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.
Colgate 2010-11
- Thread starter sshablak
- Start date
- Status
Gaterrooter
Registered Raider
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Love the new look of the board.
Love the new look of the board.
ColSkate65
Signer of '65 Arena first beam.
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Don't like the new look of the board....
Don't like the new look of the board....
Gaterrooter
Registered Raider
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Listing of top freshman classes, according to INCH. St Lawrence and Cornell listed.
By the way I really like our freshman class even though it's only 6 players and Mayer as a transfer.
http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Features/1011/recruitsteam_1011.htm
Listing of top freshman classes, according to INCH. St Lawrence and Cornell listed.
By the way I really like our freshman class even though it's only 6 players and Mayer as a transfer.
http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Features/1011/recruitsteam_1011.htm
Last edited:
hockeyenthusiast
Registered User
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Stats also say that neither Austin Smith, Wade Poplawski, Jeremy Price or Alex Evin suited up. I wouldnt worry too much it was just an exhibition.
Stats also say that neither Austin Smith, Wade Poplawski, Jeremy Price or Alex Evin suited up. I wouldnt worry too much it was just an exhibition.
'Gate Radio
Registered User
Re: Colgate 2010-11
I was sitting next to all four of them in the press box at the end of the game. As I mentioned on Twitter, Gate dressed only five d-men (with Price and Poplawski out) and had a mix-match of lines because of guys sitting out. Nothing to worry about this early and it was an exhibition game.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned - the great crowd. I was shocked to see the building probably half full (including the pep band) with around 13 minutes to go in the third period. Hopefully they'll return in a few weeks when Sacred Heart rolls into town.
I was sitting next to all four of them in the press box at the end of the game. As I mentioned on Twitter, Gate dressed only five d-men (with Price and Poplawski out) and had a mix-match of lines because of guys sitting out. Nothing to worry about this early and it was an exhibition game.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned - the great crowd. I was shocked to see the building probably half full (including the pep band) with around 13 minutes to go in the third period. Hopefully they'll return in a few weeks when Sacred Heart rolls into town.
ColSkate65
Signer of '65 Arena first beam.
Re: Colgate 2010-11
I hear ya'. There was a feedback link on the USCHO homepage, but I see it's been taken down. Was going to register my complaints, not that it would do any good.. What happened to the emotions??
I hear ya'. There was a feedback link on the USCHO homepage, but I see it's been taken down. Was going to register my complaints, not that it would do any good.. What happened to the emotions??
Re: Colgate 2010-11
I was talking to a Brock coach and Brock played their 3rd string goalie for much of the game. Also they were missing two of their top offensive threats in Allen, Schmidt and their best defenceman Pell. Yes it was exhibition, but don't kid yourself, Colgate did not dominate this game.
I was talking to a Brock coach and Brock played their 3rd string goalie for much of the game. Also they were missing two of their top offensive threats in Allen, Schmidt and their best defenceman Pell. Yes it was exhibition, but don't kid yourself, Colgate did not dominate this game.
hockeyenthusiast
Registered User
Gaterrooter
Registered Raider
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Going to be a tough weekend in the real North country. How we feeling?
Going to be a tough weekend in the real North country. How we feeling?
hockeyenthusiast
Registered User
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Ehh you forgot Army the first weekend and LSSU this weekend, I assume?
And football? They only scheduled 4 home games this year. Three of them against league teams, so only one OOC. Talk about disappointing schedules.
Ehh you forgot Army the first weekend and LSSU this weekend, I assume?
And football? They only scheduled 4 home games this year. Three of them against league teams, so only one OOC. Talk about disappointing schedules.
Re: Colgate 2010-11
Actually, I think it makes perfect sense that we sat who we sat against Brock. Not playing were the starting goalie, arguably the #1 forward and the 2 most experienced defenders (including one who has had past injury issues). This game didn't count for anything so it makes sense to get the back-up goalie some time - might need him to be the #1 guy at some point and the middle of the season is no time to be getting tuned up. On the forward side, all of the un-hurt freshman got some time as well as upperclassmen who don't normally see much if any ice time. If young Mac weren't laid up, I think another more familiar name would have sat. This was a good opportunity for Coach Vaughn to see what some of the less tested players might bring. Worked too with frosh McCann and little seen Rivellini combining for a counter - by the way that's their second in two games. Bessette seems to have played well as did Mihalik in limited time. Both gain some confidence and the team gains some trust in them.
