Who deserves 2023 D1 championship

[ugarte]

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.

it's simultaneously jarring that we have so few FFs but to be fair, we mostly weren't even supposed to be in the second round and we sure have played a lot of road games! Taking the list of appearances from tbrw where we advanced, this is what has happened in the second round:

1997: Upset over Miami before losing to North Dakota, as seeded
2002: W over Quinnipiac before losing to New Hampshire, as seeded
2003: W over Mankato, W over BC as the 1 seed. Don't want to talk about it any more.
2005: W over Ohio State, as seeded, before losing to Minnesota (in Minneapolis) in OT, as seeded
2006: W over Colorado College, as seeded, before losing to Wisconsin (in Green Bay) in 3OT, as seeded
2009: Upset over Northeastern before crushing blowout upset loss to Bemidji that I still think about too much.
2012: Upset over Michigan before losing to Ferris State, as seeded
2019: Upset over Northeastern before losing in an upset to Providence (in Providence)
2023: Upset over Denver before losing to BU, as seeded

2009 and 2019 are the only years where we were "supposed" to win the second round match and didn't and 2019 was a road game. If losing in the second round is a problem, it's a problem created by simply winning in the first round too much. Not sure I have a problem with that; the problem actually stems from not being a top 4 team very often.

[Trotsky]

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.

Partly it's bad luck.

Adding the 1986 instance in which he was a player, of the 9 times Schafer has failed to advance:

1986 was a one-goal loss in a two-game total goals series
2002 was a one goal loss
2005 was an overtime loss
2006 was a triple-overtime loss
2012 was a one-goal loss
2023 was a one-goal loss

However, SOG have not favored us:

1986 51-71 (net)
2002 18-24
2005 18-39
2006 40-60
2012 23-21
2023 14-21

FWIW, SOG in the BC win were 36-27.

[arugula]

What exacerbates this all is Yale and Union winning (and Providence).  The luck/underdog factor.  Yes, we usually shouldn't have won, but can't we get lucky once?

[scoop85]

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.

Partly it's bad luck.

Adding the 1986 instance in which he was a player, of the 9 times Schafer has failed to advance:

1986 was a one-goal loss in a two-game total goals series
2002 was a one goal loss
2005 was an overtime loss
2006 was a triple-overtime loss
2012 was a one-goal loss
2023 was a one-goal loss

However, SOG have not favored us:

1986 51-71 (net)
2002 18-24
2005 18-39
2006 40-60
2012 23-21
2023 14-21

FWIW, SOG in the BC win were 36-27.

I think while some bad luck has been involved, the other key factor is just not having quite the offensive firepower needed to win in these games against other strong programs that are sound defensively but have been stronger offensively. 2020 was the outlier IMO, but of course we'll never know what would've transpired.

[scoop85]

Special delivery for Bearlover

For inquiring minds, the history of the NCAA tournament demonstrates that having high NHL draft picks--or even many draft picks period--does not translate into NCAA hockey championships.

[underskill]

Special delivery for Bearlover

For inquiring minds, the history of the NCAA tournament demonstrates that having high NHL draft picks--or even many draft picks period--does not translate into NCAA hockey championships.

If you're stacking your team with enough overagers that should be in the AHL. I think ideally one or two game breaking draft picks would be beneficial though.

[ugarte]

What exacerbates this all is Yale and Union winning (and Providence).  The luck/underdog factor.  Yes, we usually shouldn't have won, but can't we get lucky once?

of course, but most of life is an annoying parade of other people getting luckier than you. that's why humanity is so collectively miserable. it isn't really a hockey thing.

[BearLover]

Special delivery for Bearlover

For inquiring minds, the history of the NCAA tournament demonstrates that having high NHL draft picks--or even many draft picks period--does not translate into NCAA hockey championships.

As I've said many times, one way to win other than blue-chip talent is stacking your roster with fifth-years and transfers. I actually find the latter more, not less, discouraging with respect to Cornell's chances. At least we can in theory compete on the axis of recruiting the best players. We absolutely cannot, however, compete on the axis of fifth-years and transfers.

