Opponent and other news and results 2025-2026

[adamw]

By the way, I've had more than a handful of coaches ask me the same thing BearLover asks "Why don't you report more about these differences etc...?" - because they're all annoyed and want people to know things, yet they don't want to tell me things on the record - so ... And then I tell them all the same thing I tell you ... "I wish, but don't have the time." I've asked them all to come up with $3 million to endow CHN and then I'm all theirs, but none have taken me up on that.

Being a lunatic who devotes more time than he should to college hockey also explains why I'm here - I love Cornell hockey and what it stands for that much. Not like I'm on other teams' message boards. Even the ones that rip me all the time (or so I hear).

[stereax]

high-level hockey and high-level studies. Which, a couple of schools (thinking Michigan here) are similar, but don't quite have the "lay prestige" of an Ivy.

I get the impression there is a firewall between Michigan students and Michigan athletes and, while there are exceptions, the latter are neither expected nor competent to be in real classes.

cf. Duke, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, and a number of other name academic schools with suspiciously overly competitive revenue sport teams.

Not Army, though.  Those guys are serious as a heart attack.

Aye, my thoughts as well.

[BearLover]

Because Maine and UNH are cash-strapped state schools whose budgets have been decimated over the years. Maine has done better recently in trying to re-generate cash, and UNH is trying as well, with building renovations on the way and so on. This is much different than Denver or BU, because those schools are private and have more money, and have had bigger donors, and their teams have been more successful lately, so they've been able to keep up. I can't explain every little detail -- I don't have access to their budgets -- but it's clear from the way they each operate, and from what they've all told me, that the ability for UNH/Maine to keep up is harder compared to BU/Denver. This was already happening for years to UNH/Maine, with their facilities falling behind, and athletic dept. budgets taking a hit. So this stuff has only exacerbated it, making it harder to dig out. UNH and Vermont are currently the only schools in Hockey East without 3 assistant coaches. For whatever reason, schools like DU and BU have Rev Share budgets and UNH/Vermont do not. Throw a bunch of other schools like that into the mix, and now you're dwindling little by little the amount of programs that can keep up. Clarkson/St. Lawrence, pfft - forget it. I'm holding out hope for Colgate/RPI/Union, but I doubt it. The influx of major junior talent will help, but I suspect that it will help the big boys just as much and be a wash.

FWIW, I believe BU did not opt into the House settlement, meaning no rev share for them. But yeah, I should have used
different examples rather than two state schools vs two private schools. My general point is that I'm not sure why Maine is that different from UMass, or why Denver is that different from CC. At the end of the day, it's going to come down to a few big donors. Maybe UMass has them and Maine doesn't, but that can change, and nobody really knows.

I don't need any convincing that things are much worse now for the smaller programs than they were 5-10 years ago. I would guess the transfer portal has a much bigger effect than paying players, though.

To me, it all boils down to: a college has X budget to spend on their hockey program. They can slice that pie up between facilities, more scholarships, revenue sharing, coaches' salaries, nutrition, whatever. But the hard part is growing the budget (pie). There's no free lunch, and the revenue share budget has got to come from somewhere.

As to how it affects Cornell, I agree with Adam that ultimately even if we lose no players to NIL, if we want to win a national championship we're going to have to beat these teams that are stacking talent. Honestly though, I'm not sure how much more talent they can stack. The portal already lets Michigan take Ferris State's star goalie when the Michigan goalie goes pro or doesn't pan out. There is only so much PP time to spread around, and I'm not sure the BUs and Michigans can get much better than they already are (in this portal era).

Anyway, I've already said my piece on this and there's no point repeating it anymore. If I see proof that paying players is widespread, I'll change my tune.

[upprdeck]

The margin between the best and worst team in Hockey is small enough that even the lowest team can still win.  That margin is much higher in bball/fball.

OSU is already complaining about NIL money that they cant keep spending.  How long can 95% of these schools get 10-20-50 million a year to spend on sports if after 5 yrs that school still cant win a title?

[ugarte]

OSU is already complaining about NIL money that they cant keep spending.  How long can 95% of these schools get 10-20-50 million a year to spend on sports if after 5 yrs that school still cant win a title?

Amusingly, in football the transfer portal may serve as a brake on some NIL spending. Aikman has reportedly dropped out of the NIL game after a guy he was asked to buy for UCLA skipped town after cashing the check and finishing his freshman year.

[Trotsky]

My ankles hurt.

