Top players that are still not committed

[KeithK]

Since when does Harvard... have a "great hockey program."?

Does Cornell have a great hockey program?  If so, what sets us apart from them?

The fact that we don't suck?

[Trotsky]

From 1899 to 1902, winning a "national championship" in men's hockey basically meant winning more games than the other seven or eight schools sponsoring teams in any given year, even if the season was only six games long.  Nobody but Yale gives any weight to those achievements, and they certainly don't make Yale "a great hockey program."

Well, we won it in 1911, and that's good enough for me.

[ftyuv]

Harvard's all-time in the NCAA Tournament is 12-22-1. Cornell's record is 17-19-0. I think that difference is sufficient to indicate that Cornell is a great program, especially in comparison to Harvard's success at the same level.

As much as I'd like to agree, a losing record -- even if it's in the national championship -- doesn't constitute a great program. The fact that we get there so often means we're a very good team nationally; but the fact we lose more than we win, once we're there, means we don't go past being very good.

Going by this, some other schools' win-loss records:

• BU: 34-30-0
• Michigan: 46-24-0
• Minnesota: 50-35-0
• NoDak: 40-18-0
• Wisconsin: 34-19-2

I would say these schools have great programs. We're very good.

[ugarte]

Boy this is a lot of discussion on the heels of a "Harvard Sucks" joke.

[KeithK]

Boy this is a lot of discussion on the heels of a "Harvard Sucks" joke.

My thoughts exactly. But then again, it is June.

[Aaron M. Griffin]

Kerfoot got his wish and is Harvard-bound.