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
The Boston College women’s ice hockey program, a consistent top-10 powerhouse from 2010 to 2019, has experienced a noticeable downturn in recent years, seeing them fall out of the national top rankings. This shift can be attributed to a confluence of factors, most notably a significant loss of top-tier talent through the NCAA transfer portal, coupled with the natural cycle of player graduation and the increasing parity in women’s college hockey.
The gap between the Eagles and the nation’s elite was starkly highlighted at the start of the 2025-26 season. In a two-game series on September 25th and 26th, 2025, Boston College was outscored by a combined 18-1 in back-to-back losses to the University of Minnesota, falling 7-1 and 11-0. These results provided a clear illustration of the team’s current challenges against top-tier programs.
While the program enjoyed a decade of dominance under head coach Katie Crowley, marked by numerous NCAA tournament appearances and Hockey East championships, the tide began to turn following the 2019-20 season. An examination of their season records reveals a stark contrast. After a strong 2018-19 season with a 26-12-1 record, and a respectable 17-16-3 showing in 2019-20, the team’s performance started to dip. The COVID-19-shortened 2020-21 season saw a 14-6-0 record, but the subsequent seasons marked a significant decline with losing records of 19-15-1 in 2021-22, 11-20-3 in 2022-23, and 14-18-3 in 2023-24.
The most significant factor contributing to this decline has been the departure of several high-impact players. This exodus of talent has created significant gaps in their lineup and leadership. Key losses include:
Daryl Watts: The 2018 Patty Kazmaier Award winner as the nation’s top female college ice hockey player transferred to Wisconsin after the 2018-19 season, a move that sent shockwaves through the college hockey world.
Cayla Barnes and Hannah Bilka: Two of the team’s captains and key veteran leaders, defenseman Cayla Barnes and forward Hannah Bilka, departed for rival powerhouse Ohio State following the 2022-23 season. It is important to note that both players had graduated from Boston College and were using their fifth year of eligibility, granted due to the COVID-19 pandemic, to play for the Buckeyes. While they completed their academic and athletic careers at BC, their departure meant the Eagles lost two of their most experienced and productive players, leaving a significant void in on-ice production and veteran leadership for the following season.
Julia Pellerin: The team’s leading goal-scorer in the 2023-24 season, Pellerin, transferred to conference rival UConn, further depleting the Eagles’ offensive firepower.
Molly Jordan: Adding to the recent challenges, standout defender Molly Jordan transferred to Minnesota in the 2024 off-season, representing another significant departure from the team’s blue line.
Compounding the challenges of player turnover was a major change behind the bench. In April 2023, longtime Associate Head Coach Courtney Kennedy left the program after 16 seasons to become a skills coach in the Professional Women’s Hockey League (PWHL) for the Boston Fleet and Head Coach of the 2026 USA Hockey U18 Women’s Team. Kennedy had been an integral part of the program’s success, working alongside Katie Crowley for their entire tenure. Her departure broke up one of the most stable and successful coaching partnerships in the country
These high-profile departures, coupled with the graduation of other key players, have made it challenging for Boston College to maintain its previous level of dominance.
While head coach Katie Crowley has remained a constant and respected figure behind the bench, the significant roster turnover has necessitated a period of rebuilding. The program continues to recruit talented players, but the immediate impact of losing established stars is difficult to overcome in the highly competitive landscape of NCAA Division I women’s ice hockey. The rise of other programs and the increasing talent pool across the country mean that sustained dominance is more challenging than ever.
The Boston College women’s ice hockey program’s slide from the top 10 is not due to a single catastrophic event, but rather a combination of the growing influence of the transfer portal, the loss of veteran talent, and the ever-increasing competitiveness of the sport. The program is currently in a rebuilding phase, focused on developing its younger players and navigating the new era of player movement in college athletics.
For aspiring young hockey players, September in the North American Hockey League (NAHL) is a time of immense hope and intense pressure. Main camps conclude, and rosters are finalized, leading to the difficult reality of players being cut from their dream of playing Tier II junior hockey. While the initial sting of being released can be disheartening, it is crucial to understand that this is a common part of the junior hockey journey and often opens doors to other valuable opportunities for development and advancement.
For players who are cut from NAHL teams in September, the path forward is typically a swift and dynamic process involving a “trickle-down” effect into other leagues, primarily the Tier III junior ranks. The North American 3 Hockey League (NA3HL), the official Tier III affiliate of the NAHL, stands as the most common and direct landing spot.
The Immediate Aftermath: Communication and Next Steps
The process of being released is typically handled through a direct, in-person meeting with the team’s coaching staff. In this meeting, coaches will inform the player of their decision and, in many cases, provide feedback on areas for improvement. While the news is difficult, it is a professional courtesy that allows players to understand the rationale behind the decision and what they need to work on.
Immediately following this conversation, the player’s support system, particularly their family advisor, springs into action. Advisors play a critical role in navigating the next steps, leveraging their network of contacts within lower-tiered junior leagues and high-level midget programs to find a suitable new team for the player. The urgency is palpable, as Tier III leagues are often in the final stages of their own training camps and roster selections.
