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.

Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

This weekend is another one-two Union punch. A good effort Friday night that catches a team off guard, then a Saturday relapse into Assano's, sorry, Barcomb's typical game plan. Geez, you read the post on "Union Hockey Blog" and what you find is just how clueless CoachClaudia really is. In the third game of the season CC's players are "tired"? Her teams constantly put themselves in PKs because individual aggressive players try to make up for a frustrating lack of team play. She HAS to have the team, or at least a PK squad, conditioned to kill these PKs, because Union will continue to have them. She never has been able to have a team move effectively in the offensive zone-- one shot, maybe one rebound, and the puck is no longer Union's; just like she never has been able to have a defense take possession of the puck and move it quickly and accurately out of the defensive zone. She compliments an "offensive defense" player? How many of these has she had over her too-many years at Union, good ones, and she just doesn't know what to do with them, other than let them run with the puck in some games before she beats them down or wears them out. And in just the third game, CC is back again pulling the goalie and giving up a goal. If you can't teach the six players on the ice how to control the puck in those situations, don't pull your goalie. Yep, I look forward to another season of some good efforts by individual players, but also another season of Union players who are neither allowed to play as a team nor have a coach who cm prepare them to play together as a team.
Chew some gum, CC, and laugh it off as your players leave and your coaches leave. And I'll go away for a while now, and just watch some more games. Why do I like Union? Great school, good student athletes, and a womens' hockey team that suffers under a coach and an athletic director that just can't do their jobs.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Flarrow said:
This weekend is another one-two Union punch. A good effort Friday night that catches a team off guard, then a Saturday relapse into Assano's, sorry, Barcomb's typical game plan. Geez, you read the post on "Union Hockey Blog" and what you find is just how clueless CoachClaudia really is. In the third game of the season CC's players are "tired"? Her teams constantly put themselves in PKs because individual aggressive players try to make up for a frustrating lack of team play. She HAS to have the team, or at least a PK squad, conditioned to kill these PKs, because Union will continue to have them. She never has been able to have a team move effectively in the offensive zone-- one shot, maybe one rebound, and the puck is no longer Union's; just like she never has been able to have a defense take possession of the puck and move it quickly and accurately out of the defensive zone. She compliments an "offensive defense" player? How many of these has she had over her too-many years at Union, good ones, and she just doesn't know what to do with them, other than let them run with the puck in some games before she beats them down or wears them out. And in just the third game, CC is back again pulling the goalie and giving up a goal. If you can't teach the six players on the ice how to control the puck in those situations, don't pull your goalie. Yep, I look forward to another season of some good efforts by individual players, but also another season of Union players who are neither allowed to play as a team nor have a coach who cm prepare them to play together as a team.
Chew some gum, CC, and laugh it off as your players leave and your coaches leave. And I'll go away for a while now, and just watch some more games. Why do I like Union? Great school, good student athletes, and a womens' hockey team that suffers under a coach and an athletic director that just can't do their jobs.
Click to expand...

I would take all of this a lot more seriously if it were not for the fact that every previous Union coach, dealing with the same recruiting situation, delivered worse results. I am not a Union fan, but have watched the ECAC for many years and have seen more progress under this coach than ever before.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

“I would take all of this a lot more seriously if it were not for the fact that every previous Union coach, dealing with the same recruiting situation, delivered worse results. I am not a Union fan, but have watched the ECAC for many years and have seen more progress under this coach than ever before.” -Hab

Union moved to Division I from D III at the beginning of the 2002-03 season. So, looking at D-1 only, there’s been 3 coaches. (stats from Union’s 2012-2013 Media Guide, available online)

“every previous Union coach”:
Fred Quistgard 1999-2004
Career Record (Entering 2003-04): 37-80-6 (.325) (5 Seasons)
Record at Union 1999-04: 26-68-5 (.288) (4 Seasons)
Record at D-1 Union 2002-04: 15-53-2 (.228) (2Seasons)

Tim Gerrish 2004-07
Career Record (Entering 2006-07): 323-238-25 (.573) (26 Seasons)
Record at Union 2004-07 12-77-2 (.162) (3 Seasons)

