Recruits 2026 and Beyond

[Trotsky]

6-3 198 D-man, '08, 7-12-19 with Brandon last year as a regular.  Solid, stay at home D-man.  Fine by me.

Other Saskatchewaners:

The Ferguson brothers
Stephane Gauvin
Devin Mintz
Shaun Hannah
Mark Scollan
Matt Cooney
Jeff Maxwell
Keith Peach
Alex Gregory
Byron Bitz
Tyler Mugford
Sean Collins

[scoop85]

New recruit - Cameron Allard.

"Scouting report" (Eliteprospects dive) to follow once I get back in class.

Allard was the 130th rated North American skater in the final rankings but wasn't drafted.

[stereax]

Article on the incomers.

With the loss of five cornerstone players, men's hockey took an aggressive approach to the offseason, filling in gaps in the defense, offense and goaltending.

"Five" "cornerstone" players. Clearly forgetting Cournoyer. And also exaggerating the impact of some of them.

After securing a podium spot with 47 points last season, the Red's playoff run was cut short by a narrow loss to Princeton in Lake Placid. This year, the Red is determined to reclaim its place at the top of the ECAC and beyond.

Blink blink. I mean I'd also like to forget losing to Denver but.

Following the loss of several offensive players in the previous year,

Following the loss of Nick DeSantis you mean?

Brad Gardiner elevates the Red's offensive control with his sophisticated puck-handling skills. Alongside 49 points across 133 games with the Ontario Hockey League's Barrie Colts, Gardiner brought a level of leadership and commitment as an alternate captain during his 2025-26 season. In his OHL career, he played 300 games, in which he posted 77 goals, 98 assists and 175 points, leading to the Dallas Stars selecting the forward 79th overall in the 2023 NHL Draft.

Pick a lane with games and points. Pretty sure the O doesn't play 133 games a season?

Bunch of other small things that piss me off in this article, too.

I'm getting old.

[Old Red]

stereax you may have something there.  All that new and established talent and Cornell is picked 3rd in the ECAC with no candidates for pre-season All-ECAC team honors . . .
https://ecachockey.com/news/2026/9/14/mens-ice-hockey-quinnipiac-chosen-as-favourite-for-the-second-year-in-a-row-by-league-coaches.aspx

[stereax]

stereax you may have something there.  All that new and established talent and Cornell is picked 3rd in the ECAC with no candidates for pre-season All-ECAC team honors . . .
https://ecachockey.com/news/2026/9/14/mens-ice-hockey-quinnipiac-chosen-as-favourite-for-the-second-year-in-a-row-by-league-coaches.aspx

I'm not particularly surprised, as Q and D were both better than us last year.

Who the fuck is Tyler Dunbar, though? (This is gonna bite me in the ass, I can tell.) And do we really think Croteau is that good?

Either way I'm not particularly miffed. Better to be underrated and make heads roll than the alternative.

[Chris H82]

Either way I'm not particularly miffed. Better to be underrated and make heads roll than the alternative.

Yup. See the 2026 Seattle Mariners for an example of the latter.  

[Will]

Article on the incomers.

With the loss of five cornerstone players, men's hockey took an aggressive approach to the offseason, filling in gaps in the defense, offense and goaltending.

"Five" "cornerstone" players. Clearly forgetting Cournoyer. And also exaggerating the impact of some of them.

After securing a podium spot with 47 points last season, the Red's playoff run was cut short by a narrow loss to Princeton in Lake Placid. This year, the Red is determined to reclaim its place at the top of the ECAC and beyond.

Blink blink. I mean I'd also like to forget losing to Denver but.

Following the loss of several offensive players in the previous year,

Following the loss of Nick DeSantis you mean?

Brad Gardiner elevates the Red's offensive control with his sophisticated puck-handling skills. Alongside 49 points across 133 games with the Ontario Hockey League's Barrie Colts, Gardiner brought a level of leadership and commitment as an alternate captain during his 2025-26 season. In his OHL career, he played 300 games, in which he posted 77 goals, 98 assists and 175 points, leading to the Dallas Stars selecting the forward 79th overall in the 2023 NHL Draft.

Pick a lane with games and points. Pretty sure the O doesn't play 133 games a season?

Bunch of other small things that piss me off in this article, too.

I'm getting old.

They can't all be Jane McNally.

