1st Half

[ben03]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

 [Q2]Maybe we are transitioning to an NHL/WCHA style of hockey that looks more to scoring than defense.[/Q]
I really don't think that Schafer has decided to scrap his defense first system in exchange for a high flying, WCHA style game.  What may be happening is that he is trying to introduce more speed and skill into the system in order to compete against the top ranked teams.  This would be both because of the perception that it's needed to compete nationally and (maybe more importantly) with recent success increasing the prestige of the program it's become possible to recruit some of the higher skill players.

If my hypothesis is correct, then we may be seeing growing pains and the program's style develops.  But it's not a wholesale change.[/q]
Keith,
 i think we’re mostly in agreement here. by no means do i think we'll see the defense first philosophy scraped in favor of high-flying-WCHA/HEA "big-ice" offensive system.
i think that quote was possibly taken slightly out of context … or maybe we just read it differently. my guess, like yours, is we’re in the early stages of integrating more skilled offensive into our d-first mentality. as i mentioned above in my team size ramblings, we may end up looking something akin to teams like Denver and NoDak. these teams tend to play a more controlled offensive system that to some, could look like our “d-first + O” system. they just pull in the reins whereas we let them out a bit. the chances of seeing the free-wheeling big-ice styles of CC, Minny or UHN inside "the lynah arena" are about as great as the proverbial snowballs chance in hell. i think growing pains most accurately sums up what we’re watching. nothing more, nothing less. i think this team has all the ingredients to be a contender both in the league and nationally, they just have to find the proper mix.

[daredevilcu]

[Q]
Hmm. Interesting perspective, Drew. You obviously have a much more intense following of Clarkson than most of us here, so I'll defer to your judgement, but I remember having discussions with CCT fans 10 years ago over on the old Golden Knight Roundtable.[/Q]

The roundtable still exists, so feel free to make your way over there.  It's probably not as active as it was in the 90s, but there are still some of us who post.  http://www.goldenknightshockey.com/roundtable/

[Q]The successful Clarkson teams of the early-to-mid-90s certainly had a LOT of speedy guys. That Marko Tuomainen - Patrice Robitaille combination gave me fits. The prototypical Morris guys (in my mind, anyway) were Todd Marchant, Todd White, and Eric Cole...fast, darty players with sick puck-handling skills.

Marchant: 5' 10" 175
White: 5' 10" 181
Cole: 6' 1" 185 [/Q]

During the 90s, George Roll was an assistant coach at Clarkson.  He helped recruit many of the "Morris players" that helped make the team successful.  Roll recruited 'em, Morris coached 'em from everything I've heard.  Roll's recruiting ability is clear to me now, having seen the talent he has brought to Clarkson in Weller, Dodge, Zalewski, and particularly Shea Guthrie.  Guthrie is a fantastic puckhandler, speedy and sees the ice extremely well.  He's the highest draft pick CCT has had since Erik Cole, but supposedly wasn't heavily recruited because he was playing against a lower level of competition than many major recruits.  A great find by the coaching staff.  I've also heard that Roll favors big defensemen with heavy point shots to go along with his small, speedy forwards, but I'm not sure how true that is.

[CowbellGuy]

[q]Mike Schafer said...
We have not changed our recruiting strategy. Our recruiting strategy is to look for kids with very good work ethic. They need to be competitive, have a very good hockey sense and have good character. If players have this kind of mentality and quality, they will pay attention to being strong two-way players and not just defense first. We are also graduating some offensive players like Matt Moulson, Shane Hynes and Daniel Pegoraro. We need to bring in the type of players that can do the type of things that these guys do for us and this influences how we recruit each year. Those guys will play both ways and have committed to that. We are very honest in our recruiting process on how we like to play. There has been no shift in our recruiting strategy at all.[/q]

[adamw]

Folks ... not being around the program on a consistent basis, I still pay attention, obviously, and I'll tell you what it seems to me.  Someone else hit it on the head ...

Cornell is definitely bringing in more skilled players, because the profile of the program has increased, and enabled them to bring in players that are genuinely highly-rated in the recruiting scene.  With this, however, these players may not be the same kind of high character, willing-to-immediately-buy-in kind of guys.

I think Schafer will whip them into shape, but I think it may take longer.

That said, Pokulok should know better by now.  And McKee's play is a mystery.

And the ECAC is definitely stronger top to bottom right now. St. Lawrence is VERY good, so is Dartmouth. Clarkson is close. Colgate is more than very good. And Harvard has surprisingly stuck right in there.

[ben03]

Without starting a new thread and having lost to Union, I think this news fits in best here.

The defensive corps for the Union continues to shrink. Freshman Rory Farrell became the latest defenseman to leave the Dutchmen. He informed coach Nate Leaman of his decision to depart following last Saturday’s game against Rochester Institute of Technology
http://www.uscho.com/news/id,11361/FarrellLeavesUnion.html