The Casey Jones Era: Aims

[The Rancor]

I'm not even convinced yet he's a great coach—I mean, he probably is a good coach, but what basis do we have? A slightly over .500 record in 12 years at Clarkson?

I admit I don't understand how to evaluate college hockey records with all the OT/SOL point BS from the past several seasons, but FWIW Casey's record on CHN is listed as 234-185-56 for a .552 win percentage.

Keith Allain was 282-254-54 (.524) at Yale.
Schafer was 561-300-117 (.633) at Cornell.

I think there's really no doubt that Casey Jones is at least a good coach, and probably an excellent one. I'm also inclined to think that if Allain was capable of leading a team to a national title Jones is too, although for a good coach in the Ivies I suspect that's mostly a function of luck.

That's the wonderful and yet horrible thing about the NCAA tournament - anything can happen over the course of four single-elimination games. Allain was capable of leading that Yale team to a third-place finish in the ECAC with a reasonably decent 18-12-3 record, yet a loss in the conference tourney semifinals. They were literally the last at-large team into the NCAA tourney. But once you're in, you just have to win four in a row (two of which they did win handily, the other two in overtime). They deserved the championship because they won the four games they had to win, but it was definitely closer to the fluke end of the scale - stepping up in a big moment - than Quinnipiac's title was in 2023. Of course you have to be a good coach to get those four wins out of your team especially when they're not favored - but that win was all the more frustrating to many of us because of the sheer number of regional finals we've been to with Schafer as coach, with only one Frozen Four and no titles to show for it.

All of which is beside the point - Trotsky started this thread to suggest what Casey's aims should be compared to what Schafer's were thirty years ago, not to make predictions for Casey. I think they're perfectly reasonable, and I hope he achieves all three, and soon.

100% this. It is at this point baseline for Coach Jones to make the NCAAs, and go to the Frozen Four. We all want a Championship, and not the Whitelaw. Expectation is excellence in the ECAC. Goals are to win the big one, fill Lynah and beat Quinny and Harvard. And Clarkson. And RPI...

[stereax]

I'm not even convinced yet he's a great coach—I mean, he probably is a good coach, but what basis do we have? A slightly over .500 record in 12 years at Clarkson?

I admit I don't understand how to evaluate college hockey records with all the OT/SOL point BS from the past several seasons, but FWIW Casey's record on CHN is listed as 234-185-56 for a .552 win percentage.

Keith Allain was 282-254-54 (.524) at Yale.
Schafer was 561-300-117 (.633) at Cornell.

I think there's really no doubt that Casey Jones is at least a good coach, and probably an excellent one. I'm also inclined to think that if Allain was capable of leading a team to a national title Jones is too, although for a good coach in the Ivies I suspect that's mostly a function of luck.

That's the wonderful and yet horrible thing about the NCAA tournament - anything can happen over the course of four single-elimination games. Allain was capable of leading that Yale team to a third-place finish in the ECAC with a reasonably decent 18-12-3 record, yet a loss in the conference tourney semifinals. They were literally the last at-large team into the NCAA tourney. But once you're in, you just have to win four in a row (two of which they did win handily, the other two in overtime). They deserved the championship because they won the four games they had to win, but it was definitely closer to the fluke end of the scale - stepping up in a big moment - than Quinnipiac's title was in 2023. Of course you have to be a good coach to get those four wins out of your team especially when they're not favored - but that win was all the more frustrating to many of us because of the sheer number of regional finals we've been to with Schafer as coach, with only one Frozen Four and no titles to show for it.

All of which is beside the point - Trotsky started this thread to suggest what Casey's aims should be compared to what Schafer's were thirty years ago, not to make predictions for Casey. I think they're perfectly reasonable, and I hope he achieves all three, and soon.

100% this. It is at this point baseline for Coach Jones to make the NCAAs, and go to the Frozen Four. We all want a Championship, and not the Whitelaw. Expectation is excellence in the ECAC. Goals are to win the big one, fill Lynah and beat Quinny and Harvard. And Clarkson. And RPI...

"Baseline: be a top four team in the country in a landscape stacked against us"

Just win the ECACs and it's a good year. Kick the shit out of Harvard and Q, great year.

If, in a 30-year span, Schafer, who by all accounts is an excellent coach, made the Frozen Four only once... well, I don't see how that can be a reasonable expectation for a new head coach with a large graduating class. Especially in a landscape where we historically have never been able to attract top top talent that has just been made worse with the advent of NIL and the subsequent rise of teams like Penn State.

