ELynah Forum

Any chance Cornell moves into the top 16 and gets a bye with a win over Princeton?

What is the selection process?

I found this page:

https://rpiupdatemenssoccer.blogspot.com/search/label/RPI%20Rank

but don't know how to weigh what it shows.

Quote from: ugarte on November 13, 2025, 12:12:55 AM

Quote from: nshapiro on November 12, 2025, 05:37:41 PM

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

Maybe I don't understand the meaning of "wokeness."  To me this implies a leftist bent to make sure underrepresented get a better than even chance.  I am sure that this administration wants to do audits to make sure that this does NOT happen.

you seem to think I'm suggesting they are trying to enforce a progressive agenda but I mean that they will be perpetually using the audits to find more things to label woke in order to extract more tribute or deal out more pain.

Sorry, I completely misunderstood your phrase "wokeness audits" as making sure it was woke enough, when you meant auditing to make sure there was no woke component.  My mistake.

Quote from: BearLover on November 12, 2025, 06:36:16 PM

Quote from: nshapiro on November 12, 2025, 05:37:41 PM

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

I also don't like the assertion that "Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered" when I see no evidence that THEIR principles are for sale. 

There have been reports that Harvard was close to settling for hundreds of millions of dollars. Also there are reports that many within Harvard are uneasy that Harvard is fighting this, and there is tremendous uncertainty whether they can actually win. In the meantime the Trump administration has frozen billions in research (now temporarily unfrozen), tried to block all foreign students from attending (currently being litigated), etc. I think Harvard is trying to protect itself, its students, its employees, its life-saving research, etc. It's not about principles being for sale.

I looked for "reports that Harvard was close to settling for hundreds of millions of dollars"
and found articles from July, August, September, and one on October 1st, so I don't know how 'close' a settlement is.  I also don't know if it is being held up because Harvard might be willing to pay to the extortion fee, but is not willing to compromise on letting the administration review admissions decisions.  Let's not tar Harvard with the same brush that tarred Cornell until we see the details of any settlement.

Now please stop arguing and making me defend Harvard.  I am getting ill.

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

Quote from: ugarte on November 12, 2025, 01:49:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 09:48:10 PMFair enough. I mean, I obviously hope Harvard wins. But I really don't think Cornell could afford to do what Harvard is doing. I also don't think the president and board of Cornell, who are tasked with protecting the university and its students and employees, should be sacrificing these things for a higher purpose, especially when doing so is likely to fail and jeopardize its constituents further. Lastly, I think Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered at any point. So I don't think the extreme criticism of Cornell's leadership is warranted.

i think this is probably true but the money (imo) is far less important than letting yourself be subject to wokeness audits, something clearly targeted at shaping the student body and permissible discourse. without independence* on those issues, cornell is nothing but a hockey team.

i mean, that's a pretty good reason to found an institution but it isn't the one cornell makes a big deal about.

*please no nitpicking on whether antidiscrimination law writ large is an imposition here. i already probably don't respect you if you've got that one in the chamber ready to fire

Maybe I don't understand the meaning of "wokeness."  To me this implies a leftist bent to make sure underrepresented get a better than even chance.  I am sure that this administration wants to do audits to make sure that this does NOT happen.

I also don't like the assertion that "Harvard absolutely would have settled for $30m if it was offered" when I see no evidence that THEIR principles are for sale. 

I also don't like defending Harvard

Quote from: Dafatone on November 11, 2025, 06:32:14 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 05:57:35 PM

Quote from: nshapiro on November 11, 2025, 05:37:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 05:17:56 PM

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82 on November 11, 2025, 05:01:04 PM

Quote from: Dafatone on November 11, 2025, 01:07:46 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 09, 2025, 08:49:20 PMI'd like to see the people lambasting the deal lay out how they would expect the next three years to play out in the universe where Cornell refuses to play ball.

There's only one school that isn't playing ball—-it's Harvard, and because they fought back they're getting totally screwed over by the Trump admin currently. They're also orders of magnitude richer than us, meaning their risk tolerance is much higher. Oh, and they're probably going to end up settling soon anyway, for probably five times as much as if they had just played ball from the start.

I don't see how Cornell had any real choice here. The alternative was financial ruin and ruining the lives of countless university students and workers.

This is where I disagree. It seems like Harvard is winning by fighting back.

And sure they're richer, but it's not like Cornell can't afford legal fees, even if they are significant.

I don't think it was the legal fees.  I think it was the lost funding and the associated job cuts.

The lost funding, the job cuts, the uncertainty, the huge risk that Harvard doesn't ultimately win (it won the first case before a friendly judge, but there is no ultimate guarantee of success on appeal/in other cases), the fact the Trump administrations has responded by drumming up other charges and additional fines/suspensions, and is taking even more draconian action like trying to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students at all. The list goes on. Harvard is in a terrible position now. It's especially terrible for those whose careers depend on Harvard succeeding.

I can't find them now but there were several articles published a few months back about how Harvard can't win this fight. Kotlikoff's job is to protect Cornell, its students and its employees. He clearly made the right call IMO. I think it's telling that no one here can sketch out how the rest of the Trump administration (and god forbid another Republican administration) would go in the universe where Cornell doesn't settle.

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

confessional prose piece by the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

So you would have Cornell sacrifice itself to take a performative stand against the Trump administration? That's the only way I can see this analogy applying to the present situation. And yes, many of us are Jews who identify with this piece.

I think there's a valid argument to be made for a yes to that question, setting aside whether sacrifice versus appeasement are the only two options.

Yes. As much as I hate Harvard, they are standing up for an independent higher education system, not subject to government review.  Principles are Principles.  either you live them all the time, or it is just lip service.

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 05:17:56 PM

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82 on November 11, 2025, 05:01:04 PM

Quote from: Dafatone on November 11, 2025, 01:07:46 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 09, 2025, 08:49:20 PMI'd like to see the people lambasting the deal lay out how they would expect the next three years to play out in the universe where Cornell refuses to play ball.

There's only one school that isn't playing ball—-it's Harvard, and because they fought back they're getting totally screwed over by the Trump admin currently. They're also orders of magnitude richer than us, meaning their risk tolerance is much higher. Oh, and they're probably going to end up settling soon anyway, for probably five times as much as if they had just played ball from the start.

I don't see how Cornell had any real choice here. The alternative was financial ruin and ruining the lives of countless university students and workers.

This is where I disagree. It seems like Harvard is winning by fighting back.

And sure they're richer, but it's not like Cornell can't afford legal fees, even if they are significant.

I don't think it was the legal fees.  I think it was the lost funding and the associated job cuts.

The lost funding, the job cuts, the uncertainty, the huge risk that Harvard doesn't ultimately win (it won the first case before a friendly judge, but there is no ultimate guarantee of success on appeal/in other cases), the fact the Trump administrations has responded by drumming up other charges and additional fines/suspensions, and is taking even more draconian action like trying to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students at all. The list goes on. Harvard is in a terrible position now. It's especially terrible for those whose careers depend on Harvard succeeding.

I can't find them now but there were several articles published a few months back about how Harvard can't win this fight. Kotlikoff's job is to protect Cornell, its students and its employees. He clearly made the right call IMO. I think it's telling that no one here can sketch out how the rest of the Trump administration (and god forbid another Republican administration) would go in the universe where Cornell doesn't settle.

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

confessional prose piece by the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

Quote from: BearLover on November 11, 2025, 01:23:28 AM

Quote from: semsox on November 10, 2025, 11:14:03 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 09, 2025, 11:02:28 PM

Quote from: semsox on November 09, 2025, 10:55:57 PM

Quote from: BearLover on November 09, 2025, 08:49:20 PMI'd like to see the people lambasting the deal lay out how they would expect the next three years to play out in the universe where Cornell refuses to play ball.

Respectfully, you lack the imagination to make this request given the position you are arguing from.

I have no idea what this means

It means you are having trouble imagining a universe where Cornell fighting ends up better in the long run than capitulating. I don't think people lambasting the deal have any such problem.

Well yeah, that's the entire reason I'm asking the people lambasting the deal to sketch out the next few years in such a universe.

Appeasement is never the answer.  Just ask Neville Chamberlain and Czechoslovakia

Quote from: chimpfood on November 07, 2025, 01:08:05 PMIf you actually read the deal there's nothing really problematic in there. Sure it feels icky to give the government 30 million to leave us alone but if we didn't do this they would just keep all of the research funding instead, which is a hell of a lot more. Not ideal circumstances but they had to do it to look out for their students and staff and I am glad they did.

From the pdf of the agreement:

"Cornell shall provide the United States with anonymizcd undergraduate admissions
data consistent with 34 C.F.R. § 100.6 and similar regulations broken down by
Cornell's individual colleges and schools, race, grade point average, and
performance on standardized tests, on a quarterly basis, in a form permitting
statistical analyses for each year of the Agreement. Admissions data will also be
subjected to a comprehensive audit by the United States. "

This meets my definition of really problematic (sorry to be snarky but I couldn't resist.  I enjoy your posts, and your efforts to curb thread drift)

Quote from: andyw2100 on November 03, 2025, 12:06:13 AM

Quote from: scoop85 on November 02, 2025, 05:02:38 PMThe jokes write themselves

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/10/30/students-react-grading-report/

--
Sophie Chumburidze '29 said the report felt dismissive of students' hard work and academic struggles.

