seasons of fifth year COVID eligibility. We will be at a huge disadvantage until then, but at that time I think things will even out.
Even ChatGPT thinks you are long-winded.
Quote from: ChatGPTSure! Here's a shorter and more concise version of the essay:
"Seniors returning for their graduate season is impacting college teams. Some teams benefit while others, like Cornell and the Ivies, are disadvantaged. The transfer portal may help the Ivies as players value their degrees and are less likely to leave. The Ivies will be disadvantaged for two years due to COVID eligibility but things will even out after that."
Thanks for this completely needless post which serves absolutely no purpose other than to insult me
Long-windedness on this forum is a feature, not a bug. If you don't like it, go read the tweets, Tacitus.
Quote from: BearLoverTeams across the country are announcing that seniors will be coming back for their graduate season. For example, Minnesota-Duluth just announced that three NHL draft pick seniors and key contributors will be returning for a fifth year. Meanwhile, a team like BC coming off of a disappointing season can recognize it is short a player on defense and pull a top fifth year player out of the portal. Cornell and the Ivies are at a huge disadvantage here.
I actually think the transfer portal may indirectly help the Ivies going forward. Players move so freely now in large part because they do not value getting a degree at their current school. Ivies have an advantage where it is much harder to justify leaving school and giving up the degree. We may not get many/any transfers, but at least we will retain the players we do have and not see mass defections like at Clarkson, Union, etc.
But first we need to make it through the next two years, the final couple of seasons of fifth year COVID eligibility. We will be at a huge disadvantage until then, but at that time I think things will even out.
Is this supposed to imply that Cornell isn't really an Ivy? :-D :-P
This Mean Girls shit is making me sympathize with BearLover. Please stop; there was nothing wrong with that particular post.
Quote from: DafatoneQuote from: ursusminorJack Malone entered the portal.
Can I just say I love this terminology? Very foreboding sci-fi vibe.
(https://i.etsystatic.com/17083394/r/il/9cf1a8/2477530563/il_570xN.2477530563_h99x.jpg)
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: ursusminorJack Malone entered the portal.
Can I just say I love this terminology? Very foreboding sci-fi vibe.
(https://i.etsystatic.com/17083394/r/il/9cf1a8/2477530563/il_570xN.2477530563_h99x.jpg)
We're hoping to pick up some good players via the Torment Nexus.
Any ice planets out there?
Quote from: TrotskyThis Mean Girls shit is making me sympathize with BearLover. Please stop; there was nothing wrong with that particular post.
Now is as good a time as any to say, with zero snark and full sincerity, that BearLover joking about the talent gap with Ohio State while they were beating up on Harvard might've been the highlight of the year for me.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: DafatoneQuote from: ursusminorJack Malone entered the portal.
Can I just say I love this terminology? Very foreboding sci-fi vibe.
(https://i.etsystatic.com/17083394/r/il/9cf1a8/2477530563/il_570xN.2477530563_h99x.jpg)
The extra grad year is longer than you think. IT'S LONGER THAN YOU THINK!!!
Sean Farrell in his second game with Montreal since Harvard was beaten scores his first NHl goal. From what the board says its most likely because the Panthers dont have enough draft picks on the roster
To chew on, from the Colgate thread on USCHO:
Quote from: iowabasedtraveler;n3803193From the 'More Questions than it Answers' Department...
Josh Hewitt on the Big Ten Hockey Facebook page posted a graphic of expenditures of NCAA D-1 MIH programs.
Here are a couple...
1., North Dakota, $5,453,864,
2., Minnesota, $5,269,203,
3., Notre Dame, $5,198,263
4., Michigan, $4,464,256,
5., Boston College, $4,360,627,
21., Quinnipiac, $3,029,101,
23., Clarkson, $2,630,662,
25., RPI, $2,563,477,
27., Saint Lawrence, $2,547,264,
31., Colgate, $2,423,063,
38., Yale, $2,073,478,
41., Cornell, $1,990,819,
51., Harvard, $1,374,610,
52., Brown, $1,363,881,
53., Dartmouth, $1,353,890,
56., Princeton, $1,133,425,
57., Union, $1,049,322.
From me, "I see 57 programs listed. What was the last year that NCAA had 57 men's D-1 ice hockey programs? If it is more current than that, what programs are not included (and why)? More specifically, what year does it supposedly represent? And what exactly goes into those numbers? Thanks."
