The Casey Jones Era: Aims

When Schafer took the helm he famously declared three aims:

1. Fill Lynah
2. Beat Harvard
3. Win the ECACs

Within one season he had achieved them all, then went on to repeat each many times.

In that spirit, here are 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.

Recruit well. Casey’s first class - which includes 4 NHL draft picks - is very encouraging.

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.

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.

Trotsky
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.

I think the ads are sadly unavoidable. Nobody really likes them; we just learn to tolerate them. And, personally, I agree with you. But I can only really speak for myself. I wonder if it's possible that the current students and maybe even some townies like myself genuinely like the "garbage" and gimmickry. I really don't know. All I know is that, while I could live without it, I do chuckle a bit every time they play the meme video with the pika scatting like Freddie Mercury.

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.

why would anyone be convinced he's great yet? the only reason people are talking about championships is because he was part of a program that was an OT shot away from the Final Four last year with a well-regarded pipeline. The rules are changing, and it might be to our disadvantage, but the doomerism is a bit much when we've all got the same thin materiail to work with.

Al DeFlorio

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.

ugarte

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.

why would anyone be convinced he's great yet? the only reason people are talking about championships is because he was part of a program that was an OT shot away from the Final Four last year with a well-regarded pipeline. The rules are changing, and it might be to our disadvantage, but the doomerism is a bit much when we've all got the same thin materiail to work with.

We’ll still be a top team in our conference, but things are trending in the wrong direction nationally. We just can’t take advantage of the same things that many other schools do, such as the transfer portal, NIL/revenue sharing, and loose admissions standards/willingness to bring in literally anybody (see ASU and Bemidji bringing in literal professional players). These are all new phenomena within the past few years. They aren’t traditional material that all teams have been able to work with. Rather, they are new material that is available to some teams but not to us. (Well, loose admissions standards have always been a thing, but there are now way more avenues for abuse with CHL and pro players becoming eligible.)

A few months back I noted 3 things that I hoped Casey would focus on which I felt were lacking under Schafer.

The first was Lynah atmosphere/attendance, basically the same thing Trotsky said. Based on what people are saying in the 2025-26 Schedule thread, early returns are not good. I’m not sure how much of an effect Casey really has here, but he surely has some, and I was hopeful a fresh perspective could help. Reduce ticket prices, serve beer at the games, etc.—really need more people in the door. Our crowds are what set the program apart.

The second was greater use of the transfer portal. Some on this forum doubted this was possible, but Casey brought in two players immediately (two D with potential), the same number Schafer brought in over the past four seasons combined (Seger and a third string goalie). While it’s clear we cannot use the portal as much as other programs, we can use it more than Schafer did. So far I’m overall happy with how portal use is going, though time will tell how good the new players are.

The third was putting together some kind of NIL plan. This is (as I acknowledged at the time) a pipe dream. I don’t know how it would work given the total lack of institutional support. I believe revenue sharing (which the Ivy League opted out of) would have been a more effective means of paying players than NIL because donations would be tax deductible and payments would not be subject to the NIL clearinghouse approval. But we can’t revenue share because the Ivy League won’t allow it. So the only way to pay players would be NIL. As I said a few months ago, we have the wealthy donors, and there’s nothing Cornell or the Ivy League could do to stop it. I have absolutely no hope this will happen within the next few years, but if college hockey continues in the direction it’s headed, then in the not-too-distant-future paying players will be a necessity to stay relevant.

Cornell hockey offers something very unique which insulates the program from the downsides of this new world of college hockey. That is why I expect us to remain a top team in our conference. But to win a national title, business as usual won’t cut it.

BearLover
if college hockey continues in the direction it’s headed, then in the not-too-distant-future paying players will be a necessity to stay relevant.

I don't mind paying players so that in itself is not a deal breaker. But we can apply that template to worse things. And there is a line where if that is the price I hope we don't "stay relevant." Adjusting to fit into a corrupt system is not a victory.

