Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

[OnMAA]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

During this time, 25 players have left the program prematurely. During the same time, Brown has had nine assistant coaches: Jon Guiffre, Ryan Stone, Ali Kenney, Shannon Kennedy,Dawn Loomis, Heather Reinke, Edith Zimmering, Sean Coady and Jill McInnis.

The Head Coach ultimately is responsible for the recruitment of players, hiring and retaining of assistants as well as the development and future of the program. All of the above data suggests a review and change is warranted. I admire the commitment of all the student-athletes both current and past, and wish only the best for each and every one of them.

I find it interesting that you bring up the large turnover in assistant coaches. It is a well known fact that the renumeration for the coaches at Brown is at the lower end of the scale. Many of these coaches have moved on to more prominent roles at other programs. Many of them left for more money elsewhere. If you do some research, you will find many ex Brown coaches and players involved as coaches in other programs. Most of them have glowing things to say about their experience at Brown, and for many of them Brown was the initial stepping stone towards their current role.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

While you might not agree with what is being said in the locker room, you are crossing the line by bringing it up in public. I am sure that any of us who are close to players have insights into a locker room that are truly between the coach and the players and should stay that way. It is easy for parents to take offense when their children are subject to harsh treatment (especially when they may have been the "superstars" on previous teams) but I would guess that the Brown locker room is not the only one where that happens.

That is a great paragraph. Everyone hockey parent should read it three times.

 

[law]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

An academic poll of sorts:

Do you think Coach Murphy reads this thread?

And if you do, do you think it affects her negatively, positively or not at all?

Lastly, do you think a thread like this, assuming she reads it, causes her to change her actions on or off the ice?

As far as this type of thread affecting the players, I can only use my experience as a basis: I have a daughter playing D1 (not at Brown -- really Coach Murphy) and from what I've heard from her over the years, she & her team mates, to the extent they pay any attention at all to this site (and it doesn't seem to be much) think the "Brown" type of threads (as opposed to hockey news & results threads) are hilarious and just confirms to them that their parents, with a few exceptions, know even less than the little the girls presume their parents to know.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

I've said this before....

No one who gets paid a legitimate salary for any work whatsoever related to the world of women's high school or college hockey should be relying on or even responding to anything whatsoever that is posted on this board.

To the extent that members of integrity are able to share factual information or valuable insight with other members, it is therefore of value to the rest of the members, but in no way should it serve as an information source to anyone who is making legitimate business decisions consistent with any job related to this field.

Unless he or she happens to be an entrepreneur who plans to open a whoopie pie bakery soon!

 

[Flarrow]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Absolutely the best thing I've seen on this site in months:"she & her team mates, to the extent they pay any attention at all to this site (and it doesn't seem to be much) think the "Brown" type of threads (as opposed to hockey news & results threads) are hilarious and just confirms to them that their parents, with a few exceptions, know even less than the little the girls presume their parents to know."
Thanks.
It's the pefect answer to know - it - alls who think "flaming" comment lines should be shut down. This site exists to let +holes let off steam. it's got very little hockey reality to it.
thank god for that.

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

QUOTE=Trillium;4456617]It seems you are suggesting Black Widow is wrong that the escalation in premature departures of players is related to the influence of the current asst coach. You indicate there have been 25 in total over the years. How is this broken out by year? How does it compare to other Ivy programs over the same period?

Everyone knows Brown's record has declined in recent years as you have detailed. As discussed in a previous thread, that alone though is not necessarily indicative of a coaching problem/need for change, given a variety of significant funding issues at Brown affecting both recruitment and support. Further, due to the impact of particularly strong or weak recruiting classes, many programs do go through periods of a few seasons of ebb and flow of their records as the impact of such classes is felt in a particular program.

What if any data exists to support that the problems in the program are growing despite more recently improving financial support, or that they relate specifically to coaching, rather than to finances or talent base?[/QUOTE]

Trillium.

My goal with all of my posts is to provide hard data in an effort to reduce hyperbole and provide context. As such, here is the breakdown of player turnover beginning with the ’07 incoming class. One may notice that in my earlier post, I stated 25 players have left the program but only 23 are listed below. Two underclassman from ’06 left the program during the ’04-05 season.

