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.

Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

QUAlum2004 said:
Two teams (QU and Yale) lost to #1 seeds with Quinnipiac playing in front of close to 6,000 UND fans with probably 10 QU fans in the house if that. UND to me is also the best team in the tournament. Yale gave everything they had to BU but still couldn't pull it out. Harvard played a really talented UNO squad away from the East. None of the ECAC teams got any breaks due to being 3 and 4 seeds but getting 3 teams in is still impressive.
Click to expand...

ND did have the crowd on their side, but QU looked less impressive the entire game; their heralded scorers and goalie underperformed when the stakes were at their highest. Other #1 seeds saw their seasons come to an early end, too, and Yale certainly did not play like a #4 seed against BU and could have won. Of all the ECAC teams, Yale impressed the most. What would Harvard be without Vesey? They lost to a good UNO team but barely squeaked by an underrated, impressive RIT team. Seeds and rankings don't matter so much in the playoffs; everyone is at zero and it's win or go home. Getting 3 teams in is fantastic for the league and they all earned the right to be there. Perhaps that means the league as a whole is improving.

Colskate, no ECAC team seemed to dominate like Union did last year. The Dutchmen were nearly flawless and really set the standard of what is expected to be a national contender from our conference IMO.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

TchrBill said:
ND did have the crowd on their side, but QU looked less impressive the entire game; their heralded scorers and goalie underperformed when the stakes were at their highest. Other #1 seeds saw their seasons come to an early end, too, and Yale certainly did not play like a #4 seed against BU and could have won. Of all the ECAC teams, Yale impressed the most. What would Harvard be without Vesey? They lost to a good UNO team but barely squeaked by an underrated, impressive RIT team. Seeds and rankings don't matter so much in the playoffs; everyone is at zero and it's win or go home. Getting 3 teams in is fantastic for the league and they all earned the right to be there. Perhaps that means the league as a whole is improving.

Colskate, no ECAC team seemed to dominate like Union did last year. The Dutchmen were nearly flawless and really set the standard of what is expected to be a national contender from our conference IMO.
Click to expand...

Sam Anas was 60% in that game by the way. That is a big factor why they struggled. Neither BU or Yale had any significant home ice advantage as Manchester was a practical ghost town.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

I know QU...but missing 40% of one player of a nationally ranked team...they just didn't pull it together. FWIW 'Gate shares your team's frustration in the ECAC tournament :rolleyes:

A lot to reflect on for this season. Anas's injury put QU in jeopardy, while Colgate and Harvard were the epitome of will and determination due to their shallow benches. QU and Colgate really suffered with their OOC losses. One additional win for either team (or even a tie) and both of their postseasons could have been very different.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

TchrBill said:
I know QU...but missing 40% of one player of a nationally ranked team...they just didn't pull it together. FWIW 'Gate shares your team's frustration in the ECAC tournament :rolleyes:

A lot to reflect on for this season. Anas's injury put QU in jeopardy, while Colgate and Harvard were the epitome of will and determination due to their shallow benches. QU and Colgate really suffered with their OOC losses. One additional win for either team (or even a tie) and both of their postseasons could have been very different.
Click to expand...

Losses to UConn and UMass killed us. Change both those to wins and we are probably looking at Quinnipiac as a #2 seed.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

QUAlum2004 said:
Two teams (QU and Yale) lost to #1 seeds with Quinnipiac playing in front of close to 6,000 UND fans with probably 10 QU fans in the house if that. UND to me is also the best team in the tournament. Yale gave everything they had to BU but still couldn't pull it out. Harvard played a really talented UNO squad away from the East. None of the ECAC teams got any breaks due to being 3 and 4 seeds but getting 3 teams in is still impressive.
Click to expand...

The difference between all 16 teams in the tourney seemed to be razor thin. "On any given Friday...." :) Yale was tenacious against BU, RIT was eye-opening and amazing, QU & Harvard aquitted themselves admirably, NoDak looked very impressive, and Denver was no easy out either. BU looked unstoppable and Providence was a beast. Any one of these teams could be national champs with a bounce here or lucky break there, IMO. Should be a couple of great semis in Boston.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

TchrBill said:
Colskate, no ECAC team seemed to dominate like Union did last year. The Dutchmen were nearly flawless and really set the standard of what is expected to be a national contender from our conference IMO.
Click to expand...

