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.

Wisconsin Women's Hockey 2024-2025

Gargoyle said:
No comments about today's game against UM-D?? I thought the game was closer than the score, and that Ava made some excellent saves. I was happy to see the fourth line get some time to take pressure off our top lines. Coach will have some teaching points after breaking down some of the defensive lapses, but overall, I think the team played well against a stout opponent. I'm looking forward to tomorrow's game. (We may lose some of our crowd due to an overlap with the volleyball game.)
Click to expand...

I thought the pace and flow of the game was outstanding; it sure looked like what hockey is supposed to look like, unlike the first 4 games. WI controlled more of the game than UMD, but not by a long way. Ava definitely saved the bacon. Not a real huge fan of getting out-faceoffed not allowing the 2-0 that the goal was scored on, make a sure play at your own blueline breaking out. Potter showed some great instinct from her 2 goals from down low, I hope a F was covering. I will say I have never seen a diving play called after the whistle, naturally I and questioning the legitimacy of the call.
 
Gargoyle said:
I'm thinking that "adjustments were discussed and made" during the first intermission. The second period was quite different than the first.
Click to expand...

I only saw the last period or so today. The shorty given up was more own blue line sloppiness. Sad it trickled through Ava, haven't seen a trickle through goal by a Badger in a long time. Glad to see a learning moment snafu in a win vs a loss. I wish I could have seen a replay of the 5 minute call. Was it legit? Love seeing Scannell crash the net for 2 goals. I love the scoring depth of this team. Also great to see the 4th line play a good amount against a top 3 team. How much icetime will they see next weekend?
 
Huuuge series against more ugly colored uniforms this weekend. It will be quite the strain on the eyes 2 weeks in a row. At any rate, as happy as I am to see the 4th line roll last week, I'm not excited to see them against their #1 line this weekend. It will be interesting how much risk MJ decides to take seeing he has to change first this weekend. I also would like them to make safe plays in the N zone and not give the rodents any turnovers to pounce on. If they play a clean D game, they should able to get close to maximizing the points this weekend.
 
I am surprised--and a bit alarmed--that TM doesn't have an article about this weekend's border battle. I can't be up there for the series and was looking forward to his take on the competition.
 
Gargoyle said:
I am surprised--and a bit alarmed--that TM doesn't have an article about this weekend's border battle. I can't be up there for the series and was looking forward to his take on the competition.
Click to expand...

They hung in there with that other team, they probably should have crushed BU more than they did, they should have beat UCONN more easily. The fact that they hung in there with that other team to me means that that other team is down a rung or two, not that the rodents are up a rung or two, based on how they handled UCONN and BU. I'd say UW has pretty much met the expectations of the first 6 games. It will be interesting to compare UMD to the rodents after this weekend. If UW avoids boneheaded turnovers and penalties, they will be in a spot to get a lot of points this weekend.

WI PP 28%, UM 12%. PK UW 92% UM 78%. small sample size. On paper UW should win the special teams, but UM has played 3 tougher opponents than UW.
 
Loved most of the first period, all the second and first half of the third. Got a little lazy there at the end. The rodent 4 line was juiced up to finally get play. Mj rolled 4 lines again and it paid off
 
Timothy A said:
At any rate, as happy as I am to see the 4th line roll last week, I'm not excited to see them against their #1 line this weekend. It will be interesting how much risk MJ decides to take seeing he has to change first this weekend.
Click to expand...

The Kids Table gets more impressive every game. That drop from Halverson to McCarthy for her first was exquisite. That line is going to be a huge X factor all year because they can definitely play.
 
BadgerPete said:
The Kids Table gets more impressive every game. That drop from Halverson to McCarthy for her first was exquisite. That line is going to be a huge X factor all year because they can definitely play.
Click to expand...

Yeah they did it again today with Halverson's laser goal. I wish they would shoot off the pass more than they do.
​​​​​
​​​​​
 
It's interesting comparing the 3rd and 4th lines scoring productivity......3rd line has 7g 8a 57 sog; the 4th line has 7g 6a 43 sog. Halverson is "dragging" the sog number down with only 7 on the kids table. I'd love to know the ice time numbers to get the real picture. I suspect the kids have logging less shifts than the 3rd line season to date.

The announcers in game 2 were making a point that Ava was getting scored on to her glove side. Maybe I'll watch those lowlights and give it a closer look.
 
Timothy A said:
The announcers in game 2 were making a point that Ava was getting scored on to her glove side.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing that's a point of emphasis in practice this week (or maybe they fixed it during intermission). We're not used to seeing a Badger goalie with such an evident flaw. The first one (?), it looked to be a problem with her stance, as she was holding her glove so low that it would have been tough to get it up to cover the crossbar in time, and she tried to save it with her shoulder instead.

For much of their careers, all the UW goalies have to do is go behind the net to corral dump-ins, so I can see where it is hard to focus.
 
Gargoyle said:
Todd wrote an interesting article in the SJ today. I'm still not sure I understand the current college sports climate. This transition period will be interesting. (This article may be behind a paywall. I'm a subscriber, so I could open it.)
https://madison.com/sports/college/...cle_3163092d-d16a-5c11-9741-3973ef08b8e6.html
Click to expand...