What is the point of the whole enterprise of college athletics? Once it was to give ordinary students here for education who also wanted to do a sport that option, along with a big dose of Victorian "muscular Christianity." Then it was school sponsorship to allow them to find good competition.

But at some point* in the evolution of every college sport the cart starts to drag the horse. We've already burned the village to "save" it in football and basketball. I hope hockey doesn't follow.

* _{Probably 8 seconds after it goes on TV.}

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?

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.

Whether or not he’s a good fit for the Cornell HC position remains to be seen, but there’s no real reason to think he isn’t.

There is also no real reason to think he’ll be as consistently successful as Schafer was. Nothing against Jones, Schafer was just a truly remarkable coach.

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.

This is a stretch (go figure), and no one should be worried about what ASU or Bemidji (and now Quinnipiac) has done. It's hyperbole to say "straight out of the AHL" ... The kid was in the ECHL - which is where players go after major junior when they've aged out and have nowhere else to go. The ECHL is filled with players barely as good - if at all - than what is currently in college. The fact that he was "called up" to the AHL and played a few games, is commonplace for Double-A players and means pretty much nothing. He played half a season in the ECHL after aging out of MJ. That's about it.

As for Casey, I've said it a thousand times - but let's do it again. He's a top shelf recruiter, and certainly a good to great coach. Equaling Schafer is a high bar. Casey is right there. He basically coached the Ohio State team that went to a Frozen Four - in addition to recruiting 3 first rounders. If you know the history there, you know what I mean when I say he basically was the head coach of that team. What he did at Clarkson, in and out of the pandemic, was very good, given they have less to work with than Cornell does when it comes to recruiting in this landscape. He lost 2 All-American goalies at the last minute when they bailed out to go to "bigger" schools. Goaltending was their biggest problem in the last few years, and they still knocked on the door of the NCAAs.

I'm not going to bother arguing about this - but that's it in a nutshell.

adamw

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.

This is a stretch (go figure), and no one should be worried about what ASU or Bemidji (and now Quinnipiac) has done. It's hyperbole to say "straight out of the AHL" ... The kid was in the ECHL - which is where players go after major junior when they've aged out and have nowhere else to go. The ECHL is filled with players barely as good - if at all - than what is currently in college. The fact that he was "called up" to the AHL and played a few games, is commonplace for Double-A players and means pretty much nothing. He played half a season in the ECHL after aging out of MJ. That's about it.

As for Casey, I've said it a thousand times - but let's do it again. He's a top shelf recruiter, and certainly a good to great coach. Equaling Schafer is a high bar. Casey is right there. He basically coached the Ohio State team that went to a Frozen Four - in addition to recruiting 3 first rounders. If you know the history there, you know what I mean when I say he basically was the head coach of that team. What he did at Clarkson, in and out of the pandemic, was very good, given they have less to work with than Cornell does when it comes to recruiting in this landscape. He lost 2 All-American goalies at the last minute when they bailed out to go to "bigger" schools. Goaltending was their biggest problem in the last few years, and they still knocked on the door of the NCAAs.

I'm not going to bother arguing about this - but that's it in a nutshell.

Mike Schafer also didn't pluck Casey Jones out of a hat. They've known each other for 30 years. If anyone is concerned about the Legacy and Future of Cornell Hockey, it's Coach Schafer. And if anyone knows what it's like to be a student athlete at Cornell, its Casey Jones. I like our odds.

The Rancor

adamw

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.

This is a stretch (go figure), and no one should be worried about what ASU or Bemidji (and now Quinnipiac) has done. It's hyperbole to say "straight out of the AHL" ... The kid was in the ECHL - which is where players go after major junior when they've aged out and have nowhere else to go. The ECHL is filled with players barely as good - if at all - than what is currently in college. The fact that he was "called up" to the AHL and played a few games, is commonplace for Double-A players and means pretty much nothing. He played half a season in the ECHL after aging out of MJ. That's about it.

