That is a matter of opinion. Winning the tournament only allows you to advance. Winning the overall league really shows you were the best team for the year. Tournaments are nothing more than grubbing for money.
I don't remember you saying that NCAA bball was grubbing for money when your womens team danced this year. Be consistent for once, stop changing your argument to suit your specific teams "successes". Ask your hockey squad if they are satisfied that they didn't make the tournament but won the regular season. I've got solid money on them saying exactly the opposite of what you just said.
Maybe your womens squad should have shown some "morals" and not gone to the dance b/c they won the league and were happy not to help those NCAA moneygrubbers make more money off of your squad. Pulease.
And if it is a matter of opinion, then your opinion is definitely a minority one.
Cheers.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ] [ Edit | View ] [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: The BS Meter just went off the charts -- Gate Raider, 02:07:25 05/15/04 Sat
I never said winning the tournament or getting to the NCAA was not important. They are important. I said being the regular season winner shows which team was the best over the long pull and the full measure. The tournament is a short term measure. And don't tell me the purpose of the tournaments is not to raise money. Obviously, there could be an NCAA tournament without tournaments is the various leagues.
Since 1980, Colgate has a good, but not exceptional, hockey program. The Raiders have had a .561 winning percentage(426-327-59 record), three ECAC regular season championships, 1 ECAC tournament championship, three NCAA appearances, and one appearance in the NCAA final game.
Over that period, I would rank Colgate in the middle of the ECAC pack. Harvard and Clarkson have been the cream of the league, while Cornell and Saint Lawrence also have done well. Note the following:
Team/Regular Season Champs/ECAC TournamentChamp/NCAA App.
Harvard - 7/5/12
Clarkson - 7/3/12
Saint Lawrence - 1/5/8
Cornell - 2/4/7
RPI - 2/3/4
Colgate - 2/1/3
Vermont - 1/0/2
Yale - 1/0/1
Princeton - 0/1/1
Brown - 0/0/1
Union - 0/0/0
Dartmouth 0/0/0
All things considered, just about every league member has had their season in the sun. There's plenty of parity in the ECAC, and it is evident both in regular season and tournament play. I certainly hope that Holy Cross joins the ECAC hockey fraternity, and am confident that they can quickly become competitive due to the surplus of New England hockey talent, local interest in the sport, and the potential for some good rivalries (including Colgate.)
Colgate's hockey fortunes should improve now that it's offering athletic scholarships (8 per class for men's and women's hockey). They should be contenders in the 2004-05 season.
As you are undoubtedly aware, hockey is to the 'Gate what hoops is to the Cross. It's the one men's sport where we compete with the big boys, albeit sometimes in a David vs. Goliath fashion. I get a real thrill out of a Raider win against a good CCHA, WCHA, or Hockey East team. Given the importance of Colgate hockey fortunes to me, I can certainly understand why Sader fans have similar feelings about their hoops team and a desire to elevate the level of that program.
With all due respect to Gate Raider, I consider an NCAA bid to be most important, a league tournament championships to be the second most important, and a regular season championship to be third most important. That in no way diminishes the accomplishments of this year's team...It just would have been sweeter if they could have advanced to The Show.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
The more he crows and rubs our collective noses in Colgate's athletic success and his school's more proactive posture on athletic funding just might get McFarland and the Trustees at HC off their lethargic beehinds to do something along the same lines !
Some people are just born to "tweak" others - Gate Raider is one of them or otherwise he wouldn't spend so much time on this board and would spend more time on Colgate's board. Some of his points about HC are valid and we shouldn't shoot the messenger.
But, Rick, if you think that Gate Raider's contribution is because somehow Fr. McFarland and others will change their positions about HC athletics because of something Gate Raider says here, IMO, you couldn't be more wrong. If they don't listen to Holy Cross alumni (unless you contribute 6 or 7 figure donations), they sure aren't going to listen to a Colgate alumnus.
