Colgate 2017-2018

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

*[B]’GATE, #2 ( # 3 PWR, shares ECAC # 1- but possessing tiebreaker against co - # 1 Clarkson ) DELIVERS WEEKEND SWEEP against UNION and RPI

*SETS UP THIS WEEKEND’S DUEL ON ‘GATE’S HOME ICE TO DEFEND ‘GATE’S CURRENT ENTITLEMENT TO ECAC TOURNAMENT HOME ICE

*‘GATE HOSTING CLARKSON, #3-tied with BC ( #2 PWR, ECAC # 1-shared with ‘GATE, 21-3-1 ) and ST LAWRENCE # 8 ( #8 PWR, ECAC # 3, 14-7-3 )[/B]

Regardless of what happens from here, Colgate WIH has positioned itself after 26 games in just about the best position it could to solidify its advantages into the post-season. It can now leverage its accumulated regular season success into advantages into the post-season. Sustaining its current home ice entitlement into the post season could be a very tangible reward. Will Colgate's nation-leading 14-0-1 undefeated home steak continue ? ( Wisconsin is second in the nation with a 12-0-0 undefeated home streak.
This weekend will likely determine the ECAC Tournament seeding for the four teams facing off against each other: Colgate, Clarkson, St Lawrence and Cornell.


WHICH OF THE TOP 4 TEAMS PLAYING THIS WEEKEND HAS THE EDGE ?

Is there parity among the four teams facing off this weekend ? Let's look at their individual losses within the ECAC this year, especially among themselves ?

1. Colgate- L's: Cornell, St. Lawrence W's: Cornell, Clarkson

1. Clarkson- L's: Colgate, Quinnipiac W's: Cornell, St. Lawrence ( 4 wins ),

3. St. Lawrence- L's: Cornell, Clarkson ( 4 losses ) W's: Colgate,

4. Cornell- L's: Colgate, Clarkson, Quinnipiac, Princeton W's: Colgate, St. Lawrence


The Contests:

Colgate vs St. Lawrence
Colgate vs Clarkson
Cornell vs Clarkson
Cornell vs St Lawrence

JAN 22 STANDINGS

ECAC STANDINGS: http://www.ecachockey.com/women/2017-18/standings
USCHO SRANDINGS: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-womens-poll/
PAIRWISE: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/



http://www.gocolgateraiders.com/new...gate-jumps-to-no-2-in-the-uscho-com-poll.aspx

 

[Oldtimer]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Regardless of what happens this weekend Ithaca and Hamilton, NY are the co-capitals of the women's college hockey world for 2 days with the #2, 3, 6 and 8 teams playing each other. We couldn't ask for more with the games at home and Van Dyke and Auby both available...HOPEFULLY we will finish the weekend firmly in the #2 spot and having made up ground on Wisconsin with the quality of opponent...We know we will be without L Altmann, do we know the extent to which the other 3 teams will be impacted by the Olympics? That could be a factor not only this weekend but the next couple as well...GO GATE

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Regardless of what happens this weekend Ithaca and Hamilton, NY are the co-capitals of the women's college hockey world for 2 days with the #2, 3, 6 and 8 teams playing each other. We couldn't ask for more with the games at home and Van Dyke and Auby both available...HOPEFULLY we will finish the weekend firmly in the #2 spot and having made up ground on Wisconsin with the quality of opponent...We know we will be without L Altmann, do we know the extent to which the other 3 teams will be impacted by the Olympics? That could be a factor not only this weekend but the next couple as well...GO GATE

Livia should be around this weekend. And should be back in time for the playoffs which begin Feb 23. Losing her during the games between Jan 25-6 and the beginning of the ECAC Playoffs is not that damaging. I can only speculate about the other teams. Clarkson has a member of the Czech National Team. Cornell has two members of the Canada U 22 team. St Lawrence has a Goalie who was on the New Zealand U-18 team. Some SLU Canadiens may also be involved in the Olympics.

Re: Livia's schedule:
"The team travels to Seoul, South Korea, on Feb. 1, to complete a five-day preparation camp in neighboring Goyang. As part of its preparation, Switzerland is playing two exhibition games against Canada and Finland.The Swiss face South Korea (Feb. 10), Japan (Feb. 12), and Sweden (Feb. 14) in the preliminary round. The quarterfinals are set to begin on Feb. 17."