From Josh, "It’s all the schools that have the records for expenses for the Men’s hockey program available and includes all expenditures for the program. Salaries, rink maintenance, travel, etc….
GopherPuckLive periodically puts together an article to compare where Minnesota is compared to the rest of college hockey. Here is an article from 2018 as an example with additional info."
"https://gopherpucklive.com/minnesota-ranks-second-for.../ (https://gopherpucklive.com/minnesota-ranks-second-for-ncaa-mens-hockey-revenue/?fbclid=IwAR06UuQgxG8Xi-ZxLM81SS3TLAzpPfZtG-Z-9jeVqkusnmsk9SV-pHK7R64)
"The data I posted above is for this season. I don’t know if he is going to put together an article with further breakdown or not, but you should probably be able to find the data for your program in public records."
While I still question a lot about the specifics of this ranking, it probably does fairly accurately show the basic differences between the expenditures of the Big Ten (and other) conference programs and those of the ECAC Hockey conference.
One thing that I like about eLynah is that one can post anything on almost any thread and be at least partially on topic. :-)
pretty big jump from the bottom 5 ivys to Cornell/Yale.. I mean why is Harvard able to spend 600K less? I doubt it salaries? But if you add Scholie cost to the Ivy schools they jump to the top 25 most likely .
Also How does ND spend 3-4x times as much. Is that arena that expensive to run or is it all travel cost and coaching?
Quote from: upprdeckpretty big jump from the bottom 5 ivys to Cornell/Yale.. I mean why is Harvard able to spend 600K less? I doubt it salaries? But if you add Scholie cost to the Ivy schools they jump to the top 25 most likely .
Also How does ND spend 3-4x times as much. Is that arena that expensive to run or is it all travel cost and coaching?
I'm not an accountant, but it's possible that spending out of an endowment's annual payout doesn't count as a current-year expenditure. So Cornell wouldn't count the portion of Coach Schafer's salary that's covered by its endowment, and Harvard wouldn't count whatever their men's hockey endowment covers.
Quote from: Beeeejand Harvard wouldn't count whatever their men's hockey endowment covers.
Drinks and slaves.
Harvard's Henry Thrun with two assists in his Sharks debut. He looks like the real deal but it'll be tough rooting for him.
....But not as tough as rooting for the Sharks goalie
james-reimer-pride-night-jersey (https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/19/sport/james-reimer-pride-night-jersey-lgbtq-spt-intl/index.html)
Second that.
Harvard lower expenditures may be if the coach's entire salary is endowed as opposed to some of it at Cornell, so perhaps that isn't an expenditure. And maybe all Harvard coaches are endowed?
Maybe No. 1 spender North Dakota spent a boatload of legal fees trying to keep the Fighting Sioux nickname? [is joke] [i think]
BC leads the East in spending, FWIW, twice what the mostly costly Ivy spends, $4.3M vs. about $2M for Yale.
The cost to provide hockey is pretty stiff for some teams with poor attendance. Example: Brown. The Bears drew 10,900 fans to 13 home games, about 840 per game. The Cornell game got the most bodies into Meehan, 1,177 fans versus for, say, Harvard 813 the next night. Brown
$1,363,881 Expenditures cited
10,900 2022-23 home attendance calculated
$125 Expenditure per fan per game
lots of unknowns in the costs. There are endowed costs built into things besides coaches.. many of the new buildings have endowed maintenance costs bulit into them as well. the new scoreboard might have some built into its use.
some people donate air time to fly to recruiting trips at certain schools.
Quote from: upprdecklots of unknowns in the costs. There are endowed costs built into things besides coaches.. many of the new buildings have endowed maintenance costs built into them as well.
If you want to get your name on a building, you buy the building and, I believe, something like 30 years of maintenance costs. That is probably a good thing especially if it's a replacement building that's bigger, nicer and more expensive to maintain.
Case in point may be a new swimming pool for Cornell. If one is built, it would likely not be funded by Cornell. The Teagle pool is 70+ years old, Helen Newman about 60. A donor is faced not just with facility costs but also paying to maintain the pool. https://cornellsun.com/2022/03/17/students-and-faculty-fight-to-include-new-swimming-facilities-in-university-capital-campaign/
Quote from: Martha Pollock, 2022We just don't have the money right now. We don't have tens of millions of dollars or a donor, or frankly a place on campus to put it.
