What is your definition of a Successful Season

[Dafatone]

In retrospect, we had "home ice disadvantage" for the playoffs.  Winning 2 of 3 vs. Clarkson added 1.6 wins to our W/L record for RPI purposes and added 1.2 losses.  So that series didn't help our RPI.  Had we won 2 of 3 on the road, we would have added 2.4 wins and only .8 losses.  I suspect that would have been good enough to make the NCAA's.

OK, so under last year's selection formulas we make the tournament. And as per the above, in all likelihood had we played the Clarkson series in Potsdam with the same result, we also would have made the tournament. I know someone somewhere on eLynah said they absolutely did not want to know, but I do: had we played that canceled game against UMasss and won it, would we have made the tournament?

or if they had not eliminated the consolation game ....

I have to figure a win over Q in the consolation game would have had us in pretty easily.

Of course, we'd have to win the game, which is no easy feat.

Long story short: give us back the consolation game.

[Trotsky]

Long story short: give us back the consolation game.

Yes, please.

[MattS]

You know what else would have gotten CU into the tourney? Winning the ECAC.

[redice]

You know what else would have gotten CU into the tourney? Winning the ECAC.

It hard to win the conference when you're not the best team.   This year, Cornell was nowhere near the best team.    

They got as far as their talent could take them.

Maybe an unconscious goaltending performance in LP would do it.      But, I think Union left no doubt that they,

not Cornell, deserved to move on to the next round.     It's just the reality of this era....

[RatushnyFan]

Perhaps a minority opinion here - I'm not a fan of consolation games. We had to beat Union, period. If you have to win a consolation game to get into the NCAAs you don't deserve to go IMO.

It cuts both ways - in another year, someone could bump us from the tourney by winning a consolation game. And a meaningless consolation game is an awful sight to see.

[Ronald '09]

You know what else would have gotten CU into the tourney? Winning the ECAC.

I don't feel like calculating it but isn't the biggest reason we didn't make it the fact we got one point in two games against a bad Dartmouth team? I imagine the BU loss kept us out too but at least we played pretty well in that game and just every bounce went against us. Which can happen in one isolated game. But we played completely awfully both times against Dartmouth.

[Rosey]

They got as far as their talent could take them.

Just so the point is not lost in the hand-wringing over the early end to Cornell's season, I will again point out that there is no evidence that a talent deficit has anything to do with it. Cornell has a hockey skill deficit, and the available evidence points not to talent as a cause but to environment.

Repeating the talent gap mantra over and over will not make it true, even if it makes you feel better.

[redice]

Perhaps a minority opinion here - I'm not a fan of consolation games. We had to beat Union, period. If you have to win a consolation game to get into the NCAAs you don't deserve to go IMO.

It cuts both ways - in another year, someone could bump us from the tourney by winning a consolation game. And a meaningless consolation game is an awful sight to see.

As long as we're giving opinions....    If I'm going to make the trip to a remote location, I want to watch my favorite team play two games.   If the second one has to be a consolation game, so be it.   But, I want that second game.   Keep in mind that this is coming from someone who has attended nearly every home game, some road games, lots of tourney games, all red/white scrimmages, all alumni games>>>  for decades.    

I think it's safe to say that I can't get enough Cornell Hockey.

[ugarte]

If the coaches don't want to play a third place game in the conference tournament, the handwringing about PWR implications will change nothing.

[Jim Hyla]

If the coaches don't want to play a third place game in the conference tournament, the handwringing about PWR implications will change nothing.

But the PWR implications might change the coaches opinions.:-D

[Dafatone]

If the coaches don't want to play a third place game in the conference tournament, the handwringing about PWR implications will change nothing.

But the PWR implications might change the coaches opinions.:-D

I had thought the big impetus was "a consolation game could make us lose a tourney spot."  Was it actually just not liking them?

[Trotsky]

If the coaches don't want to play a third place game in the conference tournament, the handwringing about PWR implications will change nothing.

But the PWR implications might change the coaches opinions.:-D

I had thought the big impetus was "a consolation game could make us lose a tourney spot."  Was it actually just not liking them?

