ELynah Forum

[quote RichH]
1) Fix/replace All-Access.  
Most obvious one.  Enough has been written here about it.  We all know it.  After the experience of the Duke lax webcast with ACC Select...we now know a quality product & model is not only possible, but is in use now.  Most of us would gladly pay for a reliable service.  I'd prefer it to be internal to the university, but if a league-wide service like ACC Select exists, why not try an ECAC or Ivy League branded subscription service?  CSTV is too bloated and difficult in its current form.
[/quote]
I might be the only one to disagree with this one. What home games I couldn't get to, I was able to catch on All-Access and never had any problems with it, and I've never had any issues with any of the archived games, either. I agree CSTV's customer (dis)service sucks, but honestly, anyone with an intermediate knowledge of computers should be able to figure out any bugs with the system. The few times that it didn't work for me were on my end (connection issues, mostly). It's improved a lot over the last six months - multiple camera angles, graphics, etc. I'd rather have Jason on anyway - at least you know he knows what he's talking about. Besides, I think it's funny that people point to the ACC Select and call that a good broadcast - meanwhile, over at Laxpower.com, they're ripping it to shreads. It just goes to show that no matter what format they go with, someone's ultimately going to be unhappy with it. I will say that it would be good to see some type of all-inclusive Ivy package that includes football, hoops, and lacrosse. And in talking with some of the rink folks about the video, they're prevented from doing multiple camera angles due to fire codes. The all-access broadcast uses just one less camera than when TV comes in, only losing the camera behind K, I think it is. I guess my thought with this one is be careful what you wish for - it could always be worse. I actually prefer the CSTV system to the one most of the other Ivy schools are using.

Quote2) Go back to old starting times.
There's a fairly large number of people with jobs who attend games.  The start times for games were 7:30 on Fridays, 7:00 on Saturdays.  Maybe that's too difficult to remember.  With the universal 7:00 start times, I've found myself hitting snags in sneaking out of the office, traffic delays, etc. that I get there late.  For the Dartmouth game in Hanover, the start time was pushed back to 7:30 due to an afternoon women's game.  It may have only been 30 minutes, but I found that extra time to be a luxury.  Gives people time to fight traffic, get into town, find parking, and/or maybe have a bite to eat before heading to to the arena.  Games will still end by 9:45.

I prefer the 7 pm start. Gives me more than enough time to leave work, grab a bite to eat (and not at McDonalds or Burger King), and still get to the rink as warmups are starting. Then again, I'm also proactive and take a change of clothes with me to the office on game nights. Also, it gives more time to hit the bars after the game to celebrate the wins. Don't ever discount that extra half hour of bar time...

My adds...
- more games on TV - and not just on Time Warner. There's MSG, SNY, Fox Sports, and we can't get on any of them??
- (since it's a wish list, I'm allowed to wish!) a new arena to watch games in. :-) Seriously, a lot of the problems we as fans have are a direct result of the old barn. The ushers assume many things, probably because they can't see exactly who's doing what. All-access is limited with camera positions because the rink wasn't built 50 years ago with webcasts in mind. I think you can build a new facility with much of the same charm as the older one - look at the baseball building craze for that. Actually, let me amend this to me winning the lottery so I can donate the winnings for a new barn, since that's the only way this will happen.
- a cease-fire on the Andy and athletics-bashing. I know he's not the most popular figure around here, but there are several items that athletics has done to benefit the hockey program and to make the fans happy. He's made a long-term committment to Schafer (not that I'm thrilled, but I know I'm in the minority, and that's fine with me), they went ahead with the rink renovations, knowing the majority of fans would rather keep Lynah than have a new facility, and (in spite of it being yet another popular fan-bashing point), put in the higher glass. Why's that a good thing? Because the alternative to the higher glass was netting all the way around the rink. Given your choice of the two, which would you rather have? Really, talk with some of the folks over there, and not just when you've got something you want to gripe about. Let them know if they're doing something that you like, not just bashing them when they screw up. Everyone screws up at their jobs... it's just not everyone has an internet message board bashing them when they do (and, since I know it'll inevitably be coming again, no, I do not work in athletics. I've just taken the time to get to know some of the people who work over there, and really, they're not evil incarnate).

[quote KeithK]I'm pretty sure bandrews37 isn't trolling.  He just has an unpopular negative opinion right now.  IMM's first post looked like the same.  This one is so over the top negative that I can't help but think he's trolling.  Even if e he's not there's no point in arguing with someone who thinks " Schafer gambled with the freshman forwards this season and lost".[/quote]
Thanks, Keith. I've been out of the country for a week and a half and hadn't checked around here for a bit.