Our biggest benefit was our "system" - playing as a TEAM and not as individuals. But I worry that teamwork just isn't enough in the face of sheer individual talent like some of these teams are amassing.

In either case, with such a massive shift, we need to ride out a few years and see how things go before passing any real judgment. It's entirely possible we just don't ever make the Frozen Four again, with how things are stacked. It's also entirely possible we win the Frozen Four next year. Who the hell knows?

As I think I've said before - you make the playoff dance, whether by winning Whitelaw or by ranking. Doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is winning four games in a row at that point. The regular season can go as badly as 24-25. Just need to win Whitelaw to get in and then four more games.

...In overtime against BU, it felt like the "magic" had run out. The team was just too exhausted, couldn't keep up. I had that sinking feeling in my gut minutes before the OT goal was scored.

I don't know. Winning the natty would obviously be great. I just don't think it's a realistic goal for Casey as a coach to set his benchmark at. (Obviously, that's the ultimate goal every year. But if he doesn't win it all in the next five years, I don't think that's necessarily a strike against him.)

I just want some good ass hockey, man. And hope. And I think Casey should give us both.

[BearLover]

That's the wonderful and yet horrible thing about the NCAA tournament - anything can happen over the course of four single-elimination games. Allain was capable of leading that Yale team to a third-place finish in the ECAC with a reasonably decent 18-12-3 record, yet a loss in the conference tourney semifinals. They were literally the last at-large team into the NCAA tourney. But once you're in, you just have to win four in a row (two of which they did win handily, the other two in overtime). They deserved the championship because they won the four games they had to win, but it was definitely closer to the fluke end of the scale - stepping up in a big moment - than Quinnipiac's title was in 2023.

Indeed, Allain probably should've won with the 2010 team, which laid an egg in the ECACs, affecting their seeding, or the 2011 team, which lost a barnburner to BC in the regional final. So 2013 was like winning the Oscar for the great movie that didn't win two years ago but that probably would've won in any other year. A lifetime achievement award, of sorts.

There's survivorship bias in looking at Allain as an example of an ECAC/Ivy coach winning it all. For every Allain, there are 10+ coaches in similar positions who never sniff an NCAA title. Even very successful coaches like Schafer more often than not never win a national title. So I don't really see the brief success of Yale or Union as indicative of anything rather than that it's technically possible for such a team to win an NCAA title. It's now been over 10 years since Yale and Union won and both programs have been overall mediocre in that time.

The sustained success of Quinnipiac is much more impressive, but even they wouldn't have won a national title if not for 7 fifth-year players and a phantom penalty call against Minnesota at the end of regulation. Harvard has been the other most successful league opponent during this time and they haven't even made the NCAA final.

Schafer did everything he could, and I don't blame him for the lack of NCAA success. He had great luck in the opening round and terrible luck in the second round. It would have been great to spread out the distribution a bit, but so it goes. Most other great coaches never win one either.

The goal as always is to get into the NCAA tournament and then pray things break your way. A weak ECAC helps (better chance at winning conference tournament). We've made the tournament so often lately that it makes sense to set higher goals, but I don't think that's realistic—I think the most realistic goal is to just make the tournament and pray.

[Trotsky]

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what's a heaven for?

[Jim Hyla]

I'm not even convinced yet he's a great coach—I mean, he probably is a good coach, but what basis do we have? A slightly over .500 record in 12 years at Clarkson? Let's have a good season or two before we start talking about national championships.  

The college hockey landscape has completely changed the last few years. ASU just signed a kid straight out of the AHL. Casey is going to need to revamp how Cornell recruits if we want to compete nationally.

The sky continues to fall.

No. It wasn't falling under Schafer and there are no indications it will fall under Casey—just a lot of uncertainty.

You have a pretty impressive streak going. 150 straight forums posts that have added literally nothing to the conversation other than commentary on my posting style.

I think you missed the point on Al's post, as well as on Trotsky's.

Since Trotsky's is the oldest, let's start there.

In talking about national championships he was in no way referring to the coach's past or future performance.

His mention of National Championship was as an "aim", or if you prefer, a "goal", it was not a prediction.

So if you're going to criticize it, you are criticizing it as a goal.

