Irish Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 But would not have Hak contributed a lot in the recruiting of these guys to start with? OK Lucifer did it with some of Woog's boys because he had not been there when they were recruited. But Hak was there so they really could be said to be his recruits also. No one has brought this up and I have been thinking about this. To win a national all the stars have to align properly. A groove as a team has to be found. I do not think no matter how hard one tries the groove comes on its own. When something is going right it is just that way. You can not control or make this groove no matter how hard one tries to create more or less a feeling. Yale just got into a groove for 2 games. Are they going to have that groove still 2 weeks later? I guess we will find out tomorrow. Better words Hak has only so much control or influence and then fate takes over. Look at 87, 97, and 2000. I don't think it was talent so much but the groove the talent that was there put together. As most of you know I do not like Hak but I can not see any reason to fire him. Even if he was and then next coach took a title with Haks guys I still would not give the new guy credit. Too much of it all falls on the luck of the day. Hence how people have mentioned all the pipes that were hit against Yale and the entire season. Probably why I believe in fate so much. Look at how one chance meeting can change one's life. The it factor has merit - the question is - can it be created or is it totally random. After watching the Conneticut women go 8-0 in championship games, I think that there is some amount of self determination - not as random as some here claim. I dont buy the argument that some teams are consistantly off the charts lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keikla Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 The it factor has merit - the question is - can it be created or is it totally random. After watching the Conneticut women go 8-0 in championship games, I think that there is some amount of self determination - not as random as some here claim. I dont buy the argument that some teams are consistantly off the charts lucky. I know the parity card gets used a lot, but that's the huge difference between your UConn example and men's hockey. Though I do think it's a valid question as to whether or not the 'it factor' is totally random. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 I know the parity card gets used a lot, but that's the huge difference between your UConn example and men's hockey. Though I do think it's a valid question as to whether or not the 'it factor' is totally random. Not trying to equate them - I know there is a difference in Women's basketball and hockey, although there are a number of top programs in Women's basketball to contend with. In addition, they have to win many more games in a one and done situation. I was just thinking when watching the game last night that this is an example of a team that doesn't need the stars to align and seems to make it's own "luck". UConn's stars always play like stars and seem to be peaking at tourny time and it's their system that disrupts the other team. I don't think tournament success is as random as some would make it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Not trying to equate them - I know there is a difference in Women's basketball and hockey, although there are a number of top programs in Women's basketball to contend with. In addition, they have to win many more games in a one and done situation. I was just thinking when watching the game last night that this is an example of a team that doesn't need the stars to align and seems to make it's own "luck". UConn's stars always play like stars and seem to be peaking at tourny time and it's their system that disrupts the other team. I don't think tournament success is as random as some would make it here. There is way less parity in bouncyball than hockey. Then, factor in women's bouncyball where parity is even more rare. If you saw an NCAA men's bouncyball tournament where there were 16 teams (the top 4 from each Regional any given year), you'd see something much closer to what we see in hockey. To expand on this, in the history of the NCAA Bouncyball Tournament, here's how the #1 seeds have fared against 2, 3, and 4 seeds. 1 vs 2 = 54.5% ( 36-30) 1 vs 3 = 59.4% (19-13) 1 vs 4 = 67.2% (43-21) Those numbers look very comparable to the hockey tournament to my naked eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyisGr8 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 If the coach doesn't have "it", or never had "it", or doesn't know how to find "it", how can he ever help his team find "it". Remember teams are most often a reflection of their coach. For at least the last 9 years the Hakstol hasn't had "it" so don't expect his team to have "it". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 If the coach doesn't have "it", or never had "it", or doesn't know how to find "it", how can he ever help his team find "it". Remember teams are most often a reflection of their coach. For at least the last 9 years the Hakstol hasn't had "it" so don't expect his team to have "it". You can not create it. It is like when you went somewhere and had a special time. Try going back and creating that same special time again. You can't. Do you think that Gino or Dean created "it"? I dislike Hakstol more than anyone here and I do not even find him at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxweet Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 as far as having "it": 2005-yes 2006-yes 2007-yes 2008-no 2009-no 2010-no 2011-yes 2012-yes(but undermanned) 2013-no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 If the coach doesn't have "it", or never had "it", or doesn't know how to find "it", how can he ever help his team find "it". Remember teams are most often a reflection of their coach. For at least the last 9 years the Hakstol hasn't had "it" so don't expect his team to have "it". In 7 seasons at Clarkson and 15 at Bowling Green, Jerry York only found 'it' once. Good thing you weren't the AD of Boston College in 1994 when the Eagles coaching vacancy opened up. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been on your short list... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDBIZ Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 In 7 seasons at Clarkson and 15 at Bowling Green, Jerry York only found 'it' once. Good thing you weren't the AD of Boston College in 1994 when the Eagles coaching vacancy opened up. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been on your short list... So you're saying a coach who doesn't look great at another school right now could replace Hak and win us 4 national titles?? And I thought there was nobody out there to replace him with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariucci Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 In 7 seasons at Clarkson and 15 at Bowling Green, Jerry York only found 'it' once. Good thing you weren't the AD of Boston College in 1994 when the Eagles coaching vacancy opened up. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been on your short list... Winning a national title at Bowling Green is monumentally tougher than winning one at UND. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 I had it but gave it to Ira Murphy & he never gave it back 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 I had it but gave it to Ira Murphy & he never gave it back I thought he gave it to Siouxman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Winning a national title at Bowling Green is monumentally tougher than winning one at UND. In 1984? Given the sorry state of some big-name programs back in that era, I would beg to differ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iluvdebbies Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Winning a national title at Bowling Green is monumentally tougher than winning one at UND. Great point Captain Obvious...go back and read previous posts in this thread....and you will understand the context of Mafias statement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Great point Captain Obvious...go back and read previous posts in this thread....and you will understand the context of Mafias statement! Nevermind the different format, 8 teams selected, first round = two games, total goals, etc. The format back then would certainly benefit a cinderella story coming true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariucci Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 Great point Captain Obvious...go back and read previous posts in this thread....and you will understand the context of Mafias statement! Calm down Sally, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxman Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 I thought he gave it to Siouxman? I haven't had it since I was on the golf team as a high school senior. Well.....actually it might have been the rest of the team that really had it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyisGr8 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Gwoz is available & we know his teams have been able to find "it" i.e. back to back titles. By the way if you don't have "it" and don't know exactly what "it" is or what "it" looks, sounds or feels like, or where to look for "it", then how do you ever find "it"? Therefore, shouldn't you look for someone who knows all about "it" and has found "it" b/4, as opposed to someone who doesn't know anything about "it"? Well, that's "it" for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Calm down Sally, Nice comeback to ilovedebbies' post...now do you have one for mine? Winning a national title at Bowling Green is monumentally tougher than winning one at UND. In 1984? Given the sorry state of some big-name programs back in that era, I would beg to differ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyisGr8 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Nice comeback to ilovedebbies' post...now do you have one for mine? Winning a NC at Bowling Green was close to a miracle, regardless of how you perceived the "state of some big-name programs back in the era". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Winning a NC at Bowling Green was close to a miracle, regardless of how you perceived the "state of some big-name programs back in the era". So, 1985 Rensselaer was another miracle? How aobut 1988, 1992, and 1994 Lake Superior State? 1989 Harvard? 1991 Northern Michigan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keikla Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Gwoz is available & we know his teams have been able to find "it" i.e. back to back titles. By the way if you don't have "it" and don't know exactly what "it" is or what "it" looks, sounds or feels like, or where to look for "it", then how do you ever find "it"? Therefore, shouldn't you look for someone who knows all about "it" and has found "it" b/4, as opposed to someone who doesn't know anything about "it"? Well, that's "it" for now. While I don't think it's possible to win the national championship without 'it,' I think there are enough variables in that tourney that it's possible to have 'it' and still not walk away with the national championship. See Siouxweet's post above...just because he hasn't won a national championship doesn't mean that none of Hakstol's teams have ever had 'it.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 So, 1985 Rensselaer was another miracle? How aobut 1988, 1992, and 1994 Lake Superior State? 1989 Harvard? 1991 Northern Michigan? For that matter why not UND in 80 and 82. It is not like they were some power house program at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MafiaMan Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 For that matter why not UND in 80 and 82. It is not like they were some power house program at the time. That's a stretch given the previous titles North Dakota had in its ledger. You're comparing the Fighting Sioux to Lake Superior State, who went D1 in hockey in 1974, then won 3 titles within 20 years after the jump from NAIA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyisGr8 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 So, 1985 Rensselaer was another miracle? How aobut 1988, 1992, and 1994 Lake Superior State? 1989 Harvard? 1991 Northern Michigan? First of all I said close to a miracle - but never the less: RPI - 5 or so frozen four appearances; 1 title - so no; LSSU - 4 FF appearances and 3 titles in 6 years - you were joking right N. Mich. - 3 FF appearances & 1 title - so no not really Harvard - about 11 or 12 FF appearances; 1 title (or more maybe, I don't know) - are you serious? But hey with BG in the new WCHA I would certainly say their chances of getting to the NCAA's for the 1st time in what 28 years are improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts