ELynah Forum

Quote from: Trotsky on April 15, 2026, 06:51:33 PM

Quote from: adamw on April 15, 2026, 05:58:11 PMThe attachment to the college, your alma mater, or some other close attachment (hello) is what makes it what it is.  Take it away, and there's nothing left.

And there is the market mitigating factor which in the end will restore a new balance.

The transition between states looks like it is going to suck, but in the end we'll reach a new equilibrium in which athletes are compensated and the sports generate revenue.  You can no more argue against what you blithely dismiss with patronizing quotes as "athletes rights" because of the dislocation after the old rancid system collapsed than you could argue against the Emancipation Proclamation because it interfered with property rights.

The old system was exploitative. It needed to die.  Its stable was just a smoke screen for continuing to fuck the athletes over.  The future will take care of itself.  If the fans are turned off by churn then the pie will shrink, the athletes will lose, and the athletes themselves will adopt rules that protect the emotional connection of the teams to the fans while also fairly compensating them.

I know we were all fat and happy before, but hey we were fast and happy in 1965 with gas at $1 a barrel.  When people are getting screwed they upset the apple cart.  Perhaps if you want to blame people for the dislocation now it's the university presidents and the sports enablers and the media who rode the horse knowing full well the bill would come due someday, but not giving a shit because they were all getting their slice.

The explotation was ethically dubious, but I believe it was better for everybody except the athletes.  The free market doesn't arrive at the best results.  Take a look at this country...

Quote from: adamw on April 15, 2026, 06:26:16 PM

Quote from: BigRedLaw on April 15, 2026, 06:22:15 PM

Quote from: Beeeej on April 15, 2026, 05:59:09 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 15, 2026, 05:32:59 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 15, 2026, 04:29:28 PMmy feeling about this, as always, is that i share a romantic attachment to college sports (and cornell sports in general) but that it remains improper to pretend that there is a place to regulate a maximum wage to preserve the ability to preserve the number of schools able to compete at the top level. college sports is now a multibillion dollar business. it is effectively a near-free minor league for professional sports. as such, the players should get paid a market wage. NIL is a jury-rigged solution to that conflict.

the place for romantic amateurism is in division iii, which has all of the virtues you seek but (apparently) none of the competition you want to watch.

I'm not interested in arguing about the ethics of paying or not paying athletes, but we're all Cornell fans, so obviously we aren't going to randomly start following D-III sports. I root for Cornell because I went there and loved attending the hockey games (and occasionally other sports like lacrosse).  I would not have had that experience at a D-III school. If athletes getting paid ruins Cornell's ability to compete, then I (and sounds like most others here) will quit following and just do something else with my/our time. That's one of many costs to the end of amateurism even if you happen to think it's a fairer system overall.

I dunno, man, one of my poker buddies went to Oswego and brought us to a game up there several years ago (Saturday night, following him joining us for the Friday night game at Lynah), and he and his fellow alums seemed just about as nuts for their program as we've been for ours. No scholarships, very few possibilities of going pro, but plenty of school spirit and love for the game. Maybe your experience would've been different, no idea - but there definitely isn't an inherent lack of devotion to hockey at D-III schools.

Connection to the school side, you can't seriously assert that the fan passion for d3 sports is comparable to d1. 

There are outliers, but generally d3 sports are not well attended or supported by the student body.

The 50,000 that show up every other year for Ithaca-Cortland football at Yankee Stadium would disagree.

I would say that it's well supported on a relative scale. No one is showing up for D-I Wisconsin field hockey either (sorry Jane). Most D-III schools are smaller in the first place.

What is the average regular season game attendance? 

And there are plenty of large state schools that have D3 sports, its not a bunch of small schools.

I'm not trying to crap on D3 athletics (again, I had a great time attending D3 club hockey games in undergrad), but it's absurd to pretend your typical d1 sports teams are comparable to d3 teams in the same sports.

Quote from: Beeeej on April 15, 2026, 05:59:09 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 15, 2026, 05:32:59 PM

Quote from: ugarte on April 15, 2026, 04:29:28 PMmy feeling about this, as always, is that i share a romantic attachment to college sports (and cornell sports in general) but that it remains improper to pretend that there is a place to regulate a maximum wage to preserve the ability to preserve the number of schools able to compete at the top level. college sports is now a multibillion dollar business. it is effectively a near-free minor league for professional sports. as such, the players should get paid a market wage. NIL is a jury-rigged solution to that conflict.

the place for romantic amateurism is in division iii, which has all of the virtues you seek but (apparently) none of the competition you want to watch.

I'm not interested in arguing about the ethics of paying or not paying athletes, but we're all Cornell fans, so obviously we aren't going to randomly start following D-III sports. I root for Cornell because I went there and loved attending the hockey games (and occasionally other sports like lacrosse).  I would not have had that experience at a D-III school. If athletes getting paid ruins Cornell's ability to compete, then I (and sounds like most others here) will quit following and just do something else with my/our time. That's one of many costs to the end of amateurism even if you happen to think it's a fairer system overall.

I dunno, man, one of my poker buddies went to Oswego and brought us to a game up there several years ago (Saturday night, following him joining us for the Friday night game at Lynah), and he and his fellow alums seemed just about as nuts for their program as we've been for ours. No scholarships, very few possibilities of going pro, but plenty of school spirit and love for the game. Maybe your experience would've been different, no idea - but there definitely isn't an inherent lack of devotion to hockey at D-III schools.

