Game 2: Cornell 1, Clarkson 4

[Dafatone]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

There have been some bad losses/ties, but we've beaten some pretty good teams as well, done very well out of conference, and we're 16-9-5, which is solid.

I'm wondering if it's just a perception thing, or if this is a strange year.  It seems like the bad teams have had REALLY bad years, which makes me think that the bar for success is also higher (more losses by bad teams means more wins by good teams).

[upprdeck]

who got a good look at the major last night?  at speed it looked like a shoulder to shoulder type thing with maybe the clarkson kid lowering his head as the puck went between his feet? most around us were surprised it was even a penalty let alone a major. did it look worse on replay?

[BearLover]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

There have been some bad losses/ties, but we've beaten some pretty good teams as well, done very well out of conference, and we're 16-9-5, which is solid.

I'm wondering if it's just a perception thing, or if this is a strange year.  It seems like the bad teams have had REALLY bad years, which makes me think that the bar for success is also higher (more losses by bad teams means more wins by good teams).

No, 16th in the pairwise is about right.  Cornell has not had a very good year...they have a poor goal differential relative to the other teams high in the pairwise (read: they've been lucky) and they are leaps and bounds behind Q and Union.  

With all that said, Cornell just needs to get into the NCAA's and they'll have a chance.  Yale wasn't one of the top 5 teams last year, and probably not even one of the top 10.

[Scersk '97]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

If you use the old method, Colgate is #12 and we're #15. You can also note that we're 14th in KRACH.

Bizarrely, the "strong" ECAC gets boned this year, like "hyper-strong" Hockey East, for "beating up on each other," since winning percentage counts for so much more than it used to.

I just hope that the result tonight ends up reflecting KRACH:

Code Select Expand


     204.9
--------------- = .601 ~ 3–2 over 5 games
(204.9 + 135.8)


And, putting all the quibbling about seedings and rankings aside, you shouldn't go to the national show if you blow your league quarterfinal, in my book. So, if they blow it tonight, I'm fine with no NCAAs for this team.

[BearLover]

It'd be great (for Cornell) if the last few years never happened and the ECAC still sucked.

[cuhockey93]

So getting rid of the 3rd place game that everyone was so happy about may very well keep us out of the playoffs?

[KGR11]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

There have been some bad losses/ties, but we've beaten some pretty good teams as well, done very well out of conference, and we're 16-9-5, which is solid.

I'm wondering if it's just a perception thing, or if this is a strange year.  It seems like the bad teams have had REALLY bad years, which makes me think that the bar for success is also higher (more losses by bad teams means more wins by good teams).

The only win we have against the top 16 pairwise teams is Quinnipiac. None of our non-conference opponents would make the tournament as an at-large bid.  Yale was ranked above us when we beat them in the fall, but they kept losing.  That's the thing about early wins: you have no idea how "good" they're going to be until the end.

[Dafatone]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

There have been some bad losses/ties, but we've beaten some pretty good teams as well, done very well out of conference, and we're 16-9-5, which is solid.

I'm wondering if it's just a perception thing, or if this is a strange year.  It seems like the bad teams have had REALLY bad years, which makes me think that the bar for success is also higher (more losses by bad teams means more wins by good teams).

No, 16th in the pairwise is about right.  Cornell has not had a very good year...they have a poor goal differential relative to the other teams high in the pairwise (read: they've been lucky) and they are leaps and bounds behind Q and Union.  

With all that said, Cornell just needs to get into the NCAA's and they'll have a chance.  Yale wasn't one of the top 5 teams last year, and probably not even one of the top 10.

I'll agree we've gotten somewhat lucky, but that's a question of team quality, not team performance.  If you get lucky, you overachieve, which it feels like we should be doing.

[Icy]

If Quinnipiac beats Colgate, Colgate likely drops out of the top 16.  A Cornell win over Clarkson and loss to Union may just barely be enough to get the Big Red to #15.

[Trotsky]

Does anyone else feel like we've had a better year than 16th in the pairwise?

There have been some bad losses/ties, but we've beaten some pretty good teams as well, done very well out of conference, and we're 16-9-5, which is solid.

I'm wondering if it's just a perception thing, or if this is a strange year.  It seems like the bad teams have had REALLY bad years, which makes me think that the bar for success is also higher (more losses by bad teams means more wins by good teams).

A large part of my evaluation of this year's team depends on tonight.  Tonight will tell whether this is 2004 or 2006.

[Beeeej]

So getting rid of the 3rd place game that everyone was so happy about may very well keep us out of the playoffs?

No, not playing well enough over the course of the entire season to qualify for the NCAA tournament may very well keep us out of the NCAA tournament.

[cbuckser]

A large part of my evaluation of this year's team depends on tonight.  Tonight will tell whether this is 2004 or 2006.

I felt similarly going into last night's game, though I think 2009 or 2012 are better comps than 2006.

[BearLover]

A large part of my evaluation of this year's team depends on tonight.  Tonight will tell whether this is 2004 or 2006.

I felt similarly going into last night's game, though I think 2009 or 2012 are better comps than 2006.

One game is one game.

[Trotsky]

A large part of my evaluation of this year's team depends on tonight.  Tonight will tell whether this is 2004 or 2006.

I felt similarly going into last night's game, though I think 2009 or 2012 are better comps than 2006.

One game is one game.

And a flute with no holes is not a flute.

[RichH]

A large part of my evaluation of this year's team depends on tonight.  Tonight will tell whether this is 2004 or 2006.

I felt similarly going into last night's game, though I think 2009 or 2012 are better comps than 2006.

One game is one game.

And a flute with no holes is not a flute.

A donut with no hole is a danish.