If I had tens of millions of dollars," she said, "I would be putting it towards salaries, not towards pools.
The Teagle pool is 25 yards. Contemporary pools are 50 meters.
Danger is ChatGPT could improve and condense 90% of our posts. Some more than others.
Imagine if this tool transcribed then improved condensed adapted the minutes of faculty meetings. Or speeches in the Congress.
Big article in Forbes (https://www.forbes.com/sites/timcasey/2023/04/05/how-quinnipiac-university-became-a-mens-college-hockey-power-advanced-to-frozen-four/?sh=453308751409) about how Quinnipiac became a college hockey powerhouse. The bad news, but not a surprise, is that Q is going to be working on ways to get NILs for its players. Maybe the college hockey version of the University of Miami? (https://abcnews.go.com/US/student-athlete-nil-deals-boon/story?id=98180299)
Apparently Brown's starting goalie Caron is in the transfer portal and BU is coming up quite a bit as a potential landing spot
Been three days and no Q early departure. Among the fun choices:
Yani Perets, Jr goalie
Colin Graf, Fr (58 points)
Sam Lipkin, Fr (43)
Jacob Quillian, So (38)
Quote from: TrotskyBeen three days and no Q early departure. Among the fun choices:
Yani Perets, Jr goalie
Colin Graf, Fr (58 points)
Sam Lipkin, Fr (43)
Jacob Quillian, So (38)
if you hadn't put points i'd have believed ages
Quote from: TrotskyBeen three days and no Q early departure. Among the fun choices:
Yani Perets, Jr goalie
Colin Graf, Fr (58 points)
Sam Lipkin, Fr (43)
Jacob Quillian, So (38)
Does Matthew Campbell, a Freshman who apparently didn't get into a game, count? He entered the portal on Monday.
Quote from: TrotskyBeen three days and no Q early departure. Among the fun choices:
Yani Perets, Jr goalie
Colin Graf, Fr (58 points)
Sam Lipkin, Fr (43)
Jacob Quillian, So (38)
Graf is a sophomore, after spending his Freshman year at Union. I wish he had wanted to stick together with Seger. Then I thought "maybe he didn't have the grades," but he was ECAC all-academic team and AHCA All-American Scholar.
From: https://unionathletics.com/sports/mens-ice-hockey/roster/collin-graf/15102
Quote"I chose Union because of the excellent academics along with it being a great hockey program with a winning tradition. The small school size appealed to me. When I visited the campus and met the coaches, I knew Union was the place for me."
I guess he decided small school size was more important than excellent academics when he decided to transfer.
It's nagging at me that he was one that got away. He wound up leading a similar team to the NC. Then again, would he have had a jump from 22 points to 58? Probably not, but the depth would have been that much better.
Quote from: IcebergApparently Brown's starting goalie Caron is in the transfer portal and BU is coming up quite a bit as a potential landing spot
How about coming to Cornell? Caron is excellent.
Quote from: arugulaHow about coming to Cornell? Caron is excellent.
I strongly suspect the Ivies will collude to stop from poaching each other.
Er I mean it will happen totally accidentally.
Quote from: arugulaQuote from: IcebergApparently Brown's starting goalie Caron is in the transfer portal and BU is coming up quite a bit as a potential landing spot
How about coming to Cornell? Caron is excellent.
Cornell has three goalies already.
Quote from: BearLoverCornell has three goalies already.
And another (Katz (https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/519292/justin-katz)) coming in Fall '24 to replace McInchak.
We're set in net, and in Shane's senior year we will actually have 3 potential #1 goaltenders competing.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverCornell has three goalies already.
And another (Katz (https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/519292/justin-katz)) coming in Fall '24 to replace McInchak.
We're set in net, and in Shane's senior year we will actually have 3 potential #1 goaltenders competing.
If they get chances to play. Personal choice, but I would love to have a tandem again a la Underhill-Lenny. I'm really glad Shane played his best hockey during the playoffs, but it would have been nice to have a backup with a good amount of experience.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: BearLoverCornell has three goalies already.
And another (Katz (https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/519292/justin-katz)) coming in Fall '24 to replace McInchak.
We're set in net, and in Shane's senior year we will actually have 3 potential #1 goaltenders competing.
Hypothetically if Devon Levi didn't go to the Sabres but instead had entered the transfer portal, I have to believe we'd have welcomed him with open arms.
