Is it time to Fire Hak?

[MoreSiouxForYou]

To be devil's advocate, a decade ago (pre-Hakstol) it was 7 titles in about 53 years for one every 7.5 years, Denver and Minnesota were a couple more behind, Wisconsin and BU another one back each. That's what makes the drought so hard, we used to be climbing up on Michigan and have a pretty commanding lead over our WCHA foes, but now that's evaporated.

This also speaks to the parity in college hockey that makes it more difficult now that for Gino and much lesser Blais. US juniors and just better players all around make it possible for any team (Holy Cross) to have a moment that knocks a 1 seed on their butts. There are a lot of teams out there that are a lot better than ever before. You do not see the same routes and beatings like you used to. Occasionally yes, not consistently where we all pound team X. Who would have ever thought back then that Miami would be a perennial power to deal with?

[Goon]

Holy Cow! Our favorite team is 13-5-2 at the break and you would have sworn they were 7-10-3... I would hate to think what we would be talking about today if that was our record. :D

[Runninwiththedogs]

GeauxSioux -- You make a very valid point there. Whatever happened to the successful "rope-a-dope" philosophy of Hak's first 6 years?

I realize that other teams are catching on to this tactic so he probably feels it's time to start something new, but I've been kind of enjoying these second half surges. Most of them aren't able to duplicate it anyway. Just look at the Gophers. For the last 3-4 years The Don has been trying to implement a variant of the "rope-a-dope", but his players keep forgetting that they have to abandon the "dope" systems before the end of March rolls around.

Josh Birkholz was right on top of the dope system.

[82SiouxGuy]

To be devil's advocate, a decade ago (pre-Hakstol) it was 7 titles in about 53 years for one every 7.5 years, Denver and Minnesota were a couple more behind, Wisconsin and BU another one back each. That's what makes the drought so hard, we used to be climbing up on Michigan and have a pretty commanding lead over our WCHA foes, but now that's evaporated.

If you look at UND's history, they win titles in clusters. They won iin 59 and 63, then not for 17 years. They won 3 titles in 8 years, then not again for a decade. Then they won 2 more in 4 years. Statistically that would tell me to probably expect a decade or more after the cluster ends before winning the next title, followed by at least 1 more within 4 years. Last year was the decade mark. Clustering of titles seems to be prevalent in the history of college hockey. A lot of schools have won multiple titles in a short period and then go through a drought period. By my count, a school has won 2 titles in 5 or less years or 3 titles in 8 or less years 14 times in the history of the NCAA DI ice hockey championships. UND fits the profile. The big difference between most of the top programs and several others like Lake Superior State is that the top programs have multiple clusters of titles. It also explains why schools like Denver and Minnesota caught up to UND. It was their turn for a cluster of wins. UND should be in line for a cluster of wins again in the near future.

Also, if I'm looking at the average period period over time I would either start at the beginning (getting the average of winning every 9 years) or use the first title as a base line, which would mean winning an average of every 8.5 years since 1959. But even if you use your figure of winning every 7.5 years, this is Hak's 7th year. Yo u can't blame the entire decade drought on him since Blais was the coach for the first 3 years. So Hak hasn't even reached the average period for titles. The problem is the perception that UND wins titles all of the time (every 5 years no matter what). That is just a perception, not reality. If UND wins 2 titles in the next 5-7 years (the cluster effect) it will follow the actual pattern more closely than the perceived pattern.

[siouxu31]

If you look at UND's history, they win titles in clusters. They won iin 59 and 63, then not for 17 years. They won 3 titles in 8 years, then not again for a decade. Then they won 2 more in 4 years. Statistically that would tell me to probably expect a decade or more after the cluster ends before winning the next title, followed by at least 1 more within 4 years. Last year was the decade mark. Clustering of titles seems to be prevalent in the history of college hockey. A lot of schools have won multiple titles in a short period and then go through a drought period. By my count, a school has won 2 titles in 5 or less years or 3 titles in 8 or less years 14 times in the history of the NCAA DI ice hockey championships. UND fits the profile. The big difference between most of the top programs and several others like Lake Superior State is that the top programs have multiple clusters of titles. It also explains why schools like Denver and Minnesota caught up to UND. It was their turn for a cluster of wins. UND should be in line for a cluster of wins again in the near future.