The Domino Effect: Opportunities in Tier III and Beyond
Navigating the Cut: The Path Forward for Hockey Players Released from the NAHL in September For aspiring young hockey players, September in the North American Hockey League (NAHL) is a time of immense hope and intense pressure. Main camps conclude, and rosters are finalized, leading to the difficult reality of players being cut from their dream of playing Tier II junior hockey. While the initial sting of being released can be disheartening, it is crucial to understand that this is a common part of the junior hockey journey and often opens doors to other valuable opportunities for development and advancement.
For players who are cut from NAHL teams in September, the path forward is typically a swift and dynamic process involving a “trickle-down” effect into other leagues, primarily the Tier III junior ranks. The North American 3 Hockey League (NA3HL), the official Tier III affiliate of the NAHL, stands as the most common and direct landing spot.
The Immediate Aftermath: Communication and Next Steps The process of being released is typically handled through a direct, in-person meeting with the team’s coaching staff. In this meeting, coaches will inform the player of their decision and, in many cases, provide feedback on areas for improvement. While the news is difficult, it is a professional courtesy that allows players to understand the rationale behind the decision and what they need to work on.
Immediately following this conversation, the player’s support system, particularly their family advisor, springs into action. Advisors play a critical role in navigating the next steps, leveraging their network of contacts within lower-tiered junior leagues and high-level midget programs to find a suitable new team for the player. The urgency is palpable, as Tier III leagues are often in the final stages of their own training camps and roster selections.
The Domino Effect: Opportunities in Tier III and Beyond The release of players from the NAHL creates a ripple effect throughout the junior hockey landscape. Tier III leagues, such as the NA3HL, the Eastern Hockey League (EHL), and the United States Premier Hockey League (USPHL) Premier, often wait for these cuts to fill their final roster spots. This provides an immediate opportunity for skilled players coming from a higher level of competition.
The NA3HL, with its direct affiliation to the NAHL, offers a particularly structured pathway. Many NAHL organizations have affiliate teams in the NA3HL, and they will often direct their released players to these programs. This allows the NAHL team to keep a close eye on the player’s development throughout the season.
Beyond Tier III, some players may opt for a return to high-level 18U AAA hockey. This can be a strategic move for younger players who may benefit from another year of development before making the jump to junior hockey.
The Tender Question: Understanding Player Rights
A common point of confusion surrounds players who were “tendered” by an NAHL team. A tender is a contract that gives an NAHL team a player’s rights within the league for the upcoming season. If a tendered player is cut, the NAHL team still holds their rights. This means the player cannot sign with another NAHL team unless their rights are traded or released by the original team. However, the player is free to join a team in any other league (Tier III, Midget AAA, etc.). In some instances, the NAHL team may work to trade the player’s rights to another NAHL team that has interest.
The Road Back: Affiliation and Call-Ups
For players who land on an affiliated NA3HL team, the dream of playing in the NAHL is far from over. Throughout the season, NAHL teams can “affiliate” players from their NA3HL counterparts, allowing them to practice with the NAHL team and even be called up to play in a limited number of games. This provides a tangible opportunity for players to prove they are ready for the next level and potentially earn a permanent spot on the NAHL roster later in the season due to injuries or other roster changes.
Being cut from an NAHL team in September is undoubtedly a challenging experience for a young hockey player. However, it is a common and often necessary step in the development process. With a proactive approach, a strong support system, and a commitment to continued improvement, these players can find new opportunities to thrive in the competitive world of junior hockey, with the ultimate goal of returning to the NAHL or advancing to collegiate and professional ranks.
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!
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.
In a decision poised to reshape the landscape of collegiate athletics, a federal judge in California approved the House v. NCAA settlement on June 6, 2025, finalizing a multibillion-dollar agreement that introduces direct athlete payments, redefines scholarship structures, and addresses past inequities. This landmark class-action lawsuit, consolidating House v. NCAA, Carter v. NCAA, and Hubbard v. NCAA, marks a seismic shift from the NCAA’s long-standing amateurism model. For Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey—sports cherished in pockets of the country but dwarfed by the revenue giants of football and basketball—the settlement brings both opportunity and uncertainty, particularly in the realms of scholarships and protections for current players.
A New Framework for College Sports
Effective July 1, 2025, the settlement permits Division I institutions to share up to $20.5 million annually with athletes, a figure derived from 22% of the average athletic revenue of Power 5 conference schools. This revenue-sharing cap, which will adjust upward yearly, allows schools to compensate athletes directly for the first time. Additionally, the agreement replaces traditional scholarship limits with roster caps, granting programs flexibility to distribute full or partial scholarships across their teams. Nearly $2.8 billion in back-pay damages will also be distributed to athletes who competed from 2016 onward, though ice hockey players are likely to receive modest sums compared with their counterparts in football and men’s basketball.