Q's Yanni Peretz has signed with Carolina, foregoing his last two years of eligibility.
One down.
Quote from: scoop85Q's Yanni Peretz has signed with Carolina, foregoing his last two years of eligibility.
And cutting short a promising music career.
(Jesus, that's the kind of typing glitch I would be guilty of.)
New opponent coming? https://twitter.com/IanMillsTV/status/1646245917400375298
Quote from: billhowardQuote from: scoop85Q's Yanni Peretz has signed with Carolina, foregoing his last two years of eligibility.
And cutting short a promising music career.
(Jesus, that's the kind of typing glitch I would be guilty of.)
I can't remember if you tried this joke during Kaldis's time.
Quote from: ugarteNew opponent coming?
Utica, too.
Empire League might be pretty good in a few years:
Army
Binghamton
Canisius
Cornell
Clarkson
Colgate
Niagara
RIT
RPI
St. Lawrence
Union
Utica
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteNew opponent coming?
Utica, too.
Empire League might be pretty good in a few years:
Army
Binghamton
Canisius
Cornell
Clarkson
Colgate
Niagara
RIT
RPI
St. Lawrence
Union
Utica
LIU?
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteNew opponent coming?
Utica, too.
Empire League might be pretty good in a few years:
Army
Binghamton
Canisius
Cornell
Clarkson
Colgate
Niagara
RIT
RPI
St. Lawrence
Union
Utica
LIU?
Russin, frussin...
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteNew opponent coming?
Utica, too.
Empire League might be pretty good in a few years:
Army
Binghamton
Canisius
Cornell
Clarkson
Colgate
Niagara
RIT
RPI
St. Lawrence
Union
Utica
Taking a look at Utica's roster... they have some big dudes.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ugarteNew opponent coming?
Utica, too.
Empire League might be pretty good in a few years:
Army
Binghamton
Canisius
Cornell
Clarkson
Colgate
Niagara
RIT
RPI
St. Lawrence
Union
Utica
What sports is Binghamton good at? Basketball was good enough to there be a scandal (compromised admissions standards). You'd think with the academic nature of the school, it'd draw good soccer players, but all I saw the last five years was losing record. 10 men's sports, no football. Does the school have the commitment to go big in hockey?
[b]Binghamton sports[/b]
Men's sports Women's sports
Baseball Basketball
Basketball Cross country
Cross country Lacrosse
Golf Soccer
Lacrosse Softball
Soccer Swimming & diving
Swimming-diving Tennis
Tennis Track and field
Track & field Volleyball
Wrestling At least in our minds, RIT is the next team into the ECAC if somebody drops hockey or switches leagues: the belief that Q's destiny is Hockey East. Or, cripe, why not shoot for B1G hockey?
You're not thinking Union might at some point fall back to a simpler hockey program?
Quote from: billhowardYou're not thinking Union might at some point fall back to a simpler hockey program?
Not unless there is a scandal. That national championship was amazing for them and it will keep the program going for the next century. They are RPI Nouveau.
As we have speculated many times, RIT would be a splendid ECAC program. If Brown ever drops, everything could fit into place, and we'd lose the existential threat of ILexit.
Cornell/RIT
Clarkson/St. Lawrence
RPI/Union
Dartmouth/Harvard
Colgate/Utica
Princeton/Yale
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: billhowardYou're not thinking Union might at some point fall back to a simpler hockey program?
Not unless there is a scandal. That national championship was amazing for them and it will keep the program going for the next century. They are RPI Nouveau.
It takes one forceful university president, perhaps prompted by a scandal -- criminal acts off-campus, hazing of freshmen players, failure to say "first-years" at Harvard, extreme drunkenness -- to quote rightsize sports.
David Skorton was asked by a cranky old alum every fall at a big-machers weekend called TCAM why, with football so dangerous, he permits it. Skorton's reply every year was, ~"I've enjoyed this conversation you and Ihave each fall
... if we never had football and the discussion was adding football, we wouldn't ... but we have football, it's a tradition, and we need to find ways to make it safer."
Martha Pollock in the past year said if there was money available for another or replacement sports arena on (near?) campus, she'd spend the money on faculty salaries.
Those are the kinds of things that make you hope these are just the precursors to trial balloons and no more.
