Home Blog Page 1306

Bracketology: March 10

By
-

Just when you thought things were getting easier, they aren’t. After last weekend, you thought you had it all figured out. You had your travel plans made, hotels booked, and what happens?

The games.

With one more week gone by, it’s time for our regular look at how the NCAA tournament might shake out if the season ended today. It’s something we call “Bracketology” — a look into the thought process behind selecting and seeding the NCAA tournament.

This is the fifth installment; we’ll be bringing you a new one every week until our final picks just before Selection Sunday. If you take a look at the sidebar, you’ll see our brackets from last week and you can compare and contrast on your own.

Here are the facts:

  • Sixteen teams are selected to participate in the national tournament.
  • There are four regional sites (East – Albany, N.Y., Northeast – Manchester, N.H., Midwest – Grand Rapids, Mich., West – Colorado Springs, Colo.)
  • A host institution which is invited to the tournament plays in the regional for which it is the host, and cannot be moved.
  • Seedings will not be switched, as opposed to years past. To avoid undesirable first-round matchups, including intraconference games (see below), teams will be moved among regionals, not reseeded.

    Here are the NCAA’s guidelines on the matter, per a meeting of the Championship Committee:

    In setting up the tournament, the committee begins with a list of priorities to ensure a successful tournament on all fronts including competitive equity, financial success and likelihood of playoff-type atmosphere at each regional site. For the model, the following is a basic set of priorities:

  • The top four teams as ranked by the committee are the four No. 1 seeds and will be placed in the bracket so that if all four teams advance to the Men’s Frozen Four, the No. 1 seed will play the No. 4 seed and the No. 2 seed will play the No. 3 seed in the semifinals.
  • Host institutions that qualify will be placed at home.
  • No. 1 seeds are placed as close to home as possible in order of their ranking 1-4.
  • Conference matchups in first round are avoided, unless five or more teams from one conference are selected, then the integrity of the bracket will be preserved.
  • Once the six automatic qualifiers and 10 at-large teams are selected, the next step is to develop four groups from the committee’s ranking of 1 through 16. The top four teams are the No. 1 seeds. The next four are targeted as No. 2 seeds. The next four are No. 3 seeds and the last four are No. 4 seeds. These groupings will be referred to as “bands.”

    Additionally, the NCAA recently clarified its selection criteria to include a bonus factor in the Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) for “good” nonconference wins.

    And one more note: Massachusetts-Lowell’s forfeits have not been taken into account because the NCAA has not taken official action. Therefore, the results of the games played are used here. However, it is unlikely that the NCAA will change the results.

    Given these facts, here are the top 15 of the current PairWise Rankings (PWR), plus Holy Cross and Bemidji State, the current leaders in Atlantic Hockey and the CHA (through games of March 10, 2004):

    1 North Dakota
    1 Boston College
    1 Maine
    4 Minnesota-Duluth
    5 Minnesota
    6 Denver
    7 Michigan
    8 Wisconsin
    8 New Hampshire
    8 Miami
    11 Ohio State
    12 Michigan State
    12 Colgate
    14 Notre Dame
    15 St. Cloud State
    27 Bemidji State
    28 Holy Cross

    The principal difference is that even though North Dakota swept Michigan Tech and Maine swept Boston College, there is now a three-way tie for first.

    Denver makes the biggest move as its sweep of Colorado College propelled the Pioneers to number six. And Notre Dame’s split with Lake Superior did not help the Irish at all. Colgate, while not playing last weekend, jumps into a tie for the number 12 spot.

    Step One

    From the committee’s report, choose the 16 teams in the tournament.

    We break ties in the PWR by looking at the individual comparisons among the tied teams, and add Holy Cross and Bemidji State.

    From there, we can start looking at the bubble and ties in a more detailed fashion.

    There are three ties to break this week, at number one, eight and 12.

    Let’s look first at the tie at number 12 between Colgate and Michigan State. Head-to-head, Michigan State wins the comparison, so Michigan State is 12 and Colgate is 13. That is a huge tiebreak, because that’s the difference between a three and a four seed.

    Now we’ll move to the tie at eight between Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Miami. At stake, a two seed. It’s a full round-robin, folks and it’s circular. Oh, what to do? Break it on RPI, which is how the committee is expected to do it. Wisconsin is therefore eight, UNH nine and Miami 10.

    Now we move to the top spot. Once again it’s circular among North Dakota, Boston College and Maine. Again, let’s use RPI to break the tie: North Dakota, then Boston College, then Maine.

    Thus, the 16 teams in the tournament, in rank order, are:

    1 North Dakota
    2 Boston College
    3 Maine
    4 Minnesota-Duluth
    5 Minnesota
    6 Denver
    7 Michigan
    8 Wisconsin
    9 New Hampshire
    10 Miami
    11 Ohio State
    12 Michigan State
    13 Colgate
    14 Notre Dame
    15 Bemidji State
    16 Holy Cross

    Step Two

    Assign the seeds:

    No. 1 Seeds — North Dakota, Boston College, Maine, Minnesota-Duluth
    No. 2 Seeds — Minnesota, Denver, Michigan, Wisconsin
    No. 3 Seeds — New Hampshire, Miami, Ohio State, Michigan State
    No. 4 Seeds — Colgate, Notre Dame, Bemidji State, Holy Cross

    Step Three

    Place the No. 1 seeds in regionals, starting with No. 1 North Dakota.

    North Dakota is placed in the West Regional.
    Boston College is placed in the Northeast Regional.
    Maine is placed in the East Regional.
    Minnesota-Duluth is placed in the Midwest Regional.

    This hasn’t changed in a while. It’s still all pretty much the same.

    Step Four

    Now we place the other 12 teams, eventually so as to avoid intraconference matchups.

    Begin by filling in each bracket by banding groups. Remember that in these bands, teams are not assigned to the regional closest to their campus sites (unless you are a host school, in which case you must be assigned to your home regional). Instead, the seeds are set such that the quarterfinals are played by No. 1 v. No. 8, No. 2 v. No. 7, No. 3 v. No. 6 and No. 4 v. No. 5.

    Therefore:

    No. 2 Seeds

    No. 8 Wisconsin goes to No. 1 North Dakota’s Regional, which is the West Regional
    No. 7 Michigan goes to No. 2 Boston College’s Regional, which is the Northeast Regional
    No. 6 Denver goes to No. 3 Maine’s Regional, which is the East Regional.
    No. 5 Minnesota goes to No. 4 Minnesota-Duluth’s Regional, which is the Midwest Regional.

    No. 3 Seeds

    Making the same analysis, the first-round matchups should be No. 9 v. No. 8, No. 10 v. No. 7, etc., so:

    No. 9 New Hampshire, as the host, goes to No. 7 Michigan’s Regional, which is the Northeast Regional.
    No. 10 Miami goes to No. 8 Wisconsin’s Regional, which is the West Regional.
    No. 11 Ohio State goes to No. 6 Denver’s Regional, which is the East Regional.
    No. 12 Michigan State goes to No. 5 Minnesota’s Regional, which is the Midwest Regional.

    No. 4 Seeds

    One more time, taking No. 16 v. No. 1, No. 15 v. No. 2, etc.

    No. 16 Holy Cross goes to No. 1 North Dakota’s Regional, which is the West Regional.
    No. 15 Bemidji State goes to No. 2 Boston College’s Regional, which is the Northeast Regional.
    No. 14 Notre Dame goes to No. 3 Maine’s Regional, which is the East Regional.
    No. 13 Colgate goes to No. 4 Minnesota-Duluth’s Regional, which is the Midwest Regional.

    The brackets as we have set them up:

    Midwest Regional:

    13 Colgate vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    12 Michigan State vs. 5 Minnesota

    West Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 1 North Dakota
    10 Miami vs. 8 Wisconsin

    East Regional:

    14 Notre Dame vs. 3 Maine
    11 Ohio State vs. 6 Denver

    Northeast Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Boston College
    9 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    Our first concern is avoiding intraconference matchups. We have none. Can you repeat that? Wow.

    Now let’s consider other issues.

    We’ve said in the past that we would love to get Denver in the West Regional. But can that happen? We could switch Denver with Minnesota and Wisconsin. That doesn’t interfere with the integrity of the seeds too much. Likewise, to improve attendance at Albany, we can switch Colgate and Notre Dame. We also switch Bemidji State and Holy Cross for travel purposes.

    So our brackets as of right now are:

    Midwest Regional:

    14 Notre Dame vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    12 Michigan State vs. 8 Wisconsin

    West Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 1 North Dakota
    10 Miami vs. 6 Denver

    East Regional:

    13 Colgate vs. 3 Maine
    11 Ohio State vs. 5 Minnesota

    Northeast Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 2 Boston College
    9 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    I’m going to tweak the system one more time. Let’s go back to how we broke the ties. Remember that we had a tie at 12 with Michigan State and Colgate? Look right above them — Ohio State is just one comparison win above the two. There is a discernable bubble right there.

    For the fun of it, let’s put all three of those teams in a head-to-head-to-head comparison. We see that Michigan State wins two comparisons and Ohio State one. So if you look at it this way, Michigan State could be the 11 seed, not the 12 seed, and Ohio State is the 12 seed, not the 11 seed.

    So now we’ve made the bracket a little more ordered.

    Midwest Regional:

    14 Notre Dame vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    11 Michigan State vs. 8 Wisconsin

    West Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 1 North Dakota
    10 Miami vs. 6 Denver

    East Regional:

    13 Colgate vs. 3 Maine
    12 Ohio State vs. 5 Minnesota

    Northeast Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 2 Boston College
    9 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    That’s our bracket this week without the bonus.

    Bracketing the Frozen Four, if all four number-one seeds advance, then the top overall seed plays No. 4, and No. 2 plays No. 3. Therefore, the winners of the Midwest and West Regionals face each other in one semifinal (Minnesota-Duluth and North Dakota’s brackets), while the winners of the East and Northeast Regionals (Maine and Boston College’s brackets) play the other semifinal.

    But, we may have just wasted all our time and brainpower because…

    Bonus Time

    We know there is a bonus component to the criteria, the NCAA’s tweak to the system which rewards “good” nonconference wins.

    Without official word on the size of the bonuses, we take these numbers: .005 for a good road win, .003 for a good neutral win and .001 for a good home win, and then we break ties using the method as above.

    Does anything change? Absolutely.

    1 Boston College
    2 Maine
    3 North Dakota
    4 Minnesota-Duluth
    5 Minnesota
    6 Denver
    6 Michigan
    8 Wisconsin
    9 New Hampshire
    9 Miami
    11 Ohio State
    12 Colgate
    13 Notre Dame
    13 Michigan State
    15 St. Cloud State
    27 Bemidji State
    28 Holy Cross

    That three-way tie for first is broken with BC coming out on top, Maine second and North Dakota third. Colgate also moves up into a third seed. Bemidji State moves ahead of Holy Cross here and St. Cloud is still out in this bonus.

    Let’s break the ties here. At six, Denver wins the head-to-head, so the Pioneers get the sixth seed and Michigan the seventh.

    At 13 Notre Dame defeats Michigan State head-to-head, so Notre Dame is 13 and Michigan State is 14.

    There is a tie at nine, so let’s break it. But hold on a minute. Let’s look at the band of 9-12, i.e. New Hampshire, Miami, Ohio State and Colgate. The comparison wins are so close, let’s call this a bubble.

    Now let’s go head-to-head-to-head-to-head amongst these four teams.

    There are a total of six comparisons to look at here. If you look at it, New Hampshire and Ohio State win two comparisons and Miami and Colgate win one each. We now have separation. New Hampshire and Ohio State will compete for 9 and 10 and Miami and Colgate will compete for 11 and 12.

    Let’s break 11 and 12 first. Colgate defeats Miami in that comparison, so we give Colgate 11 and Miami 12.

    Now let’s move to UNH and Ohio State. Head-to-head Ohio State defeats UNH. That gives Ohio State nine and UNH 10.

    All right, here are our teams in seeded order:

    1 Boston College
    2 Maine
    3 North Dakota
    4 Minnesota-Duluth
    5 Minnesota
    6 Denver
    7 Michigan
    8 Wisconsin
    9 Ohio State
    10 New Hampshire
    11 Colgate
    12 Miami
    13 Notre Dame
    14 Michigan State
    15 Bemidji State
    16 Holy Cross

    So, our new brackets, using the same logic as above:

    West Regional:

    14 Michigan State vs. 3 North Dakota
    11 Colgate vs. 6 Denver

    Midwest Regional:

    13 Notre Dame vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    12 Miami vs. 5 Minnesota

    Northeast Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Maine
    10 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    East Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 1 Boston College
    9 Ohio State vs. 8 Wisconsin

    We would love to get a Michigan teams into the Midwest Regional. If we switch Notre Dame and Michigan State, it wouldn’t hurt seeding integrity because they were tied in the PairWise anyway.

    We also wouldn’t mind getting Colgate into the East Regional. Can we switch Ohio State and Colgate? It’s a big step, because it throws the integrity a little out of whack, but we’re going to do it.

    I like attendance factors, thanks to Denver in the West, Michigan State in the Midwest and Colgate and Boston College in Albany.

    So our final bracket with the 5-3-1 bonus is:

    West Regional:

    13 Notre Dame vs. 3 North Dakota
    9 Ohio State vs. 6 Denver

    Midwest Regional:

    14 Michigan State vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    12 Miami vs. 5 Minnesota

    Northeast Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Maine
    10 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    East Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 1 Boston College
    11 Colgate vs. 8 Wisconsin

    3-2-1

    What if we took these numbers: .003 for a good road win, .002 for a good neutral win and .001 for a good home win?

    1 North Dakota
    1 Boston College
    1 Maine
    4 Minnesota-Duluth
    5 Minnesota
    6 Denver
    6 Michigan
    8 Wisconsin
    9 New Hampshire
    9 Miami
    11 Ohio State
    12 Colgate
    13 Notre Dame
    13 Michigan State
    15 St. Cloud State
    27 Bemidji State
    28 Holy Cross

    It looks like our “without bonus” ranking, except that Michigan and Denver are tied, Wisconsin is alone at eight, and Colgate moves into 12 all by its lonesome.

    North Dakota, Boston College and Maine wind up in that order after breaking ties. Denver is ahead of Michigan, and I am doing the exact same thing as with the 5-3-1 bonus for teams 9-12. That means Ohio State, New Hampshire, Colgate and then Miami. And Notre Dame beats Michigan State.

    With those changes, the bracket changes slightly.

    West Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 1 North Dakota
    11 Colgate vs. 8 Wisconsin

    Midwest Regional:

    13 Notre Dame vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    9 Ohio State vs. 5 Minnesota

    East Regional:

    14 Michigan State vs. 3 Maine
    12 Miami vs. 6 Denver

    Northeast Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 2 Boston College
    10 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    There are some tough ones here. Again, we make some switches for attendance purposes. Miami and Colgate switch. Notre Dame and Michigan State switch. Let’s also switch Denver with Wisconsin for attendance. And one more switch — Holy Cross with Bemidji State. This way only one team flies, not two, which is a priority for the NCAA.

    And here we go, our brackets:

    West Regional:

    15 Bemidji State vs. 1 North Dakota
    12 Miami vs. 6 Denver

    Midwest Regional:

    14 Michigan State vs. 4 Minnesota-Duluth
    9 Ohio State vs. 5 Minnesota

    East Regional:

    13 Notre Dame vs. 3 Maine
    11 Colgate vs. 8 Wisconsin

    Northeast Regional:

    16 Holy Cross vs. 2 Boston College
    10 New Hampshire vs. 7 Michigan

    RPI

    You may have heard about the new RPI rule in effect for this season. Essentially, the new rule states that if a team wins a conference playoff game against a team so weak that the win still lowers its RPI — yes, that is unfortunate, but possible — then the game does not count for RPI purposes for the winning team.

    (Conversely, if a team loses, that game counts no matter what.)

