ELynah Forum

Quote from: BearLover on April 30, 2026, 05:11:19 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 30, 2026, 05:05:59 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 30, 2026, 04:59:30 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 30, 2026, 04:52:55 PMStill following this story and waiting for more info - but at the annual coaches meetings in Florida this week, the only thing of substance the coaches agreed on -- almost universally -- was an increase of the games limit to 40.

Needless to say which schools did not agree.

A 10-game gap between Ivies and others is quite brutal.

Still subject to approval by a few levels through the NCAA food chain.

Death by a thousand cuts.

you've been beating the same extremely negative drum for awhile now, and while i've been pessimistic myself, this "death by a thousand cuts" talk is kind of silly when the ivy league arguably just had its best season in a long time

Neither the 40-game thing, nor the 5th year thing, nor the age limit thing, nor the diminished ability to recruit from Major Junior (especially Quebec) thing, nor really the money stuff (in earnest) have kicked in yet.  So, as with everything NCAA these days, what happened before is irrelevant.  These are all the cuts I'm referring to.

Cornell is recruiting heavily from major junior, especially Quebec. I haven't followed the other Ivies' recruiting as closely, but I don't see why Cornell would be so prolific in this area if the Ivies faced significant recruiting limitations in this .region specifically The 40 game thing sounds bad but I would imagine the Ivies will have no choice but to approve more games now. With regard to the money stuff, I've said my piece, and would prefer not to rehash this argument, but it still seems that from available reporting there is little money right now beyond Alston/COA, which is getting lumped in with revenue sharing. I also see no reason why spending will increase substantially, especially now that most schools will be losing more money from playing additional games. The 5-year eligibility rule is very bad, yes.

Great - so you agree 2 of the things I said were bad.

Money ... yeah, don't know what to tell you. We continue to have extremely different definitions of what is "substantial" given that every school is attempting to raise $250,000 minimum, and this transfer cycle has seen $50k payments to random players.

Again - you are confusing current recruiting with future. Not sure why. What is happening right now in recruiting is not relevant to the new rules, which haven't even happened yet.  I thought we were at the point where you read all my articles - but in the latest, Ben Syer talks about being concerned about all of this.  More is coming.  There is a reason our own Casey Jones made impassioned remarks to NCAA lawyers today at the coach's meetings.  What is happening today in recruiting, changes significantly over the next couple years as the new rules take effect, assuming no further changes. Just to give one thing in a nutshell (hardly the only thing) that everyone is talking about ... Quebec kids graduate high school at 17. If they play Major Junior until 20, they would only have 2 years of NCAA eligibility remaining.  This is actually the case for all kids, but it's a particular issue in Quebec.  What's going to happen is, players will be asked to delay graduating high school so they can come into the NCAA at 19 or 20 and still have 5 or 4 years of eligibility remaining. Getting this message to 17 year olds who are focused on major junior and not thinking NCAA at that point, is going to be difficult - let alone whether it's logistically possible under the laws of various jurisdictions.  So ... that's one reason why everyone's hair is on fire at the moment.  In fact, this is such a big deal that even David Carle - who really has his pick of the litter of 18 year olds right now - made the same plea to NCAA lawyers (who could care less).

Quote from: BearLover on April 30, 2026, 04:59:30 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 30, 2026, 04:52:55 PMStill following this story and waiting for more info - but at the annual coaches meetings in Florida this week, the only thing of substance the coaches agreed on -- almost universally -- was an increase of the games limit to 40.

Needless to say which schools did not agree.

A 10-game gap between Ivies and others is quite brutal.

Still subject to approval by a few levels through the NCAA food chain.

Death by a thousand cuts.

you've been beating the same extremely negative drum for awhile now, and while i've been pessimistic myself, this "death by a thousand cuts" talk is kind of silly when the ivy league arguably just had its best season in a long time

Neither the 40-game thing, nor the 5th year thing, nor the age limit thing, nor the diminished ability to recruit from Major Junior (especially Quebec) thing, nor really the money stuff (in earnest) have kicked in yet.  So, as with everything NCAA these days, what happened before is irrelevant.  These are all the cuts I'm referring to.

