Closing in on Epic Title Drought

[gfhockey]

My simple questions fire people up

Gotta get this lame crowd base fired up

I don't like it we always settle for fourth place or third place

[gfhockey]

The list-

James Patrick

Steve Johnson

Dean Blais

George Gwozdecky

Keith Allain

Rich Bennett

Motzko

Rick Zombo

Dave Tippett

Now the Hak defenders can point out the deficiencies in all, but each one, on day one is equal to Dave Hakstol in at least one way-

They haven't won a National Championship at UND in the last 11 years!

Ew not motzko. Rather have Lucia.

[fightingsioux4life]

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.

Okay, so over the past 11 years, it was all on the players and/or bad "puck luck"?  Think of all the different players that have come through this program in 11 years, it has to be a large number.  And you are saying that during these 7 trips to the Frozen Four, we have a 1-6 record solely because of the players not performing and/or some bad "puck luck"?  What are the odds of all those different teams with all those different guys being that delinquent for all 7 Frozen Fours in an 11 year time frame?  Especially with all the world-class talent we have had during this time: Toews, Oshie, Parise, Stafford, etc.  And if the team is good enough and competent enough to get to 7 Frozen Fours, why are they suddenly unable to win once they get there?  And this is after beating good teams on a regular basis during the regular season, the conference tournament (in most cases, anyway) and the regional, which was often held a long way from Grand Forks.  These are the questions that are vexing people on here.  And my main point is that the common thread through all of these teams is Hakstol.  Now that doesn't mean he won't get us over the hump; it may even happen next year.  But it does raise questions from our fan base and it is frustrating to watch over and over again.  So for some people on here to get all angry that everyone isn't chanting "In Hak We Trust" in unison all the time no matter what is a sign that they are blinded by their loyalty to the team and are not able to ask critical questions.  I hope I am proven wrong next year and I hope I will have to eat my words (and I will).  But if the past is a predictor of the future, I am not betting much money on that outcome.

 

I think Shawn-O had it right earlier: Retain him through the rest of his current contract, but don't extend him yet.  And I am fine with agreeing to disagree, that is what America is all about, right?

[jdub27]

And if the team is good enough and competent enough to get to 7 Frozen Fours, why are they suddenly unable to win once they get there?  

 

And obviously since no one can actually answer this question, the clear answer to is fire the coach!!

[snova4]

Okay, so over the past 11 years, it was all on the players and/or bad "puck luck"? Think of all the different players that have come through this program in 11 years, it has to be a large number. And you are saying that during these 7 trips to the Frozen Four, we have a 1-6 record solely because of the players not performing and/or some bad "puck luck"? What are the odds of all those different teams with all those different guys being that delinquent for all 7 Frozen Fours in an 11 year time frame? Especially with all the world-class talent we have had during this time: Toews, Oshie, Parise, Stafford, etc. And if the team is good enough and competent enough to get to 7 Frozen Fours, why are they suddenly unable to win once they get there? And this is after beating good teams on a regular basis during the regular season, the conference tournament (in most cases, anyway) and the regional, which was often held a long way from Grand Forks. These are the questions that are vexing people on here. And my main point is that the common thread through all of these teams is Hakstol. Now that doesn't mean he won't get us over the hump; it may even happen next year. But it does raise questions from our fan base and it is frustrating to watch over and over again. So for some people on here to get all angry that everyone isn't chanting "In Hak We Trust" in unison all the time no matter what is a sign that they are blinded by their loyalty to the team and are not able to ask critical questions. I hope I am proven wrong next year and I hope I will have to eat my words (and I will). But if the past is a predictor of the future, I am not betting much money on that outcome.

I think Shawn-O had it right earlier: Retain him through the rest of his current contract, but don't extend him yet. And I am fine with agreeing to disagree, that is what America is all about, right?

I'm like a damn bug to the light. I keep coming back. I guess I can't claim to be a fan of this team all the way back to Hakstol's beginning, maybe he did make some blunders his first couple, heck, maybe even first few years coaching. But, from the time I've been paying close attention to this team, I can't say, or point to, anything I would say was Hakstol's fault. Frattin frozen four was ridiculous, the number of shots on goal and pipes hit, with the way that team was scoring all year doesn't even seem feasible. We had a two year drought, which I thought he did a stellar job with what he had, and last year, Simpson year, I thought was his finest coaching I had ever seen from him. I can't say I felt we belonged on the ice, but we pushed the number one team in the country to the final .6. Now this season, Boston thoroughly outplayed for probably fifty of the sixty minutes, but we don't come away with a win. Two pipes hit, couple soft goals, by Zane's standards, and a near miraculous comeback in the third, still don't understand how Pattyn goes to the box there. Powerplay looked better than it has all season. Zone entries looked better than they had all season. So at the end, I can't put these last three on him, so in closing, if these last three are not on Hak, why on God's green earth would you fire him for the first four? If anything, he should have been fired in the first six years, not these last five years.

