PDA

View Full Version : Northeastern 2012-2013 Season Thread: A New Hope



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

NU Speed Racer
01-21-2013, 02:00 PM
I never understood how people argue over how long a coach should be given to "prove" themselves. Why should we give someone who's failing 3-5 years to turn things around? I swear, we are the only fan base that openly apologizes for coaches and give them the benefit of a doubt for years. I myself have done it, I supported Crowder until the very end.

The fact of the matter is that NU is quickly distancing themselves from their hockey program. It's been happening for the last 10 years. Every step we've made in the athletic department has been in favor of other sports (Basketball getting more attention. Soccer, VB, Field Hockey in NCAA tourneys). Hockey is just not a priority. And that's a very scary and sad fact. The hockey program is still the most attended program. Attendance is still strong, and the strongest its ever been.

The problem goes beyond a goalie who shouldn't be seeing the ice for the rest of his career. The problem goes beyond a coach who while trying his best to get through the season has struggled getting the job done and sends out apologetic emails every week. The problem goes beyond an AD that hired a man with no coaching background as a head coach. The problem goes beyond the hiring of an AD that is clearly a basketball minded man and as mentioned, is too worried with sanctions and political correctness to get things done.

The problem is overwhelming. While its nice to see that people are sending e-mails with their anger in the lack of success of the program, it's just not enough. As someone who's been on these boards for over a decade, you can notice that there's a lack of NU comments and threads. Why? Because the fans have moved to DieHardDogs. Over there, all you get is gum drops and lollipops and debates over lines and only the positively blinded viewpoint of people that actually are fine with 10 win seasons. Over there no one wants to hurt people's feelings in fear for a slightly awkward conversation in the Varsity Club after another 9-3 loss.

A handful of letters are helpful but won't change the culture of "I'll take a 6-5 win vs. BU, and a 9-3 loss to BC. Hey, we got 2 pts this weekend" mindset. It won't change the "It's been 25 years since we won a beanpot, but I got a good feeling about next year." mindset. The letters and outcry need to be overwhelming for a change to success to happen. In my 15 years involved in this team and program, I have never seen it outside of a select few.

Look at the teams that have been building programs in that time. Penn St., Robert Morris, Nebraska Omaha, UConn. Programs making leaps and bounds of progress. Programs that will make the NCAA tourney before we do. They have a goal, they have a mission. We just don't. The program is just a glorified book club for men to get away from their families for a night.


To the point, is 2 years enough for a coach? Absolutely. Until we get cutthroat with the program, we'll be in the same rut we've been in since Fern.

J.D.
01-21-2013, 02:02 PM
In some cases, two years is enough. In others, it's not. All I'm really asking...do any of you really think Madigan will be fired after this year? I say there's a 0% chance of that happening.

Split-N
01-21-2013, 02:29 PM
In some cases, two years is enough. In others, it's not. All I'm really asking...do any of you really think Madigan will be fired after this year? I say there's a 0% chance of that happening.

Ain't going to happen, at least under the current administration, which simply doesn't see intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of university culture. The sad fact is that nothing is going to improve so long as we're stuck with the current AD, and he will likely be around until there's a sea change in the upper levels of the administration. The only thing that's going to force change is the Trustees getting their backs up and putting pressure on the administration. But the Trustees are such a bloated and amorphous group that it's almost impossible for them to reach consensus on anything. The only hope is if a few of the mega-donors on the Board, like Messrs. D'Amore and McKim decide enough is enough. Chances of this happening? Negligible.

WRT NUSR's comment about the gumdrops and lollipops on the DHD boards, I'm seeing some pretty barbed comments over there. Maybe there's another DHD site I don't know about?

NU Speed Racer
01-21-2013, 06:45 PM
WRT NUSR's comment about the gumdrops and lollipops on the DHD boards, I'm seeing some pretty barbed comments over there. Maybe there's another DHD site I don't know about?