As for Casey, I've said it a thousand times - but let's do it again. He's a top shelf recruiter, and certainly a good to great coach. Equaling Schafer is a high bar. Casey is right there. He basically coached the Ohio State team that went to a Frozen Four - in addition to recruiting 3 first rounders. If you know the history there, you know what I mean when I say he basically was the head coach of that team. What he did at Clarkson, in and out of the pandemic, was very good, given they have less to work with than Cornell does when it comes to recruiting in this landscape. He lost 2 All-American goalies at the last minute when they bailed out to go to "bigger" schools. Goaltending was their biggest problem in the last few years, and they still knocked on the door of the NCAAs.

I'm not going to bother arguing about this - but that's it in a nutshell.

Mike Schafer also didn't pluck Casey Jones out of a hat. They've known each other for 30 years. If anyone is concerned about the Legacy and Future of Cornell Hockey, it's Coach Schafer. And if anyone knows what it's like to be a student athlete at Cornell, its Casey Jones. I like our odds.

+1

Tom Lento

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?

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.

Beeeej
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.

Beeeej

Tom Lento

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?

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...

The Rancor

Beeeej

Tom Lento

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?

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.

Scersk '97

Beeeej
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.

"Andrea del Sarto" -- Robert Browning
Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what's a heaven for?

BearLover

Al DeFlorio

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.

Jim Hyla

BearLover

Al DeFlorio

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.

BearLover

you are being a bit obtuse here.

[youtu.be]

VIEWfromK

BearLover

you are being a bit obtuse here.

[youtu.be]

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

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

Same same same.

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.

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.

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.

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

stereax

The Rancor

Beeeej

Tom Lento

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?

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!

stereax

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!

Trotsky
... 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.

Casey’s always been able to recruit. After last season we were all wondering about our goaltending, and Casey goes out and brings in Cournoyer to help shore up that critical position. Last night I happened to catch a segment of Hockey Prospect radio where the hosts were discussing the 2025 drafts of the Atlantic Division teams. When discussing Montreal’s draft, Brad Allen, who is one of NHL Radio’s draft gurus, said he thought Cournoyer was an excellent pick in the 5th round. Allen said Cournoyer has a terrific glove hand and was one of Allen’s top 10 goalie prospects in the draft.

scoop85
Casey’s always been able to recruit. After last season we were all wondering about our goaltending, and Casey goes out and brings in Cournoyer to help shore up that critical position. Last night I happened to catch a segment of Hockey Prospect radio where the hosts were discussing the 2025 drafts of the Atlantic Division teams. When discussing Montreal’s draft, Brad Allen, who is one of NHL Radio’s draft gurus, said he thought Cournoyer was an excellent pick in the 5th round. Allen said Cournoyer has a terrific glove hand and was one of Allen’s top 10 goalie prospects in the draft.

Yes, I think the Cournoyer commitment may turn out to be the highest leverage commitment in many years. By which I mean: the 2025-26 team has lots of good players at F and D, but goaltending was a clear issue, perhaps enough to curtail the season, and it seemed too late in the recruitment cycle to get anyone for next season. The fact we were able to pull a drafted goalie out of thin air may prove very important for next season.

Counterarguments:
1. Cournoyer was drafted based on a very small sample size of game action in junior hockey
2. Many other teams did the exact same thing, or more, following the CHL/transfer portal opening up a new universe of recruits. So while Cournoyer was a huge net add for us, it is still less than what our opponents did. (See late additions by PSU, UMich, Providence Quinnipiac, etc.)
3. With three other goalies on the roster, there’s a solid chance one of them would have been more than serviceable anyway

BearLover

Counterarguments:

2. Many other teams did the exact same thing, or more, following the CHL/transfer portal opening up a new universe of recruits. So while Cournoyer was a huge net add for us, it is still less than what our opponents did. (See late additions by PSU, UMich, Providence Quinnipiac, etc.)

I note that none of the other opponents you list are subject to the stringent admissions standards that Casey has to contend with. It’s just a fact that needs to be acknowledged, and one that you seem to ignore. Bringing in Cournoyer, along with transfers Ashton and Fischer, was a great piece of work.

billhoward

Trotsky
... 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.

