Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

[rdf8585]

Time for a new thread.

To kick it off, the Dutchwomen announced their incoming recruiting class today:

http://unionhockeynews.blogspot.com/...-announce.html

[CrossCheck]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Time for a new thread.

To kick it off, the Dutchwomen announced their incoming recruiting class today:

http://unionhockeynews.blogspot.com/...-announce.html

Humm....looks like another loooong year ahead for Union.

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Humm....looks like another loooong year ahead for Union.

I'd sadly have to agree wrt this recruiting class. These players are generally solid (although one I know about may not even be at that level), but like Vermont's incoming class there are no marquee players. Unlike Vermont, there aren't even a large number of recruits (making it up with numbers there). Know of several better (IMHO) players who were actually interested in Union but were spurned by the coaching staff and ended up elsewhere in D1. Have to continue to wonder about the recruiting ability of the staff (and yes I will point out yet again that the men's team operates under the same constraints and is very successful).

BTW - why is a picture of the men's team on a post about the women's team? Talk about adding insult to injury....

[CrossCheck]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

There is no reason why Union can't be at least a 'decent' D1 program. It's a good school with a lot going for it [I know the town is not great, but it's no worse than many others].

If the men's team can do it, why can't the women? Not sure the recruiting [it's hard work] is up to snuff...

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

There is no reason why Union can't be at least a 'decent' D1 program. It's a good school with a lot going for it [I know the town is not great, but it's no worse than many others].

If the men's team can do it, why can't the women? Not sure the recruiting [it's hard work] is up to snuff...

Quite frankly the women's game is still decades behind the men's agme. There are 7 times as many men vs.women playing the game while only twice as many DI programs. The Union men made it to the frozen four for the first time in it's history just 2 seasons ago. You're not comparing apples and apples.

[stanleycup]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Union is a very appealing school. I know first hand of two very good players who are both D1 freshmen this upcoming season who were interested. They received initial interest from the coach and then could not even get a return email. They are both impact D1 players who could have had an immediate impact on the program. Maybe they were the wrong profile of player that they were looking for, not sure what the recruiting strategy is.

Union has its own Jr. tournament in Sept that attracts many great players from the PWHL and other leagues. They should use this event as a recruiting tool. The coaching staff was not very visible the last few years.

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Quite frankly the women's game is still decades behind the men's agme. There are 7 times as many men vs.women playing the game while only twice as many DI programs. The Union men made it to the frozen four for the first time in it's history just 2 seasons ago. You're not comparing apples and apples.

Not buying it. That works for the first 3-5 years of a coach's tenure but she has been there 6+ years and the team has made minimal if any progress. They should be more competitive, period. As noted, a good school that would be attractive to many D1 candidates - they just aren't picking the right kids to focus on OR doing anything with them when they get there OR both.

Sometimes a coach just can't get the job done at a specific school (given your U Conn experience, you know that better than anyone - jeez, she even had scholarships). Union requires a coach that can recruit for their specific situation - and there is a type of player/person that fits their profile - they just aren't recruiting them OR getting many of the ones they focus on.

[ARM]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

The women's coach should be judged on her own merits, and IMO, it is fair to do so. However, the constant argument that the men have had success is pointless. It's a different environment. Lower profile programs on the men's side have had success because they can attract more seasoned players who aren't the first choice of the top teams. They can keep those players for four years more often, while the blue chip recruits are bolting for the NHL after a season or two. So a program like Bemidji State can reach the Frozen Four even though they don't feature a lot of highly-prized recruits. That's just one example of a difference between recruiting for the men's and women's college game at this point of their evolutions.

[123kidd]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

I think the main point here is that they are not winning more. 4 wins last year, 4 the year before and 2 before that. So 10 wins in 3 years and 3 of those were against SH.
How long does a staff get in the ECAC?

[rdf8585]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

BTW - why is a picture of the men's team on a post about the women's team? Talk about adding insult to injury....

The picture of the men's team is the blog header. It's on every page.

If the Union women's team can somehow, somewhere find a substantial increase in offense, there's no reason they can't be a player in league play. Goaltending and defense shouldn't hold them back.

[D2D]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

The women's coach should be judged on her own merits, and IMO, it is fair to do so. However, the constant argument that the men have had success is pointless. It's a different environment. Lower profile programs on the men's side have had success because they can attract more seasoned players who aren't the first choice of the top teams. They can keep those players for four years more often, while the blue chip recruits are bolting for the NHL after a season or two. So a program like Bemidji State can reach the Frozen Four even though they don't feature a lot of highly-prized recruits. That's just one example of a difference between recruiting for the men's and women's college game at this point of their evolutions.

This is spot on.

[CrossCheck]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

after 6 years? not recruiting right/smart. easy as that. ditto for colgate....at some point, as a coach/program you need to be semi-competitive.

[Still A Game]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

My daughter was highly recruited. It seemed like Union went about it like they couldn't get her. Like any of the girls.....she just needed to be wanted. Union could have had her easily if they would have just said they really wanted her. They didn't, or were too bashful about it. These are young girls trying to build a program. Its a long road for them and my daughter plays for another school now.

[ARM]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

after 6 years? not recruiting right/smart. easy as that. ditto for colgate....at some point, as a coach/program you need to be semi-competitive.

Colgate's head coach has been there a year, so your "ditto" makes no sense in this context.

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Not buying it. That works for the first 3-5 years of a coach's tenure but she has been there 6+ years and the team has made minimal if any progress. They should be more competitive, period. As noted, a good school that would be attractive to many D1 candidates - they just aren't picking the right kids to focus on OR doing anything with them when they get there OR both.

Sometimes a coach just can't get the job done at a specific school (given your U Conn experience, you know that better than anyone - jeez, she even had scholarships). Union requires a coach that can recruit for their specific situation - and there is a type of player/person that fits their profile - they just aren't recruiting them OR getting many of the ones they focus on.

I agree with you on the UCONN experience. Scholarship schools vs. non is different for sure. The academic standards and the $200,000 in tuition is a major set back as it relates to recruiting. So what about Princeton, Yale or Brown? Harvard and Cornell are the two schools doing well without scholarships and let's face it Union is not either. The women's field of players is not deep enough yet. (Yale has a very good incoming freshman class but let's see)