I assure you I'm not trolling and you're right, I don't have a popular opinion with many folks on here now. At least I'm willing to defend why I believe the way I do. I'm always willing to discuss the team, pros and cons.

This guy though... wow... My only thought is that he's like the little monkey at the zoo: throw enough shit at the wall and some of it's bound to stick.

[quote RichH][quote bandrews37] But you can't tell me that the words the seniors speak every season about how much they will miss playing in front of the fans aren't echoed at North Dakota, Denver, Minnesota, Michigan, Michigan State, Maine, BU, BC, New Hampshire - even at other schools in the ECAC, like Clarkson and SLU.

There's nothing unique about playing at Cornell. The fans cheer the same exact cheers that every other school around the country does. The facilities are average at best.

snip

Appleton is an "old barn"; so is Baker Rink and Houston Field House - how's that make us unique? So just like the coach, the fans haven't evolved and/or stayed ahead of the rest of the country.[/quote]

Good point about the home players.  But you really want to compare playing/spectating in Lynah Rink vs. playing in Baker??  Absurd.  I reject your argument that a game at Lynah is no different than anywhere else.  And it's not just CU players and fans saying things:


[Q]
"We're excited to play in a facility with the character of Lynah. We've played there before, and it's always a great experience...I truly believe that Lynah is one of the best places to play college hockey, so we are looking forward to it."
--Quinnipiac coach Rand Pecknold, Cornell Daily Sun, 3/9/07
http://www.cornellsun.com/node/22025


"However, I think that while there is unique quaintness to the rinks of the league (none with a better atmosphere that Lynah Rink at Cornell), many players who have Ivy or ECACHL options played elsewhere because of the facilities."
--Dave Starman, CSTV, March 1, 2007
http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-hockey/stories/030107aaf.html


"I joke that I have a March time share there given our recent history, but there really isn't much to hate about Lynah Rink. The atmosphere is something I wish we could replicate at Cheel, but, the buildings are so much different structurally that it would be impossible. I just get a real charge out of how in to it the crowd is, much like Kansas University's Allen Field House in basketball. Don't get me wrong, Cheel is beautiful in so many ways, and not just broadcasting view and facilities, but everywhere. Lynah just, in my opinion, has it all."
--Bob Ahlfeld (Clarkson broadcaster), Clarkson Hockey Fans interview, 7/18/06
http://clarksonhockeyfans.blogspot.com/2006/07/interview-with-bob-ahlfeld.html

"THE RINK:  Dave made an interesting point to me about Lynah Rink: the combination of its small size and rabid fans just might make for the biggest home ice advantage in college hockey, since all that noise is packed in by the small building. It's similar in a lot of ways to Walter Brown Arena at BU (although I think the layout of Lynah is far superior). However, unlike BU, Cornell doesn't have to compete with opponents whose facilities are far superior, and also has an Ivy League degree to offer. Honestly, while I do think that there are better buildings - physically - in the ECACHL (Dartmouth and Yale come to mind immediately), the atmosphere at Lynah is unmatched in the league."
--Elliot Olshansky, CSTV blog - February 18, 2006
http://slog.cstv.com/rinkrat/2006/02/far_above_cayugas_waters_there_1.html

"Let's face it: Bright Hockey Center should be renamed Bright Reading Center. It's as quiet as a library on Friday and Saturday nights.  On the other hand, what's not to love about Lynah's electric atmosphere. Even people who've never been there before are looking forward to it. 'I've never been there or played there, but it's all I hear about,' said Harvard freshman Dylan Reese. 'I hear it's one of the best places in college hockey to play, and in the world, frankly. I'm excited.'"
--Jon Paul Morosi, Harvard Crimson, 12/5/03
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=356641

"In fact, a case can be made that no Division I fans influence the game-time atmosphere as much as the Lynah Rink faithful do."
--Hockey East Commissioner Joe Bertagna, USCHO column, 1/28/03
http://www.uscho.com/news/id,6012/OnTraditionsOldandNew.html

"Absolutely best integration of fans to players in college hockey...What they do after the last home game, where they stay with the band and then mix with the players, is unlike anyplace else."
--Hockey commentator Bob Norton, same Bertagna article

"Few Eastern schools have anything like North Dakota's new Engelstad Arena, with its marble Sioux head. But Hagwell was willing to rate the Cornell crowd at Lynah Rink with any in the nation."
--USCHO.com town meeting report, 4/5/02
http://www.uscho.com/news/id,4383/DIHeadsDiscussStateOfGameAtUSCHOcomTownMeeting.html
[/Q]

This with just a few minutes of searching.  There are hundreds of similar quotes from opponents, coaches, and media.  Your opinion of the quality of the facilities seems to be valid, and on par with the rest of the East.  But I strongly disagree with your assertion that hockey games at Cornell have fallen behind the rest of the nation in atmosphere, noise, and fun.  There are probably only about 4-5 places in the nation that rival them.