I can understand if you're frustrated from the original losses, but I think the fire crowd needs to look at the last three appearances objectively. Look at each game without the built in frustration. I think you might find a very different opinion regarding the games, and Hakstol's evolution as a coach.

[Goon]

crickets are still chirping on the question I asked you

 

You might need to be more specific which one you're asking the question. gfhockey has like six alter-egos. 

[Goon]

Ew not motzko. Rather have Lucia.

 

I think Motzko, who is a good coach, would be fired if we used some the readers' standards on Sioux Sports. Lucia would probably be as well.  

[Goon]

The list-

James Patrick

Steve Johnson

Dean Blais

George Gwozdecky

Keith Allain

Rich Bennett

Motzko

Rick Zombo

Dave Tippett

 

 

None of these people you have listed here are going to coach at UND. 

[dagies]

You might need to be more specific which one you're asking the question. gfhockey has like six alter-egos.

I brought it up again in the Expectations For Next Year thread. Crickets are still chirping

[iramurphy]

Ok I get that point. I have no issue with the opinion we don't extend Hakstol yet. There is no "in Hak we trust" cuz the outcome of any game isn't a life changing experience for most of us. The fact the most of us can understand you can have an excellent coach and not win a title yet doesn't mean we are blind to the fact we haven't won a title under Hakstol or are necessarily "Hak lovers". When you mention the Oshies and Parises and Toews and Stafford, you guys still can't explain why a coach that those same players respect and trust should be replaced cuz a handful of fans think the only important measuring stick is the national title.

I look at this past year as one of his better coaching jobs. No super star forwards but a group of lunch pail guys who blocked shots, ground it out in the corners and busted their butts all year. A group of talented defensemen and talented goalie who happened to have an off night last game out. I look at how he handled the Frattin issue and Frattin ended up returning to the program and excelled when he returned. I listen to former players talk about how they think he is a great coach and how they respect him. Based on those issues alone I would not be willing to jeopardize the stability of arguably the best college hockey program in the country right now. The good thing for our hockey program is that neither my opinion, your opinion, gfhockey's opinion or others on this blog means a thing. The opinion of Toews, Parise, Oshie, Matt Greene, Chris Porter, Commodore and that long line of former and present players does matter. That is why Hakstol will remain our head coach. You mention that coaches and players shouldn't read this blog and I agree with that too. You might also remember that recruits and their families often go to these blogs not knowing that for the most part we all spew BS. Some might even believe Hakstol is on a short leash and the fact is he is much more likely to get that extension you spoke of than a coaching change. The guy can coach, he can recruit, and he has done a good job of handling his players. I disagree that anyone could get the same players here and then get them to the Frozen Four every year. I also know enough about coaching to know a change when you have has this much success doesn't always improve the end result. I believe the titles will come. It won't improve my status in life nor did it hurt me a bit when we didn't win it all this year. I enjoyed the journey. I believe the majority of Sioux fans also enjoyed the journey. Doesn't mean we are satisfied but it means we are confident we have the correct pieces of the proverbial puzzle to regain that championship that had eluded us recently. Hakstol doesn't lose these nor does he win these games. The team does, the program does and the University does. Until the former and present players clamour for a coaching change I think we are still on the right track and although you may not think so, it seems the players present and former disagree with you. Go Sioux. I guess I should apologize ahead of time for those whose feelings get hurt when others believe change for the sake of change is stupid.

[Irish]

I think individual beliefs about the nature of winning colors this discussion - Some people believe in the "intangibles" - they think that "winners win" and that there is some intangible but still there differences between teams that step up and win it all and those that don't (it's what seperates the Buffalo Bills and Vikings from say the Patriots and the Steelers.  It's what Russell brought to the Celts and Wilt didn't bring to Philedelphia.  It's what causes one team to play above their ability in a championship game and another below theirs.  People who believe in this feel that for all the Blue Chippers, All-American goalies, hard working grinders,  and great teams Hak has assembled, there is something missing.  Something Blais and Gino had.  Many sports fans believe this (I kind of do too).  One of the problems with this belief is the fact that the "winner" label is always applied after the fact and may be just a person's way of making sense of things in a way that fits his belief system.  Looking back it is easy to identify the teams who had "it" - looking forward, not so much.  People who don't put much stock in this emotional belief look rationally at Hak's record and think only a fool would complain and that things are about to even out.  The "intangible" believers can't understand why others don't even consider such an important factor and wonder if Hak will ever pick it up.  Since both of these are just beliefs that make sense to the person holding them, there is little common ground.    

