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:
Bill Fenwick <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
College Hockey discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Jan 91 15:16:31 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (99 lines)
Firstly, with the commencement of Operation Desert Storm last night, I
sincerely hope and pray, as we all do, for the quick and safe return of all
troops from the Persian Gulf.
 
Now on to somewhat less important hockey matters.  A minor correction to the
ECAC press release posted by Todd Visconti:  RPI's overall record was listed
as 11-7-0 when it is actually 12-6-0.
 
Mike Machnik writes:
 
>                      I've just grown accustomed to hearing some ECAC people
>    (not all, mind you) put down the other conferences because the ECAC
>    perceives itself to be academically superior to everyone else.
 
The ECAC does contain a higher number and a higher percentage of the more
difficult schools in Division I than any other conference does.  This is
according to the Barron's college guide, not me.  Does this prove that the
ECAC schools are academically superior to other schools?  Certainly not --
"more difficult" means exactly that and does not equate to "academically
superior".  At any top-notch school, you can find some academic departments
that rank with the best in the country and others that just don't cut it.
The latter departments would certainly not be considered "academically
superior", despite being part of a difficult school.
 
I have to point out, however, that the ECAC types are not the only ones
guilty of put-downs.  It may be unfair of them to think of their league as
academically superior, but it's equally unfair for others to dismiss the
entire ECAC as a bunch of weak-sister teams.  I remember the expressions of
surprise when Colgate made the NCAA finals last year and when Harvard won it
all two years ago -- as if no team from "that league" could ever be
considered a serious threat.  This kind of thing has been going on for
years, even in the '60s and '70s, when first Cornell (two championships) and
then BU (three) was dominating the NCAAs.  I'm not saying that the ECAC
doesn't have some poor teams -- obviously, they do, but they also have a
number of teams that are capable of doing well against anybody from the
other three conferences.  This is an important distinction that has been
made on the list before, and I'm hoping that sometime soon, the college
hockey "experts" will figure it out.  But I expect that when some ECAC team,
maybe Cornell or Clarkson or (why not?) Yale makes the NCAA final four or
even the championship game, a lot of people will be screaming "upset" again.
 
Mike also writes (about college hockey's scoring leaders):
>    Also note that three of the top five scorers are Harvard's top line,
>    which amassed their numbers beating up on the ECAC's weaker teams.
>    Now that Harvard is playing the tougher teams, they will drop among
>    the leaders.
 
That's a possibility, but Harvard has already showed that they are capable
of putting up a lot of goals against these tougher ECAC teams, having scored
4 against St. Lawrence, 5 against Clarkson, and 7 against RPI in losses this
season, as well as 8 against Cornell in a win.  (Well, Harvard always beats
Cornell anyway *sigh*)  The top line of Peter Ciavaglia, Ted Donato, and
Mike Vukonich has led the way for the Crimson this year, combining for 51 of
the team's 89 goals this season.  I don't think any of the remaining teams
on the Crimson's schedule is going to bottle this line up for a whole game
-- they're going to get their points, and probably plenty of them.  I expect
they will get even more opportunities as the season goes on, because
Harvard's other lines aren't doing anywhere near as well, and the Crimson
will need to compensate for a somewhat shaky defense.
 
Mike Zak writes:
>It appears that the black hole for top league teams to play in is the Yale
>Whale.  Clarkson, Harvard and St. Lawrence went in and loss.  None of the
>games were too close.  Does anyone know how RPI did there?
 
RPI won 4-3, in overtime.
 
>         Home ice does seem to be the key to winning this year so far, besides
>Yale, Clarkson, Harvard, SLU, and I imagine Cornell have at most one
>loss at home.
 
These five teams, the top five in the ECAC, do indeed have excellent home-
ice records:
 
Team                ECAC home      Overall home
                     record           record
--------------------------------------------
Clarkson             3-0-1            7-0-1
Cornell              4-0-1            5-0-1
Harvard              6-1-0            6-2-0
St. Lawrence         4-1-0            6-1-0
Yale                 6-1-1            7-2-1 (includes tournament)
 
Interestingly enough, however, RPI, which is currently in sixth but is only
four points out of first and has a couple games in hand, is 3-3 at home in
league games.  The Engineers have gone 4-0 on the road in ECAC games and
have dealt Harvard and Yale their only home league losses this season.  (St.
Lawrence's loss was to Cornell)
 
Bill Fenwick
Cornell '86
LET'S GO RED!!
 
"To keep your marriage brimming,
 With love in the loving cup,
 Whenever you're wrong, admit it;
 Whenever you're right, shut up."
-- Ogden Nash, "A Word to Husbands"

ATOM RSS1 RSS2