[abmarks]

Because Maine and UNH are cash-strapped state schools whose budgets have been decimated over the years. Maine has done better recently in trying to re-generate cash, and UNH is trying as well, with building renovations on the way and so on. This is much different than Denver or BU, because those schools are private and have more money, and have had bigger donors, and their teams have been more successful lately, so they've been able to keep up. I can't explain every little detail -- I don't have access to their budgets -- but it's clear from the way they each operate, and from what they've all told me, that the ability for UNH/Maine to keep up is harder compared to BU/Denver. This was already happening for years to UNH/Maine, with their facilities falling behind, and athletic dept. budgets taking a hit. So this stuff has only exacerbated it, making it harder to dig out. UNH and Vermont are currently the only schools in Hockey East without 3 assistant coaches. For whatever reason, schools like DU and BU have Rev Share budgets and UNH/Vermont do not. Throw a bunch of other schools like that into the mix, and now you're dwindling little by little the amount of programs that can keep up. Clarkson/St. Lawrence, pfft - forget it. I'm holding out hope for Colgate/RPI/Union, but I doubt it. The influx of major junior talent will help, but I suspect that it will help the big boys just as much and be a wash.

To me, it all boils down to: a college has X budget to spend on their hockey program. They can slice that pie up between facilities, more scholarships, revenue sharing, coaches' salaries, nutrition, whatever. But the hard part is growing the budget (pie). There's no free lunch, and the revenue share budget has got to come from somewhere.

It's a fundamental error to assume that each sport at a school just has the budget they have.  College sports aren't siloed, they operate as part of an athletic department portfolio.  The only revenue that an individual team can be guaranteed to have every year is the income off of any endowment that sport might have, money given to specific endowed positions (like Casey's), and what they are able to fundraise in donations made to that specific sport. 

When the athletic department does annual budgets, almost every sport these days gets subsidized by the department.  And the department decides in the budget process where there priorities are and where they want to allocate funds.  It's unreasonable to assume that sport X gets a relatively stable budget year over year.

If priorities change, or the competitive landscape changes, athletics will absolutely decide to add money to one sport and take from another.  Just look at the start of NIL and rev share in the major conferences and the impact on the non-revenue sports like track.  The need to fund football or hoop at much higher levels to remain competitive actually reduced the number of scholarships available for track. (That comes from a reputable media source that I can't recall anymore bc it was a year ago that I read it).

The point is, priorities change year to year and budgets can move with them. 

Adam mentioned UVM and UNH not having 3 assistant coaches and that while BU DU seemed to have Rev share budgets UNH and UVM don't, for reasons he couldn't explain.  I heard a short clip of a radio interview with the UVM AD last week, and he said that they spent across all sports 300k on I think it was 15 athletes. (random data point)

It makes sense to me that Bu would have a rev share budget but UVM basically doesn't.  I don't know how Hockey East splits up the TV revenue from NESN, but it's sensible to assume that it gets split by viewership and not split evenly.  BU is a very large school (student body and alumni wise) in a wealthy city, with a 50+ year run as a premier program.  UVM is basically anything but.   It's not that big, they are definitely not a long time top program, and they are a public university in a state that is under extreme budget constraints on the whole. 

It's also a reasonable guess that budgets have gradually shifted away from hockey and towards basketball at UVM.  Hoop has had a ton of success over the last decade or so and has avg attendance almost equal to hockey. 2266 v 2525/game as opposed to 1418 v 3293 in 90-91 (chosen at random for old time stat).

[adamw]

Because Maine and UNH are cash-strapped state schools whose budgets have been decimated over the years. Maine has done better recently in trying to re-generate cash, and UNH is trying as well, with building renovations on the way and so on. This is much different than Denver or BU, because those schools are private and have more money, and have had bigger donors, and their teams have been more successful lately, so they've been able to keep up. I can't explain every little detail -- I don't have access to their budgets -- but it's clear from the way they each operate, and from what they've all told me, that the ability for UNH/Maine to keep up is harder compared to BU/Denver. This was already happening for years to UNH/Maine, with their facilities falling behind, and athletic dept. budgets taking a hit. So this stuff has only exacerbated it, making it harder to dig out. UNH and Vermont are currently the only schools in Hockey East without 3 assistant coaches. For whatever reason, schools like DU and BU have Rev Share budgets and UNH/Vermont do not. Throw a bunch of other schools like that into the mix, and now you're dwindling little by little the amount of programs that can keep up. Clarkson/St. Lawrence, pfft - forget it. I'm holding out hope for Colgate/RPI/Union, but I doubt it. The influx of major junior talent will help, but I suspect that it will help the big boys just as much and be a wash.

