Howie
These Bulldogs have championship talent. They have not earned the comparison yet.
UMD is closer to the championship standard than it has been in years. It possesses the scoring, experience, coaching and roster depth required to win nationally. The 2026-27 team has earned the right to be measured against UMD’s champions. It has not earned the right to stand beside them.
Howie
Powered by Lyric Kitchen & Bar
Editor’s note: This is the fifth in a 10-part series examining the Minnesota Duluth men’s hockey program entering the 2026-27 season.
Minnesota Duluth has assembled a team talented enough to invite comparisons with the best groups in program history. That does not mean the 2026-27 Bulldogs have earned those comparisons. It means they have accepted the burden that comes with them.
This roster can score with almost any UMD team of the Scott Sandelin era. It returns the reigning Hobey Baker Award winner, another 50-point forward, experienced centers, productive wings and a defense capable of contributing offensively. The Bulldogs should enter the season as a legitimate national championship contender.
The operative word is contender.
UMD’s three national championship teams were not crowned because they looked imposing in August. They became champions because their talent survived pressure, injuries, difficult road trips, unforgiving NCAA tournament games and the inevitable nights when their best players could not manufacture easy offense.
The 2026-27 Bulldogs have the skill to enter that conversation. They must still prove they possess the rest of the championship formula.
Last season provided a compelling starting point. UMD finished 24-15-1, scored 130 goals and allowed 99. The Bulldogs averaged 3.3 goals, held opponents to 2.5 and converted an extraordinary 29.6% of their power-play opportunities. They reached an NCAA regional final before losing 4-3 to Michigan. Those numbers confirmed that UMD had returned to national relevance, but they also defined the distance between relevance and a championship. UMD’s official 2025-26 statistics show a team with elite offensive capability that was not yet dominant in every phase.
The most natural comparison is the 2018-19 championship team, the second half of UMD’s consecutive-title run. Those Bulldogs finished 29-11-2 and closed the season with eight straight victories. They scored 127 goals, three fewer than the 2025-26 team, but allowed only 77. They outshot opponents by an average of 33.4 to 23.4 and surrendered 1.8 goals per game. UMD’s 2018-19 statistics describe more than a talented team. They describe a team that controlled games.
That is the standard these Bulldogs must chase.
The 2018-19 group did not need to win every game 5-4. Hunter Shepard gave UMD stability in goal. Scott Perunovich could change possession and pace from the blue line. Nick Wolff supplied size, edge and defensive authority. Parker Mackay, Peter Krieger, Riley Tufte and a deep collection of experienced forwards understood how to play when space disappeared.
That team could win with offense, structure, patience or force. It could protect a one-goal lead without becoming passive. It could survive an opponent’s best period and respond without abandoning its identity. Most importantly, it entered the NCAA tournament with players who had already experienced championship pressure.
The 2026-27 Bulldogs may have a higher offensive ceiling.
Max Plante returns after producing 25 goals and 27 assists in 40 games and winning the Hobey Baker Award. Zam Plante had 20 goals and 31 assists. Together, they gave UMD two players with more than 50 points, an extraordinary foundation in modern college hockey. Jayson Shaugabay, Hunter Anderson, Barrett Hall, Blake Bechen and the rest of a deep forward group give Sandelin enough options to create multiple dangerous lines rather than loading every offensive responsibility onto one unit.
Victor Plante now joins his brothers after being selected in the 2026 NHL draft. Kade Kohanski adds another skilled Hermantown freshman. Peyton Platter arrives after playing at Alaska Fairbanks, while a year of development should make Anderson, Luke Bibby and Ryan Zaremba more dependable throughout the schedule. UMD’s 2026-27 roster is not built around one scorer and a collection of passengers. It contains legitimate skill throughout the forward group.
That distinguishes these Bulldogs from many good UMD teams. They should not have to wait for one line or one power-play unit to rescue them every weekend.
The defense also has championship-level ingredients. Ty Hanson is an established puck mover and offensive threat. Aaron Pionk brings experience. Brady Cleveland and Adam Kleber give UMD two 6-foot-5 defensemen who can make the front of the net a miserable place to work. Jake Toll and Grayden Siepmann have already played important minutes, while Keith McInnis and Carter Murphy add new options.
But ingredients are not the finished product.
The championship teams defended as connected five-player units. Their forwards tracked back. Their defensemen managed gaps. Their goaltenders controlled rebounds. They did not regularly trade chances simply because they believed their skill would eventually produce the deciding goal.
That is where the comparison becomes demanding.
The 2018-19 Bulldogs allowed 22 fewer goals than UMD did last season despite playing two additional games. They did not merely receive strong goaltending. They limited the volume and quality of opportunities reaching Shepard. They spent long stretches in possession and forced opponents to attack through layers.
The current Bulldogs must show they can do the same. Cole Sheffield, Ethan Dahlmeir and freshman Carl Axelsson give UMD options in goal, but none enters the season with Shepard’s championship résumé. Until one of them establishes himself as a reliable No. 1 — or a rotation proves capable of handling the job — goaltending will remain the largest unanswered question on an otherwise loaded roster.
The 2011 champions offer another useful lesson. That team had star power, led by Jack and Mike Connolly, Justin Fontaine and Justin Faulk, but its greatness was not measured only by names or point totals. UMD navigated the tension of playing the Frozen Four in St. Paul, survived three one-goal NCAA tournament games and defeated Michigan in overtime for the program’s first Division I men’s championship.
The 2018 champions followed a different path. They entered the NCAA tournament after barely qualifying, then won four consecutive one-goal games. The 2019 team carried the pressure of defending a championship and became even more commanding when the season reached its decisive stage.
Each championship team had a separate personality. All three shared the ability to become harder to play against as the consequences increased.
That is what the 2026-27 Bulldogs must establish.
They do not need to imitate the 2011 team’s offense or the 2019 team’s defensive numbers. They do not need another Shepard, Perunovich or Connolly. They need their own dependable goaltender, their own shutdown defensive pair, their own checking line and their own response when a February road game becomes ugly.
They also must prove last season’s power-play dominance can translate into postseason success. A 29.6% conversion rate is exceptional, but NCAA tournament games are not decided by regular-season averages. Opponents study tendencies, eliminate preferred entries and force stars to create under tighter pressure. Championship teams remain dangerous when their first option disappears.
UMD is closer to the championship standard than it has been in years. It possesses the scoring, experience, coaching and roster depth required to win nationally. Sandelin has already coached three teams through this exact passage from possibility to proof.
That history gives the Bulldogs authority. It does not give them a shortcut.
The 2026-27 team has earned the right to be measured against UMD’s champions. It has not earned the right to stand beside them. That distinction can be settled only on the ice.