Cu - 0 Yale - 6 final

[Chris '03]

Not sure why anyone would not credit Schafer with the 1996 and 1997 ECAC championships.  Yes he didn't recruit those players.  However, the prior coach suffered thru 3 consecutive losing seasons with these very players.

Then let's compare the last 6 years. It looks worse.

Really?

2006: Cornell finishes 3rd RS, 2nd Playoffs, upsets CC in NCAAs before falling in 3ots to National Champion. Yale places 11th, beats Union, who still never won a playoff game (including a 5ot thriller), wiped out by Dartmouth in round 2. Goes home.
2007: Cornell RS 4th. Upset by #5 QU. Goes Home. Yale finishes 10th. Loses in first round. Goes home.
2008: Cornell RS 5th. Beats Dartmouth and Union. Loses in ECAC Semi to Harvard. Yale finished 7th. Loses at Princeton in ECAC quarters.
2009: Cornell RS 2nd. Loses to Yale in ECAC final. Upsets Northeastern, loses to Bemidji. Goes home. Yale 1st/1st. Upset by UVM in NCAAs.
2010: Cornell RS 2nd, 1st in playoffs. Upset by UNH in NCAAs. Yale RS 1/Upset by Brown in quarters. Beats NoDak, loses to BC in NCAAs.
2011: Cornell RS 4th, Playoffs 2nd. Goes home. Yale RS 2, playoffs 1, NCAA fate TBD.

2006: Edge CU
2007: Edge CU
2008: Edge CU
2009: Pick 'em. Depends on what you measure success by.
2010: Pick 'em.
2011: Edge Yale.

Cornell has finished no worse than 5th. Has a 2-3 NCAA record and 1 ECAC title.
Yale has finished 1 through 11, has 2 ECAC titles, and a 1-2 NCAA record so far.

[Rosey]

Not sure why anyone would not credit Schafer with the 1996 and 1997 ECAC championships.  Yes he didn't recruit those players.  However, the prior coach suffered thru 3 consecutive losing seasons with these very players.

Agree 100%. If anything it's a testament to Schafer that he pulled championships out of a hat his first two years. It's not like he inherited a team that was wiping the floor with the competition and fell into two championships.

Past performance is not indicative of future results.

I don't think anyone (except maybe Facetimer) is contending that Coach Schafer didn't return the Cornell program to glory, or that his winning seasons were somehow flukes or really Brian McCutcheon's doing. But it's clear that the top of the ECAC has changed and Cornell has not been able to match that change. If this were still year 1 or 2 of Yale's dominance over Cornell, that would be one thing; but this is the end of year 4, and things haven't improved in any substantial way over time: Cornell still appears utterly unable to cope with the Yale attack, quickly falls behind, and has no hope of coming back.

As a final point to address something disturbing I've read in several posts, hoping that Yale will lose enough top players to make Cornell competitive again does nothing to address the structural deficits in Cornell's system that will prevent it from being competitive nationally against similar teams from other conferences. That, and winning the ECAC without having solved the Yale riddle (like Cornell did last year) is laaaaaaaame and utterly unsatisfying.

[JDeafv]

Well, can we recruit the players we need? From what I understand, the big talented players that fits our system are mostly going out west to schools like UND, and we cannot compete on that level due to a lot of factors that have already been discussed multiple times on eLynah.

Keith Allain's recruiting and execution strategy definitely fits well for the Ivies because most of their players are not the huge pre-NHL draft picks that other top schools recruit, and they still dance circles around them. The Yale fans I talked to said most of their players do not plan to play hockey professionally after school (some will perhaps play AHL), and their profile fits perfectly into the student-athlete model that the Ivy League tries to endorse.