Class......Incoming..............# of Players that
Year.......Class Size.............Left Prematurely
‘07............6..........................3
‘08............7..........................3
‘09............8..........................5
‘10............9..........................5
‘11............8..........................4
‘12............9..........................3
Total 47.........................23

Source: www.brownbears.com and www.collegehockeystats.net

I do not have the time to glean how Player turnover at other Ivies compares for the same time period. I did compile this data a few years ago and Brown was much higher than any other Ivy at that time.

I will post the Assistant Coach Turnover among Ivies as well as Conference records in another post.

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Here is the Breakdown on Assistant Coach Turnover:

College Turnover of Assistants from 03-04 to date
Brown..................9
Cornell.................4*
Dartmouth............3
Harvard................6
Princeton..............3
Yale.....................1**

*Head Coach changed in 05-06 both assistants left as part of the transition
**Didn’t include one coach as said coach left in 03-04 and returned in 08-09
Source: www.collegehockeystats.net

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Trillium.

My goal with all of my posts is to provide hard data in an effort to reduce hyperbole and provide context. As such, here is the breakdown of player turnover beginning with the ’07 incoming class. One may notice that in my earlier post, I stated 25 players have left the program but only 23 are listed below. Two underclassman from ’06 left the program during the ’04-05 season.

Class Incoming # of Players that
Year Class Size Left Prematurely
‘07............6..........................3
‘08............7..........................3
‘09............8..........................5
‘10............9..........................5
‘11............8..........................4
‘12............9..........................3
Total 47.........................23

Source: www.brownbears.com and www.collegehockeystats.net

I do not have the time to glean how Player turnover compares for the same time period. I did compile this data a few years ago and Brown was much higher than any other Ivy at that time.

I will post the Assistant Coach Turnover among Ivies as well as Conference records in another post.

To be able to interpret the data properly you need to do two things:

1 - A Pareto on the reasons for departure.
2 - A comparison with other ivies.

Unless you have inside info you cannot really do a complete analysis on item 1 above.

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

To be able to interpret the data properly you need to do two things:

1 - A Pareto on the reasons for departure.
2 - A comparison with other ivies.

Unless you have inside info you cannot really do a complete analysis on item 1 above.

Dear OnMAA,

It is not my goal to do a complete analysis, rather to provide data from public record sources for others to consider. I will post the side-by-side season records in an upcoming post.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Trillium.

My goal with all of my posts is to provide hard data in an effort to reduce hyperbole and provide context. As such, here is the breakdown of player turnover beginning with the ’07 incoming class. One may notice that in my earlier post, I stated 25 players have left the program but only 23 are listed below. Two underclassman from ’06 left the program during the ’04-05 season.

Class......Incoming..............# of Players that
Year.......Class Size.............Left Prematurely
‘07............6..........................3
‘08............7..........................3
‘09............8..........................5
‘10............9..........................5
‘11............8..........................4
‘12............9..........................3
Total 47.........................23

Source: www.brownbears.com and www.collegehockeystats.net

I do not have the time to glean how Player turnover at other Ivies compares for the same time period. I did compile this data a few years ago and Brown was much higher than any other Ivy at that time.

I will post the Assistant Coach Turnover among Ivies as well as Conference records in another post.

Thankyou.

To me, those numbers dimensionalize the problem far better than team records, which are affected by many things both internal and external to a program out of direct control of a coaching staff.

Although some attrition is always inevitable, even in the absence of an exact numerical comparison to other Ivys, 50% early attrition over a 6 year period seems alarmingly high. To me, this number is worrisome and persuasive.

Whether the problem is due to deliberate over-recruiting, poor recruiting assessments, or "just" a large proportion of players who ultimately bail because incoming expectations of their hockey experience here are not realized--or a combination of the above--these are all things over which a coaching staff has accountability and a large degree of control.

The fact that this trend has continued over several seasons with no signs of it abating is suggestive of either an unwillingness or an inability to this point in time in determining what's required to stem the tide.

It does seem that the win-loss record may in fact be the least of their problems and I certainly wish the team and the coaching staff the best in working together to find the solutions.

For that, I agree with others who have suggested that the best way for Brown parents to enable that, is to resist the urge to air the teams internal strife in public.

