Academics and Rosters

[THE Icemom]

I may be opening up a very lively discussion here. I noticed that for some of the smaller private schools they have had some decline in the number of players rostered. For yesterday's games, Finlandia:12 skaters 2 goalies, St Kates, Lake Forest and Chatham:14 skaters 2 goalies.

Is this common for after the holiday break?
Is this a normal occurance at schools with very high academic standards?
Or is this relative to the size of the school in general?

Let the fun begin!

[uvmcats]

I have seen rosters flow both ways. For those that decline, the reasons vary. The most likely being academic ineligibilty depending on the school's standards. For first year students, it could be academics, dropping out or transferring due to poor fit or money, or leaving the team because they weren't having fun in order to enjoy the other aspects of college social activity. For upper class students, it could be they transferred, didn't have the money, or lost interest in the game. If there were a coaching change, maybe they didn't like the way the new coach administered the team.

I have also seen additions, either through transfer or through a student being admitted for the second semester.

[gojackets]

Of the teams you list it could also be a competition factor. It has to be hard to go out and get your *** handed to you weekend after weekend. No offense to Chatham, Finlandia or St. Kates (the best of the worst,) but when you can't compete with the competition it has to be demoralizing. I don't know if I would be willing to stay there and be embarassed every weekend..and I don't quit.

With Finlandia-they were slowly improving, becoming competitive in the NCHA which could have given girls a reason to go play there, but now they just suck and they might not want to be a part of it anymore. Looking at their boxes FU had all their girls in the Friday Augsburg game and were missing some the next night. Maybe that was the final straw?


You know the reasons with Chatham more than anyone else. St Kates kind of has a history with this, just as Chatham. They start out with a big team and then slowly lose them throughout the season.

[notfromaroundhere]

I have seen rosters flow both ways. For those that decline, the reasons vary. The most likely being academic ineligibilty depending on the school's standards. For first year students, it could be academics, dropping out or transferring due to poor fit or money, or leaving the team because they weren't having fun in order to enjoy the other aspects of college social activity. For upper class students, it could be they transferred, didn't have the money, or lost interest in the game. If there were a coaching change, maybe they didn't like the way the new coach administered the team.

I have also seen additions, either through transfer or through a student being admitted for the second semester.

Probably a fair assessment. I might also suggest, especially with below .500 teams that a fair number of their players may be unrecruited walk-ons who may not be getting much if any ice time. There comes a certain point where a kid will say that it isn't worth it. Can't say I've looked at the cases cited above, but I think if it were the leading scorers on a team, someone would have noted it.

It is kind of sad that these schools can't seem to attract kids who will stick out the adversity that comes with a struggling program.

[sherlock12]

RIT played Chatham this weekend and I have the insiders scoop on their small roster. They lost some to academic probation, one to injury (yesterday) and at least 1 to homesickness (early in the season).

[steveyson28]

I believe St.Kate's lost atleast one due to academic reasons, not sure why the others arent on the boxscores. Maybe just being sat as punishment for something they did??? They started with 20/21 people on the roster. The roster has varied the last couple games going from 18 players to 16 and back to 18. They carry 3 goalies so one doesn't suit up leaving.

[eg1351]

Of the teams you list it could also be a competition factor. It has to be hard to go out and get your *** handed to you weekend after weekend. No offense to Chatham, Finlandia or St. Kates (the best of the worst,) but when you can't compete with the competition it has to be demoralizing. I don't know if I would be willing to stay there and be embarassed every weekend..and I don't quit.



I have a MIAC bias but i would hardly say that St. Kates gets demoralized each weekend. Of the games i have seen they have been competitive each time. Hardly embarassing to finish 1 point out of 5th place last year and be comeptitive in each game this year.

Chatham is much improved as well from what I have seen.

[gojackets]

I have a MIAC bias but i would hardly say that St. Kates gets demoralized each weekend. Of the games i have seen they have been competitive each time. Hardly embarassing to finish 1 point out of 5th place last year and be comeptitive in each game this year.

Chatham is much improved as well from what I have seen.

St. Kates is better than they have been a few years back, they seem to go up and down. They might be in games, but they still lose every time(except to the other weak teams.) They were a surprise last year, but don't see them repeating that this season.

