Prospective Recruits

[burd]

2 hours ago, .357 said:

 Interesting take.

So MI, if they are to be consistent with the 1 title every 10 years scenario, have until 2038 to win title #10 to stay ahead of the curve (first title for them was in 1948). That would be 40 years between titles (last one was in 1998). Would that still be acceptable for a school of MI's caliber?

MIchigan front-loaded when there were precious few programs and has been strictly mediocre since hula hoops.    In terms of titles, if that is your measure of a top notch program.   I still consider UMich a great program.  

[ChadR]

On 10/16/2024 at 10:12 AM, cberkas said:

Bryce Mattern to Arizona State

Odd move. Is the similar to Stibbe a couple years ago?

[brianvf]

2 hours ago, .357 said:

 Interesting take.

So MI, if they are to be consistent with the 1 title every 10 years scenario, have until 2038 to win title #10 to stay ahead of the curve (first title for them was in 1948). That would be 40 years between titles (last one was in 1998). Would that still be acceptable for a school of MI's caliber?

I would be ok with Michigan not winning another title until 2038.   

[brianvf]

With this whole CHL/WHL/NCAA stuff going on currently...I wonder how many NCAA schools will be getting in touch with Landon Dupont?
Kid is absolutely tearing it up in the WHL as a 15-yo dman.
 

[scpa0305]

2 hours ago, brianvf said:

With this whole CHL/WHL/NCAA stuff going on currently...I wonder how many NCAA schools will be getting in touch with Landon Dupont?
Kid is absolutely tearing it up in the WHL as a 15-yo dman.
 

He’ll be playing in the NHL as an 18 year old. He’d have to accelerate his schooling.

i agree though, when he’s 17 there will be zero reason for him to not be playing against older kids/men. The WHL is looking way too easy for him. I could honestly see an Austen Matthews situation for him, go play in Switzerland for a year. I believe his dad played over there.

[Big A HG]

12 hours ago, burd said:

By the only metric that matters to you, Berry is the better coach by a score of 1 - 0.

 

I give him credit, he took Hak's team and won one.  The problem is, since he's had full control over the program and recruiting, the team has floundered.  Just about every other metric I can think of except conference titles Brad is worse.  Less fan attendance, less national interest, worse recruits, less post-season success BY FAR with the exception of the win season NINE years ago.  Hak left him a national prominent program, Brad succeeded year one, and it's been in decline since.  Throw in his jersey/wordmark scandal that got swept under the rug on top of it.

[Big A HG]

10 hours ago, Walsh Hall said:

Winning 1 out of 10 is a pretty good clip, and a very reasonable goal to maintain at UND.  I know I've said this before, and it's not going to change anyone's mind, but we are ahead of the game when it comes to winning.  The Law of Averages plays a bit of a role in this.  The bad news is, from a historical perspective, we were due for another drought.  On the bright side, during this drought, we've still had a lot of secondary success to fall back on.  It's not like we've been in the cellar trying to crawl back into the successful ranks of college hockey.  The good news with the law of averages plays off of our short-term history, and it's the fact that we should have one coming soon.  So, you have the long-term history fighting against our short-term history and it's just a matter of which one plays out.

If winning 1 out of every 10 titles is a good, yet reasonable clip (which I feel is very fair for a team like UND), we'd have 10% of all titles. We are still ahead of the game.  Because we can't round down, we have 12 more years to win a championship to stay ahead of the curve.

 We've been very fortunate with our history, but times have changed and so should our expectations a little.  On the short-term we are overdue for another championship, but on the long-term, we are doing just fine still.  This is why everyone both wins and loses this argument every time.  Berry is a fine coach who has put our team in many opportunities to win another title.  He can't do it all, sometimes it's on the players, and the other team wants to win just as badly as we do, and we end up losing some games when we shouldn't.

 

Titles are too hard to win.  They're the expectation but not the standard for a program like UND or any other elite college program.  It's not about comparing Hak to Berry when it comes to 1-0 on titles, it's about the sustained success we had in the post-season.  Hak was snake bit, but we were challengers just about every year, making the Frozen Four 7 out of 11 years.  A couple years we played good enough to win but lost, a couple of times we stunk it up, and a couple of times we lost on a bit of puck luck.  But we were there.  Then Berry comes in, wins a title, and eight years later, going on nine, we've won ONE SINGLE NCAA game...against lowly AIC.  How can that be okay?

[AlphaMikeFoxtrot]

1 hour ago, Big A HG said:

 

I give him credit, he took Hak's team and won one.  The problem is, since he's had full control over the program and recruiting, the team has floundered.  Just about every other metric I can think of except conference titles Brad is worse.  Less fan attendance, less national interest, worse recruits, less post-season success BY FAR with the exception of the win season NINE years ago.  Hak left him a national prominent program, Brad succeeded year one, and it's been in decline since.  Throw in his jersey/wordmark scandal that got swept under the rug on top of it.

Recruiting classes had nowhere to go but down after the mid/late 00s. This year's is as good as any Hak had in the 10s, and our proximity to Canada is poised to pay dividends as MJ players crowd out Americans in NCAA hockey. 

I might change my tune if we don't win a game or two in Fargo this year, but between the Fargo Screwjob in 17 and 20 getting cancelled, the one win in nine years isn't as bad as it sounds.