Category: 2025

ChampsRankSOS – Strength-of-Schedule

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date December 2, 2025

This is the first iteration of the ChampsRankSOS ranking report. An explanation of the methodology can be found here.

We initially planned to publish only the time-decay version of our Strength-of-Schedule model (using a 45-day decay rate). However, the differences between the decay and no-decay versions were significant enough that it made sense to release both. This allows a clear comparison between a full-season evaluation and a ranking system that emphasizes recent performance — something both subjective polls and postseason selection committees tend to value. This weekend’s upcoming games between Wisconsin and Ohio State, might tell us which methodology makes more sense.

Click here to view our other ranking: ChampsRankELO

ChampsRankSOS with Decay Rate: DI Women’s College Hockey

as of November 30, 2025

GD = Goal Differential vs. Opponent

SOS = Strength of Schedule Rating of Opponent

Rank	Team	Rating	GD	SOS	Games Played
1	Ohio State	20.00	3.46	16.54	16
2	Wisconsin	19.78	3.96	15.82	18
3	Minnesota	18.71	1.82	16.89	16
4	Penn State	18.15	3.56	14.58	18
5	Minnesota Duluth	17.76	0.33	17.44	16
6	Minnesota State	16.77	0.24	16.53	18
7	UConn	16.73	1.21	15.52	16
8	Northeastern	16.66	1.58	15.08	16
9	St. Cloud State	16.48	-0.53	17.01	18
10	Quinnipiac	16.41	1.50	14.91	18
11	Cornell	16.35	1.74	14.61	14
12	Princeton	16.21	0.94	15.27	13
13	Clarkson	16.04	0.60	15.44	17
14	St. Thomas	15.94	-0.64	16.58	18
15	Colgate	15.74	0.04	15.71	18
16	Yale	15.67	0.74	14.93	14
17	Mercyhurst	15.52	0.54	14.99	20
18	Boston College	15.22	0.21	15.01	18
19	Harvard	15.04	0.68	14.37	12
20	RIT	15.04	0.10	14.93	20
21	St. Lawrence	14.83	-0.45	15.27	19
22	New Hampshire	14.75	0.52	14.23	18
23	Holy Cross	14.73	1.14	13.59	18
24	Vermont	14.72	-1.02	15.74	18
25	Union	14.64	0.41	14.23	18
26	Brown	14.46	-0.01	14.47	14
27	Maine	14.39	-1.07	15.46	18
28	Bemidji State	14.36	-2.24	16.60	16
29	Boston University	14.34	-1.02	15.36	15
30	Providence	14.08	-1.21	15.30	17
31	Syracuse	13.85	-1.06	14.91	20
32	Lindenwood	13.77	-0.75	14.53	20
33	Robert Morris	13.72	-0.71	14.44	20
34	Dartmouth	13.33	-2.27	15.61	12
35	Merrimack	13.08	-1.71	14.80	16
36	Saint Anselm	13.01	0.99	12.02	17
37	RPI	12.84	-2.01	14.85	19
38	Franklin Pierce	12.38	0.92	11.46	17
39	Assumption	11.74	-0.34	12.09	18
40	Stonehill	11.67	-1.25	12.92	17
41	Sacred Heart	11.65	-0.61	12.26	15
42	Delaware	11.38	-3.07	14.46	18
43	Post	11.12	-1.29	12.41	17
44	LIU	10.66	-0.98	11.64	14
45	Saint Michaels	8.24	-3.74	11.97	13