Still following this story and waiting for more info - but at the annual coaches meetings in Florida this week, the only thing of substance the coaches agreed on -- almost universally -- was an increase of the games limit to 40.

Needless to say which schools did not agree.

A 10-game gap between Ivies and others is quite brutal.

Still subject to approval by a few levels through the NCAA food chain.

Death by a thousand cuts.

Quote from: Al DeFlorio on April 29, 2026, 02:43:42 PMPrinceton once took a QB from, I think, Purdue, after his freshman year.  They say they don't take transfers, so, to satisfy that, they made him enter as a freshman, not a sophomore.  When you need a QB, you do what you have to do.

That is ostensibly what they do with players who have turned 21 in juniors from Jan to Apr. Because the rule has been "5 years to play 4" - those players have to enroll in a college - of any kind - for the semester, and be full-time students. They lose the year of eligibility in the minds of the NCAA - but then Princeton takes those players in, without really accepting the transfer credits, as freshmen with 4 years to play 4 still remaining.

Quote from: BearLover on April 28, 2026, 06:32:10 PMWell, overall it appears there are more players leaving early than in past years, so I'm not sure we can say more of them are sticking around or ascribe any cause to that. As for the rest of that stuff, I don't think Cornell will have much trouble adjusting to the maximum age being 23. We've been pretty young lately. The 5-year thing is a big problem, as I've highlighted on ELynah many times. The Ivies are going to have to let graduate students play sports or it will become impossible to compete nationally.

I asked a few Ivy coaches about this and their response was essentially "our presidents have better things to worry about so don't hold your breath"

I've said all along the Ivies would be more insulated from this - but not totally immune either. I've said this only in response to any implication that Cornell was somehow screwing up by players leaving.  It's more transient everywhere. Even if less so in the Ivies, we can expect it to be relatively more open to coming/going than the past, and is not indicative of anyone doing anything wrong.

The bigger issue is, as you said, that the rich are getting richer in other ways - feeding off the small.

The smaller schools/Ivies keep losing whatever edge they may have.  Older players?  Being great diminished now with new rules. 5th year players?  Ivies can't do it.  Blue chippers coming and going more quickly?  Looks like more of them are sticking around now because of Rev Share/NIL.  A trend that's still developing but it's obvious in basketball, and anecdotally starting to become a thing in hockey.

So - I'm a doomer and gloomer - I just don't blame anyone. Except lawyers not named Beeeej 

Quote from: Trotsky on April 23, 2026, 12:24:44 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 22, 2026, 02:04:48 PMFor schools with money, you are starting to see their ability to pay some $$ causes players to pause about going to the AHL for $80k.

When a player jumps to the pros, does he sign a guaranteed contract for the full season?  Pro-rated for the games remaining?  Do they get dental?  Are playoffs extra money?  I assume players are not ICs like golfers -- they don't have to pay for their own transportation, lodging, equipment, etc.  Do they get a per diem for food?

they get all of the above

Quote from: BearLover on April 22, 2026, 11:56:00 AMA few weeks ago it was claimed that early departures are up, and that players like Hoyt Stanley leaving early is the norm. I'm not sure this is true. On his podcast this week, Brad Schlossman said early departures are down this season. Anecdotally, I'm seeing a lot of posts like this one:
https://x.com/DanielVConnolly/status/2046966239986163836?s=20

I am skeptical that it you looked at early departures on the aggregate, the number is higher than 5 or 10 years ago.

For schools with money, you are starting to see their ability to pay some $$ causes players to pause about going to the AHL for $80k. This is of course very new - and too early to make widespread conclusions - but pretty sure that is the case with the UConn players and Michael Hage at Michigan. As with everything, there are many factors at play, and individual preferences.  Stanley was a full tuition student - no grants, academic aid, etc... - so no one has any issue with him signing a pro deal when Cornell isn't even allowed to give him squat.