Also, if I'm looking at the average period period over time I would either start at the beginning (getting the average of winning every 9 years) or use the first title as a base line, which would mean winning an average of every 8.5 years since 1959. But even if you use your figure of winning every 7.5 years, this is Hak's 7th year. Yo u can't blame the entire decade drought on him since Blais was the coach for the first 3 years. So Hak hasn't even reached the average period for titles. The problem is the perception that UND wins titles all of the time (every 5 years no matter what). That is just a perception, not reality. If UND wins 2 titles in the next 5-7 years (the cluster effect) it will follow the actual pattern more closely than the perceived pattern.

All I can say is WOW after this post.

This means that Northern Michigan and Michigan Tech. are due then. They have past titles and its been a few years, so count them in.

WOW!

[Old Time Hockey]

If you look at UND's history, they win titles in clusters. They won iin 59 and 63, then not for 17 years. They won 3 titles in 8 years, then not again for a decade. Then they won 2 more in 4 years. Statistically that would tell me to probably expect a decade or more after the cluster ends before winning the next title, followed by at least 1 more within 4 years. Last year was the decade mark. Clustering of titles seems to be prevalent in the history of college hockey. A lot of schools have won multiple titles in a short period and then go through a drought period. By my count, a school has won 2 titles in 5 or less years or 3 titles in 8 or less years 14 times in the history of the NCAA DI ice hockey championships. UND fits the profile. The big difference between most of the top programs and several others like Lake Superior State is that the top programs have multiple clusters of titles. It also explains why schools like Denver and Minnesota caught up to UND. It was their turn for a cluster of wins. UND should be in line for a cluster of wins again in the near future.

Also, if I'm looking at the average period period over time I would either start at the beginning (getting the average of winning every 9 years) or use the first title as a base line, which would mean winning an average of every 8.5 years since 1959. But even if you use your figure of winning every 7.5 years, this is Hak's 7th year. Yo u can't blame the entire decade drought on him since Blais was the coach for the first 3 years. So Hak hasn't even reached the average period for titles. The problem is the perception that UND wins titles all of the time (every 5 years no matter what). That is just a perception, not reality. If UND wins 2 titles in the next 5-7 years (the cluster effect) it will follow the actual pattern more closely than the perceived pattern.

What? National Titles are cyclic clusters? I always thought it happened due to good players and coaching. Hmmm........................

[808287]

I don't know where you get your info but scoring 13 goals and having 25 points isn't "snakebit" in my book.

While Kristo has one goal for half the season. It is truly sad for a player of his suppose caliber after 15 goals last year.

Frattin clanged a lot of iron, and shot quite a few wide, that year before the flood gates opened.

[sprig]

If I see one more reference comparing Hac to Woog I'm going to hurl. Woog's last few years were the problem, not him missing he championship in spite of multiple trips to the playoffs. The country club team with no interest in performing as a team was the problem, when you can say that about a Hackstol team then it's time to discuss firing. Until then, stfu.

[siouxforce19]

I don't know where you get your info but scoring 13 goals and having 25 points isn't "snakebit" in my book.

While Kristo has one goal for half the season. It is truly sad for a player of his suppose caliber after 15 goals last year.

Frattin had a goal drought to start the season, then hit his stride in the middle and then went without a goal from the end of January until theplayoffs. that's snakebit. That's where the snakebit thing comes in as far as his sophomore year. Inconsistent is probably a better word.

[sagard]

What? National Titles are cyclic clusters? I always thought it happened due to good players and coaching. Hmmm........................

Great players and great coaching only get you so far. You need a LOT of luck as well, even more so in the 16 team format. First round games vs. teams like Holy Cross, BSU, Air Force, Yale are no longer givens. In the past they were 1st round byes.

Gophers fit the cluster model as well, sadly ours are a bit further apart than yours.

[siouxweet]

UND won in 1959, 1963, 1980, 1982, 1987, 1997 and 2000. That's 7 titles in about 63 years. They don

[Irish]

Great players and great coaching only get you so far. You need a LOT of luck as well, even more so in the 16 team format. First round games vs. teams like Holy Cross, BSU, Air Force, Yale are no longer givens. In the past they were 1st round byes.

Gophers fit the cluster model as well, sadly ours are a bit further apart than yours.