ChampsRankSOS without Decay Rate (Full Season Rating): DI Women’s College Hockey

as of November 30, 2025

Rank	Team	Rating	GD	SOS	Games Played
1	Wisconsin	20.00	4.06	15.94	18
2	Ohio State	19.81	3.25	16.56	16
3	Minnesota	19.14	2.25	16.89	16
4	Penn State	18.10	3.72	14.37	18
5	Minnesota Duluth	17.80	0.63	17.18	16
6	St. Cloud State	16.73	-0.33	17.06	18
7	Northeastern	16.69	1.69	15.00	16
8	Cornell	16.66	2.00	14.66	14
9	Quinnipiac	16.65	1.83	14.82	18
10	UConn	16.62	1.00	15.62	16
11	Minnesota State	16.49	0.11	16.38	18
12	Princeton	16.05	0.77	15.29	13
13	St. Thomas	15.97	-0.06	16.02	18
14	Clarkson	15.93	0.76	15.17	17
15	Colgate	15.79	0.06	15.74	18
16	Yale	15.71	0.79	14.92	14
17	Mercyhurst	15.53	0.35	15.18	20
18	Boston College	15.17	-0.11	15.28	18
19	RIT	15.02	0.35	14.67	20
20	Harvard	14.98	0.58	14.40	12
21	St. Lawrence	14.89	-0.47	15.37	19
22	Vermont	14.79	-0.94	15.74	18
23	New Hampshire	14.78	0.61	14.16	18
24	Bemidji State	14.68	-2.25	16.93	16
25	Brown	14.61	0.07	14.53	14
26	Holy Cross	14.57	1.11	13.46	18
27	Union	14.49	0.17	14.32	18
28	Maine	14.43	-1.22	15.65	18
29	Boston University	14.40	-1.27	15.66	15
30	Providence	13.99	-1.47	15.46	17
31	Syracuse	13.78	-1.15	14.93	20
32	Lindenwood	13.69	-1.20	14.89	20
33	Robert Morris	13.62	-0.75	14.37	20
34	Dartmouth	13.47	-2.00	15.47	12
35	Merrimack	13.18	-1.63	14.81	16
36	RPI	12.85	-2.00	14.85	19
37	Saint Anselm	12.81	0.71	12.10	17
38	Franklin Pierce	12.32	0.47	11.85	17
39	Sacred Heart	11.77	-0.33	12.10	15
40	Assumption	11.72	-0.44	12.16	18
41	Stonehill	11.66	-1.06	12.72	17
42	Delaware	11.35	-3.00	14.36	18
43	Post	11.01	-1.76	12.77	17
44	LIU	10.82	-0.64	11.46	14
45	Saint Michaels	8.60	-3.38	11.99	13

#1 Ranking Flip

When recent games are weighted more heavily, Ohio State takes over the top spot. Over the full season, Wisconsin remains #1.

• Without decay: Wisconsin #1 (20.00), Ohio State #2 (19.81)
• With decay: Ohio State #1 (20.00), Wisconsin #2 (19.78)

Why the flip occurs

• Wisconsin: Goal differential drops from 4.06 → 3.96 due to early-season blowouts being de-weighted (e.g., 17–2 vs. Stonehill, 8–0 vs. Minnesota State).
• Ohio State: Goal differential rises from 3.25 → 3.46, reflecting stronger recent games.
• Game volume: Wisconsin has 18 games — more older results get discounted. Ohio State has 16 — more of their games retain full weight.
• Decay math: Games older than ~60 days count at roughly 35% weight, boosting teams with stronger recent form.

Other Notable Shifts

• Minnesota State: +5 spots (11 → 6) — largest improvement
• Bemidji State: –4 spots (24 → 28) — largest decline
• 24 teams experienced movement between the two models

Got feedback on the ChampsRankSOS model? Submit feedback here

Tags rankings, tag, womens-college-hockey

2025 College Hockey Recruiting Women's College Hockey Women's Hockey

🏒 How ChampsEyeQ Player Reports Work

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date October 8, 2025

ChampsEyeQ turns your game video into a professional, data-driven evaluation that helps you understand where you stand and how to improve.

🎥 Step 1: Submit Your Video

Players upload at least 10 minutes of edited game footage showing complete shifts with real game flow — not just highlights.

👀 Step 2: Expert Scout Evaluation

Our professional scouts — who have evaluated thousands of youth players — analyze your performance across 15+ key attributes, including:

Skating
Hockey IQ & Decision Making
Offensive & Defensive Skills
Compete Level & Intangibles

📊 Step 3: Ratings, Tiers & Feedback

Each player receives a quantitative and qualitative report with:

A numerical rating (1–10) for every skill
An overall average score
A Tier ranking showing how they compare to peers nationwide
Written feedback highlighting key strengths and priority areas for improvement

DOWNLOAD A SAMPLE REPORT Download

🧮 How Ratings Translate into Tiers

Average Rating	Tier	Meaning
8.5+	🏅 Top 5% – Elite Player	Exceptional performance; top national tier
7.8–8.4	🎓 Top 20% – D1 Potential	Typical range of future NCAA Division I players
6.5–7.7	💪 Top 33%	Strong skill base; competitive pathway to D1
5.5–6.4	⚔️ Top 50%	Solid player development foundation
Below 5.5	🔄 Bottom 50%	Early-stage development; focus on fundamentals

