Who deserves 2023 D1 championship

[dbilmes]

I posted this a few days ago in the Opponents thread, but it didn't get any reaction, so I'll post it here, since it ties in to this thread.
 This story from Forbes about Q's rise to a hockey powerhouse ends on this final note:

The Bobcats aren't satisfied with the status quo, though. Quinnipiac is set to begin a renovation of the hockey locker room and lounges, and alumni and donors are planning to create a name, image and likeness program for hockey players, according to Amodio, who added that he has "ongoing conversations" with Pecknold about the program.

In other words, Q isn't going away. It's going to remain the team to beat in the ECAC for the foreseeable future.

[Trotsky]

Let's take this table of ECAC points per year per season per team (using the 2-point system) and call an "extended period of dominance" a 3-year streak of 30+ points.  If there is an interruption in the streak, but the number of points below 30 for the missed year(s) is less than the number of years of the net streak, I'll count those years inclusive (e.g., Cor 04 and 06 included in our streak).

Here are the streaks since the Great Divorce:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]
Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
SLU 99 00 01
Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cgt 04 05 06
Yal 09 10 11
Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12
Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23
Clk 18 19 20 22
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


I am red-bolding 35+ point seasons as exceptional.



By team:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]

Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
Cgt 04 05 06

SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
SLU 99 00 01

Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
Clk 18 19 20 22

Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23

Yal 09 10 11

Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12

Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


Q has now been a dominant program in the 10 full seasons since 2013 almost without a break, with 5 seasons 35+.  Only Harvard in the late 80-early 90s (6 seasons 35+)  and Clarkson in the 90s (only 1 season 35+) had that extended a period of control.  Cornell's 2002-2012 stretch (3 seasons 35+)  was roughly the same length but less accomplished.

Q is the first persistent threat we have had to face since the Harvard and Clarkson teams of 25-35 years ago.  They are... a problem.

[BearLover]

Let's take this table of ECAC points per year per season per team (using the 2-point system) and call an "extended period of dominance" a 3-year streak of 30+ points.  If there is an interruption in the streak, but the number of points below 30 for the missed year(s) is less than the number of years of the net streak, I'll count those years inclusive (e.g., Cor 04 and 06 included in our streak).

Here are the streaks since the Great Divorce:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]
Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
SLU 99 00 01
Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cgt 04 05 06
Yal 09 10 11
Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12
Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23
Clk 18 19 20 22
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


I am red-bolding 35+ point seasons as exceptional.



By team:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]

Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
Cgt 04 05 06

SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
SLU 99 00 01

Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
Clk 18 19 20 22

Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23

Yal 09 10 11

Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12

Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


Q has now been a dominant program in the 10 full seasons since 2013 almost without a break, with 5 seasons 35+.  Only Harvard in the late 80-early 90s (6 seasons 35+)  and Clarkson in the 90s (only 1 season 35+) had that extended a period of control.  Cornell's 2002-2012 stretch (3 seasons 35+)  was roughly the same length but less accomplished.

Q is the first persistent threat we have had to face since the Harvard and Clarkson teams of 25-35 years ago.  They are... a problem.

I don't know how you chose your above framing of dominance, but given this is a discussion over the effect of Q winning the national championship, shouldn't your method capture things beyond regular season record? Your framing totally misses the extended success of Yale and Union around the time they won the national championship. For example, Union's national championship capped a four-year period during which they made the NCAAs all four years, won the ECAC three consecutive years, and made the Frozen Four twice (including the national championship year). Yale's national championship fell in a span of 6 NCAA appearances in 8 years that also included two ECAC championships. More to the point of Schafer being forced to adjust, Yale's record against Cornell between 2009 and 2013 (the year they won it all) was 10-2, including beating Cornell twice in the ECAC championship game by a combined score of 11-0.

So you're essentially saying that Q winning the national championship and maintaining its dominance would force Schafer to adapt to a greater degree than Union winning three consecutive ECAC titles and a national championship, or Yale repeatedly crushing Cornell and winning a national championship? That's total nonsense in my view.

[CAS]

Doubt Quinnipiac has any difficulty admitting hockey players.  Quinnipiac's 2021-2 Common Data Set reveals they admitted 89% of applicants (with an 11% yield).  Btw the 11% yield is boosted by early decision & waitlist acceptances.

[billhoward]

A reason to matriculate: Quinnipiac is a great place for dorky guys to meet cute girls. (A poster above noted video of the cheer squad at the FF in Tampa.) Women are two-thirds of the student body. If you can't meet somebody there, you aren't working the crowd.

I want Quinnipiac to win because this gives our conference three NCAA championships 2013-2023.

I also believe Rand Pecknold is a decent guy and he built this team from what seemed to be a club sport that eked into D3 and played in a high school-caliber rink; trying to recall if the glass was chain link fence or had been upgraded.

I also like Q because Rob Pannell decommitted from there to Cornell when his skills became clearer after HS. Smart man.