Claudia Asano Barcomb 2007-2013 - present
Career Record (Entering 2007-2013): 16-133-13 (.139) (Six Seasons)
Record at Union 2007-2013: 16-133-13 (.139) (6 Seasons)


“dealing with the same recruiting situation”:
Quistgard: during D-1, recruited his own players, many recruited while the team was D-3
Garrish: started with some inherited players, both D-1 and D-3; recruited players who wanted to come to a divisional transition team; one significant late recruit was Day, transferred from Maine
Barcomb: Inherited D-1 recruits from Garrish; recruited her own

“delivered worse results” (D-1)
Quistgard (.228)
Gerrish (.162)
Barcomb (.139)

And I know these aren’t coach’s stats, but they are informative: Skater Career Records
Points
1. 68 – Elise Nichols (43g-25a) – 2003-07
2. 64 – Elizabeth Flanagan (29g-35a) – 2001-02
3. 61 – Courtney Riepenhoff (35g-26a) – 2001
Goals
1. 43 – Elise Nichols – 2003-07
2. 35 – Courtney Riepenhoff – 2001-05
3. 29 – Elizabeth Flanagan – 2002
Assists
1. 35 – Elizabeth Flanagan – 2002
2. 32 – Kate Gustafson – 2002-06
3. 26 – Courtney Riepenhoff – 2001-05
Power-Play Goals
1. 9 – Suzy Pocock – 2005-09
2. 7 – Jackie Koetteritz – 2006-10
3. 7 – Elizabeth Flanagan – 2002
Short-Handed Goals
1. 4 – Elizabeth Flanagan – 2002-04
2. 3 – Suzy Pocock – 2005-09
3. 2 – Hannah Baldwin – 2001-04

Team Season Records
Most Wins 11– 2002-03
Most Losses 29– 2008-09, 2003-04, 2010-11
Most Ties 4– 2011-12
Fewest Wins 2– 2008-09, 2010-11
Fewest Losses 14 – 2002-03
Fewest Ties 0– 2006-07, 1999-20

Take it more seriously.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Thanks for your lengthy reply and detailed stats Flarrow. I assume that you did not see Union play in its first 5 years as a D1 team (the pre-Barcomb years), or you would know immediately that your stats are deeply flawed. Although a D1 team at the time, almost its only successes were against D3 teams (or Sacred Heart and Holy Cross, who were and still are worse than the average D3 team). Quistgard and Gerrish were regarded as decent coaches but...during Quistgard's one year as coach (2003-2004) Union had one win against a legit D1 team (Cornell, which at the time was doormat in the ECAC) while managing to lose games to Sacred Heart, Holy Cross, and New England College:eek:. During Tim Garrish's 3 years, of his 12 wins ten were against Sacred Heart, one was vs. RPI (div 3 at the time) and only one was against a legit D1 team (Robert Morris, during their first year in D1). Recalculate your stats, removing games against D3 teams, Sacred Heart and Holy Cross and a different picture emerges: Union has not progressed by leaps and bounds under Barcomb, but they have progressed.

The individual player stats are even more ridiculous because they include players from the D3 period (easy to rack up points when you get to play MIT, Salve Regina et.al and can come away with a 15-0 win.
 
Last edited:
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Hab
Thanks for the quick response.
I have watched Union men and women play for most of this decade, so be careful when you assume.

(I agree-individual player stats don’t mean much by themselves, but even if they were D-3 numbers they were against D3 teams, and some of these stats leaders came during D-1 pre-Barcomb seasons.)

Mostly what I was responding to was your statement “every previous Union coach, dealing with the same recruiting situation, delivered worse results”, because I just don’t think that’s true. “Every previous coach”?—there were just two before Barcomb. “same recruiting situation”?- each of the three had a very different recruiting situation. It could be argued that Barcomb has had the best D-1 recruiting platform, but I’d question if she’s gotten the best results. “worse results”? Should I say “I assume that you did not see Union play in many of its D1 games, or you would know immediately that what happens on the ice under Barcomb is deeply flawed”. The two other coaches had better line play, better systems, and often got better heart out of the players, who undeniably were playing against teams above their level---but that’s why those players were there: to get a Union education while trying to contribute to the elevation of the team from D-3 up and into D-1. They knew they weren’t going to win a lot of games—they just wanted to play good hard hockey against D-1 opponents.