However, early round upsets, while they cost some teams, help others. Take the Holy Cross game. The Sioux were looking at playing the number one seed Gophers in order to get to the Frozen Four, which if you remember looked to be a very difficult game in which we might have been the underdog, then found out that they had to beat Holy Cross to get in. Win your first game, beat the #16 seed, and you're good to go. Opening round upsets actually make it easier for teams who take care of business to advance by providing easier second round match-ups. Teams more than ever need focus for this tournament. It is not way more difficult as some would have you believe.

[Big A HG]

Whatever happens, I just hope we play in Green Bay for the regional this year. That'd make my day.

[siouxweet]

However, early round upsets, while they cost some teams, help others. Take the Holy Cross game. The Sioux were looking at playing the number one seed Gophers in order to get to the Frozen Four, which if you remember looked to be a very difficult game in which we might have been the underdog, then found out that they had to beat Holy Cross to get in. Win your first game, beat the #16 seed, and you're good to go. Opening round upsets actually make it easier for teams who take care of business to advance by providing easier second round match-ups. Teams more than ever need focus for this tournament. It is not way more difficult as some would have you believe.

true, but that was one year. in other years for example in 2005 had to go through bu and bc intheir backyards, 2007 go through michigan and then minnesota, 2008 princeton and then wisconsin on their home ice, 2009 new hampshire on virtually their home ice and if we would have won BU intheir backyard, 2010 yale and if we would have won BC in their backyard. which is more dificult? already being seeded in the semifinals as in 1980 without having to play a game,playing clarkson in a total goals series on your home ice in 1982 to advance to the frozen four, and a home series against st. lawrence in which most total goals advances you to the frozen four or the route teams have had to go in the past 9 years?

[Bob in Wisconsin]

Whatever happens, I just hope we play in Green Bay for the regional this year. That'd make my day.

I second that.

[Goon]

I second that.

Of course you guys would, you live in Wisconsin, but maybe that makes the trip more do able as well. I predict UND will get stuck in an East Regional and play in a half empty run down barn.

[jodcon]

Of course you guys would, you live in Wisconsin, but maybe that makes the trip more do able as well. I predict UND will get stuck in an East Regional and play in a half empty run down barn.

...and have to play BC in the Regional Final, because everybody hates us.

[Goon]

...and have to play BC in the Regional Final, because everybody hates us.

That could happen again after we beat YALE...

[darell1976]

Whats the earliest the REA could host a regional? 2011-2012?

[siouxforce19]

Of course you guys would, you live in Wisconsin, but maybe that makes the trip more do able as well. I predict UND will get stuck in an East Regional and play in a half empty run down barn.

All we have to do is get a number one seed and we won't have to go east!

[82SiouxGuy]

What? National Titles are cyclic clusters? I always thought it happened due to good players and coaching. Hmmm........................

Good players and good coaching are probably what cause the clusters. One really good class getting multiple titles.

[82SiouxGuy]

All we have to do is get a number one seed and we won't have to go east!

UND could get a number 1 seed and still go east. Now if they are the highest ranked number one seed the chances are pretty good that they would stay in the west.

[siouxforce19]

UND could get a number 1 seed and still go east. Now if they are the highest ranked number one seed the chances are pretty good that they would stay in the west.

Don't disagree with you on that...

but...

If attendence matters, they'd send us to St Louis or Green Bay if we have a number one seed. That's where my thinking is on that...

[82SiouxGuy]

Don't disagree with you on that...

but...

If attendence matters, they'd send us to St Louis or Green Bay if we have a number one seed. That's where my thinking is on that...

It depends on who the other number ones would be. For instance, if Wisconsin and Notre Dame got number one seeds I could see Wisconsin going to Green Bay and Notre Dame going to St. Louis. Also, the host schools automatically stay in their regional, and if they are number one seeds they would take the spots. Attendance does matter but it isn't the top deciding factor. They might decide that UND will add enough attendance to an eastern regional (say the same regional as BC) and if they can pack the western regionals with good draws they could move UND east.

[Blackheart]

It depends on who the other number ones would be. For instance, if Wisconsin and Notre Dame got number one seeds I could see Wisconsin going to Green Bay and Notre Dame going to St. Louis. Also, the host schools automatically stay in their regional, and if they are number one seeds they would take the spots. Attendance does matter but it isn't the top deciding factor. They might decide that UND will add enough attendance to an eastern regional (say the same regional as BC) and if they can pack the western regionals with good draws they could move UND east.

So if the Gofers get a #1 seed this year, the Green Bay regional gets moved to Mariucci, right?