Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

[Skate79]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

There are not enough high end players in women's hockey to have success without scholarships like the men. Union can't get those women players without scholarships. Given the circumstances, keeping scores close and trying to tie or win 8 to 10 games a year is pretty reasonable for any coach.

Harvard does not offer scholarships and we have to compete with the likes of BC, BU, UNH, Providence and other schools that can provide a free ride. We've been successful and have had winning records consistently. So I'm not entirely buying your theory.

[hab]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

"At no other D1 school would this trajectory be acceptable - why Union?"

Except for the fact that Union is not a D1 school and that's part of the problem here. A D3 tolerance for a team playing D1 hockey when they really should be playing D3 hockey instead of trying to keep scores close every weekend. That's not fun for anyone.

I suspect that this was written without any real knowledge of the situation at Union or other so-called D3 schools playing D1 hockey. Clarkson, St. Lawrence, RPI and Union are D3 in all sports except hockey but they have proud hockey traditions and a strong hockey culture on campus and definitely do not have "D3 tolerance" for their teams' performance. Union is unique amongst those schools in that they do not provide athletic scholarships, strictly speaking, but they do try to provide financial assistance to help recruit players (as the Ivies do) and have had some very successful years on the men's side. The key there, was coaching: Nate Leaman came in, took an unsuccessful program and built it into a powerhouse which went on to win a national championship shortly after he left. He is now doing the same thing at Providence. Coaches can make an enormous impact at the college level. Do you have first hand knowledge that the Union players are not having "fun"? I suspect that they are.

[giwan]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Harvard does not offer scholarships and we have to compete with the likes of BC, BU, UNH, Providence and other schools that can provide a free ride. We've been successful and have had winning records consistently. So I'm not entirely buying your theory.

More than likely Harvard is giving full financial assistance.

[Skate79]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

More than likely Harvard is giving full financial assistance.

Harvard gives generous financial aid - I'm not sure what you mean by 'full' assistance. But how does this make them different from Union? Doesn't Union give financial aid as well? Sorry, that argument doesn't hold water. If Union wants to be successful as a D-1 women's program, they have to commit the resources to make that happen. So far it seems as if the administration has only focused on the men's program. Maybe that changes after this year, maybe not. But financial aid won't be the determining factor as to whether or not Union builds a winner. It will be one factor but not the only one.

[EastFan1]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Harvard gives generous financial aid - I'm not sure what you mean by 'full' assistance. But how does this make them different from Union? Doesn't Union give financial aid as well? Sorry, that argument doesn't hold water. If Union wants to be successful as a D-1 women's program, they have to commit the resources to make that happen. So far it seems as if the administration has only focused on the men's program. Maybe that changes after this year, maybe not. But financial aid won't be the determining factor as to whether or not Union builds a winner. It will be one factor but not the only one.

"commit the resources" to be successful -

What does that mean? What do the Union men have that the women do not? Different rink?

[giwan]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Harvard gives generous financial aid - I'm not sure what you mean by 'full' assistance. But how does this make them different from Union? Doesn't Union give financial aid as well? Sorry, that argument doesn't hold water. If Union wants to be successful as a D-1 women's program, they have to commit the resources to make that happen. So far it seems as if the administration has only focused on the men's program. Maybe that changes after this year, maybe not. But financial aid won't be the determining factor as to whether or not Union builds a winner. It will be one factor but not the only one.

I just meant GENEROU$ aid, more so than compared to Union. Have two friends that their daughters are on the team, I get enough feedback when I ask them about things. BUT you are correct that alone does not make them a winner. It can potentially sway a better player though to Harvard vs Union.

The mix of having a winning team is always more than one player, one coach, more money etc. but it is a mix of having the right combination. In the athletic world there are many many examples of this in all sports and levels of sport.

[Skate79]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

"commit the resources" to be successful -

What does that mean? What do the Union men have that the women do not? Different rink?

Larger recruiting budget for one. I'm not familiar with Union's program or how it is run but money committed to coaching and recruiting would be a good place to start. Does Union encourage or spend for their coaches in the off season to attend camps and build affiliations with national or junior programs that can be feeders for better players? Again, I'm spitballing here because I don't have intimate knowledge of Union's athletic programs and their oversight.

[Skate79]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

I just meant GENEROU$ aid, more so than compared to Union. Have two friends that their daughters are on the team, I get enough feedback when I ask them about things. BUT you are correct that alone does not make them a winner. It can potentially sway a better player though to Harvard vs Union.

The mix of having a winning team is always more than one player, one coach, more money etc. but it is a mix of having the right combination. In the athletic world there are many many examples of this in all sports and levels of sport.

No question that Harvard has the financial resources to compete with any school in the country that doesn't offer scholarships. Whether they choose to use those resources on athletes, exceptional musicians, artists, techies and other talented kids is up to the financial aid office. Money has to be available to all students applying to the college, not just hockey players. I don't doubt it makes it that much harder for Union to go up against us for top flight players. The Union men seem to land quality players, some of whom would look good in Crimson. Just sayin'.

[FanofGoodHockey]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Didn't RIT go to the NCAA tournament last year? And, aren't they in a similar position as Union...good school academically, NO athletic scholarships. So, we can make all the excuses we want for Union Women's Hockey we want and find reasons why they continue to not win games. But, RIT wins games against good programs and they are in the same position. I would have to say that the problem is coaching and recruiting. Nobody said it was easy to win there or get good players, but I'd be willing to bet if they got somebody who worked tirelessly to land a few impact players things would start to turn around.

[PuckRush]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Didn't RIT go to the NCAA tournament last year? And, aren't they in a similar position as Union...good school academically, NO athletic scholarships. So, we can make all the excuses we want for Union Women's Hockey we want and find reasons why they continue to not win games. But, RIT wins games against good programs and they are in the same position. I would have to say that the problem is coaching and recruiting. Nobody said it was easy to win there or get good players, but I'd be willing to bet if they got somebody who worked tirelessly to land a few impact players things would start to turn around.

Until they try your idea, we'll never know.

[shelfit]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Didn't RIT go to the NCAA tournament last year? And, aren't they in a similar position as Union...good school academically, NO athletic scholarships. So, we can make all the excuses we want for Union Women's Hockey we want and find reasons why they continue to not win games. But, RIT wins games against good programs and they are in the same position. I would have to say that the problem is coaching and recruiting. Nobody said it was easy to win there or get good players, but I'd be willing to bet if they got somebody who worked tirelessly to land a few impact players things would start to turn around.

Very bad example / comparison. Everyone that is familiar with the game understands that RIT won their (weak) conference in a fluke last year to get the NCAA tournament. RIT no longer wins games against good programs. They barely beat Union this year. Poor coaching and recruiting is now showing up in the RIT program as well.

[Flarrow]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Back on 2 Dec, HockeyEast33 made critically important points:
“Union (and really any school) can be successful at the D1 level with the right recipe of coach, resources, facilities, and players. Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level. What has happened there is proof that she cannot be successful in that environment, not that Union can't be successful at the D1 level. Until I see at least two more respected coaches take a shot and fail at Union on the women's side, I wouldn't give up on D1 yet. But they do need to make the change after this season just to purge the air and start over - Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level.”

“Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level”—Tim Gerrish had the potential to succeed as a D1 coach, and Union was courageous in giving him the chance, but the Athletic Director chose to fire him, for whatever reasons he had. Gerrish knew, and the players he recruited knew, that the program was going to have to struggle to move from D-III to D-I, and that it would take several years to get there. The AD never gave him that chance.

Since then “Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level”. Now you’re getting to the real problem. The AD replaced Gerrish with Barcomb, and since then McLaughlin has refused to see any problems. She has never shown she can coach (in games or in practice), recruit, manage players, fund-raise, or plan strategically. These players came/come to Union for a variety of reasons. Most benefit greatly from a Union education. Many of them would perhaps be bench warmers or practice players at other schools; the sad thing is that at Union that is what Barcomb sees them as, even though they could become the players the program needs to lift itself from the cellar.

What does Union women’s hockey need? A new coach…an alumni/fan support system like the men’s team has, … and a new AD. No single thing will fix the problem, which is not lack of scholarships. Good smart athletes come to Union to get an education and play the sport they love. They choose Union in large part because it is not part of a huge university system, or in a big city. If the team was well run, it could win. But like Gerrish said years ago, any new coach needs to be confident in having at least a few years to make the transition. Jim McLaughlin has proven that any coach that comes in can have as many as nine years without having to account for W/L or standings accountability. Unfortunately, according to HE33, it could be 2033 before we see ‘SUCCESS’. That’s quite a few Union women graduates…and many more lost games. Go U!

[PuckRush]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Back on 2 Dec, HockeyEast33 made critically important points:
“Union (and really any school) can be successful at the D1 level with the right recipe of coach, resources, facilities, and players. Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level. What has happened there is proof that she cannot be successful in that environment, not that Union can't be successful at the D1 level. Until I see at least two more respected coaches take a shot and fail at Union on the women's side, I wouldn't give up on D1 yet. But they do need to make the change after this season just to purge the air and start over - Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level.”

“Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level”—Tim Gerrish had the potential to succeed as a D1 coach, and Union was courageous in giving him the chance, but the Athletic Director chose to fire him, for whatever reasons he had. Gerrish knew, and the players he recruited knew, that the program was going to have to struggle to move from D-III to D-I, and that it would take several years to get there. The AD never gave him that chance.

Since then “Union has effectively had only one coach at the D1 level”. Now you’re getting to the real problem. The AD replaced Gerrish with Barcomb, and since then McLaughlin has refused to see any problems. She has never shown she can coach (in games or in practice), recruit, manage players, fund-raise, or plan strategically. These players came/come to Union for a variety of reasons. Most benefit greatly from a Union education. Many of them would perhaps be bench warmers or practice players at other schools; the sad thing is that at Union that is what Barcomb sees them as, even though they could become the players the program needs to lift itself from the cellar.

What does Union women’s hockey need? A new coach…an alumni/fan support system like the men’s team has, … and a new AD. No single thing will fix the problem, which is not lack of scholarships. Good smart athletes come to Union to get an education and play the sport they love. They choose Union in large part because it is not part of a huge university system, or in a big city. If the team was well run, it could win. But like Gerrish said years ago, any new coach needs to be confident in having at least a few years to make the transition. Jim McLaughlin has proven that any coach that comes in can have as many as nine years without having to account for W/L or standings accountability. Unfortunately, according to HE33, it could be 2033 before we see ‘SUCCESS’. That’s quite a few Union women graduates…and many more lost games. Go U!

The point here is correct. Anyone that has dealt with Barcomb on some level during her tenure at Union knows it too.

[Puckdrop14]

The point here is correct. Anyone that has dealt with Barcomb on some level during her tenure at Union knows it too.

Coaching maybe, but line up a few goal scorers and you will be ok as you seem to have a goaltender that is stopping 95% of anything sent her way!

[FanofGoodHockey]

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2015-16 thread

Agree with Flarrow on all accounts to this. Unfortunately, it's quite obvious that the AD is the bigger problem here in not making any changes. So, we can complain about the coaching all we want, but her boss is continuing to give her the shovel to keep digging the hole. Probably another contract extension in her future.