The only issue as I see it with this game was the penalties but that also points to why a few guys that normally play might have sat. McPherson took 2 early penalties that smack of team defensive breakdowns (hooking means your man beat you and you didn't think you had support.) Looks like we didn't come in amped - again - continuing issue that this team needs to get a hold of - new intro music maybe. After that things were pretty good until the 3rd where Day - he of the 13 penalties in 36 games last year picked up 4 in a period! Didn't see the game but when a star forward picks up 3 high stickings and a slashing in a single period I start to think that frustration over chippy play is at work. No offense meant to Brock - these tilts between Canadian university teams and NCAA teams have a history of being chippy on both sides. That's the kind of game that a coach might want to keep some of his better guys out of when the outcome is meaningless. My guess - Day only played because a) he's the captain and b) there wasn't anybody else to play.
On to this week, I think this plays out as a very early, very big weekend for us. Our OOC schedule this year is pretty weak. LSSU was picked 12th in the CCHA. BC is obviously top notch but the entire rest of the schedule is AHA. The AHA is getting better but losses to any of these teams are still likely hurt a lot in Pairwise. Plus, while four of these games are against upper level AHA (RoMo, Niagara) - Army and Sacred heart were picked to end up in the bottom half of that league. With only one signature OOC team on the schedule there aren't really any chances to make up for a disappointing game. Any thoughts on why our OOC schedules have been so lack-luster of late? This year we will play 7 or 8 of our non-conference games against AHA, 2 against a CCHA opponent, 1 or 2 against an in conference team and 1 against an HE power. Quite frankly, I am not sure how you could make this worse. I am sure some of this is the result of the WCHA and HE playing so few OOC games (BC will play a [/B] maximum of 5 non-conference opponents this year) but it still seems like our mix could/should be a bit better. Anyone out there know when the number of OOC games played by the big two conferences results in a PairWise that isn't statistically valid?
Actually, I think it makes perfect sense that we sat who we sat against Brock. Not playing were the starting goalie, arguably the #1 forward and the 2 most experienced defenders (including one who has had past injury issues). This game didn't count for anything so it makes sense to get the back-up goalie some time - might need him to be the #1 guy at some point and the middle of the season is no time to be getting tuned up. On the forward side, all of the un-hurt freshman got some time as well as upperclassmen who don't normally see much if any ice time. If young Mac weren't laid up, I think another more familiar name would have sat. This was a good opportunity for Coach Vaughn to see what some of the less tested players might bring. Worked too with frosh McCann and little seen Rivellini combining for a counter - by the way that's their second in two games. Bessette seems to have played well as did Mihalik in limited time. Both gain some confidence and the team gains some trust in them.
The only issue as I see it with this game was the penalties but that also points to why a few guys that normally play might have sat. McPherson took 2 early penalties that smack of team defensive breakdowns (hooking means your man beat you and you didn't think you had support.) Looks like we didn't come in amped - again - continuing issue that this team needs to get a hold of - new intro music maybe. After that things were pretty good until the 3rd where Day - he of the 13 penalties in 36 games last year picked up 4 in a period! Didn't see the game but when a star forward picks up 3 high stickings and a slashing in a single period I start to think that frustration over chippy play is at work. No offense meant to Brock - these tilts between Canadian university teams and NCAA teams have a history of being chippy on both sides. That's the kind of game that a coach might want to keep some of his better guys out of when the outcome is meaningless. My guess - Day only played because a) he's the captain and b) there wasn't anybody else to play.
On to this week, I think this plays out as a very early, very big weekend for us. Our OOC schedule this year is pretty weak. LSSU was picked 12th in the CCHA. BC is obviously top notch but the entire rest of the schedule is AHA. The AHA is getting better but losses to any of these teams are still likely hurt a lot in Pairwise. Plus, while four of these games are against upper level AHA (RoMo, Niagara) - Army and Sacred heart were picked to end up in the bottom half of that league. With only one signature OOC team on the schedule there aren't really any chances to make up for a disappointing game. Any thoughts on why our OOC schedules have been so lack-luster of late? This year we will play 7 or 8 of our non-conference games against AHA, 2 against a CCHA opponent, 1 or 2 against an in conference team and 1 against an HE power. Quite frankly, I am not sure how you could make this worse. I am sure some of this is the result of the WCHA and HE playing so few OOC games (BC will play a [/B] maximum of 5 non-conference opponents this year) but it still seems like our mix could/should be a bit better. Anyone out there know when the number of OOC games played by the big two conferences results in a PairWise that isn't statistically valid?
- Status