Opponent and other news and results 2025-2026

[BearLover]

First game in awhile (all year?) that Dartmouth was handily outshot. I still have a hard time believing they're for real. I think they've been lucky against weak opposition. When we played them on the road shots and scoring chances were even, we lost Major to an injury early in the game, and the refs probably should have overturned a Dartmouth goal. We ended up losing 2-1. They were a bit above .500 last season and two of their best returning players left early to sign pro, so it's hard to believe the talent is there. Still, when you start 10-0 you don't need an amazing record the rest of the way to make the NCAAs, so they may snap their 46-year drought.

[Trotsky]

In my opinion Dartmouth was head and shoulders better than anybody else we have played this year.  They are for real and Cashman is an excellent coach.

I remember when Yale got good it was almost impossible to believe in them because of their history.  It happens.  RPI has been by turns terrible, amazing, terrible, amazing, and terrible in their history.  Cornell's consistency as a power program is an anomaly (7th-most weeks in the polls since 1970), not the norm.

[stereax]

When they come to Lynah, Cornell needs to come out hard and get the early lead, then keep the low slot cleared of bodies. Dartmouth is a team that can be put away. They just haven't faced a team that could do it until now. I do believe a more seasoned Cornell team will be up to the task.

This kind of content is why I stick around. Awesome analysis.

[BearLover]

In my opinion Dartmouth was head and shoulders better than anybody else we have played this year.  They are for real and Cashman is an excellent coach.

I remember when Yale got good it was almost impossible to believe in them because of their history.  It happens.  RPI has been by turns terrible, amazing, terrible, amazing, and terrible in their history.  Cornell's consistency as a power program is an anomaly (7th-most weeks in the polls since 1970), not the norm.

This is also true of when Quinnipiac got good. And that did come to mind here. But I think this logic is circular: Dartmouth is winning—>their coach is good->Dartmouth is legit. Essentially this is just saying Dartmouth is legit because they're winning.

[ugarte]

In my opinion Dartmouth was head and shoulders better than anybody else we have played this year.  They are for real and Cashman is an excellent coach.

I remember when Yale got good it was almost impossible to believe in them because of their history.  It happens.  RPI has been by turns terrible, amazing, terrible, amazing, and terrible in their history.  Cornell's consistency as a power program is an anomaly (7th-most weeks in the polls since 1970), not the norm.

This is also true of when Quinnipiac got good. And that did come to mind here. But I think this logic is circular: Dartmouth is winning—>their coach is good->Dartmouth is legit. Essentially this is just saying Dartmouth is legit because they're winning.

I don't share BL's general disdain for how Dartmouth looked in their game against us but I do agree that when Yale and Q got good, there was absolutely no mistaking it. Yale may have gone on a heater to win their title but goddamn were the best Yale teams absolute speed demons. It's OK if you still have nightmares about their breakout.

[Trotsky]

This is also true of when Quinnipiac got good. And that did come to mind here. But I think this logic is circular: Dartmouth is winning—>their coach is good->Dartmouth is legit. Essentially this is just saying Dartmouth is legit because they're winning.

No.  I am trying to say (A) Dartmouth looked legit on the ice and therefore (B) it is unsurprising to me that they are winning.  That is no more circular than any other prediction drawn from an empirical observation.  It's inductive logic which we all know is both semantically indefensible and also exactly the way all scientific progress actually starts.  Thank you, David Hume.

I will admit my assessment of Cashman is lazy, though.  I observe (A) Dartmouth sucks, (B) Cashman enters the chat, (C) Dartmouth is good and conclude Cashman had something to do with it.  He could just have fortunate timing and the real factor is Climate Change or NVIDIA's share price or something else.

[pjd8]

With regards to Dartmouth being lackluster: Don't discount UNH's defensive play. This is a team that has a uphill battle recruiting scoring talent in a conference that is all about offense. And when they do get a sniper like Ryan Conmy, he defects to BC. This team is successful when the play as a team for 60 minutes and shut down their opponent's game. But that's not sexy, and it's particularly tough when your schedule is filled with BCs and BUs and Maines.

With regards to Cashman: give the guy credit for what he's done. He inherited a team that hadn't had a winning record since 2015-16, didn't have a legacy reputation to recruit on, couldn't play a game the first year he coached, and five years later, he's got them standing on the top of the NPI a third of the way through the season. No one outside the ECAC gave a thought to Dartmouth unless they wanted to schedule an easy game. Now they are on people's radar.

On top of that, he's done what Greg Brown and Jay Pandolfo haven't done this year. He's gotten a consistent performance out of his team for a third of the season.

With regards to being legit: I suppose it's your definition of legit. If it's making it to the Frozen Four, I think the jury's still out. This is the equivalent of the conversation we had about why exams at Cornell are so hard: you have to challenge the most talented students in the group to see how far they can go. Dartmouth had their biggest challenge on Sunday, and they were almost successful. We don't really know how talented they are yet. Maybe this is their cap, and maybe not.

But if your definition of being legit is accomplishing all that is put out before you, they have been ever so close to perfect. I don't know if having the weakest schedule in Div I was a plan on Cashman's part or simply the cards he was dealt with (how many good teams want to schedule Dartmouth?), but he and his team have done almost every single task that has been put before them. They have the best winning record in Div I going into Christmas. And winning games is the ultimate goal, right?

I want them to keep on winning. I want them to stay in the top 5 of NPI and make every team in every other conference uncomfortable every time they look at the rankings. I want to see them put Harvard and Quinnipiac in their place. I want them to have the kind of success that makes the ECAC a stronger conference.

And then it will be oh so sweet when we beat them in Lynah. In the intermission filler on ESPN, the Dartmouth players talked about how last year's game was a highlight for them. They will be ready. We had better be.

[BearLover]

There isn't one good definition for "legit." I supposed I'd say "good enough for an at-large NCAA bid" if I had to offer a definition. The point I'm getting at is that there's a lot of luck in a small sample of hockey games and Dartmouth is getting credited right now as one of the best teams in the country. This is clearly a great year for them so far and their coach has done a fantastic job. But I think they're wildly outperforming their true capabilities. We'll see, though. While their astronomical shooting % and save % suggest they've been fortunate, they have been dominating most of their opponents in scoring attempts.

[ugarte]

There isn't one good definition for "legit." I supposed I'd say "good enough for an at-large NCAA bid" if I had to offer a definition.

If that's the standard I'd say Dartmouth has clearly shown that they're legit. Whether they are a genuine title contender remains to be seen for sure but the early signs are stronger than I think you are allowing.

[Trotsky]

Simple game for this: https://elf.elynah.com/index.php?topic=272487

[JasonN95]

Union's team played a game against a bar league team, 3x5:

https://youtu.be/MMoN97_Y-pw?si=3ubaEa7pzRYnG1v9