Time to Fire Dave Hakstol....

[choyt3]

Watched all those games as well, although year 2 of those losing seasons I had to drive from Devils Lake every weekend. Terrible winter, with terrible roads, losing hockey teams, but I didn't miss. Eventually was gone to Texas, and with no internet, no connection to Sioux hockey in Texas, lost track of the team. Moved back to SD in early 1977, but still don't remember well the Sioux run to the championship game and loss to the Gophers. Finally in 79/80 when the Sioux made it on Prairie Public TV and I lived in SD, very close to Oakes where I drove to watch Sioux hockey, I reconnected with the program. Went to many games as well as friends were still going to school at UND. Always had a doctor in training student ID to get in; friend was in med school at the time.

Wilbur, can't believe I didn't meet your dad as I was at the frat where he belonged often, having friends in that frat from Woodworth/Medina/ and even Maddock. Would guess he was a face in the crowd at the frat when I was there that I just didn't meet during one of their parties.

Maybe it's easier for us who lived through those bad hockey years to enjoy the success we've had under Hak, even without a title. Youngsters certainly demand a lot, hope they are just as demanding of themselves in whatever they are doing, although I'd guess it doesn't apply.

truth!

[90siouxfan]

It would be an interesting survey to determine the age of persons demanding more (nattys) from the program.

It has been mentioned that some are unhappy with Hakstol's staunch position on sticking to his game plan and not making in game adjustments. Is this perhaps how the Final Four disappointments came to be? Not because he didn't adjust, but other coaches (curse you -Jerry York) were able to develop a plan to defeat the Sioux?

[scpa0305]

It would be an interesting survey to determine the age of persons demanding more (nattys) from the program.

It has been mentioned that some are unhappy with Hakstol's staunch position on sticking to his game plan and not making in game adjustments. Is this perhaps how the Final Four disappointments came to be? Not because he didn't adjust, but other coaches (curse you -Jerry York) were able to develop a plan to defeat the Sioux?

I am 29. I would like more natty's and I am demanding at least one before my time comes and goes. However those who bash Hak's style must not know much about hockey as almost all teams play that way.....most NHL teams. The only teams that don't are Euro or other teams that play on the big ice.

[gfhockey]

Im 32

[choyt3]

Im 32

Which one of you??

[Ray77]

I ask this question, in all seriousness, to those who think that the program has fallen on hard times, below our standards, or that it's time to start thinking about coaching changes.

Look back over the past 9 seasons (I'm excluding the present season primarily because we don't know how it will turn out). If you could magically substitute the performance of another college hockey program for our own, would you? Whose?

UND is 235-119-37 over that span, with no losing seasons, 2 regular season crowns, 4 conference tourney titles, appearances in all 9 NCAA tournaments, but admittedly no national titles.

So who do you wish we were, over Hak's tenure, if not our own performance?

BC? Obviously. 3 national titles, 3 regular season titles, 6 conference tourney championships, appearances in 8 of 9 NCAA tournaments and a 238-97-33 record.

But now who?

Michigan? The supposed greatest college hockey program of all time? No national titles, 3 regular season titles, 3 conference tourney titles, 8 of 9 NCAA tourney appearances (and one losing season), with a win/loss record virtually identical to ours at 237-116-25. I'm not trading. That's the same car I'm driving without the 1 missed tourney.

How about Miami? 3 regular season titles, 1 conference tourney title, 8 of 9 NCAA appearances, but no national titles and a record no better than ours at 222-107-39. No thanks.

Minnesota? No national titles. 4 regular season titles but 1 conference tourney title. Only 6 of 9 in NCAA appearances with one losing season and a considerably worse record at 210-120-39. Plus, you're Minnesota. Forget it.

How about last year's champs, Yale. They have the almighty national title. But 2 regular season titles, 2 conference titles and only 4 NCAA appearances out of 9 seasons, to go along with 3 losing seasons and a pedestrian 153-129-24 record. I don't make that swap.

Duluth won a title, too. But not a single regular season title, one tournament title and made the NCAA's a paltry 3 of the 9 seasons, with 5 losing seasons and a barely .500 record of 161-149-47. Go ahead if you want to be a Bulldog.

How about Michigan St. and their national title? Zero regular season titles. 1 conference tourney title. 3 losing seasons. Only 4 NCAA appearances in the 9 years and a very average 173-150-42 record.

So far I'm not impressed.

So what about Wisconsin, BU or Denver?

Lot of baggage with Wisconsin. They have that title real early in the stretch of these 9 seasons, but no regular season titles, one very unexpected conference tourney title, 5 of 9 on NCAA appearances, a couple of sub-.500 seasons and a 196-133-39 record a long way behind UND. It might be for some of you, but not me.

BU? One great season with a national title. A couple of HE crowns to go with a couple of HE tourney titles. But they only made the tournament half the time and their overall record is still a long way behind UND, at 204-117-39.

Denver? For me this would be a maybe. 2 regular season crowns, 2 Broadmoors and appearances in 7 of the 9 NCAA tournaments. Pretty good record at 220-115-33. A bit of a toss up, but I might be persuaded to take that record for these past 9 seasons, understanding that the title did come at the very beginning of the run and there has been a generally downward progression.

Anybody that I missed?

So, of course I would love to have BC's record the past 9 years. Who wouldn't? Denver's? Maybe, although I don't like the direction they're going. Who else would you rather be?

Unless someone else has some good answers, I'm not sure I'd be jumping ship right about now.

Now that right there is some of the best analysis and probably the best post in this stupid thread. 111 pages of the same tired, dumb arguments recycled over and over, and we finally have a winner!

[CMSioux]

Now that right there is some of the best analysis and probably the best post in this stupid thread. 111 pages of the same tired, dumb arguments recycled over and over, and we finally have a winner!

Great stuff - but I think 111 pages shows that demanding that Hak be fired is not based on facts or statistics it's based on emotion.

[Siouxperfan7]

Great stuff - but I think 111 pages shows that demanding that Hak be fired is not based on facts or statistics it's based on emotion.

Basing decisions on emotion....what are we women??!!

[tnt]

Be careful of what you wish for when it comes to wanting a new coach. Bud Grant never won the big one, but I don't recall a steady barrage of wanting someone else to replace him. Maybe because it wasn't in the age of the internet, but look at the list of coaches that have followed him that haven't produced even Super Bowl appearances. I am sure there are many Viking fans longing for the days when they would consistently win Division titles and make runs at the Super Bowl. You could wind up with a coach that when the first half of the season doesn't live up to expectations, the players more or less fold similar to what Miami did this year. There have been several occasions with Hakstol's teams that you would think that some players could have been in the mail it in mode, but they turned it around. That is a testament to the type of players Hakstol recruits, and his ability to hold the team together when things aren't going great. Sure, I would like it not to come to that point so often, but so far there hasn't been a case when they didn't turn it around. That's gotta say something.

[UND-RedSox fan]

I ask this question, in all seriousness, to those who think that the program has fallen on hard times, below our standards, or that it's time to start thinking about coaching changes.

Look back over the past 9 seasons (I'm excluding the present season primarily because we don't know how it will turn out). If you could magically substitute the performance of another college hockey program for our own, would you? Whose?

UND is 235-119-37 over that span, with no losing seasons, 2 regular season crowns, 4 conference tourney titles, appearances in all 9 NCAA tournaments, but admittedly no national titles.

So who do you wish we were, over Hak's tenure, if not our own performance?

BC? Obviously. 3 national titles, 3 regular season titles, 6 conference tourney championships, appearances in 8 of 9 NCAA tournaments and a 238-97-33 record.

But now who?

Michigan? The supposed greatest college hockey program of all time? No national titles, 3 regular season titles, 3 conference tourney titles, 8 of 9 NCAA tourney appearances (and one losing season), with a win/loss record virtually identical to ours at 237-116-25. I'm not trading. That's the same car I'm driving without the 1 missed tourney.

How about Miami? 3 regular season titles, 1 conference tourney title, 8 of 9 NCAA appearances, but no national titles and a record no better than ours at 222-107-39. No thanks.

Minnesota? No national titles. 4 regular season titles but 1 conference tourney title. Only 6 of 9 in NCAA appearances with one losing season and a considerably worse record at 210-120-39. Plus, you're Minnesota. Forget it.

How about last year's champs, Yale. They have the almighty national title. But 2 regular season titles, 2 conference titles and only 4 NCAA appearances out of 9 seasons, to go along with 3 losing seasons and a pedestrian 153-129-24 record. I don't make that swap.

Duluth won a title, too. But not a single regular season title, one tournament title and made the NCAA's a paltry 3 of the 9 seasons, with 5 losing seasons and a barely .500 record of 161-149-47. Go ahead if you want to be a Bulldog.

How about Michigan St. and their national title? Zero regular season titles. 1 conference tourney title. 3 losing seasons. Only 4 NCAA appearances in the 9 years and a very average 173-150-42 record.

So far I'm not impressed.

So what about Wisconsin, BU or Denver?

Lot of baggage with Wisconsin. They have that title real early in the stretch of these 9 seasons, but no regular season titles, one very unexpected conference tourney title, 5 of 9 on NCAA appearances, a couple of sub-.500 seasons and a 196-133-39 record a long way behind UND. It might be for some of you, but not me.

BU? One great season with a national title. A couple of HE crowns to go with a couple of HE tourney titles. But they only made the tournament half the time and their overall record is still a long way behind UND, at 204-117-39.

Denver? For me this would be a maybe. 2 regular season crowns, 2 Broadmoors and appearances in 7 of the 9 NCAA tournaments. Pretty good record at 220-115-33. A bit of a toss up, but I might be persuaded to take that record for these past 9 seasons, understanding that the title did come at the very beginning of the run and there has been a generally downward progression.

Anybody that I missed?

So, of course I would love to have BC's record the past 9 years. Who wouldn't? Denver's? Maybe, although I don't like the direction they're going. Who else would you rather be?

Unless someone else has some good answers, I'm not sure I'd be jumping ship right about now.

The only two programs that are even considerable to trade results with had, what I consider to be, the two best coaches in college hockey until DU's AD got too full of herself. What's that say about Hakstol? I think it says he is a pretty good coach. Still has his faults but everyone does. I'm sure there is something wrong with York and Gwozdecky liked to act like a monkey.

[scpa0305]

Great stuff - but I think 111 pages shows that demanding that Hak be fired is not based on facts or statistics it's based on emotion.

If you actually look at what is being said...I believe there are only about 1-3 (maybe) posters who actually want the guy fired (and one of them is a full blown troll). The others are simply frustrated with the lack of NCAA tournament success in the past 10 or so years. I'm guessing as soon as everyone throws in the towel, that's when we'll surprise everyone.

[siouxweet]

Great stuff - but I think 111 pages shows that demanding that Hak be fired is not based on facts or statistics it's based on emotion.

and should they lose a game or two this weekend this thread will be flaming again because Hak wasn't won a title yet this season despite there still several weeks left of the season to determine if he will this year or not.

[UND1983]

and should they lose a game or two this weekend this thread will be flaming again because Hak wasn't won a title yet this season despite there still several weeks left of the season to determine if he will this year or not.

What? Mix in a period, or comma, or something.

[fightingsioux4life]

Watched all those games as well, although year 2 of those losing seasons I had to drive from Devils Lake every weekend. Terrible winter, with terrible roads, losing hockey teams, but I didn't miss. Eventually was gone to Texas, and with no internet, no connection to Sioux hockey in Texas, lost track of the team. Moved back to SD in early 1977, but still don't remember well the Sioux run to the championship game and loss to the Gophers. Finally in 79/80 when the Sioux made it on Prairie Public TV and I lived in SD, very close to Oakes where I drove to watch Sioux hockey, I reconnected with the program. Went to many games as well as friends were still going to school at UND. Always had a doctor in training student ID to get in; friend was in med school at the time.

Wilbur, can't believe I didn't meet your dad as I was at the frat where he belonged often, having friends in that frat from Woodworth/Medina/ and even Maddock. Would guess he was a face in the crowd at the frat when I was there that I just didn't meet during one of their parties.

Maybe it's easier for us who lived through those bad hockey years to enjoy the success we've had under Hak, even without a title. Youngsters certainly demand a lot, hope they are just as demanding of themselves in whatever they are doing, although I'd guess it doesn't apply.

I have heard this line aimed at me and others several times and it is generational chauvinism. I am 39, grew up with the 1980's teams and went to UND during the 1990's teams. I work hard at everything I do and expect excellence and feel disappointed whenever I cannot achieve it. So there goes your "the kids don't get it" logic.

No personal offense taken.

[siouxweet]

What? Mix in a period, or comma, or something.

.,!?

[SJHovey]

The others are simply frustrated with the lack of NCAA tournament success in the past 10 or so years.

UND has won 13 NCAA tournament games under Hakstol. No one other than BC has more than 8 NCAA tournament victories in that time.

[Siouxman]

Be careful of what you wish for when it comes to wanting a new coach. Bud Grant never won the big one, but I don't recall a steady barrage of wanting someone else to replace him. Maybe because it wasn't in the age of the internet, but look at the list of coaches that have followed him that haven't produced even Super Bowl appearances. I am sure there are many Viking fans longing for the days when they would consistently win Division titles and make runs at the Super Bowl. You could wind up with a coach that when the first half of the season doesn't live up to expectations, the players more or less fold similar to what Miami did this year. There have been several occasions with Hakstol's teams that you would think that some players could have been in the mail it in mode, but they turned it around. That is a testament to the type of players Hakstol recruits, and his ability to hold the team together when things aren't going great. Sure, I would like it not to come to that point so often, but so far there hasn't been a case when they didn't turn it around. That's gotta say something.

How many are old enough to remember that Bud Grant was followed immediately by Les Steckel? The Vikings won a grand total of 3 games and set a record for points allowed (484 in 16 games) at a time when running the football dominated the game. Les Steckel was immediately followed by................Bud Grant.

[MafiaMan]

If we are all honest with ourselves, we will all admit that we had times when we were in school that we weren't motivated to get A's and didn't think the extra effort was worth it. Until a teacher stepped in and pushed the right buttons and got us to see that hard work in school generally leads to good things down the road. The same basic rule applies to college athletes (and, for that matter, professional athletes). People are not robots, you cannot expect human beings to be perpetually motivated all the time without at least some prodding from the coaching staff. Part of coaching any sport is being able to push the right buttons on athletes to get them to perform at their very best when it matters most. Some of the Frozen Four debacles were caused by a clear-cut case of the team not being ready when the puck dropped (2008 being the most glaring example). I think this is one of the problems some of us have with Hakstol (the other being a stubborn refusal to change in-game strategy when it is needed).

Once a player puts on that jersey he should be pumped up and give his best regardless of who is on the other bench.

You recruit kids that do not need to be "pumped up" to play hockey... For every lazy D1 player who doesn't want to give it his all every night there are 10 kids that would gladly take his place. Being a Sioux hockey player isn't a right, it's an honor. For those who don't want to skate hard, get the eff off the ice.

I can't find the exact quote right now, but weren't you at some point during the BC debacle also among the group of posters calling for 110% every time you step on the ice representing UND, whether it's practice or a game, fs4l?

[MafiaMan]

If you actually look at what is being said...I believe there are only about 1-3 (maybe) posters who actually want the guy fired (and one of them is a full blown troll). The others are simply frustrated with the lack of NCAA tournament success in the past 10 or so years. I'm guessing as soon as everyone throws in the towel, that's when we'll surprise everyone.

I knew we had something in common...frustration.

We need a 1997 cinderella story.

[Irish]

If you actually look at what is being said...I believe there are only about 1-3 (maybe) posters who actually want the guy fired (and one of them is a full blown troll). The others are simply frustrated with the lack of NCAA tournament success in the past 10 or so years. I'm guessing as soon as everyone throws in the towel, that's when we'll surprise everyone.

I'm glad someone actually took the time to read the posts. Two things I think we need to hang #8 - First - he ability to adjust our game plan - when teams scout us, they seem to be able to bottle up our transition game. We need to be prepared for this. Second - we need to have our goalie steal one instead of it happening to us. A key element in our 1-5 frozen four record under Hak is goalie play.

[scpa0305]

I knew we had something in common...frustration.

We need a 1997 cinderella story.

haha....I think everyone is at leasy slightly frustrated that we haven't gotten lucky in the NCAAs given the number of times we have been up to bat...however I simply wear my emations on my sleeve.

[scpa0305]

UND has won 13 NCAA tournament games under Hakstol. No one other than BC has more than 8 NCAA tournament victories in that time.

You know exactly what I mean.....you go to the bar enough times you should get lucky at least once in awhile. I don't care how ugly your are.

[MafiaMan]

haha....I think everyone is at leasy slightly frustrated that we haven't gotten lucky in the NCAAs given the number of times we have been up to bat...however I simply wear my emations on my sleeve.

Hey, I totally get it, and I don't take personal offense to anything most folks write here, including you. I don't think I slept for a week after the Sioux regional loss to UNH a couple of years ago...and the Yale loss...and the three BC Frozen Four losses...

[tnt]

I have heard this line aimed at me and others several times and it is generational chauvinism. I am 39, grew up with the 1980's teams and went to UND during the 1990's teams. I work hard at everything I do and expect excellence and feel disappointed whenever I cannot achieve it. So there goes your "the kids don't get it" logic.

No personal offense taken.

So there are things that you haven't achieved? Perhaps you should be fired. I would suspect that Hakstol has achieved far more than any of us in his career, and that he is more disappointed in not winning the big one. I doubt Hakstol has any time to be spending so much time on a message board like all of us, because he is actually focusing his time on trying to reach that pinnacle that is missing.

[scpa0305]

Hey, I totally get it, and I don't take personal offense to anything most folks write here, including you. I don't think I slept for a week after the Sioux regional loss to UNH a couple of years ago...and the Yale loss...and the three BC Frozen Four losses...

Me neither....each year I thought "this is the year". It's odd we didn't get lucky any of those years. I was spoiled.....the first two frozen fours I went to the Sioux won it all. Ever since it has been heartache. You know, I think it's worse given the fact we made it so close those years. Had we not made it, it probably wouldn't hurt as bad.