2012-13 Polls Men & Women

[Ben]

The people near me in section M at Lynah are starting to make noises that a new coach should be brought in. I don't really have a strong feeling either way, but my question to them when considering a coaching change is: "Who can Cornell get that would do a better job?"

Seriously, who can CU lure in that would deal with the restrictions mentioned, accept the pay that would be offered (I assume that the compensation would be much less the say BU, Michigan, etc.) and can be reasonably expected do a better job? I can't think of anyone off the top of my head that I think would be willing to accept the job and that I would prefer to be the coach.

This is why I'm in the "Schafer, what happened? Figure it out" camp and not the "Schafer out" camp.

[KenP]

We are not "tournament fodder."  During Schafer's tenure we are 8-9 in the NCAAs.  The rest of the current conference membership is 7-27 over that span.

Let me be clear what I mean by Tournament Fodder. Tournament fodder is a team that when they make the tournament plays in the regionals and then goes home. That is us for better and worse. We are not a program that makes the Frozen Four 2 or 3 years out of 10.

By that definition half of every Frozen Four is taken up by "tournament fodder." I know it's a cliche, but once you get to the NCAA, "anything can happen." That time of year, luck matters more.  Those "bounces of the puck" happen more. Just about all the players/teams are playing at the top of their game and emptying the tank. You regularly see an RIT or Bemidji or Ferris slip in.  2003 is considered to be matter-of-factly "of course we made it that year," but I bet BC fans see 2003 differently. One weird bounce in either OT, and that's just another regional failure. I bet if you watched the '05 and '06 OTs, you would see a handful of times it could have gone the other way.

You make it sound like all we have is a regional final "ceiling" because that's all the coaching can give us. Since Schafer took the reins, Cornell has made seven NCAA regional finals. In six of them, the score has been tied in the 3rd period. Additionally, they've played in six overtime periods with a trip to the FF on the line, but the hypothesis is that it's a coaching problem?  Think about it...a Schafer team advances to the regional final in 40% of his seasons here. I would bet every team in the country would sign up for that opportunity from this day forward.  All I  can ask of a coach is give a team the opportunity to go that deep, then it's up to the players to come through.

Look, my freshman year, we didn't even make the conference playoffs (one of three teams that didn't). Most of my college career, I dreamed about how amazing it would be just to MAKE the NCAAs.  This coach has done that over half the time.  How many coaches can say that?

I have a particular aversion to the "anything can happen", "bounce of the puck" argument. Sure there is a random component and there is a reason why the games are played. The random component works in our favor just as much as it works against us. I do not believe in bad luck or good luck. Every bad bounce for us is a good bounce for our opponent and vice versa.

The reason I did the analysis was to try and understand where our program stands in the recent past. I come to the following conclusions:

1. The definition of a successful Cornell season is making it to the regional championship game.

2. Our program in recent years is reasonably ranked at about #15 nationally. We are not among college hockey's elites.

3. The only other comparable team that plays under the same constraint we do is Yale and they have the same 5 yr NCAA record we do.

4. The Coach may in fact be doing as well as can be reasonably be expected given the constraints (Academic, Scholarship, Number of Games, League) that he operates under. Certainly there is no example of any other coach in the Ivy's in recent time that has produced more.

This years team performance to date is well off where our long term expectations should be. Since the Coach recruits the players, trains the players, sets the roster and lines, determines the style of play, and is paid to produce results he should be held accountable for this deviation from our longer term performance.

Like everyone on this page I hope the coach rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.

I really like the points you've raised throughout this thread.  Most years, and this one in particular, the rhetoric at the start of the year is "Watch out NCAA.  We had an amazing recruiting class, our key players are back, and THIS is the year we will make a big splash."  And things go well at first.  And then the wheels fall off and we're forced to admit to our team's continued status as non-elite.

Do we have a good team?  Sure!  And I won't be surprised if we make it to the ECAC Semis or maybe the finals, or gods-be-willing even further.  Are they playing up to and beyond their potential, showing the excitement, commitment and passion required of a Top5 or Top10 team?  Absolutely not.  That's what I saw when Douglas anchored our D and we rivaled Minnesota, Wisconsin, BC, UNH etc, and is what's been missing in Ithaca the past xx years.

[billhoward]

Like everyone on this page I hope the coach [Schafer] rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.

Tough crowd.

I went to TBRW and noticed the absence of a needed but missing set of data: number of elf.elynah posts plotted against points recorded the past 1, 2, or 3 weekends. There are way more posts and the knives come out when we're playing less than .667 hockey. Otherwise, the site is pretty complete.

[Trotsky]

Like everyone on this page I hope the coach [Schafer] rights the ship. If not, I for one would not remove him this year. His long term record deserves the benefit of the doubt. Two years of this type of performance, however, would be a different story.

Tough crowd.

I went to TBRW and noticed the absence of a needed but missing set of data: number of elf.elynah posts plotted against points recorded the past 1, 2, or 3 weekends. There are way more posts and the knives come out when we're playing less than .667 hockey. Otherwise, the site is pretty complete.

