Buh-bye, seniors

[Jordan 04]

Since evidently I am not getting through to people, my point isn't that Cornell '10 was an objectively bad team: they weren't.  My point was that this was supposed to be the year that brought us back to the highs of '03 and would give us a long run in the NCAA tournament.  Instead, they folded like a cheap suit last night.  They didn't lose a one goal, back-and-forth game: they got beat and looked bad in the process.  Not what I expected from this team last off-season, but certainly what I came to expect following their night-to-night inconsistency throughout the season.

The problem is - as I stated a couple of weeks ago in the thread Age started - is that ....  I don't know what made people believe this was "the year" ... This team was never thought of, when taking off the Big Red-colored glasses, on the same par with the 2003 team.  I personally never saw that.  Any Cornell NCAA-caliber team CAN make the FF .... but in 2003, the Frozen Four was practically considered a given ... and if it didn't happen, it would've been devastating, because the chances are so few.  Not in 2005, 2006 or 2010 did I think it was on that level.  Yes, it stings, yes they certainly could've made the FF .... but they could also just as easily lose in the 1st round.  In 05 06 and 09, Cornell won tough first-round games --- coming back from down 2-0 in each one of them .... This year, they lost it.  It happens.

Every one of Adam's posts since the final horn yesterday has been spot on.

[ugarte]

Since evidently I am not getting through to people, my point isn't that Cornell '10 was an objectively bad team: they weren't.  My point was that this was supposed to be the year that brought us back to the highs of '03 and would give us a long run in the NCAA tournament.  Instead, they folded like a cheap suit last night.  They didn't lose a one goal, back-and-forth game: they got beat and looked bad in the process.  Not what I expected from this team last off-season, but certainly what I came to expect following their night-to-night inconsistency throughout the season.

The problem is - as I stated a couple of weeks ago in the thread Age started - is that ....  I don't know what made people believe this was "the year" ... This team was never thought of, when taking off the Big Red-colored glasses, on the same par with the 2003 team.  I personally never saw that.  Any Cornell NCAA-caliber team CAN make the FF .... but in 2003, the Frozen Four was practically considered a given ... and if it didn't happen, it would've been devastating, because the chances are so few.  Not in 2005, 2006 or 2010 did I think it was on that level.  Yes, it stings, yes they certainly could've made the FF .... but they could also just as easily lose in the 1st round.  In 05 06 and 09, Cornell won tough first-round games --- coming back from down 2-0 in each one of them .... This year, they lost it.  It happens.

I think what had people fooled was twofold. (1) Everyone thought that the Bemidji loss was a fluke rather than an indication of the quality of the two teams; (2) Cornell was bringing back a core from a team that was a fluky loss from the Final Four.

What we learned this year was that Bemidji really was as good as they looked against Notre Dame and Cornell (tonight's surprise loss to Michigan notwithstanding*) and Cornell wasn't really a final four squad in either '09 or '10.

* Did you ever think you'd read that a Michigan win over Bemidji was a surprise?

[RatushnyFan]

Why is that when a team has a bad night, it was the coach's fault for not coaching them properly?  In this game, I think they just didn't play well. Period.

Bingo.  We're lucky to have Schafer.  Play them again and I'm sure that it would be more credible, I can't believe that UNH is that good and teams like Union aren't any good.  But we don't get that chance.  Honestly, what system would work better given the recruiting challenges an Ivy League school faces?  We need more speed to win in the NCAAs (Harvard had a lot of speed when they won in '89, haven't seen an Ivy League school with that much talent since then) but I'm satisfied with the efforts of the student athletes across the season and with Schafer and his system.  And it's a pleasure to watch, win or lose.

[Towerroad]

Why is that when a team has a bad night, it was the coach's fault for not coaching them properly?  In this game, I think they just didn't play well. Period.

Bingo.  We're lucky to have Schafer.  Play them again and I'm sure that it would be more credible, I can't believe that UNH is that good and teams like Union aren't any good.  But we don't get that chance.  Honestly, what system would work better given the recruiting challenges an Ivy League school faces?  We need more speed to win in the NCAAs (Harvard had a lot of speed when they won in '89, haven't seen an Ivy League school with that much talent since then)  I'm satisfied with the efforts of the student athletes across the season and with Schafer and his system.  And it's a pleasure to watch, win or lose.

Yale, which is subject to the same Ivy limits seems to have found a very different style of play that puts them in the top of the ECAC and has qualified for the NCAA Tournament the last 2 years. They have been beating us with sticks for the last 2 years.

[Rosey]

Also of note - Cornell was, once again, the best team in the tournament to not offer scholarships. We win that pseudo title year in and year out.

Given the latest results, would you like to revise and extend your remarks?

[kaelistus]

Well, I'm glad Yale won, if only to refute the stupid EZAC-type comments I'm seeing in this board. I expect that type of comment from USCHO, but not from here. The ECAC has traditionally been the 4th conference, but it's always been competitive. We put 2 guys in the ECAC this year, HEA put 3.

