What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

futurestar said:
The need for some stronger players combined with a brand new on campus rink has brought a bunch of players to this school. I'll reserve my vote for Coach of the Year till I see them put some wins on the board.
Click to expand...

I don't believe I recommended the coach for COTY yet ... although she certainly does deserve credit for the recruiting she appears to have done. In looking at where those players have come from, you can't tell me that kids from Colorado, California, Washington, Ontario, etc. just randomly decided to attend Plymoth State because they have a new rink and it "need some stronger players"... Clearly this coach has made a huge push in recruiting and has succeeded in attracting players from all over the country. One can only hope that it will pay off when they take the ice next year.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
I don't believe I recommended the coach for COTY yet ... although she certainly does deserve credit for the recruiting she appears to have done. In looking at where those players have come from, you can't tell me that kids from Colorado, California, Washington, Ontario, etc. just randomly decided to attend Plymoth State because they have a new rink and it "need some stronger players"... Clearly this coach has made a huge push in recruiting and has succeeded in attracting players from all over the country. One can only hope that it will pay off when they take the ice next year.
Click to expand...


What do you expect...I've heard that trips to Clark's Trading Post and the Polar Caves are what seal the deal! ;)
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

Plymouth State:
Claire Ficaro .....................F/D ......................(Boston Shamrocks) ............................Manchester, NH
ClaireFocaro1.jpg
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
Yikes. Any idea why that happened?
Click to expand...

Ummm let's see. Lost their AD, lost their coach, finished 9 out of 10 in the West with a 5-15-3 record for a .283 winning precentage, rostered 18 players with 3 goalies and show one incoming recruit. Wonder if any of this had anything to do with it?
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

5 4 Fighting said:
Ummm let's see. Lost their AD, lost their coach, finished 9 out of 10 in the West with a 5-15-3 record for a .283 winning precentage, rostered 18 players with 3 goalies and show one incoming recruit. Wonder if any of this had anything to do with it?
Click to expand...

Yeah.... I made that post before I read the other updates on the situation. Sorry, my bad. There's been a lot to get caught up on these boards recently! I had to take a break after our prolonged, ahem, discussion over running up the score :D
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
I guess that's what must have happened with St. Norbert's, with their 20 "committed" players. Guess that coach must have told everyone that they will be on the power play, too...
Click to expand...

In the case of St. Norbert's, they need 20 committed players, as they have zero today and when starting from scratch, the first line and the power play are wide open. Plymouth State on the other hand has a roster. Granted, not much to write home about, but I'm imagining that this coach is throwing everthing against the wall to see what sticks.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
Yeah.... I made that post before I read the other updates on the situation. Sorry, my bad. There's been a lot to get caught up on these boards recently! I had to take a break after our prolonged, ahem, discussion over running up the score :D
Click to expand...

It's too bad. Things seem to have gone from bad to worse at Chatham, Maybe they should rethink their position on offering a hockey program?

No Mas!:(
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

notfromaroundhere said:
In the case of St. Norbert's, they need 20 committed players, as they have zero today and when starting from scratch, the first line and the power play are wide open. Plymouth State on the other hand has a roster. Granted, not much to write home about, but I'm imagining that this coach is throwing everthing against the wall to see what sticks.
Click to expand...

Why are you imagining that? Have you looked at their scores from this year? Last year? In the program's history? Clearly, no one has ever recruited for that program in a way that would enable it to compete at the varsity level in college. This current coach just completed her first year with the team and must know/understand what she has on the roster and how viable her players are going forward.

I would venture the opposite opinion of you - that probably the coach knows EXACTLY what she needs is doing everything she can to go out and get it. And in PSU's case, that program has needs at forward, defense, and goaltending...
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
I would venture the opposite opinion of you - that probably the coach knows EXACTLY what she needs is doing everything she can to go out and get it. And in PSU's case, that program has needs at forward, defense, and goaltending...
Click to expand...

If she knows EXACTLY what she needs, can you tell me why she needs 4 goalies?

No, I think this was throwing up her hands and saying to anyone she could find, "Anyone can beat the players I have on my roster right now, so if you've got a pulse, c'mon in".

While there are players from interesting places on the prospect list, I'd be hard pressed to say there are a lot of borderline D1 prospects there.

This is a cattle call.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

Ok - back to the "Commitment thread"

UWSP and Bethel added some quality players recently.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

notfromaroundhere said:
If she knows EXACTLY what she needs, can you tell me why she needs 4 goalies?

No, I think this was throwing up her hands and saying to anyone she could find, "Anyone can beat the players I have on my roster right now, so if you've got a pulse, c'mon in".

While there are players from interesting places on the prospect list, I'd be hard pressed to say there are a lot of borderline D1 prospects there.

This is a cattle call.
Click to expand...

There are only three goalies on BTD... :confused: I just looked at the statistics from USCHO - ignoring the GAA of the goalies (which I would guess you could blame on the team as a whole), the save percentages were not very impressive, either. So I would guess that they don't feel comfortable with the current goaltending situation. Perhaps four goaltenders would be an insurance policy in case one gets hurt and then you could still dress three? I don't know...

