November 8, 2004
Team (First Place) Record Pts Last Week
1 Boston College (38) 4-1-0 598 1
2 Michigan (1) 7-2-1 539 2
3 Minnesota 7-2-0 527 4
4 Colorado College 5-1-0 457 7
5 North Dakota 5-3-2 402 6
6 Wisconsin 5-3-0 318 5
7 New Hampshire 4-2-1 309 8
8 Cornell (1) 4-0-0 299 12
9 Minnesota-Duluth 5-3-2 254 3
10 Maine 6-5-0 230 9
11 Denver 4-3-0 228 10
12 Northern Michigan 5-1-2 225 11
13 Ohio State 7-3-0 167 14
14 Colgate 7-2-0 85 NR
15 Alaska-Anchorage 5-2-1 51 NR
Others Receiving Votes: St. Lawrence 50,
Mass.-Lowell 17, Michigan State 15, Bowling Green 9,
Nebraska-Omaha 6, Dartmouth 4, Boston University 2,
Miami 2, Rensselaer 2, Alabama-Huntsville 1,
Alaska-Fairbanks 1, St. Cloud State 1, Vermont 1
12th to 8th?! Yikes! :-D
I'm sure the first place vote is annoying more than a few fans of the other conferences.
::wow::
I guess our GPG and GAA are worth something to the voters, even if it was against three cupcakes and a wannabee. We'll see this weekend whether we deserve it or not.
So which is most surprising?
1. Our jump to 8th place. :-D
2. Our first place vote. :-}
3. Vermont's 15th place vote. ::twitch::
I too am very surprised at the high ranking this week. But to play devil's advocate here, take a look at the three teams we're immediately in front of. UMD has 1 point in it's last four games against UVM (2) and UAA (2). Maine is 6-5 and Denver is 4-3. My take: an undefeated record carries some weight, but a recent Frozen Four appearance carries more.
Hopefully we'll still be earning respect next week!
It's kind of odd...
During the 2001-02 season, the pollsters didn't give Cornell the respect it deserved, and consistently ranked them lower than where they belonged. This year, it seems as if the pllosters are giving us more credit than we deserve.
I wonder, though, how far and fast we'll drop once we suffer a loss or two.
Not that I'm complaining about a #8 ranking, but I think we are a #10 team at best.
[Q]nyc94 Wrote:
I'm sure the first place vote is annoying more than a few fans of the other conferences.[/q]
Worth it for that alone. ::nut::
I wonder why BC has played so few games.
[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
I wonder why BC has played so few games.[/q]
My guess is that it's just scheduling to balance out the Beanpot in February. BU has played six games, Northeastern seven games, and Harvard hasn't even started its nonconference losses yet. :-D
USA Today:
November 8, 2004
Team Pts (1st) Last Record
1 Boston College 509 (33) 1 4-1-0
2 University of Michigan 459 3 7-2-1
3 University of Minnesota 457 (1) 4 7-2-0
4 University of North Dakota 384 6 5-3-2
5 Colorado College 381 8 5-1-0
6 University of Wisconsin 314 5 5-3-0
7 University of New Hampshire 283 7 4-2-1
8 Cornell University 248 12 4-0-0
9 University of Maine 207 9 6-5-0
10 University of Minnesota-Duluth 204 2 5-3-2
11 Northern Michigan University 191 11 5-1-2
12 University of Denver 190 10 4-3-0
13 The Ohio State University 112 14 7-3-0
14 Colgate University 69 NR 7-2-0
15 St. Lawrence University 25 13 5-4-1
Others receiving votes: University of Alaska-Anchorage 12,
Michigan State University 7, Boston University 6,
University of Massachusetts 6, University of Massachusetts-Lowell 6,
University of Nebraska-Omaha 3, Mercyhurst College 2,
Miami (Ohio) University 2, University of Alaska-Fairbanks 1,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1, St. Cloud State University 1.
The pollsters always inflate the "name" teams -- Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, etc. In light of the 2002-2003 season, when Cornell was a legitimate top tier team, I think they're receiving some of that brand recognition in this week's polls.
I'm still surprised that tUMD dropped so quickly. Then again, they don't have the same name equity, so maybe this supports my theory above.
