HockeyisGr8 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Oh, I know. I just try to convince the newbies not to digress to a habit that's all too common around here. Fair enough. Then I appreciate your input. Thanks.
yzerman19 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Every player and coach wants to win every game they participate in. You compete to win...be it an early december match-up with Mankato or the National Championship game. First things first though, you gotta win enough games to get your shot at the NC, then you have to roll off a great tourney. Playing 4 complete games at the top of your ability. No excuses, but I definitely value consistent winning over just plucking out a random NC. Eye of the tiger...its the game not the result. 1
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 How many more years would you say you give Hak? Five? Ten? If he continues winning conference trophies and making the tournament without a title? Serious question. I'm curious to know what people think. Would that point never come to some people if he continues to win lots of hockey games except the ultimate prize?
yzerman19 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 How many more years would you say you give Hak? Five? Ten? If he continues winning conference trophies and making the tournament without a title? Serious question. I'm curious to know what people think. Would that point never come to some people if he continues to win lots of hockey games except the ultimate prize? Without a national championship, he can not have a losing season, nor can he miss the NCAAs twice...with a national championship he would be allowed a losing season and would be allowed to miss the NCAAs twice...all else being equal (his current track record of consistent winning percentage, conference titles, conference tourney titles) IMO
WeAreNorthDakota Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Because I am clearly much more intelligent than you and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that Coach Hakstol wants to win NC's. And I have no doubt that he would trade multiple appearances for winning a NC. Is it your position that he is perfectly happy appearing every year but not winning? I have a hard time not laughing at such a postion. Do you truly think like that? Do you think at all? Perfectly happy? Of course he's not perfectly happy. If he was perfectly happy he'd likely get complacent and he'd start missing the tourney once every couple years. In order to stay at the top in sports, or in anything for that matter, you have to constantly strive to be the best just to stay at or near the top. You should ask him yourself if he's satisfied. Every time he speaks at a fan luncheon he opens it up for questions from the crowd. Go to the first fan luncheon next year and ask him when we, as fans, should start being frustrated that he hasn't won a national title yet. I'd bet you my car he says you should be frustrated right now because he is and has been for some time.
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 He doesn't have a title, so are you saying if next year he has losing season and misses the NCAA twice he should be fire? Did I read it right?
yzerman19 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 He doesn't have a title, so are you saying if next year he has losing season and misses the NCAA twice he should be fire? Did I read it right? I'm saying his job would be in jeopardy, yes. We have not had a losing season since the "dark ages" of the 90's...I don't think it would be tolerated. Slightly better than .500 and missing the tourney twice in a row, same thing...the point I am really trying to make is that with all of the successes, a national championship would give him some more freedom/security to have a random bad showing. The other key variable would be who would be out there to take over...not sure...I would not fire him unless I thought we had an excellent successor. You don't fire to be punitive, you replace to improve.
MafiaMan Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 If Yale runs the table on Saturday night, can we stop blaming Hakstol for losing to them?
gfhockey Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 HHeres my question.... do they start loading up a regional full of ecac teams now they 2have are in the title game? like they do wcha teams.... i bet they dont..
WeAreNorthDakota Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 How many more years would you say you give Hak? Five? Ten? If he continues winning conference trophies and making the tournament without a title? Serious question. I'm curious to know what people think. Would that point never come to some people if he continues to win lots of hockey games except the ultimate prize? I don't think he has an infinite leash but if he goes 15 years without missing the NCAA tournament, hosts a first round playoff series 15 times, and makes 5 or 6 Frozen Fours I can't see how firing him could possibly be justified. Say he gets fired after next year if he loses in the first round of the tournament. The new guy comes in and makes the Frozen Four twice during Rocco's junior and senior seasons with Gothberg in net but then in his 3rd year he finishes 5th in the NCHC, goes on the road to Miami and loses in 3 games and misses the NCAA tournament. All you people calling for Hak to be fired would be wishing we'd hire a guy who'd make 9 straight tournaments and go to 3 Frozen Fours.
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 The competitive score index says we would have lost to Minnesota and U Mass Lowell.
gfhockey Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 II jus wanna win big games when they count.... not big games when they dont count 1
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 I don't think he has an infinite leash but if he goes 15 years without missing the NCAA tournament, hosts a first round playoff series 15 times, and makes 5 or 6 Frozen Fours I can't see how firing him could possibly be justified. Say he gets fired after next year if he loses in the first round of the tournament. The new guy comes in and makes the Frozen Four twice during Rocco's junior and senior seasons with Gothberg in net but then in his 3rd year he finishes 5th in the NCHC, goes on the road to Miami and loses in 3 games and misses the NCAA tournament. All you people calling for Hak to be fired would be wishing we'd hire a guy who'd make 9 straight tournaments and go to 3 Frozen Fours. Or would they say hey give him ten years like hak and see what happens?
watchmaker49 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Perfectly happy? Of course he's not perfectly happy. If he was perfectly happy he'd likely get complacent and he'd start missing the tourney once every couple years. In order to stay at the top in sports, or in anything for that matter, you have to constantly strive to be the best just to stay at or near the top. You should ask him yourself if he's satisfied. Every time he speaks at a fan luncheon he opens it up for questions from the crowd. Go to the first fan luncheon next year and ask him when we, as fans, should start being frustrated that he hasn't won a national title yet. I'd bet you my car he says you should be frustrated right now because he is and has been for some time. Excellent point. I can see and hear him saying that.
Irish Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Perfectly happy? Of course he's not perfectly happy. If he was perfectly happy he'd likely get complacent and he'd start missing the tourney once every couple years. In order to stay at the top in sports, or in anything for that matter, you have to constantly strive to be the best just to stay at or near the top. You should ask him yourself if he's satisfied. Every time he speaks at a fan luncheon he opens it up for questions from the crowd. Go to the first fan luncheon next year and ask him when we, as fans, should start being frustrated that he hasn't won a national title yet. I'd bet you my car he says you should be frustrated right now because he is and has been for some time. I have no doubt that Hak wants a title badly. The question is can he be flexible enough to make some changes to help that happen - maybe a more uptempo game and less cycle for example - or do we keep doing what we are doing (which has been fairly successful) and just try harder.
watchmaker49 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Why has no one ever mentioned the fact that it would cost UND a large chunk of change to fire him? If his base is 300K a year and he has 5 years left on his contract, minimum you would think that it would cost them $1,200,000 to go away. So then you hire a new coach for anywhere from 250K-300K and add the 300K Hak is still getting that makes a 500K plus coaching cost. This is not even taking into consideration that a new coach might not keep Jackson and Bubs and add having to buy out their contracts and paying the new assistants. Total of in excess of $2.5 million for a coaching change, with no guarantee that anything would get better. Now who thinks there is a chance that Hak gets fired?
WeAreNorthDakota Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Or would they say hey give him ten years like hak and see what happens? But it wouldn't be like Hak. He'd have missed a tournament and failed to host a first round playoff series. Neither of which Hak has failed to do. Ever.
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Or he could come in and win 3 out of six championship his first years. And we all cry hak should have been fired earlier. Sorta pointless to guess what could happen post hak.
Cratter Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Why has no one ever mentioned the fact that it would cost UND a large chunk of change to fire him? If his base is 300K a year and he has 5 years left on his contract, minimum you would think that it would cost them $1,200,000 to go away. So then you hire a new coach for anywhere from 250K-300K and add the 300K Hak is still getting that makes a 500K plus coaching cost. This is not even taking into consideration that a new coach might not keep Jackson and Bubs and add having to buy out their contracts and paying the new assistants. Total of in excess of $2.5 million for a coaching change, with no guarantee that anything would get better. Now who thinks there is a chance that Hak gets fired? I don't think anyone realistically thinks hak will get fired within the next five years.
watchmaker49 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 I don't think anyone realistically thinks hak will get fired within the next five years. Too many people think he should be though.
as15 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 For anyone that thinks Hakstol should be fired, just look at what is happening to Denver after Gwozdecky was fired. I guarantee something similar would happen to us. Everyone that was a flight risk would be gone, and a few of our recruits would be jumping ship as well.
HockeyisGr8 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 But it wouldn't be like Hak. He'd have missed a tournament and failed to host a first round playoff series. Neither of which Hak has failed to do. Ever. Ah, but he would also have a NC. So it again comes down to individual preference. Let's face it as Sioux fans we all want to go to the dance every year and win every year, but reality says that will not happen. We also know Hakstol is not going anywhere anytime soon. So we are really just taking about those individual preferences - do you prefer participating every year and you're ok with no NC's or do you prefer a NC and the possibility of some corresponding down years. In the last 9 years I would have much preferred a NC or 2 to gether with some years not making the NCAA's over the current situation of 9 straight appearances and no titles.
siouxu31 Posted April 12, 2013 Posted April 12, 2013 Ah, but he would also have a NC. So it again comes down to individual preference. Let's face it as Sioux fans we all want to go to the dance every year and win every year, but reality says that will not happen. We also know Hakstol is not going anywhere anytime soon. So we are really just taking about those individual preferences - do you prefer participating every year and you're ok with no NC's or do you prefer a NC and the possibility of some corresponding down years. In the last 9 years I would have much preferred a NC or 2 to gether with some years not making the NCAA's over the current situation of 9 straight appearances and no titles. If you knew it was a guarantee to win a NC in 2019 and that UND would be a .500 team and miss the NCAA playoffs for the next 5 years prior to the NC, would you be ok sitting around and waiting for that or would you prefer to watch a team that competes at a high level every year and is in the mix for a NC every year?
Recommended Posts