D1 Coaches At Risk

[OnMAA]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Even within the Ivy's things are different at different schools. Cornell is as large as some state schools and offers a WIDE variety of highly ranked degrees in pretty much all fields liberal arts and professional. Dartmouth, Princeton, etc. are indeed smaller and still offer a wide range of degree choices but fewer. If you are looking for physical therapy, exercise science, nursing, or some sort of medically oriented/trade oriented degree most of the Ivy's won't be the best choices and other schools will be ranked higher. If you're looking for a more traditional degree - science, social science, liberal arts, engineering - you'll be hard-pressed not to find a good fit in the Ivy League somewhere.

Disagree with that notion. Plenty of good medical based or medical prep programs within the ivy's. Key is the approach to study many take, challenging at first, but enriching in the end. Know several D1 Ivy grads from various schools that ended up in Med School based on their Ivy program.

Our experience in choosing an Ivy was fully worth it, despite the additional cost. Our D is still in the states, still in school post grad in an excellent nationally renowned program. She got in thanks in large part due to her achievements at the Ivy school. The good degree with the name brand definitely made a difference. One of our other D, had the option to go Ivy as well, but took the CIS route, at one of the Canadian Ivies, and was just as successful (Both ended up in a post grad Med Program), however her post grad options were more limited compared to the one that attended the Ivy. Just our experience.

Having said all that, know full well that you get out of school what you put into it, no matter which school it is. In most cases, your degree name counts for a few years, but the approach to learning and the habits learned/applied is what will define the life time career options.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Declining performance the last few years. I have never met him, but I have heard from several folks that he and his assistants projected a lot of arrogance in recruiting and that he was personally derogatory to girls he wasn't interested in. If true, the approach is out of touch with the times.

Although I have heard of a few isolated experiences like this, for the most part players talking to Dartmouth have had a good experience on that front. There are certainly FAR MORE ARROGANT coaches out there.

However, I believe the primary reason they lost a large percentage of recruits the past 4-5 years is the school's very poor reputation developed going back to the last 10 years given the high frequency Hudak et al developed to commit to players on behalf of Dartmouth and then renege at the 11th hour, presumably when someone better came along late in the game...and blame it on "unforeseen admissions problems". I personally know of about a dozen or more players this happened to over the years, which is likely just the tip of the iceberg. Given a long track record of doing so, prospects in recent years became very wary of Dartmouth's interest from the get go and reluctant to commit.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Starting to see this more and more with girls de-committing from Yale, Cornell and others purely for financial reasons.

I too have heard of several cases where players have de-committed in the past year from various Ivys they had committed to in Grade 10, back when the Canadian $ was close to par (+/- 10%). When the cost of attendance is suddenly 40% more than expected, scholarship schools become that much more tempting for Canadian kids, who generally have made up a significant proportion of the rosters of Ivy schools, especially Cornell, Yale, Dartmouth and Princeton.

Although it has always been a difficult decision to forego a full/high scholarship (or stay in Canada) to pursue an Ivy education, the financial case has become much more challenging to justify. Firstly, US private tuition costs have risen far in excess of inflation and household income growth. The $ US cost is >50% higher than it was 8 years ago. When you add to the deterioration in the $C exchange, the cost is now more than doubled over that period. However, the cost of a Canadian education is only increased by perhaps 20% over the same time.

It is also true that in that time, hockey has become a much more expensive sport to play at the elite level, and is now beyond the reach of most middle income families. As a result, the proportion of families eligible for significant/any financial aid also may not be nearly as high as in the past, and the aid packages disproportionately less generous as a result.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

I know education is expensive. My daughter was told from both Princeton and Dartmouth that they could make her marks work (average to good student - but a pretty good player). She and I choose the North Country, which ended up being a good experience back about 6 years ago. We choose not to go Ivy since we both felt that she may struggle through the course load.

This was probably a mistake, since after she started with school and many of her friends went Ivy and or scholly, the Ivy students said that once your in and put in the time - that you will survive. Looking back, I regret that she did not attend one of these Ivy schools, since many of these good scholly schools are not very well known in Canada. In the long run she would have been way better off playing Ivy than scholly! Not a knock on the scholly schools it's just that the girls can't go and play for a living anywhere in the world. It was a mistake which we made. She had a fun time, good hockey and life experience. But she had the opportunity to make a better road map for her future with the Ivy's!

She is doing ok financially and not chasing the hockey dream anymore (still plays but without the National Team aspirations). I know it costs money to play at the Ivy's but most parents cannot look me in the eye and tell me that they made the right choice with their daughter after hockey is over if they just went with the least expensive or the most hockey notoriety.

