Colgate 2019-2020

[Rightnut]

ECAC Champions, Congrats to ‘Gate! Could not be happier for them. A bittersweet season with only 4 league teams playing. IMO the league was very competitive and their records are not necessarily indicative of that.

Was wondering if Sammy’s last goal deflected off a skate...

‘Gate came out a little flat; poor defense, couldn’t pass or clear the zone or get any shots! Glad they got their mojo! Osborne played a much better game. Credit to SLU, a team that consistently gets outshot yet finds ways to win or keep it close.

Colgate still struggles scoring 5x5. That ppg was a lifesaver. Serdachny without a point, hope she turns that back around!

A lot of slack about our league and repetitive schedule and teams like PSU getting bumped from the tournament, but their conference was weak and it’s all about strength of schedule IMO. Clarkson has been a national contender for the last 5-7 years; tell me you want to play them 10x!!!

Definitely directed off skate but not kicked.

[Rightnut]

Disagree; Colgate has been #1/2 PWR all year, ranked #5/6 all year. They would have received an at-large over Providence IMO. I think you’re underestimating the records of the other 3 ECAC teams. Had you seen them play against each other as often as I have, the talent is there. Hard to speculate.

Clarkson is a very good team. Any team with 2 Patty Kaz nominations - Giguere and Lonergan - is good. Plus David. Why they faltered at the end, I don't know, but you can't tell me that team isn't better than Providence and probably UMD.

[pgb-ohio]

Disagree; Colgate has been #1/2 PWR all year, ranked #5/6 all year. They would have received an at-large over Providence IMO. I think you’re underestimating the records of the other 3 ECAC teams. Had you seen them play against each other as often as I have, the talent is there. Hard to speculate.

Looks like we're talking past each other. Probably because my initial post was written in a desperate rush, before leaving for work.

My point is that the Committee was very inconsistent with how they made use of SOS, if they made use of it all. And I still doubt that the Committee awarded bids for teams on the bubble on that basis.

I expect that Colgate will pass the eye test very nicely at the tournament. I've seen the Red Raiders in person fairly recently. When 'gate visited Columbus, it was a fun series with a high quality opponent. And a well earned split by both teams.

I can also agree that Colgate should have been selected over Providence, had it come to that. I didn't mean to insult Colgate; I meant to express puzzlement with the Committee's criteria, and application of same. By winning the autobid, Colgate simply avoided the SOS controversy. (except perhaps for seeding) That's a good thing; an accomplishment.


All that said, do you still believe that SOS is the one variable that explains the at-large selections? This year's UMD team selected over Minnesota on that basis? Seriously?

[TchrBill]

Was not offended, pgb-ohio. Glad to have you share your opinion and I apologize as well if I sounded rude. Colgate alum/posters are the best there are.
And yes, I think SOS and record against ranked opponents is likely most important. I feel confident saying this is what happened to Penn State; a victim of an unfortunate, weak conference and no ranked opponents. Something else to consider is HTH, where #6UMD lost twice to Minnesota. Stunned that it didn't sway the selection committee, which really seems unjustified.

Good article on Minn/UMD and selection criteria, puts it in better perspective for me. The last sentence really says it all...and so does the one comment lol:
https://www.uscho.com/2021/03/08/wom...prising-picks/

[TchrBill]

Still cannot stand this site...
No mention of the ECAC Champions on the Women's front page, but 4-5 articles on Wisconsin and Ohio State. Um, not cool.
Am thinking the PWR became defunct just weeks before the playoffs b/c it would have limited the Committee's preferences of at-large bids!

[Hockeynation]

Still cannot stand this site...
No mention of the ECAC Champions on the Women's front page, but 4-5 articles on Wisconsin and Ohio State. Um, not cool.
Am thinking the PWR became defunct just weeks before the playoffs b/c it would have limited the Committee's preferences of at-large bids!

The ECAC seems to not be a big priority. Would have to say fantastic league with no bottom dwellers this year. Congratulations to your team. Looks like a lot of hardware and awards for your girls this season. Some really impressive young guns. Might be the dangerous Cinderella at the dance this year that nobody is paying attention to.

https://www.ecachockey.com/women/202..._Serdachny_POY




https://www.ecachockey.com/women/202...6_-_First_Team




https://www.ecachockey.com/women/202..._-_Osborne_ROY




https://www.ecachockey.com/women/202..._-_Gates_BestD




https://www.ecachockey.com/women/202...rdachny_Best_F

[pgb-ohio]

Was not offended, pgb-ohio. Glad to have you share your opinion and I apologize as well if I sounded rude. Colgate alum/posters are the best there are.
And yes, I think SOS and record against ranked opponents is likely most important. I feel confident saying this is what happened to Penn State; a victim of an unfortunate, weak conference and no ranked opponents. Something else to consider is HTH, where #6UMD lost twice to Minnesota. Stunned that it didn't sway the selection committee, which really seems unjustified.

Good article on Minn/UMD and selection criteria, puts it in better perspective for me. The last sentence really says it all...and so does the one comment lol:
https://www.uscho.com/2021/03/08/wom...prising-picks/

Appreciate the reply.

I do think you have some of the individual decisions figured out. But looking at the decisions as a group, I still see troubling inconsistency.

Perhaps the most striking example would be a UMD/Penn State comparison. If, due to the pandemic, Win-Loss % is your guiding principle, you can justify the UMD pick. But then don't you have give the same respect to PSU's W-L %? Conversely, if SOS is really the top criteria, and you use that to eliminate PSU, shouldn't you eliminate UMD as well?

