Future Coaching?

[Jim Hyla]

Wow.  I'm duly chastised.

Jim- please read back over the thread-  I didn't initiate the Bennett idea, and have absolutely no inside info.  I just commented on it when the original poster expressed that no one responded to him/her.  I did this based on Bennett's body of work aside from his incident with RPI, which I am willing to look at as an aberration unworthy of the vitriol the RPI fans heap on him in a monumental display of false sanctimony.  These are the same people (Not you, Ralph) who blame the victim or claim faking when one of their guys injures someone with a vicious boarding from behind.

And personally, I take EVERYTHING here with a grain of salt.  Maybe two grains. So should you.

I did read your post. Here's the part I quoted.

and would come if the price was right because of the fan support, donor support, bigger rink, and better brand.

I was responding to that statement, particularly "and would come". It seemed to me that you couldn't make such a declarative statement, unless you had some inside information. That's it, plain and simple. You said he would come. So I wondered how you knew that.

[TimV]

Got it.  There was some discussion about what reasons there might be that would might be attractive enough to cause him to come.  I was positing what those reasons might be.  Sorry to mislead you. Besides, he's got contract extensions through 2021, I think. Not inside info.  I think it's in the Union media guide.  I think.::rolleyes::

[Give My Regards]

So, when is he signing that Cornell contract? ::bolt::

[TimV]

Heh.  Summer of 2121?  Or after his next fight.  Whichever comes first. ::crazy::

[ursusminor]

Why don't you like Bennett?  What's the strong dislike rooted in?

Top three reasons for SOME RPI fans:

1. He has RPI's number;
2. He has RPI's number;
3. He has RPI's number.

Although many blame The Altercation  to avoid dealing with the actual reasons.::screwy::;-)

RPI did defeat Union in both ECAC contests last season.

Yep. Last year was a relatively good year for the Tute v. Union.  Not as good as implied in your well-worded post, since the record for all games vs. Union was 2-1, with one of those W's coming in overtime and total goals being 11-10 your favor.

Ralph- I can't match up with your knowledge of RPI and college hockey in general - but correct me if I'm wrong:

Bennett's record as head coach for ALL GAMES v RPI:  11-3.  Total goals: Union 55 RPI 32.

If you include his years as assistant coach (2005-6 to 2010-11) you can add 10 wins, 3 losses and 3 ties to his record v RPI.

Looks like Bennett has your number to me.

I wish we  had that record - against both of you.:-/

Tim,

I am certainly not denying that Bennett has RPI's number. I was just pointing out that RPI defeated Union in both ECAC contests last season. Before losing to Union in the Mayor's Cup game last season, we actually had a three-game winning streak vs. Bennett and Union.

Please realize that this is like what would happen here if Harvard ever got a decent coach (and fans) and started to defeat Cornell on a regular basis. That is a reason, I suspect, that one of the questions that appears sometimes on the upper right of this forum specifically excludes Harvard from the Ivies whom one would like to win a future NCAA title.

BTW, although Cornell does not have a .786 (11-3) winning percentage against RPI, .620 isn't exactly bad over more than 100 years. Source: http://www.augenblick.org/rpi/h_rvo.html I must add that RPI did defeat Cornell twice when they were almost unbeatable in the late 1960s, the first of which is the source of my avatar.

[TimV]

No kiddin'?  Seems every time I show up at Houston, RPI, no matter how bad they seemed before, gets well again.;-)

[Jim Hyla]

Why don't you like Bennett?  What's the strong dislike rooted in?

Top three reasons for SOME RPI fans:

1. He has RPI's number;
2. He has RPI's number;
3. He has RPI's number.

Although many blame The Altercation  to avoid dealing with the actual reasons.::screwy::;-)

RPI did defeat Union in both ECAC contests last season.

Yep. Last year was a relatively good year for the Tute v. Union.  Not as good as implied in your well-worded post, since the record for all games vs. Union was 2-1, with one of those W's coming in overtime and total goals being 11-10 your favor.

Ralph- I can't match up with your knowledge of RPI and college hockey in general - but correct me if I'm wrong:

Bennett's record as head coach for ALL GAMES v RPI:  11-3.  Total goals: Union 55 RPI 32.

