Cornell 3 UAH 1

[Towerroad]

It's like clockwork, the defensiveness vis a vis Schafer on this board.  He's clearly had success as a coach here; no one would suggest otherwise.  I for one hope he sticks around a good long while, even if I don't love his brand of hockey. He graduates players who are solid in the fundamentals of the game, and that's no small thing. But surely we can allow honest criticism when that's called for, no?  I've been faithfully in my seat in section L most games this season, and what I see is a mediocre team, lacking creativity and a scoring touch up front and prone to defensive lapses, with a so-so freshman class and not a great deal going on among the upperclassmen.  True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools.  This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

As for the game itself, a reasonably comfortable win against an undersized and struggling UAH team. Not to much to say, really. I continue to like D'Agostino's play, and I thought Esposito showed a lot.  Good to see Kennedy get a nice goal, off a lovely feed by Gotovets. I was happy to see Jillson playing and moving pretty well. Crowd was a bit on the small side, and somewhat subdued.

Well said. Jim Hyla & Co. may well be right that this is just the normal ebb and flow of college hockey. Certainly BU's rise, fall and recovery are an excellent example of this phenomena. I think the claim that we are also making a transition to a more balanced style of play still needs to be proven. I am not sure that lack of scholarships is the reason why we do not attract better offensive talent. Yale, as you cite, and to a lesser extent Princeton have had better success attracting "skaters and puckhandlers". I think that our reputation, as Jim quite accurately points out, as a team that builds its offense from our goalmouth out, may lead forwards that we might otherwise get to consider other programs.

As for UAH, kudos to a team that is willing to take a 1000 mile bus ride from hell just to play for the weekend. They may not be the strongest competition but they are clearly dedicated to their sport.

[Jim Hyla]

It's like clockwork, the defensiveness vis a vis Schafer on this board.  He's clearly had success as a coach here; no one would suggest otherwise.  I for one hope he sticks around a good long while, even if I don't love his brand of hockey. He graduates players who are solid in the fundamentals of the game, and that's no small thing. But surely we can allow honest criticism when that's called for, no?  I've been faithfully in my seat in section L most games this season, and what I see is a mediocre team, lacking creativity and a scoring touch up front and prone to defensive lapses, with a so-so freshman class and not a great deal going on among the upperclassmen.  True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools.  This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

As for the game itself, a reasonably comfortable win against an undersized and struggling UAH team. Not to much to say, really. I continue to like D'Agostino's play, and I thought Esposito showed a lot.  Good to see Kennedy get a nice goal, off a lovely feed by Gotovets. I was happy to see Jillson playing and moving pretty well. Crowd was a bit on the small side, and somewhat subdued.

There's a talent gap with Yale's forwards. What else and with whom?

[ScrewBU]

Anyone got any impressions on the game itself, as opposed to in the context of the larger flamewar?

Agree with everyone above, it seemed to me Cornell wore them down and it looked at one point as if the floodgates might open, but UAH reigned it in.  I can say this, had it only been 2-0 when UAH scored that first goal, I think it would have been a completely different game and it may have gotten scary (with the caveat that you can always play the "if" game.)  I hope they make sure to not let them hang around tonight.

[Al DeFlorio]

True, Cornell can't hope to compete with the big scholarship schools in recruiting blue-chippers, but the Yale game made painfully clear that there's a talent gap also with fellow non-scholarship schools.  This gap may be temporary, or not, but it's there.

Only recently has Cornell bolstered its financial aid policies to match those announced by H-Y-P a few years ago.  I think we're seeing catch-up.

[Roy 82]

While it is clear that Cornell doesn't put as many people in the NHL as the top scholarship schools, I wonder if someone with more time on their hands could determine if our NHL placement success rate based on draft position is better or worse than the top schools. In other words, does Schafer do a better job of turning lower ranked players into NHL material than other schools?

[CAS]

I agree with Al that our newly improved financial aid, include matching HYP awards, can only enhance Cornell's attractiveness for outstanding hockey players.
Cornell, unlike many of its peers, is a place where hockey matters.  Who wouldn't want to play at Lynah?

[billhoward]

Having nothing better to argue about, this thread devolves to arguments of the meaning of wording rather than intent. I think I know how to divert the discussion quickly (in the manner of Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles asking "where the white women at?" ): Have I mentioned lately how nice RPI's web feed is ... ?

[Tom Lento]

Having nothing better to argue about, this thread devolves to arguments of the meaning of wording rather than intent. I think I know how to divert the discussion quickly (in the manner of Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles asking "where the white women at?" ): Have I mentioned lately how nice RPI's web feed is ... ?

I think that was marty.

[Cornell95]

With the disclaimer that I dont follow much hockey at the NHL level and mostly just track Cornell now from afar (be at Lynah Easy in the Spring though)

I wonder how much of the talent issue is financial aid related. Certainly it can limit the pool of potential players, but I would think the academic rigor (and entrance requirements) would have a lot more impact on recruiting.
I also wonder how much the aspiration to jump to the next level (NHL) plays in to decisions.  Not only the lack of TV and press exposure you get in the ECAC compared to Hockey East or the western conferences, but also whether the coaching staff is receptive to bringing in guys (like Riley Nash) that have a high likelihood of bailing after 2 years.  I dont have a good feel for how many people jump from the 'blue-chip' programs before graduating... I know it is less than basketball but certainly it is an issue for both the student-athletes and for the recruiting staff.