 

[vicb]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Livia should be around this weekend. And should be back in time for the playoffs which begin Feb 23. Losing her during the games between Jan 25-6 and the beginning of the ECAC Playoffs is not that damaging. I can only speculate about the other teams. Clarkson has a member of the Czech National Team. Cornell has two members of the Canada U 22 team. St Lawrence has a Goalie who was on the New Zealand U-18 team. Some SLU Canadiens may also be involved in the Olympics.

Re: Livia's schedule:
"The team travels to Seoul, South Korea, on Feb. 1, to complete a five-day preparation camp in neighboring Goyang. As part of its preparation, Switzerland is playing two exhibition games against Canada and Finland.The Swiss face South Korea (Feb. 10), Japan (Feb. 12), and Sweden (Feb. 14) in the preliminary round. The quarterfinals are set to begin on Feb. 17."

I do not think that the Czech National team qualified for the Olympics so Clarkson is not effected. However something happened to Pezjlova early in the knights game against Dartmouth that caused her to miss the rest of the game. Hopefully it was nothing serious and she will be ready for this weekend. Cornell lost all ECAC dman Mica Hart for the season as she was centralized with the Canadian National team but did not make the final roster. SLU has no one in the Olympics I believe.

 

[Oldtimer]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Thanks for correcting my post. I had seen the headlines and thought Livia was out the door this week but it is the 1st...
Glad we have her for the two big ones we are facing on Fri and Sat...

 

[Rightnut]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

I came across the reason why Colgate has women's hockey. There was a lawsuit in the early 90s. Here is the link to the ruling. Looking back in hindsight, the reasons or "defenses" offered by Colgate for not having women's hockey are laugh out loud stupid. Thankfully they have come 180 degrees and really support the sport now. And support leads to success which some other schools that should be doing better (Brown etc) should think about. I'm not sure on how to post links so it may require a cut and past.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/802/737/1650058/

 

[Puckdrop14]

I came across the reason why Colgate has women's hockey. There was a lawsuit in the early 90s. Here is the link to the ruling. Looking back in hindsight, the reasons or "defenses" offered by Colgate for not having women's hockey are laugh out loud stupid. Thankfully they have come 180 degrees and really support the sport now. And support leads to success which some other schools that should be doing better (Brown etc) should think about. I'm not sure on how to post links so it may require a cut and past.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/802/737/1650058/

Digging deep - why bring this up? I don’t get it.

 

[Rightnut]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Digging deep - why bring this up? I don’t get it.

I didn't know about and just learned about it. I found it interesting and thought others may be interested. No other reason. If its not of interest, no worries.

 

[Puckdrop14]

I didn't know about and just learned about it. I found it interesting and thought others may be interested. No other reason. If its not of interest, no worries.

Ok. Thought there was something going on at Colgate that I was not aware of. This is a very good team that has a shot at getting to the championship game. When they play their A game, they are as good as any team out there.

 

[vicb]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

I came across the reason why Colgate has women's hockey. There was a lawsuit in the early 90s. Here is the link to the ruling. Looking back in hindsight, the reasons or "defenses" offered by Colgate for not having women's hockey are laugh out loud stupid. Thankfully they have come 180 degrees and really support the sport now. And support leads to success which some other schools that should be doing better (Brown etc) should think about. I'm not sure on how to post links so it may require a cut and past.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/802/737/1650058/

1990/91

Coach Salaries for the men's team

$58,500
$28,000

Oh how the times have changed.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

I came across the reason why Colgate has women's hockey. There was a lawsuit in the early 90s. Here is the link to the ruling. Looking back in hindsight, the reasons or "defenses" offered by Colgate for not having women's hockey are laugh out loud stupid. Thankfully they have come 180 degrees and really support the sport now. And support leads to success which some other schools that should be doing better (Brown etc) should think about. I'm not sure on how to post links so it may require a cut and past.