An action passed is an action completed.

[Jim Hyla]

We are below the TUC line and falling.::help::

[billhoward]

Cornell has dropped out of even the Also Receiving Votes ranks this week. A long fall from the first post of the thread that has us No. 6 just behind the Wolverines. Quinnipiac, No. 20 then, is a solid No. 2 this week with 20 of the 50 first place votes.

The Cornell women are No. 4 in USCHO, No. 5 in coaches/USA Today.

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/  USCHO 2/4/13

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/national-polls/  Coaches

[Chris '03]

We are below the TUC line and falling.::help::

In the "game of inches" department, if you flip one DU game and the Yale game to wins, Cornell would be 17th in PW....

[Jim Hyla]

For what it's worth I'll continue to post them.

Code Select Expand


   

USCHO.com Division I Men's Poll
February 04, 2013
Team     (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (30) 18- 4-4 978 1
2 Quinnipiac (20) 19- 3-4 967 2
3 Miami        17- 6-5 876 4
4 New Hampshire 16- 7-2 804 3
5 Boston College 15- 7-2 798 5
6 Western Michigan 17- 6-5 770 6
7 North Dakota 14- 8-6 659 7
8 St. Cloud State 17-10-1 603 12
9 Denver        15- 8-4 596 10
10 Yale        13- 6-3 587 8
11 Minnesota State 16- 9-3 421 15
11 Notre Dame 16-11-1 421 9
13 Boston University 13-10-1 412 11
14 Nebraska-Omaha 16-10-2 352 14
15 Niagara        17- 4-5 328 17
16 Massachusetts-Lowell 14- 9-2 280 13
17 Dartmouth 11- 8-3 190 16
18 Union        13- 8-5 168 18
19 Wisconsin 11- 9-6 97 19
20 Merrimack 12-10-5 61 NR
Others receiving votes: Alaska 46, Colgate 46, Ferris State 17,
Providence 13, Ohio State 4, St. Lawrence 2, Bowling Green 1, Holy Cross 1, Northern Michigan 1.


Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/#ixzz2JyoS3xIe



Code Select Expand


USA Men's Poll - Week 17: February 4, 2013
  Team Points (First) Record Last Poll
1  Minnesota  494 (21)     18-4-4  1
2  Quinnipiac  488 (13)     19-3-4  2
3  Miami  427          17-6-5  3
4  Boston College 400          15-7-2  5
5  New Hampshire  375          16-7-2  4
6  Western Mich   337          17-6-5  6
7  North Dakota  274          14-8-6  8
8  Denver  240          15-8-4 10
9  Yale          238          13-6-3  7
10 St. Cloud St   233          17-10-1 13
11 Boston Univer  149          13-10-1 9
12 Notre Dame  104          16-11-1 11
13 Minnesota St    98          16-9-3  15
14 Niagara   85          17-4-5  NR
15 Nebraska-Omaha  63          16-10-2 14

Others receiving votes: UMass-Lowell, 39; Union College, 12;
University of Alaska, 7; Dartmouth College, 7;
Ferris State University, 6; Merrimack College, 3; Ohio State University, 1.

 

Code Select Expand


Rk Team       PCWs W-L-T Win % Rk RPI Rk
1 Quinnipiac 30 19-3-4 .808 1 .5846 1
2 Minnesota 29 18-4-4 .769 2 .5693 2
3 Miami        27 17-6-5 .696 4t .5623 3
4 Boston College 27 15-7-2 .667 7 .5525 5
5 New Hampshire 26 16-7-2 .680 6 .5580 4
6 Western Mich 25 17-6-5 .696 4t .5491 7
7 Yale        23 13-6-3 .659 8 .5497 6
8 St. Cloud State 22 17-10-1 .625 10t .5443 8
9 Niagara        21 17-4-5 .750 3 .5427 9
10 North Dakota 21 14-8-6 .607 12t .5393 11
11 Denver        18 15-8-4 .630 9 .5420 10
12 Minnesota State 17 16-9-3 .625 10t .5349 12
13 Boston Univer 17 13-11-1 .540 22 .5251 18
14 Alaska-Fairbanks17 12-10-4 .538 23t .5247 19
15 Dartmouth 16 11-8-3 .568 20 .5302 13
16 Notre Dame 16 16-11-1 .589 17 .5299 14
17 Colgate        15 13-9-4 .577 18t .5215 20
18 Mass.-Lowell 14 14-9-2 .600 14t .5294 15
19 Union        13 13-8-5 .596 16 .5266 17
20 Northern Mich 13 11-12-4 .481 31 .5128 23
21 Nebraska-Omaha 11 16-10-2 .607 12t .5289 16
22 Wisconsin 9 11-9-6 .538 23t .5167 21
23 Merrimack 8 12-10-5 .537 26 .5139 22
24 Ferris State 8 13-11-4 .536 27 .5126 24
25 Ohio State 6 11-11-6 .500 29t .5122 25
26 Providence 5 10-10-5 .500 29t .5081 26
27 Robert Morris 5 14-9-2 .600 14t .5080 27
28 St. Lawrence 3 12-10-4 .538 23t .5052 28
29 Rensselaer 2 10-11-5 .481 32t .5045 29
30 Holy Cross 1 14-10-2 .577 18t .5024 30
31 Massachusetts 0 10-12-2 .458 36 .5014 31
T U C   L i n e
Brown         8-9-5 .477 34 .4950 32
At least the Women can make us happy.
Yeah, OK, no double entendre.