UMD is winless in four games against not-so-spectacular opponents. Or maybe not - UAA is already ranked in the USCHO poll by virtue of their UMD sweep. Then again, UAA is a WCHA team so they must be good...
[Q]KeithK Wrote:
Then again, UAA is a WCHA team so they must be good...[/q]To be fair, UAA does also have a win over Minnesota under their belts this year. The tie against Canisius isn't pretty, though. ::screwy::
So much for our snap judgments of only a couple hours ago that with the teams just ahead of Cornell (as of last week) either winning outright or else losing to even more highly ranked teams, that it would be tough for the Big Red to move up. There is some novelty value to being X-0-0 on the season.
I'm very surprised where we ended up. I just hope that we can convert this weekend and prove to the skeptics that we belong there.
[Q]Robb Wrote:
So which is most surprising?
1. Our jump to 8th place.
2. Our first place vote.
3. Vermont's 15th place vote. [/q]
In Vermont's first game of the season, they lost 7-1 to Maine. Nevertheless, after the game, and of course well before Vermont took 3 out of 4 (imaginary) points from Minnesota-Duluth, Maine coach Tim Whitehead had this to say: "They'll have a strong season. Obviously this is a tough result, but they will definitely use it as a positive...They're going to surprise a lot of people, in my opinion" (uscho.com). I know it's still early in the season, but that was some pretty good foresight on Whitehead's part.
[Q]Avash '05 Wrote:
[Q2]Robb Wrote:
So which is most surprising?
1. Our jump to 8th place.
2. Our first place vote.
3. Vermont's 15th place vote. [/Q]
In Vermont's first game of the season, they lost 7-1 to Maine. Nevertheless, after the game, and of course well before Vermont took 3 out of 4 (imaginary) points from Minnesota-Duluth, Maine coach Tim Whitehead had this to say: "They'll have a strong season. Obviously this is a tough result, but they will definitely use it as a positive...They're going to surprise a lot of people, in my opinion" (uscho.com). I know it's still early in the season, but that was some pretty good foresight on Whitehead's part.
Edited 2 times. Last edit at 11/08/04 09:55PM by Avash '05.[/q]
And people were questioning my prediction of Vermont finishing 6th in the ECACHL this year.
Indeed. I hope this jump won't turn out to be a jinx. A sweep of MSU would go a long way to soldifying this confidence in us.
Were? I still am. Three games do not a season make.
In fairness to Vermont, that loss to Maine came the first day teams were allowed to be on the ice with coaches/ So they hadn't ever had an official practice. But I'm still a skeptic on the Cats chances this season. And not because I'd like to see them finish 12th before leaving the conference.
Personally, I like seeing 3 ECAC teams in the top 15.
I was just thinking that.:-)
(Of course, it's much nicer to see much later in the season, but still.)
Beeeej
The jump also makes us a bigger target next weekend. I would have much preferred going into East Lansing under the radar.
[Q]ninian '72 Wrote:
The jump also makes us a bigger target next weekend. I would have much preferred going into East Lansing under the radar.[/q]Even if we'd stayed at 12, we'd still have been higher in the polls than MSU. Maybe the attention being paid to the Red is broader because of that 8 ranking, but as far as MSU goes, I think we would've had to drop a home game or two to be under their radar.
Princeton seems to think that Vermont is a threat this year (not that that's saying much since it is Princeton):
[Q]It was a weekend of shutouts on the road for men's hockey (1-2-1 overall, 1-1-0 ECAC), which came up on the short end of the stick Friday night against Vermont (5-4-1, 2-0-0) â€" one of men's hockey's powerhouses â€" but rebounded to capture the win on Saturday versus Dartmouth (1-1-0 ECAC).
[/Q]
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/11/09/sports/11351.shtml
I like the 2 #8's, but I think the pollsters are just trying to get ahead of themselves; it is hard to say Cornell has proven itself yet - particularly with so many freshmen playing such a huge role. I hope this is the real level of this team, but to paraphrase Age, 4 games do not a season make. On the other hand, Colgate at 7-2 deserves more respect than they are getting.
Colgate/Cornell looks to be a real tough weekend for the ECAC this year and the H2H should be a blast.