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/802/737/1650058/

Two things of note:

1) The district court ordered that the university start a women's hockey program for the 1993-94 season, but the decision was overturned on appeal. By the time the appeal was heard, all five of the plaintiffs had either graduated or were close enough that they would not have been a part of a 1993-94 team, so the case was considered moot. Colgate didn't make women's hockey a varsity sport until 1998. So, I'm not sure to what extent this case was the direct cause for Colgate having a varsity women's hockey team.

This is also why most Title IX cases since Cook have been filed as class action lawsuits, since it usually takes longer for a case to be decided than any individual athlete will have eligibility.

2) The trial judge's assertion that:

The Statute and Regulations, however, invite a comparison between separate teams in a particular sport because they are designed to protect not only a particular class of persons, but individuals as well.[4] Section 1681 states that "no person ... [shall], on the basis of sex, be excluded ... be denied ... or be subjected to discrimination ...". 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a) (emphasis added). The same is true of 34 C.F.R. § 106.41. Otherwise it would be of little consequence for a women's basketball player to know that the overall athletic program is nondiscriminatory if her team is discriminated against through funding or otherwise, in comparison to men's basketball.

has not been held to be true in other, upheld, cases or in the federal regs. The standard is that the comparison is done on an athletic department basis, or "total program comparison," rather than at the level of each individual sport. There is not, in fact, any violation of Title IX if a sport is varsity for the men and club for the women so long as the school offers equal overall athletic opportunities for men and women.

Based upon the evidence provided, it seems likely that Colgate would have been found to be in violation of Title IX even on the total program comparison basis. However, it's less clear that this would have led to an order to raise women's hockey to a varsity sport rather than a more general order to come into compliance. There have been a number of cases (including Roberts v. Colorado State Board of Agriculture; Favia v. Indiana University of Pennsylvania; Cohen v. Brown University) in which the courts have mandated that a cancelled program be reinstated if the cancellation creates or exacerbates noncompliance, but I'm not aware of any cases in which a school has been ordered to create a varsity program that had not previously existed. It's possible that Pederson v Louisiana State could have, but by the time it was decided, LSU had already created teams in the sports in question and what was decided was damages to those held to have been denied opportunities at the time.

 

[Rightnut]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Two things of note:

1) The district court ordered that the university start a women's hockey program for the 1993-94 season, but the decision was overturned on appeal. By the time the appeal was heard, all five of the plaintiffs had either graduated or were close enough that they would not have been a part of a 1993-94 team, so the case was considered moot. Colgate didn't make women's hockey a varsity sport until 1998. So, I'm not sure to what extent this case was the direct cause for Colgate having a varsity women's hockey team.

Very interesting. I was definitely not motivated enough to Shepardize that case. Thanks for that info. I guess we will never really know their motivation but perhaps Colgate had a change in mindset as a result of the initial case. Also, not knowing if their appeal would be successful, they may have had to set the process in motion to start the women's team anyway.

 

[Oldtimer]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

As I recall the Brown case also involved women's hockey and preceded ours. I knew some women on Colgate's club teams in the early days who fought hard to get it to varsity team status, took forever. It's interesting that the Brown team which was born of the same primordial muck has never seemingly been able to get the support of its administration. You would think the opposite in an effort to bind the wounds if nothing else...

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

THE RISK OF BECOMING A DAY-TRADER WITH 'GATE WIH SUCCESS

On Jan 8th, I began to explain what has become more significant to me in the waning days of the record-breaking ’17-18 season and 3 yr. turnaround. I view the evolution of 'Gate WIH as an anomaly in 'Gate athletic history. The conjoining of Class of '65 with Fargo's vision ( success to date ) is an on-going marathon. I believe we will leverage this cumulative success beyond this school record breaking 3 year period, to become a perennial quasi-elite Program. ( Disclaimer: this may not be a linear every year "in the conversation" thing immediately ahead. But, the evidence is compelling that we're getting there. ) That defies Gate’s history of “boom-bust one-off championship runs.” These “runs” have had an almost certain dissipation within a year often when “outlying talent” leaves the program. I’d argue that what we’re witnessing is potentially different and more beneficial to ‘Gate in the long run. Don't ruin the fun by "day-trading." From my Jan 8 post:

“Let’s call it the "a winning scenario of courageously fighting for-but just missing the ECAC Crown." My ultimate goal is satisfied by: (1.) With only 13 games left, smartly exceeding the record 22 win seasons of 2015-16 and 2016-17, (2.) As a #2 or #3 seed in the ECAC Tournament and semi-final rounds, making it to the ECAC Final. (3.) maintaining a top 4 PWR rating during the post season http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise- ... d-i-women/ ( 4. ) getting an at-large ( probably visiting team ) invite to the 2018 NCAA tournament-as the ECAC Championship runner up. ( Note: Only Colgate or Clarkson, based on data today, might qualify. ) “
gate-whoc-following-the-program-3-yr-tu ... -s150.html

I came to this conclusion before being provoked to translate another poster's thoughts.
I labored to translate and interpret this run-on sentence/paragraph because I didn't feel the quagmire described.

“It's emotionally tough to be critical of a program that is loved and is making historic strides,
( one complete thought/sentence ? )
but due to their recent successes with shortcomings
( ?—successful relative to past records. But, still flawed and not not completely dominant ),
one has to wonder if it didn't happen last year
( NCAA, ECAC Championship ? )
and doesn't happen this year,
(as if this timetable is the only metric of success relative to the past )
when will it...or will it ever?”
( I guess it’s how you define success or how much you understand history and potential anomalies ? )

Here are the cold facts that support my conviction that this time can be a different twist on Colgate Athletic history. Since I attended the only ‘Gate men’s NCAA hockey championship game in 1989-90, let’s use that as Exhibit 1:

NCAA 2nd place in 1989-90 (31-6-1) followed by dismal seasons thereafter. 1990-1991 ( 16-12-4 ) 1991-92 (14-16-1) 1992-93 (13-18-3) 1993-94 (14-17-2) . What long term effect did the NCAA run have on fortifying ‘Gate hockey in subsequent years ? This pattern is repeated in every M’s and W’s team in Colgate Athletic History.

A little more history. THANK YOU to the"Non-‘Gate-alum posters" on this USCHO.com Fan Forum who awakened my understanding of the unique history of ‘Gate’s WIH team. A "Non-‘Gate-alum poster" said the following. Exhibit 2:

“I came across the reason why Colgate has women's hockey. There was a lawsuit in the early 90s. Here is the link to the ruling. Looking back in hindsight, the reasons or "defenses" offered by Colgate for not having women's hockey are laugh out loud stupid. Thankfully they have come 180 degrees and really support the sport now. And support leads to success which some other schools that should be doing better (Brown etc) should think about. I'm not sure on how to post links so it may require a cut and past.”
Scroll down to the last few posts on this page http://[url]https://law.justia.com/cases/federal...2/737/1650058/[/URL]

Fast forward to Fargo & Co’s execution, 2013- present, of a multi-year parallel rebuilding/rebranding of ‘Gate WIH as the Class of ’65 area was gradually becoming a physical reality. Look it up...No other Colgate arhletic Program has benefited from the catalyst similar to the $38 mill. investment in Class of '65. IT's a HUGE distinguishing factor for potentially sustaining into the future what we're currently witnessing.

“The new building, despite not being as flashy as some of the more expensive ones that bigger programs have, will open up a world of opportunities for the small Division I university in central New York…….………With its $37.8 million price tag, it is a huge investment for not only the current classes but the past and more importantly the future.” https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news 2016/10/11_new_rink,_fresh_start_for.php

While it’s hard to quibble with how the 38 mill Class of ’65 arena helped attract the talent underlyng this tem’s success, what indicates that this might not be another Colgate “boom and bust” cycle. Is it more than faith that makes us believe that we’re experiencing “the gift that keeps on giving ?” Just google the 16 firm 'Gate WIH recruits listed on the Women’s College Ice Hockey Future Commitments platform. They comprise the visible part of the pipeline. Exhibit 4:

http://http://collegecommitments.com/CommitList.aspx?x7cq9=FEMALE

I’d vigorously argue that to just be “in the national conversation” is a symbol of success for a Program like Colgate this year. And I'd argue, at this point, it's regardless of whether they're located “in the bubble” or “outside the bubble.” The teams that Colgate’s hanging around this year have frequently been in the national conversation. Colgate has not.
Exhibit 7:

http://https://www.ncaa.com/history/icehockey-women/nc

 

[WH Fan]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Nice piece on Zalewski and the Gate WH turnaround story (see the link on the Colgate WH website)....should be fun to see how far they can really go as the season comes to a close.