Western.

scoop85

BearLover

Counterarguments:

2. Many other teams did the exact same thing, or more, following the CHL/transfer portal opening up a new universe of recruits. So while Cournoyer was a huge net add for us, it is still less than what our opponents did. (See late additions by PSU, UMich, Providence Quinnipiac, etc.)

I note that none of the other opponents you list are subject to the stringent admissions standards that Casey has to contend with. It’s just a fact that needs to be acknowledged, and one that you seem to ignore. Bringing in Cournoyer, along with transfers Ashton and Fischer, was a great piece of work.

I acknowledged this relative limitation on Cornell earlier in this very thread.

The Rancor

stereax

The Rancor

Beeeej

Tom Lento

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?

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!

Amen to that! I would go nuts, in the best way, if we make a Frozen Four in the next few years. NHL preseason is starting nowadays so the hockey is soon returning...

billhoward

Trotsky
... 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.

Women's hockey is in such a weird position because Cornell is Really Good and brick wall Bergmann is still here, but 1) also a big graduating class and 2) woho feels super polarized into only a few teams (Wisconsin and Ohio State, mostly) being capital-C Contenders. It would be awesome to consistently make the Frozen Four there, however. Also, it looks like we were also #1 in 2020 in women's... God didn't want us to win so bad he sent a plague, huh XD

30 days until season begins. "All will be revealed."

billhoward
Re Beat Quinnipiac: ... I would not rag on the academic strengths of a Quinnipiac

I'm not ragging on schools that accept average applicants. That is by definition the majority of students. I took community college classes and saw some of the brightest young adults paying their own money to be there and work hard. Cornellians should be half as serious and diligent.

I'm ragging on pop up for profit degree mills. Q is not a joke for who they admit, they're a joke for deliberately aiming to be a Brand rather than an institution of higher learning.

So, yes, we beat Q because they are our primary challenger for conference dominance. But we also beat Q because if the expected value were a penny more they'd open a whorehouse instead of a "college," and then they'd at least be providing a useful service.

billhoward
Re Win National Championship: Gonna be tough.

Yes. That's the idea.

Trotsky
I'm ragging on pop up for profit degree mills. Q is not a joke for who they admit, they're a joke for deliberately aiming to be a Brand rather than an institution of higher learning.

I have very close second-hand information on this. They are starting to pick up some better students, and many faculty members are very focused on teaching and being good at it. Overall, the student outcomes are perhaps better than some here might imagine. Whether those outcomes justify the cost of attending is another matter, but that's an open question at a lot of schools.

But the administration is unduly focused on branding, as you say, and to no purpose. Under Leahy, the president who dragged Quinnipiac out of commuter school-dom, the branding was in the service of accumulating more funding so that they could acquire or develop new academic units to round out the school. Now, exactly no one is certain what it's for. Presidents and administrations post-Leahy have no idea what they want the institution to be.

I assume the faculty and best students do what they can with a bad lot. It's always the bean counters who lead enshittification. Virtually 90% of every environment is trying to do the right thing, but the profiteers soil everybody's nest.

Can't arrive here soon enough:

There’s a strange fixation on this forum about Q’s questionable academic standards when in reality almost every school in the country, including almost every D-1 hockey school and some in our own conference, has a similar lack of standards, especially for those on the hockey team.

BearLover
There’s a strange fixation on this forum about Q’s questionable academic standards when in reality almost every school in the country, including almost every D-1 hockey school and some in our own conference, has a similar lack of standards, especially for those on the hockey team.

I think it is born, at least in part, from the ECAC's traditional positioning as a conference of schools that take academics seriously. Adding Q rather than RIT or Holy Cross undermined that positioning.*

That's at least in part because Q is so insufferable in it's marketing of itself. If the university positioned itself more as a serious school and not as a boarding school for wealthy kids to drink in new haven (or was quieter generally), it'd probably be less of an issue too. My experience in fairfield county is that it's not taken super seriously and is wildly too expensive. They run billboards bragging that they were included in USNWR rankings. Not where they rank just that the magazine includes them. It's be great if they improved their academic profile but for a lot of folks they'll always be seen as the diploma mill Trotsky sees.