There was an email from McIntosh yesterday? Monday? talking about it all. It was because the judge in the NCAA 'payment for athletes' case had given a 'preliminary approval' to the revised settlement agreement. (I already deleted the email). The "80 to 100 fewer athletes" may not be as drastic as it sounds. Schools are notorious for padding their rosters in some women's sports to look like they're in compliance with Title IX - the Badgers are guilty as charged here. And the roster limits that are part of the agreement make that pretty much impossible.

For example, the UW web page lists 91 names for women's rowing, with another 45 for 'lightweight rowing'. The new roster limits have a roster limit of 68 for women's rowing, with no differentiation (that I can see) for lightweight. I didn't go down the lists to see if there might be duplication between the two rosters, but assuming there isn't, that's 70 right there. One could go through team by team, count up the current roster numbers, and compare with the new roster limits to see where else there might be fewer athletes listed going forward.

Of course, if you had 70 fewer women athletes, that has an obvious effect of your Title IX compliance...
 
robertearle said:
There was an email from McIntosh yesterday? Monday? talking about it all. It was because the judge in the NCAA 'payment for athletes' case had given a 'preliminary approval' to the revised settlement agreement. (I already deleted the email). The "80 to 100 fewer athletes" may not be as drastic as it sounds. Schools are notorious for padding their rosters in some women's sports to look like they're in compliance with Title IX - the Badgers are guilty as charged here. And the roster limits that are part of the agreement make that pretty much impossible.

For example, the UW web page lists 91 names for women's rowing, with another 45 for 'lightweight rowing'. The new roster limits have a roster limit of 68 for women's rowing, with no differentiation (that I can see) for lightweight. I didn't go down the lists to see if there might be duplication between the two rosters, but assuming there isn't, that's 70 right there. One could go through team by team, count up the current roster numbers, and compare with the new roster limits to see where else there might be fewer athletes listed going forward.

Of course, if you had 70 fewer women athletes, that has an obvious effect of your Title IX compliance...
Click to expand...

The football team was 120 members on it. 120!!!!!!!!!! An nfl team has 53 on the active roster and 16 on the practice squad. They play 17 games, college teams play 12 games and they have 51 more players on the roster! Want to cut some bloat? There's plenty of room on the pigiron. I know somewhere roster limit sizes will be in play. Hopefully football is at a much more reasonable size. I doubt it. Heaven forbid we do anything to rock the football team's applecart. There are also 20 coaches and 18 support staff on the payroll. Insanity.
 
Timothy A said:
The football team was 120 members on it. 120!!!!!!!!!! An nfl team has 53 on the active roster and 16 on the practice squad. They play 17 games, college teams play 12 games and they have 51 more players on the roster! Want to cut some bloat? There's plenty of room on the pigiron. I know somewhere roster limit sizes will be in play. Hopefully football is at a much more reasonable size. I doubt it. Heaven forbid we do anything to rock the football team's applecart. There are also 20 coaches and 18 support staff on the payroll. Insanity.
Click to expand...

The football roster limit will 105. So that will be a sport where there will be fewer rostered athletes going forward. for UW as well as other 'big' schools.
 
Timothy A said:
The football team was 120 members on it. 120!!!!!!!!!! An nfl team has 53 on the active roster and 16 on the practice squad. They play 17 games, college teams play 12 games and they have 51 more players on the roster! Want to cut some bloat? There's plenty of room on the pigiron. I know somewhere roster limit sizes will be in play. Hopefully football is at a much more reasonable size. I doubt it. Heaven forbid we do anything to rock the football team's applecart. There are also 20 coaches and 18 support staff on the payroll. Insanity.
Click to expand...

I agree this is outrageous. If these football student-athletes want to get paid to play in college then I believe the rosters should be exactly the same size as the real pro rosters of the NFL. That way there would be much less wasted money on guys that are going nowhere fast on the practice squads of college teams. College hockey rosters don't include having enough players to have a practice squad to scrimmage against and practice certain set plays against. Maybe that should change to mirror college football teams. Imagine a prospect being recruited for the opportunity to be on the hockey team's practice squad. Can you hear the respsonse....."Get real coach!" LMAO
 
Has anyone else noticed that the videos on the Badger women's hockey official web page are from last February and March? I think the optics would be better to ditch the videos altogether. This season's highlight videos are on YouTube, but there must be some reason they can't be posted on the university site?
 
Gargoyle said:
Has anyone else noticed that the videos on the Badger women's hockey official web page are from last February and March? I think the optics would be better to ditch the videos altogether. This season's highlight videos are on YouTube, but there must be some reason they can't be posted on the university site?
Click to expand...

I was just trying to find Mark Johnson's press conference but maybe he didn't have one this week? The women's hockey page video content really sucks. The quality of the audio on Mark Johnson's press conferences from this year that I have seen is terrible. You can't even hear the questions. I can't believe it's getting worse instead of better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top