So maybe the solution isn't fighting the market forces and trying to recruit the right players for our system. Maybe, the solution is changing the system into something that will fit the players we can recruit. I'm not calling for Schafer's resignations right now, but if he cannot make some fundamental changes in the upcoming months/year, we'll probably watch the same style of hockey for the next decade or so. There might be another amazing 2003 season down the road, but those will be very few and between. For the dedication and resources we have as a fan base and school, we should produce better results than what we have right now.

Yes, Cornell can recruit big talented players for that style of play and they have in the past with players like Greening, Bitz and Nash.  It's difficult to get high quality and quantity commitments every year, because of playing time.  Established players get more playing time - this could be why Yale has only 4 freshman on their roster this year - and only 2 have seen significant ice.  

Allain's system requires players to develop and grow into good college hockey players to maintain the speed and intensity required to execute the stretch plays - which is why 10 of the top 13 scorers (those with 10+ points) on Yale are juniors and seniors.  Leading scorer and sophomore Andrew Miller is the notable exception.

[ebilmes]

Just watched that clip of "The Shift" for the first time in a while.

Notice how much the Cornell players were hustling to pucks along the boards. Last night, especially in the defensive end, this kind of effort was not present. Some times, all it would have taken was one D-man hustling to a puck, then two sharp passes, and we'd be back in the neutral zone. Instead, it was Yale dancing around with the puck and making a nifty pass or two to set up a scoring opportunity.

Also, SOG at that point were Cornell 40, UNH 17. A different team.

[ajh258]

Yes, Cornell can recruit big talented players for that style of play and they have in the past with players like Greening, Bitz and Nash.  It's difficult to get high quality and quantity commitments every year, because of playing time.  Established players get more playing time - this could be why Yale has only 4 freshman on their roster this year - and only 2 have seen significant ice.

They are good, but my point was that they are not talented enough to use this system to reach success on a national level. Nash/Greening are few in between - we got lucky and everyone knows it. Allain doesn't need draft picks to reach where he is. I'm sure he will have a much easier time to recruit players this summer than we will.

Allain's system requires players to develop and grow into good college hockey players to maintain the speed and intensity required to execute the stretch plays - which is why 10 of the top 13 scorers (those with 10+ points) on Yale are juniors and seniors.  Leading scorer and sophomore Andrew Miller is the notable exception.

Seniors and juniors should score more, and the breakdown for their top 13 scorers looks good:

5 seniors
4 juniors
3 sophomores
1 freshman

Plus, isn't the point of college hockey to allow players develop and grow? Are we expecting our freshman to come in and become superstars?

[ajh258]

2006: Edge CU
2007: Edge CU
2008: Edge CU
2009: Pick 'em. Depends on what you measure success by.
2010: Pick 'em.
2011: Edge Yale.

Cornell has finished no worse than 5th. Has a 2-3 NCAA record and 1 ECAC title.
Yale has finished 1 through 11, has 2 ECAC titles, and a 1-2 NCAA record so far.

So what do we see here? A declining trend for us and a rising trend for them. That NCAA record could easily improve in the next few weeks, and finishing 10th and 11th in a coach's first two years is nothing to be ashamed about. With the exception of the UNH game, I don't think I've seen a strong dominant win against an out-of-conference opponent in a long time.

[css228]

Just watched that clip of "The Shift" for the first time in a while.

Notice how much the Cornell players were hustling to pucks along the boards. Last night, especially in the defensive end, this kind of effort was not present. Some times, all it would have taken was one D-man hustling to a puck, then two sharp passes, and we'd be back in the neutral zone. Instead, it was Yale dancing around with the puck and making a nifty pass or two to set up a scoring opportunity.

Also, SOG at that point were Cornell 40, UNH 17. A different team.

My point is we can have that kinda of talent coming in the next few years and be back to national relevance fast. Hudon, Ryan and Dias, coupled with guys like Iles, Brisson, D'Agostino and Gotovets who are already here can really make a difference towards being that type of team we had in '03 again

[Towerroad]

Just watched that clip of "The Shift" for the first time in a while.

