What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Suny cortland season thread 1.

Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

bakdraft21 said:
I dont get the whole Cortland thing, they have excellent athletics, and I bet if they tried could field a good/better team than the past with all american kids if the Canadian thing is the problem, it must be the higher-ups that dont give a *(&^
Click to expand...

I've said this many times before -- because they don't care.

Cortland is in the PERFECT spot geographically to recruit for every sport ... but hockey. Which is why every sport at Cortland is very successful, sometimes extremely successful ... but hockey. There's a reason why Cortland finishes way up on top of the Sears Trophy (or whatever the heck they call it these days) standings.

Thus, Cortland spends very little money to recruit -- very successfully -- for every sport. So, why should they spend way more money to recruit for hockey, when they are not spending that sort of money to recruit for all the other sports? The answer is simple -- they don't. Because they don't need to, and don't care if one sport suffers for it when all the other sports are successful. Think of it as a ROI sort of thing.
 
Russell Jaslow said:
I've said this many times before -- because they don't care.

Cortland is in the PERFECT spot geographically to recruit for every sport ... but hockey. Which is why every sport at Cortland is very successful, sometimes extremely successful ... but hockey. There's a reason why Cortland finishes way up on top of the Sears Trophy (or whatever the heck they call it these days) standings.

Thus, Cortland spends very little money to recruit -- very successfully -- for every sport. So, why should they spend way more money to recruit for hockey, when they are not spending that sort of money to recruit for all the other sports? The answer is simple -- they don't. Because they don't need to, and don't care if one sport suffers for it when all the other sports are successful. Think of it as a ROI sort of thing.
Click to expand...

And as I said, until that changes it doesnt matter who is the coach. Until they put money into that program to have the ability to recruit, scout, and attract higher talent (Canadiens) they will always be the Cortland of old. Thus the reason youve seen Brockport and Buff State become respectful.
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

PSUChamps2001 said:
And as I said, until that changes it doesnt matter who is the coach. Until they put money into that program to have the ability to recruit, scout, and attract higher talent (Canadiens) they will always be the Cortland of old. Thus the reason youve seen Brockport and Buff State become respectful.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

PSUChamps2001 said:
And as I said, until that changes it doesnt matter who is the coach. Until they put money into that program to have the ability to recruit, scout, and attract higher talent (Canadiens) they will always be the Cortland of old. Thus the reason youve seen Brockport and Buff State become respectful.
Click to expand...

Russell Jaslow said:
I've said this many times before -- because they don't care.

Cortland is in the PERFECT spot geographically to recruit for every sport ... but hockey. Which is why every sport at Cortland is very successful, sometimes extremely successful ... but hockey. There's a reason why Cortland finishes way up on top of the Sears Trophy (or whatever the heck they call it these days) standings.

Thus, Cortland spends very little money to recruit -- very successfully -- for every sport. So, why should they spend way more money to recruit for hockey, when they are not spending that sort of money to recruit for all the other sports? The answer is simple -- they don't. Because they don't need to, and don't care if one sport suffers for it when all the other sports are successful. Think of it as a ROI sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Would $3K do it?
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

Russell Jaslow said:
I've said this many times before -- because they don't care.

Cortland is in the PERFECT spot geographically to recruit for every sport ... but hockey. Which is why every sport at Cortland is very successful, sometimes extremely successful ... but hockey. There's a reason why Cortland finishes way up on top of the Sears Trophy (or whatever the heck they call it these days) standings.

Thus, Cortland spends very little money to recruit -- very successfully -- for every sport. So, why should they spend way more money to recruit for hockey, when they are not spending that sort of money to recruit for all the other sports? The answer is simple -- they don't. Because they don't need to, and don't care if one sport suffers for it when all the other sports are successful. Think of it as a ROI sort of thing.
Click to expand...