Much as I love CU sports, I agree with President Pollak's sentiment. Hockey, at least, is somewhat financially self sustaining and it's more important that academic functions get funded properly. I wonder how much could be raised from outside money for a new rink, though I personally would prefer a renovation, making Lynah spiffy and up to date with all the modern amenities whhich may draw players, but still the feel of the barn. MSG, as much as I despise the Dolans, got it right. It is modern and spiffy, but still has the iconic ceiling and other aesthetic aspects to make you think that, yes, this is the Garden.
Quote from: arugulaMuch as I love CU sports, I agree with President Pollak's sentiment. Hockey, at least, is somewhat financially self sustaining and it's more important that academic functions get funded properly. I wonder how much could be raised from outside money for a new rink, though I personally would prefer a renovation, making Lynah spiffy and up to date with all the modern amenities whhich may draw players, but still the feel of the barn. MSG, as much as I despise the Dolans, got it right. It is modern and spiffy, but still has the iconic ceiling and other aesthetic aspects to make you think that, yes, this is the Garden.
+1 for not saying those four words.
It's like someone who actively tries to makes his way onto Forbes Billionaires List and then move up.
TIL there is a plan (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/28/nyregion/penn-station-hochul-nyc.html) to make Penn Station not look like dog shit anymore.
Only been 60 years. Patience...
"Once we entered the City like lions. Now we scurry in like rats."
Quote from: Trotsky"Once we entered the City like lions. Now we scurry in like rats."
If you haven't been there in a while, they've been tearing up the main rat-hole/corridor by the LIRR portion for a few years now. Story today in Newsday declared its completion, but detailed the other issues for the rest of the site.
https://www.newsday.com/long-island/transportation/penn-station-long-island-rail-road-concourse-b2cw45jw
For those like me who struggled a bit with a paywall, here's a video: https://youtu.be/MKn-PbGOvMQ
And of course the connected Moynihan Train Hall that opened a couple years ago is pretty magnificent, despite the lack of seating.
I had no idea MSG's lease expires this year.
Dynamite it and rebuild the old station.
Quote from: TrotskyI had no idea MSG's lease expires this year.
Dynamite it and rebuild the old station.
From your lips.
I don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Quote from: dbilmesI don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Portal Pick Ups (Grad):
Brn 1
Cgt 1
Clk 3
Qpc 4
RPI 3 (2)
SLU 1 (1)
Uni 1
Quote from: dbilmesI don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Looking at their stats and prior programs, they're all good players, and they'll all play heavily next year (unless the transfer goalie gets beaten out by someone else). With the transfer portal, the good programs never need to rebuild. They just reload immediately. I'd like to see Q depart for Hockey East for this reason—a very unlevel playing field (unlevel ice surface) compared to the rest of the ECAC.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: dbilmesI don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Portal Pick Ups (Grad):
Brn 1
Cgt 1
Clk 3
Qpc 4
RPI 3 (2)
SLU 1 (1)
Uni 1
Who is RPI's third besides for Brushett and Regula? Are you counting former UVM player Dovar Tinling who is playing this year in the BCHL?
Quote from: ursusminorQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: dbilmesI don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Portal Pick Ups (Grad):
Brn 1
Cgt 1
Clk 3
Qpc 4
RPI 3 (2)
SLU 1 (1)
Uni 1
Who is RPI's third besides for Brushett and Regula? Are you counting former UVM player Dovar Tinling who is playing this year in the BCHL?
Yes. Also, Dovar Tinling is a cool name.
Quote from: TrotskyQuote from: ursusminorQuote from: TrotskyQuote from: dbilmesI don't know how good any of these players are, but Q has already landed 4 players from the transfer portal. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/playerMoves/)
Portal Pick Ups (Grad):
Brn 1
Cgt 1
Clk 3
Qpc 4
RPI 3 (2)
SLU 1 (1)
Uni 1
Who is RPI's third besides for Brushett and Regula? Are you counting former UVM player Dovar Tinling who is playing this year in the BCHL?
Yes. Also, Dovar Tinling is a cool name.
Agreed. I wonder what the ethnic origin is. BTW, Neutral Zone rated him as 4.5 *'s before he went to UVM as the youngest player in college hockey at the time. He didn't do much and is now 4.0 *'s. I think that he was a good gamble by RPI.
