Brown - Oops! They did it again.

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Nobody here ever said Digit couldn't be cut, but we are looking for reasons beyond the obvious (w/l record, personality on the bench). So far, we've had nothing.

Those who focus entirely on the w/l record seem to have a very superficial understanding of Ivy League Athletics. Although nominally Division I, Ivy League schools athletics departments operate in many ways more like Division III schools. Obviously, lack of athletic scholarships comes to mind here, but there are other ways as well. If you read the NCAA guides, you will find that Division I schools are supposed to be more focused on providing entertainment to the student body (thus the requirements for larger playing venues) while Division III athletics are supposed to focus more on the personal development of the student athlete. Ivy League schools have the broadest array of NCAA sports of any league, despite being smaller in student population on average than most. And most of these sports attract very few spectators. Clearly, the emphasis on larger participation indicates that winning isn't everything (no Vince Lombardi here).

If you look at the Academic Index (AI) requirements in the Ivy League, this is another indicator that there are other considerations for a program beyond wins and losses. Most people are not aware of all 3 different requirements of the AI. Most are familiar with the individual athlete requirements. Some are aware of the school requirement for an average AI score across all athletes. However, most are not familiar with the inner workings of the team AI requirements. These are set by the institutions themselves to give guidance to coaches, so they know if a set of recruited athletes will be admitted. Each school sets each team's goals separately. Harvard, for example is known to have low team AI score averages for its helmet sports and higher for other sports, while IIRC Penn seems to emphasize basketball. I have no knowledge of where Brown allows lower AI scores, but I'd be willing to bet it is not in womens hockey.

And while Ivy ADs set these AI targets, they also evaluate coaches with the understanding of where their AI stacks up against their Ivy League competitors (this stuff is published and shared within the league).

And I'm sure there are other standards that are used in evaluating coaches, in the Ivy League. I know community relations is important at some institutions and Digit does a lot for girls hockey in RI. Schools everywhere are very loathe to dismiss coaches who have a large level of personal support in the community. Look at how long Joe Paterno was able to field football teams at Penn State worse than Brown's hockey team. Oh, and BTW, they've come back to be very competitive in the past couple of years. So while Digit may be down, this doesn't mean that she has forgotten how to build a winner.

Ultimately, what I'm trying to say here is that there is far more to Brown's AD's job than looking at Digit's w/l record in evaluating her performance. Those Johnny-Come-Lately parents and other nay-sayers seem to lack this perspective on what makes a good womens hockey coach at Brown and only display their shallow, short-sighted ignorance and petty win-at-all-costs mentality.

"The biggest thing for me is winning. That's really all I care about right now, and I'll do whatever it takes to make my team successful."
-Digit Murphy

So your rebuttal is?

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

So you happen to know the salary of both coaches ?. Everyone knows generally how much head coaches are paid in D1 womens hockey. Not sure if the assistants at Brown make all that much money.

Based on comments I've heard in the past from various sources, many Brown assistants go elsewhere for more money. As a matter of fact the College coaching ranks are littered with people that either played at Brown, or got their start in coaching at Brown.

And no I don’t know the salaries. But based on assumptions, Digit’s been there for 20 years and has had much past success, so I’m sure she’s been able to up her paycheck over the years. And Coady left being a NHL scout to coach d-1 girls hockey, despite having a reason for the move, it’s hard to think he would of done so if he was making practically nothing. Not saying he’s earning the big bucks by any means, but Digit’s been known to be able to get the kids she wants into Brown, so she probably was able to persuade Brown into paying Coady more than what they typically pay assistant coaches (having a NHL scout be in charge of recruiting couldn’t of been that hard of a pitch to sell).

So brown might not pay as good as other universities, but they have to be paying those coaches more than they’d like to. Point being they could find someone younger who can relate to the girls better. Someone who would appreciate what their making. Give the job to someone fresh who has the same desire to win as the players, not to someone defending their name in the coaching world.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

How about the development of strong student athletes who value things like the rewards of a strong work ethic? To me, this is far more important than whether some kid wins a hockey game, D-1 or not. There's no pro league for these girls. It's far more important that they become strong citizens of whereever they're from, and potential leaders for tomorrow. I'd say this is outweighs wins by about 95-5.

As a professionaly employed manager who hires college grads from time to time, I am NOT going to hire some kid with a GPA of 2.5 who can't write a decent grammatically correct sentence, perform intellectual analysis, etc., etc., just because the kid happened to have scored 100 goals (perhaps with less than 5 assists no doubt?) and led his her team to third place in the nation or whatever. NOT HAPPENING!

