ELynah Forum

Quote from: stereax on April 08, 2026, 12:09:26 AMThe one thing about Puglisi - from my understanding, the 4-year clock starts once he enters the NCAA, not necessarily when he's drafted. Or at least that's how it's been explained to me - the concept being that they want drafted players to be able to earn their degrees in 4 years and then still have their rights retained by their org for that 30-day negotiation window.

Yes, as far as I know, this is correct.

Quote from: stereax on April 04, 2026, 08:59:10 AM

Quote from: The Rancor on April 04, 2026, 06:54:17 AM

Quote from: stereax on April 04, 2026, 12:49:35 AM

Quote from: BearLover on April 04, 2026, 12:14:57 AM

Quote from: Chris '03 on April 03, 2026, 06:44:34 PMI'm sure this won't complicate the situation at all:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/04/urgent-national-action-to-save-college-sports/

This won't become law because the president doesn't have this authority, but notably this EO gives NCAA athletes five years of eligibility. For some reason there's been a push for that. Were it to ever happen, it would cripple the Ivy League, which does not permit grad student athletes.

I mean the NCAA is a private enterprise and should be able to run its own shit the way it wants. That being said, Trump can threaten to cut federal funding and then everyone either gets in line real fast or gets well and truly fucked, in many cases, while this goes through the courts.

"He can't DO that!" Are we still pretending that he can't or won't? Or that everyone won't cowtow to his whims?

that's literally the point of my message lol

Yes, sorry I was attempting a quote of the comment above you.

Quote from: stereax on April 04, 2026, 12:49:35 AM

Quote from: BearLover on April 04, 2026, 12:14:57 AM

Quote from: Chris '03 on April 03, 2026, 06:44:34 PMI'm sure this won't complicate the situation at all:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/04/urgent-national-action-to-save-college-sports/

This won't become law because the president doesn't have this authority, but notably this EO gives NCAA athletes five years of eligibility. For some reason there's been a push for that. Were it to ever happen, it would cripple the Ivy League, which does not permit grad student athletes.

I mean the NCAA is a private enterprise and should be able to run its own shit the way it wants. That being said, Trump can threaten to cut federal funding and then everyone either gets in line real fast or gets well and truly fucked, in many cases, while this goes through the courts.

"He can't DO that!" Are we still pretending that he can't or won't? Or that everyone won't cowtow to his whims?

Quote from: stereax on April 03, 2026, 11:50:53 PM

Quote from: The Rancor on April 03, 2026, 11:25:58 PMCouns is 6'4 and already was a QMJHL goalie... Seems Michigan State needs a goalie? I'm just teasing, of course, but it is a real possibility. And as others stated, yes, NCAA does develop goaltending. Ours just don't always work out, because of, ahem, The System.
Scrivens had a pretty good NHL career, I'd say. And, FWIW, he's the Team Manager for Denver. Think on that. (if true)

Mich State is getting Ravensbergen I think

I meant that he could go to another school, not specifically Mich State- or pro.

Couns is 6'4 and already was a QMJHL goalie... Seems Michigan State needs a goalie? I'm just teasing, of course, but it is a real possibility. And as others stated, yes, NCAA does develop goaltending. Ours just don't always work out, because of, ahem, The System.
Scrivens had a pretty good NHL career, I'd say. And, FWIW, he's the Team Manager for Denver. Think on that. (if true)

Both undrafted.

Quote from: stereax on April 02, 2026, 11:58:20 PM

Quote from: The Rancor on April 02, 2026, 10:42:31 PMI can't wait to read the apoplectic tirades when Cournoyer signs or transfers next season.

Goalies are different and need a lot more time to develop. Plus the goalie room in MTL is stacked between Fowler, Dobes, and Montembeault. He almost certainly won't sign after his sophomore year. Transfers, who the hell knows anymore.

That being said, we do have Cirka recruited...

When they're stacked, he's expendable... trade-able. One bag of pucks and a salary dump and he's signing with a team that didn't draft him. LeNeveu went after his Sophomore year, and, honestly, if he puts up numbers again like he did this season, what more is there to prove at the NCAA level? I don't want to say Bon Voyage, but it isn't unrealistic, especially if we make a deep playoff run.

I can't wait to read the apoplectic tirades when Cournoyer signs or transfers next season.

Quote from: fastforward on April 01, 2026, 06:07:37 PMSpittinchiclets on instagram with a take on regionals-can't link it so if anyone can...

Interesting convo about regionals

I saw it too. They make a compelling case for on campus regionals.

Quote from: scoop85 on April 01, 2026, 02:06:16 PM100% agree on the balance of that '03 team, and the GRIT they had.
From my own observation and vibes, I really thought that the passing speed and accuracy was so much better this season, and last, than in previous Schafer years. I used to scratch my head (and scream) about how lousy our passing always seemed compared to other elite teams we'd play against. Probably just my own POV/Bias.

I agree with your observation except, sadly, the last 2 games our passing largely went off the rails for whatever reason.

Yes, the wheels came off the last two games, for sure.

Quote from: adamw on April 01, 2026, 01:08:53 PMColgate, Union, St. Lawrence will probably all lose their top players.

My Part 2 Special Report is posted today, if anyone is interested:

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2026/03/31_CHN-Special-Report-Part-.php

Great article. Thank you, Adam.

I wonder if transfer restrictions could be limited to 2 or 3 total? One, you can play immediately, but there is a 2 year (season) wait until the next one, which then would result in a one season red-shirt, which wouldn't count against your 4. If you had eligibility left after that, no restriction (eg for a grad year)

Quote from: cth95 on April 01, 2026, 12:08:32 PM

Quote from: BearLover on March 31, 2026, 09:51:06 PM

Quote from: andyw2100 on March 31, 2026, 09:47:45 PM

Quote from: BearLover on March 31, 2026, 09:30:38 PMI could have worded it more clearly, but what I said was that, in comparison to the best teams in the country, the 2003 team and the 2026 were about on the same level.

I gotta correct you there, BearLover. The 2003 team was the overall number one seed in the tournament.

Sure. Speaking purely about talent though. I think this year's team and 2003 were similar levels (normalized against the rest of the country). The difference I'm trying to show was the 2003 was stacked with talented seniors.

Unlike this year's team, I remember how crisp and accurate that team's passing was throughout the entire season.  Everything was tape-to-tape. I even mentioned that to Coach Schafer at the Hobey Baker award ceremony.
That team was also incredibly balanced from Leneveau out.  IIRC, they were #1 or close to it in both PP and PK% and in GPG and GAPG.
I told Leneveau all of the fans loved him and hoped he stayed, but I knew the chances were slim.

100% agree on the balance of that '03 team, and the GRIT they had.
From my own observation and vibes, I really thought that the passing speed and accuracy was so much better this season, and last, than in previous Schafer years. I used to scratch my head (and scream) about how lousy our passing always seemed compared to other elite teams we'd play against. Probably just my own POV/Bias.

I also remember after the 2003 loss to New Hampshire saying about David LeNeveu, "At least we have him 2 more years" to witch my granddad scoffed and said "No way. He's going pro."

Quote from: adamw on March 31, 2026, 07:39:36 PM

Quote from: BigRedLaw on March 31, 2026, 02:15:04 PMSchafer did a fantastic job retaining drafted players.  Hopefully this is an anomaly and Jones can retain more players going forward.

However, I do wonder if it is possible to match Schafer's success given the rapidly changing landscape of college sports. 

College football is full of players staying in college longer, but transferring to chase NIL.  I don't know how much that's happening in the college hockey landscape (aside from guys like McKenna) or Cornell's NIL situation, but we may have to adjust expectations going forward regardless of who our coach is.

On that subject, does anybody know what Cornell's NIL situation is (if it even exists), how it compares to other ECAC and national schools, etc.?  Its something I cant find any info on.

Read College Hockey News.

Quote from: BearLover on March 31, 2026, 05:44:38 PM

Quote from: Pghas on March 31, 2026, 05:24:06 PMThere are 2 sides to this coin.  Yers, it would be nice to keep great players for 4 years.  On the other hand, for Cornell to take the next steps towards a frozen four berth, they probably need to recruit some players who are first round or high first-round draft picks.  They need that level of speed and skill, and those guys will leave after a year or two.  But for those elite players, thats the pathway now.  Harvard had Laferriere and Coronado a few years back.  Everyone knew those guys weren't playing 4 years.  Now the money issue has reared its head so it remains to be seen how Cornell will be able to pull it off. Say you are Cornell and you are recruiting Gavin McKenna.  What do you offer him?  we will compete for ECAC and national championships, you will play in front of  the Lynah Faithful, but we cannot offer you 700K and probably, since you'll only be here a year, cannot offer you a Cornell degree, though you can always come back here and finish it in a decade or so.  Something will have to give - either schools won't want to waste energy and money recruiting guys who will only be in college for a year and dont have any sense at all of being part of the program long-term, or the schools with more cash to throw around - and the willingness to do it - will win out.  Maybe it becomes a thing where you catch lightning in a bottle and a few guys you dont expect to light it up do.  Or if it comes down to Gavin McKenna for a year, you pony up the $ for that kid and go for it that year.

It's really not college sports in many ways anymore.  Like sports at all levels it is so much about the $. 

For Cornell to make a frozen four, they'll either need to recruit better talent OR get their existing talent to stay four years. We get good talent currently. Compared to the best teams in the country, our talent this season was probably on par with the talent of our 2003 frozen four team. A key difference was that our best players on that team stayed all four years. If Castagna, Walsh, Stanley, et al came back next season, we would have had one of our best chances at a frozen four in decades.

One competitive advantage Cornell has over the other top programs is that our degree is worth much more. We should retain players at a much higher rate than other schools. This is our best chance at success.

We are not competitive for the Gavin McKennas and do not even attempt to recruit them.

I'm not naive enough to expect every Castagna to stay four years, but we should be keeping the Stanleys at least. And if a Moulson/Greening/Ryan-level star  comes along who has clear NHL potential but wants to stay through graduation, then we've got a real shot. That sort of thing is probably our best bet to getting back to the frozen four. We can't beat the top programs in talent, but we can at least try to beat them in experience and development.

Among the many issues with this analysis - you are not considering the fact that, in 2026 compared to 2003, the level of talent in college hockey as a whole is vastly superior. If Cornell 2026 talent is equal to Cornell 2003 talent - it's not enough.

It's apples and oranges. a) The players who stuck around that team four years, were drafted in low rounds. b) players didn't leave as fast in general at that time. When Boston College had its title runs in the mid-2000s, those players all stayed 3+ years. Today? BC can't get its blue chippers to stay more than 2, and many are done in 1. c) Leneveu left after that season. He was a 2nd round pick.

You are setting yourself up for a world of angst and rage if you don't accept the fact that these days are different, and players are going to come and go more quickly. Even at Cornell.

In 06 or 07 I was chatting with a development coach/scout for the Penguins and jokingly asked why the heck they passed on Matt Moulson. He rolled his eyes and basically said he didn't have what they were looking for. In that time, not that long ago, collage guys weren't seen as blue chip players, and obviously Moulson turned into one of our most successful pros. My point is that he was awesome, but no one wanted him, least of all his draft team- and while it was fun to see him thrive on Taveres wing, he'd have looked good on Sid's too. He stayed 4 years, we were lucky. There was no guarantee for Murray or Nash either, who did leave early and his draft team didn't want him either. If we see 3 years, we get lucky, 4 is just unusual.

Quote from: stereax on March 27, 2026, 09:31:25 AM

Quote from: The Rancor on March 27, 2026, 08:44:33 AMNAHL Statement

The NAHL, USHL and NA3HL have collectively, under USA Hockey, banned any players playing in 'unsanctioned' Junior Hockey Leagues. Is this just about money or is there a genuine safety and development issue that I don't understand? Doubt this will affect many of our recruits, but it is a curious development in the wake of the CHL and NCAA situation.

I suspect this is part of the new transgender policies. To be "sanctioned" under USA Hockey, you gotta implement some anti-trans shit because of the Oval Office.

They're essentially saying, if you played in a (presumably organized) league outside of the scope of USA Hockey (and presumably things like Hockey Canada as well) you can't play in the USHL/NAHL that year. I don't think this actually impacts any of our guys.

Really? Damn. I hate this timeline.