Glad to hear there are some negative comments there. I haven't been other there in years. When the mass exodus from the USCHO boards happened, that was what DHD was all about. If they have become jaded, more power to them. It's what's needed for the program.

steve66
01-21-2013, 07:28 PM
Steve, I am with you in that barring scandal or an unprecedented win/loss record, firing a college hockey coach after two years just isn't going to happen. What I want to know is how many years you think he should be given and what level of results will satisfy you?

Minimum of 4 years.

steve66
01-21-2013, 07:31 PM
That's true, I thought someone might bring that up after I posted, but wasn't there a scholarship fiasco involved? He mismanaged the scholarships he was giving out. That has to be the reason he was fired because they went from 9-24-5 in year one to 15-16-5 in year two. Back then, no way he got canned just because of the W/L record.

Huge scholarship issue, school had several lawsuits. Plus he was a well known as a big alcoholic.

Coach87
01-21-2013, 07:40 PM
I never understood how people argue over how long a coach should be given to "prove" themselves. Why should we give someone who's failing 3-5 years to turn things around? I swear, we are the only fan base that openly apologizes for coaches and give them the benefit of a doubt for years. I myself have done it, I supported Crowder until the very end.

The fact of the matter is that NU is quickly distancing themselves from their hockey program. It's been happening for the last 10 years. Every step we've made in the athletic department has been in favor of other sports (Basketball getting more attention. Soccer, VB, Field Hockey in NCAA tourneys). Hockey is just not a priority. And that's a very scary and sad fact. The hockey program is still the most attended program. Attendance is still strong, and the strongest its ever been.

The problem goes beyond a goalie who shouldn't be seeing the ice for the rest of his career. The problem goes beyond a coach who while trying his best to get through the season has struggled getting the job done and sends out apologetic emails every week. The problem goes beyond an AD that hired a man with no coaching background as a head coach. The problem goes beyond the hiring of an AD that is clearly a basketball minded man and as mentioned, is too worried with sanctions and political correctness to get things done.

The problem is overwhelming. While its nice to see that people are sending e-mails with their anger in the lack of success of the program, it's just not enough. As someone who's been on these boards for over a decade, you can notice that there's a lack of NU comments and threads. Why? Because the fans have moved to DieHardDogs. Over there, all you get is gum drops and lollipops and debates over lines and only the positively blinded viewpoint of people that actually are fine with 10 win seasons. Over there no one wants to hurt people's feelings in fear for a slightly awkward conversation in the Varsity Club after another 9-3 loss.

A handful of letters are helpful but won't change the culture of "I'll take a 6-5 win vs. BU, and a 9-3 loss to BC. Hey, we got 2 pts this weekend" mindset. It won't change the "It's been 25 years since we won a beanpot, but I got a good feeling about next year." mindset. The letters and outcry need to be overwhelming for a change to success to happen. In my 15 years involved in this team and program, I have never seen it outside of a select few.

Look at the teams that have been building programs in that time. Penn St., Robert Morris, Nebraska Omaha, UConn. Programs making leaps and bounds of progress. Programs that will make the NCAA tourney before we do. They have a goal, they have a mission. We just don't. The program is just a glorified book club for men to get away from their families for a night.


To the point, is 2 years enough for a coach? Absolutely. Until we get cutthroat with the program, we'll be in the same rut we've been in since Fern.

I understand your point and sympathize with your frustration however having a goal and a mission aren't enough. You gotta have a plan, too. A long term strategy involving academicians, scouting, coaching, alumni etc.

PPGuru
01-21-2013, 07:59 PM
In some cases, two years is enough. In others, it's not. All I'm really asking...do any of you really think Madigan will be fired after this year? I say there's a 0% chance of that happening.
Do I think Madigan will be fired after this year? No. He will continue to serve his school in the role they ask him to play. Until people above Madigan are changed, he will be safe for at least another year. I would even go so far as to say that Madigan could remain as Coach and have an honest shot at doing the job, if they replaced the AD and let Madigan operate without one arm tied behind his back. As is, Madigan is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. That is the difference between Madigans situation and Cedorchuks. Cedorchuk created his own mess.