Formula: =IFS(Rating≥8.5,“Top 5%–Elite Player”, Rating≥7.8,“Top 20%–D1 Potential”, Rating≥6.5,“Top 33%”, Rating≥5.5,“Top 50%”, TRUE,“Bottom 50%”)

🧭 Step 4: Actionable Insights

ChampsEyeQ combines objective data and expert insight to give players a clear development roadmap — showing not just what their rating is, but why and how to improve.

As more athletes are evaluated, ChampsEyeQ continually updates its benchmarks, giving families an evolving, data-backed view of what it takes to reach the NCAA Division I level.

🚀 Ready to See Where You Stand?

Submit your game footage today and receive your personalized ChampsEyeQ Player Evaluation Report.
👉 Start your submission at www.ChampsEyeQ.com

Tags college-hockey-recruiting, hockey-development, tag, womens-college-hockey

2025 College Hockey Recruiting Women's College Hockey Women's Hockey

Your NCAA Women’s Hockey Recruitment Video: What Coaches REALLY Want to See

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date July 21, 2025

Aspiring to play NCAA women’s hockey? Your recruitment video is a key piece of the puzzle, but what exactly are college coaches looking for? We recently surveyed both D1 and DIII women’s hockey coaches for their specific video-submission preferences to give you the inside scoop. Forget the guesswork – here’s what you need to know to make your video stand out.

Keep It Concise: Less Than 6 Minutes is Key

First and foremost, keep your video submission under 6 minutes. Coaches are busy, and a succinct, impactful video is far more likely to be watched in its entirety. This isn’t the time for a lengthy highlight reel; focus on quality over quantity.

Video: Helpful, But Not the Only Factor

While your video is “somewhat important,” coaches emphasized that it’s helpful but not critical for their initial evaluation. Think of it as a strong supporting document that complements your athletic profile and academic achievements. It’s a tool to get you noticed, not the sole determinant of your recruitment.

What Kind of Footage Do They Prefer?

This is where many players go wrong. Coaches overwhelmingly prefer full game shift-by-shift footage with selected shifts from multiple games (e.g., 10-15 shifts). They want to see you in real-game scenarios, demonstrating your hockey sense and decision-making under pressure.

What to avoid? Tightly edited highlight reels with just goals or flashy plays. Coaches want to see the full sequence of play, not just the spectacular finish. This provides a much more accurate representation of your abilities.

How to Submit Your Video

The preferred methods for submission are straightforward: YouTube, Hudl, or Instat. Providing a profile/channel link or a direct email attachment (e.g., an .mp4 file) are both acceptable. Note: Coaches made it clear that they will almost always watch your videos via another service if you’re already in that system.

When to Submit

Consistency is important. Aim to submit new video during recruiting season every 1-3 months. This keeps coaches updated on your progress and reminds them of your interest.

Special Considerations for Goalies

Goalies, pay close attention! Coaches want to see a mix of both full games and a highlight reel. Critically, they prefer gameplay highlights over practice sessions. When it comes to the content, they’re looking for a breadth of skills, including:

Rebound control
Puck handling
Odd Man Rushes
Net Front Scrambles
High Danger Shots

Perhaps the most surprising insight for goalies: coaches find it helpful to show clips where you let in a goal but demonstrate strong fundamentals. This shows resilience, good technique even in challenging situations, and provides a more realistic assessment of your abilities than only showing perfect saves.

In Summary:

Length: Under 4 minutes.
Importance: Helpful, but not critical for initial evaluation.
Content: Full game shift-by-shift with selected shifts from multiple games (20-30 shifts). Full sequence clips, not just highlights.
Method: YouTube/Hudl/Instat link or direct email attachment. But know that coaches will review their own subscriptions service like Hudl/Instat to watch your footage.
Frequency: Every 1-3 months during recruiting season.
Goalies: Mix of full games & highlight reel, game play preferred, include clips demonstrating strong fundamentals even if a goal is scored.

By following these guidelines, you can create a recruitment video that truly resonates with Division 1 women’s hockey coaches and helps you take the next step in your athletic journey. Good luck!