I'm not prepared to go as far as "the one comment." But when you see significant inconsistency in the decision-making, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the process.

[Hockeybuckeye]

Appreciate the reply.

I do think you have some of the individual decisions figured out. But looking at the decisions as a group, I still see troubling inconsistency.

Perhaps the most striking example would be a UMD/Penn State comparison. If, due to the pandemic, Win-Loss % is your guiding principle, you can justify the UMD pick. But then don't you have give the same respect to PSU's W-L %? Conversely, if SOS is really the top criteria, and you use that to eliminate PSU, shouldn't you eliminate UMD as well?

I'm not prepared to go as far as "the one comment." But when you see significant inconsistency in the decision-making, it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the process.

So, do the coaches on the committee remove themselves from the part of the process when their team is up for consideration like those on the football selection committee do in the interest of fairness who are administrators of the schools in the mix or is the hockey committee too small a group to be able to do that?

[pgb-ohio]

So, do the coaches on the committee remove themselves from the part of the process when their team is up for consideration like those on the football selection committee do in the interest of fairness who are administrators of the schools in the mix or is the hockey committee too small a group to be able to do that?

Fair question, and I'll admit I wasn't 100% sure. But TTT answered you over in the Selections & Seeding thread.

I'd echo the general thrust of TTT's post. Work product can fall short for any number of reasons. It doesn't necessarily mean that procedural rules were broken -- the suspicions of the most vehement posters notwithstanding.

[TchrBill]

The ECAC seems to not be a big priority. Would have to say fantastic league with no bottom dwellers this year. Congratulations to your team. Looks like a lot of hardware and awards for your girls this season. Some really impressive young guns. Might be the dangerous Cinderella at the dance this year that nobody is paying attention to.

Nice of you to say. Would rather be a household name than a Cinderella, but hopefully the ECAC - with Clarkson and Cornell being so successful - is taken more seriously. Hard to predict what the season would have held had all 12 teams been present. Colgate never defeats Cornell, men OR women, and maybe we would have finished in the top 4, but no guarantee about bringing home the players' hardware or the league title. Our offense sputters at times and is inconsistent. Hope Colgate can make a great run in the tournament.

[TchrBill]

Team hit the road today with a nice, sunny sendoff from Hamilton! Hope they stay healthy and play an amazing game!

https://twitter.com/ColgateWIH/statu...226584580?s=20

Go 'Gate!

[TchrBill]

Don't mind being the lone poster on here for the best team in hockey from the greatest college on Earth!
First, congratulations to UMD on a fantastic game! Good luck the rest of the way.

Every school that kept their season has overcome so much adversity and deserves nothing but accolades. In that regard, we've all earned a share of the trophy.

Not the desired outcome, but another memorable season for Colgate! Freshman goalie Osborne kept us in it, but as has been the challenge all season, scoring goals never came easy for this team. With the majority of their talent returning next season, they should be a great contender in the ECAC.

Without reigning ECAC champ Princeton and arch nemesis Cornell, whom we never defeat, Colgate's fate could have been very different this season. As one USCHO staff writer wrote of Colgate, "They're a year early, and next year will be their year." A-men.

Thank you, Colgate Athletics. Thank you, Coach Fargo. Thank you, Seniors. And thank you, @ColgateWIH. Because of you, we have 2, new, beautiful banners to raise at Class of '65 Arena next Fall.

CU in 2022!

[TitleIXHockey]

Cornell is losing 7 of their top 8 scorers and their top 6. I can't see them being in the top 4.

Colgate and Princeton seem like locks. Clarkson, St. Lawrence, Harvard could compete for the other two spots.

[vicb]

Cornell is losing 7 of their top 8 scorers and their top 6. I can't see them being in the top 4.

Colgate and Princeton seem like locks. Clarkson, St. Lawrence, Harvard could compete for the other two spots.

.
Clarkson is going to be scoring challenged next year unless the Freshmen class can provide A LOT or Giguere comes back or they get a high profile transfer (which I doubt). I do not see Lonergan coming back.
A top 4 in the ECAC would be a stretch IMHO.

[TitleIXHockey]

.
Clarkson is going to be scoring challenged next year unless the Freshmen class can provide A LOT or Giguere comes back or they get a high profile transfer (which I doubt). I do not see Lonergan coming back.
A top 4 in the ECAC would be a stretch IMHO.

They have 2 coming in that lit up their previous leagues.

Gretchen Branton: 94 games, 77g, 73a (USHS-MN)
Laurence Frenette: 115 games, 73g, 73a (CAHS)

Nicole Gosling is a stud on D and should improve and they have a very underrated D otherwise. Even if both Lonergan and Giguère depart, they shouldn't be completely bereft of scoring talent. They'll also have both McQuigges, and Gabrielle David. No Gig/Lonergan but not slouches. I think Florence Lessard will improve a lot too.

I think Clarkson would have benefited the most from a full season.
1. They rely on cohesiveness and passing more than other teams
2. They replaced the two most important positions - top line center and top defender

With a full year and some easier games to get the freshmen more minutes I think they land just on the other side of the NCAA bubble.

Edit: I don't know why you'd doubt a high profile transfer, it has happened 4 times now: Cianfarano, Sauvé, Lonergan, Hanson (high profile for Brown anyway).