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.

Patty Kazmaier 2026

BuckyB said:
Janecke should not be Top 3 by any stretch of the imagination
Click to expand...
I agree. Top 10, absolutely. But I'm shocked she made it the final three. People were just looking at the stats, apparently.

Not that it matters. It's between Harvey and Murphy. Whomever the third person is, she's just there to fill a chair at the ceremony.
 
If you consider impact on the sport, Janecke is a great choice. She has aided PSU in being a bigger factor, getting them to the NCAA Tournament multiple times, with a realistic shot at a first Frozen Four. This award has been kind to the Badgers. Harvey's teammates can be there to watch her get the award (or is that even a thing anymore?) After a year where they had all three finalists, do the UW fans really have to complain about this?
 
ARM said:
If you consider impact on the sport, Janecke is a great choice. She has aided PSU in being a bigger factor, getting them to the NCAA Tournament multiple times, with a realistic shot at a first Frozen Four. This award has been kind to the Badgers. Harvey's teammates can be there to watch her get the award (or is that even a thing anymore?) After a year where they had all three finalists, do the UW fans really have to complain about this?
Click to expand...
It’s just in no way shape or form from the top 10 list right that she’s top 3.
Lamarche ? 42 goals in another weak conference but better than AHA.
Eden ? 70 plus points and carried her team all year ?
It’s correct she’s just a chair filler but at least make it look like educated people made the choice.
 
So in addition to knowing more hockey than all of the USA Hockey coaches and evaluators that select the Olympic team, BuckyB knows more hockey than the 13 folks on the Patty Kaz selection committee as well.

Wow, are we ever fortunate to have such an incredible resource here, sharing his wisdom with our tiny sliver of the hockey world.
 
ARM said:
If you consider impact on the sport, Janecke is a great choice. She has aided PSU in being a bigger factor, getting them to the NCAA Tournament multiple times, with a realistic shot at a first Frozen Four. This award has been kind to the Badgers. Harvey's teammates can be there to watch her get the award (or is that even a thing anymore?) After a year where they had all three finalists, do the UW fans really have to complain about this?
Click to expand...
It's simply about being objective, it's not about who they are. She racked up a lot of points in a weak conference. I'm not saying any Wisconsin player was screwed. I'd probably go for that forward from Q who wracked up a lot of points or maybe Dunne as the 3rd player. She scares me greatly.
 
Knowing hockey is one thing that is undeniable.
Knowing how the minds of coaches, evaluators and committee members work around the bias and outside influences of their decisions is something that nobody will ever be able to comprehend.
 
Timothy A said:
She racked up a lot of points in a weak conference. I'm not saying any Wisconsin player was screwed. I'd probably go for that forward from Q who wracked up a lot of points or maybe Dunne as the 3rd player. She scares me greatly.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't have had a problem with either one of them. I think they are all deserving, and not everyone can get recognition. But in a sport that gets so little recognition, I don't want to be a wet blanket who comes along after a highlight of someone's career and trash them. From what I saw of Janecke at the Olympics, she'd have been a star in whatever league she picked. It isn't like her league dominates the ballot every year; some time in the spotlight once in a while isn't a bad thing.

Anyway, congrats to the all of the finalists, including the three who were selected!
 
BuckyB said:
It’s just a pr stunt being that the show is at Penn State.
Sad that things operate that way but that’s all it is.
Click to expand...
You are clueless about hockey and how it works. Every Badger is the best to you. You can’t just score at will at any level of hockey, that’s not how it works. It’s really frustrating listening to you hate things you know nothing about. It’s very obvious that you have never played athletics at any level. You really are blind to what’s going on. Obviously you think athletics work like Techmo Bowl and Bo Jackson. There are some great players on the Badgers, but some people, (obviously not you) actually can see what is going on can separate good from great. Just because someone has a lot of points, does not make them great. The best players in the country make their teammates better, their culture better, their program better, and are physical, smart, fast, have a great shot, great hands, and work harder than every person on the ice. You don’t see that. You see white and red and the wcha and believe they deserve everything. Get a clue. I believe they have the 3 best hockey players in the country. That is why you are not asked to cast a vote for the award.
 
Last edited:
LBartowski said:
You are clueless about hockey and how it works. Every Badger is the best to you. You can’t just score at will at any level of hockey, that’s not how it works. It’s really frustrating listening to you hate things you know nothing about. It’s very obvious that you have never played athletics at any level. You really are blind to what’s going on. Obviously you think athletics work like Techmo Bowl and Bo Jackson. There are some great players on the Badgers, but some people, (obviously not you) actually can see what is going on can separate good from great. Just because someone has a lot of points, does not make them great. The best players in the country make their teammates better, their culture better, their program better, and are physical, smart, fast, have a great shot, great hands, and work harder than every person on the ice. You don’t see that. You see white and red and the wcha and believe they deserve everything. Get a clue. I believe they have the 3 best hockey players in the country. That is why you are not asked to cast a vote for the award.
Click to expand...
There is a player that fits every one of your descriptions to a T. And by the way, she also happens to be the leading scorer in the nation.
 
TJ77 said:
There is a player that fits every one of your descriptions to a T. And by the way, she also happens to
Click to expand...
I’m not sure who the point leader is. The Patty Kaz is not about having the most points.
An award of The USA Hockey Foundation, the Patty Kazmaier Memorial Award was established in 1998 and is presented annually to the top player in NCAA Division I women’s ice hockey. Other selection criteria include outstanding individual and team skills, sportsmanship, performance in the clutch, personal character, competitiveness and a love of hockey. Consideration is also given to academic achievement and civic involvement.
 
Last edited:
LBartowski said:
It’s very obvious that you have never played athletics at any level. You really are blind to what’s going on. Obviously you think athletics work like Techmo Bowl and Bo Jackson.
Click to expand...

Wait...So you're saying athletics isn't like Bo Jackson in Tecmo Bowl?

Dude...That game was awesome...And if you think about it, Bo Jackson in Tecmo Bowl was just a precursor to Megan Keller.
 
LBartowski said:
I’m not sure who the point leader is. The Patty Kaz is not about having the most points.
An award of The USA Hockey Foundation, the Patty Kazmaier Memorial Award was established in 1998 and is presented annually to the top player in NCAA Division I women’s ice hockey. Other selection criteria include outstanding individual and team skills, sportsmanship, performance in the clutch, personal character, competitiveness and a love of hockey. Consideration is also given to academic achievement and civic involvement.
Click to expand...
It still is an award for the best hockey player ON the ice, so stats absolutely matter. If a player far exceeds every other player in the country in the "other" criteria, but has 2G and 4A in 30 games, they will never be nominated. If it's a Humanitarion Award then absolutely.

Do the women even have a Humanitarian Award like the men?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ARM
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top