🚨Champs App Profile 2.0 is Here – With Videos, References & More!

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date July 17, 2025

We’re excited to introduce Champs App Profile 2.0 – a major upgrade to your already BEAUTIFUL and FREE profile on Champs App.

Whether you’re a player, parent, team coach, development coach, advisor, or agent, your profile just got more powerful.

Here’s what’s new:

🎥 Upload Videos Directly

No need to upload to YouTube first! Just drag and drop video files straight into your profile. You can now also add Vimeo links in addition to YouTube.

🤝 Add Trusted References

You can now list coaches, advisors, or other contacts as references—with their permission. You control who sees them with new privacy settings.

📅 Smarter Scheduling

Add event times and locations separately, and mark events as TBD when plans aren’t finalized yet.

📊 Elite Prospects Integration

Got an EP profile? Just paste your URL to import your stats. You can also add your EP profile to your social links section.

Tags mens-hockey, tag, womens-hockey

2025 Men's College Hockey NCAA DI Commits Women's College Hockey

The NCAA Settlement: Practical Impacts on Division I Ice Hockey Rosters and Scholarships

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date July 7, 2025

The recently approved NCAA House settlement is poised to fundamentally reshape collegiate athletics, and its impact on Division I men’s and women’s ice hockey programs will be significant. While many details are still emerging, the core changes revolve around athlete compensation, scholarship flexibility, and roster limits.

Understanding Scholarship Flexibility

For schools that opted into the NCAA House settlement, a critical change is the newfound flexibility in offering athletic scholarships. Previously, strict scholarship caps limited teams. Now, if a Division I hockey team cannot afford to offer the maximum of 26 full athletic scholarships, they have the discretion to offer fewer.

This flexibility stems from several key aspects of the settlement:

Roster Limit as a Maximum: The 26-player roster limit for Division I ice hockey is an absolute maximum. It dictates the highest number of players a team can have on its active roster, not a minimum or a mandated number of scholarships. Teams are not required to fill all 26 spots, nor are they required to offer full scholarships to all players on their roster.
Equivalency Scholarships: Under the new system, all athletic scholarships are “equivaency scholarships.” This grants schools the ability to:
- Offer Partial Scholarships: For instance, instead of two full scholarships, a school might offer four half-scholarships.
- Mix Full and Partial Scholarships: Teams can create a blended approach, with some players receiving full scholarships and others partial aid.
- Offer Fewer Overall Scholarships: A school might decide that its budget allows for only 15 full scholarships, even if it carries 22 players on the roster. The remaining players would either be true walk-ons (receiving no athletic aid) or receive very small partial scholarships if financial resources permit.
Budgetary Constraints: The settlement introduces an annual cap on the total amount of revenue a school can share directly with athletes, starting at approximately $20.5 million for the first year. This cap includes scholarship costs that exceed previous limits. For many institutions, particularly those outside the major revenue-generating conferences, fully funding 26 scholarships for a hockey team in addition to other sports, while remaining within this overall cap, will present a significant financial challenge. Strategic decisions on fund allocation across all sports will be essential.
Strategic Roster Management: Coaches and athletic departments will need to balance their desired roster size for competitive reasons with their financial realities. Some may opt for a smaller, more highly funded roster, while others might spread aid among more players if their budget allows for a greater number of partial scholarships.

In summary, while the settlement removes the old scholarship caps and permits up to 26 scholarships for hockey, it does not mandate that a school must provide 26. Each institution will make its own decisions based on its financial capacity and athletic priorities.

The “Grandfather Rule” Exception

An important caveat to the strict roster limits is the “grandfathering” provision. Current or incoming 2025-26 student-athletes who were already on a roster or had a promised spot and would otherwise be cut due to the new limits are designated as “Designated Student-Athletes.” These individuals do not count against the 26-player limit for their remaining eligibility at their original institution or any transfer institution. However, once these players complete their eligibility, the strict 26-player cap will apply, reinforcing that the new system streamlines roster management: the number of players a team can carry is now the number they can offer aid (including scholarships and direct payments) to, up to that specific sport’s roster cap.

