No More Do-Overs

Cornell bounced back in New Hampshire, but cannot afford any more setbacks

Just 4 days after the bad losses in Florida, the Cornell team responded with one of their best games of the season, beating the University of New Hampshire 5-2 on the Olympic-sized New Hampshire ice. The highlight of this game was an unbelievable 3-minute stretch of hockey where Cornell maintained uninterrupted possession in the UNH zone, changed lines twice while pinning the same UNH players on the ice, and capping it off with a goal by Riley Nash. Cornell had this weekend off, and resumes ECAC Hockey play on Friday.

Now that we are in 2010 and the final stretch of the regular season, we've reached the stage in the schedule where us fans can begin to obsess over rankings. In College Hockey, there are a number of different rating schemes. The two national polls (which can be found on www.USCHO.com) and the Inside College Hockey Power Rankings are fun and interesting, but ultimately reflect the opinions of a few people, and are not an accurate ranking. There are a number of numerical ranking systems, but the most important is the PairWise Ranking (PWR).

The calculation of the PWR is a complicated process (stay tuned for an overview of the process soon), but the important thing to know is that it is the closest available approximation to the secret process by which the NCAA selection committee selects teams to the national tournament in the spring. Sixteen teams make the tournament, but league champions automatically earn one of those spots regardless of their PWR. Considering the actual selection algorithm is secret, a fan who is interested can assume fairly safely that their team will be invited to the tournament if their PWR rank is better than 10th or 12th at the end of the season. (It is likely that teams ranked 14 or 15 can also get in, but it is not quite a safe bet).

Prior to the Florida weekend, Cornell's PWR was somewhere in the 8-15 range. (I did not check right before the Colorado College game, but that is usually approximately Cornell's position). After losing once to a good team and once to a mediocre team, the PWR dropped to 25, the final spot in the ranking. After winning to a decent team in UNH, the team recovered some ground, but only to 23.

In Short: Losing = big drop. Winning = small gain.

Since then, Cornell has climbed moderately, two more positions due to other teams losing. Regardless, the consequence is clear. Climbing back up the rankings is going to be difficult, and the team cannot afford many more set backs. No more do-overs. The team cannot take a mental vacation for one night, and expect a strong game the next night to compensate.

North Dakota, Yale, and Union are the 3 teams on Cornell's second-half schedule with stronger PWR rankings than us. Quinnipiac, Colgate, and St. Lawrence are the teams behind us that are most likely to climb into the top-25 PWR, if they finish the season exceptionally strongly. The way the rankings are constructed, winning against a strong team is more helpful than beating a weak team. Similarly, losing to a weak team is more destructive than losing to a strong team.

The two-game set against North Dakota are now the most important games of the season. They are the strongest opponents left on our schedule. While a loss to them (or Union or Yale) would be less devastating to our ranking than a loss to Clarkson or the other lower echelons of the ECAC, they also represent our best chance to make up ground, and to repair our image in the eyes of the nation.

That being said, the games against the mid-level ECAC teams are also important for Cornell, in order to hold them at bay and prevent them from overtaking us. The games against the low-level ECAC teams are also important, due to the dramatic effect of losing to a weak team.

Every game for the rest of the season can be seen as a season-defining match. It should be an exciting time to watch Cornell hockey. Lets Go Red!