How far Cornell hasn't fallen this year

[billhoward]

This is shaping up as Cornell's least successful season in years. Can we take solace that the depths of our fall has only been to fifth place in the RS standings? Compare to say St. Lawrence and Dartmouth that finished last year's RS 1 and 3 and now are 9th (SLU) and in a three-way tie for last.

[TimV]

nm

[Doug '08]

I don't think you can compare Cornell's program to St. Lawrence or Dartmouth.  Cornell has the tradition, money, infrastructure, recruiting network, not to mention player caliber to expect to be a top 10 team every year.

Simply put, Dartmouth and SLU are just not the same kind of program.  I'm sure this is a poor analogy, but I don't think any Notre Dame football fan takes solace in the fact that some of the teams that finished ahead of them last year were even worse than they were this year? Notre Dame expects to win at football, Cornell expects to win at hockey; there are strong, winning traditions in place.

You can't just not compare the two programs- no offense to their respective fans, but Dartmouth hasn't won a thing in over 60 years, and SLUs history isn't much more distinguished.

Any season where we can't win a championship is a disapointing, and any season where we can't raise at least one banner is unacceptable.

[ugarte]

I'm not on board with the comparison to SLU and think the comp to Dartmouth is crazy. That said, 5th place in an off-year does say good things about the program. Wait until next year to panic.

[ebilmes]

Just keep in mind that this is 5th place in a conference that went 21-38-4 (.365) against the "big 4" this year (according to CHN).

And a team that was 0-8 against the four teams above it.

[Kris]

I think billhoward's posting begs the question: How does one define "success" in athletics? How does one know that the failures of the Red are not a trend, to be replicated in the future? Will our fortunes be reversed? I mean to say: with Harvard now paying its athletic population for its labor, how can a (relatively) poor school like Cornell University compete? How will Cornell obtain good players? I must say that the Western schools play a different game. We all know that they are extremely fast, quick, skilled, and agile on the individual levels. Traditionally the defensive style of Cornell University has been able to overcome the "rabbits" of the West. But my question to the community is: Will Red Recruiting be able to trump the West anymore with its "tortoises," given the obscene competition for recruits. I am very worried for the state of Cornell hockey. I suspect we will never win another national championship. My father has argued so. Now this is pessimistic as hell, but I do not know why a team with such inspired fanbases cannot impose its will upon the University and Red Recruiting to build a team capable of national glory (yes, unrealistic, but come on, you cannot blame me for dreaming). OK, finally, I want to state that I apologize for my past annoyances and will stick only to substantive issues from now (I do realize now that the reference to my father was uncalled for). Thanks.

[Kris]

Well-put, ebilmes. It is the relativity of hockey leagues that we must consider, if we care about national glory. I was trying to reach your conclusion in my posting below. Thanks.

[Beeeej]

While I would never try to discredit anybody on the basis of their relative youth (and I would be foolish to try to do so on the basis of ebilmes's parentage, given that I share some of it), I think it's worth pointing something out.

Very little of what you say and ask now was not also said and asked in loud, semi-panicked conversations in 1993, 1994, and 1995 as the Cornell men's hockey team finished in 11th, 8th, and 9th place respectively.  Just look at what happened after that, in 1996 and 1997.

Hell, look at our 8th place finish in 1998, and imagine how most of us must have felt at the time - were 1996 and 1997 flashes in the pan, super-motivated kids playing way above their ability and out of their heads for a new coach?  Was it already over?  Then look at what happened after that, in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, and 2006.

Just as you may find it telling that the older members of this group are the ones most ready to believe that our "calamitous" 5th place finish this year is part of a passing phase or a readjustment and that things will improve with the next couple of seasons, I find it telling that you, Doug08, and a couple of other of the youngest members of this group are the ones most ready to declare a permanent end to the glory.

Are there brand-new, never-before-seen obstacles to a return to glory?  Perhaps, but I think it would be foolish to assume that we are the only ones who can see the obstacles or are trying to come up with solutions to them.  An ability to adjust to one's circumstances in order to succeed does not mean that one will succeed at every turn.  I find it utterly remarkable that anybody is willing to say right now, today, that Cornell will never win another national championship.  Is it possible we never will?  Of course it is, but that's largely because once you get to that level, anything can happen in a single game.

I am absolutely not ready to say that circumstances are already to the point where we should just pack in our priority numbers and go home.  I believe we will be back in the Frozen Four in the next four or five years.

Yes, this was a disappointing season, in that we did not defeat anybody above us in the standings, but think about what that means - we didn't beat anybody we weren't supposed to beat.  That doesn't shock me as much as it seems to shock other people.  It was also difficult because we didn't do well out of conference.  But there have only been a few seasons in the past thirteen since Coach Schafer took over that we have done well out of conference; the point isn't always to beat the OOC teams, it's to get exposure to OOC talent and styles of play, and if you can get some Ws, so much the better.

