Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

    let's make Finnish the official language of the hockey Huskies.
    Originally posted by mtu_huskies
    "We are not too far away from a national championship," said (John) Scott.
    Boosh Factor 4

    Originally posted by Brent Hoven
    Yeah, but you're my favorite hag.

    Comment


    • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

      Originally posted by huskyfan View Post
      let's make Finnish the official language of the hockey Huskies.
      But we actually have a Swede on the team. The Fins are simply Yoopers in disguise.
      Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

      RIP - Kirby

      Comment


      • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

        For some reason, many seem to think that simply changing the coach will greatly improve the fortunes of the program. This season started out very promising and then got crushed by injuries. It's pretty tough when you are picking up people off the street by mid-season. Before you change the coach, you must look at the underlying problems that impede success. Why were Mike Sertich, Newell Brown, Herb Boxer and Bob Mancini able to have better records in their other coaching stops than they did at Tech? Were they much better coaches in other organizations? No matter who has been there since John MacInnes retired, success has been elusive. Why? What are the underlying problems that have hindered all of these guys? What can be done to alleviate them? Because if you can't answer these questions, the next guy, whether the next year, the year after or 10 years from now, won't have much more success than his predecessors.

        And before anyone jumps on the guy from Marquette, I grew up in Hancock, grew up on Tech hockey and names like Zuke, Usitalo, Jensen, Krieber and Payne mean something to me. Sure, I'm an NMU alum, but if I had my way it would be 1981 again and Tech and Northern would be in the Frozen Four together!
        "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

        Comment


        • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

          Ryan Furne is the WCHA Rookie of the Week. http://www.michigantechhuskies.com/V...CLID=205101465
          Originally posted by SCSU Euro
          What are you TALKING about? Best fans, best travelling, best insults nobody else understands, best talking in nerdy code. MTU rocks at like everything but winning hockey games.

          Comment


          • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

            Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
            For some reason, many seem to think that simply changing the coach will greatly improve the fortunes of the program. This season started out very promising and then got crushed by injuries. It's pretty tough when you are picking up people off the street by mid-season. Before you change the coach, you must look at the underlying problems that impede success. Why were Mike Sertich, Newell Brown, Herb Boxer and Bob Mancini able to have better records in their other coaching stops than they did at Tech? Were they much better coaches in other organizations? No matter who has been there since John MacInnes retired, success has been elusive. Why? What are the underlying problems that have hindered all of these guys? What can be done to alleviate them? Because if you can't answer these questions, the next guy, whether the next year, the year after or 10 years from now, won't have much more success than his predecessors.
            I'm under the impression that Sertie took the Tech job as a favor until the program could re-evaluate itself and hire a more permanent replacement (ultimately Russell). At any rate, he was only around long enough to stem the bleeding after Watters was canned. I think the general consensus is that Brown and Mancini were promising coaches who both took opportunities to move on to pros/OHL before either could make a long-term impact. From what I can dig up on Boxer, he spent a few years coaching second-tier minor league hockey after his rocky stint at Tech, and was canned midway into his 4th year with the Memphis Riverkings after a 9-23-0 start; hardly what I'd call success.

            Comment


            • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

              Originally posted by Flashy Man View Post
              Ryan Furne is the WCHA Rookie of the Week. http://www.michigantechhuskies.com/V...CLID=205101465
              We have a NICE THING!
              Michigan Tech Huskies Pep Band: There's No Use Trying To Talk. No Human Sound Can Stand Up To This. Loud Enough To Knock You Down.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Twitch Boy View Post
                We have a NICE THING!
                Three nice things in five days!
                Originally posted by SCSU Euro
                What are you TALKING about? Best fans, best travelling, best insults nobody else understands, best talking in nerdy code. MTU rocks at like everything but winning hockey games.