*- yes I know it wasn't strictly a choice of those three at the time to replace UVM. But the perception at the time was that RIT and HC would be better cultural fits for the conference than Q.

Chris '03

BearLover
There’s a strange fixation on this forum about Q’s questionable academic standards when in reality almost every school in the country, including almost every D-1 hockey school and some in our own conference, has a similar lack of standards, especially for those on the hockey team.

I think it is born, at least in part, from the ECAC's traditional positioning as a conference of schools that take academics seriously. Adding Q rather than RIT or Holy Cross undermined that positioning.*

That's at least in part because Q is so insufferable in it's marketing of itself. If the university positioned itself more as a serious school and not as a boarding school for wealthy kids to drink in new haven (or was quieter generally), it'd probably be less of an issue too. My experience in fairfield county is that it's not taken super seriously and is wildly too expensive. They run billboards bragging that they were included in USNWR rankings. Not where they rank just that the magazine includes them. It's be great if they improved their academic profile but for a lot of folks they'll always be seen as the diploma mill Trotsky sees.

*- yes I know it wasn't strictly a choice of those three at the time to replace UVM. But the perception at the time was that RIT and HC would be better cultural fits for the conference than Q.

From Chatgpt:

ECACHL Schools:

Ivies:

| School | Approximate Recent Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
| **Brown University** | \~5.6% for Class of 2029 ([The Brown Daily Herald][1]) |
| Yale University | \~3.7% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Harvard University | \~3.6% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Columbia University | \~3.85% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Princeton University | \~4.62% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Dartmouth College | \~5.3% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Cornell University | \~8.41% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |

[1]: [www.browndailyherald.com] "Brown admits 5.65% of applicants to class of 2029 - The Brown Daily Herald"
[2]: [www.crimsoneducation.org] "Ivy League Acceptance Rates For The Class of 2028 - Crimson Education GE"

Non-Ivies:
| School | Approximate Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
| Clarkson University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][1]) |
| Colgate University | \~12% ([U.S. News & World Report][2]) |
| Quinnipiac University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][3]) |
| Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) | \~58% ([Niche][4]) |
| St. Lawrence University | \~58% ([U.S. News & World Report][5]) |
| Union College (NY) | \~44% ([U.S. News & World Report][6]) |

[1]: [www.usnews.com] "Clarkson University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[2]: [www.usnews.com] "Colgate University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[3]: [www.usnews.com] "Quinnipiac University Admissions - US News Best Colleges"
[4]: [www.niche.com] "Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Admissions & Acceptance - Niche"
[5]: [www.usnews.com] "St. Lawrence University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[6]: [www.usnews.com] "Union College (NY) - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"


Notes:
1. Sorry for the formatting. I'm still working my way into the 21st Century.
2. I realize admission rates are not a very good measure of academic quality. And there may be considerable self-selection. E.g., Clarkson's emphasis on technology may screen applicants without considerable STEM backgroun in high school.

Chris '03
They run billboards bragging that they were included in USNWR rankings. Not where they rank just that the magazine includes them.

It is des-ti-n[ee]
The Big Red will show up.

...

We are a member,
Of the Ivy League.

Swampy

Chris '03

BearLover
There’s a strange fixation on this forum about Q’s questionable academic standards when in reality almost every school in the country, including almost every D-1 hockey school and some in our own conference, has a similar lack of standards, especially for those on the hockey team.

I think it is born, at least in part, from the ECAC's traditional positioning as a conference of schools that take academics seriously. Adding Q rather than RIT or Holy Cross undermined that positioning.*

That's at least in part because Q is so insufferable in it's marketing of itself. If the university positioned itself more as a serious school and not as a boarding school for wealthy kids to drink in new haven (or was quieter generally), it'd probably be less of an issue too. My experience in fairfield county is that it's not taken super seriously and is wildly too expensive. They run billboards bragging that they were included in USNWR rankings. Not where they rank just that the magazine includes them. It's be great if they improved their academic profile but for a lot of folks they'll always be seen as the diploma mill Trotsky sees.