Schools Not Opting In

While the vast majority of Division I schools opted into the settlement (approximately 319 out of 389), some notable exceptions relevant to hockey exist:

The Ivy League: All eight Ivy League institutions, including their six hockey schools, have opted out. This decision aligns with their longstanding model of not awarding athletic scholarships or providing direct athletic compensation.
Military Academies: Institutions like Air Force and Army have opted out due to military rules that prevent their cadets from receiving Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) compensation.
Other Hockey Programs: Certain other Division I hockey programs, such as Nebraska-Omaha, also chose not to opt in, often citing financial considerations or a desire to observe how the new system unfolds before committing.

Impact on Women’s Ice Hockey

The new rules could be beneficial for women’s hockey. Traditionally, women’s hockey teams have averaged around 25 roster spots. The new 26-player cap is very close to this average, suggesting less drastic changes in immediate roster size. This consistency may alleviate concerns about increasing roster sizes potentially forcing players into unhealthy competition for ice time or risking being healthy scratched.

However, schools like Sacred Heart, which have historically maintained larger women’s hockey rosters (sometimes exceeding 30 players), will face a significant adjustment. While the grandfather rule will mitigate immediate impacts for current players, these programs will see a necessary decrease in their roster size for future recruiting classes as the grandfathered players cycle out.

Impact on Men’s Ice Hockey

The new rules are expected to have a more pronounced impact on decreasing roster sizes in men’s hockey. On average, men’s teams have historically carried around 29 players. Given that men’s hockey tends to have more injuries than women’s hockey, larger rosters were often maintained to provide depth.

Now, these rosters will shrink to the 26-player maximum. While the grandfather rule will offer a short-term buffer, this ultimately means the overall number of players participating in Division I men’s hockey will decrease, potentially from approximately 1,800 players to 1,600 players across the country.

This reduction in available spots is further compounded by the recent change allowing Canadian junior players, who were previously ineligible due to stipends, to now play college hockey. This new pool of eligible talent will intensify competition for the fewer available roster spots in Division I men’s programs.

Tags mens-college-hockey, ncaa-settlement, tag, womens-college-hockey

2025 Women's Hockey

NCAA Dominance Shines at the 2025 PWHL Draft: A Look at the Top Programs

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date June 30, 2025

Last week, the hockey world turned its attention to the highly anticipated 2025 Professional Women’s Hockey League (PWHL) Draft, held on June 24th. As the league continues to solidify its place as the premier destination for elite female talent, the draft provided a fascinating snapshot of where the next generation of stars are coming from. Unsurprisingly, NCAA Division I programs once again proved to be the powerhouse pipeline, alongside a strong showing from European leagues.

Leading the charge in player development was Ohio State University, which saw an impressive six of its athletes selected, showcasing the strength and depth of their program. Close behind, the University of Minnesota Duluth (UMD) celebrated five of its own making the leap to professional ranks, reinforcing their consistent high-level output.

Quinnipiac University had a phenomenal draft, with four players hearing their names called, a testament to their growing influence in women’s hockey. Following them with three draftees each were Clarkson University, the University of Minnesota, and St. Cloud State University, highlighting the continued excellence across multiple conferences.

The draft also recognized talent emerging from beyond North American collegiate play, with three players selected directly from European leagues, emphasizing the global reach of the PWHL.

Further contributing to the NCAA’s robust representation, a strong contingent of programs each had two players drafted: Boston University, Colgate, Cornell, Penn State, Providence, St. Lawrence, UConn, and Wisconsin. Rounding out the selections were Boston College, Mercyhurst, Northeastern, and Yale, each celebrating one draftee.

Please note: The numbers above reflect the last college or university the drafted player attended. Schools like Wisconsin, Penn State, New Hampshire and Brown had drafted players transfer out prior to this past season.

Tags tag, womens-college-hockey, womens-hockey

2025 Coaching Women's College Hockey Women's Hockey

Who Will Replace Brian Idalski as Head Coach of St. Cloud State Women’s Hockey?

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date June 24, 2025

With the surprise announcement that Brian Idalski will be leaving St. Cloud State to become the inaugural head coach of PWHL Vancouver, the Huskies face a critical decision. Idalski helped elevate the program’s competitiveness in the WCHA during his tenure, and his successor will be tasked with maintaining that upward trajectory. Here’s a breakdown of the leading candidates to take the reins—and how their credentials stack up in 2025.

