ECAC 2014-15

[Jim Hyla]

The only thing more embarrassing than everyone here sneering that they didn't even apply to Harvard is when you all greet ursusminor - an RPI fan who comes here to talk hockey and is nothing but courteous - with a fucking safety school chant.

You're right, I'm sorry.

[marty]

The only thing more embarrassing than everyone here sneering that they didn't even apply to Harvard is when you all greet ursusminor - an RPI fan who comes here to talk hockey and is nothing but courteous - with a fucking safety school chant.

You're right, I'm sorry.

Yes, I'm sorry too.  I enjoy Ralph here.

[ursusminor]

The only thing more embarrassing than everyone here sneering that they didn't even apply to Harvard is when you all greet ursusminor - an RPI fan who comes here to talk hockey and is nothing but courteous - with a fucking safety school chant.

Thanks.

Well there is my avatar. For those who don't recognize it, which is probably most of you, it is Doug Hearns scoring in overtime against Ken Dryden on 12/4/68 in the game which is often described as the one which saved RPI hockey after a few poor seasons and one disastrous one (65-66). The RPI admins had been considering leaving D-I.

The other Cornell player, who appears to be trying to trip Hearns, is #21 (Bruce Pattison I think).

[Swampy]

The only thing more embarrassing than everyone here sneering that they didn't even apply to Harvard is when you all greet ursusminor - an RPI fan who comes here to talk hockey and is nothing but courteous - with a fucking safety school chant.

Thanks.

Well there is my avatar. For those who don't recognize it, which is probably most of you, it is Doug Hearns scoring in overtime against Ken Dryden on 12/4/68 in the game which is often described as the one which saved RPI hockey after a few poor seasons and one disastrous one (65-66). The RPI admins had been considering leaving D-I.

The other Cornell player, who appears to be trying to trip Hearns, is #21 (Bruce Pattison I think).

Pattison was indeed #21.

[Jim Hyla]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

[scoop85]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

They've been bringing in excellent talent the past few years, and with some new assistant coaches to help Donato out, they may have something going.

[BearLover]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

[Rosey]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Blah blah blah play better blah blah

[marty]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Yes, we better put a stop to this footstep nonsense and do it ASAP.::scared::

[Towerroad]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

[BearLover]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

We did not make the tournament because there were a number of better teams in our own conference.  Yale was about the 14th-best team in the country in 2013.  Just gotta get in.

[Chris '03]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

We did not make the tournament because there were a number of better teams in our own conference.  Yale was about the 14th-best team in the country in 2013.  Just gotta get in.

And had Quinnipiac not been in our conference, Yale wouldn't have gotten in even though there would have been fewer good teams in the conference (the scenario you apparently desire).

[BearLover]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

We did not make the tournament because there were a number of better teams in our own conference.  Yale was about the 14th-best team in the country in 2013.  Just gotta get in.

And had Quinnipiac not been in our conference, Yale wouldn't have gotten in even though there would have been fewer good teams in the conference (the scenario you apparently desire).

I haven't run the numbers, but I don't think that's true.  Q beat Yale twice that season.  Those losses probably would have turned into wins, which would have turned into an at-large bid even if Q wasn't in-conference.  Also, Yale would have had a higher seed in the ECAC tournament and a far easier route to the championship.

[Chris '03]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

We did not make the tournament because there were a number of better teams in our own conference.  Yale was about the 14th-best team in the country in 2013.  Just gotta get in.

And had Quinnipiac not been in our conference, Yale wouldn't have gotten in even though there would have been fewer good teams in the conference (the scenario you apparently desire).

I haven't run the numbers, but I don't think that's true.  Q beat Yale twice that season.  Those losses probably would have turned into wins, which would have turned into an at-large bid even if Q wasn't in-conference.  Also, Yale would have had a higher seed in the ECAC tournament and a far easier route to the championship.

Q finished the season on top with a .756 winning percentage.  That gets weighted into EVERY ECAC team's RPI at least twice. Remember it was Yale's LOSS to Q in AC that put them in the tourney thanks to the SOS.  Take out that considerable RPI bump that every ECAC team got (even from losing to Q) and there's no way Yale's RPI ends up as high if you swap two loses to Q for two wins against the little sisters of the poor or whatever doormat you'd propose join the league. As it was, Yale and SCSU finished the season with RPI tied out to the ten thousandth of a point. Simply not playing the consy would have cost Yale that comparison.  The margins are very thin and that's why having good teams in your conference helps Yale (the 3rd best ECAC team) get that shot in the tournament.  The top 4 AHA teams don't get that shot.  

Yale may have had a better ECAC seed but they also probably would have needed to win twice in AC instead of laying an egg to make the tournament.

[BearLover]

So after watching last night's game, I have to say, Harvard looks like the real thing.  Their offense is very good, their defense is so-so, but if Michalek plays the rest the season like he has started, they will be very difficult to beat.

Didn't watch the game, but they were outshot 42-24.  Great teams don't get outshot almost 2-to-1.  Yale and Union winning the past two years have made things tough enough on Cornell already (eg. they'd have made the tournament last year easily had the ECAC not been so good)...we don't need Harvard following in their footsteps.

Hmmm. We did not make the tournament because there were a lot of better teams. I never thought about it that way.

We did not make the tournament because there were a number of better teams in our own conference.  Yale was about the 14th-best team in the country in 2013.  Just gotta get in.

And had Quinnipiac not been in our conference, Yale wouldn't have gotten in even though there would have been fewer good teams in the conference (the scenario you apparently desire).

I haven't run the numbers, but I don't think that's true.  Q beat Yale twice that season.  Those losses probably would have turned into wins, which would have turned into an at-large bid even if Q wasn't in-conference.  Also, Yale would have had a higher seed in the ECAC tournament and a far easier route to the championship.

Q finished the season on top with a .756 winning percentage.  That gets weighted into EVERY ECAC team's RPI at least twice. Remember it was Yale's LOSS to Q in AC that put them in the tourney thanks to the SOS.  Take out that considerable RPI bump that every ECAC team got (even from losing to Q) and there's no way Yale's RPI ends up as high if you swap two loses to Q for two wins against the little sisters of the poor or whatever doormat you'd propose join the league. As it was, Yale and SCSU finished the season with RPI tied out to the ten thousandth of a point. Simply not playing the consy would have cost Yale that comparison.  The margins are very thin and that's why having good teams in your conference helps Yale (the 3rd best ECAC team) get that shot in the tournament.  The top 4 AHA teams don't get that shot.  

Yale may have had a better ECAC seed but they also probably would have needed to win twice in AC instead of laying an egg to make the tournament.

Oh, they actually lost to Q three times that year!  Three losses turned into wins would have gotten them in, I'm pretty sure...RPI also counts a team's own win %, of course.  Once again I can't say for certain, but last year Cornell went 17-10-5 in a strong conference and didn't get in.  Being 7 games over .500 and still not getting in, when they've gotten in many times when the ECAC sucked, suggests having great teams in your conference isn't as helpful as you make it seem...or at least not as helpful as having more wins.  Regardless, winning the ECAC tournament is a very real thing.  Even if the difference between Q being in-conference and Q not being in-conference were equal to three wins instead of three losses, that doesn't take into account the benefit of not having to run into them in the ECAC tournament.  (And that's not to mention possible recruiting issues when more players want to go to Yale, etc.).