    The rule is meant to protect teams advancing in their conference tournaments from losing ground in the RPI compared to teams that lose out and go home. It sounds simple, though it really isn’t once the computations are all done. Trust me.

    Next Week

    After this weekend, we’ll have a handle as to who is in the tournament and who still has a chance to be a spoiler. Then we’ll really get down to it and see what the tournament might look like.

    • Gophers’ Ashley Suspended for Remainder of the Season

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    Minnesota women’s coach Laura Halldorson has suspended freshman defenseman Danielle Ashley for the remainder of the 2003-04 season for violating team policies.

    Ashley played in 26 games for the No. 1 Gophers, scoring two goals and 13 assists for 15 points. She was also the national leader in penalties with 37, all minors. Minnesota had sat Ashley for both of last weekend’s wins over St. Cloud.

    Ashley is the second Minnesota freshmen defensemen to be lost for the season. Lyndsay Wall, a 2002 U.S. Olympian, was declared academically ineligible back in January.

    This is also the second consecutive year that a Minnesota player has been suspended for the entire season in its final two months. Kristy Oonincx was suspended on Feb. 6, 2003 and later transferred to St. Cloud State.

    The No. 1 Gophers next play on Saturday in the WWCHA Final Five, which they are hosting at Ridder Arena.

    Youthful Feel on All-CCHA Team

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    This year’s All-CCHA First Team has a distinct youthful feel.

    logos/conf-cc.gif

    For just the second time in the conference’s 33-year history, two freshmen have been named to the CCHA First-Team. Michigan forward T.J. Hensick and Michigan State defenseman A.J. Thelen are the first freshman duo to be chosen First-Team All-Conference since Lake Superior forward Pat Tims and goaltender Kim Gellert made the squad in 1973-74.

    The team also includes a sophomore, two juniors, and one senior.

    Hensick

    Hensick

    Michigan State placed two players on this year’s squad, the third straight year the Spartans have placed at least two players on the team. Miami had two players selected to the First Team for the first time since 1996-97. Bowling Green makes its first apperance on the First Team since 1998-99 with one selection, while Michigan returns a player to the First Team after a one-year hiatus. Miami and Michigan were also represented on the Second Team, along with players from Notre Dame and Northern Michigan. The teams, which include five seniors, three juniors, three sophomores and two freshmen, were selected by a vote of the league’s head coaches and are based on performance in league games. Coaches were not allowed to vote for their own players.

    Miami senior foward Derek Edwardson, the conference scoring champion with 35 points, and Michigan State junior forward Jim Slater, this year’s only first-team returnee, led the way at the forward position. Hensick, who led the league in assists, completes the forward line. Thelen, who led all reargaurds in scoring, and Miami sophomore Andy Greene, who was named to the All-Rookie Team last season, round out the blueline. Bowling Green junior Jordan Sigalet, the NCAA leader in minutes played, was chosen as the goaltender for the First Team. Sigalet becomes the first BGSU goaltender to make the First Team since Gary Kruzich was chosen in both the 1985-86 and 1986-87 seasons.

    Miami senior forward Greg Hogeboom, who enters the postseason with a streak of 151 consecutive games played, heads up the Second Team. Notre Dame senior Rob Globke, who received two first-place votes, and fellow Irish senior Aaron Gill, round out the forward line. Three players, Notre Dame senior Brett Lebda, Northern Michigan sophomore Nathan Oystrick and Michigan junior Brandon Rogers, all first time Second-Team selections, comprise the defense; a tie in the balloting made it necessary for three Second-Team Defenseman. Michigan sophomore Al Montoya, who was named to last season’s All-Rookie Team, is the All-Conference Second Team goalie.

    2003-04 CCHA All-Conference Teams

    FIRST TEAM

    F Derek Edwardson, Sr., Miami
    F Jim Slater, Jr., Michigan State
    F T.J. Hensick, Fr., Michigan
    D A.J. Thelen, Fr., Michigan State
    D Andy Greene, So., Miami
    G Jordan Sigalet, Jr., Bowling Green

    SECOND TEAM

    F Greg Hogeboom, Sr., Miami
    F Rob Globke, Sr., Notre Dame
    F Aaron Gill, Sr., Notre Dame
    D Brett Lebda, Sr., Notre Dame
    D Nathan Oystrick, So., Northern Michigan
    D Brandon Rogers, Jr., Michigan
    G Al Montoya, So., Michigan

    Honorable Mention: Craig Kowalski, Sr., G, Northern Michigan; Nate Guenin, So., D, Ohio State; Doug Andress, Sr., D, Ohio State; Mike Kompon, Sr., F, Miami; Kelly Czuy, So., F, Alaska Fairbanks; Kevin Bieksa, Sr., D, Bowling Green.

    CCHA Stats

    Between the Lines: March 10, 2004

    By Adam Wodon
    -

    Our thoughts go out to Steve Moore, former Harvard skater who has made himself into a quite respectable NHL player. Unfortunately, he’s been involved in a reprehensible act of on-ice violence, perpetrated by a star of the league, encouraged, apparently, by his coach. It started when Moore hit Vancouver star Markus Naslund, leading to a concussion for Naslund. This raised the ire of the Canucks, and in the next meeting, Moore was target No. 1. They thought the incident was behind them after Moore got into a fight in the first period, and held his own. But alas no, as the Canucks continued to take runs at Moore throughout the entire game. That is until power forward extraordinaire Todd Bertuzzi sucker punched Moore, and drove him face first into the ice, breaking Moore’s neck and leaving him in a pool of blood. Moore is out for the year (he’s lucky that’s all), Bertuzzi is indefinitely suspended.

    The entire Moore hockey-playing family, all Harvard alums including recent graduate Dominic Moore, have always been known to be class acts. It’s hard to believe his original hit on Naslund was intentional, nevermind that it deserved the retaliation he got. But the stupidity of it is the reaction from fight lovers. They say that the incident could have been avoided had there not been an instigator rule in effect in the NHL. Theory being, without the instigator rule, a player could’ve started a fight with Moore during the original game, and gotten it over with. But because of the rule, which tosses a player who clearly starts a fight, nothing happened. I’m trying to understand the logic of this. This rule certainly didn’t prevent the Canucks from headhunting Moore all night in the recent meeting. And it certainly has nothing to do with Bertuzzi’s gutless cheap shot to Moore’s temple.

    Quickies

    Speaking of former college players and bad NHL incidents, former St. Cloud State star Tyler Arnason was recently involved in strange one with his Chicago Blackhawks coach Brian Sutter. Apparently, in a bar somewhere, Sutter confronted Arnason about the need to work harder and play better. The New York Post’s Larry Brooks said that Arnason’s “laid-back manner and inconsistency have irritated Sutter throughout his three-year tenure behind the Chicago bench.” The confrontation apparently became physical. Sutter certainly is not the first coach to get frustrated with Arnason — just ask Craig Dahl. But fisticuffs is another matter. On the other hand, Arnason did go out and score two goals the next game — a game which featured the NHL debut of former Cornell All-American goalie Matt Underhill. … The worst part, though, is that apparently the incident was witnessed by Chicago management and swept under the rug for four days until a newspaper broke the story. …

    Last Thursday, Steve Saviano picked up his first penalty of the season. Prior, the Hobey Baker Award candidate had been channeling the honor’s namesake. Hobey Baker took one penalty in his college career, and, the legend goes, he didn’t deserve it, and it made him very upset. No one was arguing Saviano’s call.

    Good Luck

    It’s never easy to see someone you know and like get fired, in any walk of life. Such was the case this week when Princeton’s Len Quesnelle was let go by the university, after 20 years of service as a player, assistant coach and then head coach.

    logos/pri.gif

    Obviously, it’s hard to defend eight wins in two seasons and a 17-game winless streak to end this one. But Princeton athletic director Gary Walters has to ask himself, who can win at Princeton? Did he ask himself that question? Well, first of all, we’ll never know, because Princeton’s publicity office is deflecting all media requests for interviews, saying that Walters is busy for the next month as a member of the Division I men’s basketball committee. Oooooh-K.

    But Don Cahoon, who coached from 1991-2000, was the only relatively successful coach at Princeton since the early ’30s. And his teams never finished higher than fourth in the standings. Of course, the Tigers did win an ECAC tournament championship under Cahoon, and had three seasons of 18 wins or higher.

    Thing is, Don Cahoon can sell ice to an eskimo. And he’s one of the best coaches out there. He is an extremely rare personality and coach. I’m not even sure an older Don Cahoon today, minus a little energy from 12 years ago, could do now what he did at Princeton then. Especially when you add in the fact that the whole ECAC is down.

    Admissions at Princeton are a big problem that are going to hamper any coach. Harvard forward Tim Pettit, he of the best release in the ECAC, is from a legacy family that dates back to the 1800s at Princeton. Yet he couldn’t get in. Assistants, and lead recruiters, Brian Wiseman and Mike Bois are getting paid paltry wages. This kind of thing won’t be solved with a new coach.

    I’m not sitting here telling you that Len Quesnelle is a great coach and just a victim of circumstance. You could argue his case back and forth all day. But until other things on campus change, I don’t think a new coach has a ceiling of any higher than 10 wins. I just know that he’s all class and deserves to land on his feet.

    As for some candidates, let’s throw out some names. New Hampshire assistant, and former Lake Superior head coach, Scott Borek, interviewed for the position after Cahoon left. Dartmouth’s Dave Peters is one of the more experienced Ivy League assistants. How about USNTDP Under-18 coach David Quinn? He was willing to be a masochist at Union, where he interviewed for that recent opening, and he shares Cahoon’s BU heritage. As does John Hynes, also at the USNTDP. I’ve seen the name John Messuri thrown out there, a Princeton alum who coaches high school hockey in Massachusetts. And Jeff Kampersal, another alum who currently coaches the Princeton women’s team. Pat Ford, current coach of the soon-to-be disbanded Findlay program, is an intriguing thought. How about Mark Dennehy, formerly a Princeton assistant now with Cahoon at UMass? I’ve long touted Dennehy as one of the next good young coaches out there, along with BC assistant Ron Rolston. I’d love to mention Middlebury coach Bill Beaney, whose son Trevor recently graduated from Princeton, but we’ve been down that road too many times to make that mistake again.

    Greatness

    Despite its growing popularity, college hockey is still the world’s best-kept secret. And its greatness was on full display again this past weekend.

    First Northeastern. Needing a sweep to get into the Hockey East playoffs — the only playoffs that eliminates a team — and no better than two ties out of Boston University, Northeastern had every reason to feel confident going into the weekend. Despite the long odds, it was playing a struggling Massachusetts, while BU was facing New Hampshire in a home-and-home. BU hadn’t scored off UNH goalie Mike Ayers since early last season, over four games ago. But BU managed a 3-3 tie with UNH on Thursday, while Northeastern drew closer with a win on Friday. … Switch to Saturday, Northeastern is getting pounded, outshot 15-1 in the first period, yet leads 1-0. The Huskies go up 3-0 before UMass rallies to make it 3-2. Just as this is happening, New Hampshire finally ties up BU. If it stays like this, Northeastern is in, and BU is out. But just like that, BU scores again, and the Terriers lead. Back in Amherst, the Huskies hang on by a thread to win, just as New Hampshire ties it. Celebration time in Northeastern-land, eh? Not quite. Boston University, struggling to score all year, and shut out four straight times by Ayers heading into the weekend, comes up with an overtime game winner, on the road, and stuns UNH — thereby preventing UNH, by the way, from passing UMass — and avoids missing the HEA playoffs for the first time ever. Craziness.

    What does this mean for UMass? The Minutemen got swept on the last weekend and struggled down the stretch. Though Don Cahoon has a way of finding playoff magic just when you think all has been lost. Now they face Massachusetts-Lowell, which shut out UMass twice earlier in the season. Those losses though, coming at a time when UMass was without two of its best players, were reversed because of Lowell’s use of an inelgible player. Now UMass has its guys back, and Lowell has its team set, and I guess we’ll find out for real who is better. Isn’t it amazing how these matchups just have a way of happening?

    Meanwhile, BU now gets Boston College in the first round, just the second time that’s ever happened. Again, these matchups just work out. It’s like the WCHA, where three of the five playoff series are rematches of the series that just happened this past weekend.

    Michigan State's Dominic Vicari stood toe-to-toe with Michigan's Al Montoya again.

    Michigan State’s Dominic Vicari stood toe-to-toe with Michigan’s Al Montoya again.

    In the CCHA, things were just as crazy, if not moreso, considering that the positions being fought for were at the top, not the bottom.

    Friday, three teams are separated by four points, and No. 3 is playing No. 1, who just happen to be bitter rivals. Meanwhile, No. 2 (Miami) is playing No. 4 (Ohio State), which is no slouch, but is out of the first-place hunt. So Miami makes a great comeback to overtake OSU, and draw even with Michigan, for the time being. Meanwhile, in East Lansing, you not only have the rival teams, by Al Montoya and Dominic Vicari are squaring off between the pipes — last year’s star freshman goalie, and this year’s. They exchanged shutouts the last time these teams met, in December. Then they were teammates when the U.S. won the gold in Finland at the World Junior Championships, and became good friends. They are locked in a tight battle until four goals are scored in a two-minute stretch of the second period, Michigan still up 3-2. But the Spartans, a great third-period team all year, score twice early in the third against a team, the Wolverines, which was 17-0-0 when taking a lead into the third. With a national television audience (and Oxford, Ohio) watching, and MSU trying to hold on, the Spartans get a power play late in the third. This looks in the bag. But wait, Joe Ryznar scores a shorthanded goal! to tie it up, and the Wolverines remain on top by a point.

    Elsewhere Friday, Notre Dame, looking so impressive the previous weekend in sweeping Michigan — and thus setting up all of this top-of-the-standings drama — gets a crushing blow, getting shutout by Lake Superior upstart goalie Jeff Jakaitis. Just when prosperity was standing at the door, the Irish let it walk away. Notre Dame won the next night, but its NCAA status is shaky.

    So we go to Saturday, where again, Montoya, balky hamstring and all, and Vicari are locked in a battle that stays scoreless until the third. Mike Lalonde’s backhander eventually gives MSU a big 1-0 win, and the Spartans wind up just two points out of first. Meanwhile, Miami, seemingly inspired by all this, again rallies to tie Ohio State. But the RedHawks need a win, and they are pressing — which opens the door for the Buckeyes to take advantage with a late goal and a 5-4 win. Michigan celebrates, as its bitter football rival, Ohio State, wins.

    Michigan State was one shorthanded goal allowed away from creating a three-way tie atop the standings. As it is, Michigan’s eight losses are the most ever by a CCHA regular-season champ, which is just what happned in the ECAC the week before with Colgate. Can you say more parity?

    By the way, I don’t want to hear about this “backing in” nonsense. Michigan went 0-3-1 in the last four, and won the title anyway, so some say they “backed in.” That is baloney. It’s an overused term, and 99 percent of the time, it means nothing. There’s a reason they play games in November too. They all count. Losing a couple games at the end is far more likely to simply be coincidence than anything. Sometimes you can tell a team is limping to the finish and is due for a playoff collapse. But it rarely is actually the case.

    So how about the ECAC? Just four series this past weekend involving teams 5-12 in the standings, so no big deal, right? Well, Clarkson coach George Roll sits his captains, Tristan Lush and Rob McFeeters, for disciplinary reasons just before the big games. All Clarkson does is come out and roll Union to the tune of 8-3, on the road. The next night, the Golden Knights crush them again, and Union’s strong play down the stretch is nothing but a distant memory. The Dutchmen have now lost 13 straight playoff games, including the last four at home, its only ECAC Division I home playoff games ever.

    St. Lawrence advanced in the ECAC playoffs with two OT wins.

    St. Lawrence advanced in the ECAC playoffs with two OT wins.

