Cu - 0 Yale - 6 final

[Jim Hyla]

Maybe the coaches need to polish up our trophies just to remind themselves what Cornell hockey is all about.  I seem to recall that tactic being used on the players a few years back.

Excuse me, we didn't go as far as we wanted, but we did get to the ECAC Finals the last 3 years, and won last year. I'm as concerned as anyone about moving ahead and competing with Yale and Union, but to imply that the coaches, 2 of whom are grads, don't understand what CU hockey is all about, well give me a break.

Remember Union hasn't won it yet, so they still have something to prove. Yale is doing well, and this should have been their year. Let's hope they can move on. And just so you know, I was also there in 70.

[Al DeFlorio]

Agree, Jim.  Having been there in 1970 is no excuse for being a whiner.

[ajh258]

With all due respect, when's the last time BC won an NCAA championship? What about BU?

I don't appreciate snarky comments either if they are not productive. However, if we don't have national championship aspirations, the men's hockey team can move their stuff into the football team's locker room and we'll call it a day.

[Wastherein70]

It's easy for people to get complacent after they've been doing the same job for a long time.  Reminding oneself periodically about history and tradition is never a bad thing.  And making that suggestion is hardly whining.

[CAS]

We won the ECAC last year and were a #2 seed in the NCAA's.  We have a tremendous recruiting class coming in.  We will be back!  LGR!

[The Rancor]

This team, and others like it in recent years has only a few major flaws, that i can see.
First: passing. As Kyle pointed out, the lack of crisp tape to tape give and go passing is completely absent. Yale had it, we didn't.
Second: hesitation. You can't hesitate with the puck. you have to know what to do and do it in an instant- not second guess yourself into lost opportunities.
The 2003 team passed well and never hesitated- that's how they got as far as they did. Yeah, they had great goaltending, size and a core of role players, but so did the last 10 years of Cornell teams. Moving forward means 1000 hours of passing drills this summer.

[Facetimer]

I was not there in 1970, but am here in 2011.  Last night was an embarrassment to Cornell hockey ...

Whatever the reason - be it lack of motivation, bad passing (good observation, The Rancor), undisciplined hockey, or, as I've said all along, Coach Schafer's entire system that has proven incapable of returning to championship hockey, I wholeheartedly believe that Cornell is need of a changing of the guard.  I renew my campaign for a coaching change.

[Jim Hyla]

This team, and others like it in recent years has only a few major flaws, that i can see.
First: passing. As Kyle pointed out, the lack of crisp tape to tape give and go passing is completely absent. Yale had it, we didn't.
Second: hesitation. You can't hesitate with the puck. you have to know what to do and do it in an instant- not second guess yourself into lost opportunities.
The 2003 team passed well and never hesitated- that's how they got as far as they did. Yeah, they had great goaltending, size and a core of role players, but so did the last 10 years of Cornell teams. Moving forward means 1000 hours of passing drills this summer.

Thank you for some constructive comment. I totally agree with you, and it's so nice to see rather than the "Why aren't we national champs, get rid of the coach." lines.

This team was much different than those of the past. They definitely were a passing rather than clutch and grab. And I think you hit to correctly, their main fault was not keeping moving. Passes from a stationary man to another stationary man, will lead to turnovers. Our main breakout problem was when we sat behind the net, waiting. When you skate continuously with the puck, passes are much more successful.

But that takes a particular type of player and it takes practice with your teammates. You need to know their tendencies and everyone needs to know how they are supposed to react to a given circumstance. That way it almost becomes second nature, thereby being quick and accurate.

If the recruits pan out as we want, next year will be better, but we'll still be at least a year away from real success. Patience as a fan is the key. No one who watched the team throughout the season can really say this team played like the old ones. We are changing.

[scoop85]

Having attended last night's debacle, we can talk about systems, style of play, whatever.  Fact is Yale right now has far more talented players than we do.  Hard to know why, but it seems we're bringing in some higher caliber classes than in the past few years (based on their relative performances in their Junior leagues), so maybe we can close the talent gap.  Yale loses a lot this year, so we'll see.

While I would have liked to see Garman start last night, I understand while Iles got the nod.  He was shaky from the get-go, but in the end it mattered little.

As far as the whole AC thing goes, the rink itself is quite a bit nicer than the TUC.  But nothing else about the AC experience is an improvement over Albany, except that we were able to spend a few minutes watching the Ocean.  Attendance was pitiful, and while we had the best presence, it suffered in comparison to Albany.  Everything is more expensive in AC (except for the free parking at the Trump Plaza), and of course it is too far from the fan bases.  

As frustrating as it was to watch the game, I couldn't help but marvel at the way Yale plays.  If Yale can't make the Frozen Four this year, they may never do it.

[Facetimer]

Passing is a fundamental skill that can be improved with a little coaching.  Starting Iles was a coaching decision.  Lacking motivation is a coaching problem.  Jim, I'm disappointed in your comments.  I'd assume a booster like yourself would want what's best for the team.  If they can't even be coached to make a good pass - how are they ever gonna be a successful program?  Your blind support of Schafer is not constructive.


Oh, and last I checked, Yale was a member of the Ivy League.  How is it that they can be a far superior team than Cornell and a serious contender for a national title without being able to offer scholarships?  The answer is evident:  Mike Schafer is not their coach.

[Rosey]

Having attended last night's debacle, we can talk about systems, style of play, whatever.  Fact is Yale right now has far more talented players than we do.

This is completely beside the point. Even if it is true (which is not at all clear), the difference in talent is a small part of the problem. Harvard brings in scads of blue chippahs every year, and they still suck hairy donkey scrotum. The difference here is coaching and system: some of it you can forgive for Cornell being so young this year, but the things I pointed out earlier (which someone, I think Rancor, correctly phrased as a lack of tape-to-tape passing and too much hesitation) are a result of a failure in coaching, not a lack of talent. A good transition game is a learned skill, not an instinct.

