Opinion Piece: A Little Perspective

[CowbellGuy]

When I recently saw someone refer to the "relative mediocrity" of this year's team, I died a little inside. Fair warning: there's a bit of "back in my day" coming, but it's not like I saw Dryden play or anything...

Keep reading...

[andyw2100]

Nice article, Age.

It's all too easy to forget the lean years and get spoiled by success. I hope your piece is read by most of the eLynah community.

[CUontheslopes]

Very well said. I can't stand to read the hockey pieces in the Cornell Sun. No disrespect to the two kids who write it, but honestly, it comes across as a weekly whine about how Cornell has failed each week. I choose not to read it and I know a lot of other hockey fans who don't either because they can't stand the Chicken Little "the sky is falling" weekly rant. Let's cheer the team on and quit whining. This year's team has a great chance to make the tourney and make some noise. Let's go Red!

[KeithK]

Amen.

[Al DeFlorio]

Fair warning: there's a bit of "back in my day" coming, but it's not like I saw Dryden play or anything...

The tag on this morning's tea bag read:  "Too many of us keep looking forward to the good old days.";-)

[amerks127]

Very well said. I can't stand to read the hockey pieces in the Cornell Sun. No disrespect to the two kids who write it, but honestly, it comes across as a weekly whine about how Cornell has failed each week. I choose not to read it and I know a lot of other hockey fans who don't either because they can't stand the Chicken Little "the sky is falling" weekly rant. Let's cheer the team on and quit whining. This year's team has a great chance to make the tourney and make some noise. Let's go Red!

And no disrespect to you, but don't show your age by calling Elie and me "kids." I think it's rather ironic that someone who claims they don't read our articles then feels free to openly comment on how they come across as a weekly whine.  Please read exactly what we've written this season at http://cornellsun.com/users/mitchell-alva-and-elie-bilmes/track but please ignore the titles as the editors write them (and do read every piece).  Except for early season comments about Brendon Nash, we don't complain about the team.  We offer honest assessments, and when things go poorly as in Dartmouth a few weeks ago, we comment on its effect.  We've offered our share of compliments toward almost every player on the team as well as the traveling fan base.  Do you know we were criticized for writing that we had great expectations for the team this season because they were "stale" thoughts?

In the past, we've taken umbrage with the treatment of Cornell Athletics toward hockey fans vis a vis other sporting events.  Those articles can be found here http://cornellsun.com/node/30396 and http://cornellsun.com/node/32726.  It was in this context that the term "relative mediocrity" originated.

[Jim Hyla]

My only disagreement with the piece is that you also have to look at what is expected. Frankly, to me this year has been a disappointment. Not by any stretch would I say it's mediocre; no I've seen mediocre and this is not close to that. However my view of CU hockey is to be competitive for a top 4 ECAC spot each year, win a title every 4 years or so, get to the NCAAs more than 50% of the time, win 1 game at least half of that time and consideration of a Frozen Four appearance at least 3-4 out of 10 years. Now I consider those lofty goals, and more than I'd expect from any other ECAC team.

My problem is that I expected this was to be the year for an ECAC crown and serious Frozen Four potential. That may still happen, but this team, for one reason or another, has not shown the ability to put together a string of good/great games, the kind of thing you need to win the tourneys, ECAC or NCAA. After last year I expected that, so that's disappointing. Hopefully they will prove me wrong.

Another reason to be disappointed is I expect the next 2 years to be more rebuilding and not the NCAA type. If goal-tending turns out to be great, that may be wrong; but it's another reason I wanted this year to be better.

This has been a good year, the kind of year most ECAC schools would die for, but I expected a little better. So let's put our effort in helping and enjoying Harvard, they are games that we could lose.

[marty]

Makes me want to make the trip from Troy on Friday, even though Janice and I were there last week for Onion and Senior Night.  Thanks for reminding us how wonderful '96 was and how it foreshadowed 2003.  In that time frame I was sure that Cornell would make Albany in '01.  Buffalo two years later was fine.  Was I hoping for Detroit?   Surely.  Do I still bleed Red no matter?  Yes.

[Facetimer]

I'm not gonna toe the eLynah company line here.  I disagree with Age's opinion.  If you ask Schafer what his goal for the season is, he will not say to win the Ivy League title or the ECACs.  The ultimate goal is to win the NCAA title.  This year's team will probably not reach that goal.  The season, therefore will not be a success.  If the coaching staff or the players think otherwise, then the team is destined for mediocrity.  I'm not saying the team isn't entertaining - I'm just saying the team isn't great.

The balance of Age's editorial seems to me like a bunch of excuses.  Cornell hockey players have it pretty good.  They are big fish in a small pond; they get a decent education; they usually get favorable admissions/financial aid considerations; they play in front of sold out and boisterous crowds; etc.  In contrast to other schools with more prominent athletics programs, where hockey isn't necessarily the top sport on the depth chart, Cornell is a viable program which many recruits will (or should) strongly consider.  Plus, I'm tired of hearing about "earning our degrees."  I took a course with Greg Hornby back in the Spring of 2004.  It was his senior year - we were both enrolled in ASTRO202 - Our Home in the Solar System for Freshman and Sophomores.  If Hornby can graduate, anyone can.  The bottom line is we get some pretty darn good players despite not having a prime rib carving station at Lynah Rink.