    Meanwhile Friday, Yale jumps out to a 2-0 early lead, and St. Lawrence’s Adam Hogg is tossed from the game. Nothing is going right for the Saints. But they get a goal and there’s life, and then all of a sudden, early in the second period, Yale goalie Josh Gartner — son of NHL Hall of Famer Mike Gartner — who has played just about every minute for Yale this season, gets tossed from the game for butt-ending. This also means Gartner will miss Game 2. The Saints sense an opening, and take advantage. But not so fast, because little-used senior backup Peter Dobrowolski comes in and stands on his head. The game goes to overtime. St. Lawrence eventually does win, putting 59 shots on net against one of the nation’s worst defenses. Saturday night, St. Lawrence in control, but Yale, still without Gartner, manages to get off the deck and tie the game in the last minute, forcing overtime again. And again, St. Lawrence wins.

    Amid all of this conference maneuvering, there are NCAA implications galore. And the intricacies of the PairWise system is such that, with teams hanging on the edge of being considered a Team Under Consideration or not (defined as a team with an RPI of .500 or better), then every win or loss by one of those teams winds up throwing the PairWise for a loop. If Northeastern falls off the TUC bubble, who gets helped or hurt? What about BU? And Harvard? Say what you want for the PWR system, you gotta love this kind of intrigue (just bring your slide rule).

    All of this on one weekend. And we haven’t even reached the heart of the playoffs.

    We touched on the WCHA earlier. There was basically just playoff positioning on the line, but the games were fun to watch. Saw Minnesota-St. Cloud State and Wisconsin-UMD on the dish both nights. Entertaining games. I’m still waiting for any defense at all to show up to last Friday’s Gophers game. … The real shame of the weekend, though, was the injury suffered by Denver senior Connor James. The senior forward broke his leg, ending his college career. He had never missed a game previously in his four-year career.

    Motley Rule

    The fact that scoring is down, across the board, is no longer news. Everyone in hockey has been discussing it extensively. It’s down more than ever. Thirty percent in the NHL just over the last decade alone. College hockey is showing similar trends. (Just don’t tell the wide open WCHA, which is looking more like 20 years ago sometimes.)

    The news, however, is the proposed NHL rules changes. And NHL rules changes have a way of seeping down to the college level eventually — though this time, we’re hoping some college rules seep up to the NHL. Here are some that have been bandied about, though not all are proceeding to a final vote by the NHL.

    • Reducing size of goalie pads. A no brainer.

    • Goalies can’t handle the puck behind the net. I hate it. Rules should not be made that directly restrict a valid skill of a player. Has the fact that goalies play the puck better than ever attributed to hockey’s scoring decline? Absolutely. But that is not a reason to outlaw it. Sports should be about encouraging particular skills, not eliminating them. It’s like when the dunk was outlawed in college basketball for a few years in the ’70s.

    • Shootout. An abomination to sports. Play 10 minute OTs at 4-on-4, that’s fine with me. The argument that shootouts is “entertaining” is not valid. Naked women shooting fire darts at players would be entertaining. But I don’t think we should add that (though I’d take that over shootouts).

    • Widen the ice. I’ve long been against widening the ice to Olympic size of 100 feet. But something like a five-foot boost, to 90 feet, might be good. Of course, many college arenas are already wider, though the trend in recent years has been to go to 85 feet again. Too many people believed the game slowed down too much with 100-foot surfaces, and there was less hitting. This is very true in college, though there is probably more validity to widen the ice in the NHL, because the players are so big and fast across the board.

    • Widen the neutral zone. This includes making the blue lines thicker, and moving the nets back close to the boards, where they used to be. These are no brainers.

    • Full two-minute power plays. I don’t like this. I realize that, originally, power plays were always two minutes, whether the power-play team scored or not. And that it was changed in the ’50s as an artificial way to limit Montreal’s potency. Further, I don’t think power plays are that exciting. You may see further scoring, but excitement in hockey comes from scoring off the rush, or a bang-bang play in the zone. The power play is deliberate and slow most of the time. You may get more goals, but not more excitement, which is really the issue.

    • Remove the red line. Would love to see it in the NHL. Maybe in the AHL as an experiment to start. But there’s no reason not to do it. There was a day and age when you couldn’t pass forward. I think we can allow passes over two lines.

    • Make the nets bigger. I’ve talked about this before. Huge thumbs up. Goalies are bigger, the nets need to be bigger. It’s that simple.

    2004 CCHA All-Academic Team

    USCHO Staff Report
    - 
    F Paul Davies      Sr.  Western Michigan  Pre-Medicine
F Derek Edwardson  Sr.  Miami             Exercise Science
F Rob Globke       Sr.  Notre Dame        Marketing
D Nate Guenin      So.  Ohio State        Undeclared
F Tom Herman       Sr.  Alaska Fairbanks  Business
F Mike Kompon      Sr.  Miami             Physical Education
F Dana Lattery     Sr.  Western Michigan  Pre-Medicine
F D'Arcy McConvey  Sr.  Bowling Green     Financial Economics
F Derrick McIver   Sr.  Ferris State      Computer Information Systems
F Andrew Wong      Sr.  Nebraska-Omaha    Finance

    HONORABLE MENTION

    ALASKA FAIRBANKS: Paul Austin, F; Jordan Hendry, D; Jared Sylvestre, F.
    BOWLING GREEN: Kevin Bieksa, D; Alex Rogosheske, F; Jordan Sigalet, G.
    MICHIGAN: Andrew Ebbett, F; Al Montoya, G.
    MICHIGAN STATE: Colton Fretter, F; Steve Swistak, F.
    NOTRE DAME: T.J. Mathieson, D.

    SPECIAL MENTION

    ALASKA FAIRBANKS: Kelly Czuy, F; Cramer Hickey, F; David Keough, D; Preston McKay,G; Cory Rask, F; Corbin Schmidt, D;
    Scott Vockeroth, F.
    BOWLING GREEN: Ryan Barnett, F; Steve Brudzewski, F; Bob Frazee, G; Chris Pedota, D; John Sitko, D.
    FERRIS STATE: Trevor Large, F; Greg Rallo, F; Nick Scheible, F.
    LAKE SUPERIOR: Tim Krueckl, F. MIAMI: Matt Davis, D; Brian Sipotz, D.
    MICHIGAN: Charlie Henderson, F; Brandon Kaleniecki, F; Noah Ruden, G; Jeff Tambellini, F.
    MICHIGAN STATE: David Booth, F; Lee Falardeau, F; Joe Markusen, D.
    NEBRASKA-OMAHA: Mike Gabinet, D; Dan Hacker, F.
    NORTHERN MICHIGAN: Kevin Gardner, F; Geoff Waugh, D.
    NOTRE DAME: Tom Galvin, D; Brett Lebda, D; Neil Komadoski, D; Cory McLean, F; Chris Trick, F.
    OHIO STATE: Thomas Welsh, D; Reed Whiting, D.
    WESTERN MICHIGAN: Jeremy Cheyne, D; Lucas Drake, F; Mike Jarmuth, D.

    Jutting Honored by USA Hockey

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    USA Hockey today named Minnesota State’s Troy Jutting its 2003 National Coach of the Year.

    In August 2003, Jutting coached the U.S. Under-18 Select Team to its first-ever gold medal at the Under-18 Junior World Cup in Piestany, Slovakia. The team registered a perfect 5-0-0 record, including two victories over Russia, as well as handing seven-time defending champion Canada a 4-3 loss. Jutting is in his fourth season as the men’s head coach of Minnesota State. During the 2002-03 campaign, he was named the WCHA Coach of the Year, leading the Mavericks to a 17-game unbeaten streak during the regular season, a second-place finish in the WCHA regular-season standings and a berth in the NCAA Tournament.

    “Last year, Troy was able to take an exceptional group of players and, in a short time, mold them into a team that was able to capture USA Hockey’s first-ever gold medal in the Under-18 Junior World Cup,” said USA Hockey’s Coaching Education Program director Mark Tabrum.

    Also recognized was former BU forward David Quinn as USA Hockey Developmental Coach of the Year. Quinn is part of the U.S. National Team Development Program in Ann Arbor. The Volunteer Coach of the Year is Leo Bronston of Onalaska, Wis., involved in the Wisconsin Amateur Hockey Association for nearly 15 years.

    The three USA Hockey Coaches of the Year have also been nominated for the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) Coach of the Year in each of the categories. Coaches are nominated in all sports represented within the USOC family.

    The five finalists in the National and Developmental categories and the winner of the USOC Volunteer Coach of the Year title will be honored May 1-3 at the Colorado Springs Olympic Training Complex. The USOC National Coach of the Year and USOC Developmental Coach of the Year will be announced during a May 2 dinner at the Cheyenne Mountain Resort in Colorado Springs, Colo.

    Four-Year Plan

    By
    -

    When you consider the accomplishments of incumbents during this Election Year, you’ll be hard-pressed to find a better four-year term than the one delivered by Minnesota-Duluth coach Scott Sandelin.

    Arriving at Duluth in Fall 2000, Sandelin faced the challenge of replacing Mike Sertich, who coached the Bulldogs to three regular-season championships, four NCAA Tournament appearances, and two Frozen Fours in the 1980s. In response, Sandelin has led a program that now stakes its claim to the title of “Most Improved” over his first four years. Of course, he wasn’t the only arrival in the Fall 2000: a freshman from Quebec named Junior Lessard was another key newcomer to Duluth, along with Minnesota native Beau Geisler, a defenseman. Although it wasn’t obvious at the time, it’s no coincidence that these three began at the same time that the program began its ascent in the WCHA as well as on the national picture.

    In the first season for this new trio in Duluth, the Bulldogs posted a lowly 7-28-4 record — the lowest winning percentage that the program had endured since 1968-69. Lessard’s debut was forgettable, as he recorded a modest 4-8–12 in 37 games played that year.

    It has taken four years, but Minnesota-Duluth coach Scott Sandelin is ready to bring the Bulldogs back to the national stage.

    It has taken four years, but Minnesota-Duluth coach Scott Sandelin is ready to bring the Bulldogs back to the national stage.

    In 2001-02, the turnaround officially began, as the team put up a 13-24-3 record. Lessard blossomed nicely, posting 17-13–30 in 39 games. Last year, the Bulldogs made a true Great Leap Forward, going 22-15-5 and coming up one win short of qualifying for the NCAA Tournament. After upsetting North Dakota in the WCHA play-in game, Minnesota-Duluth had to play their fifth game in eight days against powerhouse Colorado College, only to fall in overtime. Many irate Bulldog fans e-mailed USCHO to vent when the team was bypassed for an at-large bid in the NCAA Tournament, but Sandelin knew that the team had come up short.

    “We were close but yet we were still far,” said Sandelin. “Because I knew what we had to do — we had to win three games. Looking back, we didn’t get in because we didn’t win certain games and our strength of schedule within the league was not as good as probably this year. But it was a real positive step.”

    This year they aren’t leaving anything to chance. With a 23-10-4 record, the Bulldogs have already surpassed last year’s mark and are currently fourth in the PairWise Rankings. After taking three of four points against Wisconsin last week, the team is assured of an NCAA berth. Lessard is just as much of a lock to be a Hobey Baker finalist, seeing that he is third in the nation in scoring with totals of 23-25–48 in 37 games played.

    In light of all these glowing achievements, it appeared to be an opportune time to find out the story behind the program’s remarkable rise to the top, starting with last season.

    “Last year we had some inconsistencies the first half of the year,” Sandelin said. “Obviously the key was getting solid goaltending. Our freshman [Isaac] Reichmuth came in last year and really stabilized that position and gave everybody confidence. We started to play a little bit better in the second half; I think through recruiting we had a little better depth through our four lines. I think those guys really became a team.

    Junior Lessard is expected to be named a Hobey Baker Award finalist.

    Junior Lessard is expected to be named a Hobey Baker Award finalist.

    “Things started clicking, and we had that good finish to the year. We had the opportunity to get to our Final Five, and we were certainly close to being in the tournament.”

    There have been two major factors in this year’s success: upperclassmen now comprise the majority of the lineup, and they have had several years together to build great chemistry. Additionally, there have been some stunning contributions from unexpected sources.

    “We’ve got a big junior class,” Sandelin said. “We’ve got four seniors, and we’ve got our 12 juniors. Certainly when you look at some of the successful teams and programs, you always talk about not being able to win with a big group of freshmen or a loaded group of freshmen and sophomores. That’s been a key — that those of guys have gained experience over the years. We’ve had some different players — kind of like last year — step up and have good years. Guys that maybe you didn’t expect last year, guys like Evan Schwabe and Tyler Brosz are having great years for us; Lessard and Geisler, two of our seniors, are having outstanding years for us.”

    Lessard may get the most ink, but Schwabe’s metamorphosis into one of the top scorers in the nation has been an absolute revelation. As a sophomore, Schwabe scored just six times with four assists in 39 games, playing third or fourth-line center. Now he is tied for ninth in scoring nationally with 41 points in 37 games.

    “He’s in better shape; he showed up ready and is getting a chance to play,” Lessard said of Schwabe, his centerman on the top line. “He’s such a quick skater and great playmaker, and he also can finish well. Those are probably his strongest parts of the game. I’ve been playing with him all year, and he’s been underestimated a bit–If you don’t pay attention to him and give him lots of room, he’s going to make you pay.”

    Likewise, junior Brosz has jumped from 17 points in 31 games to 38 points in 34 games thus far this season. He’s also a bit of a character.

    “He’s a very outgoing guy on the ice,” captain Beau Geisler said. “He cracks jokes but then all of a sudden he’s down to business and gets right at it. He’s a very hard worker, a good guy to have on your team. He makes you laugh and have fun.”

    Both Geisler and Lessard also mentioned defenseman Tim Hambly as another key to the team’s improvement, given that he went from five points last season to 23 to date during this campaign. “He’s having an exceptional year, playing great ‘D’ and getting a lot of points,” Geisler said.

    There’s always those bragging rights, but … I think the guys have taken that in stride really well, talked about getting points against Minnesota than the actual beating them four times.

    — UMD coach Scott Sandelin

    As Sandelin indicated, though, it may be the stabilizing presence of Reichmuth in goal that helped this team believe that they could hold their own against the likes of Minnesota and North Dakota.

    “I think he’s pretty spectacular,” Lessard said of Reichmuth. “He’s got pretty good technique, and most of the time doesn’t get himself out of position, but he had such a good year last year and was the main reason for our success at the end of the year. This year he had kind of a tough start, but the expectations for him were so high. After Christmas, he’s been outstanding. Every game he gives us a chance to win. The defense feels more confident with him and takes chances they wouldn’t have taken before.”

    While Reichmuth holds the fort in the defensive end, Lessard certainly is the standout on the other end of the ice.

    “Certainly this year he’s gotten quicker and stronger, and obviously as a senior you have a confidence level from playing a lot of games,” Sandelin said. “He’s a real leader for us. He’s not going to be a dynamic player; we’ve got a lot of those guys in our league in [North Dakota’s] Zach Parise and [Michigan Tech’s] Chris Conner — guys with great speed, flashy, dynamic guys. Junior’s more of a good strong power forward who can score goals. He’s a tough guy to knock off his feet. He gets abused a lot in a lot of games, but he keeps going back into those tough areas. From a team standpoint, when you see one of your leaders doing that, it picks up everybody. He’s slowly each year improved his game, and this year is maybe the culmination of all that hard work.

    “He usually scores from around 10 or 15 feet; he’s very good around the net. He’s not a Zach Parise, who can dangle you and beat you one-on-one; Junior’s more of a Brett Hull-type player who finds his spots and tries to get his shot off. He’s one of those guys who will stand in front of the net and get cross-checked and tip pucks and get rebounds. He shoots the puck very well; those are reasons he’s scored 20-plus goals the last two years.”