Notice how much the Cornell players were hustling to pucks along the boards. Last night, especially in the defensive end, this kind of effort was not present. Some times, all it would have taken was one D-man hustling to a puck, then two sharp passes, and we'd be back in the neutral zone. Instead, it was Yale dancing around with the puck and making a nifty pass or two to set up a scoring opportunity.

Also, SOG at that point were Cornell 40, UNH 17. A different team.

"The Shift" was 3 min of amazing hockey if you are a Cornell fan but it might look different if you were the UNH coach, more like a complete defensive break down. I don't think we should talk about the UNH game out of context. That context includes:

1. This was UNH's first game in over 3 weeks. Cornell had played 2 games less than a week earlier. It may be possible that "rink rust" and turkey were a factor.
2. Within a year we met UNH 2 more times and they pretty much had their way with us beating us 2-6 and 4-7.

So, while enjoyable, I don't think pointing to the best 3 min of hockey we played in 2 years and saying "See, the system works." is credible, the other team has something to say about that. In short, this has not been a reproducible result. If it were we would not be having this discussion.

[scoop85]

Just watched that clip of "The Shift" for the first time in a while.

Notice how much the Cornell players were hustling to pucks along the boards. Last night, especially in the defensive end, this kind of effort was not present. Some times, all it would have taken was one D-man hustling to a puck, then two sharp passes, and we'd be back in the neutral zone. Instead, it was Yale dancing around with the puck and making a nifty pass or two to set up a scoring opportunity.

Also, SOG at that point were Cornell 40, UNH 17. A different team.

Yeah, but we're only one year removed from that team, which seems to undercut the claims being made on this thread that we're in an absolute state of decline.  That being said, it is perplexing that we've been so uncompetitive against Yale.  Many teams that we beat this year (RPI, St. Lawrence, even Colgate) managed to either beat Yale or at least play them competitively.  Other than the game at Lynah where we almost tied it up in the 3rd period, we haven't really been in a game with them of late.  Clearly their system appears to completely leave us in the dark.

[Rosey]

Yeah, but we're only one year removed from that team, which seems to undercut the claims being made on this thread that we're in an absolute state of decline.

Three minutes of hockey against a team that looked like it was playing with a hangover¹ is what engineers laughingly refer to as "proof by example". How dominant was that team last year? They were good, but hardly 2003 level... and they still couldn't beat Yale, nor could they muster the effort to get out of the first round of the NCAAs.

That being said, it is perplexing that we've been so uncompetitive against Yale.  Many teams that we beat this year (RPI, St. Lawrence, even Colgate) managed to either beat Yale or at least play them competitively.  Other than the game at Lynah where we almost tied it up in the 3rd period, we haven't really been in a game with them of late.  Clearly their system appears to completely leave us in the dark.

I recall comments from Allain that lead me to think his system was designed specifically to beat Cornell. If I find a reference to them, I will post them here.


¹Really, what Scali did was amusing, but I find it hard to believe opponents would regularly let that happen: that sort of thing makes one prime target for a hit)

[Trotsky]

As I read recently we didnt get a lot of the players we wanted in this class.

Where did you read that?  I'm not challenging you, I'm curious.  The only thing I have read indicating we didn't get certain players was that a couple guys appear to have used us as a bargaining chip to get Major Junior deals.

[Trotsky]

The systems put in place by the coaches and the player talent is intricately linked and the Cornell/Yale coaching staffs put in place systems that suit their teams.

Cornell does not play a tape-to-tape transition game through the neutral zone.  Cornell uses tips and quick dump-ins through the neutral zone to get the puck deep below the goal line, executes puck retrieval (aka forechecking) and attempts to generate offense from the offensive zone cycle.  

Yale plays a 2 out of the zone break-out transition game through the neutral zone that relies on the defense making tape-to-tape passes to the stretch forwards or the third forward through the neutral zone.  This is the primary reason Yale "looks so fast."  Their forwards essentially start first - transitioning to offense earlier.  Yale generates offense from quick zone-entry shots.  Also, Dartmouth's top line plays this system.