[Trotsky]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

[stereax]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

Oh, no, I know we were spoiled, I just. Ya know. I'd like the facts to be right. I don't even particularly care about emotional storylines but get the facts straight 😭

"You should have applied for the hockey beat" maybe but man I don't have the time or ability to write on a deadline

[BearLover]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

[adamw]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

ha - Jane is great. Trotsky's journalism pontificating is always weird. I assume he is a Christopher Hitchens fan. She, however, does not have a full-time journalism job - yet - FWIW. But will be writing for CHN still.

[Will]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

ha - Jane is great. Trotsky's journalism pontificating is always weird. I assume he is a Christopher Hitchens fan. She, however, does not have a full-time journalism job - yet - FWIW. But will be writing for CHN still.

I, for one, appreciate that Jane will continue to be involved in college hockey circles.

[marty]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

ha - Jane is great. Trotsky's journalism pontificating is always weird. I assume he is a Christopher Hitchens fan. She, however, does not have a full-time journalism job - yet - FWIW. But will be writing for CHN still.

Not surprising that you and BL have different tastes in writing style - nor that he didn't enjoy Jane as much as the rest of us.

At least we know he's getting tuned up for another season of his writing beat/ersatz vocation here.

[BearLover]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

ha - Jane is great. Trotsky's journalism pontificating is always weird. I assume he is a Christopher Hitchens fan. She, however, does not have a full-time journalism job - yet - FWIW. But will be writing for CHN still.

Not surprising that you and BL have different tastes in writing style - nor that he didn't enjoy Jane as much as the rest of us.

At least we know he's getting tuned up for another season of his writing beat/ersatz vocation here.

Revving up my engine!

[BearLover]

You also have to realize there are probably at least ten people on eLF who know more about the day to day operation of the team and the program than any current undergrad, for reasons which are well beyond any Sun reporter to control.

I agree we should be kind.  Jane was head and shoulders above any prior student reporter in my years of fandom, including a few who were highly honored.  She isn't the standard, she's a miracle we were fortunate to experience.  Her combination of precision and thoroughness in reporting facts and more importantly her utter disdain for the mawkish, tired overwrought emotional bullshit that typically infests sports reporting, is a one-off.  I have never seen it ever before -- even among the greatest sports reporters of all time.  She's simply a wonder.

Honestly I doubt that will survive in her professional career.  You cannot thrive in a commercial space without giving the boobs what they want.  There's just too many of them with too many dollars for your editor to ignore.  And I'm sure her successors at the Sun will return to that tawdriness as well, as it is always guaranteed to get applause.  It is the false hustle of journalism, and it plays, even at an institution where the inmates should know better.

From all this glazing of Jane, you'd think she's Charlotte Brontë...

Seriously, what is going on here? Jane was great, but she was a student reporter covering a hockey team. She didn't do anything groundbreaking our special. She asked good questions. She wrote solid descriptions of the games. I'm happy she now has a full-time adult job in sports journalism, but I have no idea what the crazy hype on this forum is all about. Several Sun reporters in past years were just as good. Raphy Gendler and a few others in the 2017-2020 era come to mind. (And that's just during the time I've been closely following this stuff--I'm sure there are others too.)

To be clear, Jane was very good, as have been some other Sun hockey writers in recent years. But this level of glazing is out of control.

If you disagree, and think she's the second coming of Grantland Rice, I'd love for you to post a few of her articles you think are particularly great. 

I'll say one thing that I did think Jane did uniquely well, which was (probably because she's an athlete herself) try to drill down into the intricacies of hockey strategy. For example, the faceoff article about Walsh and Castagna's dominance at the dot. That type of article was actually really cool. But come on, her typical game recaps and weekly pieces were solid, but at approximately the same (quite high!) level of some past Cornell hockey writers.

ha - Jane is great. Trotsky's journalism pontificating is always weird. I assume he is a Christopher Hitchens fan. She, however, does not have a full-time journalism job - yet - FWIW. But will be writing for CHN still.

Not surprising that you and BL have different tastes in writing style - nor that he didn't enjoy Jane as much as the rest of us.

While it seems I didn't enjoy her as much as the person who referred to her (a college student) as a "miracle," "head and shoulders above prior reporters who were highly honored," "a wonder," and something "[he] had never seen before...even among the greatest sports writers of all time," that does not mean I didn't find her fantastic. Jane was great and I am happy she will continue to cover college hockey.