Barcomb walked in as if she should have a coach’s respect just because she had the title (with no experience as head coach—she was using Union just like those players were), and she gave very little respect to her players. Now, after six seasons, I still watch Barcomb teams (recruited and trained by Barcomb) who simply cannot execute fundamental hockey systems or play as a team for her---and the players came to Union with those skills from previous teams/coaches. Her teams are not freshman walk-ons. They come with skills; that’s why they were recruited. They just can’t display them under her game.
That’s what I saw from Friday to Saturday last week, that’s what makes me think this season will be like the previous ones, and that’s why I think the problems at Union are not the players’, they are the coach’s, and the AD’s.

So I guess we agree to disagree. Enjoy the season.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Flarrow said:
So I guess we agree to disagree. Enjoy the season.
Click to expand...

I will enjoy the season, as always, and hope you do too. Obviously, you are passionate about the team, and in the end that's the important thing.
 
hab said:
I will enjoy the season, as always, and hope you do too. Obviously, you are passionate about the team, and in the end that's the important thing.
Click to expand...

Sadly, I have to agree with Flarrow. I had high hopes for U womens hockey when Claudia was hired. Although she did not have head coaching experience, she had several years as an assistant and this progression is not uncommon. However, after seeing lacklustre teams/performances over this many years, one has to look at the coach. Especially after seeing the success of the men's program with the same 'recruiting restrictions' under Leaman and Bennett, coach Claudia needs to be held accountable. I hope the team has a great year and this argument goes away but I can't see it. Good luck ladies.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

I am a dedicated follower of the men's team but also want to see the women's team develop. Unfortunately, I rarely get to see the women play although this weekend both teams will be playing home games back to back on Friday and Saturday.

The lack of success pains me as a Union alum and I have a few observations. First, I can only surmise that the women went D-1 to a large extent to comply with gender equity requirements. There were people I know who felt that was a mistake and that another D-1 women's program such as soccer would have been a better fit for success. I believe however that if you are going to be a D-1 program, you can't do it half way and expect to be competitive. This leads me to my second observation and I've mentioned this before, the men's team success has to a large extent mirrored the meteoric rise of the fund raising efforts of the Garnet Blades which is the men's program's support group. Beginning ten years ago and raising $10,000, the organization last year raised $175,000 and broke the million dollar mark in total funds raised. I can assure you that the funds have made a huge difference in recruiting, team travel, facilities and equipment. If you are going to improve you have to beat the bushes for recruits and that takes money, lots of it and the athletic department simply lacks the resources to fully fund these costs. I should say that the Blades do more than raise money. They also create enthusiasm and level of support which in my opinion is palpable to the coaches, staff and even the players. The ECAC is a dogfight every year and you can't go in tepidly and expect too succeed. I wish the women the best, I know how much work and dedication it takes to be a an athlete in a rigorous academic institution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D2D
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Wholin1 said:
I am a dedicated follower of the men's team but also want to see the women's team develop. Unfortunately, I rarely get to see the women play although this weekend both teams will be playing home games back to back on Friday and Saturday.

The lack of success pains me as a Union alum and I have a few observations. First, I can only surmise that the women went D-1 to a large extent to comply with gender equity requirements. There were people I know who felt that was a mistake and that another D-1 women's program such as soccer would have been a better fit for success. I believe however that if you are going to be a D-1 program, you can't do it half way and expect to be competitive. This leads me to my second observation and I've mentioned this before, the men's team success has to a large extent mirrored the meteoric rise of the fund raising efforts of the Garnet Blades which is the men's program's support group. Beginning ten years ago and raising $10,000, the organization last year raised $175,000 and broke the million dollar mark in total funds raised. I can assure you that the funds have made a huge difference in recruiting, team travel, facilities and equipment. If you are going to improve you have to beat the bushes for recruits and that takes money, lots of it and the athletic department simply lacks the resources to fully fund these costs. I should say that the Blades do more than raise money. They also create enthusiasm and level of support which in my opinion is palpable to the coaches, staff and even the players. The ECAC is a dogfight every year and you can't go in tepidly and expect too succeed. I wish the women the best, I know how much work and dedication it takes to be a an athlete in a rigorous academic institution.
Click to expand...