    Curiously, Sandelin and the two seniors agree that the turning point of the season was an apparently meaningless exhibition game against the Latvian National Team. Coming on the heels of a tough sweep at Grand Forks against the Sioux, the game gave the team an opportunity to right itself before Christmas break.

    “It was a fun game to play; it was obviously important to go into that break winning,” Sandelin said. “Guys came back refreshed and ready to go, and things just started to click.”

    They sure did: The team proceeded to go on a 13-0-1 roll, including a 1-0 win at Denver that Sandelin believed was the key win in the streak.

    UMD's chance at the MacNaughton Cup was stopped when it tumbled against North Dakota recently.

    UMD’s chance at the MacNaughton Cup was stopped when it tumbled against North Dakota recently.

    “If you look at the third period, we didn’t deserve to win because they outshot us pretty badly with some power plays, and we blocked a lot of shots and did some things I like to see, certainly got some great goaltending,” Sandelin said. “I had a good feeling after that game — the excitement in the room — and that kind of carried us through. We won games in different ways, had a great stretch with the 14 games.”

    One emotional high point of the streak was beating the Golden Gophers twice to complete a first-ever four-game sweep of their southern rivals. Celebrating the sweep, Bulldog fans at the DECC showered the ice with brooms after the final buzzer sounded. But Sandelin downplays the event’s significance.

    “I think it’s better for the fans,” Sandelin said. “There’s always those bragging rights, but … I think the guys have taken that in stride really well, talked about getting points against Minnesota than the actual beating them four times. But it’s certainly been a good topic around our community.”

    Now the team looks forward to their first national tournament together.

    “I don’t think we care where we go or who we play,” Sandelin said. “Guys are just excited about getting there and having that experience. For me it would just be a real positive step for this program. Once you get in there, you never know. They’re one-game shots; you never know how far you can go.”

    “It’s very exciting for us as a team,” acknowledged Geisler. “It’s rewarding after last year: We knew what had to do; we had to beat CC that night to jump up in the PairWise, but we didn’t do it. We kind of knew that we didn’t get it. We knew that this year we had to do more: We had to win the little games to make it to the national tournament. This year it looks like we can do it.”

    However far the team may go, the coach’s seniors agree that Sandelin deserves considerable credit for the program’s success.

    “He expects a lot,” Lessard said. “He’s pretty fair: If you show up every day and work hard, he’s going to give you a chance to play. His system is pretty good, and he got the players to buy into it. Our special teams have been a lot better too. We work hard on them, but we have to give him a lot of credit for that. He knows his hockey really well, and players just follow up on what he says.”

    “He wants to see us strive to be the best we can,” agreed Geisler. “Sometimes he’s a little hard on us, but we know it’s for a good reason.”

    Even with Lessard and Geisler graduating after this season, the 14 juniors should mean that the team will be a contender once again — even if the Latvian National Team is not available for a not-so-insignificant exhibition game next December.

    Whether or not the Bulldogs make it to Boston for the more important of the two major conventions in that city this year, it’s enough to make a Minnesota-Duluth fan chant “Four more years!”

    Neumann Coach Resigns

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    Nick Russo, head coach of the Neumann’s men’s ice hockey program since its inception six year ago, has resigned. It was a mutual decision by the administration and Russo.

    Russo

    Russo

    “Six years of building a program from the ground up takes its toll physically,” said Russo. “The program has turned the corner, and it was time to turn it over to some one else. I have small kids, and I don’t want to miss any more of their growing up.”

    Russo started the Neumann program in 1998 as a Division III team, although it played mainly against club teams. In 2001, the team was admitted into the ECAC West as a full member, and has competed against a full schedule of Division III opponents since.

    “I love Neumann,” said Russo. “It was a real learning experience. The thing I will miss the most right now will be the coaches in the ECAC West. From top to bottom, they have always supported me and let us grow as a program.”

    CCHA Names All-Rookie Team

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    Three schools each have a pair of players among the six freshmen named to the 2003-04 CCHA All-Rookie Team by vote of the conference head coaches. At least one Wolverine has been honored in 12 of the 16 years since the team was created. The team will be honored at the 2004 CCHA Awards on Wednesday, March 17, at the Fox Theatre in Detroit.

    2003-04 CCHA All-Rookie Team

    F Matt Christie, Miami
    F Marty Guerin, Miami
    F T.J. Hensick, Michigan
    D Matt Hunwick, Michigan
    D A.J. Thelen, Michigan State
    G Dominic Vicari, Michigan State

    Matt Christie: The CCHA’s leading power-play goal scorer this season with seven in conference play. Christie recorded 12 goals in conference play, tying him with two others for the freshman lead, and was tied for fourth on Miami in overall scoring with 30 points.

    Marty Guerin: Emerged as the second-highest scoring rookie in conference play with 11 goals and 24 points in 28 games. Guerin, who was one of just six freshmen to record a shorthanded goal this season, finished tied for the Miami lead with a plus-10 rating in conference play.

    T.J. Hensick: Led Michigan in both conference and overall scoring with 34 and 41 points, respectively. Hensick’s 34 points in CCHA play made him the leading freshman scorer and second-leading scorer overall in conference play.

    Matt Hunwick: Led Michigan with a plus-14 in CCHA games. Hunwick, who led his team with 54 penalty minutes, is the sixth Wolverine defenseman to be named to the All-Rookie Team in the last seven years.

    A.J. Thelen: Third in the nation for scoring by a defenseman with 29 points overall. Thelen, whose 23 points in conference play tie him for third on Michigan State, is third in the CCHA with a plus-16. Thelen is ranked 16th in the NHL’s Central Scouting MidTerm Report, the highest of any CCHA skater.

    Dominic Vicari: Leads the CCHA with a 1.88 GAA in 20 conference games played. Vicari’s .933 save percentage in those games ranks him second in the league. Vicari, who leads Michigan State with 13 wins on the season, recorded a nation-leading seven shutouts this season, six coming in CCHA play.

    Honorable mentions
    Forward — Tom Goebel, MSU; Darin Olver, NMU; Curtis Fraser, UAF; Andrew Schembri, OSU; Scott Parse, UNO; Paul Szczechura, WMU. Defense — Wes O’Neill, ND; Jonathan Sigalet, BGSU; Giovanni Flamminio, FSU. Goaltender — David Brown, ND; Jeff Jakaitis, LSSU; Brandon Crawford-West, MIA.

    Quesnelle Fired by Princeton

    By Juan Martinez
    -

    Two days after its season ended with an ECAC First Round playoff sweep at the hands of Rensselaer, Princeton University fired Len Quesnelle as head coach of its men’s hockey team.

    headshots/pri_quesnelle.jpg

    Gary Walters, Princeton’s director of athletics, made the announcement Monday afternoon. He said a national search for a new head coach will begin right away.

    In his four years as the Tigers’ bench boss, Quesnelle posted a combined 29-84-11 record, including back-to-back seasons of more 24 or more losses. A four-year letterwinner as a player with the Tigers from 1984-88, Quesnelle posted a 5-24-2 mark this season. The Tigers were 0-15-2 in their last 17 games, and hadn’t won since Dec. 16.

    “Len has been a very loyal member of the Princeton hockey program and Princeton athletic department for many years,” Walters said. “It’s not easy to make a decision like this, but we felt it was necessary for a change. We thank him for his service and wish him all the best in the future.”

    To finish out the remainder of his contract, Quesnelle may be reassigned to other duties within the athletic department. Details of such a move have yet to be announced.

    Quesnelle replaced Don Cahoon, the current Massachusetts coach, in 2000 after serving as his assistant at Princeton for nine years. The assistant coaching tenure included an ECAC Championship and an NCAA tournament bid in 1998, the only ones in the program’s history. In all, Quesnelle was a Tigers’ assistant for 12 seasons.

    Quesnelle guided the Tigers to back-to-back .500 finishes in the ECAC in his first two years as head coach, but Princeton finished last in the league the past two seasons. As a player, Quesnelle played in 106 games as a defenseman, and was an all-Ivy Honorable Mention during his senior year.

    He is the first coach to be let go in the ECAC for performance reasons since 1999, when Harvard fired Ron Tommasoni.

    D-III Men … Final Bracketology

    By
    -

    The NCAA Division III Selection Committee won’t be officially meeting until after the ECAC Northeast championship, but their work may already be close to finished. Two possible scenarios will emerge based on the winner of that game, the final one before the field can be set.

    Here’s what we know for sure:

    Pool A

    Pool A, which is comprised of teams getting automatic bids is set with the exception of the ECAC Northeast champion. The following are in:

    Middlebury (NESCAC champion)
    Norwich (ECAC East champion)
    Plattsburgh (SUNYAC champion)
    St. Norbert (NCHA champion)
    St. Thomas (MIAC champion)
    Either Wentworth or Curry will round out Pool A

    Pool B

    It’s close, but Hobart’s win over RIT in the ECAC should give the Statesmen the lone Pool B bid, which goes to the top team from a conference that does not qualify for an automatic berth. The same criteria are used to select all the at-large teams as well as seed the field once it’s selected. The criteria are:

    • Win Percentage
    • Strength of Schedule
    • Head-to-Head Results
    • Record Against Common Opponents Within Region
    • Record Against Ranked Teams Within Region

    Here’s the breakdown for Hobart and RIT:

     Hobart vs RIT
     WIN      0.6481  1      0.6364  0
     SOS      8.5556  0      9.5000  1
     H2H     2- 1- 0  1     1- 2- 0  0
     COP     8- 4- 5  0     9- 1- 4  1
     RNK     7- 4- 2  1     6- 6- 3  0
     ==================================
     PTS              3              2

    RIT would have taken all five categories with a win, but the Statesmen take the winning percentage and record against ranked teams plus head-to-head.

    Pool C

    There are two Pool C bids, which go to the top teams, based on the criteria. Here’s where the two scenarios come in. If Curry wins, then the top two teams based on the criteria look to be Wisconsin-River Falls and St. John’s. Other teams under consideration are Lake Forest and New England College.
    Here’s how they all stack up:

     Lake Forest vs Wis.-River Falls
     WIN      0.7143  0       0.7586  1
     SOS      9.6786  0      10.0690  1
     H2H     0- 2- 0  0      2- 0- 0  1
     COP    16- 4- 4  1     16- 5- 4  0
     RNK     6- 5- 3  0      7- 2- 2  1
     ===================================
     PTS              1               4
     
     New England vs Wis.-River Falls
     WIN      0.7200  0       0.7586  1
     SOS      9.3200  0      10.0690  1
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     RNK     5- 6- 1  0      7- 2- 2  1
     ===================================
     PTS              0               3
     
     St. John's vs Wis.-River Falls
     WIN      0.8696  1       0.7586  0
     SOS      9.6000  0      10.0690  1
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP    13- 3- 0  0      8- 0- 1  1
     RNK     4- 2- 0  0      7- 2- 2  1
     ===================================
     PTS              1               3

    River Falls wins the comparisons with all three other teams, so the Falcons get one of the Pool C bids for sure.

    Now, if Curry wins, the other Pool C bid will probably go to St. John’s but it will be close:

     Lake Forest vs St. John's
     WIN      0.7143  0       0.8696  1
     SOS      9.6786  1       9.6000  0
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     9- 0- 2  1     14- 3- 0  0
     RNK     6- 5- 3  0      4- 2- 0  1
     ===================================
     PTS              2               2
     
     New England vs St. John's
     WIN      0.7200  0       0.8696  1
     SOS      9.3200  0       9.6000  1
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     RNK     5- 6- 1  0      4- 2- 0  1
     ===================================
     PTS              0               3

    Lake Forest and St. John’s tie, but in the past, the NCAA committee has given more consideration to winning percentage and strength of schedule at times like this. The teams are very close in SOS, but St. John’s is way ahead in winning percentage.

    That’s assuming that Curry wins. If Wentworth wins and takes the automatic bid, how does Curry stack up against Wisconsin-River Falls, St. John’s and Lake Forest?

     Curry vs Wis.-River Falls
     WIN      0.8913  1       0.7586  0
     SOS     10.4348  1      10.0690  0
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     RNK     3- 2- 0  0      7- 2- 2  1
     ===================================
     PTS              2               1
     
     Curry vs Lake Forest
     WIN      0.8913  1       0.7143  0
     SOS     10.4348  1       9.6786  0
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     RNK     3- 2- 0  1      6- 5- 3  0
     ===================================
     PTS              3               0
     
     Curry vs St. John's
     WIN      0.8913  1       0.8696  0
     SOS     10.4348  1       9.6000  0
     H2H     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     COP     0- 0- 0  0      0- 0- 0  0
     RNK     3- 2- 0  0      4- 2- 0  1
     ===================================
     PTS              2               1

    This may change slightly based on a loss to Wentworth, but it looks like Curry tops all three, so that will bump St. John’s.

    So in terms of pairings, we have two scenarios:

    Scenario One

    Curry wins — The seedings should look like this:

    1W St. Norbert
    2W Wisconsin-River Falls
    3W St. John’s
    4W St. Thomas

    1E Middlebury
    2E Norwich
    3E Curry
    4E Plattsburgh
    5E Hobart

    Hobart will travel to Plattsburgh for the play-in game, with the winner going to Middlebury for the quarterfinals. Curry goes to Norwich for the other.

    In the West, St. Thomas will travel to St. Norbert, while UWRF will host St. John’s.

    Scenario Two

    Wentworth Wins — The seedings should look like this:

    1W St. Norbert
    2W Wisconsin-River Falls
    3W St. Thomas

    1E Middlebury
    2E Norwich
    3E Plattsburgh
    4E Curry
    5E Hobart
    6E Wentworth

    In this case, The play-in game is in the West, with UWRF hosting St. Thomas. The three Eastern quarterfinals will be Wentworth at Middlebury, Hobart at Norwich and Curry at Plattsburgh.

    Stay tuned for the official announcement later this evening.

    CSI: NCAA, The 2004 Edition

    By
    -

    Wow. What a great weekend of conference championship hockey. And what a tough job the NCAA Men’s D-III Hockey Committee had after the upsets of St. John’s and Curry on Sunday. Without a doubt, it left some fans and some teams disappointed, and scratching their heads just a bit.

    Once again this year, let’s do a little forensic investigation — what we like to call CSI: NCAA. Since none of us were privy to the conversations that went on about the selection this year’s teams, let’s see if we can piece together from the evidence what might have happened to choose the nine teams and decide the seeding.

    The first step in the selection of teams was easy for the committee. Six teams in conferences with automatic qualifiers won their tournaments: St. Norbert in the NCHA, Middlebury in the NESCAC, SUNYAC champ Plattsburgh, Norwich in the ECAC East, plus two upset winners, St. Thomas in the MIAC and Wentworth in the ECAC Northeast.

    With those six teams in place, that left three more teams for the committee to select: the single Pool B bid, for a team from the two leagues without autobids — the MCHA and ECAC West — and the two Pool C bids, for teams that didn’t win league titles in the six autobid conferences.

    The selection committee has five criteria on which to rank at-large teams: in-region winning percentage, in-region head-to-head results, in-region results against common opponents, the Strength of Schedule Index (SOS), and results against ranked teams. The NCAA has been publishing a regional ranking of teams since February 10, using those criteria.

    It appears that the criteria were followed explicitly — and correctly — by the committee.

    Once the ECAC Northeast championship was settled around 7:40 p.m. ET, each regional committee, comprised of coaches and athletic directors, was able to submit teams to consider from that region for at-large bids.

    First, let’s look at the Pool B bid. Because Marian of the MCHA was not ranked, we can surmise that the Sabres were not really considered for the Pool B bid, and that the comparison was made among the four ranked teams in the ECAC West: Hobart, Manhattanville, RIT, and Utica. Utica was ranked well below the other three, so let’s drop the Pioneers from the comparison.

