dagies

It's worth considering that recruits look at how long a coach will be around when making decisions. Giving him only a 2 year deal tells recruits it's uncertain if this guy is going to be around half-way through their career. That's not helpful...

Also, it would seem strange that if Jackson is the top choice the announcement wouldn't come more quickly. I suppose it is possible a full search is being done and Jackson could still rise to the top of the pool. If so, I think we can feel even better about that.

I get why ppl think a Jackson hire wouldn't be exciting but that's discounting the amount of control and influence you have when you are an assistant vs the responsible party. As an assistant your job is to provide advice and counsel but carry out the policy of the head person. Same as a middle manager in a business organization. But how you are received by the team changes when you are the final say on things. Your ability to influence those who report to you changes significantly because they know their future is in your hands. So that dynamic isn't being well considered in this thread. Add to that the likely influx of new assistants, etc. Potential exists for significant change in performance. I'm not saying I think Jackson is, or is not, he best choice. Just that I think he could be a great choice.

Good post

No way. You don't open a job hoping you get your target. You know on the front end.

My theory. Chavez told Berry "you need to get rid of X staff member". Berry said "you'll have to fire me". So Chavez did. Just a theory.

Preferred Qualifications are just that. Not mandatory. If you are like me, and a tie goes to UND connections, then you put that in there to prevent the coach not selected complaining that the decision wasn't fair. The "UND Family" is a big deal. The culture draws recruits and keeps former players connected which maintains interest and $ coming in. Hire a coach who doesn't see the value in maintaining those connections (see Lucia at MN) and you can hurt your program. UND is a small financial fish in a big financial pond with the Big10 and other big schools putting more into hockey. $ is becoming a huge deal in getting guys from the portal and keeping guys you want to keep. UND cannot afford to lose the benefits of the UND family. Doesn't have to be a UND guy to keep it going, but you better hire the right guy.

If we went back ten years on this board I wonder how much Hak love there would be? Personally I'd be fine with him coming back but don't see it.

Agree

Baloney. Money talks.

Do you guys not know this is happening at every school? Every "agent" is checking around to see who would be interested in their player. Every coach is letting back channels communicate to a target "hey, there could be a spot for ya here...." This is not news. It's the landscape.

Amen

Fair

That is a stark visual

No doubt

Don't understand the desire to not hire a UND alum. I'm OK if they don't. But for me tie goes to the guy who bleeds green. As for guys who have proven something, Enrico Blasi.

UND has a lot of spoiled fans. Getting the next great coach is far from a sure thing. Berry's teams almost always had a chance. Good character, good citizens. Good players. Maybe the next coach will be better. Might not be.

Showed up at game time

Weird. We also can't see it as of 5 min ago...

Love that by Perron. Scores on a VERY nice shot, but doesn't pound his chest or "look at me", instead points to Johannes who had done the hard work and made the pass that made it all possibly. Love it.

What patience by OM!

What a shot that was by Johannes

au contraire

Head trainer advised him to take VitaD and is as surprised as anyone of what was in the bottle McKay took. Wouldn't be surprised the trainer had him on ivermectin as a precaution either (just referring back to someone's comment earlier in this thread about how VitaD isn't proven to help with immunity). Point is, we don't know if McKay was referred to this product BY the trainer but if he had checked with the trainer he'd have gotten the go-ahead. The miniscule amounts are meaningless. I think this is bad luck on his part and a cautionary tale to most athletes....don't take supplements unless there's real scientific evidence backing up a product. And I'm not talking about "do your own research" scientific evidence. Real stuff. I'm no apologist for doping. I'm a big fan of road cycling and there's a sport that has a terrible history with doping and all kinds of stories of "it was in my supplement, I had no idea!". But those stories typically don't have the same details here (teensy amounts, same lot tested, etc.). I'm happy to criticize any athlete who's doping. I just can't get worked up over this one.

THANK YOU!