Home Playoffs

[Jeff Hopkins \'82]

Aren't they one and the same?  Or was that your point?

JH

[Greg Berge]

We could win and turn down the bid. ;-)

[jeh25]

Jeff Hopkins '82 wrote:

Aren't they one and the same?  Or was that your point?

JH

I assume that was Avash's point.

However, if the Sun staff doesn't fully understand the PWR, they may think it is possible for us to make the NCAA tourney *without* winning in Albany.  After all, that *has* happened in the current undergrad's tenure with our at large bid in 2002 after losing to the Cantab's in that double 2OT.  (Damn you Ty Kolarik!)

Nevermind that Whelan has a better chance of winning the Noble Prize this year than Cornell has of getting an at-large bid...

[Give My Regards]

Greg Berge '85 wrote:

We could win and turn down the bid. ;-)

Go ahead and laugh, but this happened once.  Hopefully those with longer memories than mine can fill in the details, but during the '60s, there was some dispute between the Ivy League and the NCAA which led to the Ivies boycotting NCAA tournaments.  Thus in 1963, Harvard won the ECACs and did not go on to the NCAAs.  I also thought I read that, had Cornell beaten Clarkson for the 1966 ECAC championship, the Big Red would have stayed home... but I see that Brown went to the '65 NCAA tourney as the ECAC runner-up, so perhaps that was not the case.

[ursusminor]

SLU was invited in 1964 and chose not to go. Also Clarkson had an undefeated team one year (1956?) that chose not to go because half the team would have been ineligible.

[Ben Doyle 03]

... speaking of clarkson, we haven't seen/heard much form Rich S this season ... any thoughts?;-)

al ... what did you do to him???:-P

[Section A]

[Q]Jeff Hopkins '82 wrote:

Aren't they one and the same? Or was that your point?

JH


I assume that was Avash's point.[/Q]


Indeed it was :-D



Post Edited (02-19-04 20:40)

[Jim Hyla]

[Q]Bill Fenwick wrote:

I also thought I read that, had Cornell beaten Clarkson for the 1966 ECAC championship, the Big Red would have stayed home... but I see that Brown went to the '65 NCAA tourney as the ECAC runner-up, so perhaps that was not the case.[/Q]You are right (as much as I can remember), we would not have gone. I thought it had to do with the IVY's not agreeing to the grade point requirement that the NCAA had set up then, but then I don't know why Brown would've gone? So, can you help Al?

edit:   Actually, the NCAA site says it was Clarkson and BU in 66, so , I think I'm right about the reason. Although, it wasn't because we chose not to go, rather we were not allowed to go. And I misread that Bill said Brown went in 65, not 66 that I was thinking of. But then I don't know why he brought up Brown in 65 while discussing the 66 tourney?



Post Edited (02-19-04 22:43)

[David Harding \'72]

There was a pissing match between the Ivies and the NCAA that I think only lasted a year.  The details have faded, but the essence of what I remember is that the NCAA wanted to enforce a standard minimum GPA for player eligibility across all schools for the first time.  The Ivies already had a higher minimum, and the NCAA wanted them to lower the academic eligibilty standard.  You can imagine the negative reaction to that one in the ivory towers.  So, the Ivies were out of tournaments for a year until people at the NCAA came to their senses and backed down.
From the NCAA web site (http://www.ncaa.org/ ->about->history->NCAACenturySeries->timeline)
[q]January 1965 The Convention adopts the "1.6 rule," which sets an academic floor for the award and retention of financial aid based on a prospect's ability to predict a grade-point average of at least 1.600.

January 1966 Convention rejects attempts to weaken or delay 1.6 rule.

May 1967 Compliance with 1.6 rule noted by 93.5 percent of the membership.[/q]

[Give My Regards]

Jim Hyla '67 wrote:
edit:   Actually, the NCAA site says it was Clarkson and BU in 66, so , I think I'm right about the reason. Although, it wasn't because we chose not to go, rather we were not allowed to go. And I misread that Bill said Brown went in 65, not 66 that I was thinking of. But then I don't know why he brought up Brown in 65 while discussing the 66 tourney?

I mentioned Brown because I was under the impression that the dispute David Harding talked about had applied to Harvard in '63 as well, and I was wondering why Brown accepted the bid in '65.  But since this dispute apparently affected only the '66 tournament, I'm dazed and confused again.  Did Harvard turn down a bid in '63, as I've always thought, or did they not get one in the first place?  Inquiring minds want to know...

[Al DeFlorio]

I think David Harding's got it right.  

As best as I can remember, the 1965-6 season was the only one affected, and it cost us an NCAA appearance.  That team could have done some damage, as it routed BC 9-0 and BU 8-1 in the ECAC quarters and semis before a really terrific Clarkson team with the late Terry Yurkiewicz in goal stoned 'em in the finals.  Clarkson went on to beat Denver in the NCAA semis but lost to Michigan State in the championship game.

[Killer]

FYI, everything I've seen online about the schedules says that Dartmouth is at Brown on Friday, the 27th.  They finish at Harvard on Saturday, the 28th.  Not sure what impact that has, but Harvard probably won't sell out for Dartmouth, so if any Boston-area fans want to catch that one...and root for Harvard for once (can you imagine?)...you might give it a shot.

[Chris \'03]

The Sun and the CU Library has embarked on a project to digitize the Sun's archive. (http://cdsun.library.cornell.edu/)
They have some samples up as they look for donations to fund the project. One of the samples is from 3/14/66. There's an aricle about ECACs that year and how despite being #2 in the East, Cornell was staying home from the Nationals because of the Ivy boycott and it seemed pertinant to this old discussion.

My favorite quote in the article might be, "BU beat Brown for third place Saturday, 5-2, and at any mention of the NCAA there was a great deal of booing."

[David Harding]

Those Sun articles are great fun!  Harking back to the discussion of goalies, I was interested by these two about the freshman team in the spring of 1966:
http://dpr.oclc.org/Default/Client.asp?skin=CSUN&pub=SUN&AW=1080702364216

25 February 1966

The unbeaten freshman team was preparing to face Colgate again:  â€œJust one month ago, the frosh walked all over the Red Raiders in Lynah, blanking them behind George Swan’s goaltending, 16-0.  Ted Coviello racked up an unbelievable six goals in that contest.  stevens plans to split the goaltending between Ken Dryden and Chris Elwell.  Swan will play the final game against UCC next weekend."

17 March 1966

Looking forward to the following year:   “All-Ivy goalie Errol McGibbon will graduate, but experienced Dave Quarrie returns.  Ken Dryden and George Swan will probably have to fight it out for the other position.  Harkness may keep all three, however.”

[Bio '04]

Could you post what dates these papers were?   Everytime I click on the links, it just sends me to the main page...  Thanks :-)