If you include his years as assistant coach (2005-6 to 2010-11) you can add 10 wins, 3 losses and 3 ties to his record v RPI.

Looks like Bennett has your number to me.

I wish we  had that record - against both of you.:-/

Tim,

I am certainly not denying that Bennett has RPI's number. I was just pointing out that RPI defeated Union in both ECAC contests last season. Before losing to Union in the Mayor's Cup game last season, we actually had a three-game winning streak vs. Bennett and Union.

Please realize that this is like what would happen here if Harvard ever got a decent coach (and fans) and started to defeat Cornell on a regular basis. That is a reason, I suspect, that one of the questions that appears sometimes on the upper right of this forum specifically excludes Harvard from the Ivies whom one would like to win a future NCAA title.

BTW, although Cornell does not have a .786 (11-3) winning percentage against RPI, .620 isn't exactly bad over more than 100 years. Source: http://www.augenblick.org/rpi/h_rvo.html I must add that RPI did defeat Cornell twice when they were almost unbeatable in the late 1960s, the first of which is the source of my avatar.

Which two are you referring to?

[ursusminor]

Why don't you like Bennett?  What's the strong dislike rooted in?

Top three reasons for SOME RPI fans:

1. He has RPI's number;
2. He has RPI's number;
3. He has RPI's number.

Although many blame The Altercation  to avoid dealing with the actual reasons.::screwy::;-)

RPI did defeat Union in both ECAC contests last season.

Yep. Last year was a relatively good year for the Tute v. Union.  Not as good as implied in your well-worded post, since the record for all games vs. Union was 2-1, with one of those W's coming in overtime and total goals being 11-10 your favor.

Ralph- I can't match up with your knowledge of RPI and college hockey in general - but correct me if I'm wrong:

Bennett's record as head coach for ALL GAMES v RPI:  11-3.  Total goals: Union 55 RPI 32.

If you include his years as assistant coach (2005-6 to 2010-11) you can add 10 wins, 3 losses and 3 ties to his record v RPI.

Looks like Bennett has your number to me.

I wish we  had that record - against both of you.:-/

Tim,

I am certainly not denying that Bennett has RPI's number. I was just pointing out that RPI defeated Union in both ECAC contests last season. Before losing to Union in the Mayor's Cup game last season, we actually had a three-game winning streak vs. Bennett and Union.

Please realize that this is like what would happen here if Harvard ever got a decent coach (and fans) and started to defeat Cornell on a regular basis. That is a reason, I suspect, that one of the questions that appears sometimes on the upper right of this forum specifically excludes Harvard from the Ivies whom one would like to win a future NCAA title.

BTW, although Cornell does not have a .786 (11-3) winning percentage against RPI, .620 isn't exactly bad over more than 100 years. Source: http://www.augenblick.org/rpi/h_rvo.html I must add that RPI did defeat Cornell twice when they were almost unbeatable in the late 1960s, the first of which is the source of my avatar.

Which two are you referring to?

12/4/68 RPI 4 Cornell 3 (OT)
12/1/70 RPI 6 Cornell 3 (I guess that wasn't in the late 1960s, except for those who regard decades ending in years with zeros at the end . It did end Cornell's winning streak after the perfect season.)

[redice]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread.....

But, I am now solidly in the "Fire Schafer" crowd.   It repulses me to watch his teams constantly focus so much on defense that they seem to have lost sight of their need to score enough goals to win hockey games.  

Why play overtime games when their only focus is NOT allowing their opposition to score....    Has it ever occurred to him that Cornell must score in the OT to actually win the game?

And, their failure to close out games?    Does anyone think that maybe, just maybe, this would be less of a problem if they continued to FORECHECK and kept the puck in the opponents end of the ice?   But, no!!   In Mike's world, the team must drop back & play ONLY defense at times like that....   Hey Mike, your team no longer has the ability to play lock-down defense like they did in the early 2000's....   Wake up, Mike, or please leave!!

[marty]

... I am now solidly in the "Fire Schafer" crowd.

Why play overtime games when their only focus is NOT allowing their opposition to score....    Has it ever occurred to him that Cornell must score in the OT to actually win the game?

And, their failure to close out games? ....