The transition to this new model requires schools to opt into revenue sharing by June 15, 2025, and designate athletes who can remain on rosters above the new caps—known as “grandfathered” players—by July 6, 2025. These provisions aim to ease the shift but have sparked debate, particularly in sports like ice hockey, where roster sizes and scholarship allocations are critical to maintaining competitive balance.
Scholarships: Flexibility with Risks
Historically, NCAA rules restricted Men’s and Women’s Ice Hockey programs to 18 scholarships each, often divided into partial awards to stretch limited resources. The House settlement dismantles these caps, allowing schools to offer scholarships to any number of players within the new roster limits, expected to range from 25 to 30 for ice hockey, pending final NCAA guidelines. This change offers a chance to deepen rosters and broaden access to the sport but introduces financial disparities that could reshape competition.
Wealthier programs, particularly those in Power 5 conferences, stand to benefit most. Schools like the University of Michigan or Boston University, with robust athletic budgets, could fund scholarships for an entire roster, giving them a recruiting edge over smaller programs in conferences like the ECAC or Atlantic Hockey. For instance, a program with ample resources might offer 30 partial scholarships, enhancing depth, while a less-funded school might struggle to support even 20. This financial divide threatens to widen gaps in conferences like Hockey East or the NCHC, where budget disparities already influence outcomes.
Women’s Ice Hockey, often operating with fewer resources, faces a dual-edged sword. The removal of scholarship limits could enable programs to attract more talent by offering partial awards to a larger pool of players, potentially narrowing the competitive gap with men’s teams. Yet, schools prioritizing revenue sports like football may allocate fewer resources to women’s programs, limiting their ability to capitalize on this flexibility.
Grandfathered Players and Roster Transitions
The shift to roster limits has been a flashpoint in the settlement’s rollout. Early proposals suggested caps as low as 20–25 players for ice hockey, far below the typical 25–30, raising fears that thousands of athletes could lose their spots. Following objections from players and a directive from Judge Claudia Wilken, the settlement now includes a grandfathering provision, allowing current athletes to remain on rosters above the new limits during a transitional period.
By July 6, 2025, schools must identify these grandfathered players, ensuring they retain their roster spots or scholarships temporarily without counting against the cap. For a Men’s Ice Hockey team with 28 players, for example, a school could designate several as grandfathered, preserving their eligibility for the 2025–26 season even if the roster limit is set at 25. Women’s teams, similarly, could protect players who might otherwise face cuts. This provision offers a lifeline to current athletes, many of whom feared being squeezed out by the settlement’s reforms.
Yet, the grandfathering process is not without flaws. The NCAA’s framework grants schools discretion over designations, meaning budget-conscious athletic departments might prioritize high-profile sports or incoming recruits over existing players. Some schools have already trimmed rosters in anticipation of smaller caps, and reintegrating cut players could strain resources for scholarships, room, and board. For ice hockey, where physical demands necessitate robust rosters, retaining grandfathered players is critical to maintaining competitiveness, particularly for women’s programs, which may receive less priority in revenue-sharing allocations.
The Road Ahead for Ice Hockey
The House settlement’s revenue-sharing model could intensify recruiting battles in ice hockey. Power 5 schools, flush with larger revenue pools, may lure top prospects with lucrative NIL deals and scholarships, challenging traditional powers like the University of North Dakota or Boston College. Restrictions on third-party NIL collectives, intended to curb pay-for-play schemes, may limit ice hockey players’ earning potential compared with athletes in revenue-driven sports.
Still, the settlement’s scholarship flexibility could democratize access to ice hockey, enabling more players to receive financial support. Smaller programs, however, risk falling behind if they cannot match the financial commitments of wealthier rivals. The grandfathering provision offers temporary relief, but its discretionary nature underscores the uncertainty facing current players, particularly in women’s programs, which may struggle for equitable treatment.
As college ice hockey navigates this new era, the House v. NCAA settlement promises to redefine the sport’s competitive and financial landscape. For players, coaches, and administrators, the challenge lies in balancing opportunity with equity in a system now driven by revenue and choice.
Carrington is a quick, aggressive defenceman known for her physical play and willingness to battle along the boards. She excels at making sharp, efficient breakout passes and contributes offensively when needed, all while staying solid at the blue line. Whether she’s backchecking with intensity or keeping the puck in the zone, Carrington consistently makes smart, impactful plays to support her team at both ends of the ice.
Caroline thrives competing at the highest level. A proud moment was her shutout vs. Assabet Valley, which helped her Chicago Mission team win the 2024 14U Nat’l Championship. Neutral Zone describes her as athletic and composed, with strong fundamentals, quick reflexes, and excellent rebound control.
A coachable, versatile, impact player who plays top minutes and can be relied upon in any situation. A powerful skater who plays a heavy, physical, hardworking and effective two-way, 200-foot game with speed and tempo. Sound positional defender who is patient with the puck in all zones, an accurate and creative passer, who is also a very effective scoring threat, particularly from the dots down.
I’m a calm technical goalie focused on consistent improvement. My strengths are my communication, rebound control, and hockey IQ. I play this sport because I love it.
