NCAA Tournament

[WillR]

Fantastic, I am guessing this is a bit of a surprise to the BC fans.  Go U.

[ursusminor]

Whereas, while we're on this line of inquiry, RPI loses practically nobody.  Casey continues to rebuild at Clarkson. Perhaps Harvard finally fires Teddy?

I have to think that next year is the year that the traditional powers of the ECAC (RPI, SLU, Clarkson, Harvard, and, well, us) reassert themselves.

RPI is losing Nick Bailen whom the powerplay was centered around. The powerplay will need to be reconstructed. He will be replaced on the roster by Parker Reno who was a finalist for Minnesota's Mr. Hockey award and is expected to be drafted this year, but he is not the offensive force (and often defensive liability) that Bailen has been. Besides for him, RPI is indeed not losing much. We lost most of the Class of '13 when Jerry D'Amigo and Brandon Pirri left three years ago. We might have been concerned about the loss also of Marty O'Grady, had he not been injured most of the year.

Barring defections to the pros, We aren't going to be losing much a year from now either.

It's too bad that RPI doesn't do cheers like Cornell does of "Good Goalie, Bad Goalie" and the like. I'd love to see "Parker Reno, Janet Reno" when playing Cornell. ::cheer::

[profudge]

Thank you.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

An intersting observation:  During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs.  My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!  ::wank::

[Jim Hyla]

An intersting observation:  During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs.  My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!  ::wank::

Maybe you wouldn't if you were the incorrect.

Now we've done it, this thread has been permanently damaged.::deadhorse::

[Towerroad]

An intersting observation:  During the entire Yale - NoDak game they never called Yale the Bulldogs.  My guess is the couldn't call NoDak the Sioux, so they didn't call Yale by their nickname either, in case somebody might question why only one had a nickname.

God, I hate polical correctness!  ::wank::

I don't think we should be using words like hate. It is far too offesive to the tender souls which are it's object. I think what you really meant was "I have some mild ambivilence about political correctness but I understand that my ambivilence might cause the oppression of someone, so I will not express it in any terms that could be percieved as negative."

[billhoward]

Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.  It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.  

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now.  I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program.  They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

We want Yale, Union and Quinnipiac to keep winning until one of them poses for the winner's photo in two weeks. A competitive league breeds respect and draws better players. Some will go to the other schools. Enough will go to Cornell. We (Cornell and the ECAC) have been down far too long on the national scene where down means "didn't win the NCAA title." (OK, feel free to argue about how having 2 of 4 in the FF makes us look good. It's a start.)

Six years is enough to know if you've got a good program, four years is enough to have a dynasty if they coincide with your four years at Cornell, and you need a decade to tell if the program and coach are going to be legendary. Odds are if you have a coach who's on his way to being a legend, he'll get poached in less then 10 by Hopkins, Penn State, BC or someone with an offer of more dollars.

The flip side is it takes about that long for the school to know if your program is in trouble. (Fans will say they know after back to back losses.) So players and fans suffer for too long.

[Jim Hyla]

Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.  It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.  

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now.  I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program.  They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

We want Yale, Union and Quinnipiac to keep winning until one of them poses for the winner's photo in two weeks. A competitive league breeds respect and draws better players. Some will go to the other schools. Enough will go to Cornell. We (Cornell and the ECAC) have been down far too long on the national scene where down means "didn't win the NCAA title." (OK, feel free to argue about how having 2 of 4 in the FF makes us look good. It's a start.)

Six years is enough to know if you've got a good program, four years is enough to have a dynasty if they coincide with your four years at Cornell, and you need a decade to tell if the program and coach are going to be legendary. Odds are if you have a coach who's on his way to being a legend, he'll get poached in less then 10 by Hopkins, Penn State, BC or someone with an offer of more dollars.

The flip side is it takes about that long for the school to know if your program is in trouble. (Fans will say they know after back to back losses.) So players and fans suffer for too long.

As my brain was working overnight, it came up with what might be the strongest reason, at least for next season, to want all ECAC teams to do well. Maybe, just maybe, the players and coaches will see what can be done and be encouraged to start a strong off-season program.

[Rosey]

Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.

A rising tide lifts all boats. I'm sick and tired of Cornell playing down to an also-ran league. And guess what? That isn't the case right now, and hopefully the ECAC can keep it up and continue to embarrass Hockey Least.

Suck it, BC. ::wank::

[RichH]

So right you are. That's why right now I'm ecstatic. Assuming U can hold on, we'll have a Frozen Four with 2 ECAC teams, 1 HE, and 1 WCHA or CCHA. How the hell can't you be happy with that. Go to the FF, wear your jersey with pride. See what those WCHA fans say now. Yes, it may only be one year, but as Keith said, it can be head a long distance when you go to recruit.

I'm considering making a t-shirt with a giant "Z" on it to wear around Pittsburgh.

Yesterday was a historic day for us long-time ECAC fans...I think everybody gets this.  And while it's true that the league could get wiped in the semis, the teams remaining aren't distasteful at all.  In the last year of the current conference layout, all the SuperPowers are dead. No BC, BU, Maine, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, North Dakota, Denver, Wisconsin. They're all gone.  

