Regular season wrap-up.

[Trotsky]

The 74-43 GF-GA compares favorably with every year gong back to 2005.  It's also the 7th season in the last 9 that Cornell gave up < 2.0 GA in conference play.

2000 70-54
2001 44-44
2002 74-34
2003 89-29
2004 53-32
2005 70-26
2006 61-48
2007 69-60
2008 60-43
2009 56-41
2010 74-43

[Jim Hyla]

The 74-43 GF-GA compares favorably with every year gong back to 2005.  It's also the 7th season in the last 9 that Cornell gave up < 2.0 GA in conference play.

2000 70-54
2001 44-44
2002 74-34
2003 89-29
2004 53-32
2005 70-26
2006 61-48
2007 69-60
2008 60-43
2009 56-41
2010 74-43

But why couldn't we have been 2003?:`-(

[Trotsky]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

[Al DeFlorio]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Those were "freak" years, too.  Like the 100-year storm.

[jkahn]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Greg, each of those years should have 24 regular season games.  Three more in the ECAC playoffs plus two in the NCAA's will account for the 29 total.

[Al DeFlorio]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Greg, each of those years should have 24 regular season games.  Three more in the ECAC playoffs plus two in the NCAA's will account for the 29 total.

I think those are ECAC regular season stats, not including out-of-conference regular season games--to make apples-to-apples comparisons with the recent stats posted earlier in the thread.

[KeithK]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Greg, each of those years should have 24 regular season games.  Three more in the ECAC playoffs plus two in the NCAA's will account for the 29 total.

I believe he's only showing ECAC RS games.

[Jim Hyla]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Those were "freak" years, too.  Like the 100-year storm.

That is if you consider Harkness a 100 year storm.**]

[jkahn]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Greg, each of those years should have 24 regular season games.  Three more in the ECAC playoffs plus two in the NCAA's will account for the 29 total.

I believe he's only showing ECAC RS games.

my bad

[Al DeFlorio]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Those were "freak" years, too.  Like the 100-year storm.

That is if you consider Harkness a 100 year storm.**]

We haven't seen his like since, and I don't expect to...sadly.  Once was not enough...but it was quite special.

[Jim Hyla]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Those were "freak" years, too.  Like the 100-year storm.

That is if you consider Harkness a 100 year storm.**]

We haven't seen his like since, and I don't expect to...sadly.  Once was not enough...but it was quite special.

Yeah, when I was talking to Dan Lodboa yesterday, he also mentioned how he was like a second father to him as well. He had a lot of sons.

[Trotsky]

I think those are ECAC regular season stats, not including out-of-conference regular season games--to make apples-to-apples comparisons with the recent stats posted earlier in the thread.

Yes.

[Larry72]

Harkness had a lot of "sons" and few daughters-in-law too.  There is a surprising legacy of Cornell (and Ithaca) spouses that came out of those years as well.  Not to mention a goodly number of grandchildren as well! The Lynah mystique was also born in those years as well.

[redice]

Because 2003 was a freak year.

Then again:

1967 106 32 (20 GP)
1968 144 29 (20)
1969 139 39 (20)
1970 142 39 (21)

Those were "freak" years, too.  Like the 100-year storm.

That is if you consider Harkness a 100 year storm.**]

We haven't seen his like since, and I don't expect to...sadly.  Once was not enough...but it was quite special.

Yeah, when I was talking to Dan Lodboa yesterday, he also mentioned how he was like a second father to him as well. He had a lot of sons.

I had a chance to talk with Ned just a couple of times.    He was, far & away, the most engaging person that I've ever met.   I walked away and thought to myself:  "I can now understand why his players would skate through brick walls for him".   He had a way of making you feel like, at that moment, you were the center of the universe; his universe.   There was a serious "wow factor" for me.

[billhoward]

Makes you wish Harkness had lunch with Pete Carril and talked about the jpys of lifetime tenure in the Ivy League vs. striking out in the pros. We got Harkness because RPI paid poorly. But I bet Harkness' inflation-adjusted salary in 1970 doesn't match what a top tier Ivy coach makes now in hockey or hoops. $200,000 in today's dollars deflates to $36,000 in the 29-0 year. Maybe it would be a good conversation for Steve Donahue to have with Carril.

(I know Carril was only 4-5 years into his Princeton tenue at the point Harkness struck out for Detroit.)