[Trotsky]

I don't know how you chose your above framing of dominance, but given this is a discussion over the effect of Q winning the national championship, shouldn't your method capture things beyond regular season record? Your framing totally misses the extended success of Yale and Union around the time they won the national championship. For example, Union's national championship capped a four-year period during which they made the NCAAs all four years, won the ECAC three consecutive years, and made the Frozen Four twice (including the national championship year). Yale's national championship fell in a span of 6 NCAA appearances in 8 years that also included two ECAC championships. More to the point of Schafer being forced to adjust, Yale's record against Cornell between 2009 and 2013 (the year they won it all) was 10-2, including beating Cornell twice in the ECAC championship game by a combined score of 11-0.

So you're essentially saying that Q winning the national championship and maintaining its dominance would force Schafer to adapt to a greater degree than Union winning three consecutive ECAC titles and a national championship, or Yale repeatedly crushing Cornell and winning a national championship? That's total nonsense in my view.

It is one way of looking at things.  Models are not reality.  If you wish to show a different way, do it.

You are really starting to give the other guy a run for most unnecessarily obnoxious on this forum.

[Tcl123]

A reason to matriculate: Quinnipiac is a great place for dorky guys to meet cute girls. (A poster above noted video of the cheer squad at the FF in Tampa.) Women are two-thirds of the student body. If you can't meet somebody there, you aren't working the crowd.

I want Quinnipiac to win because this gives our conference three NCAA championships 2013-2023.

I also believe Rand Pecknold is a decent guy and he built this team from what seemed to be a club sport that eked into D3 and played in a high school-caliber rink; trying to recall if the glass was chain link fence or had been upgraded.

I also like Q because Rob Pannell decommitted from there to Cornell when his skills became clearer after HS. Smart man.

And maybe a NC will make a move to Hockey East happen sooner?? (That's wishful thinking anyway)

[Trotsky]

So, here's another way, using appearances in the NC$$.

Let's call "dominance" a streak of seasons including any appearance in the F4.  Here are the recent streaks:

Code Select Expand


Qpc 19 21 22 [color=#FF0000][b]23[/b][/color]
Hvd 15 16 [b][color=#FF0000]17[/color][/b]
Qpc [b][color=#FF0000]13[/color][/b] 14 15 [b][color=#FF0000]16[/color][/b]
Yal [b][color=#FF0000]13[/color][/b]
Uni 11 [b][color=#FF0000]12[/color][/b] 13 [b][color=#FF0000]14[/color][/b]
Cor 02 [b][color=#FF0000]03[/color][/b]
SLU 99 [b][color=#FF0000]00[/color][/b] 01
Ver [b][color=#FF0000]96[/color][/b] 97
Hvd 93 [b][color=#FF0000]94[/color][/b]
Clk 90 [b][color=#FF0000]91[/color][/b] 92
Cgt [b][color=#FF0000]90[/color][/b]
SLU 87 [b][color=#FF0000]88[/color][/b] 89
Hvd 85 [b][color=#FF0000]86 87[/color][/b] 88 [b][color=#FF0000]89[/color][/b]
RPI 84 [b][color=#FF0000]85[/color][/b]


By team:

Code Select Expand


Qpc 19 21 22 [color=#FF0000][b]23[/b][/color]
Qpc [b][color=#FF0000]13[/color][/b] 14 15 [b][color=#FF0000]16[/color][/b]

Hvd 15 16 [b][color=#FF0000]17[/color][/b]
Hvd 93 [b][color=#FF0000]94[/color][/b]
Hvd 85 [b][color=#FF0000]86 87[/color][/b] 88 [b][color=#FF0000]89[/color][/b]

Yal [b][color=#FF0000]13[/color][/b]

Uni 11 [b][color=#FF0000]12[/color][/b] 13 [b][color=#FF0000]14[/color][/b]

Cor 02 [b][color=#FF0000]03[/color][/b]

SLU 99 [b][color=#FF0000]00[/color][/b] 01
SLU 87 [b][color=#FF0000]88[/color][/b] 89

Ver [b][color=#FF0000]96[/color][/b] 97

Clk 90 [b][color=#FF0000]91[/color][/b] 92

Cgt [b][color=#FF0000]90[/color][/b]

RPI 84 [b][color=#FF0000]85[/color][/b]


[Trotsky]

And maybe a NC will make a move to Hockey East happen sooner?? (That's wishful thinking anyway)

I would think they would stay until pushed.  Why not?  With few exceptions it looks like they can be penciled in as a bye team every season, much as we were once.  But the only ways I can see us pushing would be self-defeating (imposing Ivy-like restrictions on the rest of the conference).

OTOH an NC will probably increase the flight of underclass players this year.  Maybe we can flush Perets.  I assume Pecker is a Lifer, and good for him.

I think the only thing that stops Q is some godawful internal scandal like the Vermont Elephant Walk, the Harvard Cheating, or the BU Rape Culture.  It does seem like the kind of place that would happen, and Q doesn't have the deep roots that allowed the latter two to survive.

[Tcl123]

And maybe a NC will make a move to Hockey East happen sooner?? (That's wishful thinking anyway)

I would think they would stay until pushed.  Why not?  With few exceptions it looks like they can be penciled in as a bye team every season, much as we were once.  But the only ways I can see us pushing would be self-defeating (imposing Ivy-like restrictions on the rest of the conference).