Schafer has done a good job getting the program to where it is now, and I have enjoyed entertaining hockey over the past 10 years.  However, that isn't good enough.  Perhaps another coach would be able to motivate the team to go the extra mile and win the NCAAs.  The talent is there, and it is disappointing to consistently fall short every year.

[Jim Hyla]

I'm not gonna toe the eLynah company line here.  I disagree with Age's opinion.  If you ask Schafer what his goal for the season is, he will not say to win the Ivy League title or the ECACs.  The ultimate goal is to win the NCAA title.  This year's team will probably not reach that goal.  The season, therefore will not be a success.  If the coaching staff or the players think otherwise, then the team is destined for mediocrity.  I'm not saying the team isn't entertaining - I'm just saying the team isn't great.

The balance of Age's editorial seems to me like a bunch of excuses.  Cornell hockey players have it pretty good.  They are big fish in a small pond; they get a decent education; they usually get favorable admissions/financial aid considerations; they play in front of sold out and boisterous crowds; etc.  In contrast to other schools with more prominent athletics programs, where hockey isn't necessarily the top sport on the depth chart, Cornell is a viable program which many recruits will (or should) strongly consider.  Plus, I'm tired of hearing about "earning our degrees."  I took a course with Greg Hornby back in the Spring of 2004.  It was his senior year - we were both enrolled in ASTRO202 - Our Home in the Solar System for Freshman and Sophomores.  If Hornby can graduate, anyone can.  The bottom line is we get some pretty darn good players despite not having a prime rib carving station at Lynah Rink.

Schafer has done a good job getting the program to where it is now, and I have enjoyed entertaining hockey over the past 10 years.  However, that isn't good enough.  Perhaps another coach would be able to motivate the team to go the extra mile and win the NCAAs.  The talent is there, and it is disappointing to consistently fall short every year.

Maybe I shouldn't even respond, but we don't come close to talent or other amenities, cost, difficulty of school, etc.,compared to those schools you mention. Compare to North Dakota, Minny, Wisc, Mich, well the list goes on. Check the NHL drafties list from some of those schools. Sure just change the coach and Frozen Four here we come.

[Towerroad]

Good Article! I am not sure I agree with all of it though. Schafer has done great things for the program but I doubt that the "Schafer System" with it's absolute premium on grind it out defense will ever take the program to the next level. Year after year I watch the same so so power play and offensive system.  (shoot for the perimeter and hope for a garbage goal). I don't think the "system" is effectively balanced and year after year we are vulnerable to fast puck handling teams.

We are what we are, an Ivy League School and with that come some inherent limits (academics and very modest restraints on "scholarships") and some pluses. I am not sure it is worth giving up what we are to move to the next level it is certainly worth the debate.

Regardless: Let's Go Red!

[billhoward]

More was expected of the team this year. In that regard it has been a disappointment. They still have time to deliver on the more part. If they don't get past the ECACs or pull a one-and-done Harvard-style exit from the NCAAs, well, okay. We'll have grist for the next decade as we talk about "if only ... "

But still: Good stuff. Well worth saying. Fifteen years coaching, roughly 4,000 fans a game, that's a million home attendance in Ithaca in the Schafer era. Has Harvard drawn that many fans in its entire existence?

[redice]

Within the previously stated "inherent limits", I think Schafer has done & will continue to do a fine job with this program.   Is another coach going to come in & take CU to a Nat'l title?  IMO, no way!!   The best we can hope for is good solid hockey.   Teams that are near to being on a par with the best in the country.  Even if that means we're a step below.   But, with Schafer's system and the right players in the right spots, CU can win an NCAA Title.   2003 was very very close to being that team.   That shows that the concept is workable.   He'll do it one day.

That said, I am a bit disappointed with the 09-10 team.   Before the season, I thought we had a serious chance to make a run for the title in Detroit.   During the course of this season, they've not demonstrated that little something extra that championship teams have.  (Ex: Games stolen from them in the late going (BU, DC)).  At this late point in the season, I don't think it's likely to appear.

LGR!!!

[CUontheslopes]

Very well said. I can't stand to read the hockey pieces in the Cornell Sun. No disrespect to the two kids who write it, but honestly, it comes across as a weekly whine about how Cornell has failed each week. I choose not to read it and I know a lot of other hockey fans who don't either because they can't stand the Chicken Little "the sky is falling" weekly rant. Let's cheer the team on and quit whining. This year's team has a great chance to make the tourney and make some noise. Let's go Red!