Give me the kid whose team didn't win a game all year, but worked her buns off fulfilling her commitment to please her coach, and who still managed a 3.0 or better, AND performed community service projects with a wholesome interest in the people she was helping. That's right, winless season, but still leading candidate for my opening.

Get it?

Clearly these athletes are aware of this. The main reason people chose Ivies over scholarship schools is to come out with an Ivy degree. And it's not the reputation of the sports teams that make the degree so valuable it's what's done in the classroom.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

"The biggest thing for me is winning," Murphy said. "That's really all I care about right now, and I'll do whatever it takes to make my team successful."
-Digit Murphy

So your rebuttal is?

You have a fantastic career in tabloid journalism ahead of you if you want, as you are good at taking quotes out of context, noting here that there is no background given on when this was said.

I Don't know where you took the quote from, but clearly from the words "right now" in bold type, there is a context to this comment. For all I know it was taken from a talk to her players just before a game. And on game day, that would be a comment made by just about any coach. And would you fire every coach who said that right before a game and then lost?

You wouldn't fool too many students at Brown with that cheap argumentative trick. I suggest that you along with ccookie79 work on bringing some real coaching or hockey knowledge to the discussion besides the win and loss record if you wish to have some credibility. Stop relying on weak word twisting and do you homework.

 

[D2D]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

I'll trust those put in place to make those evaluations to do their jobs.

Over the years I've seen lots of errors in judgement made by superiors (whether it be in sports, business, politics, or whatever). Sometimes those in charge act too quickly without thinking things through; other times they evaluate but end up taking the wrong course of action. And then there's the third type of error: a failure to do anything because (a) you're unaware that a problem exists or (b) you don't recognize how serious it is.

I'm not nearly close enough to the Brown situation to know which of the above might apply, but from a distance it would appear there are some problems that need attention.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

And no I don’t know the salaries. But based on assumptions, Digit’s been there for 20 years and has had much past success, so I’m sure she’s been able to up her paycheck over the years. And Coady left being a NHL scout to coach d-1 girls hockey, despite having a reason for the move, it’s hard to think he would of done so if he was making practically nothing. Not saying he’s earning the big bucks by any means, but Digit’s been known to be able to get the kids she wants into Brown, so she probably was able to persuade Brown into paying Coady more than what they typically pay assistant coaches (having a NHL scout be in charge of recruiting couldn’t of been that hard of a pitch to sell).

So brown might not pay as good as other universities, but they have to be paying those coaches more than they’d like to. Point being they could find someone younger who can relate to the girls better. Someone who would appreciate what their making. Give the job to someone fresh who has the same desire to win as the players, not to someone defending their name in the coaching world.

You know what happens when you assume something...


So where it the out of context quote to say she doesn't desire to win? And I don't see Digit here posting here defending her name against the whining hockey parents in this thread. Where is the quote for that one?

Or better yet, just step away from the keyboard and preserve what little reputation you have left.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

You have a fantastic career in tabloid journalism ahead of you if you want, as you are good at taking quotes out of context, noting here that there is no background given on when this was said.

I Don't know where you took the quote from, but clearly from the words "right now" in bold type, there is a context to this comment. For all I know it was taken from a talk to her players just before a game. And on game day, that would be a comment made by just about any coach. And would you fire every coach who said that right before a game and then lost?

You wouldn't fool too many students at Brown with that cheap argumentative trick. I suggest that you along with ccookie79 work on bringing some real coaching or hockey knowledge to the discussion besides the win and loss record if you wish to have some credibility. Stop relying on weak word twisting and do you homework.

I'm not sure the exact day and time this was said, but you can try to figure that out by looking at Digit's bio on the Brown hockey website.

 

[5 4 Fighting]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

I'm not sure the exact day and time this was said, but you can try to figure that out by looking at Digit's bio on the Brown hockey website.

Just out of curiosity...what is your stance on teams running up the score?

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

You know what happens when you assume something...


So where it the out of context quote to say she doesn't desire to win? And I don't see Digit here posting here defending her name against the whining hockey parents in this thread. Where is the quote for that one?

Or better yet, just step away from the keyboard and preserve what little reputation you have left.

One reason Digit might not be on this forum defending herself is because she has nothing to say. Even if she did she could say whatever she likes but it doesnt doesnt change the fact that she does not have a league win or that she has the highest attrition rate.

Clearly people aren’t going to come to an agreement. Some people want the team to have a good record solely for the coaches’ sake. Other people want Brown to rally back and be competitive again actually for the players on the team’s sake. So naturally we’re going to have different solutions to the problem.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

I'm not sure the exact day and time this was said, but you can try to figure that out by looking at Digit's bio on the Brown hockey website.

I'll take your word that the quote was taken from the bio on the Brown Hockey website. The location of that quote would indicate that she is talking about the immediate goals for the team as a part of the publicity effort (the point of much of the content of a college hockey website). This is normal stuff one would expect any coach to say.

Hardly newsworthy. You are a bit young (24) to understand the objectives a head coach must balance and the different communications you must present for the varying audiences you deal with. Yes, coaching is not just an X's and O's job, but it is also a political job with audiences with different and competing interests, especially at a high powered school like Brown. Young coaches often get chewed up and spit out when they go into a job like this thinking it is just about running practices and changing lines at a game.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

You know what happens when you assume something...


So where it the out of context quote to say she doesn't desire to win? And I don't see Digit here posting here defending her name against the whining hockey parents in this thread. Where is the quote for that one?

Or better yet, just step away from the keyboard and preserve what little reputation you have left.

There is no quote. I think she's past her prime, but I'm not expecting to find a quote from Digit actually saying that. That's just common sense.

Digit's the most winningest coach and Coady was working in the NHL, what more do they have to prove in d-1 women's hockey. Not much. Theres one reason a new coach would come in with a bigger desire to win.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

I'll take your word that the quote was taken from the bio on the Brown Hockey website. The location of that quote would indicate that she is talking about the immediate goals for the team as a part of the publicity effort (the point of much of the content of a college hockey website). This is normal stuff one would expect any coach to say.

Hardly newsworthy. You are a bit young (24) to understand the objectives a head coach must balance and the different communications you must present for the varying audiences you deal with. Yes, coaching is not just an X's and O's job, but it is also a political job with audiences with different and competing interests, especially at a high powered school like Brown. Young coaches often get chewed up and spit out when they go into a job like this thinking it is just about running practices and changing lines at a game.

If anything the only point this thread has made is that Brown does not chew up and spit out coaches. If that was the case Digit would of been long gone. So it's actually the perfect place for new coaches.

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

One reason Digit might not be on this forum defending herself is because she has nothing to say. Even if she did she could say whatever she likes but it doesnt doesnt change the fact that she does not have a league win or that she has the highest attrition rate.

Clearly people aren’t going to come to an agreement. Some people want the team to have a good record solely for the coaches’ sake. Other people want Brown to rally back and be competitive again actually for the players on the team’s sake. So naturally we’re going to have different solutions to the problem.

Quite frankly, I don't think Digit cares about what the blogosphere says, except that if it gets back to her that parents of current players are out to get her fired, she'd probably be none too happy with people trying to poison the well. That is what is wrong with this thread - the insiders destroying the team.

Oh, and to the high attrition rate... You know what happens when they bring in a new coach? The attrition rate goes even higher, as the new coach wants their own people. And when you do that, guess what happens? The winning percentage goes down even more with more freshmen getting more ice time.

New coach doesn't necessarily mean better team. Be careful what you wish for...

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Just out of curiosity...what is your stance on teams running up the score?

You are funny Most on this thread would not get it !

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Quite frankly, I don't think Digit cares about what the blogosphere says, except that if it gets back to her that parents of current players are out to get her fired, she'd probably be none too happy with people trying to poison the well. That is what is wrong with this thread - the insiders destroying the team.

Oh, and to the high attrition rate... You know what happens when they bring in a new coach? The attrition rate goes even higher, as the new coach wants their own people. And when you do that, guess what happens? The winning percentage goes down even more with more freshmen getting more ice time.

New coach doesn't necessarily mean better team. Be careful what you wish for...

Indeed....Remember the New Blood quote from a few pages back.....
...

One Executive for our firm once said after being internally asked if leadership required change:
- "Be careful what you wish for, New Blood may mean yours is no longer required."

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Nobody here ever said Digit couldn't be cut, but we are looking for reasons beyond the obvious (w/l record, personality on the bench). So far, we've had nothing.

Those who focus entirely on the w/l record seem to have a very superficial understanding of Ivy League Athletics. Although nominally Division I, Ivy League schools athletics departments operate in many ways more like Division III schools. Obviously, lack of athletic scholarships comes to mind here, but there are other ways as well. If you read the NCAA guides, you will find that Division I schools are supposed to be more focused on providing entertainment to the student body (thus the requirements for larger playing venues) while Division III athletics are supposed to focus more on the personal development of the student athlete. Ivy League schools have the broadest array of NCAA sports of any league, despite being smaller in student population on average than most. And most of these sports attract very few spectators. Clearly, the emphasis on larger participation indicates that winning isn't everything (no Vince Lombardi here).

If you look at the Academic Index (AI) requirements in the Ivy League, this is another indicator that there are other considerations for a program beyond wins and losses. Most people are not aware of all 3 different requirements of the AI. Most are familiar with the individual athlete requirements. Some are aware of the school requirement for an average AI score across all athletes. However, most are not familiar with the inner workings of the team AI requirements. These are set by the institutions themselves to give guidance to coaches, so they know if a set of recruited athletes will be admitted. Each school sets each team's goals separately. Harvard, for example is known to have low team AI score averages for its helmet sports and higher for other sports, while IIRC Penn seems to emphasize basketball. I have no knowledge of where Brown allows lower AI scores, but I'd be willing to bet it is not in womens hockey.

And while Ivy ADs set these AI targets, they also evaluate coaches with the understanding of where their AI stacks up against their Ivy League competitors (this stuff is published and shared within the league).

And I'm sure there are other standards that are used in evaluating coaches, in the Ivy League. I know community relations is important at some institutions and Digit does a lot for girls hockey in RI. Schools everywhere are very loathe to dismiss coaches who have a large level of personal support in the community. Look at how long Joe Paterno was able to field football teams at Penn State worse than Brown's hockey team. Oh, and BTW, they've come back to be very competitive in the past couple of years. So while Digit may be down, this doesn't mean that she has forgotten how to build a winner.

Ultimately, what I'm trying to say here is that there is far more to Brown's AD's job than looking at Digit's w/l record in evaluating her performance. Those Johnny-Come-Lately parents and other nay-sayers seem to lack this perspective on what makes a good womens hockey coach at Brown and only display their shallow, short-sighted ignorance and petty win-at-all-costs mentality.

Those who don’t focus entirely on the record seem to have a very superficial understanding of Ivy League athletics. They don’t attract big crowds for multiple reasons. The student body’s significantly smaller. Admission is much stricter so to get into an Ivy League school you need to have some exceptional talent or hobby (whether it’s sports, chemistry, speech and debate, politics). But the majority of students here have their own obligations. The fact that there are not many spectators does not in any way demonstrate that Ivy League athletics don’t view winning as top priority.

 

[rinkrat890890]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

If anything the only point this thread has made is that Brown does not chew up and spit out coaches. If that was the case Digit would of been long gone. So it's actually the perfect place for knew coaches.

All I can say after reading all of your posts is "I know you are not an Ivy League student".

 

[CanHockGuy]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Indeed....Remember the New Blood quote from a few pages back.....
...

The old double insertion trick!

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

I wonder how many people on this thread have actually seen Brown play at least two or more games this season. My interest in participating in this discussion is to provide context for thoughtful conversation.

In this spirit, I am willing to pay for up to 25 posters to either go to a Brown game or watch one online. I will buy your admission ticket or pay the one-game online fee. This offer is for the home game weekend series against Cornell, Friday February 12, and Colgate, Saturday, February 13. I chose these games as both are webcast and it gives me enough time to send you the money.

All you have to do is send me your contact info via rep and I'll take care of the rest.

 

[hcky85]

Re: Brown - Oops! They did it again.

Quite frankly, I don't think Digit cares about what the blogosphere says, except that if it gets back to her that parents of current players are out to get her fired, she'd probably be none too happy with people trying to poison the well. That is what is wrong with this thread - the insiders destroying the team.

Oh, and to the high attrition rate... You know what happens when they bring in a new coach? The attrition rate goes even higher, as the new coach wants their own people. And when you do that, guess what happens? The winning percentage goes down even more with more freshmen getting more ice time.

New coach doesn't necessarily mean better team. Be careful what you wish for...

I dare a new coach to come in and make the attrition rate higher or decrease the winning percentage, it's not possible.

And your arguments pretty tough to defend especially at Brown. Just look at the men's team. They had the Grillo Empire going on for twelve years. He had early success too, but then drove the program into the ground. This year they got a new coach and now they're doing awesome, without even having the chance to have their own recruiting class come in to work with. I think the men's team is actually breaking previous years records in shots and goals.

So if anything, I'm a firm beleiver that the talent of the players at brown is not the problem, it's the coaches.