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.

D1 Commitments 2011-2012

Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
The fact of the matter is that this years (2011) class of Minnesota girls have more girls playing D-1 hockey than ever before. No there aren't any Wendell's or Darwitz's but I think that the overall quality is better than the Wendell or Darwitz era. I think its tougher for individual players to dominate like they could in the past because the level of play overall is better.
Click to expand...

No question this is true - there is way more depth than there used to be, especially if you go "all the way back" to the Wendell/Darwitz era. And there's no doubt that this makes it more difficult for individual players to dominate, like Wendell and Darwitz used to do rather easily. You see this whenever the overall quality of play is improving, and the further you go back, the more the change becomes evident.

SlewFoot said:
I think its a natural progression that the skill of the younger players is better and better and the quality will continue to get better, like any sport.
Click to expand...

While I'm sure we all HOPE this will prove to be true, to be honest I believe we're starting to see a slowdown in the progression of the sport, just in the past few years. Here I'm referring more to the quality of play at the very highest level, as opposed to "the base". Although there is no sure-fire way to prove the extent to which this may or may not be true, to my eyes the skill level of the very best players in the women's game has at least started to level off. There seems to still be a growing number of very, very good players, but in the past five years is the skill level of the very, very best players still improving? I suppose if you had to pick a timeframe when this "leveling off" trend started - assuming it's even true - the 88/89 class (3-4 years) is as good as any. Maybe the best way to judge this is to see how quickly a good number of the "more experienced" ladies are displaced by the "up and coming" talent on the USA and Canadian National and Olympic teams. With normal retirements there will always be changes to their rosters, but as far as I can tell it doesn't appear that the pace of (more skilled?) younger players replacing (less skilled?) older players has picked up over the past 5 years or so.
 
Last edited:
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

D2D said:
No question this is true - there is way more depth than there used to be, especially if you go "all the way back" to the Wendell/Darwitz era. And there's no doubt that this makes it more difficult for individual players to dominate, like Wendell and Darwitz used to do rather easily. You see this whenever the overall quality of play is improving, and the further you go back, the more the change becomes evident.



While I'm sure we all HOPE this will prove to be true, to be honest I believe we're starting to see a slowdown in the progression of the sport, just in the past few years. Here I'm referring more to the quality of play at the very highest level, as opposed to "the base". Although there is no sure-fire way to prove the extent to which this may or may not be true, to my eyes the skill level of the very best players in the women's game has at least started to level off. There seems to still be a growing number of very, very good players, but in the past five years is the skill level of the very, very best players still improving? I suppose if you had to pick a timeframe when this "leveling off" trend started - assuming it's even true - the 88/89 class (3-4 years) is as good as any. Maybe the best way to judge this is to see how quickly a good number of the "more experienced" ladies are displaced by the "up and coming" talent on the USA and Canadian National and Olympic teams. With normal retirements there will always be changes to their rosters, but as far as I can tell it doesn't appear that the pace of (more skilled?) younger players replacing (less skilled?) older players has picked up over the past 5 years or so.
Click to expand...

Its a good debate and there are good arguments on both sides. You might be right about the USA and Canadian Olympic teams but my take is that when these women first made the team they were quite young and the sport was not very good. Now they are strong mature women. There are many explanations for the lack of younger players. One like you point out is that the older women are just plain better. Another might be that they are better because they have maturity in body and mind and have lots of experience in the pressure of the Olympics. There's a lot to be said for keeping a team together for a long time and typically most athletes are in their prime in their late 20s to early 30s. Another reason might be that since the only competition is Canada and the teams are close there isn't an urgency to change by adding younger talent. I don't know what the reason is but I still think overall the younger players are more skilled. Its just the way it works in sports. I suggest you look at a video of the Minnesota State Tournament from 2005-2006 (just 5 years ago). I think you would be amazed at the changes to today.

The dominant Green Bay Packers of the sixties wouldn't have a chance against the modern teams. The sixties Packers were great but today there is more advanced training, better health, better equipment, bigger stronger and faster bodies. The same thing is happening in all sports. We have a tendency to look back with admiration, deservedly so, but the fact is the genetics, talent, technology of equipment and training moves forward to make a sport better today than it was yesterday. Its happened today and it will happen again tomorrow.

I really don't think there is a slow down. There might be a slight pause but not a slow down. The SEC in Minnesota is an example. Many of the top teams graduated large senior classes and the teams weren't as good this year but I didn't think it was a loss of talent it was a loss of experience which the younger players lacked. There is a tendency to look back a class or two and remember the time when those girls weren't as good as the present class but I think its just human nature to think "those kids just aren't as good as...". I think the top players are progressing but I think they don't stand out as much because the middle of the pack is so much better than it was before.