I know you wanted to raze the place and get a state-of-the-art palace built somewhere away from campus, but my opinion holds for Lynah as it did for the new basketball facility that CornellFan brought up in the "other sports" forum.

[quote bandrews37]Much like the goalies thread, numbers can be twisted around here to prove whatever point you want. Most wins? Meaningless stat.[/quote]

Agreed in this context.  I like to go by winning %, where coach Schafer ranks #3 in school history (.636).  However, it's his post-season records that get my attention.  ECAC: 30-12-2 (.705) and NCAA: 6-6 (.500).  And 4 league championships in 12 years.  I think it's quite impressive.  True, he doesn't have the NCAA title yet, and he may never get it, but no current ECAC coach can claim as much success, and I can't think of anyone who I'm confident could be more successful with our recruiting & academic advantages/disadvantages at this place and time.[/quote]
Good to see there's someone halfway intelligent to have a discussion with around here.... thanks for the well thought out reply.
I wasn't comparing the atmosphere at Lynah to Appleton or Baker, merely the comment that it was an old barn, and so are the other two. Just because it's old doesn't make it special. It does get loud in there (only the two times this season when it was louder there than any other place I'd been were the end of the Harvard game and the end of the Colgate game, killing off the bs five minute penalty on Krantz). I'm just saying, the players who leave Mariucci and the Ralph echo the same comments that departing Red players do. Is it one of the best places to play around the nation? Absolutely - but the same arguement could easily be made by fans of a half dozen other schools.
I wouldn't say I wanted to raze Lynah - I just think that in 5-10 years, we're going to be behind the eight ball again in terms of facilities in the east, and then we'll be asking why we did all this now. I maintain that if you're standing still, you're moving backward, because there's others gaining ground - which may or may not be what happened this season (others gaining ground, I mean) (yes, losing three players hurt, but in the end, you're not going to win many playoff series scoring a goal a game - we made Fisher look like Ryan Miller last weekend).
Anyway, regarding Schafer... I'll agree four titles in 12 years is pretty good. His playoff record, though, is inflated over coaches in the past because of the format of the postseason. In the old days, you had to only win three games - that changed to six in Schafer's early years, then to as few again as four now. Also, the NCAA tournament was smaller back in the day. Is he probably one of the top 3 coaches in the league? Might be fair to say that. All I know is, having spoken with him, and most of his past assistants over the years, I just feel like the assistants don't nearly get the credit they deserve. They do the heavy lifting (recruiting, scouting, gameplanning), and he gets the glory - which is what happens with every team, no matter the sport, I know. But that doesn't mean I'm going to bow to the altar of Schafer. I feel like he's changed since taking us to the frozen four, and not in a good way.

[quote Al DeFlorio][quote bandrews37]Just like how everyone on here threw a shit fit about the jerseys the team wore in Florida, though at most 500 people saw the team actually wearing them in person. Did anyone care to think about what the players prefered, since they're the ones, you know, WEARING THEM? Every player I spoke with (and yes, I spoke with most of them) preferred the new uniforms, saying they were lighter and that made a difference late in the games because they weren't soaked with water and sweat. Yet because of fan backlash over them, the jerseys were banished to the back of the closet.[/quote]
Perhaps you can explain to us how having goofy fonts on front and back rather than the traditional and having vertical stripes on the sides rather than a horizontal stripe at the bottoms of the jerseys helped "make a difference late in the games."  I don't recall anyone objecting to the material of which the jerseys were made, only the way they were decorated.

Wait...if it's going to provoke another irrational, intemperate rant, don't bother explaining.[/quote]
I wouldn't say I've said anything all that irrational - just stepping away from being a fanboy and taking an objective look at the team for a change, that's all.
Personally, Al, I don't care if they come out looking like a damn candy cane. If the players have a preference to them, then that's what I want them to wear. Because without the players, there's no team. To me, that's the one thing that I feel gets forgotten on here.

And RichH, thanks for understanding I am not trolling, but merely expressing my opinions based on following the team and college hockey in general. And no, I'm not an Athletics lackey - like you, I'm a fan who cares as much about the program as anyone else (only I'm a bit more concerned about the direction of the program than others).

