Success begets success - heart and soul
Success begets success - heart and soul
Don't take too much offense Chuck when I tell you that your description of Parker is ridiculous. Given their performance this year, or that of the last few years (save 1999), BU teams have frequently come out flat, and perhaps unprepared. You only have to look at their abysmal performance against UNH in Janaury, or the way they laid down against Maine in the HE semis.
I should have been more clear, having re-read what I wrote. I meant to say that Coach Parker's teams never come out flat or unprepared for a Beanpot or NCAA tourney game. I'm sure that's still probably a little flattering overall, but the larger point I'm going for there is that the BU program does not lay these monstrous eggs in their high-profile games. Neither does BC in recent seasons, and when Walshy was still with us, neither did UMaine. Any team can have a bad game in the spotlight once in awhile. Unfortunately, it's a *trait* that has become synonymous with UNH over the last decade.
Personally, I think Parker is not the dynamic coach he once was. He still brings in a boatload of blue chippers, last year's team is evidence of that, and he still gets his teams to the NCAA's (except this year), but last year he was lucky to get out of Manchester, never mind the luck involved in winning the whole thing. Ever read Parker's rants after a losing effort. I've never seen a coach throw his team under the bus more than him. Something Umile never does BTW.
We probably agree more than you might think on the above ... but in the end, Coach Parker gets these talented kids for a reason ... and it's not just because they're a big city school, or else Northeastern would be a perennial HE powerhouse. And it's hardly a secret that Parker can turn quickly on a player that falls out of favor, for whatever reason. Yet that doesn't seem to stop more top-talent kids from coming anyway. Maybe because perception has become reality at this stage of the respective careers of Coach Parker and Coach Umile, which leaves Parker admired for being an outwardly feisty and demanding winner in the big games, and Umile discounted and scorned at times for being an outwardly passive and resigned also ran? I think that's what huesie is driving at in the previous post ... and it's tough to dispute.
But ultimately I think that, always, it is up to the players to go out there and do what they are supposedly capable of doing. Umile, or any coach, can give the old Knute Rockne speech, but if the players aren't listening and/or aren't capable, what's a coach supposed to do.
Agreed. But isn't Coach Umile ultimately responsible for choosing most/all of the players who come to play at UNH? It's not like he's a public HS coach who is at the whim of his town's general enrollment, and the quality of the town's grass roots programs in his sport(s). He ultimately gets the final say on admittance to the program if they're not capable, and he can say "yes" or "no" to icetime (or even dressing) IF they aren't listening.
Without naming names, UNH has had a lot of players (including some great ones) run through the program in the nearly 40 years I've been watching, who had the "attitude" from day one. On the other hand, we've had players, not always the greatest ones, who would go through a brick wall to get the job done. Guys like Gould, Mitrovic, Thomson, Krog, Haydar, Gare, Prudden, Saviano come to mind. The bottom line is that I have seen enough of UNH Hockey over the years to know that you can't always peg the guy who is going to be the team leader. But, ultimately, it does have to be the guys on the ice who get it done, not the suits behind the bench.
I bet if we both wrote down our respective lists of the "attitude" kids from the last 10 years of the program, there would be lots of identical names on both lists. It's not really that hard to see, if you know what to look for.
Now at the risk of some derision, I'm going to wander in with my personal experiences (admittedly on a much lower level) on the huge importance of correctly identifying leadership within any given team. I'm not sure that a coach faces a more important and critical task than to identify its leaders, and put them in leadership roles for the present and/or future of the team. Getting those decisions right or wrong will impact the chemistry of a team accordingly. And in the end, it is a coach's job to get to know ALL of their players, and in doing so get a clear sense of who your true leaders will be.
If you get your chemistry right, and you have your true leaders setting an example on AND off the ice/field/pitch, your job gets exponentially easier. There are players that thrive on the extra responsibilities that come with leadership, and couldn't give a toss about their stats - only about team *stats* like wins and losses. Likewise, there are sometimes mega-talented kids who are not good fits for leadership roles. Overlooking a true leader, or anointing a non-leader can both have similar consequences for any team.
But going back to a point I tried to make a few posts ago ... regardless of where you go with your leadership decisions, as a coach, you cannot just delegate away your own leadership and (yes) motivational responsibilities. It's just too important to leave for a relatively young player to shoulder that burden alone, or even share with a small collection of young teammates.
I've been very fortunate to have had the opportunities to see how this all plays out on a very personal level over the last several years. I can say with no qualms that teams I've coached have often come up against opponents with better tactical coaches having far more technical experience than me, and many of those teams have probably had better talent than we did, too.
But our teams have somehow managed to overcome those obstacles more often than not, and I can't ever remember an instance where our teams have failed to show up for a big game (albeit at their level). All I will say is that a coach in ANY setting has a great opportunity to set the framework for their team/program in all areas of its operation. And the ultimate level of success in any sport is rarely as simple as just having the best talent, or using the best tactics. Players need to buy in with their heads and hearts, too. And if you can't make that connection with your players ... then you owe it to them to ask yourself some very tough questions about why they're not buying in.
Again ... I'm not advocating for Coach Umile to step down, but I do think he has to selflessly ask himself those tough questions about what HE needs to do better to get where he so clearly would like to be. It would be a great story of perseverance if he were to somehow get to the pinnacle someday. And even if he doesn't, he deserves nothing less than our total respect for what he's done over the last 20 years. It's been a remarkable run for sure.
But getting to the pinnacle isn't going to happen by accident, just continuing down the path the UNH program has been trending over the last few years. And "puck luck" has little to do with an almost unprecedented run of lopsided losses to big fish and little minnows alike in spotlight games that can make or break the competitive reputation of your program. JMHO.
