ELynah Forum

Quote from: BeeeejGreening just scored the 2OT game-winner for the Sens on a rebound to make the series 2-1 Penguins. Gritty, hard work.

Matt Cooke loses, humanity wins.

Surely making the goals bigger would be the easiest way to increase scoring. But is that even a desirable end?

Great. An endorsement of this season's mix of petulance, stupidity, occasional brilliance, and overwhelming inconsistency. None of the '14ers except Iles getting an A is telling as well.

-edit- I should clarify that I'm talking about McCarron.

Are the semifinals going to be on Slope Day again?

Quote from: TrotskyHave the teams been named?  Can't find 'em anywhere.  (I thought they were announced with Hobey.)

http://www.ecachockey.com/men/2012-13/News/20131204_All-Americans

Quote from: KeithK

Quote from: BenNot really. The cutoff (GPA, SAT/ACT) is higher at HYP than it is here. Students who get admitted to one of HYP as well as Cornell will probably have higher measurable academic attributes than students who only get into Cornell. Because of this, Cornell will be offering financial aid packages that are effectively merit-based.

I was trying to say that there may already have been some bias in aid packages based on merit, just not on the size of the package. Anyway, I don't have a problem with giving merit based aid.   Once you guarantee to provide financial need to all students I don't think it's a bad thing to give more aid to better candidates. I actually think it's a good thing. But YMMV.

I agree with the principle, but it doesn't seem that we could currently afford to provide merit-based aid in addition to meeting demonstrated need.

Quote from: KeithK

Quote from: BenIt also means that financial aid is not wholly need-based.

Not necessarily.  It just means we're using a different definition of need. That is, HYP's definition.

Snark aside, I don't think the need-based financial aid policy ever guaranteed that all students would get the same types of aid, just that all students would be admitted without consideration of need and would receive a package equal to their computed need. One kid could get a larger percentage of grants vs. loans.  So we may not have been as "pure" as advertised. (Am I remembering this wrong?)

Not really. The cutoff (GPA, SAT/ACT) is higher at HYP than it is here. Students who get admitted to one of HYP as well as Cornell will probably have higher measurable academic attributes than students who only get into Cornell. Because of this, Cornell will be offering financial aid packages that are effectively merit-based.

Quote from: KeithK

Quote from: BenTo go back to the allusion I made before, I believe that athletic recruiting runs counter to the Ivy League academics-first principles. If Cornell is going to recruit, it should recruit biologists, engineers, Hotelies, architects, etc. Not athletes.

I see your point and am sympathetic to it. Taking this position does imply that Cornell will not have D1 athletics though, since recruiting is a fact of life at this level. That might be an acceptable outcome to maintain our principles, but we shouldn't kid ourselvees about the consequences.

I's pretty hard to actively recruit biologists, hotelies, architects,etc. since there isn't a comparable practical for high school students to directly demonstrate their suitability for these fields in the way there is for sports.  Schools do certainly recruit top caliber students though.

As I've mentioned elsewhere on these boards, I would support Cornell ending varsity athletics altogether. In terms of recruiting students, I remember getting bucketloads of (form) letters from colleges after taking the PSAT, so there is some available information on high school students' academic performance. Form letters, though, are pretty different from a visit by a coach/professor.

Quote from: KeithK

Quote from: BMacMatching the higher scholarships of wealthier Ivy League schools to ensure athletic competitiveness...  that's about as close to giving athletic scholarships as I'd ever like Cornell to be. Or perhaps it's over the line.

I'm conflicted.

It's unfair to the rest of us, but it's more fair for athletic competitions against other Ivies. The Ivy League was created to enshrine a group of schools that did not sacrifice academic priorities to pursue athletic fairness. We would be uncompetitive together. Now, as a result of government pressure to spend endowments, the wealthier members have created an imbalance in our little group. Is it unprincipled to sacrifice academic priorities to remain competitive within our (not-that-) uncompetitive group?

I love Cornell hockey, but I'm starting to think that the answer may be no. I would not be pleased to learn that a squash player got a higher scholarship because Harvard offered them a nicer package.

This discussion is centered around athletics. But do we know whether this affects non-athletes as well?  The Ivy schools are now prohibited from sharing aid packages among themselves but that doesn't prevent Cornell from using the Harvard online calculator for any student to determine what kinds of financial aid packages they're up against.  I suspect they do. If admissions routinely makes comparisons with other Ivy guarantees for the general student body then doing it for athletes becomes less of a concern.

The difference, of course, is that an athete has an advocate pressuring the admissions to match and offer while a non-athlete does not.

It also means that financial aid is not wholly need-based.

To go back to the allusion I made before, I believe that athletic recruiting runs counter to the Ivy League academics-first principles. If Cornell is going to recruit, it should recruit biologists, engineers, Hotelies, architects, etc. Not athletes.

Quote from: George64I need some clarification.  I thought that financial aid was essentially "need based" and administered though Day Hall, not Bartels Hall.  I was under the impression (perhaps naively) that the HYP match applied to all Cornell students.  While I've attended far more athletic events than Glee Club concerts or poetry readings, I like to think that all students are treated equally when it comes to financial assistance.  Shouldn't we compete as hard for a brilliant physics major as for a prospective All Ivy athlete?

I don't recall Professor Hull taking any trips to recruit the country's best high school historians.

I can top all of your concrete bunkers: Levien Gym (Columbia basketball) is the worst sporting arena that I've ever visited. Horrible place.

Quote from: RichH

Quote from: BenI expect all the ECAC supporters on this board will be heading here to pick up the appropriate swag.

There's a difference between being happy for your conference/league/division and being an all-out fan. I wished several Yale fans I met luck before the game, and congratulated others after the game.  While a group of us were leaving the arena, we passed by some obviously exuberant Yale students, and they shouted "yeah, Ivy League!"  That's what it's about. There are bonds and camaraderie that is important to some of us. We all dream of us winning some year, and I guarantee you that the same support from peers would make the experience that much sweeter.  When you're here, you can either choose to be miserable or choose to enjoy the experience, and I know for a fact for me, it is much more fun to do the latter.  That's what makes the college hockey community so addictive: when it comes down to it, we all love the same game, so find comfort in this awesome experience, and hope someday we get fortunate enough to experience the euphoria too.

Can't wait for October.

I like that making a joke turns me into a miserable git. I neither want nor expect support from the fans of any other team. If no one likes us, I won't care (like Millwall, without the hooliganism). I'll just enjoy the hockey.

I expect all the ECAC supporters on this board will be heading here to pick up the appropriate swag.

Quote from: marty

Quote from: marty

Quote from: BenAs a fan, it's great to see your team win a game coming back from 3-0 down, but an excellent coach makes sure his team doesn't have to dig themselves out of that hole.

News flash. Motzko no longer considered excellent.

Ditto Pecknold. Time to replace him, too.

Way to not get the point at all.

Quote from: Kyle RoseNo need to repeat what Greg said. I'll just add that Cornell is hardly "a 9th place team" from the perspective of a recruit: Cornell has been the most consistently good team in the conference over the past decade and a half: one off year doesn't change that. By virtue of attracting recruits that would previously not have returned the calls of ECAC recruiters, a stronger conference will definitely benefit the strongest teams in the conference: Yale, Union, Quinnipiac, Cornell, and (yes) Harvard.

But not necessarily equally.

I'll be pulling for the asteroid.