Want to know what sets Pecknold apart from other ECAC coaches? Zero loyalty to his own players. Q had three goalies on the roster this season, all underclassmen. Perets signs an NHL deal, so down to two goalies on next season's roster. But Q has a highly regarded goalie recruit coming in, so back up to three. Except, Pecknold isn't content to let his current/incoming goalies fight it out for the starting role. He goes to the transfer portal and adds BU's backup goalie. Now with four goalies slated to be on the roster next year, one of the existing goalies no longer has a spot. End result: Chase Clark, Capitals draft pick and backup Q goalie from this past season, has entered the transfer portal.
That is fascinating as the Q sub on USCHO was convinced Clark was going to be the #1.
Pretty easy to make kids leave those schools.. if you recruit more kids they have no chance to get a scholie so they try to jump where they might get one.
Speaking of goalies, Brown's excellent goalie Caron is transferring to BU, so we'll most likely see him again at MSG.
is it as bad as telling a kid that his scholarship is being pulled, or are kids jumping because they anticipate they will not get playing time?
Quote from: BearLoverWant to know what sets Pecknold apart from other ECAC coaches? Zero loyalty to his own players. Q had three goalies on the roster this season, all underclassmen. Perets signs an NHL deal, so down to two goalies on next season's roster. But Q has a highly regarded goalie recruit coming in, so back up to three. Except, Pecknold isn't content to let his current/incoming goalies fight it out for the starting role. He goes to the transfer portal and adds BU's backup goalie. Now with four goalies slated to be on the roster next year, one of the existing goalies no longer has a spot. End result: Chase Clark, Capitals draft pick and backup Q goalie from this past season, has entered the transfer portal.
Lack of loyalty is a two-way street. The players are quick to jump to another team if they see advantage, even more so in basketball.
Nobody (well, under 70) yearns for the old days when a school could say with a straight face, "Pay the athletes? They're getting a first class education."
Don Vaughan retires. (https://colgateathletics.com/news/2023/4/18/vaughan-retirement.aspx)
(CHN story. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/04/18_Colgates-Vaughan-Steps-Down.php))
Quote from: kingpin248Don Vaughan retires. (https://colgateathletics.com/news/2023/4/18/vaughan-retirement.aspx)
(CHN story. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/04/18_Colgates-Vaughan-Steps-Down.php))
Going out on top, to some extent.
And for the record, he's about the same age as Schafer.
Quote from: kingpin248Don Vaughan retires. (https://colgateathletics.com/news/2023/4/18/vaughan-retirement.aspx)
(CHN story. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2023/04/18_Colgates-Vaughan-Steps-Down.php))
Interesting, but first Colgate needs to name a new Vice President and Director of Athletics.
.
Quote from: From the ReleaseOne of Vaughan's most impressive achievements was leading the program to the ECAC Hockey tournament on a near-annual basis. In his three decades at the helm, Colgate made 27 appearances in the playoffs and reached the ECAC championship weekend on 14 occasions.
Not exactly the most impressive stat.
Quote from: cozQuote from: From the ReleaseOne of Vaughan's most impressive achievements was leading the program to the ECAC Hockey tournament on a near-annual basis. In his three decades at the helm, Colgate made 27 appearances in the playoffs and reached the ECAC championship weekend on 14 occasions.
Not exactly the most impressive stat.
I am too lazy to check, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was the lowest appearance percentage of the 12 coaches who were in the ECAC last season. :-O
Quote from: cozQuote from: From the ReleaseOne of Vaughan's most impressive achievements was leading the program to the ECAC Hockey tournament on a near-annual basis. In his three decades at the helm, Colgate made 27 appearances in the playoffs and reached the ECAC championship weekend on 14 occasions.
Not exactly the most impressive stat.
Maybe it's a bit more "impressive", 'cause I think Vaughan got shorted here. I can only find one non-playoff year (2001) during his tenure.
Vaughan is a member of a pretty exclusive club. Only six Div. I coaches have put up more than 500 losses (according to this chart (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/almanac/coach-alltime.php?sort=sum_wins)), and only Vaughan and Ferris State's Bob Daniels, who was hired the same year, have done so at one school.
Quote from: Give My RegardsVaughan is a member of a pretty exclusive club. Only six Div. I coaches have put up more than 500 losses (according to this chart (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/almanac/coach-alltime.php?sort=sum_wins)), and only Vaughan and Ferris State's Bob Daniels, who was hired the same year, have done so at one school.
Gaudet got out just in time.
York has the most losses and the most games over .500. Let that sink in.
Schafer is third among active coaches in winning percentage. Pecker is second.