Sure, I'll revise: Cornell was the second best non-scholarship team in the tournament this year. Yet somehow I don't find myself disappointed by that. In fact, I'm actually really comforted by the fact that you people are whining about this finish. TWELVE ECAC CHAMPIONSHIPS! WOOOooo!! Schafer has spoiled you. Also, I don't buy the easy tournament argument - Union was 19th in RPI and the we earned the Brown placement by having a 29 point season. What I am annoyed at tho is that between you and Facetimer we seem to be loosing the 'cheer the team through thick and thin' attitude that existed back when we were in college. Especially since I live in super fickle Red Sox country, I don't want that to go away.

A second note: Everyone has a bad game. And I don't deny that we did. But I think it's insulting to infer that the Cornell players didn't try hard enough or didn't want it hard enough.

[Rosey]

What I am annoyed at tho is that between you and Facetimer we seem to be loosing the 'cheer the team through thick and thin' attitude that existed back when we were in college.

Okay, let's be clear: I didn't piss and moan heavily until after the season was over.  As I just said in the other thread, though, I probably should have waited a bit more time before starting.  But I also never found the "cheer them on no matter what happens" attitude to be particularly intellectually satisfying.  I like debating way too much for that.  ELF would be far less interesting if everyone were positive all the time.  I also don't bitch and moan AT the games, and I'm always there from warmups until after the stick salute, cheering no matter what happens.

Please note also that I'm not indicting the entire program.  I am simply disappointed that this particular roster didn't live up to the expectations of many going into this year, and seemed to be two entirely different teams on different nights.  I'm disappointed that the senior class didn't get a Frozen Four appearance because Friday happened to be one of the nights the defense mailed it in for the second half of the game.  They didn't even wait for Saturday, like they did the rest of the season!  It doesn't take away from their other accomplishments, but it is disappointing nonetheless.  I hope that makes sense, because I don't think I can be any more clear.

Especially since I live in super fickle Red Sox country, I don't want that to go away.

Super-fickle Red Sox country?  Are you kidding?  The Sox fans I know are rabid, like Cornell fans: I often call Cornell the Red Sox of college hockey, because of their fan fervor and long title drought despite consistent competitiveness.  "Demanding" is the word you want, and is a NY Yankees attitude: beat on the team when they're down. ;-)

A second note: Everyone has a bad game. And I don't deny that we did. But I think it's insulting to infer that the Cornell players didn't try hard enough or didn't want it hard enough.

I don't know how else you explain their poor second half performance.  "A bad game" = "didn't play as hard or as smart as they could", which is devastating in a single-elimination tournament.  It's not meant as an insult, but as an attempt to explain the reality of the situation.  If the scoring went 1-0, 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 2-3 and that's how they lost, I would not be saying this: I would be saying, "Them's the breaks!  One team's gotta lose."  But the scoring went 1-0, 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, 1-5, 2-5.  This team should not have had that game.

[kaelistus]

Super-fickle Red Sox country?  Are you kidding?  The Sox fans I know are rabid, like Cornell fans: I often call Cornell the Red Sox of college hockey, because of their fan fervor and long title drought despite consistent competitiveness.  "Demanding" is the word you want, and is a NY Yankees attitude: beat on the team when they're down. ;-)

Red Sox fans support their team at all costs. But they don't support their players. With the possible exception of Ortiz, it only takes a couple of bad breaks for them to call for player's heads. Its annoying (tho I don't mind it so much when someone is paid to play). As an example, a few months ago there well calls to trade the all star closer because he had one bad game in the playoffs last year.

I actually think the analogy is perfect. I'm sure you're suddenly not going to stop cheering for the team. But at the same time, you're starting threads with the topic "Buh-bye, seniors" and include the line "See ya, seniors. What a way to go out. Blah. ". Nice. You do know that many athletes and family read this forum right? This is even worse when they had such a great season, that just didn't meet whatever expectation you had for the team.

[andyw2100]

Nice. You do know that many athletes and family read this forum right? This is even worse when they had such a great season, that just didn't meet whatever expectation you had for the team.

Unless something has changed, it's my understanding that Coach Schafer forbids players from reading eLynah. If family members choose to read eLynah they do so at their own risk. And on the whole there is certainly much more here that is positive than negative.

As for the attack on Kyle he has both apologized for letting the conversation spill from one thread to the other, and has also said he should have waited a couple of days before posting.

Finally as a relatively neutral observer in all this I do feel the need to point out that your statement about the team not meeting whatever expectations Kyle had for them seems to be shared by at least 65 other members of eLynah, which, at least for now, is a slightly larger number than those that believe the team met or exceeded expectations. Could those numbers be biased by the pain and disappointment of the last game? Of course. But I don't see the point in attacking Kyle, especially in light of the apologies he has already offered.

[Jim Hyla]

Nice. You do know that many athletes and family read this forum right? This is even worse when they had such a great season, that just didn't meet whatever expectation you had for the team.