FWIW, I believe BU did not opt into the House settlement, meaning no rev share for them. But yeah, I should have used different examples rather than two state schools vs two private schools. My general point is that I'm not sure why Maine is that different from UMass, or why Denver is that different from CC. At the end of the day, it's going to come down to a few big donors. Maybe UMass has them and Maine doesn't, but that can change, and nobody really knows.

Well, some people do know. Just not necessarily everything. Just yesterday, UMass received a $1,000,000 endowment for the hockey program from a donor. That's good for about 1 player a year. Maine has had improvements in recent years, and may not be much different at the moment. It was well behind for a number of years.

Denver vs. CC ... CC is a D-III school, and about 1/4th the size, among other things. But CC will also get its share of donors.

To me, it all boils down to: a college has X budget to spend on their hockey program. They can slice that pie up between facilities, more scholarships, revenue sharing, coaches' salaries, nutrition, whatever. But the hard part is growing the budget (pie). There's no free lunch, and the revenue share budget has got to come from somewhere.

I agree, but this is the same, at a different scale, for the bigger sports. It's no different. Yet they are still handing out gobs of money anyway. Denver, as an example, is going to hand out money to get players, because the school thinks it's important. And is. Whether that is sustainable is different conversation. It's not sustainable for Ohio State's football program either. But they're still doing it. You're making a leap between whether this makes any sense in the big picture, and whether teams are doing it. You're skeptical that it's happening because of this. Yet, it is - regardless.

Anyway, I've already said my piece on this and there's no point repeating it anymore. If I see proof that paying players is widespread, I'll change my tune.

You're right that it's maddening. Unless someone walks into your house and hands you a stack of canceled checks, you won't believe anything anyone tells you. But I'll keep pushing back nevertheless, not because I expect to ever convince you of anything, but just to help others.

Whether it's sustainable - again - different story. I agree the whole thing is absurd.

[Jim Hyla]

Denver vs. CC ... CC is a D-III school, and about 1/4th the size, among other things. But CC will also get its share of donors.

You're being generous.

DU 11,500
CC  2,100

But I've certainly heard that CC is generally wealthier, and I'm not going to check.

[Trotsky]

CC did (does?) have that ridiculous ultra modern barn.  When we drove by it I figured it was just another of Colorado Springs' pathetic McJesusHut monstrosities but nope.  Anyway, it didn't cost chicken feed.  Maybe they have their own Nazi-sympathizing Engelstad douche to be a (very) white knight.

[scoop85]

Gavin McKenna with 1G, 6A for PSU tonight against OSU — and the game isn't over.

[Trotsky]

Gavin McKenna with 1G, 6A for PSU tonight against OSU — and the game isn't over.

Finished 1-7-8 +2.  PSU was 5x5 on PP.

[adamw]

CC did (does?) have that ridiculous ultra modern barn.  When we drove by it I figured it was just another of Colorado Springs' pathetic McJesusHut monstrosities but nope.  Anyway, it didn't cost chicken feed.  Maybe they have their own Nazi-sympathizing Engelstad douche to be a (very) white knight.

In what way, dare I ask, is it ridiculous or ultra-modern. I've been there a bunch of times - and it's quite nice actually, but not ridiculous. No better or worse than any other arena built of that size in the last 20 years. Replaced a 400-year old arena, so it's not like they weren't due. Only thing wrong with it is, they built the press box assuming the only person who would go in it is Flat Stanley.

[Trotsky]

CC did (does?) have that ridiculous ultra modern barn.

In what way, dare I ask, is it ridiculous

...

No better or worse than any other arena built of that size in the last 20 years.

Asked and answered.

If your idea of nice is the new Gahden or the new Forum, it's nice.

[marty]

CC did (does?) have that ridiculous ultra modern barn.  When we drove by it I figured it was just another of Colorado Springs' pathetic McJesusHut monstrosities but nope.  Anyway, it didn't cost chicken feed.  Maybe they have their own Nazi-sympathizing Engelstad douche to be a (very) white knight.

In what way, dare I ask, is it ridiculous or ultra-modern. I've been there a bunch of times - and it's quite nice actually, but not ridiculous. No better or worse than any other arena built of that size in the last 20 years. Replaced a 400-year old arena, so it's not like they weren't due. Only thing wrong with it is, they built the press box assuming the only person who would go in it is Flat Stanley.

In an era of Fat Stanley. At least you have the goods to get in.

Have you kept track of those you have yet to visit?