*- yes I know it wasn't strictly a choice of those three at the time to replace UVM. But the perception at the time was that RIT and HC would be better cultural fits for the conference than Q.

From Chatgpt:

ECACHL Schools:

Ivies:

| School | Approximate Recent Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
| **Brown University** | \~5.6% for Class of 2029 ([The Brown Daily Herald][1]) |
| Yale University | \~3.7% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Harvard University | \~3.6% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Columbia University | \~3.85% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Princeton University | \~4.62% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Dartmouth College | \~5.3% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Cornell University | \~8.41% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |

[1]: [www.browndailyherald.com] "Brown admits 5.65% of applicants to class of 2029 - The Brown Daily Herald"
[2]: [www.crimsoneducation.org] "Ivy League Acceptance Rates For The Class of 2028 - Crimson Education GE"

Non-Ivies:
| School | Approximate Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
| Clarkson University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][1]) |
| Colgate University | \~12% ([U.S. News & World Report][2]) |
| Quinnipiac University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][3]) |
| Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) | \~58% ([Niche][4]) |
| St. Lawrence University | \~58% ([U.S. News & World Report][5]) |
| Union College (NY) | \~44% ([U.S. News & World Report][6]) |

[1]: [www.usnews.com] "Clarkson University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[2]: [www.usnews.com] "Colgate University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[3]: [www.usnews.com] "Quinnipiac University Admissions - US News Best Colleges"
[4]: [www.niche.com] "Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Admissions & Acceptance - Niche"
[5]: [www.usnews.com] "St. Lawrence University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[6]: [www.usnews.com] "Union College (NY) - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"


Notes:
1. Sorry for the formatting. I'm still working my way into the 21st Century.
2. I realize admission rates are not a very good measure of academic quality. And there may be considerable self-selection. E.g., Clarkson's emphasis on technology may screen applicants without considerable STEM backgroun in high school.

Yikes! Is admitting less than ten percent of your applicants something to be proud of? Something that makes these schools better than others? Or is it just bad marketing that wastes the time and resources of the AI admissions bots?

I think it would be better to target the proper audience and admit somewhere between 30% and 60% of their applicants. We are clearly wasting the time and maybe even the hopes of 75% of our applicants.

A better measure of school quality for me would be the number of accepted students who decide to attend. That reflects on the safety school considerations.

Old Red

Swampy

Chris '03

BearLover
There’s a strange fixation on this forum about Q’s questionable academic standards when in reality almost every school in the country, including almost every D-1 hockey school and some in our own conference, has a similar lack of standards, especially for those on the hockey team.

I think it is born, at least in part, from the ECAC's traditional positioning as a conference of schools that take academics seriously. Adding Q rather than RIT or Holy Cross undermined that positioning.*

That's at least in part because Q is so insufferable in it's marketing of itself. If the university positioned itself more as a serious school and not as a boarding school for wealthy kids to drink in new haven (or was quieter generally), it'd probably be less of an issue too. My experience in fairfield county is that it's not taken super seriously and is wildly too expensive. They run billboards bragging that they were included in USNWR rankings. Not where they rank just that the magazine includes them. It's be great if they improved their academic profile but for a lot of folks they'll always be seen as the diploma mill Trotsky sees.

*- yes I know it wasn't strictly a choice of those three at the time to replace UVM. But the perception at the time was that RIT and HC would be better cultural fits for the conference than Q.