Split-N
01-21-2013, 08:19 PM
Glad to hear there are some negative comments there. I haven't been other there in years. When the mass exodus from the USCHO boards happened, that was what DHD was all about. If they have become jaded, more power to them. It's what's needed for the program.

Times have apparently changed.

J.D.
01-21-2013, 08:42 PM
Sounds like if you all had a choice between replacing roby or madigan...it would be roby.

Steve, what level of results would satisfy you?

NU Speed Racer
01-21-2013, 09:00 PM
Minimum of 4 years.

Please explain why 4 years? Is it solely based on recruiting "his own players"? If that's the case shouldn't it be 5 years, so that is completely his system and no straggling redshirts are involved?

And why does that have anything to do with his coaching ability? A system needs to be learned, but how long does it take to get them working it correctly? A good coach will have them running it by midseason. An average coach would take a year. If its taking a coach 4 years to teach his system, then he's the problem. Now I know you'll say a system needs the correct players to run it, and to that I saw nonsense. This isn't like football where there's a major difference between the option and the pro style offense. There's no major change in a player's needs to run a trap compared to a up tempo pond hockey style. Everyone knows how to cycle.


So I'd love to know why you're willing to forfeit almost half a decade to decide on whether a coach is good enough.



Side note and I know its not hockey, so its not apples to apples here but look at ND, they had Charlie Weis. Didn't take them 4 years to decide. Florida has Zook. Didn't take them 4 years. Look at what happened after they acknowledge the mistake, removed it quickly and moved on. Both have been in the BCS title game within a handful of years.

steve66
01-21-2013, 09:01 PM
Sounds like if you all had a choice between replacing roby or madigan...it would be roby.

Steve, what level of results would satisfy you?

I think he inherited a bad team. Would like to see a couple of incoming classes and see the talent. From what you hear next year is supposed to be pretty good.

Agganis
01-21-2013, 09:08 PM
Side note and I know its not hockey, so its not apples to apples here but look at ND, they had Charlie Weis. Didn't take them 4 years to decide.

Correct, he got 5 years, but to ND's credit he was a real person so they could have been more naive.

northeastern
01-21-2013, 09:15 PM
..From what you hear next year is supposed to be pretty good.

..he can't coach, Steve.

He is an evaluator of talent.. not a 'behind the bench..nuts & bolts' D1 Coach.. that is all. I wish the University never proclaimed there was a 'National Search'.. bs.. there never was. Just a 'inhouse' conversation between AD & someone (Madigan), from within the U..

Heck look at Quinnipiac.. how much 'blue chip' talent on paper do they have? It's the coaching pal.. wake up!

Split-N
01-21-2013, 09:26 PM
Sounds like if you all had a choice between replacing roby or madigan...it would be roby.


....in a heartbeat!

northeastern
01-21-2013, 10:15 PM
Of course now texting is okay.. mad AD..poor Cronin.. just ahead of his time a bit..
per CHN..

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2013/01/21_ncaa_rule_changes_affect_scouting.php

J.D.
01-21-2013, 10:24 PM
I can't even remember...did Cronin actually break any rules (at NU)? I thought he was removed from the bench for that game at BC following the Beanpot as a precautionary measure in case he did?

northeastern
01-21-2013, 10:40 PM
..in the end, nope.

PPGuru
01-21-2013, 11:38 PM
All sanctions imposed on Cronin,and inherited by Madigan, were pre-emptive strikes by AD Roby, to show the NCAA that he was on top of his business. Previously, another sport had been penalized by the NCAA and Roby was afraid that the NCAA was going to see Cronins' (as Roby saw them) infractions as a sign that Athletics was (laugh here) out of control at NU, and that severe penalties would be handed down. Basically, Roby panicked and over-reacted.

Happy Husky Victory!
01-22-2013, 09:37 AM
ROBY MUST GO! Is there anyone that can start a Roby Must Go facebook page or something. Sad to say, I don't know how to use Facebook or I'd do it. NU Speed Racer...you interested?