5_4_fighting
New member
Union women's hockey has struggled from it's inception. Although improvement has been seen in recent years, they still have yet to earn a playoff berth, ever! Union has managed to recruit some decent players, some in fact are very talented, but are they being coached to maximize their potential and the team's potential? Has Barcomb maxed out her ability, and fallen into such a deep rut, that she can't find her way out? Isn't now the time to shake it up, starting at the top, by finally bringing in new blood to revitalize this team, and give it a fighting chance?
Does it really make a difference, the fact that Union only offers financial aid? The men's team has demonstrated that it does not. In fact, so has the RIT women's ice hockey team. While I will acknowledge that every year can not be a championship year, and that losses are not as deep for Union as they once were, is it too much to expect that a playoff berth can be earned at least 1 in every 4 years?
As recently written in her article Sorry if You're Offended, but Women Can Play, Marttila states "The point of athletics is to improve". With 8 years now under her belt, Barcomb I believe has demonstrated that although marginally improved, yet still losing; the improvement being that she is losing by less, she has clearly reached her potential. Working with her own, personally hand picked team for the last 4 years, I think it's safe to conclude that she lacks the vision, hockey sense, savvy, an personality to take it to the next level. I believe staffing changes (Carpenito) delivered her, her most successful season, and staffing changes the following year has demonstrated a serious loss in coaching talent, that has brought Barcomb right back to the beginning. Finding another 'Scott McDonald', could finally turn this program around and perhaps make it up to the Union faithful.
Men's sports clearly get the lion's share of sponsorship and fan support, but the NBA getting behind the WNBA has proven that women's sport can be marketed. Men's D1 athletics is no different. Support the team, give them the tools, get them winning, and finances will come flooding in, through sponsorships, ticket sales, alumni donations, etc. For women's hockey to continue to grow, those with the control, means or ability need to get behind the sport and their team, and continue to encourage improvement. Succeed, and the finances will follow. Marttila pointed out, in her article, many schools were attendance at women's games is actually doing well. According to Martilla, "Cornell also averaged over 1,000 fans per game". In the west, it's even better. She states, "In February, Wisconsin drew a women's NCAA record crowd of 13,573 for a game versus Minnesota". Best way to continue to improve this momentum thoughout the sport is to put pressure on programs that have been struggling far too long, and push them to replace the only thing that hasn't seen a recent change. In this instance, it is the head coach, who has been at the helm for 8 years.
I enjoy watching women's hockey. Watching two good teams go head to head can be an exciting event. I would like to think that although a 'niche' sport, this sport can continue to grow and improve both nationally and internationally. To grow it though, we all must continue to support out teams, develop our players and grow our base, which includes our fan base. Give the fan base an exciting event to watch, and it will grow. Allow a program to flounder, and the product you provide fans will not be as exciting and can potentially damage the sport as a whole. Will Union continue to treat their women's team as their title IX beard, or are they finally going to demonstrate equality in their coed status, and pay some attention to this team and fix its' most obvious issue?
I think even if they have to pay her off, now is the time to do it. I don't believe she is functional in this role. Perhaps now is the perfect time and opportunity for Barcomb to step aside, save face , regroup and move to another opportunity down the road. Given the environment 4 years ago, a renewal was perhaps understandable, but the last 4 years has demonstrated that it was negligent. It's not hard to recognize when the issue is coaching, and not the talent. Change is desperately required, and perhaps the associate HC and assistant can do better without Barcomb, they certainly can't do any worse. It's been a long haul, but now is the time to end it.
Does it really make a difference, the fact that Union only offers financial aid? The men's team has demonstrated that it does not. In fact, so has the RIT women's ice hockey team. While I will acknowledge that every year can not be a championship year, and that losses are not as deep for Union as they once were, is it too much to expect that a playoff berth can be earned at least 1 in every 4 years?
As recently written in her article Sorry if You're Offended, but Women Can Play, Marttila states "The point of athletics is to improve". With 8 years now under her belt, Barcomb I believe has demonstrated that although marginally improved, yet still losing; the improvement being that she is losing by less, she has clearly reached her potential. Working with her own, personally hand picked team for the last 4 years, I think it's safe to conclude that she lacks the vision, hockey sense, savvy, an personality to take it to the next level. I believe staffing changes (Carpenito) delivered her, her most successful season, and staffing changes the following year has demonstrated a serious loss in coaching talent, that has brought Barcomb right back to the beginning. Finding another 'Scott McDonald', could finally turn this program around and perhaps make it up to the Union faithful.
Men's sports clearly get the lion's share of sponsorship and fan support, but the NBA getting behind the WNBA has proven that women's sport can be marketed. Men's D1 athletics is no different. Support the team, give them the tools, get them winning, and finances will come flooding in, through sponsorships, ticket sales, alumni donations, etc. For women's hockey to continue to grow, those with the control, means or ability need to get behind the sport and their team, and continue to encourage improvement. Succeed, and the finances will follow. Marttila pointed out, in her article, many schools were attendance at women's games is actually doing well. According to Martilla, "Cornell also averaged over 1,000 fans per game". In the west, it's even better. She states, "In February, Wisconsin drew a women's NCAA record crowd of 13,573 for a game versus Minnesota". Best way to continue to improve this momentum thoughout the sport is to put pressure on programs that have been struggling far too long, and push them to replace the only thing that hasn't seen a recent change. In this instance, it is the head coach, who has been at the helm for 8 years.
I enjoy watching women's hockey. Watching two good teams go head to head can be an exciting event. I would like to think that although a 'niche' sport, this sport can continue to grow and improve both nationally and internationally. To grow it though, we all must continue to support out teams, develop our players and grow our base, which includes our fan base. Give the fan base an exciting event to watch, and it will grow. Allow a program to flounder, and the product you provide fans will not be as exciting and can potentially damage the sport as a whole. Will Union continue to treat their women's team as their title IX beard, or are they finally going to demonstrate equality in their coed status, and pay some attention to this team and fix its' most obvious issue?
I think even if they have to pay her off, now is the time to do it. I don't believe she is functional in this role. Perhaps now is the perfect time and opportunity for Barcomb to step aside, save face , regroup and move to another opportunity down the road. Given the environment 4 years ago, a renewal was perhaps understandable, but the last 4 years has demonstrated that it was negligent. It's not hard to recognize when the issue is coaching, and not the talent. Change is desperately required, and perhaps the associate HC and assistant can do better without Barcomb, they certainly can't do any worse. It's been a long haul, but now is the time to end it.
