ELynah Forum

I wonder if prospective recruits are aware of the style of hockey - "system", if you will, they would have to adapt to in order to play for colleges which attempt to recruit them?

Denver U. is a small school (11,797), but U.M.D. is even smaller (10,878). For a really small school root for Union (2,242), which has to compete against Penn State (99,133).

GREAT game! Speed, heavy checking, great goaltending, and no trapping.

I believe that would be a Scarlet Letter.

There is a difference between "rooting for Harvard" and "rooting for the Harvard Hockey Team". Rhetoricians call this a "synecdoche" - where the user confuses the part for the whole. This is a serious error in logic, love, and hockey fans.

Trotsky: If you find a video of that game I'll split the cost of a copy with you.

1967 Syracuse War Memorial Cornell vs North Dakota one goal game

How the mighty have fallen. From statistical analysis to predictions/Expectations! Of course there could be a lot of overlap here. There certainly is in reports by stock-market/investment touts.

Have rules changes/interpretation in the last decade or so influenced what style of play in college hockey is more successful? For example, is the defensive "trap" strategy less or more successful? Has the relative success of speed versus strength changed? Have recruiting priorities changed, and if so how?

Talent alone does not produce winners. Attitude, coaching, strategy, teamwork and even fan support play large roles in determining a team's success. And the latter qualities, like recruiting, are variables which may be influenced by deliberate change.

But is Donato any good at playing a trap defense?

". . . sturdy defensively, but everything else is up in the air." - That comment is annoyingly accurate and familiar. Still, following this year's Big Red team was immensely more enjoyable this year than last year. A similar improvement next year would brig joy to the faithful, more fans to Lynah, and more prospects to Ithaca. Hope springs eternal . . .

Last night the four playoff teams had a total of 29 power plays but scored a total of TWO power play goals - a less than 7% success ratio. This seems low. How does it compare to regular season power-play success results?

Who are you going to believe, a cluster of effete statisticians or a seasoned Cornell Hockey Fan?

Percentage posters hedge their bets, while zealots are certain where certainty does not exist. Cornell wins, 3-1.