After successfully including Courtney Kessel in our list of candidates for the Princeton head coaching role, let’s see how we do on this analysis:

🔝 Leading Contenders

Jinelle Zaugg‑Siergiej

Current Role: Associate Head Coach, St. Cloud State (2019–present)
Why She’s a Top Choice:
A silver medalist with Team USA (2010) and two-time NCAA champion at Wisconsin, Zaugg‑Siergiej has been a steady hand behind the bench for the past six seasons. She knows the program inside and out, has strong relationships with current players and recruits, and would provide continuity at a time of transition. She has never been a head coach, but she’s well-positioned to step up.

Mira Jalosuo

Current Role: Assistant Coach, PWHL Minnesota (2023–present)
Why She’s a Top Choice:
After spending the 2022–23 season as an assistant at St. Cloud, the Finnish Olympian joined Ken Klee’s staff in the PWHL and helped guide Minnesota to back-to-back Walter Cup championships. Known for her defensive acumen and elite playing background, Jalosuo brings both credibility and a championship mentality. Her return would inject high-level tactical knowledge and energy into the program.

Molly Engstrom

Current Role: Head Coach, University of Maine (since 2022)
Why She’s a Top Choice:
A former assistant at St. Cloud State (2018–2022) and two-time U.S. Olympian, Engstrom has transformed Maine into a defensively responsible team. She was one of three finalists for the St. Cloud State job in 2022 before Idalski was ultimately hired. Her success at Maine and familiarity with SCSU make her a very attractive candidate—if she’s interested in returning.

Erik Strand

Current Role: Assistant Coach, University of Vermont (since May 2025)
Why He’s a Top Choice:
Strand was also a finalist for the SCSU head coach role in 2022. Prior to joining Vermont, he spent 10 years as head coach at UW–Eau Claire, guiding the DIII program to consistent success, including multiple NCAA tournament appearances and conference championships. A veteran of player development and known for his high-character leadership, Strand is ready for the Division I spotlight.

🔁 Long-Shot Options

Jeff Giesen

Current Role: Associate Head Coach, Minnesota State
Why He’s Notable:
Giesen was St. Cloud State’s head coach from 2006 to 2014, leading the team through eight seasons. While he’s been at Minnesota State for nearly a decade, his familiarity with the Huskies’ program and the WCHA landscape gives him a theoretical path back—though it’s unclear whether he’s looking for a return to head coaching.

Britni Smith

Current Role: Head Coach, Syracuse (since 2022)
Why She’s Notable:
A former Clarkson assistant and Hockey Canada coach, Smith has turned around Syracuse’s program in the CHA. While she’s respected as a rising leader, her current commitment at Syracuse may keep her focused out east.

Nick Carpenito

Current Role: Associate Head Coach, Northeastern
Why He’s Notable:
A key architect of Northeastern’s success over the past decade, Carpenito is highly respected in NCAA circles. A jump to head coach in the WCHA would be a bold but potentially rewarding move—for both sides.

Greg May

Current Role: Associate Head Coach, Minnesota (joined July 2023)
Former Augsburg University DIII Head Coach (Sept 2021–July 2023), where he led the team to back-to-back NCAA Division III appearances and MIAC titles with a 41–15–2 record
Named an assistant coach for the 2026 U.S. Women’s U18 National Team
Why He’s Notable: Proven leadership at DIII and college program building. Now adding national-team experience. A fresh, well-rounded external hire.

Dan Koch

Current Role: Assistant Coach, University of Wisconsin
Why He’s Notable:
Koch has spent years in the powerhouse Wisconsin program, developing elite players. Like others on this list, he’d represent a fresh external hire with deep knowledge of what winning programs look like.

🏁 Final Thoughts: Familiarity or Fresh Blood?

St. Cloud State has no shortage of qualified candidates, and their decision may ultimately come down to priorities:

If the goal is continuity, promoting Zaugg‑Siergiej or recruiting Jalosuo back from the pros makes the most sense.
If the program seeks a proven leader, Engstrom or Strand—both past finalists—are strong, familiar names with NCAA and program-building experience.
For a bold shake-up, external hires like Carpenito, Smith, or Koch could introduce a new culture and broader recruiting reach.

Whoever takes over will inherit a program on the rise and a passionate fanbase eager for sustained WCHA and NCAA success.

Tags hockey-coach, ncaa-college-hockey-coach, tag, womens-college-hockey, womens-hockey

2025 Women's College Hockey Women's Hockey

Who Will Be the Next Head Coach of Princeton Women’s Ice Hockey?