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

I am having a heck of a time posting the season comparision. If anyone can provide step by step instructions on how to post a chart(I used tabs to separate the columns which may be causing the problem), I will be happy to post the chart.

 

[4LoveoftheGame]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

scrambledlegs, thanks for your insights and input. I played both hockey and baseball through college and have coached my entire adult life. I agree that teams should work together and that coaches play a role in this. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to do so. I believe that coaches have a responsibility to create a healthy environment where player want to work together for a common goal (this doesn't have to be wins!). This is not Digit's way. I will not divulge any inside information, but I know that Digit's tactics are intimidation and bullying.

I also have to question why everyone's answer to a less than perfect hockey experience is that the student-athlete should transfer! I would hope that each of these girls that is no longer with the team chose Brown for reason besides just hockey!

 

[4LoveoftheGame]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

OnMAA, thanks for your thoughts. I've already stated mine. I have no ax to grind with Digit or Brown hockey, but I do not believe that she has run the program into the ground with her ego. Scratch that; I know it.

 

[4LoveoftheGame]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

"To me, those numbers dimensionalize the problem far better than team records, which are affected by many things both internal and external to a program out of direct control of a coaching staff.

Although some attrition is always inevitable, even in the absence of an exact numerical comparison to other Ivys, 50% early attrition over a 6 year period seems alarmingly high. To me, this number is worrisome and persuasive.

Whether the problem is due to deliberate over-recruiting, poor recruiting assessments, or "just" a large proportion of players who ultimately bail because incoming expectations of their hockey experience here are not realized--or a combination of the above--these are all things over which a coaching staff has accountability and a large degree of control.

The fact that this trend has continued over several seasons with no signs of it abating is suggestive of either an unwillingness or an inability to this point in time in determining what's required to stem the tide.

It does seem that the win-loss record may in fact be the least of their problems and I certainly wish the team and the coaching staff the best in working together to find the solutions.

For that, I agree with others who have suggested that the best way for Brown parents to enable that, is to resist the urge to air the teams internal strife in public." - Trillium

Great post!

 

[Hockeydad4two]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Another statistic that I would like to see (besides those that Brown Parent posted) is what percentage of those that left the program left the school. If it's a high number, then I would suspect that the administration might want to look into what's going on. If it's a low number, then from the school's standpoint, why bother?

 

[Brown Parent]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Another statistic that I would like to see (besides those that Brown Parent posted) is what percentage of those that left the program left the school. If it's a high number, then I would suspect that the administration might want to look into what's going on. If it's a low number, then from the school's standpoint, why bother?

Perhaps, this except from the Letter from Director of Athletics published in the Brown Athletics 2007-08 Annual report will shed some light:

As a department we have spent a great deal of
time discussing the role we envision for Brown athletics. The vision is
centered on four main areas of strategic focus:
1. The Department of Athletics and Physical Education
should be an integrated part of the educational
mission of the university;
2. The health and safety of our students and athletes is
paramount in all we do;
3. Brown is committed to being a competitive member
of the Ivy League;
4. Our programs and facilities should reflect the
excellence of the University.

One can read the full letter at: http://www.brownbears.com/annualReports/AnnualReport-2008.pdf

 

[Trillium]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Another statistic that I would like to see (besides those that Brown Parent posted) is what percentage of those that left the program left the school....If it's a low number, then from the school's standpoint, why bother?

Why might they still be concerned? Here's just a few possible reasons

1) If the coaches were recruiting an inordinate proportion of high AI kids they never intend to play, merely in order to manipulate the team AI to gain admission for especially low AI players (that perhaps other Ivys could not get admitted?), the school might want to at least be aware of and agree to "buy in" to that practice...and also whether there was full disclosure to these high AI players going in, so as to manage their expectations from the program.

2) Did the low AI kids end up quitting hockey because they were having a difficult time managing both the academics and hockey? Are there too many of these then?

3) Are there players taking advantage of the reduced admission standards for athletes primarily to get admitted to an Ivy school, with little or no intention of actually playing hockey for 4 years (possibly tieing into #1a)?

Bottom line, if the premise is that the school is admitting prospective players at significantly lower admission standards than the rest of the student population in order to enrich the campus environment through their athletic contributions, I can't imagine why the administration wouldn't be concerned that, in practice, only half of them actually follow through on that expectation. Do they consider that an acceptable payoff?