As far as slowdown, I have heard this and in some cases the arguments I've heard make sense but I'm from Minnesota. I look at the fact that more girls are committed to playing D-1 than ever. I look at when my daughter was young. She had to train with the boys (she didn't mind) because there were not any girl specific programs. Today girls have lots of choices for girl specific training (e.g. OS, FHIT, Potter, CADP, Velocity, Impact, MN Made, etc). Hockey training for girls is exploding in Minnesota and is a multimillion dollar business. Believe me the girls are working hard and they are getting better.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: D2D
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
For example, the dominant Green Bay Packers of the sixties wouldn't have a chance against the modern teams. The sixties Packers were great but today there is more advanced training, better health, better equipment, bigger stronger and faster bodies. The same thing is happening in all sports. We have a tendency to look back with admiration, deservedly so, but the fact is the genetics, talent, technology of equipment and training moves forward to make a sport better today than it was yesterday. Its happened today and it will happen again tomorrow.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% with this as it applies to ALL professional sports, especially if you go all the way back to the 60's. Your Packers example is a good one - any of their heralded teams from back then would get pummeled today. The players now are bigger, stronger, faster and are in much better condition. The coaching and the systems that are used are much more advanced. And the same can be said for hockey and basketball - much progress has been made in just about any sport that you can think of over the past 50 years.

But shrink the timeframe down to 5 or 10 years and the improvement becomes less obvious, of course because the improvements are gradual and happen over time. Focusing on women's D1 hockey, another way to look at it would be the relative impact that incoming D1 freshmen are having on their teams' success. To get some indication I suppose you could compare the total point production of the freshmen as a percent of the total for each of the past 10 years. If the incoming players have been getting better and better over this period, you would think the general trend would be for the percentage to be rising, not every year necessarily but there would be a trend. Looking at any one team would not prove much, but it would mean more if you looked at an entire conference, or D1 as a whole. For goalies it would be just a matter of relative playing time - to what extent did the new (and presumably more skilled) incoming displace the returning upperclassmen?

That's just one suggestion to get a sense; otherwise it's pretty subjective and as you say there are good arguments on both sides.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

D2D said:
. . . the 60's . . . Packers example is a good one - any of their heralded teams from back then would get pummeled today . . .
Click to expand...
Well, yeah, I guess so.

Those guys are all about 65 years old now. Expecting 65 year olds to compete against athletes in the prime of youth is unrealistic.

How do you do those smilies? I need one here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D2D
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
Hannah Brandt, Jonna Curtis and Milica McMillen are 2012-2013 recruits.

Minnesota already has 12 girls verbally committed as follows:

Girls that are currently playing on the U19 Icecats that have committed are Jordyn Burns(Syracuse), Casey Hirsch(Syracuse), Morgan Fritz-Ward (Quinnipiac), Chelsea Laden(Quinnipiac), and Layla Marvin(N.Dakota).

From current U19 Jr. Whitecaps committed girls are Meghan Lorence (Minnesota), Shelby Ansley-Benzie (N.Dakota), Molly Byrne(Mercyhurst), Rachel Ramsey(Minnesota) and Audrey Hanmer(St.Cloud) (the last 3 are former Icecats).

Emma Stauber(Duluth) and Abby Ness(St.Cloud) as far as I know haven't played for the Icecats or Jr. Whitecaps but that isn't surprising since it would be geographically difficult for them to join these teams.

Therefore I suggest that most of the future commitments from Minnesota will most likely come from the Icecat/Jr. Whitecap families. Below are the Icecat/Jr.Whitecap players remaining that are eligible for the 2011-12 recruiting season.

Icecats

Krystal Bauman - F
Megan Berglund - F
Rachel Bona - F
Alex Citrowske - F
Alison Micheletti - F
Taylor Kuehl - F
Emily Snodgrass - F
Brittney Huneke - D
Delaney Middlebrook - D
Greer Vogl - D
Tiana Press - G

Jr. Whitecaps

Kayla Mork - F
Hilary Crowe - F
Leah Jensen - F
Sami Reber - F
Allie LaCombe - F
Karley Sylvester - F
Marrissa Brandt - F/D
Jessie Ryan - F/D
Caitlyn Hewes - D
Morgan Illikainen - D
Julie Friend - G
Aly McKeever - G
Click to expand...


Just circling back to follow-up on my prediction prior to last years hockey season. All but 2 of the above girls committed to D1 schools. The entire 2010 U19 AAA Ice Cat team (which won the 2010 NAHA tournament) ended up committing to D1 schools. All but 2 of the 2010 U19 AAA Jr. Whitecap team committed to D1 schools.
 