[quote The Rancor][quote bandrews37]Then apparently you missed the last four games of the season, when all we were doing was dumping and chasing.
In truth, I believe that Schafer has taken this team and this school as far as he possibly can. This team was in a position to win an ivy title this season, needing just two points in the final two league games to get at least a share, and they couldn't pull it out. Is it because we weren't talanted enough? No - we were outplayed and thus outcoached in both contests. The assistant coaches are ok, but anyone who's ever talked to Schafer knows he's more phony than a $3 bill.
People on here are quick to point out our facilities as a strong point in luring top-notch recruits. Really, though, the new facilities aren't as grand as everyone makes them out to be. Sure, they're a step up over what we had, but Clarkson, Dartmouth and Quinnipiac all have a better setup, and that's just within the league. What our new facilities move us to is the middle of the national pack.
Our hope should not to be simply be better than the teams in the ECAC. It should be to be better than EVERY team in college hockey. Too many are content just to finish higher than Harvard every year-and that's a dangerous mindset to be in.
And frankly, it's funny to hear how much of an impact the fans think they have on potential recruits and on the success of the team. Does having a packed house help? Sure it does. But you can't tell me that the words the seniors speak every season about how much they will miss playing in front of the fans aren't echoed at North Dakota, Denver, Minnesota, Michigan, Michigan State, Maine, BU, BC, New Hampshire - even at other schools in the ECAC, like Clarkson and SLU.
There's nothing unique about playing at Cornell. The fans cheer the same exact cheers that every other school around the country does. The facilities are average at best. The support from the administration is also average, could be better, could be worse. The league is middle tier and plays in some of the worst venues in division one hockey. And when you lump that all in with a style of play that - if you're a top-notch offensive player - will hamper your growth and development, than the writing on the wall is clear.[/quote]

I did not see the last 4 games. 2x away games with no vidieo + no All Access for 2 home playoff games::bang:: / i live in florida = No I didnt see the last four games. Also, no indicators of that syle of play from any posters or game recaps. sooo...[/quote]Then if you didn't see the games, how can you have any type of informed opinion of how we have played when the games mattered the most? And I hope you didn't have the All Access because you were away, because it certainly was working - with score graphics and instant replay, no less.

QuoteNothing unique about playing at Cornell?? We TOUGHT other schools those cheers! Lynah is an "old Barn" which lots of old school hockey players (and those new school guys with that mindset) like.

Tought, or taught? Appleton is an "old barn"; so is Baker Rink and Houston Field House - how's that make us unique? So just like the coach, the fans haven't evolved and/or stayed ahead of the rest of the country. Just like how everyone on here threw a shit fit about the jerseys the team wore in Florida, though at most 500 people saw the team actually wearing them in person. Did anyone care to think about what the players prefered, since they're the ones, you know, WEARING THEM? Every player I spoke with (and yes, I spoke with most of them) preferred the new uniforms, saying they were lighter and that made a difference late in the games because they weren't soaked with water and sweat. Yet because of fan backlash over them, the jerseys were banished to the back of the closet.

QuoteAnd how is Schafer a phoney? He's the winningest coach in Cornell history and has taken  this team to the FF not more than a few years ago and has a couple dozen former players in the Pros. That and he is a 2 time ECAC COTY. What planet are you from?

Winningest coach just means he's been here longer than anyone else has. You want to get picky? Fine - he may have the most wins in school history, he's also got the most losses. Yes, more than Brian McCutcheon, more than Dick Bertrand, more than Lou Reycroft.

Much like the goalies thread, numbers can be twisted around here to prove whatever point you want. Most wins? Meaningless stat.

I will say this about next year's team: if we can get through the summer with minimal defections (and I've been hearing as many as four may leave - to go pro or to another program - and as few as one), this team will be a lot better, only because it'll be Topher wearing the C and not Bitz.

Then apparently you missed the last four games of the season, when all we were doing was dumping and chasing.
In truth, I believe that Schafer has taken this team and this school as far as he possibly can. This team was in a position to win an ivy title this season, needing just two points in the final two league games to get at least a share, and they couldn't pull it out. Is it because we weren't talanted enough? No - we were outplayed and thus outcoached in both contests. The assistant coaches are ok, but anyone who's ever talked to Schafer knows he's more phony than a $3 bill.
People on here are quick to point out our facilities as a strong point in luring top-notch recruits. Really, though, the new facilities aren't as grand as everyone makes them out to be. Sure, they're a step up over what we had, but Clarkson, Dartmouth and Quinnipiac all have a better setup, and that's just within the league. What our new facilities move us to is the middle of the national pack.
Our hope should not to be simply be better than the teams in the ECAC. It should be to be better than EVERY team in college hockey. Too many are content just to finish higher than Harvard every year-and that's a dangerous mindset to be in.
And frankly, it's funny to hear how much of an impact the fans think they have on potential recruits and on the success of the team. Does having a packed house help? Sure it does. But you can't tell me that the words the seniors speak every season about how much they will miss playing in front of the fans aren't echoed at North Dakota, Denver, Minnesota, Michigan, Michigan State, Maine, BU, BC, New Hampshire - even at other schools in the ECAC, like Clarkson and SLU.
There's nothing unique about playing at Cornell. The fans cheer the same exact cheers that every other school around the country does. The facilities are average at best. The support from the administration is also average, could be better, could be worse. The league is middle tier and plays in some of the worst venues in division one hockey. And when you lump that all in with a style of play that - if you're a top-notch offensive player - will hamper your growth and development, than the writing on the wall is clear.