Unlike Facetimer, I'm not calling for Coach Schafer's head, but I would like to know what he's planning to do about something even he recognizes as a problem given his comments about Yale's superior transition game.

[Towerroad]

Having attended last night's debacle, we can talk about systems, style of play, whatever.  Fact is Yale right now has far more talented players than we do.

This is completely beside the point. Even if it is true (which is not at all clear), the difference in talent is a small part of the problem. Harvard brings in scads of blue chippahs every year, and they still suck hairy donkey scrotum. The difference here is coaching and system: some of it you can forgive for Cornell being so young this year, but the things I pointed out earlier (which someone, I think Rancor, correctly phrased as a lack of tape-to-tape passing and too much hesitation) are a result of a failure in coaching, not a lack of talent. A good transition game is a learned skill, not an instinct.

Unlike Facetimer, I'm not calling for Coach Schafer's head, but I would like to know what he's planning to do about something even he recognizes as a problem given his comments about Yale's superior transition game.

Kyle

Please stop insulting donkeys.

Since Nov of 07 our record against Yale is 1-8-1 and we have been outscored 15-36. They are clearly a better team and have proven it on the ice. Even if they do recruit better players they do so under the same restrictions and constraints we (and Union) do. Who is responsible for recruiting?

I can live with next year being another "rebuilding" year but in a sport with a fundamental 4 year cycle you cannot have 3 rebuilding years in a row. For that matter, I am not sure what we were rebuilding from. The 9-10 team was good but not great as you pointed out they won the ECAC's because Union did the dirty work for us and it was pretty much one and done in the NCAA's

Like you I am think the coach deserves the benefit of the doubt but there is substantial doubt. There is a whole lot of difference between knowing what is broken (I think we all know that) and knowing what to do about it.

[Jim Hyla]

Passing is a fundamental skill that can be improved with a little coaching.  Starting Iles was a coaching decision.  Lacking motivation is a coaching problem.  Jim, I'm disappointed in your comments.  I'd assume a booster like yourself would want what's best for the team.  If they can't even be coached to make a good pass - how are they ever gonna be a successful program?  Your blind support of Schafer is not constructive.


Oh, and last I checked, Yale was a member of the Ivy League.  How is it that they can be a far superior team than Cornell and a serious contender for a national title without being able to offer scholarships?  The answer is evident:  Mike Schafer is not their coach.

and I don't? That's your problem, you think you know everything that's best, and the rest of us are wrong. However, your comments are mainly limited to fire Schafer. It was asked of you before, but who is available, and why is it that the rest of the ECAC isn't out getting them. Look, there is Yale and Union that we are having trouble with, as is most of the rest of the league. Compared to the rest of the league we're doing quite well. Ask a Harvard or Clarkson fan if they'd like our record.

That doesn't mean I don't want to do better, but I try to be objective. I try to talk about things that are happening, and what can happen, to make a better team. Just saying fire the coach doesn't make it with me, but then you already knew that.

[Jim Hyla]

Having attended last night's debacle, we can talk about systems, style of play, whatever.  Fact is Yale right now has far more talented players than we do.

This is completely beside the point. Even if it is true (which is not at all clear), the difference in talent is a small part of the problem. Harvard brings in scads of blue chippahs every year, and they still suck hairy donkey scrotum. The difference here is coaching and system: some of it you can forgive for Cornell being so young this year, but the things I pointed out earlier (which someone, I think Rancor, correctly phrased as a lack of tape-to-tape passing and too much hesitation) are a result of a failure in coaching, not a lack of talent. A good transition game is a learned skill, not an instinct.

Unlike Facetimer, I'm not calling for Coach Schafer's head, but I would like to know what he's planning to do about something even he recognizes as a problem given his comments about Yale's superior transition game.

Kyle

Please stop insulting donkeys.

Since Nov of 07 our record against Yale is 1-8-1 and we have been outscored 15-36. They are clearly a better team and have proven it on the ice. Even if they do recruit better players they do so under the same restrictions and constraints we (and Union) do. Who is responsible for recruiting?

I can live with next year being another "rebuilding" year but in a sport with a fundamental 4 year cycle you cannot have 3 rebuilding years in a row. For that matter, I am not sure what we were rebuilding from. The 9-10 team was good but not great as you pointed out they won the ECAC's because Union did the dirty work for us and it was pretty much one and done in the NCAA's

Like you I am think the coach deserves the benefit of the doubt but there is substantial doubt. There is a whole lot of difference between knowing what is broken (I think we all know that) and knowing what to do about it.

That's not been entirely true. I don't know what Union's policy is, but we have been seriously behind some other Ivys in regards to financial support. It has been such an important issue that the University took steps to try and correct it. I'm hoping that next years class may be a result of that. We'll see, but until now the playing field has not been even.

[dbilmes]

Our luck ran out Saturday. We got lucky the week before when Union collapsed against Colgate, shuffling the brackets so we got beatable Dartmouth Friday rather than unbeatable  (for Cornell this year) Union. With Colgate's reversion to norm Friday in its 4-0 loss to Yale, our fate was cast.
Indeed. I called it last year, for which everyone gave me shit, but I stand by that statement with last night's performance being something as close to a proof as you're going to get in sports: the only reason Cornell won the ECAC championship last year was that a lesser Union team did Cornell's dirty work for it and took Yale out of the tournament.

Just to set the record straight, Brown upset Yale in the quarterfinals last season. Union didn't play Yale in last year's ECAC playoffs.