brianvf Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 So would you fire these coaches after eight years? Coach one: made NCAA five times in first 8 years, then did not make the playoffs for the next 4 years. Coach two: did not make the NCAAs in his first six years, then made it to quarterfinals and semifinals in his seventh and eighth year. Yes or No. Are we talking about a hypothetical Sioux coach in these scenarios? Because if so, he should be fired on both counts.
Rink Rat Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 How long should Hak have left the lines intact to develop chemistry? It seemed to me that he would leave most line combos together for a few games...some lines for longer. And then when Parks and MiMac got back after Xmas it started all over again. Take the top line...even after most on here (myself included) wanted to see that line with Grimaldi on it, they still weren't effective for a few of the games that they were together. Throughout the season, he was probably on that line for 8-10 games at least... I think the "chemistry" angle is overblown a bit IMO. True, if you pair certain players that have complementary skills together on a line, they will have a higher chance at success...but it's not that black and white. What works one game may not work the next...and not for an entire season. We've had success in the past with the Money Line, Line of Fire, DOT line, etc where essentially the coach just stacked our three best forwards on the ice together. And I do think when Grimaldi was on the KK line that they certainly generated chances, but for whatever reason they just couldn't click together consistently (even though they were given a chance to develop that elusive "chemistry"). Lack of secondary scoring certainly played a part being that teams could focus their best defensive line against that stacked line...but even so that line should have been successful regardless with that amount of talent on it. One thing to make a few changes game by game, but it seemed like it all 4 lines were consistently changing. I mean come one, not even one line stayed consistent in the second half of the year. You need a team to win any kind of championship and correct me if I'm wrong, but we went 0-3 this season. Any good coach will reflect on why they didn't do the job this season. So hopefully Hak has it in him to learn from it then, but my opinion is he isn't going to be the guy behind the bench when we win number 8.
CMSioux Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Are we talking about a hypothetical Sioux coach in these scenarios? Because if so, he should be fired on both counts. Nope - real coaches and what they had accomplished after their first eight years.
Irish Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 So would you fire these coaches after eight years? Coach one: made NCAA five times in first 8 years, then did not make the playoffs for the next 4 years. Coach two: did not make the NCAAs in his first six years, then made it to quarterfinals and semifinals in his seventh and eighth year. Yes or No. It really depends upon which program he took over - was it a bottom feeder or did he come into one of the top programs in the nation - also what resources did he have and what did his immediate predecessors do? The expectations for UND are quite different than those at Anchorage.
yzerman19 Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 These have to be the likes of Jerry York,Jack Parker, Red Berenson, Herb Brooks
Fetch Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Becoming a true Fanatic has taught me that all the end of year stuff is way overrated I really have enjoyed meeting my family in St Paul for the F5 & it has been great when we win I have been to a F4 & it was fun but not as good as the F5 I have a new big tv & HD now so I cant wait for away games to be in HD & all shown I have season tickets for around 30 yrs & the Ralph makes me smile every time I take the time to see & remember how spectacular it is The enjoyment I get from Sioux Hockey is way more than winning it all at the end I'm glad were competitive & get some really special skill guys now & then & we get to see other teams skill guys & now that I enjoy hockey so much more on TV in HD - I will watch the Wild & see many of them in the NHL But to weigh it all on the end tournaments is just setting yourself up for disappointment 1
UND Alum Fan Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 the key point about duluth in your post is one frozen four=one national title...sandelin got it done when he was there And the rest if the time Duluth is mediocre at best. So you get one national title and then nothing for years. You would prefer that over a team that's always exciting and near the top of the rankings? Fire Sandeline!!!
CMSioux Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 It really depends upon which program he took over - was it a bottom feeder or did he come into one of the top programs in the nation - also what resources did he have and what did his immediate predecessors do? The expectations for UND are quite different than those at Anchorage. I would guess the expectations at the colleges are similar to UNDs. Coach one is Jack Parker who just retired at BU and Coach two is Red Berenson at Michigan. So comparing their first eight year record to Haks some would have fired them both. Oh and Jack won 3 championships in his 40 years, Red won two championships in 28 years - also appears some would call their records a failure because of lack of championships every time they made the tourney.
BeazSioux Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Becoming a true Fanatic has taught me that all the end of year stuff is way overrated I really have enjoyed meeting my family in St Paul for the F5 & it has been great when we win I have been to a F4 & it was fun but not as good as the F5 I have a new big tv & HD now so I cant wait for away games to be in HD & all shown I have season tickets for around 30 yrs & the Ralph makes me smile every time I take the time to see & remember how spectacular it is The enjoyment I get from Sioux Hockey is way more than winning it all at the end I'm glad were competitive & get some really special skill guys now & then & we get to see other teams skill guys & now that I enjoy hockey so much more on TV in HD - I will watch the Wild & see many of them in the NHL But to weigh it all on the end tournaments is just setting yourself up for disappointment Good stuff. I was getting ridiculed by my family who have all been SIOUX fans for longer than me because of my antics and cursing and expectations of perfection during yesterday's game. I too am greatly disappointed and have a definite SIOUX hangover today, like losing a close friend. I too want # 8 to be hung and was hoping it was for Danny and Cor-ban. But alas, we failed. But I would not trade constant success and excitement at being close for Duluth's one moment of glory and then real mediocrity or even poor results. Go SIOUX!
CMSioux Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Oh & this is a fun pic also This was obviously created by a rube who has no clue about the life-long connections players make during their time spent at UND.
GFG Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 This was obviously created by a rube who has no clue about the life-long connections players make during their time spent at UND. Or it was created by a rube who saw an opportunity to make a meme picture
geaux_sioux Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 This was obviously created by a rube who has no clue about the life-long connections players make during their time spent at UND. Hook line and sinker. It's funny. Just like the Hakstol memes last year about him not always taking time outs, but when he does his team scores six unanswered goals.
Goon Posted March 31, 2013 Author Posted March 31, 2013 This was obviously created by a rube who has no clue about the life-long connections players make during their time spent at UND. The Picture was created by the guy who's team lost to Yale the day before.
scpa0305 Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 I wasn't using points to point out how good they were defensively, my point was from an offensive perspective this year was far more effective than in previous years. +/- is a horrible stat to judge a defense off though, give me a break. Also when you are stating holding the line vs. falling back, you don't ever have the defense hold the line on a 1-0 lead and stay that aggressive all game long. You drop back to protect the neutral zone and slow down the attack into the offensive zone. Why the heck would you ever commit both d-men like that and sacrifice a goal, they started to do that at the end of the game when down to get more offense because they had to. The team looked like they were tired IMHO and that can happen when you go from a late game on friday to afternoon on Saturday. It seems like this team is far more effective and confident with Gothberg in net than Saunders for some reason. Overall it was a good year and this team did overachieve a bit for what they had on forward. Outside of our top line, there wasn't a ton of depth at all. I'm not going to read your entire post but our d collectively has a lot of points
SIOUXFAN97 Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 And the rest if the time Duluth is mediocre at best. So you get one national title and then nothing for years. You would prefer that over a team that's always exciting and near the top of the rankings? Fire Sandeline!!! this team was far from exciting....
Irish Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 The title of this thread was done tongue in cheek - this isn't a fire Hak thread and most of the people venting are not calling for his job - We know it's secure This is a venting of frustrations thread where people can criticize our performances in the playoffs - not everyone that is frustrated is a poor fan or wants Hak's head. We do want him to improve his playoff strategies and prep. Hak is a very good coach - but not yet a great coach - many fans want him to go to the next level. There seems to be two camps regarding expectations for Hak and Sioux Hockey. One camp is what I think of as the Red Berenson/Michigan hockey group. They point to Michigan as a reason not to get upset because we have had a dry spell in Nattys. The other group thinks that a better comparison would be the Sioux program from the 80's and 90's. That group won titles at a rate of about one every 5 years and could say for about 20 years that we were the best program in college hockey. I am in the second group. It is frustrating this year because after the Gophs got beat it started to look like maybe we caught a break and the stars finally aligned. That we got outplayed by Yale in the 3rd and couldn't hold a lead with a trip to the frozen 4 on the line seemed incredible. This group of seniors has had their season ended by Yale twice. As has been pointed out, there are some commonalities among our frustrating losses - It never seems like we are the team with the hot goalie or the team that disrupts the other's game. This isn't a wait until next year thing - this year is "the next year". For some reason, this loss was more frustrating to me than some of the other painful letdowns. I know it's time to let go and look towards the future. I hope we can learn from this. 3
Goon Posted March 31, 2013 Author Posted March 31, 2013 (edited) The title of this thread was done tongue in cheek - this isn't a fire Hak thread and most of the people venting are not calling for his job - We know it's secure Correct, it was posted tongue in cheek to give fans a place to blow off steam, so we could talk hockey in the other threads. Anyone that's been around this program probably hurts today, but's it's not like UND is a bunch of talentless hacks. You're not going to win the national title every year. Sure it would be nice to see the boys win it again but some weird crap is happening this year. Edited March 31, 2013 by Goon
cberkas Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Since there are some people that want to fire Hakstol every year because he hasn't won a national title, how about look at some other coaches. Don Lucia - 26 seasons as a D1 head coach, 15 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 10 seasons since his second title. George Gwozdecky - 24 seasons as a D1 coach, 15 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 8 seasons since his second title. Red Berenson - 29 seasons as a D1 coach, 12 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 15 seasons since his second title. Jack Parker - 40 seasons as a D1 coach, 5 seasons to win his first national title, it took 17 seasons to win his second title, it took 14 seasons to win his third title. Jerry York - 41 seasons as a D1 coach, 12 seasons to win his first national title, it took 17 seasons to win his second title, it took 7 seasons to win his third title. Scott Owens - 14 seasons no national title. Dick Umile - 23 seasons no national title. Tim Whitehead - 17 seasons no national title, 12 seasons at Maine. I believe Hakstol will get a national title, after he gets the first one I could see Hakstol getting more national titles at the rate BC has been winning them. This year in the national turnament I didn't see a team that couldn't be beat. The only thing Hakstol can't do is go play for the guys on the team, its up to the 26 guys in the locker room that put the North Dakota jersey on to play a full 60 minutes every night. This team seemed to have a game each weekend that they didn't show up for a full 60 minutes. 1
UNDBIZ Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Also, when we go into the defensive shell, we fall apart. For some reason, Hak tries to do this to protect a lead- NHL style- but we always fail miserably at it...feels like the prevent defense. Agreed on Hak's prevent defense. The only thing the prevent defense does is prevent the team from winning. I'd prefer we stay cautiously agressive.
bypolairxam Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Gino Gasparini..2 years for National Title...Dean Blaise 3 years for National Title...We're spoiled....
Irish Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Since there are some people that want to fire Hakstol every year because he hasn't won a national title, how about look at some other coaches. Don Lucia - 26 seasons as a D1 head coach, 15 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 10 seasons since his second title. George Gwozdecky - 24 seasons as a D1 coach, 15 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 8 seasons since his second title. Red Berenson - 29 seasons as a D1 coach, 12 seasons to win his first national title, it has been 15 seasons since his second title. Jack Parker - 40 seasons as a D1 coach, 5 seasons to win his first national title, it took 17 seasons to win his second title, it took 14 seasons to win his third title. Jerry York - 41 seasons as a D1 coach, 12 seasons to win his first national title, it took 17 seasons to win his second title, it took 7 seasons to win his third title. Scott Owens - 14 seasons no national title. Dick Umile - 23 seasons no national title. Tim Whitehead - 17 seasons no national title, 12 seasons at Maine. I believe Hakstol will get a national title, after he gets the first one I could see Hakstol getting more national titles at the rate BC has been winning them. This year in the national turnament I didn't see a team that couldn't be beat. The only thing Hakstol can't do is go play for the guys on the team, its up to the 26 guys in the locker room that put the North Dakota jersey on to play a full 60 minutes every night. This team seemed to have a game each weekend that they didn't show up for a full 60 minutes. I see what you did there - couple of names for comparison you left off your list Gino Gasparini - 16 years - 3 titles - first one in his second year - took over a program that was in shambles Dean Blais - 10 years - 2 titles - first one in his 3rd year Cherry-picking coaches for comparison without including previous Sioux coaches is misleading at best 1
brianvf Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 Gino Gasparini..2 years for National Title...Dean Blaise 3 years for National Title...We're spoiled.... If only Hak could have won the big one in his first year as coach in the title game against Denver. That was another one that UND could have easily won after out shooting them 45-24.
cberkas Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 I see what you did there - couple of names for comparison you left off your list Gino Gasparini - 16 years - 3 titles - first one in his second year - took over a program that was in shambles Dean Blais - 10 years - 2 titles - first one in his 3rd year Cherry-picking coaches for comparison without including previous Sioux coaches is misleading at best I could have added Bob Johnson, Jeff Sauer, Mike Eaves, and Murray Armstrong. Dean Blais, who is a great coach, hasn't won a national title since 2000 that would be 8 years (as a D1 coach). The point is there are some great coaches out there that took time to get a national title. For everyone saying the Hakstol should be fired, who do you hire?
Big A HG Posted March 31, 2013 Posted March 31, 2013 I could have added Bob Johnson, Jeff Sauer, Mike Eaves, and Murray Armstrong. Dean Blais, who is a great coach, hasn't won a national title since 2000 that would be 8 years (as a D1 coach). The point is there are some great coaches out there that took time to get a national title. For everyone saying the Hakstol should be fired, who do you hire? I'm not part of the Fire Hak crowd, but Mike Cavanaugh comes to mind. I think Western hockey is stuck in their ways of "Old Time Hockey" and it's biting us when it comes to tournament play. The future is in the Eastern style, whether we like it or not. Adapt or get run over. 1
Recommended Posts