Cornell at Union 2/28

[BearLover]

In the past Schafer has been very critical of the team (without naming names) in postgame press conferences and Sun interviews.

The post-game quotes from the coaches haven't sounded all like sunshine and rainbows to me. Were you hoping they would be more vicious and personal with their critiques?

"We don't line ourselves up with their speed, and we don't identify one of the best players in the league," Schafer said. "I told our guys afterwards, 'I'm getting tired of the same formula.'"


"[It was a] self-inflicted wound. You can't give up and not line yourself up with the speed and let a guy get in behind you," Schafer said. "If you just do your job, we're good."

"I don't want them coming out of the locker room and going, 'Poor us. We had a good game, we did a good job, we kept them [to] 11 shots on net,'" Schafer said. "What we did was [make] two monumental mistakes that cost us both goals. That's what we did. All the other stuff is just extracurricular."

"[Dartmouth] were stronger on their pucks and sticks. When that happens, and then the game [gets] out of control, and you get frustrated," Schafer said. "That's what we have a tendency to do to other teams, and they did that to us."

"Colgate played a good game," Schafer said. "We didn't play the way we need to play as a hockey team. The wheels fell off tonight."

"We just weren't sharp in all areas," Schafer said. "Our goaltending wasn't sharp, a lot of guys weren't sharp."

"I know our guys are banged up," Schafer said, referring to the growing list of injuries that has racked the Red's roster. "But we only had to play one game tonight and we couldn't suck it up and play the way we needed to play, and that's something we have to discuss as a team."

And then I thought tonight, we wanted to take it easy. So, we were disappointed in terms of execution, in terms of our effort."

"I thought last night we probably deserved a better fate. Didn't get it," Jones said. "So we should have responded today and came out with the effort and attitude to get it done here tonight. But we wanted some shortcuts."

"I didn't like the way we started the game. I didn't think we had the same pop [as last night]," said head coach Casey Jones '90.

In my original post, I was referring specifically to Schafer's weekly write-ups of the game. They're all posted on the cornell hockey association website. I know several on this forum have expressed the same reaction. Schafer repeatedly praising the team's play despite garbage results has really gotten on my nerves.

Here are some quotes (just ones that I remember—I'm sure there are worse):
[following going 0-1-1 against Dartmouth and Harvard on the road]: "Given the injuries in our lineup, our 3-1-2 record is not that bad. The rest of the team has stepped up!"

[after beating UMass 3-2 and losing 4-0 to ASU]: "Even though I didn't like Saturday night's results, I am very happy overall with our team, and I feel we have turned a corner. We played the type of hockey that will lead to success, and we were consistent both nights." "On Saturday night...I felt we played well against the home team" [Cornell lost this game 4-0].

[after going 0-1-1 against Sacred Heart]: "I was really pleased with how we played in Arizona but coming out of Sacred Heart with a tie and a loss, I must keep things in perspective. The only analytic I didn't like was the scoreboard. I like the formula of how little chances we gave up and how many we created." "I felt like we were ready to play on Saturday night" [a game in which Cornell fell behind 3-0].

[after going 0-1-1 against StL/Clarkson]: "Getting two points in the standings was a great job for our guys."

[sah67]

In my original post, I was referring specifically to Schafer's weekly write-ups of the game. They're all posted on the cornell hockey association website.

Oh you mean communications that are written specifically for an limited audience of team donors and boosters? What do you expect him to say? "This team sucks. Give your money to Quinnipiac instead."?

[BearLover]

In my original post, I was referring specifically to Schafer's weekly write-ups of the game. They're all posted on the cornell hockey association website.

Oh you mean communications that written specifically for a limited audience of team donors and boosters? What do you expect him to say? "This team sucks. Give your money to Quinnipiac instead."?

I'd find it much more refreshing and confidence-inspiring if he acknowledged the team is struggling.

[Scersk '97]

Last years of great coaches are often disappointing. I leafed through the CHN almanac one day and saw some patterns.

Jeff Jackson this season at Notre Dame. Of course most of those other examples were not coming off a final eight season with virtually the entire team returning.  Shocking.

Pretty much the entire list of leaders by wins, including York, Parker, Berenson, Sauer, etc. Ron Mason is the only exception.

I would imagine almost all of their final years were under very different circumstances than Schafer's.

You don't read, do you? Great coaches, mediocre final seasons.

I think Bear's point was you could be switching the causal arrow.

Pretty sure they all left on their own terms.

I don't have direct knowledge of their leaving circumstances, but their records suggest they did indeed leave on their own terms. Sauer's sub-.500 years were not directly before his last season. Berenson and Parker had minor RS/CT/NCAA droughts toward the end, but not horrible results overall.