Chatham may be improved, but doesn't hide the fact that they get beat handily most of the time.

[hockeyfan1]

I think that some of the schools have to take a chance on players that might have weak academics. To compete with the established programs in the recruiting process. Things should get better over the next few years lots of talent out there and young teams can be successful. I know that the coach at Chatham is commited and has a very good hockey mind so you will see that they just improve year after year. She brought in several players this year that are good students and outstanding players. If she does the same next season they will start winning. As for why rosters decline I think some of the players seeing that the program is going to more competitive players they know ice time will be limited.

[WIrinkrat]

Chatham may be improved, but doesn't hide the fact that they get beat handily most of the time.


I think some clarification may be necessary for you to make this statement......because a quick perusal of the box scores doesn't do a ton to support your argument that they get beat handily "most" of the time.

If you mean they get beat handily most of the time when they play Plattsburgh, Elmira, and RIT (as do most other non-ranked teams), against whom 6 of their 12 losses have come, then you would be correct. But even at that, two of their games against these teams have been played to 1-1 at even strength, with the superior talent of Elmira and Plattsburgh deciding the game on special teams. Their only other "bad" loss not to one of the big three was 5-0 to Lake Forest, who is certainly not a bad team, in the first game of their season.

They handily outshot St. Mikes and Nichols in 1 goal losses, and also outshot Cortland in a loss. They played to an OT loss and a tie against St. Kates who is a couple years further into their rebuilding process. They were 2-0 with Adrian with less than 10 minutes to go. 2-0 with Elmira in the 3rd period.

Are they still playing with less than a full deck after the new coach has had only one year to recruit? Are they getting tired at the end of games? Hitting some bumps in the road while trying to change the entire culture of a losing program? Sure they are..but that is to be expected. Rome wasn't built in a day, and this program was in a really bad place a few years ago. The wins aren't there yet, but the games are closer, they aren't giving up 80 shots a game, and they aren't generating 5 or 10 shots of their own. It certainly looks like they are heading in the right direction, which is great for the sport and the ECAC West. I think this team has earned some respect..at least enough to give them another year or two of recruiting and see where it takes them.

[AllAboutRebounds]

Are they still playing with less than a full deck after the new coach has had only one year to recruit? Are they getting tired at the end of games? Hitting some bumps in the road while trying to change the entire culture of a losing program? Sure they are..but that is to be expected. Rome wasn't built in a day, and this program was in a really bad place a few years ago. The wins aren't there yet, but the games are closer, they aren't giving up 80 shots a game, and they aren't generating 5 or 10 shots of their own. It certainly looks like they are heading in the right direction, which is great for the sport and the ECAC West. I think this team has earned some respect..at least enough to give them another year or two of recruiting and see where it takes them.

I certainly hadn't thought of their season thus far that way. But you're correct. So far, they've played some of the top teams in the nation and even held them to scores that are very respectable.

It can't help when you lose what looks to be what? 6 or 7 players after the break? I think that showed up in another "bad" loss in Buffalo last Saturday. By the looks of the box score, the team fell apart in that one. On Sunday, they came back, though, and took away an important win from a team that's close to them in the rankings. It'll be interesting to see how they compete when up against teams that aren't ranked top 10 in the nation. You've got to hand it to them, though. Looks like for the first year in a long time, they're going to go through the second half of the season and be just fine (Oswego, Pottsdam, even Neumann are possible wins) while facing adversity. They lost a lot of players--not to mention one of their goalies. Scott has been suiting up every game since the break and doing a fine job save for the loss in Buff State. It seems like that's pretty standard across the board for Chatham, though. They only have 5 D, right? Playing 2 games in a weekend and getting that much playing time has to be incredibly taxing. If nothing else, the kids on this team have lots of heart and determination.

I wish them luck in the second half.

In regards to academic probation, I would guess that small numbers are relative to small schools as well as rigorous academics. Perhaps the drop in numbers can be attributed to the desperateness of the coaching staff in recruiting. I doubt that they're pursuing top notch academics. I'd guess that, in many cases, they take what they can get.