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date June 7, 2025

Last week, Princeton University officially posted the job opening to replace longtime Women’s Ice Hockey Head Coach, Cara Morey. Morey, who had helmed the program since 2017, has accepted a new opportunity as the General Manager of the newly formed PWHL Vancouver franchise. Her departure marks the end of a significant era at Princeton, and the search is now underway for her successor.

The next head coach of the Tigers will almost certainly have deep ties to the Ivy League — if not Princeton itself. With the unique demands of balancing elite athletics and academics, experience within this system is not just preferred; it’s practically essential.

A number of qualified candidates already stand out as possible hires, and several have previously been part of the Princeton program.

Shelly Picard is a prominent contender. Currently an assistant coach at Long Island University, Picard served as a Princeton assistant coach from 2021 to 2023. A former U.S. National Team player, Picard combines elite playing experience with Ivy familiarity, and her recent time with Princeton gives her valuable insight into the current roster and culture.

Jamie Lundmark, Princeton’s current Director of Player Development and Assistant Coach since the 2023-24 season, could be an internal hire. A former NHL forward, Lundmark has already earned the trust of the current team and staff. While his Ivy League experience is limited, his presence in the program could provide needed continuity after Morey’s departure.

Another compelling candidate is Kelly Nash, currently the Head Coach at Long Island University. Nash was an assistant at Princeton from 2017 to 2019, playing a key role in the program’s growth during that period. With recent head coaching experience and a past connection to the university, she checks many of the right boxes.

Mel Ruzzi, now the Head Coach at Brown University, also brings a strong resume. She served as an assistant at Princeton from 2019 to 2021 before taking the helm at Brown, where she’s made steady progress. Her current Ivy League head coaching experience could be a significant asset in the selection process.

Lee-J Mirasolo, the current Head Coach at Stonehill College, has a long history with Princeton as an assistant from 2011 to 2015. She also spent nearly a decade at Harvard. Mirasolo’s combination of head coaching experience and extensive Ivy knowledge could make her a strong fit.

Edith Racine, Associate Head Coach at Cornell since 2009, brings over 18 years of Ivy League coaching experience. Though she has never coached at Princeton, her long tenure at Cornell — and previous time at Brown — demonstrates her deep understanding of the Ivy hockey landscape.

Among the longer shots, two names stand out. Courtney Kessel, who recently took over as Head Coach of the PWHL Boston franchise, was Princeton’s assistant coach from 2019 to 2023. While her new pro role might make her unavailable, she’d be a dream hire if interested. Jeff Kampersal, now at Penn State and formerly Princeton’s head coach for over two decades (1996–2017), also fits the mold — but a return seems unlikely.

With such a strong pool of candidates who know the Ivy League inside and out, Princeton is well-positioned to find a leader who can build on Morey’s legacy and continue to elevate the Tigers on and off the ice.

Tags college-hockey-recruiting, tag, womens-college-hockey, womens-hockey

2025 Development Camp Player Development Women's Hockey

Big Changes to USA Hockey’s 2025 Girls Player Development Camp Structure & Selections

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date May 27, 2025

Last week, USA Hockey announced the player invitations for the 2025 Girls Player Development Camps—and this year brings significant changes to the selection process and the number of players invited to each camp.

Last year, I wrote about how players often move between camps from one year to the next. In 2025, that path—especially for those going directly to the U18 Camp—has been simplified. Kristen Sagaert breaks down many of these updates in Episode 108 of the Champs App Podcast.

Here are some key differences compared to 2024:

15s players (2010 birth year) now have a chance to be selected for the U18 Camp after completing 15s Camp.
Only 15 players—all from the 2025 U18 World Championship roster—were selected to go directly to U18 Camp (compared to over 60 in previous years).
The 16/17s Camp (2008 & 2009) has expanded from 8 to 10 teams, increasing capacity from 150 to 174 players.

As a result, 2008 and 2009 players who went directly to U18s last year must now earn their spot through the 16/17s Camp. With the addition of an All-Star game, top players will have a stronger opportunity to prove they belong at the U18 level.

While the 16/17s Camp grew by 16 players, the combined total of 2008 and 2009 players across the 16/17s and U18 camps has dropped by about 10. This is likely due to last year’s U18 participants now filling 16/17s spots.