Jerry York, Last Season 15-18-5, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Jack Parker, Last Season 21-16-2, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Ron Mason, Last Season 27-9-5, Prior 10 seasons: 0 sub-.500 years
Red Berenson, Last Season 13-19-3, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Jeff Sauer, Last Season 16-19-4, Prior 10 seasons: 3 sub-.500 years
Mike Schafer, YTD 12-10-6, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year

I think there's a real chance that when a coaching retirement is announced it can drain the focus/energy of a team. That would certainly be consistent with Cornell's performance this year. Combine high pressure to have a great season with a slew of injuries early on, and it's easy to see how frustration mounts quickly.

What I loved most about Schafe's senior year was the fire the team had. It won them games that they shouldn't have. I haven't seen that fire this season, and the result has been just the opposite.

This is a great post; well-researched and relevant.  Thank you.

Agreed. Thanks for doing the "legwork."

[marty]

In my original post, I was referring specifically to Schafer's weekly write-ups of the game. They're all posted on the cornell hockey association website.

Oh you mean communications that written specifically for a limited audience of team donors and boosters? What do you expect him to say? "This team sucks. Give your money to Quinnipiac instead."?

I'd find it much more refreshing and confidence-inspiring if he acknowledged the team is struggling.

I know what I'd find refreshing.  

Maybe his Johnny one note posts are due to the hypnotic jargon he reads as he studies the very insightful postings on eLynah, eh, Brian?

[BearLover]

Last years of great coaches are often disappointing. I leafed through the CHN almanac one day and saw some patterns.

Jeff Jackson this season at Notre Dame. Of course most of those other examples were not coming off a final eight season with virtually the entire team returning.  Shocking.

Pretty much the entire list of leaders by wins, including York, Parker, Berenson, Sauer, etc. Ron Mason is the only exception.

I would imagine almost all of their final years were under very different circumstances than Schafer's.

You don't read, do you? Great coaches, mediocre final seasons.

I think Bear's point was you could be switching the causal arrow.

Pretty sure they all left on their own terms.

I don't have direct knowledge of their leaving circumstances, but their records suggest they did indeed leave on their own terms. Sauer's sub-.500 years were not directly before his last season. Berenson and Parker had minor RS/CT/NCAA droughts toward the end, but not horrible results overall.

Jerry York, Last Season 15-18-5, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Jack Parker, Last Season 21-16-2, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Ron Mason, Last Season 27-9-5, Prior 10 seasons: 0 sub-.500 years
Red Berenson, Last Season 13-19-3, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year
Jeff Sauer, Last Season 16-19-4, Prior 10 seasons: 3 sub-.500 years
Mike Schafer, YTD 12-10-6, Prior 10 seasons: 1 sub-.500 year

I think there's a real chance that when a coaching retirement is announced it can drain the focus/energy of a team. That would certainly be consistent with Cornell's performance this year. Combine high pressure to have a great season with a slew of injuries early on, and it's easy to see how frustration mounts quickly.

What I loved most about Schafe's senior year was the fire the team had. It won them games that they shouldn't have. I haven't seen that fire this season, and the result has been just the opposite.

This is a great post; well-researched and relevant.  Thank you.

Agreed. Thanks for doing the "legwork."

I appreciate the analysis but number of seasons under .500 is the wrong metric. We are talking about legendary coaches from blue blood college hockey programs, there should be almost no seasons under .500 ever. It would make more sense to look at NCAA bids.

[Jim Hyla]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

No. This is what we have been all season.  It is not an anomaly.  We are, somehow, average, despite being loaded with talent and having the greatest incentive to win any Cornell team ever has.

The Doomers are all fucking idiots, too -- we aren't "embarrassing" or any adolescent shit.  We're just average.  This year, this is us.

I hope we work it all out and come back strong next year.

I understand that this was written in the heat of the game, but really!;-)

It's hard to judge incentives, but if you ever listened to Harkness (Yeah I know, I know) you'd believe that every game was the most important. And certainly as the season progressed the incentive in 1970 was immense.

[Dafatone]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

No. This is what we have been all season.  It is not an anomaly.  We are, somehow, average, despite being loaded with talent and having the greatest incentive to win any Cornell team ever has.

The Doomers are all fucking idiots, too -- we aren't "embarrassing" or any adolescent shit.  We're just average.  This year, this is us.

I hope we work it all out and come back strong next year.

I understand that this was written in the heat of the game, but really!;-)

It's hard to judge incentives, but if you ever listened to Harkness (Yeah I know, I know) you'd believe that every game was the most important. And certainly as the season progressed the incentive in 1970 was immense.

I wonder if knowing it's Schafer's last year is making things harder.

[abmarks]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

[BearLover]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

Yes, 100%. This team was predicted to be first in the ECAC and contend for the national title. If I knew Rayhill would dress as the extra skater a few times that would move the needle only a little.

[Tom Lento]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

Yes, 100%. This team was predicted to be first in the ECAC and contend for the national title. If I knew Rayhill would dress as the extra skater a few times that would move the needle only a little.

What if you knew that the team would be playing guys out of position in nearly every game in the middle part of the season because 6 of their top 12 options up front were unavailable due to injury?

Fans have every right to be disappointed with how the season has unfolded. It's disappointing! Be disappointed! Hell, I'd even go so far as to say that the season has been a bit disappointing even after accounting for the injuries, as there were a good four or five games this team could have - and should have - won even as-played, and with better discipline at the end of the Dartmouth game maybe they have a shot at Clarkson as well.

However, the continued insistence that we need some explanation for how the season has unfolded is just annoying. The explanation is the most obvious thing in the world. They've had a monumentally unlucky run of injuries that have prevented the team from finding any rhythm or cohesion, and the core of the team was too young to weather that storm in that best possible way. Add in a mediocre to poor special teams performance in the preceding year and you've got a recipe for a bad time.

Hope for the best in the playoffs, they probably don't make placid but if they do then maybe we'll finally see some of their upside potential.

[BearLover]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

Yes, 100%. This team was predicted to be first in the ECAC and contend for the national title. If I knew Rayhill would dress as the extra skater a few times that would move the needle only a little.

What if you knew that the team would be playing guys out of position in nearly every game in the middle part of the season because 6 of their top 12 options up front were unavailable due to injury?

This was true for like 3 games the entire season, right? For most of the season Devlin+Wallace+1-3 other guys were out.

I don't think injuries explain even half of our struggles. Shane had a very tough year, the PP (most of which stayed healthy almost the entire year) was awful, and the team was overall quite unlucky. Those things aren't injury-related. This was a very disappointing year even accounting for the injuries.

[ugarte]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

Yes, 100%. This team was predicted to be first in the ECAC and contend for the national title. If I knew Rayhill would dress as the extra skater a few times that would move the needle only a little.

What if you knew that the team would be playing guys out of position in nearly every game in the middle part of the season because 6 of their top 12 options up front were unavailable due to injury?

This was true for like 3 games the entire season, right? For most of the season Devlin+Wallace+1-3 other guys were out.

I don't think injuries explain even half of our struggles. Shane had a very tough year, the PP (most of which stayed healthy almost the entire year) was awful, and the team was overall quite unlucky. Those things aren't injury-related. This was a very disappointing year even accounting for the injuries.

I think everyone agrees with you that Shane had a bad year, the power play was a disaster and the team simply didn't score enough goals.

You have a very clear opinion that I'd call intractable but I don't mean it pejoratively: there was a failure of coaching. Tthat failure combined getting the guys game ready and/or motivated and making smarter/faster decisions on the starting goalie.  You aren't saying anything about the facts of the team's injuries that aren't generally agreed-upon, but your framing is dismissive. We had repeated injuries to players who were expected to get serious minutes, from the top to bottom lines. They were overlapping and recurring. We saw a lot of guys who weren't supposed to break a sweat out there skating real shifts. Obviously you don't think that it mattered much but obviously that is not a generally shared opinion on the forum.*

Isn't it a little exhausting repeating yourself like this? You don't have new evidence, you just keep saying it, which results in... CRAP LIKE THIS! JESUS! DO YOU THINK I ENJOY THIS? THIS IS A COMPULSION! STOP! FOR MY SAKE, PLEASE STOP!

* Me? I don't care either way. The injuries are what they are. I have no idea what other teams were going through and generally think that fans tend to overstate the impact of their own teams injuries while "them's the breaks" for the bad guys. We lost a lot of games. Imagine, this is the reaction of someone who mostly agrees with you about what a disappointment the season has been!

[Dafatone]

Something I noticed that hasn't been talked about a ton is that a lot of our PP guys are also PK guys. Bancroft and Walsh for instance. That surprised me some.

[andyw2100]

One thing that I don't think has been talked about much is that the injuries affect things well beyond who is dressed for a game. The injuries had a negative impact on how hard and with what lines the team could practice. I'm guessing the injuries also resulted in a lot of guys playing at 60 or 70%. I'm not suggesting the injuries were all that was responsible to the results thus far this season, but they really were a big part of it. Add in some bad luck and a goaltender having an off year, and here we are.