    Hobart downed RIT for the ECAC West championship and beat RIT in three of the five criteria: winning percentage, head-to-head record, and record against ranked teams, giving the Statesmen the nod over the Tigers. Manhattanville and Hobart split the criteria, winning two comparisons each and splitting head to head, while RIT beat Manhattanville in four of the five categories, including head to head. Hobart gets the Pool B bid by having the best comparisons among the three.

    That leaves us with the most controversial picks, the two Pool C at-large bids.

    The top two teams in the east not receiving automatic qualifiers were Curry and New England College, while in the west, Wisconsin-River Falls and St. John’s were the top two submitted in that region.

    Each region submitted its two at-large candidates in order. River Falls beat St. John’s in three of the five comparisons: SOS, record against common opponents, and record against ranked teams. St. John’s had a slightly higher winning percentage, and the two teams did not compete this season. Thus, the west region’s two teams were River Falls and St. John’s in that order.

    The third ranked team not winning a conference in the west was likely Lake Forest. It lost four comparisons to River Falls, and split with St. John’s. With a better winning percentage and better record against ranked teams, the Johnnies would get a slight edge.

    In the east, Curry beat New England in three of five comparisons: winning percentage, SOS, and record against ranked teams. The Pilgrims were one of only three teams to beat Curry, and New England had a better record against common opponents. Both Curry and New England win comparisons against the next teams, Trinity and Oswego.

    Next came the part that probably took at least a couple of hours — hammering out the choices for Pool C. With each region presenting its top team, Curry was then compared to River Falls. Curry wins two comparisons, winning percentage at 0.8542 vs. 0.7586, and SOS at 10.2083 to 10.0690. River Falls wins one comparison, record against ranked teams at 7-2-2 against 3-2-0.

    Curry wins the first Pool C slot.

    Next, River Falls was compared against New England College. The Falcons win three comparisons to none for the Pilgrims. River Falls gets the other Pool C bid.

    What could possibly take so long to determine Pool C after those comparisons? Let’s match up Curry and St. John’s. While we saw already that St. John’s loses to River Falls in the five criteria, the Johnnies beat Curry in winning percentage and record against ranked teams, while Curry has the higher SOS. That circular comparison must have been quite a topic of discussion.

    Now a couple of what ifs for St. John’s:

    If St. John’s had been ranked higher than River Falls, St. John’s would have beaten out Curry for the first Pool C bid, and Curry would then have beaten River Falls for the second bid. But since St. John’s was not the top team in the west, Curry’s advantage in the comparisons over River Falls kept the Johnnies out.

    And had Curry won the ECAC Northeast, St. John’s would have received the other Pool C bid by beating New England, Oswego, and Trinity in comparisons. Unranked Wentworth was clearly the spoiler.

    With that, we have our field of nine teams.

    Next, the committee was charged with seeding the teams. A page of comparisons won, like the USCHO Men’s D-III National PairWise Rankings, generates this list:

    1. St. Norbert
    2. Middlebury
    3. Norwich
    4. Plattsburgh
    5. Wis.-River Falls
    7. Curry
    11. St. Thomas
    15. Hobart
    29. Wentworth

    (The numbers are those of the USCHO Men’s D-III National PairWise Rankings, not the NCAA’s.)

    Using the rankings above, the committee seeded the field like this: Since there is a 6-3 east-west split, the first-round game is held in the west region, to avoid flying teams in the first round. River Falls, as the higher seed, hosts St. Thomas on Wednesday, March 10, and the winner of that game visits St. Norbert on Saturday, March 13.

    In the east, the committee followed the rankings exactly when choosing seeds. Wentworth visits Middlebury, Hobart is at Norwich, and Curry travels to Plattsburgh in eastern quarterfinals on Saturday.

    By 10:30 p.m. or so, the committee had finished its work. For a second straight year, the selection committee followed the championship manual to the letter.

    Another case closed.

    D-III Women’s NCAA Field Announced

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    The 2004 NCAA Division III Women’s Tournament field was announced this evening with no real surprises.

    Manhattanville (23-2-2), the champions of the ECAC East, was awarded the No. 1 seed and the bye straight into the Frozen Four. Manhattanville’s home facility of Playland Ice Casino did not meet the NCAA criteria for hosting the Frozen Four, so Manhattanville will not get that typical associated benefit of the bye. The site of the Frozen Four will be announced after next weekend’s games.

    The Valiants will be playing the winner of the Wisconsin-Stevens Point (17-6-4) and Gustavus Adolphus (22-5-0) game next weekend. The NCHA and MIAC Champions will be playing at the home of the Gutsies.

    The other half of the bracket finds two teams each from the NESCAC and ECAC West. In one semifinal Middlebury (21-4-0) will host the two-time defending champion, and winner of the ECAC West Tournament, Elmira Soaring Eagles (18-7-2). The other semifinal will see Plattsburgh (20-5-2) host the NESCAC Champion Bowdoin (20-4-1).

    USCHO.com’s Bracketology predicted the entire field of participants as well as the correct matchups. The only difference in the actual field and USCHO’s Bracketology was the site of the Wisconsin-Stevens Point and Gustavus Adolphus game.

    NCAA Men’s Division III Field Announced

    USCHO Staff Report
    -

    The NCAA has announced the pairings for the 2004 Division III Men’s Hockey tournament. As correctly predicted by USCHO, the pairings are as follows:

    First-Round, Wednesday, March 10

    #3W St. Thomas at #2W Wisconsin-River Falls

    Quarterfinals, Saturday, March 13

    St. Thomas/Wisconsin-River Falls at #1W St. Norbert
    #6E Wentworth at #1E Middlebury
    #5E Hobart at #2E Norwich
    #4E Curry at #3E Plattsburgh
     

    Semifinals, Friday, March 19

    St. Thomas/Wisconsin-River Falls at St. Norbert winner vs. Curry at Plattsburgh winner
    Hobart at Norwich winner vs. Wentworth at Middlebury winner

    The site for the Division III Frozen Four will be announced after the completion of the quarterfinals. Odds strongly favor an Eastern location, based on three Eastern teams guaranteed a spot in the semifinals.

    USCHO will have reactions to the announced bids later on Monday.

    Bracketology: D-III Women

    By
    -

    It’s all said and done in Women’s Division III action. All that’s left is the NCAA Touranament. It’s time to take a look at who I believe will be in the NCAA Tournament.

    Let’s remind everyone that there are seven teams in the Division III Women’s Tournament.

    • There are four automatic bids — the winners of the conference tournaments for the ECAC East, ECAC West, MIAC and NESCAC. This is Pool A.

    • Then there is one bid for Pool B teams, those teams that are in conferences which do not get an automatic bid. In this case, it’s just the teams in the NCHA.

    • And then there are two bids for Pool C teams. These are teams in the conferences which have automatic bids, but did not get the automatic bid.

    With seven bids, we know that there are four teams already in the tournament. Those four teams are the Pool A teams. These four teams are:

    MIAC Champion — Gustavus Adolphus
    ECAC East Champion — Manhattanville
    ECAC West Champion — Elmira
    NESCAC Champion — Bowdoin

    The next step is to award the Pool B bid to the tournament.

    For this we take a look at the eligible teams. That is all the NCHA teams. Wisconsin-Stevens Point won the NCHA Championship, so that would lead us to believe that the Pointers should be awarded the Pool B bid. But that is not based on the criteria, so we have to look at the criteria.

    Per the NCAA, the criteria for selection are:

    • Win Percentage

    • Strength of Schedule per the NCAA’s table

    • Head-to-Head Results

    • Record Against Common Opponents Within Region

    • Record Against Ranked Teams Within Region

    You can take those five criteria and create a PairWise Comparison table with them.

    Ties are not broken by RPI as in the Division I PairWise, but rather by looking at all the criteria and then deciding — it’s subjective here.

    Let’s take a look at the PairWise Rankings for the West Region, since that is where the NCHA is. Most notably. Let’s look at the NCHA teams which are tournament eligible.

    Those three teams are the Pointers, Wisconsin-Superior and Wisconsin-River Falls. Per the rankings they are:

    2 Wisconsin-Stevens Point
    4 Wisconsin-Superior
    5 Wisconsin-River Falls

    Looking at the comparisons head-to-head between the three teams we see:

    Wis.-River Falls

    		Wis.-Stevens Point

    WIN

    		0.6481 0

    		0.7391 1

    SOS

    		9.4074 0

    		9.9565 1

    H2H

    		0- 4- 1 0

    		4- 0- 1 1

    COP

    		15- 5- 0 1

    		12- 5-1 0

    RNK

    		4- 8- 1 0

    		7- 4- 2 1

    PTS

    		1

    		4
    Wis.-River Falls

    		Wis.-Superior

    WIN

    		0.6481 0

    		0.7222 1

    SOS

    		9.4074 0

    		9.4074 0

    H2H

    		3- 1- 0 1

    		1- 3- 0 0

    COP

    		13- 6- 1 0

    		18- 3-1 1

    RNK

    		4- 8- 1 0

    		6- 5- 0 1

    PTS

    		1

    		3
    Wis.-Stevens Point

    		Wis.-Superior

    WIN

    		0.7391 1

    		0.7222 0

    SOS

    		9.9565 1

    		9.4074 0

    H2H

    		2- 3- 0 0

    		3- 2- 0 1

    COP

    		13- 1- 2 1

    		15- 4-0 0

    RNK

    		7- 4- 2 1

    		6- 5- 0 0

    PTS

    		4

    		1

    From these three comparisons it is easy to see that Stevens Point wins two comparisons, Superior wins one and River Falls wins none.

    Therefore we award the Pool B bid to Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

    We now have five of our seven teams in the tournament.

    It’s time to award the remaining two bids — the Pool C bids.

    Let’s now take a look at the current PairWise Rankings for Division III Women on a national scale. Let’s look at the Top 10 of the Rankings on a national scale.

    In rank order they are:

    1 Manhattanville
    1 Middlebury
    3 Plattsburgh
    4 Bowdoin
    5 Elmira
    6 Rensselaer
    7 Gustavus Adolphus
    7 Wisconsin-Stevens Point
    9 St. Thomas
    10 Wisconsin-Superior

    Let’s take out the teams that already have Pool A bids to the Tournament (Manhattanville, Bowdoin and Elmira), plus our choice for Pool B, Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

    1 Middlebury
    3 Plattsburgh
    6 Rensselaer
    9 St. Thomas
    10 Wisconsin-Superior

    We have to eliminate Wisconsin-Superior because they are not eligible for a Pool C bid because they are a Pool B team. That leaves four teams for two spots.

    Looking at the pure rankings themselves, Middlebury and Plattsburgh look like they will be the two teams, but let’s just confirm that with the comparisons.

    Let’s take all four teams and do the head-to-head.

    Middlebury

    		Plattsburgh

    WIN

    		0.8750 1

    		0.8400 0

    SOS

    		10.2500 0

    		10.4400 1

    H2H

    		2- 0- 0 1

    		0- 2- 0 0

    COP

    		10- 3- 0 0

    		7- 1- 1 1

    RNK

    		7- 3- 0 1

    		6- 3- 2 0

    PTS

    		3

    		2
    Middlebury

    		Rensselaer

    WIN

    		0.8750 1

    		0.7500 0

    SOS

    		10.2500 1

    		9.6111 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		5- 0- 0 0

    		2- 0- 0 0

    RNK

    		7- 3- 0 1

    		5- 3- 1 0

    PTS

    		3

    		0
    Middlebury

    		St. Thomas

    WIN

    		0.8750 1

    		0.7407 0

    SOS

    		10.2500 1

    		9.4815 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		1- 0- 0 1

    		0- 0- 1 0

    RNK

    		7- 3- 0 1

    		3- 4- 1 0

    PTS

    		4

    		0
    Plattsburgh

    		Rensselaer

    WIN

    		0.8400 1

    		0.7500 0

    SOS

    		10.4400 1

    		9.6111 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		5- 0- 1 1

    		4- 2- 1 0

    RNK

    		6- 3- 2 1

    		5- 3- 1 0

    PTS

    		4

    		0
    Plattsburgh

    		St. Thomas

    WIN

    		0.8400 1

    		0.7407 0

    SOS

    		10.4400 1

    		9.4815 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		0- 0- 1 0

    		0- 0- 1 0

    RNK

    		6- 3- 2 1

    		3- 4- 1 0

    PTS

    		3

    		0
    Rensselaer

    		St. Thomas

    WIN

    		0.7500 1

    		0.7407 0

    SOS

    		9.6111 1

    		9.4815 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    RNK

    		5- 3- 1 1

    		3- 4- 1 0

    PTS

    		3

    		0

    Looking at the comparisons, Middlebury wins three of the six, Plattsburgh two of the six and Rensselear the last one.

    So, that confirms our selections of Middlebury and Plattsburgh.

    Therefore our seven teams in the tournament are:

    1 Manhattanville
    1 Middlebury
    3 Plattsburgh
    4 Bowdoin
    5 Elmira
    7 Gustavus Adolphus
    7 Wisconsin-Stevens Point

    Now we need to break ties to determine the seedings.

    We have two ties here, one in the east and one in the west. Therefore we break the ties using the regional PairWise Rankings.

    Let’s break the Western tie with Gustavus Adolphus and Wisconsin-Stevens Point. Looking at the overall ranking, they each have six comparison wins. So let’s look at the individual comparison.

    Gustavus Adolphus

    		Wis.-Stevens Point

    WIN

    		0.8750 1

    		0.7391 0

    SOS

    		10.5833 1

    		9.9565 0

    H2H

    		1- 1- 0 0

    		1- 1- 0 0

    COP

    		7- 2- 0 0

    		6- 0- 2 1

    RNK

    		4- 3- 0 0

    		7- 4- 2 1

    PTS

    		2

    		2

    We have ourselves a tie. So we have to figure out who is the higher seed here.

    Remember that this is subjective. There is no weight to either of the five factors, so the tie could be broken by any of the five criteria. We head to out-of-region competition to take a look.

    The Gusties pick up a win over Colby and two losses to Bowdoin and Williams. The Pointers picked up a win over Williams, ties against Plattsburgh and Elmira and a loss to Middlebury. Breaking it down a little more, let’s take a look at out-of-region competition against teams already in the tournament.

    It becomes clear that the Pointers are 1-1-2 against those teams while Gustavus Adolphus is 0-2.

    I give Wisconsin-Stevens Point the sixth seed and Gustavus the seventh seed.

    Now let’s break the Manhattanville-Middlebury tie.

    Manhattanville

    		Middlebury

    WIN

    		0.8696 1

    		0.8636 0

    SOS

    		10.9130 1

    		10.1818 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		4- 1- 2 0

    		8- 3- 0 1

    RNK

    		9- 2- 2 1

    		6- 3- 0 0

    PTS

    		3

    		1

    The head-to-head comparison favors Manhattanville. Therefore we award Manhattanville the number one seed. Or do we?

    But if you go to the national comparison, the two are tied because of a switch with the winning percentage.

    Manhattanville

    		Middlebury

    WIN

    		0.8696 0

    		0.8750 1

    SOS

    		10.9130 1

    		10.2500 0

    H2H

    		0- 0- 0 0

    		0- 0- 0 0

    COP

    		4- 1- 2 0

    		8- 3- 0 1

    RNK

    		9- 2- 2 1

    		7- 3- 0 0

    PTS

    		2

    		2

    Let’s look at record against teams that are in the tournament. Manhattanville is 2-1-2, Middlebury is 4-3-0. That still makes me choose Manhattanville as the number one seed.

    The seven teams in the tournament by rank order are as follows:

    1 Manhattanville
    2 Middlebury
    3 Plattsburgh
    4 Bowdoin
    5 Elmira
    6 Wisconsin-Stevens Point
    7 Gustavus Adolphus

    Let’s now set our games.

