PDA

View Full Version : USA Hockey active player pool



Call It
11-26-2012, 09:02 PM
I just noticed USA Hockey updated the active player pool list. What happens to the players that were removed?

http://www.usahockey.com/uploadedFiles/USAHockey/Menu_Team_USA/Menu_Womens_National_Team/Fall%202012%20Active%20Player%20Pool%20List.pdf

hkymom12
11-27-2012, 03:26 PM
Was Courtney Burke on it before? And now she's not? WOW.

HockeyEast33
11-27-2012, 04:17 PM
I just noticed USA Hockey updated the active player pool list. What happens to the players that were removed?

http://www.usahockey.com/uploadedFiles/USAHockey/Menu_Team_USA/Menu_Womens_National_Team/Fall%202012%20Active%20Player%20Pool%20List.pdf

Is it my imagination or does the list seem a lot shorter than in previous versions? This is probably a good thing. Number of somewhat surprising MIAs: Courtney Burke, Amanda Pelkey, Erika Lawler..... Suppose Josephine Pucci is off the list due to her injury.

Stick Boy
11-27-2012, 04:46 PM
Was Courtney Burke on it before? And now she's not? WOW.

Burke is good but is young and one for the future. Similar situation with Crossley for Canada - she wasn't invited to the U22 or National Team camps for Canada after a great U18 Worlds last January. She, like Burke, is a '94 and both are having a great start in College. The National teams for both countries are full of 'more mature/experienced' players who are pretty good. These two should have their chance down the road.

hkymom12
11-27-2012, 06:09 PM
Truely believe that a '94 birth year player is better than a '97 player! I've never seen this '97 play, but have seen Burke and some of the others mentioned that were left off the list.

Call It
11-27-2012, 07:29 PM
Burke is good but is young and one for the future. Similar situation with Crossley for Canada - she wasn't invited to the U22 or National Team camps for Canada after a great U18 Worlds last January. She, like Burke, is a '94 and both are having a great start in College. The National teams for both countries are full of 'more mature/experienced' players who are pretty good. These two should have their chance down the road.

Young?! There is a 97 on the list :rolleyes: Perhaps her experience on a under 14 team last year will suffice?

The list does seem shorter. Is this the whole list or just the National Team list and/ or is there is a seperate list for U22 & 18?

Stick Boy
11-28-2012, 03:26 AM
Young?! There is a 97 on the list :rolleyes: Perhaps her experience on a under 14 team last year will suffice?

The list does seem shorter. Is this the whole list or just the National Team list and/ or is there is a seperate list for U22 & 18?


It's a big country, game is growing, bigger numbers involved, Big Fish in a smaller pond now and things tighten up when you are talking of the highest team in the country. Sure the 97 date is surprising but she must be good or they wouldn't have her there - have not seem her play.

ARM
11-28-2012, 06:43 AM
Is this the whole list or just the National Team list and/ or is there is a seperate list for U22 & 18?Given all of the goalies on it are at least college juniors or older, it is safe to conclude that this does not include everyone in consideration for U18.

HockeyEast33
11-28-2012, 08:07 AM
It's a big country, game is growing, bigger numbers involved, Big Fish in a smaller pond now and things tighten up when you are talking of the highest team in the country. Sure the 97 date is surprising but she must be good or they wouldn't have her there - have not seem her play.

There is often one younger player on these national team lists taht are put there for encouragement and they are usually very good (Amanda Pelkey, Kendall Coyne, and Alex Carpenter were pretty young when they started showing up on national team lists as an example). That being the case, I would suggest that the 97 is probably very good and also someone that the Harvard coach wants on her college team so she put her on the list. Doesn't mean that she will get picked for the team.