Opponent and other news and results 2025-2026

[VIEWfromK]

while Cornell struggled mightily through Casey's first year.

This is Casey's first year.  The comparisons can't be made concurrently

[Trotsky]

Two enjoyable cases of schadenfreude:

1. BU fans on the USCHO forum apoplectic about their team being on the outside of the NCAA despite having the most talent in the entire country (19 draft picks + midseason addition of soon-to-be top 5 pick). All sorts of comments like "you can't win with a team of underclassmen." I guess they forget they made the frozen four the past three years with the same recruiting strategy?

2. Clarkson fans on their forum, the Clarkson Hockey Roundtable, at a loss for why their team has been so mediocre this season. Normally I wouldn't hate on Clarkson but their fans universally wanted to run Casey out of town. (Also I still hold a grudge for how they stole the 2019 ECAC title from us in the worst officiated game I've ever seen.) Casey was replaced with J.F. Houle and for awhile it appeared Clarkson got the better of that exchange, going from a middle-of-the-road team to second in the conference and making the ECAC championship game last season, while Cornell struggled mightily through Casey's first year. But then Cornell beat Clarkson in the ECAC final, and since then Cornell has been up, while Clarkson has been down. The Clarkson fans found all sorts of "issues" to complain about w/r/t Casey, such as his supposed emphasis on dump-and-chase, his inability to motivate players, his inability to develop players, etc.

This is a PSA for everyone with respect to BL. He very clearly comes by his anxiety about the present and future of the team honestly. While he sometimes bangs a similar drum a little too insistently let s/he who is without sin cast that first stone. His assessment of Dartmouth has panned out. His notes on the precarious position we are in w/r/t an at-large bid in a weak conference aren't without merit. I am always happy to make fun of his worst instincts but in general eLF needs to chill out with the reflexive defensiveness to his analysis.

tldr: Schopenhauer was an asshole but he was still right sometimes.

[ugarte]

tldr: Schopenhauer was an asshole but he was still right sometimes.

[Trotsky]

Yes, ugarte.  That's the joke.

[stereax]

Joshua Ravensbergen expected to attend Michigan State next season. Presumably means Augustine is going to sign after this year.

[arugula]

Joshua Ravensbergen expected to attend Michigan State next season. Presumably means Augustine is going to sign after this year.

Augustine, much like Celebrini, seemed to meet kryptonite when they played us.  Just sayin'

[scoop85]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

[stereax]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

Pretty sure they do.

[BearLover]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

Pretty sure they do.

With regard to NIL in hockey, I would like to see a smidge of actual reporting, somewhere, anywhere, with specific details (players + amounts). Everyone just waives their hands and shouts "NIL!" whenever a good recruit signs with a top school. But there's no hard evidence anywhere. In football and basketball, we know NIL to be a major factor because such reporting exists. In hockey, we never get specific details. The one exception is Gavin McKenna receiving "$700,000," reported elsewhere as $500,000 or less, which is itself disputed by others (I heard on a hockey podcast it's under $250K). And then when you listen to the people who report these figures, it becomes clear they don't even know if it's NIL, or revenue sharing, or if it includes scholarship, or if it's just for McKenna's freshman year or if instead it only gets paid in full if he stays more than one year.

What I'm saying is, we're left totally in the dark on NIL in hockey, as any reporting is wildly vague. It sounds like the reporters themselves don't know.

I am sure NIL/revenue sharing in hockey exists, but I'm skeptical it exists to any real degree outside of specific circumstances. Money does not materialize out of thin air. Hockey programs were already reliant on donations to survive, so for NIL to be a major factor you'd need donors committing vast sums of money on top of what they were previously committing. That's certainly possible, but it's unlikely for most schools, even the big ones. And that's leaving out questions such as passing the new NIL clearinghouse or the difficulties of foreign players earning NIL.

[stereax]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

Pretty sure they do.

With regard to NIL in hockey, I would like to see a smidge of actual reporting, somewhere, anywhere, with specific details (players + amounts). Everyone just waives their hands and shouts "NIL!" whenever a good recruit signs with a top school. But there's no hard evidence anywhere. In football and basketball, we know NIL to be a major factor because such reporting exists. In hockey, we never get specific details. The one exception is Gavin McKenna receiving "$700,000," reported elsewhere as $500,000 or less, which is itself disputed by others (I heard on a hockey podcast it's under $250K). And then when you listen to the people who report these figures, it becomes clear they don't even know if it's NIL, or revenue sharing, or if it includes scholarship, or if it's just for McKenna's freshman year or if instead it only gets paid in full if he stays more than one year.

What I'm saying is, we're left totally in the dark on NIL in hockey, as any reporting is wildly vague. It sounds like the reporters themselves don't know.

I am sure NIL/revenue sharing in hockey exists, but I'm skeptical it exists to any real degree outside of specific circumstances. Money does not materialize out of thin air. Hockey programs were already reliant on donations to survive, so for NIL to be a major factor you'd need donors committing vast sums of money on top of what they were previously committing. That's certainly possible, but it's unlikely for most schools, even the big ones. And that's leaving out questions such as passing the new NIL clearinghouse or the difficulties of foreign players earning NIL.

For sure - I'm just going off things like Porter Martone's reported $300k to presume that MSU is using NIL as a factor. But at the same time, NIL in hockey is so new that it's so difficult to have a good idea of what exactly it consists of, how much it is, etcetera, etcetera. (I'll also note that BU isn't a football school, so perhaps they have more cash to devote to their hockey program.)

At the same time, BU also has serious pedigree. MSU is on the upswing and is also a really, really good team. So it could also be, take Ravensbergen, a "this school has a great chance of winning and has developed a really good goalie already". I know Carter George was considering BC before he got traded from Owen Sound, more out of a developmental thing than necessarily NIL.