Probably the most well-thought-out post on here in history. Something I've been thinking of for the last three weeks....

The Schafer glory years are over. The game has evolved, and he's still coaching his style of play from when he wore the Red and White. It's a shame, the players he hoodwinked into coming here deserve better.

Tell me where in my post did I say last night he was stifled?

Learn to read....

Feola's the ref for Saturday night. Binda's stuck up with Dartmouth and Clarkson (praise Allah).

Hansen's back on Sunday, if we even get that far. After tonight, not counting on it.

As long as his creativity is stifled under Schafer's direction, he's not going to continue to develop.

I'm sorry, but after tonight's game, I'm starting to believe that what DILLIGAF is saying is true; Romano (among other players) won't be around next year.

Cornell's got four kids at the indoor national's this weekend in Arkansas. Of them, two (Halim -- triple jump & Uceny -- 800m) are seeded in top three. According to Ivy League site, if either of them win their events, they'd be the first individual champion since Charlie Moore way back in 1951.

That's not really a fair assessment, though, Jim. Of Scrivens' decisions this year (he's 3-6-2 overall, right?) he's gotten the decision in three games where he came on in relief of Troy - and those have been two losses and a tie. If you remove those where he came in down several goals and ended up with the decision, he's 3-4-1 - not great, but not too bad, I suppose. And Troy becomes 11-7-3 - still not too bad, but not great, either.

On top of that, as was pointed out earlier, Troy's gotten the benefit of more offensive support in front of him.

I think the safest bet is that we'll see both goalies this weekend, especially if the series goes three games. I have to figure that whoever starts will be on a relatively short leash.

You guys working with some-access over there too, eh?

One concern I'm starting to see with Romano - he gets open, yet doesn't get the puck. Looks like he's frustrated, and he's starting to do more of getting the puck in the defensive end and trying to go all the way with it. I wonder if some of the guys don't like his flashyness and don't want to get him the puck.

Which is too bad, because he's the most creative offensive threat this team's had in a long, long time.

Not sure what games you were watching, but they sure weren't the ones I saw. At SLU, he got peppered with 17 shots in 15 minutes - stopping 14 of them. Yeah, he gave up an easy one that got him pulled, but how's that any different than the three easy rebounds Davenport gave up at Dartmouth? Scrivens didn't play at Clarkson, and played pretty damn well at Union, making 31 stops - more than Davenport had made at that point in the season, then didn't play at RPI. Had he not played well in the third period at Union, that's another loss and we're playing this weekend.

Thing is, Scrivens, while he may or may not be better, has at least been more consistent than Davenport. Davenport's much more likely to follow up a stellar shutout with a ghastly stinker. As proof, I implore you to check out the two shutouts he has posted this year - against Wayne State and against Quinnipiac. The following game, what did he do?

RPI - 32:35, 3 GA
Princeton - 60:00, 4 GA

Anyway, more examples....
Last six appearances for both goalies, regardless of time played
Davenport
2/23 @ Dartmouth - 5 GA, 16 svs - L
2/17 vs. Princeton - 4 GA, 37 svs - W
2/16 vs. Quinnipiac - 0 GA, 27 svs - W
2/10 @ RPI - 1 GA, 28 svs - W
1/25 @ Colgate - 2 GA, 4 svs - no decision (L)
1/19 vs. Yale - 2 GA, 15 svs - T

Scrivens
2/24 @ Harvard - 3 GA, 36 svs - L
2/9 @ Union - 3 GA, 31 svs - T
2/3 vs. SLU - 2 GA, 21 svs - L
2/2 vs. Clarkson - 2 GA, 26 svs - W
1/27 vs. Colgate - 1 GA, 24 svs - W
1/25 @ Colgate - 1 GA, 6 svs - L (in relief)

Say what you will, but I'll take the more consistent player any day of the week. At this point, isn't consistency what this team needs more of anyway?