[iramurphy]

I think individual beliefs about the nature of winning colors this discussion - Some people believe in the "intangibles" - they think that "winners win" and that there is some intangible but still there differences between teams that step up and win it all and those that don't (it's what seperates the Buffalo Bills from say the Patriots and the Steelers.  It's what Russell brought to the Celts and Wilt didn't bring to Philedelphia.  It's what causes one team to play above their ability in a championship game and another below theirs.  People who believe in this feel that for all the Blue Chippers, All-American goalies, hard working grinders,  and great teams Hak has assembled, there is something missing.  Something Blais and Gino had.  Many sports fans believe this (I kind of do too).  One of the problems with this belief is the fact that the "winner" label is always applied after the fact and may be just a person's way of making sense of things in a way that fits his belief system.  Looking back it is easy to identify the teams who had "it" - looking forward, not so much.  People who don't put much stock in this emotional belief look rationally at Hak's record and think only a fool would complain and that things are about to even out.  The "intangible" believers can't understand why others don't even consider such an important factor and wonder if Hak will ever pick it up.  Since both of these are just beliefs that make sense to the person holding them, there is little common ground.

I get that. You win or you lose. There are many factors but thus far Hakstols teams haven't won a title. I don't happen to believe that is necessarily because of the coach just like winning it all isn't just because of the coach.the fact that Marv Levy's teams or Bud Grant's didn't win a Super Bowl doesn't diminish their accomplishments nor mean they weren't excellent coaches. When Levy left Buffalo how did that work for them. When Grant left Minnesota how did that work? Changing coaches especially when you have an excellent coach doesn't mean things will improve. Sometimes you get beat by someone you maybe should have beaten. I think to get teams to the playoffs every year and frozen four most years means your are doing things right and the championship will come. Do you believe the opinions of the players present and past might trump the options of us as casual fans?

[Irish]

I get that. You win or you lose. There are many factors but thus far Hakstols teams haven't won a title. I don't happen to believe that is necessarily because of the coach just like winning it all isn't just because of the coach.the fact that Marv Levy's teams or Bud Grant's didn't win a Super Bowl doesn't diminish their accomplishments nor mean they weren't excellent coaches. When Levy left Buffalo how did that work for them. When Grant left Minnesota how did that work? Changing coaches especially when you have an excellent coach doesn't mean things will improve. Sometimes you get beat by someone you maybe should have beaten. I think to get teams to the playoffs every year and frozen four most years means your are doing things right and the championship will come. Do you believe the opinions of the players present and past might trump the options of us as casual fans?

Look, I'm not saying fire Hak or anything like that - just trying to point out that the two sides in this discussion both believe they are right based on some of the beliefs I mentioned.  Hak has certainly not done anything that warrents talk of firing - I just really really hope we win one soon.  

[cberkas]

The list-

James Patrick

Steve Johnson

Dean Blais

George Gwozdecky

Keith Allain

Rich Bennett

Motzko

Rick Zombo

Dave Tippett

Now the Hak defenders can point out the deficiencies in all, but each one, on day one is equal to Dave Hakstol in at least one way-

They haven't won a National Championship at UND in the last 11 years!

 

James Patrick - NHL assistant coach with the Dallas Stars. No head coaching experience that I cane find. He was also charged with assault of his girlfriend in 2014. I'll say he's not leaving the NHL any time soon and if he does he'll be a coach in the AHL.

 

Steve Johnson - Head coach in the USHL for 13 year made the USHL finals 4 times winning it twice. Was an assistant coach at St. Cloud for 2 years and Omaha for one year. Shows he hasn't coached since 2012-13 season. If he was trying to be a NCAA head coach someday he'd be coaching now somewhere.

 

Dean Blais - Current head coach at Omaha where he will likely retire at the end of his current contract.

 

George Gwozdecky - Current assistant coach for Tampa Bay Lighting. The only way he coaches college hockey again is if a school puts up more money then he was going to make at Denver before he was fired. His name has come up as a replacement for Mike Eaves at Wisconsin. You'd be pretty much getting the same as Hakstol minus making the Frozen Four on a regular basis (Gwozdecky has only been to 2 Frozen Fours at Denver).

 

Keith Allain - Current Yale head coach, and Yale Alumni. Was an assistant coach in the NHL and also a goalie coach in the AHL and NHL before taking the Yale job. He wouldn't even be mentioned by anyone on here if he didn't win a National Title in 2013.

 

Rick Bennett - Current Union head coach. He's been a NCAA D1 assistant up until he took over at Union. Next season will be the start of 4 classes of Bennett's recruits, this will be the time to see how good of a coach he is. Most likely he'd take a better job out East.

 

Bob Motzko - Current head coach at St. Cloud. I don't see him leaving that job for anywhere else. You could say Motzko is the reason Minnesota and Lucia won the National Title in 2002 and 2003.