Cornell could not play Yale's system and Yale could not play Cornell's system.  Yale is successful this year, because they have enough skill to execute the stretch plays (especially the third forward who is usually out-numbered 2-to-1 in the neutral zone) without leaving themselves susceptible to the counter-attack (see 9-7 loss to BC in NCAA quarterfinals last year).  

Yale's system of play requires a much higher level of puck control and smart decision making on the part of the players.  Cornell's system removes the decision making from the players and requires a physical presence to generate offense from the corners.  

Schafer attempted to counter the stretch system in two ways.  First, a Cornell forward should be on one of the stretch forwards creating a 1-on-2 overload with the Cornell defender and forward against one of the stretch forwards.  Second, a Cornell forward should be high-side on the third forward.  This is designed to slow the transition through the neutral zone and force turnovers or force the stretch offense team to dump and chase.  It worked against Dartmouth, it didn't against Yale.  Why?  Yale is more talented and could execute.  This Yale team is the culmination of events starting with Keith Allain's hire in 2006 and his ability to recruit players that fit this stretch system.

The great thing about eLynah is if we wait long enough even a thread this inane will turn up one intelligent post.  Thank you.

[kaelistus]

You guys are really way too picky I feel.

Look, It's unreasonable to expect excellence every year. This was a down year and everyone knew it - yet we still managed to come in 4th and play in the finals. Over Schafer's career, I'll take Cornell's record over anyone in the ECAC. He's allowed a few years of weak play (If that's what you can call this year) before I start calling for his head.

As far as Yale goes, I only have two comments: 1) They don't have the same restrictions as Cornell. Their financial aid is second only to Princeton. That, without question, hurts us. 2) I'd like to see them stay at the top for more than the two years that they've been there before I declare them a perennial power. Ditto with Union.

[Trotsky]

I'd like to see them stay at the top for more than the two years that they've been there before I declare them a perennial power. Ditto with Union.

To be fair, Yale has been great for three years.  However, they have a problem:

Code Select Expand



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yale                                |  Overall - 34 GP  (27- 6- 1  .809)  | Conf Only - 22 GP  (17- 4- 1  .795) |      Career    
------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|----------------
## Player                    POS YR | GP   G   A PTS PEN/MIN  PP SH GW GT | GP   G   A PTS PEN/MIN  PP SH GW GT |  GP   G   A PTS
17 Andrew Miller               F SO | 34  12  33  45   9/ 18   4  2  4  0 | 22   9  18  27   6/ 12   4  2  2  0 |  68  17  62  79
 9 Brian O'Neill               F JR | 34  18  26  44  11/ 22   9  0  3  0 | 22  12  13  25   5/ 10   6  0  2  0 | 101  46  69 115
[color=#FF0000][b]14 Broc Little                 F SR | 34  18  22  40   9/ 26   7  1  2  0 | 22   8   9  17   4/  8   3  0  2  0 | 129  71  68 139
19 Denny Kearney               F SR | 34  15  24  39  10/ 20   3  1  1  0 | 22   6   8  14   6/ 12   2  1  0  0 | 136  44  85 129
24 Chris Cahill                F SR | 33  15  19  34  20/ 62   5  1  4  0 | 21   9  14  23  10/ 23   3  1  2  0 | 124  31  44  75[/b][/color]
18 Kenny Agostino (PIT)        F FR | 29  11  14  25  15/ 30   4  0  1  0 | 20   7   9  16   7/ 14   3  0  1  0 |  29  11  14  25
 [color=#FF0000][b]2 Jimmy Martin                D SR | 34   7  15  22  16/ 32   4  0  1  0 | 22   3   7  10  12/ 24   1  0  1  0 | 136  11  46  57[/b][/color]
10 Kevin Limbert               F JR | 34  10  10  20   8/ 16   2  1  2  0 | 22   3   5   8   5/ 10   0  1  1  0 | 100  20  23  43
59 Chad Ziegler                F JR | 34   7   7  14   6/ 12   3  0  2  0 | 22   4   5   9   6/ 12   2  0  1  0 |  78  10  11  21
23 Kevin Peel                  D JR | 34   4  10  14  10/ 20   2  0  0  0 | 22   2   7   9   5/ 10   1  0  0  0 |  90  11  26  37
 [color=#FF0000][b]7 Mike Matczak                D SR | 34   2  12  14   7/ 22   0  0  1  0 | 22   1   9  10   3/ 14   0  0  1  0 | 112   8  31  39[/b][/color]
28 Antoine Laganiere           F SO | 23   5   8  13   5/ 10   0  0  1  0 | 16   3   6   9   3/  6   0  0  1  0 |  48  12  11  23
[color=#FF0000][b]22 Brendan Mason               F SR | 30   4   9  13  11/ 30   1  0  1  0 | 21   4   6  10   9/ 26   1  0  1  0 | 127  19  24  43[/b][/color]
11 Charles Brockett            F JR | 29   3   6   9  15/ 38   0  1  0  0 | 18   2   4   6   6/ 12   0  1  0  0 |  90   3  13  16
21 Colin Dueck                 D SO | 33   1   8   9  13/ 26   0  0  0  0 | 21   0   6   6   9/ 18   0  0  0  0 |  51   1   9  10
20 Jesse Root                  F FR | 25   2   6   8   7/ 14   0  0  0  0 | 17   2   3   5   5/ 10   0  0  0  0 |  25   2   6   8
 8 Josh Balch                  F SO | 11   3   4   7   1/  2   0  0  2  0 |  7   2   2   4   1/  2   0  0  1  0 |  33   5   8  13
 5 Nick Jaskowiak              D JR | 32   1   5   6  13/ 37   0  0  0  0 | 21   1   3   4  11/ 33   0  0  0  0 |  82   3  13  16
[color=#FF0000][b][b]44 Jeff Anderson               F SR | 11   3   2   5   7/ 22   2  0  0  0 |  6   3   0   3   6/ 20   2  0  0  0 | 106  14  15  29[/b][/b][/color]
15 Clinton Bourbonais          F FR | 13   4   0   4   4/  8   0  0  2  0 |  6   2   0   2   1/  2   0  0  1  0 |  13   4   0   4
[color=#FF0000][b]12 Ken Trentowski              D SR | 32   1   3   4   8/ 16   0  0  0  0 | 22   1   2   3   6/ 12   0  0  0  0 |  91   2  13  15[/color]
 [color=#FF0000]1 Ryan Rondeau                G SR | 32   0   2   2           0  0  0  0 | 22   0   1   1           0  0  0  0 |  46   0   2   2[/b][/color]
 4 Gus Young (COA)             D FR |  5   0   1   1   2/  4   0  0  0  0 |  2   0   0   0   1/  2   0  0  0  0 |   5   0   1   1


It's not just quantity but quality.  That is arguably the best graduating class in the ECAC in the last 20 years.

Vaya con Dios.

Union OTOH looks like they are just at the start of their run.

[css228]

As I read recently we didnt get a lot of the players we wanted in this class.

Where did you read that?  I'm not challenging you, I'm curious.  The only thing I have read indicating we didn't get certain players was that a couple guys appear to have used us as a bargaining chip to get Major Junior deals.

A quote from the CHN article on the Devin twins. I think Schafer said this, "I remember the day we committed to him, we had just had a bunch of other guys say they wanted to come here and then went back on their commitment". That kind of sounds to me as if there were players that they wanted that they didn't get.
Devins
*Actually it looks like we're speaking about the same thing, that said doesn't mean that wouldn't screw up your recruiting*