From Chatgpt:

ECACHL Schools:

Ivies:

| School | Approximate Recent Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ |
| **Brown University** | \~5.6% for Class of 2029 ([The Brown Daily Herald][1]) |
| Yale University | \~3.7% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Harvard University | \~3.6% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Columbia University | \~3.85% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Princeton University | \~4.62% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Dartmouth College | \~5.3% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |
| Cornell University | \~8.41% (Class of 2028) ([Crimson Education][2]) |

[1]: [www.browndailyherald.com] "Brown admits 5.65% of applicants to class of 2029 - The Brown Daily Herald"
[2]: [www.crimsoneducation.org] "Ivy League Acceptance Rates For The Class of 2028 - Crimson Education GE"

Non-Ivies:
| School | Approximate Acceptance Rate |
| -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------- |
| Clarkson University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][1]) |
| Colgate University | \~12% ([U.S. News & World Report][2]) |
| Quinnipiac University | \~77% ([U.S. News & World Report][3]) |
| Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) | \~58% ([Niche][4]) |
| St. Lawrence University | \~58% ([U.S. News & World Report][5]) |
| Union College (NY) | \~44% ([U.S. News & World Report][6]) |

[1]: [www.usnews.com] "Clarkson University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[2]: [www.usnews.com] "Colgate University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[3]: [www.usnews.com] "Quinnipiac University Admissions - US News Best Colleges"
[4]: [www.niche.com] "Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Admissions & Acceptance - Niche"
[5]: [www.usnews.com] "St. Lawrence University - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"
[6]: [www.usnews.com] "Union College (NY) - Profile, Rankings and Data | US News Best Colleges"


Notes:
1. Sorry for the formatting. I'm still working my way into the 21st Century.
2. I realize admission rates are not a very good measure of academic quality. And there may be considerable self-selection. E.g., Clarkson's emphasis on technology may screen applicants without considerable STEM backgroun in high school.

Yikes! Is admitting less than ten percent of your applicants something to be proud of? Something that makes these schools better than others? Or is it just bad marketing that wastes the time and resources of the AI admissions bots?

I think it would be better to target the proper audience and admit somewhere between 30% and 60% of their applicants. We are clearly wasting the time and maybe even the hopes of 75% of our applicants.

A better measure of school quality for me would be the number of accepted students who decide to attend. That reflects on the safety school considerations.

The Ivies could enroll an equally qualified class five times over.

Ivy yield rates for class of 2029 based on random website I found:
Cornell 64%
Dartmouth 71%
Columbia 61%
Yale 68%
Harvard 85%
Princeton 75%
Brown 73%
Penn 69%

Harder to find the yield rates for other ECAC schools but they seem to be much lower, between 10% (Quinnipiac, Clarkson) and 28% (Colgate).

Becoming an adult is realizing that none of this actually matters.

BearLover
Becoming an adult is realizing that none of this actually matters.

Also that it is all manipulated. A few years ago an article brutally exposed Vandy for marketing to unqualified students with the express purpose of rejecting them, inflating their acceptance rate, and moving up the USnooze rankings.

On matters of finance, universities are the moral equal of car companies, and with the Apotheosis of the MBAs everything in academia since 1980 has been reduced to finance.

Trotsky

BearLover
Becoming an adult is realizing that none of this actually matters.

Also that it is all manipulated. A few years ago an article brutally exposed Vandy for marketing to unqualified students with the express purpose of rejecting them, inflating their acceptance rate, and moving up the USnooze rankings.

On matters of finance, universities are the moral equal of car companies, and with the Apotheosis of the MBAs everything in academia since 1980 has been reduced to finance.

Apropos, an interesting opinion piece in today’s NY Times.

George64
Apropos, an interesting opinion piece in today’s NY Times.

"Here's why that's bad news for Biden."

George64

Trotsky

BearLover
Becoming an adult is realizing that none of this actually matters.

Also that it is all manipulated. A few years ago an article brutally exposed Vandy for marketing to unqualified students with the express purpose of rejecting them, inflating their acceptance rate, and moving up the USnooze rankings.

On matters of finance, universities are the moral equal of car companies, and with the Apotheosis of the MBAs everything in academia since 1980 has been reduced to finance.

Apropos, an interesting opinion piece in today’s NY Times.

Written by Ithaca College alum Jeff Selingo - one-time editor of The Ithacan. Proving, of course, that being an Ivy doesn't matter