Second, Al's mention of "The sky continues to fall" had nothing to do with the team's, or coach's performance.

Go back and read "Henny Penny", or if you prefer "Chicken Little".

The phrase "the sky is falling" refers to the chicken, or in this case the person (you) who always comes up with the negative in any situation.

So Al's use is referring to your constant posting about the negatives of situations, not about coach's performance.

[BearLover]

I'm not even convinced yet he's a great coach—I mean, he probably is a good coach, but what basis do we have? A slightly over .500 record in 12 years at Clarkson? Let's have a good season or two before we start talking about national championships.  

The college hockey landscape has completely changed the last few years. ASU just signed a kid straight out of the AHL. Casey is going to need to revamp how Cornell recruits if we want to compete nationally.

The sky continues to fall.

No. It wasn't falling under Schafer and there are no indications it will fall under Casey—just a lot of uncertainty.

You have a pretty impressive streak going. 150 straight forums posts that have added literally nothing to the conversation other than commentary on my posting style.

I think you missed the point on Al's post, as well as on Trotsky's.

Since Trotsky's is the oldest, let's start there.

In talking about national championships he was in no way referring to the coach's past or future performance.

His mention of National Championship was as an "aim", or if you prefer, a "goal", it was not a prediction.

So if you're going to criticize it, you are criticizing it as a goal.

Second, Al's mention of "The sky continues to fall" had nothing to do with the team's, or coach's performance.

Go back and read "Henny Penny", or if you prefer "Chicken Little".

The phrase "the sky is falling" refers to the chicken, or in this case the person (you) who always comes up with the negative in any situation.

So Al's use is referring to your constant posting about the negatives of situations, not about coach's performance.

You are reading my posts too literally. I was well aware of what both meant. This should be obvious, as I replied to Al's post to quip about him always complaining about my posting style (i.e.,that it's too pessimistic). When I said the sky isn't falling, I meant that *I* don't believe the sky is falling and that I never said as much.

With respect to Trotsky's post, it is important to set attainable/realistic goals. It would be ridiculous for a Brown hockey fan to post their goal this season is winning the national title. And that is precisely because of past performance. Again, I think this should be fairly obvious. Every team's goal could be to win the championship, but if that's not realistic, then what is the point of stating it in lieu of an attainable goal?

For the record, I do believe it's plausible we win the national championship, but given the massive levels of uncertainty right now I don't think it's worth thinking too much about. But yes, that is my ultimate hope/goal for Cornell hockey.

I appreciate your posting Jim, including your pleasantness and refusal to name-call, but you are being a bit obtuse here.

[VIEWfromK]

you are being a bit obtuse here.

https://youtu.be/iYhYzqqs8pQ?si=_8-AoQ99ryg52aWI

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

you are being a bit obtuse here.

https://youtu.be/iYhYzqqs8pQ?si=_8-AoQ99ryg52aWI

I usually can't stand "Family Guy", but that was funny.

[Tom Lento]

I just want some good ass hockey, man. And hope. And I think Casey should give us both.

Same same same.

[chimpfood]

I absolutely love the consistency that we have had my whole life. I literally cannot remember us finishing outside the top half of the pairwise. In my opinion, that is so much better than having boom/bust cycles even if it ends in a few nattys. I think that our consistent success is the sole reason that our crowd and traditions are among the best in the country. All it takes is a couple bad years for people to stop coming to the games and us to lose our traditions, and spoiler alert, this ends with us having the fanbase and rink environment of RPI or Clarkson. If Casey can just continue putting together winning, NCAA tournament caliber seasons, I will be thrilled.

[ugarte]

I absolutely love the consistency that we have had my whole life. I literally cannot remember us finishing outside the top half of the pairwise. In my opinion, that is so much better than having boom/bust cycles even if it ends in a few nattys. I think that our consistent success is the sole reason that our crowd and traditions are among the best in the country. All it takes is a couple bad years for people to stop coming to the games and us to lose our traditions, and spoiler alert, this ends with us having the fanbase and rink environment of RPI or Clarkson. If Casey can just continue putting together winning, NCAA tournament caliber seasons, I will be thrilled.

Man, if I were an RPI fan old enough for the glory days of 1985 I might agree but damn I don't know if I would refuse a swap with Wisconsin fans from behind the veil of ignorance (of my own years in Ithaca) - and they've only made the tournament four times in the last 15 years.