...And Yale in 2013.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

MarkEagleUSA said:
Not even close. They had a great run in the tourney but didn't dominate like Union did last year. Remember, Yale needed two OT winners to get to Pittsburgh while Union basically cruised into Philly.
Click to expand...

To "get" to Pittsburgh, Yale needed one OT winner, against Minnesota. They beat North Dakota 4-1.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

ColSkate65 said:
All three teams out of the NCAAs. Maybe the ECAC wasn't quite as potent this year as we thought?
Click to expand...

IMO we (ECAC) shoot ourselves in the foot each year. The key is the pairwise. We have to play thinking that non-conference games are important and not some warn up exercise or a practice. We have to schedule some top 20 non-conference teams and win some, not all, just some. Look at St. Cloud. Barely a .500 team but 6 wins against top 10 teams kept them anchored to the top. Union, Colgate and Q all split a pair with them. Look at Robert Morris 24-8-5 and they were 25th in the pairwise. Can you believe that? Those early wins against BU, BC and UML helped anchor Harvard. Two years Colgate made the tournament in part because of great non-conference wins over Ferris State and others. This is hard for the IVY's because they only have 7 non-conference games and IMO waste them by playing each other in non-conference matchups. Two years ago Q had great wins against UML. We cannot let Vermont beat us each year. I bet had St. Lawrence had those Vermont as wins and Yale had Northeastern as a win ..... they were leading 3-0.

We Dutchmen did not exactly light up the world this year getting blown out by Western Michigan and losing to Connecticut so I am not complaining about any team. Cornell won its first against Denver and then took the next game off. Their coach even said so.

The NCHC did it right. They built up a very strong non-conference record and then it didn't matter that they knocked each other off in league play.

We were really lucky to get three in this year. It could have been 1.

Next year we will do better. We should be trying to schedule more NCHC, HE, Minnesota, etc. and go easy on the AHA. That next non-conference game you face may be your ticket to the Frozen Four. That is how we have to think.
 
Last edited:
So a kid I know who played both hockey and soccer with my kid back when they were little announced he's going to 'Gate...

to play lacrosse.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

I don't think it's a good idea in the middle of the season, maybe closer to Christmas would be better. Don't forget, Gate wasn't home for over two months from something like Nov 22 to Jan 22.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

sshablak said:
I don't think it's a good idea in the middle of the season, maybe closer to Christmas would be better. Don't forget, Gate wasn't home for over two months from something like Nov 22 to Jan 22.
Click to expand...

You do have Clarkson and SLU at home the week after.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

Then definitely a bad idea, plus the fact there's exams around then.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

Dutchman said:
Next year we will do better. We should be trying to schedule more NCHC, HE, Minnesota, etc. and go easy on the AHA. That next non-conference game you face may be your ticket to the Frozen Four. That is how we have to think.
Click to expand...

I don't think ECAC teams are turning down NC games against strong opponents. We wind up with AHA opponents (or even worse, ECAC NC opponents) when schedules don't mesh. Teams with huge barns don't want to schedule home and home against the small barn ECAC teams, so unless you're willing to only play road games, you're SOL.

I don't have empirical evidence but it seems to me league-wide we've been getting stronger NC schedules lately, maybe because of the stronger NCAA showings. But unless ECAC teams start scheduling home NC games in nearby larger venues, I don't think we'll ever see consistently strong NC slates -- the economics of the game just don't support it.
 
Re: Colgate 2014-2015: Part II

Don't forget that the scenario used to be a western team had really nothing to gain by beating, say, an ECAC team, they were expected to win. They had everything to lose and in a maybe 3000 seat arena. Now the games are important in the PWR, and it's not the EZAC anymore. Add in expenses, lost revenue by not playing at home, 3000-10,000 gate, why would you want to come to say Starr, and play in front of 1500 people ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top