I don't believe we have ever had an official statement.  Coaches do not like them (it is difficult to motivate players and there is always a risk of injury).  I would assume the venue likes them (that much more revenue).  Fans prefer to be guaranteed two games.

The 2013 consy loss nearly cost Yale their bid and by extension the ECAC its first title in 24 seasons.  That may have been the league office's cost-benefit analysis, in its entirety.  They don't always seem like they're really doing their due diligence.

[redice]

They got as far as their talent could take them.

Just so the point is not lost in the hand-wringing over the early end to Cornell's season, I will again point out that there is no evidence that a talent deficit has anything to do with it. Cornell has a hockey skill deficit, and the available evidence points not to talent as a cause but to environment.

Repeating the talent gap mantra over and over will not make it true, even if it makes you feel better.

Despite your condescending & snarky statement, Kyle, it has nothing do with making me feel better.   It is my opinion, based on lot experience iwith the college game.    I don't project myself as an expert.   I'll leave that to you...   I will just say that my opinion is no less valid than yours.    I don't see the value in you countering my opinion every time I mention it.    My most recent statement was not directed at you.    It's just lame, Kyle........

[Rosey]

They got as far as their talent could take them.

Just so the point is not lost in the hand-wringing over the early end to Cornell's season, I will again point out that there is no evidence that a talent deficit has anything to do with it. Cornell has a hockey skill deficit, and the available evidence points not to talent as a cause but to environment.

Repeating the talent gap mantra over and over will not make it true, even if it makes you feel better.

Despite your condescending & snarky statement, Kyle, it has nothing do with making me feel better.   It is my opinion, based on lot experience iwith the college game.    I don't project myself as an expert.   I'll leave that to you...   I will just say that my opinion is no less valid than yours.    I don't see the value in you countering my opinion every time I mention it.    My most recent statement was not directed at you.    It's just lame, Kyle........

I feel obliged to call it out when you post something as fact ("They got as far as their talent could take them" ) that isn't supported by the evidence, especially when an incorrect interpretation of the facts can have a profoundly negative effect on the program long-term. I'm not really interested in your opinion or comprehension, as you've made it perfectly clear you don't feel obligated to allow facts to dissuade you: I am, however, very interested in making clear to everyone else reading your post that what you are saying is not correct and is a clear, demonstrable misinterpretation of the situation.

Your statement is roughly equivalent to "I think it's awful that Joe Biden died in a plane crash last night." Yes, that's an opinion, but the basis of that opinion is a false statement. This is a clear illustration of why not all opinions are equally valid.

My opinion about Cornell's performance, unlike yours, has not yet had any evidence presented contradicting it.

[Dafatone]

They got as far as their talent could take them.

Just so the point is not lost in the hand-wringing over the early end to Cornell's season, I will again point out that there is no evidence that a talent deficit has anything to do with it. Cornell has a hockey skill deficit, and the available evidence points not to talent as a cause but to environment.

Repeating the talent gap mantra over and over will not make it true, even if it makes you feel better.

Despite your condescending & snarky statement, Kyle, it has nothing do with making me feel better.   It is my opinion, based on lot experience iwith the college game.    I don't project myself as an expert.   I'll leave that to you...   I will just say that my opinion is no less valid than yours.    I don't see the value in you countering my opinion every time I mention it.    My most recent statement was not directed at you.    It's just lame, Kyle........

I feel obliged to call it out when you post something as fact ("They got as far as their talent could take them" ) that isn't supported by the evidence, especially when an incorrect interpretation of the facts can have a profoundly negative effect on the program long-term. I'm not really interested in your opinion or comprehension, as you've made it perfectly clear you don't feel obligated to allow facts to dissuade you: I am, however, very interested in making clear to everyone else reading your post that what you are saying is not correct and is a clear, demonstrable misinterpretation of the situation.

Your statement is roughly equivalent to "I think it's awful that Joe Biden died in a plane crash last night." Yes, that's an opinion, but the basis of that opinion is a false statement. This is a clear illustration of why not all opinions are equally valid.

My opinion about Cornell's performance, unlike yours, has not yet had any evidence presented contradicting it.

I'm pretty sure that nothing that's said here is ever going to have an impact on anything.

At the very least, I sure hope that's the case.