Unless something has changed, it's my understanding that Coach Schafer forbids players from reading eLynah. If family members choose to read eLynah they do so at their own risk. And on the whole there is certainly much more here that is positive than negative.

As for the attack on Kyle he has both apologized for letting the conversation spill from one thread to the other, and has also said he should have waited a couple of days before posting.

Finally as a relatively neutral observer in all this I do feel the need to point out that your statement about the team not meeting whatever expectations Kyle had for them seems to be shared by at least 65 other members of eLynah, which, at least for now, is a slightly larger number than those that believe the team met or exceeded expectations. Could those numbers be biased by the pain and disappointment of the last game? Of course. But I don't see the point in attacking Kyle, especially in light of the apologies he has already offered.

All of what you say is true, but I'd suggest to Kyle that if he really wants to change the tenor of the conversation, he could go back and change the thread title and put his changes in his original post. That is, better describe what he means, that would take some of the personal attack away.

I, for one, voted on underachievement, but that was a team vote. By no means do I put the deficit on only the seniors, and the only negative I really have is their inconsistency. I was terribly happy when Greening and Nash said they were coming back, and we have to balance our unhappiness with the fact that they did feel continuing their education was important. If Greening goes on to win more awards, such as Lowe's, that will need to be put in the pot as an achievement, as well. This "season" is not over.

[kaelistus]

Unless something has changed, it's my understanding that Coach Schafer forbids players from reading eLynah. If family members choose to read eLynah they do so at their own risk. And on the whole there is certainly much more here that is positive than negative.

1- It's been clear over the last few years that some of the players break that rule especially when the season is over. When we make "thank you seniors" type threads, I think we expect some of the seniors to actually see it.

2- This was probably the most negative thread I have seen in my 14 years here. With the exception of Facetimer's rants against the coach. But those were so crazy, they were kinda funny. I don't think Kyle meant it that way, but that's the way it comes across to me.

I don't know If I'm being clear here, it's not that I want everything to be positive here, but there's a huge difference between:
 - Paolini needs to stop taking stupid penalties  (Name chosen randomly)
 - See ya, Paolini, blah.
One is thoughtful discourse of possible flaws in or play. The other one is just insulting.

Somewhat related, given that we can't get into the minds of the players, saying they do/don't play with heart is something I've never been a fan of.

Finally as a relatively neutral observer in all this I do feel the need to point out that your statement about the team not meeting whatever expectations Kyle had for them seems to be shared by at least 65 other members of eLynah, which, at least for now, is a slightly larger number than those that believe the team met or exceeded expectations. Could those numbers be biased by the pain and disappointment of the last game? Of course. But I don't see the point in attacking Kyle, especially in light of the apologies he has already offered.

The number was very lopsided earlier when the thread started and is now going the other way. I think a lot of people were frustrated by the game and are now realizing that we had a pretty good season nonetheless. I'm doing my part by trying to keep people grounded and pointing this out.

Anyway, in light of Kyle's apology: I didn't post another reply in the other thread. Given that's what he apologized for, I still found it appropriate to point out what I find incorrect in what he posted in this thread. For the record, I've met Kyle multiple times (Although he probably doesn't remember me), and enjoy his company quite a bit.

[Rosey]

You do know that many athletes and family read this forum right? This is even worse when they had such a great season, that just didn't meet whatever expectation you had for the team.

In the future, I'll be sure to discuss any negative thoughts regarding Cornell hockey where players' families won't be reading: maybe on some forum related to knitting or motorcycles. ::smashfreak::

[Rosey]

Finally as a relatively neutral observer in all this I do feel the need to point out that your statement about the team not meeting whatever expectations Kyle had for them seems to be shared by at least 65 other members of eLynah, which, at least for now, is a slightly larger number than those that believe the team met or exceeded expectations. Could those numbers be biased by the pain and disappointment of the last game? Of course. But I don't see the point in attacking Kyle, especially in light of the apologies he has already offered.

I worded it poorly, as well: the choices should have been something like "Met Expectations" and "Underachieved" or "Met Expectations" and "Did not meet expectations".  The team has clearly "achieved" a lot, regardless of whether they've also "underachieved".

[Rosey]

All of what you say is true, but I'd suggest to Kyle that if he really wants to change the tenor of the conversation, he could go back and change the thread title and put his changes in his original post. That is, better describe what he means, that would take some of the personal attack away.

I don't change history.  What's done is done.

I, for one, voted on underachievement, but that was a team vote. By no means do I put the deficit on only the seniors, and the only negative I really have is their inconsistency.

The idea that I was blaming the loss entirely on the seniors is probably the greatest source of misunderstanding, and probably the thing I regret the most about how this has been received.  I can see how one would think that given how I worded the initial post, but that was not my intent.  The team as a whole played a disappointing game one too many times this season, and unlike previous NCAA runs did it at precisely the wrong time this year.

[adamw]

Sure, I'll revise: Cornell was the second best non-scholarship team in the tournament this year.

Make that third-best.  RIT doesn't give scholarships either.