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Why might they still be concerned? Here's just a few possible reasons

1) If the coaches were recruiting an inordinate proportion of high AI kids they never intend to play, merely in order to manipulate the team AI to gain admission for especially low AI players (that perhaps other Ivys could not get admitted?), the school might want to at least be aware of and agree to "buy in" to that practice...and also whether there was full disclosure to these high AI players going in, so as to manage their expectations from the program.

2) Did the low AI kids end up quitting hockey because they were having a difficult time managing both the academics and hockey? Are there too many of these then?

3) Are there players taking advantage of the reduced admission standards for athletes primarily to get admitted to an Ivy school, with little or no intention of actually playing hockey for 4 years (possibly tieing into #1a)?

Bottom line, if the premise is that the school is admitting prospective players at significantly lower admission standards than the rest of the student population in order to enrich the campus environment through their athletic contributions, I can't imagine why the administration wouldn't be concerned that, in practice, only half of them actually follow through on that expectation. Do they consider that an acceptable payoff?

You do an excellent job of pointing out the possible stories behind the numbers. And the only thing that can explain the numbers are the people behind the numbers - the actual ex-players themselves. I'm quite sure the athletics department at Brown knows exactly what their turn over is. The are required to report to the NCAA on their graduation rates. They keep track of these students even after they quit the team.

Now if they are interested in knowing why these students leave the team, they have every right to ask them. Now the ex-players are under no obligation to say anything, but with nothing to lose (you can't fire me, I already quit), they have no reason to lie about it. If Digit were truly the reason they were quitting the team and this upset the athletic department, you'd think they'd know and have done something about it if it were important to them. Perhaps the issue isn't what you think.

I'm rather tiring of all of the team statisticians, coaches, and athletic directors in the stands. If you really want to change hockey at Brown, become involved in the athletic department (making a nice donation would be a good start). One thing I know is true of all Ivies - money talks and more money talks louder. It is no coincidence that the best programs (both athletic and academic) have the most generous supporters.

 

[irishbridie49]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Trillium,
Five of the 9 kids who are no longer on the team were ECAC all-academic during the 2008 or 2009.

They are: Maggie Suprey (Noble and Greenough) and Andrea Hunter (Pomfret) were honored for the second consecutive year, Jaclyn Small (Thornhill Secondary, ON), Julianne Bishop (Noble and Greenough) and Jenny Cedorchuk[/B(Noble and Greenough)].

That kinda blows that theory, wouldn't you say? These kids were everyday players so I doubt the AI theory is even relevant. The kids were exceptional players and exceptional students from exceptional private prep schools (except for Small) - and they're all gone.

These players were all of equal caliber and hardly benefitted from any reduced admissions' standards for their athleticism. You might be confusing Brown with Harvard - if you know what I mean [wink][wink]

 

[notfromaroundhere]

Re: Brown Women's hockey coaching problems

Trillium,
Five of the 9 kids who are no longer on the team were ECAC all-academic during the 2008 or 2009.

They are: Maggie Suprey (Noble and Greenough) and Andrea Hunter (Pomfret) were honored for the second consecutive year, Jaclyn Small (Thornhill Secondary, ON), Julianne Bishop (Noble and Greenough) and Jenny Cedorchuk[/B(Noble and Greenough)].

That kinda blows that theory, wouldn't you say? These kids were everyday players so I doubt the AI theory is even relevant. The kids were exceptional players and exceptional students from exceptional private prep schools (except for Small) - and they're all gone.

These players were all of equal caliber and hardly benefitted from any reduced admissions' standards for their athleticism. You might be confusing Brown with Harvard - if you know what I mean [wink][wink]

I'm happy that these ladies were successfull academically. But perhaps that came at such a price that something had to give. That may or may not have something to do with Digit. Perhaps Digit's problem is that she recruits kids who want an education more than hockey.

But to put numbers together with a personality type who is loud and boisterous(and unless you are an ex-player or coach you have only hearsay about what goes on in there) and say that is causing the demise of womens hockey at Brown, is really oversimplifying the situation. There are lots more pieces to the puzzle than the coach.

She's a great coach when she's winning and a bum when she's losing. C'mon, nobody likes losing, but fingerpointing never made a winner out of a loser.