[Edit] Some research: There has been two previous FF without at least one of: BU, BC, Mich, NoDak, or Minn.  1969 and 1970.

I'm going to enjoy the hell out of this Frozen Four.

[Trotsky]

Maybe, just maybe, the players and coaches will see what can be done and be encouraged to start a strong off-season program.

I've wondered whether there might be a little bit of a "5 minute mile" mental barrier.  From the mid-80s through mid-90s the ECAC Championship was like that for Cornell: we tried to get in position in the final four and hoped that everything would break exactly right (like 1986).

When Schafer came along and won it in his first two years, that completely demythologized the ECACs.  From 2 finals in the prior 14 years we went to 10 in the next 16.  It was still great to win, but it was no longer supernatural.

Now something similar may be happening with the ECAC in the NCAAs.  In the 15 years prior to 2012 the ECAC sent just 2 teams to the Frozen Four: SLU in 2000 and Cornell in 2003.  Now we will have sent 3 teams in 2 seasons.  We still regard actually winning the national title as an occult act, but maybe that mental barrier will fall as well.

[Trotsky]

Suck it, BC. ::wank::

Every time a BC fan cries an angel gets his wings.

[ScrewBU]

Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.  It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.  

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now.  I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program.  They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

A Yale/Union or Yale/Quinnipiac final is the best proof there could be that 1) Schafer is done, his time has passed 2) he and the rest of the staff are being out-coached by many other teams in league, and 3) a team can be razed and rebooted in less time than it takes to try and retool a system THAT NO LONGER WORKS.

You can talk about how many times Schafer has led us into the NCAAs, but he has only led us into the Frozen Four ONCE, and NEVER into the title game.  Reframed another way: there are now three ECAC teams (two after tomorrow) that will have gone as far as we ever have in his too-long tenure.  The two remaining ECAC teams will have a pretty good shot at doing what coach Schafer has NEVER done, get into a title game.

You people have gone past blind allegiance into delusion, you can say whatever you want but if you look objectively at the situation you will see how far this program has fallen.  

And let me repeat again, because it's really important, these programs have been built from the ground up while Cornell sat by and did NOTHING, even though the signs were there.  Congratulations, we're Blackberry (or Palm.)  You call every negative poster a  troll, and that's fine, but it's the program that pays the price, we are now a punchline---"Look at all these ECAC teams, what happened to Cornell?"  Indeed.

[Jim Hyla]

Not sure why people here want Yale to keep winning.  It doesn't actually do Cornell any bit of good because the rankings are computerized, and I don't want Cornell to no longer be the team that has gotten the farthest in the NCAA tourney in recent memory.  

Nonetheless, it's official: Yale is better than Cornell at hockey right now.  I don't mean this current team, I mean the entire current program.  They've now been doing this for an extended period of time, despite losing players to graduation, with a great system that Cornell can't ever beat.

A Yale/Union or Yale/Quinnipiac final is the best proof there could be that 1) Schafer is done, his time has passed 2) he and the rest of the staff are being out-coached by many other teams in league, and 3) a team can be razed and rebooted in less time than it takes to try and retool a system THAT NO LONGER WORKS.

You can talk about how many times Schafer has led us into the NCAAs, but he has only led us into the Frozen Four ONCE, and NEVER into the title game.  Reframed another way: there are now three ECAC teams (two after tomorrow) that will have gone as far as we ever have in his too-long tenure.  The two remaining ECAC teams will have a pretty good shot at doing what coach Schafer has NEVER done, get into a title game.

You people have gone past blind allegiance into delusion, you can say whatever you want but if you look objectively at the situation you will see how far this program has fallen.  

And let me repeat again, because it's really important, these programs have been built from the ground up while Cornell sat by and did NOTHING, even though the signs were there.  Congratulations, we're Blackberry (or Palm.)  You call every negative poster a  troll, and that's fine, but it's the program that pays the price, we are now a punchline---"Look at all these ECAC teams, what happened to Cornell?"  Indeed.

Maybe I shouldn't even answer, but here goes. Yale and Union have built good programs, yes. The jury is still out on Q. They really haven't done much this year, unless you say winning the regular season and then folding would be great. If they get to FF, OK. But this is just 1 year and they may fold next year after losing a lot of talent.

I've said that Yale and U are our equals or more right now. But who else? So far of the 3 teams you mention, they have been led to the FF a total of 3 times, or ave 1 per team. That's hardly soooo much better. And the rest of the league?

I know you'll never be convinced that there isn't a pot of gold (i.e. coach) right out there at the end of your rainbow, but until you can show me what would be better (meaning who) and that it's feasible, then I'm not going to go running after that rainbow.

[Trotsky]

Cornell alumnus Darren Eliot doing the color for the St. Cloud - Miami game.

To show how different college hockey used to be, Eliot was First Team All-American in 1983 with a GAA of 3.74 and a save percentage of .892.