Quote from: Snowball on April 21, 2026, 02:25:29 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 21, 2026, 01:51:47 PM

Quote from: Snowball on April 21, 2026, 12:40:11 PMSo opinions on whether this matters or not vary.

opinions vary, sure, but that doesn't mean they're equally grounded

Quote from: adamw on April 21, 2026, 12:30:53 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 20, 2026, 10:59:16 PMI still think anyone who thinks a future employer will give the slightest shit about this is bonkers.

The future employer stuff is why the ECAC is the only league on Earth that doesn't announce suspensions. I wrote a diatribe about this a few years ago which I should just automatically re-publish every 3 months, because it remains a preposterous premise.

I got it I got it I got it.

You and Adam (and every other sports league in the world) are right, the ECAC and I are wrong.

Issue resolved!

FTFY 

I really personally don't have much interest in debating whether anyone should be more mad at Robertson or Cournoyer or anyone at all. But I will say that there are many behind-the-scenes, and front of scenes, reasons why one could consider Robertson to be just as bad or worse. Just one example - the courtship, as it were, was going on much longer in Robertson's case. Whether this makes it better or worse -- to each their own.  But ultimately, it's seems a waste of time to debate it.

Quote from: ugarte on April 20, 2026, 10:59:16 PMI still think anyone who thinks a future employer will give the slightest shit about this is bonkers.

The future employer stuff is why the ECAC is the only league on Earth that doesn't announce suspensions. I wrote a diatribe about this a few years ago which I should just automatically re-publish every 3 months, because it remains a preposterous premise.

Quote from: BearLover on April 20, 2026, 01:14:54 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 20, 2026, 01:08:51 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 20, 2026, 01:02:00 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 20, 2026, 12:40:47 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 20, 2026, 11:49:48 AMThat part I got. But his reasoning for transferring is what I want to know, and that is still a mystery. Did he transfer because he though Wisconsin would give him a better opportunity to sign pro? Because he was struggling in school/didn't want to go to class anymore? "He only cares about hockey" seems clear, but why transfer? I can think of several reasons, but we don't have much clarity as to the ones that led to the decision, other than maybe a vague allusion to the "education" bit.

I think it's pretty clear that if he doesn't care about the degree and is ready to jump ship to the pros ASAP, he'd rather be someplace that has the B1G's NIL budget, scholarship generosity and academic support (TAs who will take his exams). I don't know if Cornell's coaching/schedule came into it at all but it seems secondary. I honestly doubt that MTL cares very much which program he was at. 

That's true but it seems relevant which of those purported reasons was decisive. It's vague as to which of the following affected his decision and to what degree:
—he wanted more of a challenge (I suspect it's not this but that's basically the answer he gave to the Wisconsin journalist)
-money, whether scholarship or NIL (not mentioned in either of the articles but could of course be a reason)
-he didn't want to go to school (sort of alluded to by Casey but only if you squint)

I know people roll their eyes when I harp on this stuff but it's a lot different if a kid is dipping because he has to pay tuition versus because he thinks the ECAC is weak versus because he isn't a serious student. Yeah the answer could be "all of the above" but in terms of future recruiting it's good to know why a player like this would leave Cornell when so many other good players do not. The coaching staff got burned and it'd be nice to not have that happen again.

roll my eyes is one way to say it ... I mean, if you think the definition of journalism is forcing a run-of-the-mill college hockey player to confess, on the record, all of his deep thoughts about why he transferred, just to satisfy the burning curiosity of 10 people who absolutely need to know or it will kill them ... then ... good luck waiting on that.

You've been given way more to infer on this one case, either by my comments here or Jane's articles, than 99.9% of all the other 200 kids that transferred last week and pissed off the fans/coaches of the place they left.

She had Casey on the record. I was hopeful this would reveal more than we already knew, but it didn't. Not expecting her to grill Cournoyer, obviously. I think Jane is a promising journalist and the Sun's hockey coverage has been great, to be clear. But people wanted to know why he transferred and it's still extremely murky.