Last edited:
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

D2D said:
I agree 100% with this as it applies to ALL professional sports, especially if you go all the way back to the 60's. Your Packers example is a good one - any of their heralded teams from back then would get pummeled today. The players now are bigger, stronger, faster and are in much better condition. The coaching and the systems that are used are much more advanced. And the same can be said for hockey and basketball - much progress has been made in just about any sport that you can think of over the past 50 years.

But shrink the timeframe down to 5 or 10 years and the improvement becomes less obvious, of course because the improvements are gradual and happen over time. Focusing on women's D1 hockey, another way to look at it would be the relative impact that incoming D1 freshmen are having on their teams' success. To get some indication I suppose you could compare the total point production of the freshmen as a percent of the total for each of the past 10 years. If the incoming players have been getting better and better over this period, you would think the general trend would be for the percentage to be rising, not every year necessarily but there would be a trend. Looking at any one team would not prove much, but it would mean more if you looked at an entire conference, or D1 as a whole. For goalies it would be just a matter of relative playing time - to what extent did the new (and presumably more skilled) incoming displace the returning upperclassmen?

That's just one suggestion to get a sense; otherwise it's pretty subjective and as you say there are good arguments on both sides.
Click to expand...

All good points. I was surprised that the freshman from MN, as a group, didn't do better this year (at least if you judge by the stats). Hopefully they will do better in their sophomore year. I think the 2011 class is deeper than 2010 so I am curious to see how they do this year.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
All good points. I was surprised that the freshman from MN, as a group, didn't do better this year (at least if you judge by the stats). Hopefully they will do better in their sophomore year. I think the 2011 class is deeper than 2010 so I am curious to see how they do this year.
Click to expand...

Which part of the class is deeper, the whole class or the one from MN ?.

Overall there were plenty of strong rookies in the 2010-2011 recruit class that performed well in their first year of college. Heck a rookie won ECAC player of the year. Remember as well that compared to the year before the top end was stronger due to the return of the Olympians. That in itself would have a dampening effect on the impact of rookies on some teams compared to the previous season.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
Just circling back to follow-up on my prediction prior to last years hockey season. All but 2 of the above girls committed to D1 schools. The entire 2010 U19 AAA Ice Cat team (which won the 2010 NAHA tournament) ended up committing to D1 schools. All but 2 of the 2010 U19 AAA Jr. Whitecap team committed to D1 schools.
Click to expand...

Why should this come as a surprise? It is only logical that when coaches choose certain players, provide them with opportunities to be seen, and promote them to D1 coaches, those players have a pretty good chance of receiving D1 offers. Make sure to pat yourself on the back for coming up with that prediction. I'm sure you will be right again next year with the same prediction.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

SlewFoot said:
All good points. I was surprised that the freshman from MN, as a group, didn't do better this year (at least if you judge by the stats). Hopefully they will do better in their sophomore year. I think the 2011 class is deeper than 2010 so I am curious to see how they do this year.
Click to expand...

I disagree that the 2011 class is deeper than the 2010 as far as overall talent. They might have more D1 players commit but that doesn’t' make them better. I just think talent everywhere in 2011 is a little down. They will do better in their sophomore year as do most players.

I think it's rare for a Freshman from Minnesota dominate. The college player is much stronger and it takes time. Minnesota girls train hard during their season which is 4-6 months(it doesn't even come close to College training). Where Canadien and European players condition year round and have the edge early. Of course a few Minnesota girls will train year round but many have other sports or take time off. I'm not talking skating on summer teams as that isn't strength training.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

mattj711 said:
Union announces its incoming class. http://ecachockey.com/women/2010-11/News/20113105_Union_Incoming_Class

Confirms the two listed here (Lundberg and McGrath) and lists four others:

Camille Corbin, F, Gilmour Academy (San Diego, CA)

Alex Tancrell-Fontaine, D, East Greenwich HS (East Greenwish, RI)

Bryanne Panchuk, F, Edge School (Calgery, Alb.)

Christine Valente, F, Choate Rosemary Hall (West Haven, CT)
Click to expand...

Alex Fontaine is a good little D. Played with the Mass Spitfires and is a smooth, quick skater who carries and moves the puck well.
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

From Wayne State to Lindenwood

Allison Wickenheiser ...............F .......................(Washington Pride) ............................Gaithersburg, MD
 
Re: D1 Commitments 2011-2012

Ikea line. LOVE IT Fiver!! That's humour I can get behind. I hope they come with as much awesomeness that all the other Swedes have contributed to the program. More forwards though... feel like we're really light on D again... Sigh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top