That said, I'd be a very pissed off Wisconsin fan and probably care an inordinate amount about women's hockey to compensate.

[stereax]

That said, I'd be a very pissed off Wisconsin fan and probably care an inordinate amount about women's hockey to compensate.

You can care an inordinate amount about women's hockey anyway <3

[The Rancor]

I'm not even convinced yet he's a great coach—I mean, he probably is a good coach, but what basis do we have? A slightly over .500 record in 12 years at Clarkson?

I admit I don't understand how to evaluate college hockey records with all the OT/SOL point BS from the past several seasons, but FWIW Casey's record on CHN is listed as 234-185-56 for a .552 win percentage.

Keith Allain was 282-254-54 (.524) at Yale.
Schafer was 561-300-117 (.633) at Cornell.

I think there's really no doubt that Casey Jones is at least a good coach, and probably an excellent one. I'm also inclined to think that if Allain was capable of leading a team to a national title Jones is too, although for a good coach in the Ivies I suspect that's mostly a function of luck.

That's the wonderful and yet horrible thing about the NCAA tournament - anything can happen over the course of four single-elimination games. Allain was capable of leading that Yale team to a third-place finish in the ECAC with a reasonably decent 18-12-3 record, yet a loss in the conference tourney semifinals. They were literally the last at-large team into the NCAA tourney. But once you're in, you just have to win four in a row (two of which they did win handily, the other two in overtime). They deserved the championship because they won the four games they had to win, but it was definitely closer to the fluke end of the scale - stepping up in a big moment - than Quinnipiac's title was in 2023. Of course you have to be a good coach to get those four wins out of your team especially when they're not favored - but that win was all the more frustrating to many of us because of the sheer number of regional finals we've been to with Schafer as coach, with only one Frozen Four and no titles to show for it.

All of which is beside the point - Trotsky started this thread to suggest what Casey's aims should be compared to what Schafer's were thirty years ago, not to make predictions for Casey. I think they're perfectly reasonable, and I hope he achieves all three, and soon.

100% this. It is at this point baseline for Coach Jones to make the NCAAs, and go to the Frozen Four. We all want a Championship, and not the Whitelaw. Expectation is excellence in the ECAC. Goals are to win the big one, fill Lynah and beat Quinny and Harvard. And Clarkson. And RPI...

"Baseline: be a top four team in the country in a landscape stacked against us"

Just win the ECACs and it's a good year. Kick the shit out of Harvard and Q, great year.

If, in a 30-year span, Schafer, who by all accounts is an excellent coach, made the Frozen Four only once... well, I don't see how that can be a reasonable expectation for a new head coach with a large graduating class. Especially in a landscape where we historically have never been able to attract top top talent that has just been made worse with the advent of NIL and the subsequent rise of teams like Penn State.

Our biggest benefit was our "system" - playing as a TEAM and not as individuals. But I worry that teamwork just isn't enough in the face of sheer individual talent like some of these teams are amassing.

In either case, with such a massive shift, we need to ride out a few years and see how things go before passing any real judgment. It's entirely possible we just don't ever make the Frozen Four again, with how things are stacked. It's also entirely possible we win the Frozen Four next year. Who the hell knows?

As I think I've said before - you make the playoff dance, whether by winning Whitelaw or by ranking. Doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is winning four games in a row at that point. The regular season can go as badly as 24-25. Just need to win Whitelaw to get in and then four more games.

...In overtime against BU, it felt like the "magic" had run out. The team was just too exhausted, couldn't keep up. I had that sinking feeling in my gut minutes before the OT goal was scored.

I don't know. Winning the natty would obviously be great. I just don't think it's a realistic goal for Casey as a coach to set his benchmark at. (Obviously, that's the ultimate goal every year. But if he doesn't win it all in the next five years, I don't think that's necessarily a strike against him.)

I just want some good ass hockey, man. And hope. And I think Casey should give us both.

Being a top 4 team every year, I admit is unrealistic- perhaps I should have put that as a 'goal'

What I meant is that making the Frozen Four again is the next ratchet up in success. We've been a goal, an OT, a dang triple OT away from tasting that and I felt so deeply we deserved to be there. Alas- I am an emotional fan. And I love me some good ass hockey, win (mostly) or lose. Being so close so many years has been a blessing, I know. Drop the puck, I'm ready!