 

Rick Zombo - Current head coach at ACHA D1 Lindenwood University. Had one winning season as a head coach in the NAHL, with 3 loosing seasons two in the NAHL and one in the USHL.

 

Dave Tippett - Current Arizona Coyotes head coach. If the Coyotes fired him he'll find another NHL head coaching job.

 

Tony Hrkac - Current assistant coach for the Madison Capitals. Wasn't a good head coach at Concordia University Wisconsin going 10-109-10 in 6 seasons as the schools first head coach.

[iramurphy]

Look, none of us are "satisfied" with anything less than the National title. Doesn't mean we can't and don't appreciate the efforts of the coaches and players and we can't appreciate the journey. I'm not "satisfied" with not winning the NCAA FCS FB title or the NCAA VB title or the NCAA MBB or WBB titles either. Certainly it's more realistic to expect the hockey championship and with every sport we should be pushing to keep getting better in order to reach those goals. We have to have coaches who also expect to win it all and in hockey we do. Let's hang in there. First order of business is to keep the underclass men and get ready for next year. Championship will come. Go Sioux.

[scpa0305]

Look, I'm not saying fire Hak or anything like that - just trying to point out that the two sides in this discussion both believe they are right based on some of the beliefs I mentioned. Hak has certainly not done anything that warrents talk of firing - I just really really hope we win one soon.

Great post. There are simply two view points, I like it.

[Cratter]

Has a (former) college hockey player ever talked bad about their (former) coach?

[Oxbow6]

Great post. There are simply two view points, I like it.

Yup. Agree with Irish too.

Hak today = good coach.

Hak with a NC = great coach.

Hak will coach at UND as long as he wants...even if he never wins a NC but to be offended or think it's out of line by those who bring up his 1-7 F4 record and his inability to win a NC with the teams he had had is being ignorant to what this storied hockey program is all about...expecting to win national championships.

[jk]

I'm not in the camp that says we should be looking, but if UND needed to find a new coach, I'd look more to the model of the school's last three hires, none of whom had previous college head coaching experience.  Amazing to think those last three coaches take us back 36 years!  What a model of stability.

[Cratter]

Tyler Palmiscno is just missing "College Hockey Assistant Coach" on his resume.

[Benny Baker]

Between 1950 and 2000, Boston College went to 14 frozen fours and won 0 national championships.  Yikes!  At least we're only at 8 in a row!

[jimdahl]

Being a Caps fan, I'm used to high expectations and unhappy exits. I thought this article on some of the intangibles a coach can bring was interesting.

 

Are the Capitals ready to 'raise their flag'?

 

While the "here's how this year is different from all those that we lost" aspect is reminiscent of articles we see about UND pre-Frozen Four each year, it's different in that it gets to focus on differences in coaching (because the situation is somewhat reversed from UND's--the Caps have some stability in the players but have been cycling through coaches at a rapid pace).

[SJHovey]

And if the team is good enough and competent enough to get to 7 Frozen Fours, why are they suddenly unable to win once they get there?  And this is after beating good teams on a regular basis during the regular season, the conference tournament (in most cases, anyway) and the regional, which was often held a long way from Grand Forks.  These are the questions that are vexing people on here. 

In my opinion, the further along you get in the tournament, the better the competition.  As a general rule the teams we have faced in rounds one and two have been weaker than the teams we have faced in the Frozen Four.

 

Also, this notion that we are beating all these teams in the regular season, then failing in the Frozen Four is false.  In 2005 DU absolutely dominated us all year long.  Beat us at home in the only two regular season games, beat us at the X, and then in Columbus.  In fact, imho the game in Columbus was the best game we played against them that year.

Same in 2006.  Wisconsin beat us both games at home in the regular season.  We beat them at the X, when Elliot was just returning from his injury, but they were clearly the class of the WCHA that year, and were likely to win the championship whether we got there or not.

 

I personally would like to see us play more eastern teams in the regular season, since candidly the better teams are out east right now.

[The Sicatoka]

I know for fact that there is one UND fan more upset, more disappointed, more angry about not winning in Boston, and more wanting of, and determined to achieve, a national title than any of us here can say, think, feel, or imagine.

 

That fan's name?

 

Dave Hakstol. 

[scpa0305]

Yup. Agree with Irish too.

Hak today = good coach.

Hak with a NC = great coach.

Hak will coach at UND as long as he wants...even if he never wins a NC but to be offended or think it's out of line by those who bring up his 1-7 F4 record and his inability to win a NC with the teams he had had is being ignorant to what this storied hockey program is all about...expecting to win national championships.

Wow, no way I could have said it better.  The difference between good college coaches and great colleges coaches are national champsionships.  I really don't think anyone can argue that.  That's all I have been trying to say for several years and I sometimes get lumped in that "Fire Hak" bucket.  I don't want the guy fired nor do I expect them to fire him.