Do you honestly expect Casey to trash a kid on the record, or that it would be a good idea if he did?

I mean, this goes for every other coach too.

"Well, the kid is clueless, he lied to us in his meeting and then had his agent start calling around. Turns out he wasn't a good student and he decided he wanted the money more than a Cornell education."

What would be the benefit in a coach saying something like this? Assuming this is true.

Quote from: BearLover on April 20, 2026, 01:02:00 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 20, 2026, 12:40:47 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 20, 2026, 11:49:48 AMThat part I got. But his reasoning for transferring is what I want to know, and that is still a mystery. Did he transfer because he though Wisconsin would give him a better opportunity to sign pro? Because he was struggling in school/didn't want to go to class anymore? "He only cares about hockey" seems clear, but why transfer? I can think of several reasons, but we don't have much clarity as to the ones that led to the decision, other than maybe a vague allusion to the "education" bit.

I think it's pretty clear that if he doesn't care about the degree and is ready to jump ship to the pros ASAP, he'd rather be someplace that has the B1G's NIL budget, scholarship generosity and academic support (TAs who will take his exams). I don't know if Cornell's coaching/schedule came into it at all but it seems secondary. I honestly doubt that MTL cares very much which program he was at. 

That's true but it seems relevant which of those purported reasons was decisive. It's vague as to which of the following affected his decision and to what degree:
—he wanted more of a challenge (I suspect it's not this but that's basically the answer he gave to the Wisconsin journalist)
-money, whether scholarship or NIL (not mentioned in either of the articles but could of course be a reason)
-he didn't want to go to school (sort of alluded to by Casey but only if you squint)

I know people roll their eyes when I harp on this stuff but it's a lot different if a kid is dipping because he has to pay tuition versus because he thinks the ECAC is weak versus because he isn't a serious student. Yeah the answer could be "all of the above" but in terms of future recruiting it's good to know why a player like this would leave Cornell when so many other good players do not. The coaching staff got burned and it'd be nice to not have that happen again.

roll my eyes is one way to say it ... I mean, if you think the definition of journalism is forcing a run-of-the-mill college hockey player to confess, on the record, all of his deep thoughts about why he transferred, just to satisfy the burning curiosity of 10 people who absolutely need to know or it will kill them ... then ... good luck waiting on that.

You've been given way more to infer on this one case, either by my comments here or Jane's articles, than 99.9% of all the other 200 kids that transferred last week and pissed off the fans/coaches of the place they left.

Quote from: The Rancor on April 20, 2026, 11:44:01 AMNo, it probably is very good- I'd be shocked if it wasn't. What I'm implying is that Wisconsin probably has a larger goaltending coaching staff and resources, because it's a bigger program with more money. Training/Coaching is SO important for goalies in this era. They train to be robots. Playing approximately the same amount of games at Wisco Vs Cornell but against a full slate of Big 10 goon squads and snipers. I'm not shitting on our program, but I do see that there are limits to what we offer, and the impression of quality in the hockey world. Seeing things through non Carnelian glasses...
Of course I think Cornell is awesome. Teams should fear us. But in the wider hockey world, we're on the B tier (and the ECAC is C/B- tier in their eyes...) in spite of our consistency and success. Is what it is. It's ridiculous obviously considering that the Big Whoop hasn't claimed a Natty since it started, but, even we on e-lynah get worried when we have to face off against them with the season on the line.

My insights come from being a fan my whole life and playing ice hockey for a long time- and playing with and interacting with on a regular basis former Junior, College and pro players. I'm not that good, but they are and they know. I skate with (literal) kids on their way to College and Juniors with pro ambitions- I have a sense of how they think and feel, not that anyone cares about credentials- only Adam W has the street cred that matters.

Gee thanks - but FYI - Wisconsin is not allowed to have more coaches than Cornell has. Almost every kid has their own personal/private goalie coach these days.

A lot of CHL teams are still playing.