"The whole entire day, I was crying," she said. "I skipped classes on Monday, and I was just sobbing in bed because I felt like I try so hard in my classes, and my grades aren't even the best."
--

The above sounded like something you'd read in one of those April Fools articles that start out somewhat plausible, but get more and more ridiculous as the article continues.

Poor Sophie.  2 months in and sooo stressed.  In my day at Cornell, when we were told "Look Left, Look Right, one of you three won't be at graduation, Sophie would have been the one.  Now, I am sure that with counselling and extra support, she will graduate on time with a lowly 3.6 GPA.  I think a similar result would also happen at Cornell now

Quote from: jkahn

Quote from: sah67Malinski draws in for Game 3, "slightly" overshadowed by Landeskog's return.

and Malinski with an assist on the 1st goal of the game, a 4-on-4 goal by Nichushkin

Nichushkin entered the zone holding the puck, did a loop and a half, lost his defender, and scored.
Only in hockey does anybody get an assist on a goal like that.

Quote from: BearLoverIt is going to be important to be on the opposite side of the NCAA bracket from Maryland. They are 10-2 with their losses being a combined 3 goals, against a much harder schedule than Cornell's (their SOS is 1st in the country, though ours isn't too shabby at 11th).

Why?

If we are the 2nd seed and play the late game on the first round of Memorial Day weekend, aren't we at a disadvantage?

Wouldn't it be better to play them when we have equal rest?

Are you now arguing that getting to the final is its own reward?

Quote from: Scersk '97

Quote from: RichHHonestly, it should always be Cornell-Syracuse. We played the last two years, but did they really drop us for Princeton as an annual thing?? Really?? Maybe they got annoyed because they couldn't win outside the dome.

Our annual fixtures should be Hobart and Syracuse, because and because. If Syracuse is not an annual thing anymore, then that's an indictment of Syracuse; thus, we shouldn't in turn "Syracuse" Hobart. (Not that you would suggest we should, but other posters...)

Army and Penn State are the other obvious choices for annual games, and I would be surprised if they would not feel like making those pacts.

Other than those, I'm fine with spreading outselves around a bit for our other three games. We should look into BU, since they seem to be making a real go of it. I'm fine with freezing out the South. Let the NCAAs be our out-of-conference meetings with them.

Syracuse is in the 'South' (ACC)

Quote from: CU77

Quote from: upprdeckI didnt think Lax used straight RPI type stuff like hockey does though?

Officially, no. Unofficially, kinda yes. Committee chair one year said they just started with the RPI list and then made adjustments.

This is a consequence of the official criteria being basically impossible to grok:

Primary Criteria:
Strength-of-schedule index [average RPI of top-10 opponents]
Results of the RPI:
- Record against ranked teams 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20; 21+.
- Average RPI win (average RPI of all wins).
- Average RPI loss (average RPI of all losses).
Head-to-head competition:
- Results versus common opponents.
- Significant wins and losses (wins against teams ranked higher in the RPI and losses against teams ranked lower in the RPI).
- Locations of contests.
Additionally, input is provided by the regional advisory committee for consideration by the Division I Men's Lacrosse Committee. Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used by the committee for selection purposes.

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/lacrosse/d1/men/2024-25D1MLA_PreChamps.pdf

Just curious, how do they pick the "top-10 opponents"?

Quote from: RichH

Quote from: dag14

Quote from: chimpfoodHow on earth do you register on fanlax? I've tried to to make an account multiple times but the confirmation question says "Paul and Gary's last name. 4 letters." I've tried putting random stuff but it says invalid answer. I don't think I'm a robot but I cannot decipher what that means

This is hysterical!  Not making fun of chimpfood; rather the notion that Gait is a magic password.  I bet there are a lot of lax fans who wouldn't know how to spell it.... I mean, how about "Gate" if you never saw the written word?

Agreed. Amazingly myopic (and reverse-ageist) attempt at gatekeeping. Really one of the funniest lax-related things I've heard in a while.

Shouldn't that be gaitkeeping::rolleyes::

Quote from: RichH

Quote from: ER

Quote from: stereax

Quote from: ER

Quote from: KenPI will be there on Saturday if they get through the first game.

I fully expect us to make it to the frozen four. This team is playing with a mission

Shhhh.

I don't believe in jinxes. I'm not that powerful. If they don't make it, it won't be because of anything I did.

True, but if we've learned nothing else here in the pages of eLynah this season is the poisonous nature of high expectations.

ok.  I will just root for Schafer to finish with a winning record in NCAA tournament games.::whistle::