Listen, I'm not all "Trust in Schafer, he knows all."  But one benefit of being around for twenty-one years of this stuff is that I've heard it before, and I've seen what happens afterwards.  I said earlier this season, and I will repeat it now despite the results this past weekend:

Given what I know of our current team, who we're losing, who and what we believe we're gaining, and what I saw in the several games I watched, I could not shake the feeling that I was watching the 1999-2000 team all over again.  Not in the specific tools that specific players have, although it's hard to resist comparisons - but in the sense that something special has started, that these kids are trying to work together much more than the team had in the previous couple of years, and that they just don't have the maturity of skills and judgment to make use of that drive, but that some of it will come to them, and the rest is on the way from other quarters.

Is it possible I'm wrong, and we're not going to have a Frozen Four-caliber team in 2011?  Of course it is.

But I hope you'll excuse me for not rending my garments and sitting in ashes about it just yet.

[dietlbomb]

This team had a better in-conference record than last years' team, but last year we really backed into 4th place.

[Kris]

Now what I would say to you Beeej is that I think that you establish that there is a chance that the Red will return to national glory but you do not really tell us how that will happen. Regardless, I very much appreciate your optimistic attitude and I, as a pessimist, will try to mirror your outlook on the Red. As I outline in my below posting, I believe that the Red and the fanbases are up against the gargantuan wall that is the recruiting policies of other Hockey Universities and the inferior position of Red Recruiting in the war for recruits. I too am skeptical of the Schafer, but I agree when he mentioned last week in the Sun that our ultimate goal is "destroying" the "Western Devils" (these are my own words) and winning the national tourney championship. Thank you

[Trotsky]

[quote Beeeej]Listen, I'm not all "Trust in Schafer, he knows all."[/quote]I am, and the hell with the rest of you.  ::uptosomething::

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

[Trotsky]

[quote Beeeej]Given what I know of our current team, who we're losing, who and what we believe we're gaining, and what I saw in the several games I watched, I could not shake the feeling that I was watching the 1999-2000 team all over again.[/quote]

Interesting thought. While I wouldn't say I felt that way, here's a look at next year's projected lineup, bearing in mind that this year is not over yet.

[Rosey]

[quote Trotsky]Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?[/quote]
Forget it, he's rolling.

[ebilmes]

Just because a poster says they agree with me does not mean that I, in turn, agree with his claims.

There's no doubt that Cornell will return to the top within a few years. My point was simply that this year was disappointing -- a good sized drop-off from earlier in the decade. This team could have accomplished a lot more than a mediocre finish in a weak conference.

[Beeeej]

[quote Kris]Now what I would say to you Beeej is that I think that you establish that there is a chance that the Red will return to national glory but you do not really tell us how that will happen.[/quote]

Actually, I think I did venture a few suggestions as to what will get us there: the relatively small graduating group; the current list of expected recruits for '09 and '10 and their particular strengths and reputations; the raw talent in our underclassmen that I believe will develop with time, work, and maturity; and maybe even to a certain extent the cyclical nature of the sport and our conference.

Every few years another horrific situation arises that makes us think we're doomed.  Other schools following our lead and recruiting from Canada - the departure of the teams that became Hockey East - the increase in athletic scholarship presence at other ECAC schools - the season getting longer everywhere but in the Ivies - bigger, newer arenas going up elsewhere - cats and dogs living together!  Yet all this happened before we got to the Frozen Four in 2003.  I'm not suggesting Schafer has magical powers, I'm simply suggesting that the newest obstacles are not as onerous as people are making out.

Remember, one of the reasons we compete with the top schools for top recruits is that we got awfully good.  We may not get the recruits we want, but we're getting better recruits than we did ten years ago.  We may be losing people to the pros, but that's partly because we're getting recruits who are in demand by the pros.  Success breeds success, but it also breeds its own challenges.  I just find that when I look at a fifth-place finish in conjuction with new financial aid policies at a few of our competitor schools, I am not inclined to go screaming in the streets in panic.  Those who are so inclined may do so, but I think it's awfully premature.

I also think it is as sure a sign as any that this program has succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of people who were following it in the mid-1990s that anybody, much less a current senior, would suggest anything less than a new banner every year is unacceptable.  (On the other hand, I can't argue with calling failure to win the conference tournament every year "disappointing" - of course it's "disappointing."  I'd love for Cornell to win in Albany every single year.  I also think it's grossly unrealistic to expect it, no matter how good your coach and your recruiting are.  Even the perennial powers in the west don't win their conference tournament every year.)

As for the specifics, I have no suggestions.  I am not a recruiter, I have no pipeline, and I'm surely no coach.  But Coach Schafer has done pretty well by me in the thirteen years he's been at Cornell - and a fifth-place finish a couple of seasons after two years in a row of overtime national quarterfinal losses simply isn't anywhere near enough for me to go knocking on his door and demanding to know what he intends to do about it, then presenting him with a list of my ideas.