Quote from: cozQuote from: From the ReleaseOne of Vaughan's most impressive achievements was leading the program to the ECAC Hockey tournament on a near-annual basis. In his three decades at the helm, Colgate made 27 appearances in the playoffs and reached the ECAC championship weekend on 14 occasions.
Not exactly the most impressive stat.
I'm still parsing the playoffs-percentage stat. Right now 100% of ECAC teams make the ECAC playoffs. Someone cruder would probably say this is the ECAC version of everybody-gets-a-ribbon.
Pecknold will now have the locker room named after him and his wife as a result of the largest alumni donation in history of Q athletics. (https://www.qu.edu/quinnipiac-today/a-historic-gift-for-a-historic-team-2023-04-26/)
Quote from: dbilmesPecknold will now have the locker room named after him and his wife as a result of the largest alumni donation in history of Q athletics. (https://www.qu.edu/quinnipiac-today/a-historic-gift-for-a-historic-team-2023-04-26/)
The "Rand and Nikki Pecknold jock strap storage facility" does have a bit of a nice ring to it.
Why is everyone named "Rand" unpleasant?
Quote from: dbilmesPecknold will now have the locker room named after him and his wife as a result of the largest alumni donation in history of Q athletics. (https://www.qu.edu/quinnipiac-today/a-historic-gift-for-a-historic-team-2023-04-26/)
The largest alumni donation? I wonder how much $$$ it takes to renovate and name a locker room? A lot less, I'd think, than endowing a head coaching position that must go for at least 3 or 4 million.
.
I'm pretty tired of hearing about Quinnipiac at this point. They're operating from different premises than the rest of the ECAC and it would be nice if they left for Hockey East.
Quote from: George64Quote from: dbilmesPecknold will now have the locker room named after him and his wife as a result of the largest alumni donation in history of Q athletics. (https://www.qu.edu/quinnipiac-today/a-historic-gift-for-a-historic-team-2023-04-26/)
The largest alumni donation? I wonder how much $$$ it takes to renovate and name a locker room? A lot less, I'd think, than endowing a head coaching position that must go for at least 3 or 4 million.
.
I thought some Pegula scumbag type financed their new boring barn. That would be north of $500M.
Edit: jesus fuck, it only cost $52M. Even for 2007 that seems ludicrously low.
Does that mean we could rebuild Lynah with slightly less carcinogenic materials for say $40k and donuts for the workers?
Quote from: BearLoverI'm pretty tired of hearing about Quinnipiac at this point. They're operating from different premises than the rest of the ECAC and it would be nice if they left for Hockey East.
I think we'd all like that, but what incentive is there for Q to leave? In Hockey East, their chances of conference domination are far less than in the ECAC.
The Quinnipiac Palace on the Hill cost $52 million, yes, which is $78M in 2023 dollars. That is for the hockey rink, separate basketball arena, and the common concourse. Cheap? they may have cut corners backstage, locker rooms, weight rooms. things like that.
Sacred Heart Martire Family Arena is 3,600 seats, $70 million.
Arizona [edit add:] State, the one in Phoenix not Tucson, has a new a rink. Its name -- wait for it -- Mullet Arena. 5,000 seats, cost $134 million. Is that more to your liking?
Quote from: billhowardThe Quinnipiac Palace on the Hill cost $52 million, yes, which is $78M in 2023 dollars. That is for the hockey rink, separate basketball arena, and the common concourse. Cheap? they may have cut corners backstage, locker rooms, weight rooms. things like that.
Sacred Heart Martire Family Arena is 3,600 seats, $70 million.
Arizona has a new a rink. Its name -- wait for it -- Mullet Arena. 5,000 seats, cost $134 million. Is that more to your liking?
Arizona State, you mean. And they have an NHL team supplying rent income as a tenant.
Quote from: TrotskyWhy is everyone named "Rand" unpleasant?
I feel like the obvious answer is the correct one there.
Quote from: billhowardArizona [edit add:] State, the one in Phoenix not Tucson
My entire in law family had loaded up the cactus truck to hunt you. I have convinced them to stand down. This time.
"Why?" - Because "Rand" is always the shortened form of "Randy"- but you can't blame them for trying.
Quote from: osorojo"Why?" - Because "Rand" is always the shortened form of "Randy"- but you can't blame them for trying.
The worst cases are when it's Rand as in Ayn.