    Based upon the NCAA Championship Handbook, group by geography. That means that we have one matchup of Wisconsin-Stevens Point and Gustavus Adolphus. Let’s set that matchup as one of the first-round games next weekend. Who gets to host? The higher seed, in this case Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

    Geographic proximity, as defined by the NCAA, is within 500 miles of one another. Therefore all five of the teams are in geographic proximity with each other.

    The closest matchups would be Bowdoin-Middlebury and Elmira-Plattsburgh, but since all teams are within 500 miles of each other, we will go with the matchups of Elmira at Middlebury and Bowdoin at Plattsburgh.

    I know what everyone is saying. The tournament champions have to go on the road, while the two losers of the championship games get to host? That’s what the numbers say.

    This also gives Manhattanville the bye and the right to host the Frozen Four.

    But, Manhattanville cannot host the Frozen Four. A first-round game, yes, but not the Frozen Four due to its facility at the Playland Ice Casino.

    Now the questions begs, do you take away Manhattanville’s bye? You can’t according to the criteria.

    But you have to find a place for the Frozen Four to be played. The next logical step is to award it to Middlebury. We can do that, but then again there is the possibility that Middlebury will also gets the Men’s Division III Frozen Four.

    But you can not make a decision based upon a possibility that Middlebury will win a first-round game and then be eligible to host the Frozen Four. Therefore we give it to Middlebury.

    We now have our NCAA Division III Women’s Ice Hockey Championship set.


    First Round
    Gustavus Adolphus at Wisconsin-Stevens Point
    Elmira at Middlebury
    Bowdoin at Plattsburgh

    Frozen Four
    at Middlebury
    Gustavus Adolphus/Wisconsin-Stevens Point vs. Manhattanville
    Elmira/Middlebury vs. Bowdoin/Plattsburgh

    The selections come out on Sunday, we’ll see how accurate our bracketology was.

    Crimson Anchor

    By Juan Martinez
    -

    One of the ECAC’s best-kept secrets continues to excel. Arguably the best defensive defenseman in the league, Harvard junior Ryan Lannon is the quiet anchor of a stingy blueline corps.

    Lannon

    Lannon

    A group of seven defensemen, six of whom, including Lannon, are NHL draft picks, they have combined to do the majority of the heavy lifting in leading Harvard to back-to-back shutouts — the first such feat for the Crimson since 1987.

    Friday, the sextet combined to hold Vermont to just 19 shots, including only 10 with 10 minutes to go in the teams’ ECAC playoff Game 1. This is the same UVM squad that scored six times last Friday against Harvard.

    “I thought we did a lot of good things defensively,” said Harvard coach Mark Mazzoleni.

    Especially on the penalty kill, where the Crimson held UVM without a quality scoring chance over six opportunities, including a crucial 5-on-3 early in the first period.

    “[That’s] a great opportunity to generate offense,” said Mazzoleni, “but it can work both ways — if you don’t generate offense, it takes away your momentum.”

    “We worked on shutting them down,” added Lannon. “We did not want to give them room to operate. We wanted it more than them.”

    While the return to health of rookie Dylan Reese and senior Dave McCulloch have been big boosts down the stretch, it is Lannon who has consistently been the best defender of the Harvard zone all season long — and among the best in the league since his rookie campaign.

    The Grafton, Mass., native is the most physical defenseman on the team, using the strength contained in his 6-foot-2, 220-pound frame to keep opponents’ top forwards off balance and away from the front of the net.

    “When you play defense,” explained Lannon, “one little detail can cost you a goal. You want to play aggressive, but not too aggressive. Every game from here on out is magnified.”

    Lannon walks that fine line better than most in the ECAC. Rarely out of position, he has a strong understanding of his role.

    “When I’m at my best,” he said, “my game is to keep it simple and by physical. I don’t have the quick hands and feet to step up into the offense. My job is to support the forwards, not lead the rush.

    “Being a veteran, it’s a big difference. We’ve been in this position before. Confidence is a big part of it. As a freshman you may be nervous in the first playoff game. Now it comes more naturally. I know my game and I don’t do too much.”

    On the contrary, Lannon does it all for the Crimson.

    Bracketology: D-III Women

    By
    -

    It’s crunch time. This is the final weekend of the Division III Women’s season and there is a lot on the line. With the NCAA selections coming this weekend, let’s do Bracketology: Division III Women’s Hockey style.

    What we’ll do here is take a look at who I think is in the tournament, and then possible scenarios with this weekend.

    Let’s remind everyone that there are seven teams in the Division III Women’s Tournament.

  • There are four automatic bids — the winners of the conference tournaments for the ECAC East, ECAC West, MIAC and NESCAC. This is Pool A.
  • One bid is for Pool B teams, those teams that are in conferences which do not get an automatic bid. In this case, it’s just the teams in the NCHA.
  • And then there are two bids for Pool C teams. These are teams in the conferences which have automatic bids, but did not get the automatic bid.

    There are five criteria used when selecting teams. These criteria are:

  • Win Percentage
  • Strength of Schedule per the NCAA’s table
  • Head-to-Head Results
  • Record Against Common Opponents Within Region
  • Record Against Ranked Teams Within Region

    You can take those five criteria and create a PairWise Comparison table with them.

    Ties are not broken by RPI as in the Division I PairWise, but rather by looking at all the criteria and then deciding — it’s subjective here.

    It’s time for a snapshot of what would happen if the season ended right now. What would the tournament look like?

    Let’s now take a look at the current PairWise Rankings for Division III women and its Top 9 teams.

    In rank order they are:

    1 Middlebury
    2 Plattsburgh
    3 Manhattanville
    4 Elmira
    5 Rensselaer
    6 Bowdoin
    7 Wisconsin-Stevens Point
    8 Gustavus Adolphus
    9 St. Thomas

    Let’s take the top seeds in the tournaments for each of the automatic bid conferences. Those are Middlebury, Plattsburgh, Manhattanville and St. Thomas. We’ll call these the four Pool A teams.

    (We now see our first twist to the process. St. Thomas is number nine and only seven make the tournament. Which means that somebody in the Top 7 will be left out of the tournament.)

    Now that we’ve chosen our Pool A teams, let’s choose the Pool B teams. In the top nine, there is only one eligible Pool B team: Wisconsin-Stevens Point, the NCHA champion. We give our Pool B bid to the Pointers.

    Now it’s time for Pool C. In our top nine, we have three Pool B teams: Elmira, Rensselaer and Bowdoin. We will take Elmira since they are above Rensselaer and Bowdoin. Now we’ll choose between Rensselaer and Bowdoin.

    They each have the same number of PairWise comparison wins at 14. So we have to break the tie by looking at the five criteria. They have not played one another this season, so let’s first see who wins the head-to-head between these two in the comparison criteria.

    Win percentage favors Bowdoin, but Rensselaer wins Strength of Schedule, Record Against Common Opponents In Region, and Record Against Ranked Teams in Region. Rensselaer wins the comparison 3-1. So we take Rensselaer over Bowdoin. The Engineers become the last team in the Tournament.

    Ranking our seven teams:

    1 Middlebury (A)
    2 Plattsburgh (A)
    3 Manhattanville (A)
    4 Elmira (C)
    5 Rensselaer (C)
    6 Wisconsin-Stevens Point (B)
    7 St. Thomas (A)

    Let’s set the field:

    Middlebury receives the bye to the semifinals and gets to host the Division III Women’s Frozen Four.

    The Bracket would then be:

    St. Thomas at Wisconsin-Stevens Point. The winner plays Middlebury in one semifinal

    Rensselaer at Plattsburgh, and Elmira at Manhattanville. The winners play each other in the other semifinal.

    What Will The Weekend Bring?

    Well, this is an interesting weekend coming up. The conference championships are taking place, meaning some results can change the whole scheme.

    There are some things that won’t change, and that is that the top four in the PairWise are definitely in the tournament, as is Wisconsin-Stevens Point. That makes five teams in the tournament and only two spots to be decided. One of those spots is the MIAC Pool A winner, so there is only one truly at-large spot left.

    Who gets left out is the question.

    The teams on the bubble, Elmira, Rensselaer and Bowdoin, could help themselves out with two wins this weekend. That would give them Pool A bids and a ticket to the tournament, leaving one of the number-one seeds out of the tournament.

    It comes down to the MIAC championship game for Gustavus and St. Thomas. The loser of that game is out.

    But let’s look at some scenarios individually, and at the bubble teams. Because I have already called Elmira as being in the tournament, the only real bubble teams are Rensselaer and Bowdoin.

    What would be disastrous for both teams is that if they do not win their tourneys and none of the top four win their tournaments. Both teams would then be out. Williams, New England College and Utica come to mind as possible spoilers here.

    If both teams lost their semifinal games what would happen? Rensselaer plays New England College. Rensselaer would still win the comparison 3-1, because it would still beat Bowdoin in the criteria despite the two losses.

    If Rensselaer won and Bowdoin lost, then Rensselaer would obviously be above Bowdoin. If Rensselaer lost and Bowdoin won, and then Bowdoin lost the NESCAC championship, what would happen?

    Tough call. Bowdoin would pick up a loss against a ranked team, as Rensselaer had. That criterion still goes Rensselaer’s way.

    The comparison in Common Opponents would also still go Rensselaer way, as the only team that could affect that in the NESCAC championship is Williams. The strength of schedule criteria would go to Rensselaer as well.

    So Rensselaer is in? Yes and no.

    Should Middlebury beat Bowdoin in this theoretical, then yes, Rensselaer would go. But should Williams defeat Bowdoin for the championship, the Rensselaer is out. That is because Elmira/Plattsburgh and now Middlebury would get the two Pool C bids.

    Should both teams win, then lose in the title game, the numbers still favor Rensselaer. If it’s Middlebury-Bowdoin in the championship game, Rensselaer wins the comparison. If it’s Williams-Bowdoin in the championship, we have the same situation as above.

    If both teams won their semifinals and only one of them won the championship, the other would automatically be out because there are no more Pool C spots left.

    Let’s turn our attention to the bye now, looking at the top four teams.

    Middlebury — Two wins for Middlebury could assure it the bye. It would help tremendously if the Panthers played Bowdoin for the championship and won. That could solidify them for the number-one seed as they would switch the comparison with Plattsburgh by winning the Ranked Teams criterion. Let’s examine that in a little more detail.

    Here is the current comparison:

    Middlebury

    		Plattsburgh

    WIN

    		0.9000 1 pt

    		0.8810 0 pt

    SOS

    		10.200 0 pt

    		10.714 1 pt

    H2H

    		2- 0- 0 1 pt

    		0- 2- 0 0 pt

    COP

    		7- 2- 0 0 pt

    		6- 0- 0 1 pt

    RNK

    		5- 2- 0 0 pt

    		6- 2- 1 1 pt

    PTS

    		2

    		3

    Let’s look at the Ranked Opponents line, the last one. Two wins over Williams and Bowdoin would give Middlebury a 7-2 mark there. Plattsburgh with two wins would be 7-2-1, as Neumann is not ranked but Elmira is. That criteria now switches over to Middlebury, giving it the head-to-head comparison win. Two wins by both teams does not affect win percentage, head-to-head or common opponents.

    And Plattsburgh has already won the strength of schedule criterion, so if that switched, it would make no difference; Middlebury wins the comparison.

    Plattsburgh — As noted above, two wins may not be enough to get the bye if Middlebury wins two. Plattsburgh needs Middlebury to lose to continue to win the head-to-head comparison between the two teams.

    Manhattanville — The Valiants’ chances hinge on losses by Plattsburgh and Middlebury. It is almost impossible for the Valiants to get the bye should either of those two win two games this weekend. They lose the comparison to Plattsburgh and are tied with Middlebury. Nothing can change those comparisons unless they both lose. It did not help the Valiants that Mass.-Boston upset RIT in the ECAC East quarterfinals. They would rather have played New England College, a ranked team.

    Elmira — Elmira has a tough go. Even if all three teams above them lost in the semifinals, it would be highly unlikely that the Soaring Eagles could jump to the top seed. The Frozen Four will have a new home for the first time.

    Well, there you go — a quick look at what the field would like today and some of the possibilities after this weekend.

    We’ll be back Sunday afternoon with a final look, including the predicted field for the NCAA Division III Women’s Championship.

    • Between the Lines, March 4, 2004

    By Adam Wodon
    -

    What a weekend we’ve got coming up. You can’t be a college hockey fan and not be looking forward to this. Two major league titles are on the line, NCAA berths are out there to be had — or lost — and the ECAC playoffs begin.

    In Hockey East, things are settled for the top spot (Boston College), but there is some intrigue elsewhere. If Boston University loses at home to New Hampshire tonight (certainly possible), and to UNH again on Friday, that would open the door for Northeastern to actually make the playoffs as the 8th-place team. Northeastern has a pair of games with Massachusetts, which has struggled in the second half, and is another interesting story — to see if it can right the ship enough to make a strong playoff run and even its first NCAA berth. But if Northeastern made the playoffs, it would be a seismic happening. For one, it would mean bumping out BU, which has never happened. Second, it might be a last reprieve for coach Bruce Crowder, who seems to be on the chopping block right now.

    Michigan State's Jim Slater is a Hobey candidate, and he hopes to lead the Spartans into first place this weekend.

    Michigan State’s Jim Slater is a Hobey candidate, and he hopes to lead the Spartans into first place this weekend.

    In the CCHA, Notre Dame’s sweep of Michigan last weekend has opened the door for Miami and Michigan State to make a run at the title. Miami was in good position until it faltered a bit, starting with its own pair of weekend losses at the hands of Michigan. But now the Red Hawks are back within two points. The Spartans are four back, but have destiny in their hands with a weekend series against the Wolverines (the Saturday game is at Joe Louis Arena). It’s a tall order for Michigan State, but it will be exciting. And the Spartans need the games for NCAA purposes on top of it all. Miami, meanwhile, has its own exciting home-and-home with Ohio State, which has its own issues to deal with. Alaska-Fairbanks and Notre Dame are just one point behind the fourth-place Buckeyes, and, again, there are NCAA implications.

    North Dakota gave second-place Minnesota-Duluth an unceremonius “not so fast” hand to the face last weekend, sweeping the series in Duluth, and thus taking all five meetings against the teams this year. These were great college hockey games, however, with the normally wide-open teams playing low scoring games. For one, there was a lot on the line, and for two, the goaltenders, North Dakota’s Jake Brandt and UMD’s Isaac Reichmuth, are on the top of their game. With North Dakota now in the lead by two points and hosting Michigan Tech, odds are the Sioux have first place. Duluth plays two at Wisconsin, which has a lot on the line as well, making the task for the Bulldogs pretty difficult. But they still have plenty to look forward to in the WCHA and NCAA tournament. … This conference is so knock-down drag out, though, that just about every matchup has major standings and NCAA implications. Colorado College is at Denver with home ice and NCAA berths on the line. St. Cloud State is at Minnesota for a pair, with the same issues hanging out there, and both teams in need to get themselves back on the right track. … Of course, it’s not really fair to say that a couple of WCHA losses in a row means a team is on the wrong track. The WCHA is so ridiculously difficult right now, that there really is no shame in losing games here. Just ask Minnesota, which loses its captain for a bit and all of a sudden is barely .500 (13-12-1), yet is still ranked seventh in the nation.

    And the ECAC is sure to be wild this weekend as well. Other than the matchup between No. 5 seed RPI and No. 12 Princeton, there doesn’t figure to be any clear cut favorites. No. 11 Vermont just defeated No. 6 Harvard last Friday, 6-4, so that’s no gimme for the Crimson, who are dying to rectify an extremely disappointing season, a la two years ago. And with five teams separated by three points at the top of the standings, there are no gimmes to Albany either.

    We love this game.

    Holy Smokes

    Who knew there were so many Holy Cross hockey fans? And they all seemingly wrote to me last week, telling me how incredibly dumb I was to even suggest that Quinnipiac may be anywhere close to Holy Cross academically. According to one gentleman, I had better be a Quinnipiac alum, because if so, he could respect me sticking up for my school. Otherwise, I just must be an idiot.