                Comment


                • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                  Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
                  I'm under the impression that Sertie took the Tech job as a favor until the program could re-evaluate itself and hire a more permanent replacement (ultimately Russell). At any rate, he was only around long enough to stem the bleeding after Watters was canned. I think the general consensus is that Brown and Mancini were promising coaches who both took opportunities to move on to pros/OHL before either could make a long-term impact. From what I can dig up on Boxer, he spent a few years coaching second-tier minor league hockey after his rocky stint at Tech, and was canned midway into his 4th year with the Memphis Riverkings after a 9-23-0 start; hardly what I'd call success.
                  Did your research show that Boxer had a winning record in two of his three full seasons at Memphis? Did it show that in the season prior to being fired, that he led the team to the CHL finals? Did it show that his record at Tech was 66-129-8, a .345 winning percentage and that at Memphis he had a record of 112-119-7, a winning percentage of .485 and an appearance in the finals and two playoff appearances in three seasons? His record at Memphis was significantly better than it was at Tech. Why do you think Brown and Mancini moved on after two and four years? Is it possible that they realized there wasn't alot of upside to continuing at Tech and that they had a better chance to advance elsewhere? That being said, why were all of these people able to be more successful, or should I say have better winning percentages with other programs?
                  "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                  Comment


                  • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                    Originally posted by Twitch Boy View Post
                    We have a NICE THING!
                    Watch, this means some Gopher will take out his knee this weekend and he'll be done for the season.

                    Comment


                    • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                      Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
                      Did your research show that Boxer had a winning record in two of his three full seasons at Memphis? Did it show that in the season prior to being fired, that he led the team to the CHL finals? Did it show that his record at Tech was 66-129-8, a .345 winning percentage and that at Memphis he had a record of 112-119-7, a winning percentage of .485 and an appearance in the finals and two playoff appearances in three seasons? His record at Memphis was significantly better than it was at Tech. Why do you think Brown and Mancini moved on after two and four years? Is it possible that they realized there wasn't alot of upside to continuing at Tech and that they had a better chance to advance elsewhere? That being said, why were all of these people able to be more successful, or should I say have better winning percentages with other programs?
                      I don't think that it is fair to compare pro vs. college success. As a pro coach, management gives you a team and tells you to do only one thing with them - do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, or we'll find someone else who can. In college, you're also responsible for recruiting your own team, and making sure that, to the best of your ability, they stay out of trouble and remain academically eligible. Maybe Boxer couldn't handle the recruiting aspect.

                      As for Brown and Mancini moving on, don't try to tell me that if you were a young, promising NCAA coach with no loyalty to the school you were employed by, you wouldn't seriously consider an opportunity to get things like recruiting and academic eligibility off your back and coach a team of professionals. That's just the way it goes.

                      Look, no one is expecting Tech to appear in a Frozen Four anytime soon, and only an idiot would think that a coaching change will have this team back in the Top 15 by the end of the next season. I think overall, we'd just like to see more seasons along the lines of 06-07, and fewer seasons along the lines of anything resembling the last three. As a coach, when an injury plague continues for three seasons in a row, you can no longer just sit there and cry "Bad luck!" You have a culture, not an anomaly, and you need to figure out how to fix the problem.

                      Comment


                      • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                        Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post
                        I don't think that it is fair to compare pro vs. college success. As a pro coach, management gives you a team and tells you to do only one thing with them - do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, or we'll find someone else who can. In college, you're also responsible for recruiting your own team, and making sure that, to the best of your ability, they stay out of trouble and remain academically eligible. Maybe Boxer couldn't handle the recruiting aspect.

                        As for Brown and Mancini moving on, don't try to tell me that if you were a young, promising NCAA coach with no loyalty to the school you were employed by, you wouldn't seriously consider an opportunity to get things like recruiting and academic eligibility off your back and coach a team of professionals. That's just the way it goes.

                        Look, no one is expecting Tech to appear in a Frozen Four anytime soon, and only an idiot would think that a coaching change will have this team back in the Top 15 by the end of the next season. I think overall, we'd just like to see more seasons along the lines of 06-07, and fewer seasons along the lines of anything resembling the last three. As a coach, when an injury plague continues for three seasons in a row, you can no longer just sit there and cry "Bad luck!" You have a culture, not an anomaly, and you need to figure out how to fix the problem.
                        Your pro vs college argument doesn't work. At the CHL minor pro level you are responsible for recruiting your team. Management generally has very little to do with it. Same for the OHL, Bob Mancini was Head Coach and GM in Saginaw. He was also under .500 at Tech and over .500 at Ferris.

                        So think about this. First, if you make a coaching change, it is highly likely that there will be a record improvement over this season. Now who do you bring in? Do you think there is any chance that some of those marquee names would throw their hat into the ring? And let's just say that the money to hire that marquee coach and his chosen assistants is available, but the rest of the budget and support remains the same. Why might some of these coaches with a record of success not be interested in coming to Tech?
                        "The use of common sense and logic will not be tolerated and may result in fine and/or suspension."- Western Professional Hockey League By-laws. 1999-2000.