It also doesn't hurt trying to attract athletes to a school that has great PE teaching and sport management programs.
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

According to the Main page, Canfield will coach the team for 13-14 and keep the AD job.
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

From my research it looks like Cranfield had quite a bit more success at Cortland than Balderotta did. Hopefully he will be about to take the team back to the playoffs!
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

My nephew played for Cranfield and when he first got there, they had some pretty good players. Nate Gagnon, Kevin Watters come to mind. I haven't seen anybody of that caliber since really. The pattern never seems to change. A win or two against a really good team coupled with many losses to teams they could beat. That's the constant in that program. If you go Waaaaay back, they were actually good in the late 80's/early '90's for a couple of years but that's about it.

I'd say Brockport might be a worse overall program if you take a closer look at it. They have brought in dozens and dozens of Canadian players over the years. Just not very good ones !!!
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

admiral0417 said:
My nephew played for Cranfield and when he first got there, they had some pretty good players. Nate Gagnon, Kevin Watters come to mind. I haven't seen anybody of that caliber since really. The pattern never seems to change. A win or two against a really good team coupled with many losses to teams they could beat. That's the constant in that program. If you go Waaaaay back, they were actually good in the late 80's/early '90's for a couple of years but that's about it.

I'd say Brockport might be a worse overall program if you take a closer look at it. They have brought in dozens and dozens of Canadian players over the years. Just not very good ones !!!
Click to expand...

Gagnon and Watters were decent, and I also played against a lot of the Section 7/10 guys. Still think Lyisisi and Kaleta are better, sorry.

Correct, back in the late 80's early 90's things were different in the DIII landscape. Again, appples to oranges.

Brockport had 12 Canadian players on their 2005-2006 roster. From 2003/04 to 1999-2000 they had 11 total. In the past 14 years, Brockport has had 101 Non American players. Since 2004-2005 90 of the 101 have been during that time. Since that time Brockport has a SUNYAC Win % of .37% the 7 years prior Brockport was a .29% SUNYAC Team.

Buff State has had 89 Non Americans. In 2005-2006 they had 12 Non Americans on their roster. From 2004-2005 to 1999-2000 Buff State had a total of 18 Non Americans. Since 2005-2006 there have been 71 Non Americans on the Buff State roster. From 2004-2005 to 1999-2000 Buff State was a .28% SUNYAC Team. From 2005-2006 Buff State was a .45% SUNYAC Team.

Cortland from 2004-2005 was a .35% SUNYAC team. From 2005-2006 on (when Brockport and Buff State started to add more Canadian players to their team) they've dropped to a .32% SUNYAC team.

As I said, what Baldy did with his hands handicapped against a MUCH improved SUNYAC conference is greater then what Cranfield did when the top of the SUNYAC had "point night" against the Brockport and Buff States of the conference of the old days. Yes it shows that Cortland was a tad better then Brockport and Buff State in the early 2000's, but as soon as they (Brockport/Buff St) started offering the FA packages and the (here is that big phrase again) Administration started CARING about the hockey program (AKA allowing recruiting in Canada and attracted them with $$$) the teams started to win more (Brockport a +8%, Buff State +17%, Cortland -3%). Some people are so blind and want to pin the blame on the coach, when its not the coach's fault the fans have to see short season after short season. Comparing the SUNYAC of the late 90's early 2000's is like apples and oranges to the past 7 or so years. Anyone who's been watching DIII can see this.
 
Re: Suny cortland season thread 1.

Gagnon (113 points), Watters (101) vs. Lysyj (77 points) and Kaleta (55 points) is a no-brainer for me....sorry. Really no comparison. Lysyj was a decent player, but nowhere near as talented as Gagnon. I never noticed the other guy, but who would averaging 14 points per season.

I do agree that at this level the administration is equally important as a coach in the success of the program. But I wouldn't give too much credit to the Buffalo admin. Carriere works his tail off recruiting and is an underrated coach IMO.

I've been following this league since it's formation...so I've been watching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top