[ugarte]

That said, I'd be a very pissed off Wisconsin fan and probably care an inordinate amount about women's hockey to compensate.

You can care an inordinate amount about women's hockey anyway <3

i care a suitable amount!

[billhoward]

... my aims for the Casey Jones Era, whether that is 5 years or 25:

1. Fill Lynah.  Our discriminator is our crowd.  It all begins there.  This also means the AD encouraging the students and not getting in their way.  Don't overwhelm them with loud piped in garbage and ads and gimmickry.  This is Cornell.  The fans lead the rink, the band supports.  The administration's job is to clear obstacles and allow the fans to intimidate the visitor while amusing themselves.

2. Beat Quinnipiac. Harvard, for all their bullshit, is still an academic institution.  Q is everything wrong with the last 50 years: commerce without standards and aggressive enshittification.  In a just world we drive Q into the sea and they finish behind Brown every year.  Well, if you aint up on things, it is not a just world. So we need to do ourselves and the free world a favor and destroy these punks whenever possible.  Sic semper numbskullus.

3. Win a National Championship.  It's just a jump to the left.  We have climbed the mountain so often, and we have seen RPI, Harvard, Yale, Union, and Q get there.  There is no reason that Cornell can't win it all.  So, win it all.

Re Fill Lynah: We are the best draw among the ECAC and I suspect among most or all Hockey East teams. Cornell has ~2X as many students as in 1970. But they seem to have more things to do including, ah, study. Maybe there's less excitement and desire to be there than when your team just won an NCAA title. (If so, lax will draw more in 2026.) We can have contests, give away tickets, have more entertainment in the dead 30 seconds before the next puck drop, but we have to steel ourselves for games where it's not full and games where it's noticeably not full although always > 50% full.

Re Beat Quinnipiac: We want to beat them because they have been the best / highest-ranked ECAC team the last decade. A lot of us still get more of a thrill beating Harvard because they are the #1 university in most eyes. Plus I was there the year in Cambridge when they first attached a chicken to the Cornell goalpost; I love that we are perpetuating the feud the way the South believes the Civil War remains unsettled. We also want / need to beat BU in the odd-year MSG games. I would not rag on the academic strengths of a Quinnipiac or some of the other not-top-50 schools. Not everyone will go to an Ivy and run a venture capital fund or become a federal judge or cure cancer. Q has a good nursing school and RNs can make $75K a year not long after graduation.

Re Win National Championship: Gonna be tough. Since that 1970 title, the number of D1 teams doubled from 32 to 65, and 7 of the championships have gone to the new teams: Quinnipiac (ECAC team), Union (ECAC team), UMass-Amherst, Maine twice, Northern Michigan this year, Bowling Green. More realistic goals are to win the ECAC championship (and make the NCAAs), get to the Frozen Four, and ultimately win the title again. Cornell lacrosse did it after a 48-year gap. Remember the Covid year ended hockey in 2020 with Cornell ranked #1; that could have been a title year.

I disagree on this: Loud music from the scoreboard (not band) plus video animation, we can live with if not love. We're just getting old. #suckitup  Cornell fans coming late, it's a little rude, but they do show up. Compare this to Saturday night games at Quinnipiac where maybe a third of the students have left after the second period for parties. We did have a soft turnout hosting Q last fall, but it was also a week before we played them at MSG. Sheesh, how do we manage these oddly timed matchups. Also: The video board is newish, but it's not very high-res.

For the sake of all fans including those at home: Cornell needs to improve its video with higher placement of cameras (it can be done with remote-operator cameras), cameras over the goals, a center ice reverse-angle camera, in-goal cameras. Wouldn't hurt to clean the Plexiglas for side/end cameras (RIT has the glass buffered after every game). I think the better video also helps recruiting and certainly benefits parents and siblings who live far away.

Casey Jones did a lot at Clarkson with a lower-profile program and smaller student body. He is regarded as a good recruiter. If he can entice players to go to Clarkson, he can get them to apply to Cornell as well. I was about to say, "...and Cornell alone among the Ivies has the Ag School," but a goodly number of current players are in the Dyson School in the ag college and that is tougher to get into than Arts or Engineering.

And also: Women's hockey is a legitimate title threat. They're Cornell hockey, too. They starting playing just after the men's 1970 title, in 1972, using beat-up, cast-off equipment.  Title IX became law in 1972, but it didn't really get rolling for a while.