On the other hand, PSU, for example, clearly benefitted heavily from being able to lure talent in with cash. So there's definitely some truth to NIL screwing with the college hockey landscape. Unfortunately, we probably won't know how much it does until someone does actual investigative reporting in a few years.

[Trotsky]

So NIL is secret?

I'm not sure why it wouldn't be public information, like an athlete's contract.  Why not?  I'm not saying we have a right to know (if you aint up on things, we don't have any rights any more in any respect).  But why not just let it be transparent?

It's supposed to not be cheating or unsavory, after all.

[BearLover]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

Pretty sure they do.

With regard to NIL in hockey, I would like to see a smidge of actual reporting, somewhere, anywhere, with specific details (players + amounts). Everyone just waives their hands and shouts "NIL!" whenever a good recruit signs with a top school. But there's no hard evidence anywhere. In football and basketball, we know NIL to be a major factor because such reporting exists. In hockey, we never get specific details. The one exception is Gavin McKenna receiving "$700,000," reported elsewhere as $500,000 or less, which is itself disputed by others (I heard on a hockey podcast it's under $250K). And then when you listen to the people who report these figures, it becomes clear they don't even know if it's NIL, or revenue sharing, or if it includes scholarship, or if it's just for McKenna's freshman year or if instead it only gets paid in full if he stays more than one year.

What I'm saying is, we're left totally in the dark on NIL in hockey, as any reporting is wildly vague. It sounds like the reporters themselves don't know.

I am sure NIL/revenue sharing in hockey exists, but I'm skeptical it exists to any real degree outside of specific circumstances. Money does not materialize out of thin air. Hockey programs were already reliant on donations to survive, so for NIL to be a major factor you'd need donors committing vast sums of money on top of what they were previously committing. That's certainly possible, but it's unlikely for most schools, even the big ones. And that's leaving out questions such as passing the new NIL clearinghouse or the difficulties of foreign players earning NIL.

For sure - I'm just going off things like Porter Martone's reported $300k to presume that MSU is using NIL as a factor. But at the same time, NIL in hockey is so new that it's so difficult to have a good idea of what exactly it consists of, how much it is, etcetera, etcetera. (I'll also note that BU isn't a football school, so perhaps they have more cash to devote to their hockey program.)

If you try to dig up the source for that Porter Martone number, though, you'll see what I'm talking about. The original "source" was a student at Penn State with a few hundred followers on Twitter who blogs about the Flyers. He "reported" an NIL offer for Martone "north of $250,000," and then a bunch of other media ran with it. Maybe this is a commentary on today's media generally rather than hockey NIL reporting specifically, but I see no reason this random kid should be trusted on the matter.
https://x.com/BR_OpenIce/status/1920169144533549556?s=20

[pjd8]

For sure - I'm just going off things like Porter Martone's reported $300k to presume that MSU is using NIL as a factor. But at the same time, NIL in hockey is so new that it's so difficult to have a good idea of what exactly it consists of, how much it is, etcetera, etcetera. (I'll also note that BU isn't a football school, so perhaps they have more cash to devote to their hockey program.)

Given that the BU women have their own rink (Walter Brown), which they have been loaning to homeless Northeastern, I'd say that Terriers Hockey is doing okay financially. During a Northeastern game broadcast a week or two ago, the commentators talked about how they had nicely renovated that rink.

[VIEWfromK]

MSU must have some massive NLI for hockey, as they (along with BU) are cleaning up with the elite guys (McKenna excepted).

Pretty sure they do.

With regard to NIL in hockey, I would like to see a smidge of actual reporting, somewhere, anywhere, with specific details (players + amounts). Everyone just waives their hands and shouts "NIL!" whenever a good recruit signs with a top school. But there's no hard evidence anywhere. In football and basketball, we know NIL to be a major factor because such reporting exists. In hockey, we never get specific details. The one exception is Gavin McKenna receiving "$700,000," reported elsewhere as $500,000 or less, which is itself disputed by others (I heard on a hockey podcast it's under $250K). And then when you listen to the people who report these figures, it becomes clear they don't even know if it's NIL, or revenue sharing, or if it includes scholarship, or if it's just for McKenna's freshman year or if instead it only gets paid in full if he stays more than one year.

What I'm saying is, we're left totally in the dark on NIL in hockey, as any reporting is wildly vague. It sounds like the reporters themselves don't know.

I am sure NIL/revenue sharing in hockey exists, but I'm skeptical it exists to any real degree outside of specific circumstances. Money does not materialize out of thin air. Hockey programs were already reliant on donations to survive, so for NIL to be a major factor you'd need donors committing vast sums of money on top of what they were previously committing. That's certainly possible, but it's unlikely for most schools, even the big ones. And that's leaving out questions such as passing the new NIL clearinghouse or the difficulties of foreign players earning NIL.

This is the sport that gave us the upper body injury.  Keeping things under wraps is ingrained in the fiber

[stereax]

For sure - I'm just going off things like Porter Martone's reported $300k to presume that MSU is using NIL as a factor. But at the same time, NIL in hockey is so new that it's so difficult to have a good idea of what exactly it consists of, how much it is, etcetera, etcetera. (I'll also note that BU isn't a football school, so perhaps they have more cash to devote to their hockey program.)

Given that the BU women have their own rink (Walter Brown), which they have been loaning to homeless Northeastern, I'd say that Terriers Hockey is doing okay financially. During a Northeastern game broadcast a week or two ago, the commentators talked about how they had nicely renovated that rink.

I almost forgot Northeastern is homeless now LMAO.