Oh, we know they'll be young, but LBsk8r makes a good point. Did Jay mention "The Leadership Group" once this season? I don't think he did. A successful team still needs leaders. A successful team still needs guys with some experience and maturity to create a cohesive and accountable locker room.While we all agree you need a mix of veteran players being young is nor a real disadvantage
Of the frozen four teams 3 are the 2nd 4th and 8th youngest in the country
When was the last time BU did not have a freshman make the hockeyeast all rookie team
he did mention some qualities i’d consider part of leadership (or implied it), just not the actual guys w letters. mainly the guys referenced were the 4th line (at the time) and Svoboda. iirc it was Merrill Morello and Roukounakis. basically of the forwards they were the only ones willing to get dirty. later on Lawrence regularly brought that.Oh, we know they'll be young, but LBsk8r makes a good point. Did Jay mention "The Leadership Group" once this season? I don't think he did. A successful team still needs leaders. A successful team still needs guys with some experience and maturity to create a cohesive and accountable locker room.
Leaders don't grow on trees. It's not an easy fix.
Interesting point. You reminded me that the Bruins don't have a captain.Interesting points…if somebody asked me “hey, should I have a leadership council if I don’t have enough real leaders to make it work?”, I’d answer that in my view it would be worse to have a leadership group with poor leaders than to have no leadership group for a year. I would not condone having one in name only - which isn't to say you can’t have a group that is a little green, but you should know leaders and leadership when you see it..it would be unwise to hand out letters and/or have a leadership group with guys who are not ready or viewed as leaders.
That last scenario undermines more than just the name of the group…it can send a message that true leadership is not what you seek but instead you want the appearance of leadership and/or want to have certain players appear to be more than they are.
The number of captains or size of a leadership group should not exceed the number of true leaders on a team.
That might be different. Like the early 1970s when Harry Sinden didn't have a C. He didn't want anyone (Phil) pissed off that they didn't get the C. Bruins have a good leadership group this year. That works at some levels but maybe not on a young NCAA D1 team.Interesting point. You reminded me that the Bruins don't have a captain.
Id suspect we will begin hearing some portal news this weekend. I'll go on record as disagreeing with people on this thread. I'm not interested in bringing back the majority of last year's forward group outside of 4 or 5 of them (7 10 11 19 26)
I understand players get better with age but none of the others have a motor skill or good hockey sense.
This team needs different DNA
Correct meant 25 not 26
- 12 isn't going anywhere and I like him to have a solid 18-20 Senior year (A Senior! What a concept.)
- I don't know how to fix 8, but it's a make or break year for him. I'm hopeful he's a late bloomer
- 25 was strong down the stretch. He should be on your above list
- 38 isn't going anywhere, but I'm not gonna lie, I wouldn't be that said if he left
- On D.... Who knows, but man would I love to get two veteran transfers with size
- I'm not sure how to fix the goalie. Watching last night's Michigan/Denver game really hammered home how mediocre to terrible 40 was all last season