HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Erik Biever <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 31 Mar 2005 08:12:09 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
I've been enjoying this argument, but am sorry to see it descend into
name-calling.  It seems unnecessary.  Can you supply us with a list of western
teams that have refused an opportunity to play Cornell at Lynah?

Also, would Cornell want to exchange visits from the less prominent WCHA teams,
or just the big names?

Here's something I'd like to see.  I'm not a big fan of holiday tournaments.
Minnesota's tournament, the Dodge Holiday Classic (formerly Mariucci Classic)
usually features one team from each of four conferences, in standard
elimination format.  I'd like to see it become more like the College Hockey
Showcase:  two WCHA teams and two teams from one other conference, with a
different conference visiting every year.  Rather than have the first game
winners and losers play each other, have all four games be inter-conference
matchups.  No champion is produced, but so what?

-- Erik

Arik writes:

> Cornell does not play Western teams too often because they refuse to play
> anyone who won't go home and home with them.  We want the home gate and the
> home-ice advantage too.  The big teams out west with the big  rinks do have
> a fiscal responsibility, but they are also chicken-shits, not unlike Duke,
> Syracuse and others in D1 hoop that schedule lots of home games against
> sub-100 RPI ranked teams.  Why take the risk of losing?
>
> You argue that it doesn't make fiscal sense to go to play a home and home
> against a team that has a small building.  That is illogical.  Regardless of
> the opponent in a home and home series, you get your revenue for your two
> home games and you have your travel costs to the two road games.  Your
> travel costs don't vary AT ALL by the size of the competitors rink.  This
> isn't the NHL where there is revenue sharing!  The only way it makes fiscal
> sense is to never travel and to pay a partial guarantee for someone
> desperate enough to come to your sainted buildings.
>
> As long as there are teams wanting to say "oh look where we played at" or
> "oh we needed the money" we'll still have this problem.  Much as I love Red
> at Michigan, he's very arrogant about not needing to go anywhere.  It may be
> true, but arrogant it is.
>
> So stay behind your financial arguments.  I think your teams are just
> chicken-shit.  Ask Jack Parker after his last home and home with Cornell.
> He got blasted 4-1 and 5-1 in Lynah in 02-03 and said he didn't anticipate
> the storied rivalry being resumed any time soon.  Think it had anything to
> do with getting wiped out two in the row on the road? (That BU team was good
> too, lost to UNH in HE tourney final and to UNH in NCAA round of 8)
>
> I think every college hockey player should have the chance to play in the
> "Mecca's" of the college hockey world during their career, be that Mariucci,
> Lynah, Yost, Whittemore, and whatever else you've got out west that's truly
> worth it.
>
> Enough for now,
>
> Arik Marks

ATOM RSS1 RSS2