Cleary Cup

[RichH]

[quote Trotsky]

93 Union[/quote]
*Whew*

[Josh '99]

[quote jtwcornell91][quote jmh30]Shared championships are stupid.[/quote]

You mean like all three of our Ivy Football titles?  ::uhoh::[/quote]Well...  yes.  Ivy football would have an especially easy time applying head-to-head as a tiebreaker rather than awarding a shared championship, what with one matchup between each pairing of teams per season (though I suppose there'd need to have been a second-tier tiebreaker for the period when there were ties in college football).  

Unfortunately, if ties were broken this way, we'd lose the two Ivy titles we shared with Dartmouth (in 1971 and 1990) by virtue of having lost to the Green those two years.  We'd still have the one we shared with Penn in 1988, since we beat them that year.

[Trotsky]

[quote jmh30]Unfortunately, if ties were broken this way, we'd lose the two Ivy titles we shared with Dartmouth (in 1971 and 1990) by virtue of having lost to the Green those two years.  We'd still have the one we shared with Penn in 1988, since we beat them that year.[/quote]

So the question is, would you rather have 3 (or 1.5) shared titles, or 1 Unabashed Championship.

I guess it won't matter until the Ivies negotiate to have their champion automatically advance to a BCS game.

[Josh '99]

[quote Trotsky]So the question is, would you rather have 3 (or 1.5) shared titles, or 1 Unabashed Championship.[/quote]As it's applied to us, I'd rather have the 3 shared, but speaking conceptually, I just don't like shared titles.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Trotsky][quote jmh30]Unfortunately, if ties were broken this way, we'd lose the two Ivy titles we shared with Dartmouth (in 1971 and 1990) by virtue of having lost to the Green those two years.  We'd still have the one we shared with Penn in 1988, since we beat them that year.[/quote]

So the question is, would you rather have 3 (or 1.5) shared titles, or 1 Unabashed Championship.

I guess it won't matter until the Ivies negotiate to have their champion automatically advance to a BCS game.[/quote]

I don't want to speak for 1971 (it would be a shame for Marinaro to lose that bit of hardware), but I was there in 1988 and 1990, and I would give up claim to the second title to make the first unabashed.  (Especially since we beat Penn on the last day of the season to secure it.)

[Beeeej]

[quote jtwcornell91][quote Chris '03][quote krose]
Actually, I'm too lazy to look it up: does the existence of the Cleary Cup even overlap with autobids for the regular season winner?

Kyle[/quote]

No. The Cleary Cup showed up in 2002. I'm pretty sure 2000 was the last year the RS "champ" got an autobid. I remember in Placid '01 they recognized (absent thanks to Vermont) Clarkson for winning the RS but they didn't make the tourney.[/quote]

Yes, I remember Clarkson winning the RS the one year it meant absolutely nothing.  That was funny. :-D[/quote]

Jerk.

[Ben Rocky '04]

The stupid Ivy League should atleast send one team into the I-AA postseason instead of just ending the weekend after thanksgiving.  And having tied teams play or divisional based playoffs for the championship would be nice too.

[Trotsky]

[quote Ben Rocky 04]The stupid Ivy League should atleast send one team into the I-AA postseason instead of just ending the weekend after thanksgiving.  And having tied teams play or divisional based playoffs for the championship would be nice too.[/quote]

But that, like an Ivy hoops tournament, would make too much sense.  Being arcane and self-defeating is a sign of superiority, you see.  ::yark::

[Josh '99]

[quote Trotsky][quote Ben Rocky 04]The stupid Ivy League should atleast send one team into the I-AA postseason instead of just ending the weekend after thanksgiving.  And having tied teams play or divisional based playoffs for the championship would be nice too.[/quote]

But that, like an Ivy hoops tournament, would make too much sense.  Being arcane and self-defeating is a sign of superiority, you see.  ::yark::[/quote]Heh.  A three-round single-elimination tournament over a long weekend would clearly be too much for those guys to handle.  ::rolleyes::

[ninian '72]

[quote jtwcornell91][quote Trotsky][quote jmh30]Unfortunately, if ties were broken this way, we'd lose the two Ivy titles we shared with Dartmouth (in 1971 and 1990) by virtue of having lost to the Green those two years.  We'd still have the one we shared with Penn in 1988, since we beat them that year.[/quote]

So the question is, would you rather have 3 (or 1.5) shared titles, or 1 Unabashed Championship.

I guess it won't matter until the Ivies negotiate to have their champion automatically advance to a BCS game.[/quote]

I don't want to speak for 1971 (it would be a shame for Marinaro to lose that bit of hardware), but I was there in 1988 and 1990, and I would give up claim to the second title to make the first unabashed.  (Especially since we beat Penn on the last day of the season to secure it.)[/quote]

Having been there in 1971, I'm on the same page as John.  There was a lot of hype for the Dartmouth game, with both teams being undefeated until the week before that game.  After the Cornell win over Brown that week, a lot of people stayed at Schoellkopf to wait for the final score of the Dartmouth-Columbia game.  There was a lot of celebrating when the score came in, but we should have known better. Dartmouth seemed to have taken advantage of the loss to get fired up.  They seriously manhandled Cornell, which was especially tough, given that ABC broadcast the game regionally. If there were a tie-breaker, the championship should have gone to them.

[Chris \'03]

Anyone else catch the photos in the USCHO ECAC column featuring Dartmouth and Colgate each celebrating with their own Cleary Cup? Guess that answers that question...

[Rosey]

[quote Chris '03]Anyone else catch the photos in the USCHO ECAC column featuring Dartmouth and Colgate each celebrating with their own Cleary Cup? Guess that answers that question...[/quote]
Notice the Colgate players have suits on, which suggests they didn't just get out of the game.

Kyle

[Dpperk29]

actually, all it implies is that they showered and changed before the picture was taken

[Rosey]

[quote Dpperk29]actually, all it implies is that they showered and changed before the picture was taken[/quote]
Seems silly to use that picture and not the dogpile, had (a copy of) the cup been there at the time.  But this is all speculation, until someone demonstrates with facts that they know how many of those trophies existed on Saturday night.

Kyle

[Chris \'03]

[quote krose][quote Dpperk29]actually, all it implies is that they showered and changed before the picture was taken[/quote]
Seems silly to use that picture and not the dogpile, had (a copy of) the cup been there at the time.  But this is all speculation, until someone demonstrates with facts that they know how many of those trophies existed on Saturday night.

Kyle[/quote]

It's also possible they (colgate) were awarded the cup after the game off the ice because it was a road game. The picture looks awfully like a team getting on the bus after a road game. If it was awarded later, why are is the team on a bus?