And no disrespect to you, but don't show your age by calling Elie and me "kids." I think it's rather ironic that someone who claims they don't read our articles then feels free to openly comment on how they come across as a weekly whine.  Please read exactly what we've written this season at http://cornellsun.com/users/mitchell-alva-and-elie-bilmes/track but please ignore the titles as the editors write them (and do read every piece).  Except for early season comments about Brendon Nash, we don't complain about the team.  We offer honest assessments, and when things go poorly as in Dartmouth a few weeks ago, we comment on its effect.  We've offered our share of compliments toward almost every player on the team as well as the traveling fan base.  Do you know we were criticized for writing that we had great expectations for the team this season because they were "stale" thoughts?

In the past, we've taken umbrage with the treatment of Cornell Athletics toward hockey fans vis a vis other sporting events.  Those articles can be found here http://cornellsun.com/node/30396 and http://cornellsun.com/node/32726.  It was in this context that the term "relative mediocrity" originated.

My apologies for calling you guys kids. I'm only '07, so I'm only a few years older. You're free to your opinions, but I'm free to disagree. I don't think your comments are insightful and I stopped reading the hockey column for the first time in 7 years after reading several of your pieces. Maybe you should reread your own articles from a more detached perspective because to me and a good portion of the Cornell hockey world, they come across as a weekly airing of grievances and complaints. Also, as you say, perhaps its the titles that set the tone for that interpretation, but articles titled "Inconstitency Plagues Mens Hockey," "Men's Hockey Has Issues, but Potential Is Evident," and "Red Still Needs to Learn to Finish" with text that reflects their titles certainly rings true to CowbellGuy's sentiment (no pun intended). Feel free to write whatever you want, but CowbellGuy is right. There's a distinctly unpleasant smell in the air of recent.

The atmosphere in Lynah has changed significantly since basketball has improved. The casual fans have stopped going to hockey in the numbers they once did even 4 years ago. Just look at the attendance numbers and the lack of sellouts. It's just my opinion, but the fanbase at Lynah used to be comprised of a more-or-less representative cross-sectional sampling of the Cornell student body. No longer is that the case. The average fan now is a hell of a lot pickier. For one, I've learned just to enjoy the ride. I'd like to see more general Cornell sports fans again instead of hyper-critical hockey-dorks (for lack of a better word). After years of being beaten down by ushers, the administration, and even some fellow fans, the Greek system has abandoned hockey in alarming numbers in favor of basketball and a lot of the fun in the atmosphere has gone with them. Again, just my 2 cents from someone who's been here for the last 7 years. I'm hardly old and hardly discussing how it was "back in the day," but I think it's becoming increasingly evident that when hockey's not the only good ticket in town, Lynah's not as fun as it was just a few years ago.

[ebilmes]

As the person who has used "relative mediocrity" as a term to describe this year's team, I would like to make a few points.

First, there is a clear difference between "mediocre" and "relative mediocrity," and I'm not sure everyone understands it. This year's team is certainly not "mediocre;" they finished second in the conference and currently sit at #10 in the Pairwise. I would never say that.

However, it seems in the Cornell hockey community that the reference point for the Schafer era tends to be the 2003 season, and sometimes 2005 as well. Everyone remembers that great run to the Frozen Four; I was throwing things at the television after I came home from high school to find Cornell losing to UNH.

More relevant to my original use of the word, Cornell hockey season ticket policy has been based off of those glory years, when Cornell hockey was the hottest thing on campus, students trampled each other to get season tickets, and no price seemed too high for tickets.

Things are different now. You can not find 1500 students to pay $247 for hockey season tickets, especially with the free basketball games next door, and the lousy economy. There are also factors like cheering policies at Lynah, the reputation of the hockey players on campus, and things like that.

But you're delusional if you don't think that a major factor behind decreased ticket sales is the team's relative mediocrity, compared to teams earlier in the decade. Of course it's unreasonable to expect a 2003-like season every year, but the fact is that tickets are priced for that kind of season, and Cornell just hasn't had a year like that during our time at Cornell.

Jim makes some good points above. If there was going to be a 2003- or 2005-like year during my time on the Hill, this was supposed to be it.

Going into the season, the team's goals were to win, and win everything. They wanted to win the Ivy title, the ECAC RS title, the ECAC tournament title, make the Frozen Four, and win the national championship. They did not say in October that they were happy to be playing during the glory days of Schafer and didn't care what happened because whatever it was, it was going to be better than the bad old days.

They wanted to win big, and they haven't won anything yet this season.

In fact, it's been 5 years since the last ECAC RS title, 5 years since the last ECAC tournament title, and 5 years since the last Ivy title. Jim mentioned the talent of this year's group; if Cornell wants another trip to the Frozen Four, this is a great opportunity for that to happen. Watching the games this season, the Frozen Four seems like an unlikely destination.

It goes without saying, but much credit should be given to Schafer for his success over the last 14 years and his ability to keep the team towards the top of the ECAC and on the national radar. Saying that this season isn't as great as 2003's is a fact, and not some dig at the coach. Nor does making that comparison reveal some appalling lack of appreciation for how bad we were before Schafer arrived, or some misguided notion that the team didn't stop winning between 1970 and 1996. But this year's team has certainly failed to meet expectations so far, and is certainly a step down from what we saw in 2003 and 2005.