Regardless of how this season ends up, this team will be in the mix at the top for more years to come given the talent coming in 2018 and 2019...

Go Gate!

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Last Weekend of Regular Season: ’Gate ( 27-4-1 ) #3/4 National Polls, #1-tied ECAC, #4 PWR @ Rensselaer 2/16 & @ Union 2/17


A SWEEP results in:

Colgate sharing the 2017-18 ECAC WIH REGULAR SEASON CO-CHAMPIONSHIP

29-4-1....


. ....And a slew of Colgate Records smashed




ECAC QUARTERFINALS 2/23-24-25 Princeton or Harvard @ Colgate ?

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

.@ECACHOCKEYMWD1 women's quarterfinals match-ups for next weekend.

No. 8 Yale at No. 1 Clarkson

No. 7 Harvard at No. 2 Colgate

No. 6 Princeton at No. 3 Cornell

No. 5 Quinnipiac at No. 4 St. Lawrence


Congrats to @CUknights & @ColgateWIH Co-Regular Season Champs!

 

[Oldtimer]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

Welcome back Livia, great job at the Olympics. Your Swiss team and specifically you and Nicole Gass '16 played great and made all of us at Colgate very proud.

NOW, on to the playoffs and a first round sweep of HARVARD...GO GATE. pedal to the metal

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

It's official--Semifinals

Saturday, March 3
POTSDAM, N.Y. / CHEEL ARENA

No. 3 Cornell vs. No. 2 Colgate, 4 p.m.

No. 4 St. Lawrence at No. 1 Clarkson, 1 p.m.

 

[Raider Archivist]

Re: Colgate 2017-2018

The Cornell game: three scenarios/three “Program Turnaround” epitaphs

I'm selfish. I'd like to see 'Gate win the NCAA WIH championship. I'd like to continue to watch them every week. And, I'd like this team to cap this three year run and record breaking season with a fitting epitaph. Fortunately, even If this scenario doesn't materialize, 'Gate has positioned itself for an honorable consolation prize and a fitting epitaph.

There's a balance and a certain continuity provided by the interaction of teams' PWR rankings and performance during "championship weekend." There's quite a gap between the PWR rankings of the current top 8 teams and the rest of the 40 teams in Division I WIH. There are virtually no additional candidates for the NCAA tournament other than "autobid upsets" in the HE and CHA tournaments. The ECAC, with Clarkson, Colgate and Cornell, has a very good chance of sending all 3 teams to the NCAA tournament. The WCHA "possibilities," Ohio State and Minnesota have lower PWR's than all 3 ECAC teams.

According to BCinterruption.com: “ The selection show is Sunday at 9pm EST, and will be streamed online at NCAA.com."

I'm opting for #1 or #2 below:
1. Beat Cornell, Beat Clarkson in Championship, get good seed and home ice in NCAA tournament
2. Lose to Cornell, get mediocre seed and travel in the NCAA tournament
3. Lose to Cornell, get poor seed and travel in the NCAA tournament


The NCAA field is relatively straightforward. As always, upsets of the anticipated autobids can cause a displacement of the lowest teams on this list. Otherwise, the PWR rankings of these 8 teams make it unlikely any other “surprises” will emerge in the top 8 on Sunday night. And we shouldn't be surprised if 'Gate is invited to the NCAA tournament regardless of how they do in the ECAC championship weekend.

( Autobids are temporalilly set here by regular season champions. )
1) Wisconsin — WCHA Champion
(2) Boston College — WHEA Champion
(3) Clarkson — ECAC Champion
(4) Colgate
Cornell
Ohio State
Minnesota
Robert Morris — CHA Champion



https://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-c ... colgate-bc


https://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-c ... ur-bracket