                        Comment


                        • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                          Originally posted by Twitch Boy View Post
                          We have a NICE THING!
                          Your mother has a nice thing.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by davyd83 View Post
                            And let's just say that the money to hire that marquee coach and his chosen assistants is available, but the rest of the budget and support remains the same. Why might some of these coaches with a record of success not be interested in coming to Tech?
                            Sir Bedevere: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
                            Peasant 1: Are there? Oh well, tell us.
                            Sir Bedevere: Tell me. What do you do with witches?
                            Peasant 1: Burn them.
                            Sir Bedevere: And what do you burn, apart from witches?
                            Peasant 1: More witches.
                            Peasant 2: Wood.
                            Sir Bedevere: Good. Now, why do witches burn?
                            Peasant 3: ...because they're made of... wood?
                            Sir Bedevere: Good. So how do you tell whether she is made of wood?
                            Peasant 1: Build a bridge out of her.
                            Sir Bedevere: But can you not also build bridges out of stone?
                            Peasant 1: Oh yeah.
                            Sir Bedevere: Does wood sink in water?
                            Peasant 1: No, no, it floats!... It floats! Throw her into the pond!
                            Sir Bedevere: No, no. What else floats in water?
                            Peasant 1: Bread.
                            Peasant 2: Apples.
                            Peasant 3: Very small rocks.
                            Peasant 1: Cider.
                            Peasant 2: Gravy.
                            Peasant 3: Cherries.
                            Peasant 1: Mud.
                            Peasant 2: Churches.
                            Peasant 3: Lead! Lead!
                            King Arthur: A Duck.
                            Sir Bedevere: ...Exactly. So, logically...
                            Peasant 1: If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood.
                            Sir Bedevere: And therefore...
                            Peasant 2: ...A witch!

                            Is it the lack of women? Actually, a better broadcast contract would go along ways even if it's expanding to a radio network to cover more of the Western U.P. and Northern Wisconsin.
                            Originally posted by SCSU Euro
                            What are you TALKING about? Best fans, best travelling, best insults nobody else understands, best talking in nerdy code. MTU rocks at like everything but winning hockey games.

                            Comment


                            • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                              Originally posted by Burnt Orange Husky View Post
                              Pres. Mroz is the person responsible for making a decision about the Head Coach. Unfortunately, he's preoccupied with trying to keep the classroom doors open and figuring out to make Tech a private institution. Plus, I think there's a lot of denial going on. Why else would the University spend the money to build skyboxes in the smallest arena in the WCHA with the worst attendance.

                              Let's face it, Tech is not a hockey school any more. The hockey program has been losing for as long as the current students have been ALIVE! The basketball and football programs are more successful and less expensive to operate. At a luncheon last year with Pres. Mroz, he did not even mention the hockey program until he was asked about it. And when I asked about a new coach, he just shrugged his shoulders and had a blank "will see" look on his face.

                              I hope I'm wrong but I don't think the Administration is going to do anything to improve the program and my fear is that when Big Ten hockey starts up, the Administration will take the opportunity to kill the program. It's all about the money these days...
                              I don't think the hockey program is going anywhere. I have always been under the impression that Rick Yeo was asked to leave as athletic director after he tried to eliminate the football program. (Of course, he was replaced around the same time Tompkins was fired and Mroz became interim President. I'm too lazy to look up if they both happened in the same year). Also, why would the University let the Opies donate a million bucks for the suites if they won't be used?

                              Ultimately, you're right, though, about Mroz having to try to keep the doors open. I have it on very good authority that in one of the Engineering departments a professor is retiring and he won't be replaced next year. All this because of State of Michigan budget cuts.

                              Comment


                              • Re: We Cannot Have Nice Things: Michigan Tech 2010-2011 Season Thread: Part Tre

                                Originally posted by flashy man View Post
                                ryan furne is the wcha rookie of the week. http://www.michigantechhuskies.com/v...clid=205101465
                                yeah!
                                Originally posted by mtu_huskies
                                "We are not too far away from a national championship," said (John) Scott.
                                Boosh Factor 4

                                Originally posted by Brent Hoven
                                Yeah, but you're my favorite hag.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X