Meanwhile, 15s Camp still needs to add 44 players from the Minnesota selection camp which till take place around June 17th. Also, there seems to be more district and multi-district camps for players who don’t make national camps.

Overall, this restructuring is a positive step. It creates broader access to earn a spot at the U18 Camp. The continued challenge remains the evaluation process—where leveraging analytics can play a key role in ensuring fairness and consistency in player assessments.

Tags girls-hockey, player development camp, tag, usa-girls-hockey

2025 Coach page College Hockey Recruiting Youth Hockey

RAD Player Advancement Camp 2025

Post author By Ray Tenenbaum
Post date May 1, 2025

Go straight to the Instructions on How to Connect with RAD Player Advancement Camp Coaches

Why Create a Champs App Profile? (Video)

How to Create a Beautiful Hockey Profile That Gets Noticed (Video)

Coach Profiles

Matt Gilroy

Assistant Coach – Harvard University

Brett Beebe

California Scout – Portland Winterhawks

Joel Rumpel

Assistant Coach – Chilliwack Chiefs

NICK GALLO

West Coast Scout – Fargo Force

BLAKE HIETELA

Assistant Coach- Augustana Vikings

Gudger Gentzler

Assistant Coach – Bentley University

Hugh Dunlop

California Scout – Penticton Vees

Brady Bakke

Assistant Coach – Blackfalds Bulldogs

James Spargaaren

Head Coach – San Diego Sabres

LEIGH MENDELSON

Director of Scouting – Wenatchee Wild

Alex Hicks

Associate Head Coach – Arizona State University

Lee Demas

West Coast Scout – Red Deer Rebels

Sam Graham

Assistant Coach – Anchorage Wolverines

Ryan Donald

Head Coach -Cranbrook Bucks

Champs App lets players create beautiful, free hockey resume that facilitate the college hockey recruiting process.

“How do I know coaches will remember me after the RAD Player Advancement Camp?”

By connecting directly with coaches, players can know that coaches will continue to follow them after the event during the regular season (see their schedule, video & profile updates). Coaches can not only get more details about each player, but also see their upcoming schedule, regular teams and coaches.

Instructions:

Step 1: Create your free Champs App Profile hockey resume here

Step 2: To make it easier for the RAD Player Advancement Camp coaches to find you make sure you add your current team to your Champs profile and make sure to include your jersey #

Step 3: Review the list of the RAD Player Advancement Camp to connect with and then send connection requests to the coaches/schools you are interested in from within Champs App.

Tags college-hockey-recruiting, ncaa-college-hockey-coach, tag

ChampsRankSOS with Decay Rate: DI Women’s College Hockey

as of November 30, 2025

ChampsRankSOS without Decay Rate (Full Season Rating): DI Women’s College Hockey

as of November 30, 2025

#1 Ranking Flip

Why the flip occurs

Other Notable Shifts

🎥 Step 1: Submit Your Video

👀 Step 2: Expert Scout Evaluation

📊 Step 3: Ratings, Tiers & Feedback

🧮 How Ratings Translate into Tiers

🧭 Step 4: Actionable Insights

🚀 Ready to See Where You Stand?

Keep It Concise: Less Than 6 Minutes is Key

Video: Helpful, But Not the Only Factor

What Kind of Footage Do They Prefer?

How to Submit Your Video

When to Submit

Special Considerations for Goalies

In Summary:

READ MORE ON THIS TOPIC:

🚨Champs App Profile 2.0 is Here – With Videos, References & More!

🎥 Upload Videos Directly

Here’s what’s new:

🎥 Upload Videos Directly

🤝 Add Trusted References

📅 Smarter Scheduling

📊 Elite Prospects Integration

Understanding Scholarship Flexibility

The “Grandfather Rule” Exception

Schools Not Opting In

Impact on Women’s Ice Hockey

Impact on Men’s Ice Hockey

Jinelle Zaugg‑Siergiej

Mira Jalosuo

Molly Engstrom

Erik Strand

Jeff Giesen

Britni Smith

Nick Carpenito

Greg May

Dan Koch

🏁 Final Thoughts: Familiarity or Fresh Blood?

Coach Profiles

“How do I know coaches will remember me after the RAD Player Advancement Camp?”

Instructions: