siouxkid12 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Tippett was listed in the top 5 for NHL based on the list I saw. Yeo makes about $1 million Babcock makes about $2 but is about to make northwards of $4 I saw Gretzky was making over $8 million when he was coach/GM The figure I see for Hak is $435,000 with max bonuses There would be no way we could pay anything over that without having other sports suffer (although hockey is the biggest money maker).
scpa0305 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 It's just my opinion but I think Tippet is more of an NHL coach and Murray is a college coach. It seems like Murray is wired to mentor and coach younger players rather than put up with egos at the NHL level... Murray was getting older. Sometimes it is the right move to go back to college where you can teach and motivate rather than just motivate (and deal with egos). UND would never have a chance at Tippet. 1
siouxfan512 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Tippett was listed in the top 5 for NHL based on the list I saw. Yeo makes about $1 million Babcock makes about $2 but is about to make northwards of $4 I saw Gretzky was making over $8 million when he was coach/GM The figure I see for Hak is $435,000 with max bonuses Could I submit my name for the job? $435k would be a slight bump from my current salary. AND I hate to brag but I am still pretty successful on NHL 93 for Super Nintendo.
Cratter Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 All I'm saying is the better team does not always win. Thats what people are saying. When is UND gonna win. Cause they arent always the better team. Luck should have then doing better than 1-7. 1
OshieRoll Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Could I submit my name for the job? $435k would be a slight bump from my current salary. AND I hate to brag but I am still pretty successful on NHL 93 for Super Nintendo. Do you win fake championships?
snova4 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Okay, let me explain this to you because you don't get it. A fan forum like this is where people vent their frustrations over whatever. Maybe you think it shouldn't be that, but that is what it is. So the last thing the players and coaches should do is read this forum after a tough loss because they won't like what they read. I know if I was a coach or player on the team I wouldn't read this forum. Why thank you for the condescending tone, sure gets my respect rolling for you. Also, thank you for the definition of a fan forum. With the understanding of how a fan forum works, I would also understand that many of the posters have no idea what they are really talking about, so I'm going to place you in that category. Constructive criticism of players and coaches would be one thing, but what you and several of your fire Hak buddies don't grasp is that it's not actually constructive. You rant about their coach, wanting him gone because he hasn't won the big one, but you can't actually point to what he did or didn't do to cause the losses. The frozen four in 2011 our team outplayed Michigan. 2014, we outplayed the Gophers, 2015, we outplayed Boston. None of which is on the coach. It's terrible, terrible luck. But a very vocal few don't seem to grasp that, and I'm sorry but you're in that. If you'd like to continue, we can make condescending messages back and forth in private, I don't want to dumb down the group anymore than it already is. 2 2
fightingsioux4life Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Why thank you for the condescending tone, sure gets my respect rolling for you. Also, thank you for the definition of a fan forum. With the understanding of how a fan forum works, I would also understand that many of the posters have no idea what they are really talking about, so I'm going to place you in that category. Constructive criticism of players and coaches would be one thing, but what you and several of your fire Hak buddies don't grasp is that it's not actually constructive. You rant about their coach, wanting him gone because he hasn't won the big one, but you can't actually point to what he did or didn't do to cause the losses. The frozen four in 2011 our team outplayed Michigan. 2014, we outplayed the Gophers, 2015, we outplayed Boston. None of which is on the coach. It's terrible, terrible luck. But a very vocal few don't seem to grasp that, and I'm sorry but you're in that. If you'd like to continue, we can make condescending messages back and forth in private, I don't want to dumb down the group anymore than it already is. First of all, someone that likes to call other people "morons" shouldn't complain about my "condescending tone". Second of all, I have never called for Hakstol's head, but I do have serious doubts that we will win a "natty" under his watch. And lastly, a lot of people on this forum have put forth many statistics and analysis of what might not be working for us in April. I would call that "constructive" (not including gfhockey's irreverant viewpoints). Our fans are a little smarter than you give them credit for. If you don't agree with it, that is fine, but don't scold and preach from your perch about how right you are and how wrong we are. This whole issue is complicated and has many different angles to it. End rant. 3 2
SJHovey Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I find it funny that the anti-Hakstol posters on this board all profess they are not calling for him to be fired, and can't tell us what he is doing incorrectly with respect to the team or the program, except for the "he hasn't won me a natty" refrain. So I guess my question is, if you don't think he should be fired, why are you guys here whining? Either call for his head (and suffer the public ridicule that goes with putting your name to an idea that anyone who is even remotely neutral thinks is crazy), or quit whining. You don't get to have it both ways. And if you think he is making mistakes as a coach that has caused UND to lose these games, lets hear it. What mistake, exactly, did Hakstol make in the BU game? Should he have started Cam Johnson in goal? Was there a different line combination that he should have used? And tell me why these decisions caused us to lose? I'll hang up and listen. 4 2
siouxkid12 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 First of all, someone that likes to call other people "morons" shouldn't complain about my "condescending tone". Second of all, I have never called for Hakstol's head, but I do have serious doubts that we will win a "natty" under his watch. And lastly, a lot of people on this forum have put forth many statistics and analysis of what might not be working for us in April. I would call that "constructive" (not including gfhockey's irreverant viewpoints). Our fans are a little smarter than you give them credit for. If you don't agree with it, that is fine, but don't scold and preach from your perch about how right you are and how wrong we are. This whole issue is complicated and has many different angles to it. End rant. I'm sorry but I haven't heard anything that would scream Hakstol is not a good coach. I have heard from you that Hak is the CEO of the team and the "buck" stops with him. That's not a good enough analogy, as I have said before, at some point the players have to take it upon themselves and say that they are the ones who screwed up. It's not Hak's fault Zane didn't bring his A game on Thursday and its not his fault his players hit more pipes than usual. He never got out coached, it was just a few terrible plays that messed it up for the team (and I'm sure every player knows that). I'm not going to sit here at say that I'm right and you're wrong but until I see evidence that the UND hockey program is in a tailspin and its time for a new coach, you wont be changing my mind. I am also glad the Athletic Department see's it that way too. 2 1
siouxkid12 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I find it funny that the anti-Hakstol posters on this board all profess they are not calling for him to be fired, and can't tell us what he is doing incorrectly with respect to the team or the program, except for the "he hasn't won me a natty" refrain. So I guess my question is, if you don't think he should be fired, why are you guys here whining? Either call for his head (and suffer the public ridicule that goes with putting your name to an idea that anyone who is even remotely neutral thinks is crazy), or quit whining. You don't get to have it both ways. And if you think he is making mistakes as a coach that has caused UND to lose these games, lets hear it. What mistake, exactly, did Hakstol make in the BU game? Should he have started Cam Johnson in goal? Was there a different line combination that he should have used? And tell me why these decisions caused us to lose? I'll hang up and listen. That's the thing, they can't come up with a reason. They also only see what's on the ice at the time the game is played, so how can they give an adequate answer to what line combinations should be on the ice? 1
scpa0305 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I think the all important question is....do national championships even matter? Or are they simply a plus when they happen? To some it seems to matter a lot. To others not so much. To a third group they do matter however the state of the current program appears adequate even though something seems a tad off come April. All parties have their viewpoints and arguments. Honestly, groups #1 and #2 have done their professing (for too long). I honestly think neither party will ever see things the same so maybe we quit talking about it...Hak isn't going anywhere for the foreseeable future unless it is his own call. 3
scpa0305 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I'm sorry but I haven't heard anything that would scream Hakstol is not a good coach. I have heard from you that Hak is the CEO of the team and the "buck" stops with him. That's not a good enough analogy, as I have said before, at some point the players have to take it upon themselves and say that they are the ones who screwed up. It's not Hak's fault Zane didn't bring his A game on Thursday and its not his fault his players hit more pipes than usual. He never got out coached, it was just a few terrible plays that messed it up for the team (and I'm sure every player knows that). I'm not going to sit here at say that I'm right and you're wrong but until I see evidence that the UND hockey program is in a tailspin and its time for a new coach, you wont be changing my mind. I am also glad the Athletic Department see's it that way too. Hak is a very good coach...who is debating that? However the difference between a good coach and a great coach is......? It's the same rule in every sport. We all know that answer. Again, Hak is going no where and by no means should the man be fired. That would be silly, everyone is just hot off the loss. You can't fire a coach before his contract ends with his success. Now when his contract expires the AD will need to determine if they want what Hak brings to the table (assuming he still hasn't won a natty) or would they like to hand the reins over to someone else to see if they can get our program over that hump. Tough decision. Depends on what you want I guess. I'm still crossing my fingers that Hak gets one before 2018. 1
snova4 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 First of all, someone that likes to call other people "morons" shouldn't complain about my "condescending tone". Second of all, I have never called for Hakstol's head, but I do have serious doubts that we will win a "natty" under his watch. And lastly, a lot of people on this forum have put forth many statistics and analysis of what might not be working for us in April. I would call that "constructive" (not including gfhockey's irreverant viewpoints). Our fans are a little smarter than you give them credit for. If you don't agree with it, that is fine, but don't scold and preach from your perch about how right you are and how wrong we are. This whole issue is complicated and has many different angles to it. End rant. Never called for Hak's head? Your posts really do make it seem otherwise. I don't recall ever calling you a moron, but if I did I'm sorry, I'm not going to spend the time to look it up. Again, maybe we have different ideas of giving examples of what could have been done differently, you've seen constructive ideas, I honestly have not. Besides the 1-7 statistic and him not getting it done, I haven't, in my mind, seen anything that resembles a solid plan to get rid of one of the winningest coaches in college hockey, and arguably the best coach in college hockey. To be fair, again, in my opinion, I think part of the issue is Hak has gotten teams to the frozen four that really had no business being their in the first place. Last year's team is an example. I love the team, and the players, but in my opinion last season was probably the finest coaching job Hak has ever done. But in the end, we can agree to disagree, because quite frankly, I'm tired of our back and forth. For what it's worth, you may have taken the brunt of my frustration based off siouxvikes comments towards me in the beginning of this thread. That individual did get under my skin, and I may have had a condescending tone throughout based off him alone. 1
UND1983 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I find it funny that the anti-Hakstol posters on this board all profess they are not calling for him to be fired, and can't tell us what he is doing incorrectly with respect to the team or the program, except for the "he hasn't won me a natty" refrain. Well, that's a pretty big one when you coach UND Hockey. Just like when a person coaches North Carolina, Indiana, or Kentucky basketball. Better win one every so often or you are gone. That is, unless UND isn't considered one of the top hockey programs. 2
Shawn-O Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Could I submit my name for the job? $435k would be a slight bump from my current salary. AND I hate to brag but I am still pretty successful on NHL 93 for Super Nintendo. I would outshoot my opponents 70-12 on a regular basis in NHL2k3 and lose 1-0, 2-1. So I'm not the guy.... 3
fightingsioux4life Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Never called for Hak's head? Your posts really do make it seem otherwise. I don't recall ever calling you a moron, but if I did I'm sorry, I'm not going to spend the time to look it up. Again, maybe we have different ideas of giving examples of what could have been done differently, you've seen constructive ideas, I honestly have not. Besides the 1-7 statistic and him not getting it done, I haven't, in my mind, seen anything that resembles a solid plan to get rid of one of the winningest coaches in college hockey, and arguably the best coach in college hockey. To be fair, again, in my opinion, I think part of the issue is Hak has gotten teams to the frozen four that really had no business being their in the first place. Last year's team is an example. I love the team, and the players, but in my opinion last season was probably the finest coaching job Hak has ever done. But in the end, we can agree to disagree, because quite frankly, I'm tired of our back and forth. For what it's worth, you may have taken the brunt of my frustration based off siouxvikes comments towards me in the beginning of this thread. That individual did get under my skin, and I may have had a condescending tone throughout based off him alone. I think you called gfhockey a moron either in this thread or a different one (and he does get on people's nerves from time to time). No hard feelings, in the end, we all support the same team (except for the FU and Rodent trolls).
UND1983 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I would outshoot my opponents 70-12 on a regular basis in NHL2k3 and lose 1-0, 2-1. So I'm not the guy.... You had em ready to go but the players just didn't execute. 2
siouxkid12 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I think the all important question is....do national championships even matter? Or are they simply a plus when they happen? To some it seems to matter a lot. To others not so much. To a third group they do matter however the state of the current program appears adequate even though something seems a tad off come April. All parties have their viewpoints and arguments. Honestly, groups #1 and #2 have done their professing (for too long). I honestly think neither party will ever see things the same so maybe we quit talking about it...Hak isn't going anywhere for the foreseeable future unless it is his own call. I think part of the problem is a lot of people on here live in the past and how we used to dominate college hockey (as some say) and the other side has grown accustom to the transformation of college hockey over the years and understand that the landscape is much different now-a-days.
scpa0305 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I think part of the problem is a lot of people on here live in the past and how we used to dominate college hockey (as some say) and the other side has grown accustom to the transformation of college hockey over the years and understand that the landscape is much different now-a-days. Respectfully, I don't agree with that. I still think we dominate college hockey, we've been to 7 FF's in the last 11...that's dominating. If I ask my goof buddy in private if we are a dominate program, he's going to say absolutely. In '97 we had a great hockey team but we definitely were not supposed to win it that year. Even in 2000, we played some super tough teams, we just got it done. Finished the job. I would argue that we are a more dominate program now than we were back than....we just can't win the big one. The one that matters to a lot of fans. Again, it's been tough and confusing all at the same time. I thought this was our year for sure...that Boston trip was tough. Maybe next year.
snova4 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I think part of the problem is a lot of people on here live in the past and how we used to dominate college hockey (as some say) and the other side has grown accustom to the transformation of college hockey over the years and understand that the landscape is much different now-a-days. This very well could be the issue I have, being part of the latter group. I came to hockey late, it wasn't until I started dating my now wife seven years ago that I had even been to a Sioux game. I understand the history and tradition, and know the players from the past era, but have only witnessed the game through this era of parity. I look at what this program has done year after year and am extremely impressed because of them annually being one of the best teams in the country. I guess I can see where, if I grew up watching them win championships regularly, this may not cut it for me. Someone up above have Indiana, North Carolina, and Kentucky basketball as examples. That actually is the sport I've come from, and honestly, that person dated themselves. Because if those are the programs you base your idea of what is expected of Hak off of, you're going to see he's doing exactly that. Indiana hasn't been relevant in years, and really, North Carolina either, outside 2009 and 2005. Kentucky is seemingly the top team every year, but don't have the championships to back it up either. If this were a Kentucky forum, we'd be calling for Calipari's head.
jdub27 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Hak is a very good coach...who is debating that? However the difference between a good coach and a great coach is......? It's the same rule in every sport. We all know that answer. Again, Hak is going no where and by no means should the man be fired. That would be silly, everyone is just hot off the loss. You can't fire a coach before his contract ends with his success. Now when his contract expires the AD will need to determine if they want what Hak brings to the table (assuming he still hasn't won a natty) or would they like to hand the reins over to someone else to see if they can get our program over that hump. Tough decision. Depends on what you want I guess. I'm still crossing my fingers that Hak gets one before 2018. Hak will be extended or fired before he ever coaches into the last year of his contract unless he has personally made it clear that he is done following the season. I think you called gfhockey a moron either in this thread or a different one (and he does get on people's nerves from time to time). No hard feelings, in the end, we all support the same team (except for the FU and Rodent trolls). Defending a poster who has been banned multiple times and who's purpose 99% of the time is to be to derail and train wreck threads is pretty amusing. I don't think he's a moron, I think he just plays one on here.
fightingsioux4life Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Defending a poster who has been banned multiple times and who's purpose 99% of the time is to be to derail and train wreck threads is pretty amusing. I don't think he's a moron, I think he just plays one on here. Defending him? I just don't think calling him a "moron" is the right move. If anything, it gives him what he wants.....a reaction. And I don't mind gfhockey even if I don't always agree with his posts. If everyone on here was the same, it would be a boring place to post. 1
siouxkid12 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Respectfully, I don't agree with that. I still think we dominate college hockey, we've been to 7 FF's in the last 11...that's dominating. If I ask my goof buddy in private if we are a dominate program, he's going to say absolutely. In '97 we had a great hockey team but we definitely were not supposed to win it that year. Even in 2000, we played some super tough teams, we just got it done. Finished the job. I would argue that we are a more dominate program now than we were back than....we just can't win the big one. The one that matters to a lot of fans. Again, it's been tough and confusing all at the same time. I thought this was our year for sure...that Boston trip was tough. Maybe next year. I should've said that when the people say we dominated college hockey was when we won NC. I still think we are a dominate program but at the same time I also realize that there is some parity is college hockey now. I mean who would've thought that the last three NCAA champs would all win their first title? As a fan base I think we have overlooked other teams and how they have "caught" up with the times. In the end I wish I had the answer to winning a NC every year but I don't and neither does anyone else. All we can hope for is the chance to be there and get a little luck along the way.
fightingsioux4life Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Could I submit my name for the job? $435k would be a slight bump from my current salary. AND I hate to brag but I am still pretty successful on NHL 93 for Super Nintendo. NHL 94 is even better, you can create your own players.
scpa0305 Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 I should've said that when the people say we dominated college hockey was when we won NC. I still think we are a dominate program but at the same time I also realize that there is some parity is college hockey now. I mean who would've thought that the last three NCAA champs would all win their first title? As a fan base I think we have overlooked other teams and how they have "caught" up with the times. In the end I wish I had the answer to winning a NC every year but I don't and neither does anyone else. All we can hope for is the chance to be there and get a little luck along the way. I agree with you on the parity...but that would explain earlier losses in the NCAAs or a tougher regular season. No matter what year we are talking about, the last four teams will be good in the F4. Going back to those natty years, all four teams were solid.
Recommended Posts