Recruits 2026 and Beyond

[BearLover]

... and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

i don't think it's unlikely though! i think it's fairly routine. on the other hand, what's kind of unbearable about belaboring this is that it assumes pelletier was offended he wasn't brought in OR that the analysis by hindsight is a reflection of anything other than bad luck.

the way i see it, Cornell didn't know Pelletier was about to break out like this. If anyone had known, we'd have brought him in and taken advantage of his leap. On the other hand, if he *hadn't* had a breakout year we wouldn't have lost him but he wouldn't be salivating over getting the guy having a breakout year.

Yeah, the simplest explanation is also by far the most likely: the coaching staff misjudged what they had in Pelletier. This isn't a logical leap at all, as it comports with how hockey recruiting tends to work. Anyway, I've moved on but am happy to reopen this debate any time I get gently trolled on this topic.

[marty]

Looks like we have a new commit for next year: Charles Arend of Dubuque in the USHL. He turns 20 in a couple of weeks, is a 6 feet tall, 190 pound forward. He was under half a point per game the last couple of years but has 20 points in 27 games this year.

former OSU recruit

they should have brought him in

Their coaches should answer for this travesty.  Their fans deserve to know who made their bone-headed decision.

[marty]

I know you're trolling but there's a big difference between a school essentially telling a player they don't have space for him, as OSU did, and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

I could have not included the word since the probability of it being true is so high, I but decided to include it to throw a bone to the doubters.

Most of whom would like to pick up a bone or a stick and break it across la tete.

[marty]

... and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

i don't think it's unlikely though! i think it's fairly routine. on the other hand, what's kind of unbearable about belaboring this is that it assumes pelletier was offended he wasn't brought in OR that the analysis by hindsight is a reflection of anything other than bad luck.

the way i see it, Cornell didn't know Pelletier was about to break out like this. If anyone had known, we'd have brought him in and taken advantage of his leap. On the other hand, if he *hadn't* had a breakout year we wouldn't have lost him but he wouldn't be salivating over getting the guy having a breakout year.

Yeah, the simplest explanation is also by far the most likely: the coaching staff misjudged what they had in Pelletier. This isn't a logical leap at all, as it comports with how hockey recruiting tends to work. Anyway, I've moved on but am happy to reopen this debate any time I get gently trolled on this topic.

зделия капля стекла для

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

... and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

i don't think it's unlikely though! i think it's fairly routine. on the other hand, what's kind of unbearable about belaboring this is that it assumes pelletier was offended he wasn't brought in OR that the analysis by hindsight is a reflection of anything other than bad luck.

the way i see it, Cornell didn't know Pelletier was about to break out like this. If anyone had known, we'd have brought him in and taken advantage of his leap. On the other hand, if he *hadn't* had a breakout year we wouldn't have lost him but he wouldn't be salivating over getting the guy having a breakout year.

Yeah, the simplest explanation is also by far the most likely: the coaching staff misjudged what they had in Pelletier. This isn't a logical leap at all, as it comports with how hockey recruiting tends to work. Anyway, I've moved on but am happy to reopen this debate any time I get gently trolled on this topic.

зделия капля стекла для

Translation please?

[Give My Regards]

зделия капля стекла для

Translation please?

For those who are familiar with Tom Lehrer's _Lobachevsky_, "It stinks."

[adamw]

I know you're trolling but there's a big difference between a school essentially telling a player they don't have space for him, as OSU did, and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

I could have not included the word since the probability of it being true is so high, I but decided to include it to throw a bone to the doubters.

remember that part about saying things with certainty when you really don't have any, and how that is the issue, and not that you have are being persecuted for having opinions? yeah ... ah, nevermind FFS

[adamw]

Also, I want to add—-it's commendable how diplomatic Arend was about OSU, but that's some serious bullshit on the part of the school that things are more uncertain under the new landscape, therefore we can't guarantee you a spot, blah blah blah. Umm, you can certainly guarantee anybody a spot, what you're actually saying is "we'll take you unless we can find someone better." Which is not how a commitment works. Essentially, OSU reneged on their offer. Which happens all the time, sure, but they should call it what it is.

I want to reiterate that Arend looks like a fine player and seems like a good kid too. So no issues with us picking him up. But there's some serious bullshit being put out by schools these days. 

The days of "Commitments" are over - both ways. Gone. Out the window.  So everyone might as well just get used to it.

Go look at the recruit list of all the teams. UMass, for example, has 30 players "committed" ... um, duh, that's not going to happen.  They are not alone. Most of the other big teams have 20+ players on their lists. They'll never all show up in a million years.  Some of it will the player's decision.  Some of it will be the school's decision.  At this point, that's the way the cookie crumbles, and everyone knows it.

At this point "we'll take you unless we can find someone better" - is basically exactly how it is working - both ways.

[BearLover]

I know you're trolling but there's a big difference between a school essentially telling a player they don't have space for him, as OSU did, and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

I could have not included the word since the probability of it being true is so high, I but decided to include it to throw a bone to the doubters.

remember that part about saying things with certainty when you really don't have any, and how that is the issue, and not that you have are being persecuted for having opinions? yeah ... ah, nevermind FFS

I'm serious about this—don't you have better things to do with your time?

In this case, I think what I said is quite likely the case. Therefore, I said that. Confidence level depends on the particular case. Should be obvious.

[stereax]

Also, I want to add—-it's commendable how diplomatic Arend was about OSU, but that's some serious bullshit on the part of the school that things are more uncertain under the new landscape, therefore we can't guarantee you a spot, blah blah blah. Umm, you can certainly guarantee anybody a spot, what you're actually saying is "we'll take you unless we can find someone better." Which is not how a commitment works. Essentially, OSU reneged on their offer. Which happens all the time, sure, but they should call it what it is.

I want to reiterate that Arend looks like a fine player and seems like a good kid too. So no issues with us picking him up. But there's some serious bullshit being put out by schools these days. 

The days of "Commitments" are over - both ways. Gone. Out the window.  So everyone might as well just get used to it.

Go look at the recruit list of all the teams. UMass, for example, has 30 players "committed" ... um, duh, that's not going to happen.  They are not alone. Most of the other big teams have 20+ players on their lists. They'll never all show up in a million years.  Some of it will the player's decision.  Some of it will be the school's decision.  At this point, that's the way the cookie crumbles, and everyone knows it.

At this point "we'll take you unless we can find someone better" - is basically exactly how it is working - both ways.

It feels like a BUNCH of prospects flip their commitment nowadays.

[Trotsky]

It could be we are more informed of early commits than before.

I suspect nothing has changed.  But then I believe nothing has changed in human affairs since we first swung down from the trees.

[Trotsky]

I know you're trolling but there's a big difference between a school essentially telling a player they don't have space for him, as OSU did, and a school delaying a recruit's arrival by one year, as was presumably the case with Cornell and Pelletier.

That word is carrying so much weight my back hurts just reading it.

I could have not included the word since the probability of it being true is so high, I but decided to include it to throw a bone to the doubters.

remember that part about saying things with certainty when you really don't have any, and how that is the issue, and not that you have are being persecuted for having opinions? yeah ... ah, nevermind FFS

I'm serious about this—don't you have better things to do with your time?

In this case, I think what I said is quite likely the case. Therefore, I said that. Confidence level depends on the particular case. Should be obvious.

This Will They or Won't They is getting intense.