I have seen this in some third period play this year but didn't feel that way last night. They have outshot their opponents in OT since January and I thought they had the better of RPI last night in OT. The only OT game in which we were embarrassed in the extra frame looks to have been vs BU in November. ( I certainly haven't watched every game and don't have a perfect memory of those I've seen.)

How can you use the lack of forecheck argument against a team that was, last night, tied by way of an extra attacker?

The main problem I saw last night was a handful of poor passes made in the defensive zone. The rest looked like a hockey game.

Kasdorf is a good goalie who we solved last night with difficulty. EA goals are frustrating as hell but if I had any criticism of coach last night it is that he didn't pull Gillam in the final seconds of OT. That does show a defensive mindset. The chance for a sixth place finish in the league would have been worth risking the loss.

[upprdeck]

hockey is a frustrating thing to watch because so many of the goals have little to do with making good passes and plays.. 3 of the 6 last night were just throw something at the net and hope it bounces the right way. the only thing you can control is the effort and last night we had good effort.  we lack team speed and thats something that causes more issues for us than anything else.

[redice]

... I am now solidly in the "Fire Schafer" crowd.

Why play overtime games when their only focus is NOT allowing their opposition to score....    Has it ever occurred to him that Cornell must score in the OT to actually win the game?

And, their failure to close out games? ....

I have seen this in some third period play this year but didn't feel that way last night. They have outshot their opponents in OT since January and I thought they had the better of RPI last night in OT. The only OT game in which we were embarrassed in the extra frame looks to have been vs BU in November. ( I certainly haven't watched every game and don't have a perfect memory of those I've seen.)

How can you use the lack of forecheck argument against a team that was, last night, tied by way of an extra attacker?

The main problem I saw last night was a handful of poor passes made in the defensive zone. The rest looked like a hockey game.

Kasdorf is a good goalie who we solved last night with difficulty. EA goals are frustrating as hell but if I had any criticism of coach last night it is that he didn't pull Gillam in the final seconds of OT. That does show a defensive mindset. The chance for a sixth place finish in the league would have been worth risking the loss.

Nowhere, did I make any specific reference or inference to last night's game.    

Yes, it was a tough way to end the regular season  and made my Schafer-frustration boil over.   But, my comments refer to his body of work this year.    He and his style are no longer relevent in this conference.   His giant players are not allowed  (by officials/league rules) to play the style of the Doug Murray/Stephen Baby CU teams.    Mike is still foolishly trying to build that type of team.    All the while,  smaller, quicker teams like Yale are skating circles around them.    To Mike, I say:  change, or move on....  PLEASE!!    This coming from a long time Schafer supporter.    The game has past him by....

[redice]

hockey is a frustrating thing to watch because so many of the goals have little to do with making good passes and plays.. 3 of the 6 last night were just throw something at the net and hope it bounces the right way. the only thing you can control is the effort and last night we had good effort.  we lack team speed and thats something that causes more issues for us than anything else.

Thanks for the stately words of wisdom.....    I've just completed my 49th season of watching CU hockey.    Yep, I've seen/felt it all.   However, I don't profess to know it all.   But, I'm pretty sure it's time for Schafer to go.    That lack of team speed is his responsibility.    The conference is moving away from the style that gained Mike success 10+ years ago.    For him to continue to recruit these giant players is insane.   Admittedly, Angello may be an exception to that....    He is just a great player, big or small.

[upprdeck]

it seems  that if this team had just held on to wins when skating 6 on 5 we would be looking at a top 2-3 finish in the league with no stle change at all.. about 2 more min of solid d and we are top 10 in the country.

[redice]

it seems  that if this team had just held on to wins when skating 6 on 5 we would be looking at a top 2-3 finish in the league with no stle change at all.. about 2 more min of solid d and we are top 10 in the country.

This is not directed specifically at you, upprdeck...   I've read this forum forum for quite some time...    We cannot just wish for these things.   We can't continue to say that things went well except (you fill in the blank here)...     It doesn't matter if we outshot them, if we lost.....  We have to take off the rose-tinted glasses and realize that we're not good enough.   The record shows that.   The arguable point is that, with Schafer as coach, we never will be good enough.   He does not seem willing to adapt to today's reality.   The ECACH world has passed him by.    Cornell Hockey is "special" no more.