I'm not sure why you take such offense at her recruiting efforts - sounds like you may know someone (returner? in-coming?) that is worried about having to compete for a position on the team. Why don't you applaud her for trying to revamp a program that didn't record a win or a tie last year?

Seems to me that this is a case of "****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't". This program was ripped on these boards for a good chunk of the year for not recruiting, not being committed to the program, etc. Now that recruiting is happening and players are deciding to go to PSU, there are cries of "over-recruiting" or that players are going there because there is a new rink, or that the players are not "borderline D1 prospects" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

Finally, for the sake of argument, let's say you're right and it IS a "cattle call" - so what? The program needs a massive infusion of players/talent. We'll find out eventually about the quality of the incoming players.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

Knowing nothing about these goalies... could it be a case where one or all of them didn't commit until the end? Or, perhaps, they were on the border academically and therefore couldn't be guaranteed to get in? Either way, I have to wonder if the coach recruited 4 because she didn’t expect to get them all.

Just my 2 cents. :)
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

BTW67 said:
Knowing nothing about these goalies... could it be a case where one or all of them didn't commit until the end? Or, perhaps, they were on the border academically and therefore couldn't be guaranteed to get in? Either way, I have to wonder if the coach recruited 4 because she didn’t expect to get them all.

Just my 2 cents. :)
Click to expand...

Those are a couple of good points ... certainly reasonable scenarios.

Could also be that some players post themselves on BTD regardless of the level of contact they may or may not have had with the school. As mentioned before (I think by Hux), there is nothing binding about D3 "commitments". Haven't there been examples of names popping up on and then disappearing from the listings of schools on BTD?
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
There are only three goalies on BTD... :confused: I just looked at the statistics from USCHO - ignoring the GAA of the goalies (which I would guess you could blame on the team as a whole), the save percentages were not very impressive, either. So I would guess that they don't feel comfortable with the current goaltending situation. Perhaps four goaltenders would be an insurance policy in case one gets hurt and then you could still dress three? I don't know...

I'm not sure why you take such offense at her recruiting efforts - sounds like you may know someone (returner? in-coming?) that is worried about having to compete for a position on the team. Why don't you applaud her for trying to revamp a program that didn't record a win or a tie last year?

Seems to me that this is a case of "****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't". This program was ripped on these boards for a good chunk of the year for not recruiting, not being committed to the program, etc. Now that recruiting is happening and players are deciding to go to PSU, there are cries of "over-recruiting" or that players are going there because there is a new rink, or that the players are not "borderline D1 prospects" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

Finally, for the sake of argument, let's say you're right and it IS a "cattle call" - so what? The program needs a massive infusion of players/talent. We'll find out eventually about the quality of the incoming players.
Click to expand...

Looks like the 4th goalie disappeared with this update (updated today).

I have no relationship to the PSU progam, its coaches, nor any of its players. The fact that so many goalies committed (and the 4 had been there for about a month) tells me that the coach is not doing a good job of advising the prospects of where they stand with regards to other prospects. To me, this is not a good practice in recruiting.

Yes, there are no true committments (from the player or the coach) until the player shows up at tryouts and that should be explained to prospects and their families. That being said, a coach should be able to (without divulging the identities of other prospects) tell a prospect, "I'm looking for X number of your position this year. I have Y number of prospects and you are/aren't in the top X at this time. I know you and my other prospects may be looking at other schools right now, and some of them don't have this place as #1 on their list. Let's talk about this in April." Now if they are #1 on the coach's list, this clearly changes the nature of the talk, but clearly there shouldn't have been 4 #1 goalies.

My daughter went through the recruiting process and the coaches that were more interested in her gave her clearer signals as to where she stood through the year. Others, not so much. So when it came down to time to commit, she pretty much knew where she stood with the coaches talking to her.

So when I saw 4 goalies saying they were committed to PSU, especially when there were early commits, this told me that the coach was not being particularly clear as to his desire for the candidates. Either that or BTD wasn't getting the "uncommit" messages very quickly from the ones who changed their minds.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

FranchisePlayer said:
Those are a couple of good points ... certainly reasonable scenarios.

Could also be that some players post themselves on BTD regardless of the level of contact they may or may not have had with the school. As mentioned before (I think by Hux), there is nothing binding about D3 "commitments". Haven't there been examples of names popping up on and then disappearing from the listings of schools on BTD?
Click to expand...

As to borderline academics being a reason, PSU isn't selective at all, so if they can't get admitted there, a bigger problem exists.

I can buy the players themselves posting their intent regardless of the contact with PSU. Marking their territory to keep others away, perhaps? Unfortunately, that doesn't work too well if a better player comes a long.
 
Re: 2010-2011 DIII commitment thread

The D3 commits should be taken similar to a verbal commitment in the D1 ranks. For the most part when a player is added then removed or moved to a different team it's because they have found a better fit or there a self commit and the coach asks us to remove them as they are not interested in having the player on their team. About 80% of the D3 commits come from the coaches. Another 15% are self commits and the other 5% are from other places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top