Code Select Expand


   

USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll
February 04, 2013
Team      (First) Record Points Last Poll
1 Minnesota (15) 28- 0-0 150 1
2 Boston College 20- 4-2 132 2
3 Boston University 18- 3-3 109 4
4 Cornell        19- 4-0 104 5
5 Harvard        17- 2-2 98 3
6 Clarkson 21- 7-0 67 6
7 Mercyhurst 21- 5-1 60 7
8 Wisconsin 15- 9-2 46 8
9 North Dakota 18-10-0 39 9
10 Minnesota-Duluth 13-10-3 14 10
Others receiving votes: Northeastern 3, St. Lawrence 2, Providence 1.

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/#ixzz2JysU8inU



Code Select Expand


Week 17: Women's College Hockey Poll

USA Women's Poll - Week 17: Feb. 5, 2013
      Team   Points (First) Record Last Poll
1  Minnesota      190 (19)  28-0-0   1
2  Boston College 170       20-4-2   2
3  Boston Univer  139       18-3-3   3
4  Cornell  130       19-4-0   5
5  Harvard  125       17-2-2   4
6  Clarkson   91       21-7-0   6
7  Mercyhurst   80       21-5-1   7
8  North Dakota   52       18-10-0  9
9  Wisconsin   43       15-9-2   8
10 Minn Duluth   14       13-10-3 10

Others receiving votes: St. Lawrence University, 7;
Northeastern University, 3; Providence College, 1.


Code Select Expand


Women's Division I PairWise Rankings

Rank Team        PWR W-L-T Win % Win % Rank RPI RPI Rank vs. TUC TUC %
1 Minnesota 11 28-0-0 1.000 1 .7391* 1 14-0-0 1.000
2 Boston College 10 20-4-2 .8077 6 .6322* 2 9-3-1 .7308
3 Boston Univer    9 18-3-3 .8125 5 .6296* 4 6-2-3 .6818
4 Cornell         8 19-4-0 .8261 4 .6308* 3 7-4-0 .6364
5 Harvard         7 17-2-2 .8571 3 .6215* 5 3-2-0 .6000
6 Clarkson 6 21-7-0 .7500 8 .5936* 6 7-6-0 .5385
7 Mercyhurst 5 21-5-1 .7963 7 .5835* 7 2-3-0 .4000
8 North Dakota 4 18-10-0 .6429 9 .5653* 8 4-8-0 .3333
9 Wisconsin 3 15-9-2 .6154 10 .5636* 9 3-7-0 .3000
10 Minnesota-Duluth 2 13-10-3 .5577 17 .5539 10 3-7-2 .3333
11 St. Lawrence 1 15-11-2 .5714 16 .5435 11 2-10-0 .1667
12 Northeastern 0 14-10-2 .5769 15 .5370 12 1-9-0 .1000

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/#ixzz2JysyDCUG



[Jim Hyla]

Q is first in USCHO poll. I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.

[billhoward]

Q is first in USCHO poll. I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.

Be nice if an ECAC team brought glory to the ECAC in the NCAAs (say, by winning it). Yale and Union had their chances. Cornell last year.

[marty]

Q is first in USCHO poll. I'll post them later. Beating us is what did it.

Be nice if an ECAC team brought glory to the ECAC in the NCAAs (say, by winning it). Yale and Union had their chances. Cornell last year.

Be even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.

[Trotsky]

Be even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.

These are the years that make the other ones so great.

[Rosey]

Be even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.

These are the years that make the other ones so great.

Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?

[Trotsky]

Be even nicer if I wake up tomorrow and this is all some crazy nightmare. Was hoping for that on Groundhog's day, too.

These are the years that make the other ones so great.

Greg, every time you post a link to your site, I end up seeing the same thing, the front page. I'm not using some exotic browser (Chrome) or configuration (OS X and Linux). It works with Firefox, but not with Chrome. Any ideas why?

The pages include the following javascript in the header that puts them back inside the top frame to ensure that the menubar is displayed.  Perhaps Chrome doesn't support it?  (I would think it would.)

Code Select Expand





...






[munchkin]

I'm also using Chrome and it goes to the Games Over/Under .500 page for me. I'm on Chrome on OSX 10.8 - not sure if that makes a difference compared to what Kyle's running.