OTOH an NC will probably increase the flight of underclass players this year.  Maybe we can flush Perets.  I assume Pecker is a Lifer, and good for him.

I think the only thing that stops Q is some godawful internal scandal like the Vermont Elephant Walk, the Harvard Cheating, or the BU Rape Culture.  It does seem like the kind of place that would happen, and Q doesn't have the deep roots that allowed the latter two to survive.

U don't think pecknold would jump if offered a blueboood/nhl gig?

[Trotsky]

U don't think pecknold would jump if offered a blueboood/nhl gig?

I would think given his success he has gotten offers before.  I have no idea, of course, but he sure seems to me to be a guy who has settled comfortably into  beloved Founder, rather than just another asshole on the hedonic treadmill.

[Swampy]

Let's take this table of ECAC points per year per season per team (using the 2-point system) and call an "extended period of dominance" a 3-year streak of 30+ points.  If there is an interruption in the streak, but the number of points below 30 for the missed year(s) is less than the number of years of the net streak, I'll count those years inclusive (e.g., Cor 04 and 06 included in our streak).

Here are the streaks since the Great Divorce:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]
Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
SLU 99 00 01
Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cgt 04 05 06
Yal 09 10 11
Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12
Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23
Clk 18 19 20 22
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


I am red-bolding 35+ point seasons as exceptional.



By team:

Code Select Expand


Hvd [color=#CC0000][b]86 87 88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92 [color=#CC0000][b]93 94[/b][/color]

Cgt 87 88 89 [color=#CC0000][b]90[/b][/color]
Cgt 04 05 06

SLU 87 [color=#CC0000][b]88 89[/b][/color] 90 91 92
SLU 99 00 01

Clk 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 [color=#CC0000][b]99[/b][/color]
Clk 18 19 20 22

Cor [color=#CC0000][b]02 03[/b][/color] 04 [color=#CC0000][b]05[/b][/color] 06
Cor 17 [color=#CC0000][b]18[/b][/color] 19 [color=#CC0000][b]20[/b][/color] 22 23

Yal 09 10 11

Uni 10 [color=#CC0000][b]11[/b][/color] 12

Qpc [color=#CC0000][b]13[/b][/color] 14 [color=#CC0000][b]15 16[/b][/color] 17
Qpc 19 20 [color=#CC0000][b]22 23[/b][/color]


Q has now been a dominant program in the 10 full seasons since 2013 almost without a break, with 5 seasons 35+.  Only Harvard in the late 80-early 90s (6 seasons 35+)  and Clarkson in the 90s (only 1 season 35+) had that extended a period of control.  Cornell's 2002-2012 stretch (3 seasons 35+)  was roughly the same length but less accomplished.

Q is the first persistent threat we have had to face since the Harvard and Clarkson teams of 25-35 years ago.  They are... a problem.

I don't know how you chose your above framing of dominance, but given this is a discussion over the effect of Q winning the national championship, shouldn't your method capture things beyond regular season record? Your framing totally misses the extended success of Yale and Union around the time they won the national championship. For example, Union's national championship capped a four-year period during which they made the NCAAs all four years, won the ECAC three consecutive years, and made the Frozen Four twice (including the national championship year). Yale's national championship fell in a span of 6 NCAA appearances in 8 years that also included two ECAC championships. More to the point of Schafer being forced to adjust, Yale's record against Cornell between 2009 and 2013 (the year they won it all) was 10-2, including beating Cornell twice in the ECAC championship game by a combined score of 11-0.

So you're essentially saying that Q winning the national championship and maintaining its dominance would force Schafer to adapt to a greater degree than Union winning three consecutive ECAC titles and a national championship, or Yale repeatedly crushing Cornell and winning a national championship? That's total nonsense in my view.

Why so much focus on Q?

True, it won the NC & has HUGE recruiting advantages compared to the Ivies & other members of the ECAC. I get it. But Q did not stop us from advancing to the FF.

We lost to Q on 11/5 & beat Q on 1/20. But our 1-0 loss to Harvard on Mar. 17 kept us from playing for the ECAC Championship, which Colgate won by beating Harvard. And our 2-1 loss to BU on Mar. 25 kept us from advancing to the FF.

It seems obvious that we need more elite offensive players to have at least one "scoring line" to compete at the championship level, but Q has not been our nemesis so far.

[arugula]

Considering the variety of schools to whom we have lost big games over the last decade or two, I suspect we are our own nemesis.

[Trotsky]

But Q did not stop us from advancing to the FF.

< Yale has entered the chat >

[Iceberg]

Considering the variety of schools to whom we have lost big games over the last decade or two, I suspect we are our own nemesis.

Yeah, throughout all the discussion I wanted to say that Schafer (and his staff) has largely done the best he can given the internal and external challenges that Cornell faces, but if you're going to knock him for one thing, it's his record in the regional final games. 2003 was the only victory and that required overtime. I'm sure others who actually watched that game can speak more about whether Cornell was controlling play and just wasn't able to convert more against BC, but given the number of opportunities, only one Frozen Four appearance is jarring.