    OK, uncle. Call me an idiot. Holy Cross is a fine academic institution. I’ve seen the statistics. My eyes have seen the glory. It is superior to Quinnipiac.

    So much for a throwaway line that was just trying to be nice to Quinnipiac — so all their alums wouldn’t write to me and tell me how I was disparaging their fine academic institution.

    Let’s understand something, though. It just doesn’t matter. OK, so Holy Cross is a superior institution. It wasn’t the point of that whole section. It doesn’t matter if Holy Cross is a combination of Harvard and Oxford. It won’t be the basis for them getting into the ECAC.

    Geography, academics and its Patriot League relationship with Colgate are all in Holy Cross’ favor. But if those are the reasons the ECAC uses for bringing them in, they just shouldn’t bother with a 12th team.

    The point was that Quinnipiac is good enough academically to fit into the ECAC, and is overwhelmingly superior in their commitment to a strong hockey program. If the ECAC decides it wants a 12th team, I would think that should be an overwhelming factor. Although, as I said, the groundswell is to leave it at 11 for now.

    But let’s throw in that Quinnipiac has a relationship with the New England Sports Network (NESN). That’s a heckuva lot more than can be said for the rest of the ECAC right now. (Keep reading.)

    TV Guide

    CSTV broadcast two ECAC games this season, out of the goodness of its own heart, apparently, since the ECAC never actually announced a relationship with the network. This despite the fact that CSTV is falling over itself to get college hockey games on televison, and every other conference signed and announced a deal years ago.

    logos/conf-ec.gif

    Meanwhile, all season long, the ECAC tournament Championship Game was on CSTV’s schedule, also supposedly part of this phantom deal. All of a sudden, it’s March 4th — heck, still 15 days from the tournament, plenty of time, eh? — and the ECAC sends out a press release saying that the games will instead be televised on CN8, a regional cable station owned by Comcast and shown on Comcast systems throughout New England and the Mid-Atlantic.

    What in the world happened? If we only knew. But this has all the makings of another Phil Buttafuoco-led ECAC fiasco.

    Remember, this is the league that reneged on a handshake agreement with Lake Placid, and never returned its phone calls for months. Buttafuoco has a history of fracturing business relationships through neglect. Did this happen here? God only knows. But if it did, so help us all if it’s not the last straw for ECAC teams to bolt from this boondoggle.

    Somehow, the games will probably be picked up by some satellite entity or another, allowing the games to be seen by people outside CN8’s coverage area.

    (By the way, this has nothing to do with CN8, a fine channel which I’ve actually worked for in the past, and who I’m sure will do a very good job with the broadcasts.)

    But in the meantime, what happened with an entity that the ECAC desperately needs to have in its corner? I’m sure the ECAC will say there was financial considerations, but why then was the game on CSTV’s schedule all year? And don’t you need to see the forest for the trees here?

    If there was any conference more in need of the relationship with CSTV, it’s the ECAC, which has no other regular TV contract. Here’s a place that’s actually dying to have you. And not just some nothing place, but a place with the first-ever national college hockey game of the week. The same place that has deals with all the other big boys. And because the big boys already have their local deals, here’s an opportunity for you to sign on with this place and become their highlight game on the biggest weekend of the season pre-NCAAs.

    And then it doesn’t happen. Why? I don’t know. Something.

    “I know he’s working his butt off, but I don’t know what’s in his mindframe that makes him say, ‘I’m going to ignore [these people] again,” says one source close to the league. “That’s the problem I could never figure out with the guy.

    “He doesn’t like confrontation, and that’s part of why he doesn’t return calls that could be a little sticky. … He has great ideas. He absolutely understands what needs to happen. The problem is how he executes them, and the relationships he ends up destroying along the way.”

    The league deserves better than this.

    This is a league filled with great schools, great fans, great coaches, great players. It has character. It has tradition. Because of the nature of athletics, it may never again reach its heights of the ’70s and ’80s, but ECAC teams can still be competitive every night. And do it within the confines of much higher academic standards than anywhere else.

    In no other sport, except lacrosse, can Ivy League teams compete on this kind of level. These programs should be given a medal and saluted by every sports fan in North America.

    At the same time, however, it continues to associate itself with this albatross in Centerville.

    The ECAC hockey schools need to reinvent themselves so that we can go back to talking about how great they are, and not how much their progress is hampered by inept leadership.

    There is more to say, but it can wait, because, frankly, I personally don’t want to distract any more from what is set up to be another outstanding ECAC tournament.

    Check, Please

    And people wonder why coaches sometimes go off on officials. You don’t think Mike Schafer’s tirade following a game against Rensselaer in January had any effect? Try these numbers on for size.

    Schafer

    Schafer

    Cornell’s coach was upset with referree Joel Dupree, calling him out for failing to “protect his players” from a number of hits from behind. One led to a shoulder injury to Cornell power forward Shane Hynes. Following the game, Schafer went on a three and a half minute tirade, and was subsequently suspended for the team’s next game.

    Don’t think for a second, however, that Schafer didn’t know what he was doing. He didn’t know at the time, of course, whether it would have any effect, but we can now see that it did.

    In 44 ECAC games up to and including Schafer’s comments, there were six hit from behind penalties called. That’s one every 7.3 games.

    In the 63 ECAC games from that point forward, there were 31 hit from behind penalties called. One every 2.0 games.

    Pretty sad that it takes a three-and-a-half-minute profanity-laced tirade to get something accomplished, but sometimes it does.

    Close Call

    With five points separating three teams at the top of the ECAC standings, and numerous other close bunches throughout the 12-team league, Saturday’s regular-season finale was filled with intrigue. Teams were calling each other’s press boxes, getting up-to-the-minute updates on where games stood with teams close to them in the standings. Sports Information Directors racing down to the benches to relay scores to coaches. It was happening all over the league.

    In one place, however, it appears someone got a little overzealous.

    Union’s game with Princeton was going unusually long. Meanwhile, Cornell’s game with Clarkson was also going long, because it was on local television. It started seven minutes later than all other games, and included TV timeouts. Nevertheless, that game was pretty close to conclusion as Princeton tied Union in the game’s closing minute.

    It seems that Union’s coaches were informed that Clarkson was losing, but didn’t get the update that the game was over. Union entered the night a point behind Clarkson for the final home-ice spot, but if the teams finished even, Union won the tiebreaker. There was still a chance Clarkson could tie, though, so Union’s coaches had to go for the win. So Union pulled its goalie in overtime. Union scored, won the game, and came in eighth place, the final home-ice spot, one point ahead of Clarkson. Brilliant.

    Except that Union didn’t need to win the game.

    According to information released before the game, if Clarkson and Union finished in a tie for eighth, then Union would win the tiebreaker based on record against the Top 4 in the league. Union coaches never got the new information that Clarkson had officially lost. If Princeton had scored an empty-net overtime goal, Union would be playing at Clarkson this weekend, instead of vice-versa.

    This is why it pays sometimes to be a stats geek.

    When the Balls Come Tumbling Down

    I’m all for tradition. I’m even for dumb tradition, as long as there was a point, at some point. But Dartmouth’s “tradition” of throwing tennis balls on the ice when it faces Princeton at home, is right up there in the Hall of Dumbth.

    This year, fans were implored not to do it by coach Bob Gaudet and the administration. It happened anyway, and continued to happen later in the game, to the tune of two penalties.

    This is not so much the problem. Cornell throws fish on the ice for Harvard. It has gotten a penalty before, thanks to some dumb freshman. That shouldn’t be held against the rest of the crowd.

    It’s the way it got started that makes it silly.

    Princeton fans, as they were, used to throw tennis balls onto the ice for the first goal of every game. When that started, I don’t know, but it was happening in the early ’90s. Princeton coach Don Cahoon, who took over in 1991, hated that. After a few years, he managed to put an end to it.

    Somewhere in there, however, Dartmouth fans, as they were, took personal offense to this. Why they thought it was personal, I don’t know. But the next time Princeton came to Dartmouth, they were bombarded with tennis balls and oranges (Princeton, orange, get it?) after the Big Green scored their first goal. All this ever seemed to accomplish was to delay the game and take momentum away from Dartmouth. But Princeton was befuddled, wondering what they did to deserve this treatment. You know those crazy Princeton fans, though … enough to stir the passion in anyone.

    So the whole genesis is somewhat inane, which is reason enough to kill it. At least Cornell’s fish tradition had a point. Harvard fans, mocking Cornell’s agriculture school, tied a live chicken to the goalpost during a game. Cornell fans responded with the fish to mock Harvard’s proximity to the bay. And on it went. Sometimes things get too out of hand, though, and times change, and now Cornell officials are trying to stop the fish.

    It’s like with the Detroit Red Wings. The octopus thing was rooted in some logic … needing to win eight games for a Stanley Cup. Unfortunately, just like with a lot of other things, with increased media coverage over the last couple decades, the octopus thing became chic. Soon, hundreds of people were doing it at Wings games, after every goal. It got to be too much. End of tradition.

    Day Late, Dollar Short

    For years, higher-seeded teams have often been forced to play NCAA games in the home arena of lower-seeded teams. Most recently, this has often happened with Michigan, which has defeated higher-seeded St. Cloud State and Colorado College in recent years, in Ann Arbor. This always leads to an outcry, even though there is nothing shady about the whole thing.

    But with the turn to a 16-team, four-region tournament, more teams are getting the chance to host regionals. And turn the tables. And one of the responses to the conspiracy theorists has always been, “Don’t worry, such and such a team will be getting a chance to host soon too.”

    One such team is Colorado College, which put in for and received a bid for this year’s West Regional. Turnabout is fair play, right?

    Well … the best laid plans. Gearing up for years to finally return the favor, the Tigers look like they won’t even make the NCAAs this year.

    How’s that for a kick in the pants?

    Between the Lines

    By Adam Wodon
    -

    CSTV broadcast two ECAC games this season, out of the goodness of its own heart, apparently, since the ECAC never actually announced a relationship with the network. This despite the fact that CSTV is falling over itself to get college hockey games on televison, and every other conference signed and announced a deal years ago.

    Meanwhile, all season long, the ECAC tournament Championship Game was on CSTV’s schedule, also supposedly part of this phantom deal. All of a sudden, it’s March 4th — heck, still 15 days from the tournament, plenty of time, eh? — and the ECAC sends out a press release saying that the games will instead be televised on CN8, a regional cable station owned by Comcast and shown on Comcast systems throughout New England and the Mid-Atlantic.

    What in the world happened? If we only knew. But this has all the makings of another Phil Buttafuoco-led ECAC fiasco.

    Remember, this is the league that reneged on a handshake agreement with Lake Placid, and never returned its phone calls for months. Buttafuoco has a history of fracturing business relationships through neglect. Did this happen here? God only knows. But if it did, so help us all if it’s not the last straw for ECAC teams to bolt from this boondoggle.

    Somehow, the games will probably be picked up by some satellite entity or another, allowing the games to be seen by people outside CN8’s coverage area.

    (By the way, this has nothing to do with CN8, a fine channel which I’ve actually worked for in the past, and who I’m sure will do a very good job with the broadcasts.)

    But in the meantime, what happened with an entity that the ECAC desperately needs to have in its corner? I’m sure the ECAC will say there was financial considerations, but why then was the game on CSTV’s schedule all year? And don’t you need to see the forest for the trees here?

    If there was any conference more in need of the relationship with CSTV, it’s the ECAC, which has no other regular TV contract. Here’s a place that’s actually dying to have you. And not just some nothing place, but a place with the first-ever national college hockey game of the week. The same place that has deals with all the other big boys. And because the big boys already have their local deals, here’s an opportunity for you to sign on with this place and become their highlight game on the biggest weekend of the season pre-NCAAs.

    And then it doesn’t happen. Why? I don’t know. Something.

    “I know he’s working his butt off, but I don’t know what’s in his mindframe that makes him say, ‘I’m going to ignore [these people] again,” says one source close to the league. “That’s the problem I could never figure out with the guy.

    “He doesn’t like confrontation, and that’s part of why he doesn’t return calls that could be a little sticky. … He has great ideas. He absolutely understands what needs to happen. The problem is how he executes them, and the relationships he ends up destroying along the way.”

    The league deserves better than this.

    This is a league filled with great schools, great fans, great coaches, great players. It has character. It has tradition. Because of the nature of athletics, it may never again reach its heights of the ’70s and ’80s, but ECAC teams can still be competitive every night. And do it within the confines of much higher academic standards than anywhere else.

    In no other sport, except lacrosse, can Ivy League teams compete on this kind of level. These programs should be given a medal and saluted by every sports fan in North America.

    At the same time, however, it continues to associate itself with this albatross in Centerville.

    The ECAC hockey schools need to reinvent themselves so that we can go back to talking about how great they are, and not how much their progress is hampered by inept leadership.

    There is more to say, but it can wait, because, frankly, I personally don’t want to distract any more from what is set up to be another outstanding ECAC tournament.

    Check, Please

    And people wonder why coaches sometimes go off on officials. You don’t think Mike Schafer’s tirade following a game against Rensselaer in January had any effect? Try these numbers on for size.

    Cornell’s coach was upset with referree Joel Dupree, calling him out for failing to “protect his players” from a number of hits from behind. One led to a shoulder injury to Cornell power forward Shane Hynes. Following the game, Schafer went on a three and a half minute tirade, and was subsequently suspended for the team’s next game.

    Don’t think for a second, however, that Schafer didn’t know what he was doing. He didn’t know at the time, of course, whether it would have any effect, but we can now see that it did.

    In 44 ECAC games up to and including Schafer’s comments, there were six hit from behind penalties called. That’s one every 7.3 games.

    In the 63 ECAC games from that point forward, there were 31 hit from behind penalties called. One every 2.0 games.

    Pretty sad that it takes a three-and-a-half-minute profanity-laced tirade to get something accomplished, but sometimes it does.

    Close Call

    With five points separating three teams at the top of the ECAC standings, and numerous other close bunches throughout the 12-team league, Saturday’s regular-season finale was filled with intrigue. Teams were calling each other’s press boxes, getting up-to-the-minute updates on where games stood with teams close to them in the standings. Sports Information Directors racing down to the benches to relay scores to coaches. It was happening all over the league.

    In one place, however, it appears someone got a little overzealous.

    Union’s game with Princeton was going unusually long. Meanwhile, Cornell’s game with Clarkson was also going long, because it was on local television. It started seven minutes later than all other games, and included TV timeouts. Nevertheless, that game was pretty close to conclusion as Princeton tied Union in the game’s closing minute.

    It seems that Union’s coaches were informed that Clarkson was losing, but didn’t get the update that the game was over. Union entered the night a point behind Clarkson for the final home-ice spot, but if the teams finished even, Union won the tiebreaker. There was still a chance Clarkson could tie, though, so Union’s coaches had to go for the win. So Union pulled its goalie in overtime. Union scored, won the game, and came in eighth place, the final home-ice spot, one point ahead of Clarkson. Brilliant.

    Except that Union didn’t need to win the game.

    According to information released before the game, if Clarkson and Union finished in a tie for eighth, then Union would win the tiebreaker based on record against the Top 4 in the league. Union coaches never got the new information that Clarkson had officially lost. If Princeton had scored an empty-net overtime goal, Union would be playing at Clarkson this weekend, instead of vice-versa.

    This is why it pays sometimes to be a stats geek.

    This Week in Women’s Hockey: March 4, 2004

    By
    -

    No matter how long sports are played, watched or coached, the next week is never quite like any other. Many of women’s college hockey’s seniors, even as they’re ritually honored in their final home games of the regular season, nonetheless have plenty of new competitive experiences forthcoming. Even if the seniors were to play forever, they would still find they have a lot left to learn.