Connection to the school side, you can't seriously assert that the fan passion for d3 sports is comparable to d1. 

There are outliers, but generally d3 sports are not well attended or supported by the student body.

Once you sign up and login, nothing works.  No hockey players show up as available despite 4ish players being listed as available before logging in.   Am I missing something?

Quote from: ugarte on April 15, 2026, 04:29:28 PMmy feeling about this, as always, is that i share a romantic attachment to college sports (and cornell sports in general) but that it remains improper to pretend that there is a place to regulate a maximum wage to preserve the ability to preserve the number of schools able to compete at the top level. college sports is now a multibillion dollar business. it is effectively a near-free minor league for professional sports. as such, the players should get paid a market wage. NIL is a jury-rigged solution to that conflict.

the place for romantic amateurism is in division iii, which has all of the virtues you seek but (apparently) none of the competition you want to watch.

I went to a D3 school for undergrad.  There was surprising amount of excitement around club hockey due to a dedicated group of fans, but from what I heard that didn't survive after we graduated.  Generally speaking, the traditions and passionate crowds you want to see at college sporting events don't exist in most D3 sports.  Also, if you went to Cornell or another D1 school for undergrad, what connection would there be to a D3 school to get invested? 

Quote from: stereax on April 15, 2026, 03:54:12 PM

Quote from: BearLover on April 15, 2026, 03:46:41 PM

Quote from: Trotsky on April 15, 2026, 03:44:34 PM

Quote from: Snowball on April 15, 2026, 09:12:37 AM

Quote from: BearLover on April 15, 2026, 01:12:24 AMWow, much bigger freakout by the non-BL posters in response to this news than when Robertson ditched last year. Why is that?

What I actually enjoy most about Cornell hockey isn't the chance for an NCAA run, though that's always fun, it's the season itself. The rhythm, watching a roster grow up together. Seeing freshmen turn into real players (Charlie Major!) and lines develop real chemistry over time.

If roster churn becomes constant, it's basically free agency every offseason. That continuity is gone and with it, a big piece of what made this program endearing.

It also breaks the connection between the students and the players.  The idea of college sports was "One of Us."  If it's just hired guns like Kentucky basketball, why would anybody care?  It would be like rooting for the endowment.

I completely agree with this. It is the consequence of the end of amateurism.

Thirded.  I can handle players getting paid (albeit preferably not the insane amounts we see in football and basketball) but constant transfers and sham "students"-athletes will kill my love for this sport, just as it is doing for most of ncaa football/bball.

I'd even be alright if we weren't competitive for the national tournament.  I love Cornell hockey for the atmosphere, rivalries, high level play and passion.  If we have continuity in our teams and are competing for/winning the ECAC, that's the majority of what I watch for and enjoy.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a Frozen Four appearance and national title (more than any other pro or college sport), but the biggest threat in my eyes is being unable to keep players season over season and/or seeing teams turn into a bunch of mercenaries that'll jump ship without a second thought.

Quote from: adamw on April 15, 2026, 02:48:00 PMI don't think the problem will be getting the money. I think the issue will be how to distribute the money in such a way that flies by Cornell/Ivy/NCAA rules.  NIL is not a pay-for-play bucket. (and yes I know many teams get around this - but ... Ivy)

Ivy or not, how can the Ivy League stop a donor from paying one of our players to do some advertising for them, billboards, Instagram, commercials, a few de minimus appearances during the school year (in a manner that is only feasible if they are in Ithaca), etc.

I'm far from an expert on this, but have followed the college athlete litigation a decent amount.  The Ivy League can't get around the court decisions on NIL even if they don't/didn't opt into the settlement in the case relating to revenue sharing.

There's logistical issues in terms of the ability to coordinate with Ivy League teams about how to spend or use NIL, but I dont see a path for the League to prevent alumni from taking independent action to dissuade individual players from transferring.

Whether that will happen in practice is a fair question, but shrugging our shoulders because of the Ivy League is an oversimplification of the issue.

(This isn't meant to be an attack on or dismissal of anybody's individual comments, just trying to further discussion and understand this issue).

EDIT:  I'm seeing additional posts that were just made that may address this.

Quote from: stereax on April 14, 2026, 09:26:13 PM

Quote from: BigRedLaw on April 14, 2026, 07:58:10 PMI was expecting this team to get better for the next two years as this young team got more experience, with Cournoyer as the most important piece.  Losing Cournoyer would be catastrophic.  Hopefully he changes his mind or we can get somebody to pony up some money to match whatever offer he might be leaving for (assuming that's the case?).

Sounds like a bidding war out there. Ivy rules also mean we can't be doing NIL shenanigans. I would be SHOCKED if he came back to Cornell. We'll have more luck scavenging the portal ourselves.

Can the Ivies regulate NIL shenanigans though?  I know the ivies opted out of the settlement that is supposed to establish a ~$20m salary cap, but given the current state of college athletics and the law how can the Ivies restrict "external" NIL agreements?

I was expecting this team to get better for the next two years as this young team got more experience, with Cournoyer as the most important piece.  Losing Cournoyer would be catastrophic.  Hopefully he changes his mind or we can get somebody to pony up some money to match whatever offer he might be leaving for (assuming that's the case?).

Schafer 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.