[Weder]

Special delivery for Bearlover

For inquiring minds, the history of the NCAA tournament demonstrates that having high NHL draft picks--or even many draft picks period--does not translate into NCAA hockey championships.

If you're stacking your team with enough overagers that should be in the AHL. I think ideally one or two game breaking draft picks would be beneficial though.

NCAA sports in general — and Ivy sports to a more extreme degree — still are based on the idea that a "typical" undergrad is in the 18-23 age range. The reality at most universities is far different, and a significant number of undergraduate students are 25 and older. Should the makeup of sports teams reflect sone outdated idea of who undergrads are or more accurately reflect the real demographics?

[upprdeck]

we can compete with 5yr kids they just cant be 5th yr grad students because of another dumb IVY rule.

[ursusminor]

Just curious. What rules on age, etc. were Cornell and the other Ivies living with when Dick Bertrand was a player? I recall that he was about as old as the QU grad student players when he arrived at Cornell.

[Beeeej]

Just curious. What rules on age, etc. were Cornell and the other Ivies living with when Dick Bertrand was a player? I recall that he was about as old as the QU grad student players when he arrived at Cornell.

If I recall correctly, one of the rules was about class year, not age - when Dick arrived at the age of 25, he wasn't allowed to play for varsity because he was a freshman. I don't know what the upper age limit at the time was, but he was still an undergraduate at 29 years old when he took over the head coaching position.

Also IIRC, he was a police officer before he was a college student, but my memory could be inventing that.

[billhoward]

Dick Bertrand was a Toronto police officer before Cornell. (Insert "Harkness needed another enforcer" joke here.) He arrived at Cornell as a 25-year-old, when freshmen could not play varsity (all schools, not just Ivies). This in an era when Canadian players were uncommon at some schools. BC and its coach Snooks Kelley refused to recruit Canadians -- foreigners -- on the grounds that the U.S. should develop its own talent. Other schools preferred American players but not exclusively. (Fast forward five decades, US players have arrived, although less the BC role of excluding Canadians, more that Americans came to play as well as Canadians, and Europeans, by playing against them.)

The NCAA had a Screw the Canadians rule which -- I'm a mite hazy here -- you lost something like a year of eligibility for every year you were over 25, something like that, and could not play in the NCAA tournament. The other hazy part is, I believe, the rule applied to every nationality but really it was a No Older Canadians rule. There were age exemptions for veterans and missionaries, in case BYU was thinking of fielding a team. It worked out so that Bertrand competed on varsity sophomore through junior year then for senior year, as a 29-year-old captain, he played the RS and had to sit out the NCAAs. Good thing we won the NCAAs fine without him, that is we didn't lose based on Bertrand's line without Bertrand got caught on ice for the winning goal by Clarkson (final instead was 6-4 Cornell and 29-0 and all). If that happened, the telex version of eLynah would have been outraged.

Bertrand coached at Cornell for a decade but he had a mixed relationship with the players. In hindsight, he never had a chance to spend a couple years as an assistant and transition from player to coach to long-term successful head coach.

Boston College fun fact: From 1932 to 2022, BC had just four hockey coaches (excluding a pair of temp coaches during WW II.)

[abmarks]

Special delivery for Bearlover

For inquiring minds, the history of the NCAA tournament demonstrates that having high NHL draft picks--or even many draft picks period--does not translate into NCAA hockey championships.

As I've said many times, one way to win other than blue-chip talent is stacking your roster with fifth-years and transfers. I actually find the latter more, not less, discouraging with respect to Cornell's chances. At least we can in theory compete on the axis of recruiting the best players. We absolutely cannot, however, compete on the axis of fifth-years and transfers.

Agree on 5th years, but one or two transfers a year is doable I'd think.  Seger transferred in and was our top scorer.

[upprdeck]

the thing that helps is hockey is not all full rides or even 4 yr deals..  There are a decent number of kids at some of these schools  who are always looking for a better deal and some more time and already pay their own way.

the question is can we find them and do they want to go to an  IVY