    For some, these last few weeks have already been marked by unprecedented achievements. Minnesota’s seniors, after living through three straight Minnesota-Duluth NCAA titles, earned their first three-win season over the Bulldogs and likely dealt the death blow to a UMD Frozen Four run. Dartmouth’s seniors became the first to go undefeated against Harvard and Brown during the same regular season in recent history.

    For the most senior of the seniors on each side of the Harvard-Dartmouth rivalry, this past weekend brought a tremendous amount of adversity in the midst of unprecedented achievement. Harvard’s Angela Ruggiero and Dartmouth’s Lydia Wheatley are the only players left on each roster who could describe Dartmouth’s 3-2 overtime win over Harvard in the 2000 ECAC semifinals first-hand. As experienced as they are, neither could anticipate the misfortune that befell them this past weekend.

    Like the stuff of Greek tragedies, both players proved most vulnerable because of their feet. Ruggiero, when her foot struck the head of Dartmouth’s Katie Weatherston’s on Friday night, earned the first disqualification of her hockey career in the biggest game of the season. Wheatley, who sustained a small fracture in her foot later in the weekend, might have just played the last games of her career.

    After an emotional weekend, Ruggiero will be back in action for No. 3 Harvard this weekend against Yale and No. 9 Princeton with an ECAC title on the line. After back-to-back seasons of ACL injuries, Wheatley finds her foot in a cast, and there’s only a slim chance of her returning for the ECAC final rounds.

    The Penalty

    Though hundreds may have left Dartmouth’s 3-2 win at Thompson Arena on Friday believing that Angela Ruggiero maliciously kicked Katie Weatherston in the head during the second period, neither Harvard coach Katey Stone, Dartmouth coach Mark Hudak, nor Ruggiero herself thinks there’s any evidence of intent.

    By Ruggiero’s account, Weatherston fell on the ground after attempting to take the puck from her. As Weatherston lay on her back, her legs wrapped Ruggiero’s foot. The first time Ruggiero pulled up to skate away, she was pulled back by Weatherston’s grip. As Ruggiero pulled up the second time, Weatherston released her grip and lifted her head at the last possible moment. The result is what everyone saw.

    “It was completely accidental. The second I hit her and started skating away, I turned around to apologize to see if she was okay,” Ruggiero said. “Hockey is a game, and obviously I’d never want someone to be injured in the process of playing a game.”

    Ruggiero never got to apologize on the ice, because she was crosschecked by Dartmouth’s Alana BreMiller in retaliation. Ruggiero sought Weatherston again during the postgame reception to offer an apology but failed to find her. She did speak with Hudak and Dartmouth sophomore Tiffany Hagge so that they could pass an apology along to Weatherston.

    “I find it very tough to believe that Angela maliciously did something like that,” Hudak said. “She certainly struck her in the head with the skate, but whether it was just reckless or her trying to get away, I don’t know, and I really can’t tell from the tape.”

    “As a coach and an educator, you have to be an optimist and you have to believe in the best part of people. Angela spoke with me after the game in private and apologized, and she didn’t offer an excuse or anything. She said she was really sorry and it was certainly not her intent to do that, and I have to believe her. I’ve spoken with Angela before on the ice and I’ve watched her play and I think she’s a good person.”

    Furthermore, Hudak speculated that his players could sympathize with Ruggiero’s situation.

    “I think the team was certainly upset at the time, but at the same time, they’re all athletes and they’ve all done things in their careers which I am sure they wished they hadn’t, which I’ve got to believe is Angela’s position right now,” Hudak said. “I don’t think anyone on the team is sitting there thinking she’s a bad person or was trying to injure somebody. I think they look at it as an unfortunate incident.”

    Ruggiero said she holds the same respect for Dartmouth. It was tough for her to miss the opportunity to close out that game.

    “It’s fun, that’s why you play hockey, when you know it’s going to be a one-goal game and have to capitalize on their mistakes and make the least mistakes possible for your team,” Ruggiero said. “Those are the games you want to play in and as an athlete you want to be challenged as much as possible. And Dartmouth always brings their best game to us so all the little things we’ve worked on all year long are going to pay off in those situations — well, hopefully they’ll pay off. I love to play against Dartmouth.”

    As Ruggiero was being removed from the ice, she spoke with the officials to clarify that the contact was unintentional, but her words could do nothing to keep her in the game. Even if the officials were to agree there was no intent, she still had no case by the book.

    In the official NCAA rulebook, there is no mention of intent being a requirement for the kicking penalty, which always results in a disqualification — an immediate ejection and one-game suspension for first-time offenders. In fact, the rules state that a kicking penalty should be given even if a kicking gesture is made towards a player that results in no contact.

    A point of emphasis this year is to show zero tolerance for contact to the head. Ruggiero can accept that.

    “Whenever there’s contact to the head, I realize and understand that the referees have to protect the players on the ice,” Ruggiero said. “I’ll take the disqualification if that’s what they think is necessary.”

    Earning a disqualification was an entirely new experience for Ruggiero. She had earned two game misconducts earlier this season in the final minutes, but never any penalty this serious. In fact, those have been the only three ejections of her entire playing career. She lasted this long without an ejection despite having once played for a squirt team where all but five players were unable to dress due to various punishments. She was one of the five who played.

    Perhaps the toughest part for Ruggiero was that she was unaware of her one-game suspension until she started to dress for the Vermont game on Saturday. Stone said she had talked to Ruggiero the night before and was under the impression that she knew, which made the situation all the more unfortunate.

    Another difficult aspect of this third ejection for Ruggiero is that she has faced questions regarding her character that she’s never had to answer before. This is the same Angela Ruggiero who was one of three Patty Kazmaier finalists last year and the same Angela Ruggiero that during the 2002 Olympic Winter Games was one of eight U.S. athletes elected to carry the American flag that survived the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. She maintains that her teammates and the opponents who know her stand by her. Her coach has always supported her.

    “It’s certainly not part of a larger problem,” Stone said of Ruggiero’s three ejections. “Angela Ruggiero has played her best hockey at Harvard University this year. She has played more of the way I want her to play than ever. She’s under control. She manages the game well.

    “We would not be where we are if it hadn’t been largely for the way Angela Ruggiero played for us. There’s no question about it. We’re a very young team. And she’s a great leader.”

    Stone said that Ruggiero has come a long way in college hockey, since she was a freshman and really didn’t know how to play with athletes who weren’t as strong. Ruggiero drew 74 minutes of penalties her freshman season. She had not come close to matching that total until the events of these past several weeks, an increase that Stone attributes to Ruggiero having to enter another period of learning — one where she has to deal with the reality that she’s always being watched.

    Ruggiero’s worst game this season was a 6-3 loss to Princeton in which Ruggiero drew four penalties in just the first period. By the final minute, she had earned 22 penalty minutes and a game misconduct.

    “She’s playing the best hockey she’s ever played in college hockey this year,” Stone said. “She’s the most dominant player, and with that comes a heavy burden and a huge bulls-eye on your back. So now there’s even another growth period here where she has to understand those hurdles even more and adjust her game to suit the things that are happening on the ice. The advantage is going to the less talented, less skilled, less strong player in this league right now and I think that’s unfortunate.”

    Stone calls Ruggiero the strongest, best-conditioned player there is. She observes that most other players would have fallen at some point had they been leg-locked by Weatherston or crosschecked by BreMiller.

    “I think it’s typical of our players that we’re trying to get them as strong and fit as possible,” Stone said. “They’re not diving. They’re not dropping to draw penalties. They’re trying to stay on their feet and play hard. That’s how we’re going to do it. If that means we don’t get to draw as many penalties as other teams, that’s okay. I prefer to play that way.”

    Stone did not take issue with the disqualification, and she noted that the level of officiating is headed in the right direction.

    And she stands by her player.

    “She’s a tremendous ambassador for the game of women’s hockey.” Stone said of Ruggiero. “She’s bright, she’s articulate, and she’s kind. No one asked her to go up to that reception and apologize. That’s just a testament to her character. Kids don’t do that kind of stuff. She’s a mature kid.”

    Another Tough Break

    While Ruggiero has always inspired the Harvard team, Lydia Wheatley has been a constant source of inspiration for Dartmouth. In her junior year, her season ended after 10 games due to an ACL tear. In her senior year, her season ended after two games, when she tore her other ACL. Where others might have quit, she kept pressing onward for a what has been an outstanding fifth season.

    Wheatley has played in all 27 games this season, and her presence was crucial to Dartmouth’s success because of the team’s constant national team departures and frequent injuries. Wheatley was typically the player who got the call to fill in on the top two lines when necessary.

    In the weeks prior to her first ACL tear, Wheatley had been a dominant player. She had 4 goals and 8 assists in just 10 games of a junior season where she was finally coming into her own.

    One of her greatest starring roles came in an early season game against Brown, a team Dartmouth would battle blow-for-blow with all season for the ECAC title and a Frozen Four berth. Dartmouth had scored to go ahead 4-3 late in that game, when Wheatley took the puck straight off the faceoff, blew down ice and circled in front for a critical insurance goal just seconds after the fourth Dartmouth goal.

    It has never been easy for Wheatley to be the player she was before the knee injuries. In Dartmouth’s 7-3 loss to Minnesota in early February, she came up short on more than one breakaway chance that showed just a shadow of the Wheatley of the past.

    But Wheatley came to play this past weekend. She was one several Dartmouth players that could always bring her best for Harvard and Brown. Her first career goal as a freshman gave Dartmouth a commanding 3-1 first period lead the night Harvard raised its national championship banner, and the Big Green went on to stun the defending champions 5-4 in overtime. This past Friday against Harvard, she was there to redirect the puck at the crease on the power play for a 2-0 second period lead.

    “Lydia has been a real leader in that program,” said Stone, a most respectful opponent.

    On Saturday, Wheatley’s redirection tied up Brown, 1-1. The Big Green went on to win both games by a 3-2 margin and provide Dartmouth with its third Ivy title in four seasons on Wheatley’s last senior weekend.

    “The whole season has been a continued improvement for her getting right back into shape,” Hudak said of Wheatley. “This past weekend we saw a Wheatley that was really reaching for her potential.”

    That makes her broken foot this past weekend all the more upsetting for Dartmouth. According to Hudak, it’s not a bad break, but it’s enough to keep her in a cast and there’s only a very slight possibility Wheatley will be back by March 20th. It’s another tough blow for Dartmouth, who once again finds itself with different line combinations and power play units from the week before.

    If this past weekend’s games are Wheatley’s last, she can take solace in that she went out at the top of her game this season, and she has made her team proud.

    What Lies Ahead

    There is no league with more at stake than the ECAC this weekend, from top to bottom. Not one seed is secure. Vermont and Cornell fight for the last playoff spot, Princeton and Brown go head-to-head for home-ice advantage and the No. 4 seed, while St. Lawrence, Harvard and Dartmouth battle for the top.

    Dartmouth will be unable win the league title assuming St. Lawrence sweeps last-place Union or Harvard beats Princeton and Yale, but the Big Green still will have to get by Cornell and Colgate to maintain the No. 2 seed and the No. 2 standing in the Frozen Four hunt. Colgate gave Dartmouth a tough 4-2 game last time around, and Rebecca Lahar has been a steady presence in net for the Raiders.

    “They do a nice job defensively, trying to keep you away from the net and letting their goalies see the puck,” Hudak said. “I expect to have a good game with them. We’ll continue to work on the things we need to work on. At this time of the year our focus is really trying to refine some things we’re doing.”

    The Princeton-Harvard game on Sunday could have both home ice for Princeton and an ECAC title for Harvard riding on it, which promises to make it a show.

    The Tigers struggled a bit with losses to Yale and Mercyhurst this past week, which Princeton coach Jeff Kampersal attributed to youthful mistakes. On Sunday, the Princeton seniors, not wanting to close out their regular season home slate with three straight defeats, rallied for a 3-0 victory in a rematch with Mercyhurst. The Tigers were led by Seniors Angela Gooldy and Lisa Rasmussen who both netted goals, and Megan Van Beusekom who delivered a 40-save shutout.

    “Hopefully they can rally the troops again and perform well this weekend and get us going and back on track heading into the playoffs,” Kampersal said.

    Princeton took it to Harvard in a 6-3 win in late January but fell to Brown 3-1 the next day. The Tigers were outshot by a 31-18 margin and outscore 2-0 against the Bears in the final two periods.

    “I think that we put so much energy into that [Harvard] game that weekend and it was an emotional game, we were just flat on Saturday,” Kampersal said. “Not to take anything away from Brown — in the second and third period they really took it to us. We respect Brown, and hopefully we can match their intensity on Friday.”

    One of Princeton’s keys to success against Harvard was effectively shadowing Ruggiero. In her words, she could not skate in a straight line all day.

    “I just think Ruggiero is a dominant, dominant player and we’ve got a lot of respect for her,” Kampersal said. “Watching her in different box scores she’s posting 12 shots, 17 shots, 10 shots — it’s just a ridiculous number of shots for a defensemen. So that’s someone we tried to focus on a little bit more in that game.”

    “I just know that I’m fortunate to get to see her play in the summer and work with her a little bit in the summer. I don’t know her as while as some of the other kids, but she’s always pleasant, she’s nice, she’s a professional. She’s a respectful kid and she’s someone you don’t really want to play against on a particular day. We certainly don’t fear her but we certainly respect her, though.”

    Ruggiero said she’ll look to be prepared for what Princeton throws at her, though she added that as per usual, Harvard will not be changing its game plan. She expects to bring far better games against both Yale and Princeton this time around.

    “We have a lot of respect for all of our opponents,” Stone said. “We’d like to play better than we played the first time we played them. But we’re in a better place now than we were then. It should be a great atmosphere and two great hockey games.”

    Although Ruggiero only saw the end of the Dartmouth game from the tunnel and all of the Vermont game from the stands, she likes where Harvard is headed.

    “We played tremendous in that game,” Ruggiero said of the conclusion against Dartmouth. “We proved were not a two or three-person team, but we’re a really good hockey team. You have to take the positive experiences. We have that going into the playoffs, knowing that when we need to we can find it in ourselves to elevate our game.”

    “From what little bits I saw from my position in the tunnel, it was a good, fun period.”

    1...1,3051,3061,307...1,480Page 1,306 of 1,480

    Latest Stories from around USCHO

    Northland College to remain open under refocused model as refined curriculum, structure to be implemented starting fall 2024

    USCHO Staff -

    Arcadia tabs former Bryn Athyn head coach, Neumann assistant Heickert as Knights’ new men’s hockey coach

    USCHO Staff -

    Former Elmira women’s hockey assistant Simon named new head coach at Wisconsin-Superior

    USCHO Staff -

    Creating a unified identity: Atlantic Hockey America commissioner Morgan on rebranding, league’s future

    Ed Trefzger -

    Atlantic Hockey, CHA women will combine as Atlantic Hockey America for 2024-25 season

    USCHO Staff -

    NCHC names longtime Omaha coach, administrator Kemp 2024 winner of conference’s distinguished service award

    USCHO Staff -

    Former Western New England women’s hockey graduate assistant, University of New England player Drinkwater named head coach at Rivier

    USCHO Staff -

    Longtime Cornell, Quinnipiac men’s hockey assistant Syer chosen new head coach at Princeton

    USCHO Staff -

    Michigan State, Michigan Tech, Northern Michigan, Western Michigan make up Great Lakes Invitational field for 2024 event in Grand Rapids, Mich.

    USCHO Staff -

    After leading Denver to second national championship in three seasons in 2023-24, Pioneers’ Carle selected USCHO.com Coach of the Year

    USCHO Staff -

    Union assistant men’s coach Childs steps down, heading back to junior hockey as new head coach of USHL’s Lancers

    USCHO Staff -

    Muckalt feels ‘instant connection’ as former Michigan hockey player, coach takes over as new bench boss at Lindenwood

    USCHO Staff -
    ©1996-2024 USCHO.com – U.S. College Hockey Online