Colgate 2019-2020

[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/status/1370444564226584580?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).

 

[ARM]

I think Clarkson would have benefited the most from a full season...

Maybe -- you raised good points -- but it seemed like St. Lawrence was trending upward more so than Clarkson at the end of the season. Of course, seasons that are long enough include both ups and downs.

 

[TitleIXHockey]

Maybe -- you raised good points -- but it seemed like St. Lawrence was trending upward more so than Clarkson at the end of the season. Of course, seasons that are long enough include both ups and downs.

Yeah, like I said they'd be competing for the top four with a couple other teams. I definitely wouldn't pencil them in to a top 4 spot but I would give them even odds to get there.

SLU was really hurt early by not getting on campus until January. Their sophomore class made big steps. The ECAC more or less came down to who lost the least in graduation from last season (and who had the most to begin with). In so short a season maybe cohesiveness matters more than anything else and the more new faces, the harder it is to get.

19-20 losses to graduation
Colgate: Caroline Ross, D with 2 points in 19-20 and Auby the starting goaltender, whom Osborne filled in for nicely
SLU: #1, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, 20, 21 scorers but brought back a ton of good freshmen who made solid to huge leaps
Clarkson: #3, 4, 5, 9, 12, 18 scorers but top 2 defenders and top C, but brought back Giguère and got Lonergan back from injury
Quinnipiac: #2, 5, 9, 18 and starting goaltender - probably had the least to start with

 

[Reddington]

Colgate UMD was the most competitive of the four games. Colgate had a nice year.

 

[Oldtimer]

They sure did, a great year and with the core coming back and the addition of what looks like another great class we should be right there for another legitimate shot at a repeat come October.

 

[TitleIXHockey]

Who was the top line for Colgate - Serdachny, Kaltounkova, Neubauerova? I have some questions about how Fargo rolls the lines relative to other teams (seeming playing top forwards a couple minutes less than other teams' top forwards).

 

[Rightnut]

Who was the top line for Colgate - Serdachny, Kaltounkova, Neubauerova? I have some questions about how Fargo rolls the lines relative to other teams (seeming playing top forwards a couple minutes less than other teams' top forwards).

It changed. By the end of the season he had: Serdachny, ODonohoe and Kaltounkova and Smigliani, Demers and Neubauerova. Those were the top 2 and they played alot in the last game. He ran 4 lines mostly during the season.

 

[TitleIXHockey]

It changed. By the end of the season he had: Serdachny, ODonohoe and Kaltounkova and Smigliani, Demers and Neubauerova. Those were the top 2 and they played alot in the last game. He ran 4 lines mostly during the season.

Right the latter part I knew. Serdachny logged big minutes all season long (25:46 per InStat), but none of the other forwards were over 20 minutes. In the QF against UMD they played more during regulation (correcting their overall icetime for a 60 minute game anyway) than they tended to during the season.

Wondering if Greg Fargo leaning more heavily on the top line(s) than they did all season was a tactical error that made them look flat in OT and cost them the game.

 

[Offsides Guy]

Right the latter part I knew. Serdachny logged big minutes all season long (25:46 per InStat), but none of the other forwards were over 20 minutes. In the QF against UMD they played more during regulation (correcting their overall icetime for a 60 minute game anyway) than they tended to during the season.

Wondering if Greg Fargo leaning more heavily on the top line(s) than they did all season was a tactical error that made them look flat in OT and cost them the game.

Maybe Fargo had to do that because UMD played their top line quite a bit? I have no idea if that’s what UMD did but it wouldn’t shock me and would force Fargo to respond accordingly.

 

[TitleIXHockey]

Maybe Fargo had to do that because UMD played their top line quite a bit? I have no idea if that’s what UMD did but it wouldn’t shock me and would force Fargo to respond accordingly.

I mean yeah, that's the other side of it. And it's the NCAA tournament and there's a grain of "of course you play your best players more."

But Colgate was perfectly capable of shutting down Giguère (as much as she can be), Julia Gosling, and Anna Segedi without those top lines playing those extra minutes.

 

[Oldtimer]

I didn't think we looked flat in overtime, we simply had a turnover with our D pinching up on the attack which is the risk we take when we play our "we skate free" game. Not dissimilar from the end of the 2018 OT loss to Clarkson. We choose to live and die by the sword which generally has been very effective but there are risks. As we add more scoring talent it will be interesting to see if the D gets more traditional/conservative...I hope not. I really like our all in style.