I heard once that a Divison I Head Coach has 3 basic functions - recruiting, teaching in practice and coaching in a game. How many do they do exceptionally well? A great coach does all 3 exceptionally well. A very good coach can get away with doing 2, and an okay coach may do 1. A below average coach doesn't do any of those functions very well.

As for recruiting - go back to the post on "07-15-2013, 02:19 AM" and the discussion that followed. I suppose funding has some impact, but the biggest impact would be athletic scholarships.
As for coaching, funding shouldn't affect that so much.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

96IllinoisDad said:
I heard once that a Divison I Head Coach has 3 basic functions - recruiting, teaching in practice and coaching in a game. How many do they do exceptionally well? A great coach does all 3 exceptionally well. A very good coach can get away with doing 2, and an okay coach may do 1. A below average coach doesn't do any of those functions very well.

As for recruiting - go back to the post on "07-15-2013, 02:19 AM" and the discussion that followed. I suppose funding has some impact, but the biggest impact would be athletic scholarships.
As for coaching, funding shouldn't affect that so much.
Click to expand...
I agree but as my mother once said, "Rich or poor, it's good to have money." ;)
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

96IllinoisDad said:
I heard once that a Divison I Head Coach has 3 basic functions - recruiting, teaching in practice and coaching in a game.
Click to expand...
Don't trust your source. D-I coaches at successful programs wear many hats beyond those three. For example, I've heard coaches say they were surprised to learn how big a component fundraising was when they became a D-I head coach.

As for funding, it has a huge impact. The programs that have had the most success over the years are also those that are better-funded.
 
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

HockeyEast33 said:
Union certainly does have a smaller endowment than the Ivies, but that is not the financial aid pool and in fact they are only marginally related (Harvard or Princeton for instance could send every kid for free and it would have only minimal impact on their endowment - they use the endowment primarily for other purposes). Union has a very strong financial aid pool. According to their website, they award $39MM of scholarships to 60% of their students for an average award of $30,500 and overall financial aid of $60MM for an average award of $46,900. They also have academic merit awards that are separate from these scholarships. These are pretty substantial financial aid awards.

Your premise that Ivies "throw money at hockey players" is just flat out wrong. Union and the Ivies both use the Expected Family Contribution method to calculate need (there are some individual school uniquenesses in what they consider, but the differing methods generally yield similar results). All Ivy League aid is need based and need is based on a standard calculation (this is a requirement of being in the Ivy League). If a kid is on the Olympic team and her parents make $1MM a year, the kid is going to pay full tuition. If a kid just squeaks into the school and is on the fourth line but her parents earn $35K between them, that kid is going for free. As a more concrete example, I am aware of at least two highly recruited current D1 players who were USA U18 players/candidates that REALLY wanted to attend/play at an Ivy League school, but also had full scholarship offers at non-Ivies. Both sets of parents made over $100K per year and tried to negotiate free rides at the Ivies because they figured that they would "throw money at the players". They got nowhere - the kids both ended up at the scholarship schools because they decided that the benefit of attending the Ivy didn't justify giving up the scholarship (personal choice).

The Ivies all understand that there are certain types of kids that they can attract (combination of skill, income level, academics, and desire to attend the school) and are generally good at identifying those kids and pursuing them. Union doesn't seem to be able to figure out with any consistency who these kids are and even when they do seems unable to capture them with any reliability.
Click to expand...

Just, excellent. Thank you. Always is so good to see the record set aright.

Many followers of the ECAC- 'Women's' (myself included), desire to see Dutchwomen succeed. Is a team we likely could all get behind were they once to get the ball rolling. A 2/2 start esp. against Providence, UConn, Northeastern isn't 'lame'. near being lame.

So second N'estrn, Penn State U. and Syr., might get some momentum?

I'm impressed by the little guy who surprises. Isn't that the, 'American Way'?
Go Dutchwomen!
 
Last edited:
Re: Union College Dutchwomen 2013-2014

Dutchwomen are on the way up for sure. Fantastic to see Hartford Vt minor hockey teammates like Devins and Davis (Banff Hockey Academy) getting a chance to shine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top