Once you get done your hockey experience in Mankato, UM, BC, UW, Mercyhurst, Quinnipiac, etc; I really hope that the 4 years was not just for hockey and that the move was one to build a strong foundation on which to build your life. Trust me, some can and do waste their time at the elite schools but I guarantee you, in Canada most of the scholly schools are not very well recognized. Sorry, but it's the truth

Interesting perspective. These are not easy decisions, and when we make them, we don't have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. We too struggled with the decision of accepting a full scholarship vs going the Ivy route for our kids. As you point out, we also had the worry about whether they'd keep up academically, in addition to the financial implications.

We never regretted our decision to choose the Ivy route despite the cost, deciding it was a once in a lifetime opportunity too good to pass up, that money alone could never buy. Though our kids were never high school academic stars by any means, through hard work they both did fine, even achieving all-academic status. The experiences they had through summer study abroad programs sponsored by their schools, the hugely high profile profs they had, and the resources available to them too numerous to mention,were truly mind-blowing. I thought the education was well worth the cost before they graduated.

However, the biggest pay-off was when it came to jobs and connections. Both got summer jobs/internships specifically because they were Ivy student-athletes. Upon graduation, it was the Ivy degree alone that got them the interview, and ultimately well-paying jobs they enjoy, with a strong foundation for long-term success. Though there is certainly never any guarantee that you will get a great job because of an Ivy League education (and I can think of a few who didn't), however, I similarly don't know all that many from the scholarship schools who came back to Canada and got great jobs, though no doubt some stand-out kids do.

The best choice is different for everybody, but you are right that you should never choose a school because of hockey. My kids don't even play beer league hockey currently, though I imagine that may eventually change again as their careers become better established.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

the second mistake is going back to Canada, after earning a degree in the US
sorry, but it is the truth
there is sooooo much more opportunity in the US

You seem to be blissfully unaware of the fact that, thanks to U.S. immigration policy, it is extremely difficult for Canadians--even Ivy grads-- to acquire the necessary work visa to remain in the US after graduation, even for a couple of years.

I suppose that will also apply to all those jobs being created to build the walls.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Year and a half ago.

IVYs are also quite small with limited programs and none had her specific program of choice. State schools offer every degree imaginable and are much higher ranked than the schools you mentioned above. Still need to balance the school and hockey aspect but thats an individual choice.

I'm not sure what program you refer to specifically. Certainly if you are pursuing Nursing, or Engineering as examples, you need to go to a school which offers the necessary courses. However, as others have mentioned, several Ivys offer Engineering, and any can accommodate the needs of students whose program requires post-graduate study, as required for Medicine, Dentistry, Law etc.

Though many Ivys don't offer Business, all offer Economics. If you are interested in such fields as Investment Banking or Consulting, most of the jobs go almost exclusively to students from Ivy League schools--despite the lack of Business/Accounting majors--, along with a few other select schools such as BC, Georgetown, Duke, Stanford.

Are you aware that more than 50% of students change their major once they start university??

With the benefit of hindsight and the above information , I think it may actually be dangerous to select a university based on the availability of a narrow program, unless you would still choose that school regardless.

A high proportion of students I have encountered state a desire to study Kinesiology/Exercise Science, Athletic Therapy and the like. Certainly many state schools offer majors that stream students into such paths. However, these desires relate mostly to a student's past narrow experience with athletics. These degrees typically prepare students for little more than being high school gym teachers--and any teaching jobs after graduation are few and far between. Many of the other narrow programs also have low job opportunities available upon graduation, and/or are low-paying with limited career growth potential.

It's important to explore the availability of opportunities and salary potential post-graduation before committing to 4 years of study to something that may ultimately unsatisfying.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Although I have heard of a few isolated experiences like this, for the most part players talking to Dartmouth have had a good experience on that front. There are certainly FAR MORE ARROGANT coaches out there.

However, I believe the primary reason they lost a large percentage of recruits the past 4-5 years is the school's very poor reputation developed going back to the last 10 years given the high frequency Hudak et al developed to commit to players on behalf of Dartmouth and then renege at the 11th hour, presumably when someone better came along late in the game...and blame it on "unforeseen admissions problems". I personally know of about a dozen or more players this happened to over the years, which is likely just the tip of the iceberg. Given a long track record of doing so, prospects in recent years became very wary of Dartmouth's interest from the get go and reluctant to commit.

I would suggest that committing to kids and then throwing them aside at the last minute when it is generally to late to latch on elsewhere is in fact the worst kind of arrogance (amongst other things). And in this case it is very consistent with the stories I have heard. In the NE Prep circuit he was not a trusted recruiter.

 

[Trillium]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

I would suggest that committing to kids and then throwing them aside at the last minute when it is generally to late to latch on elsewhere is in fact the worst kind of arrogance (amongst other things). And in this case it is very consistent with the stories I have heard. In the NE Prep circuit he was not a trusted recruiter.

Fair enough. Don't disagree.

My point was that he could certainly be more personable in recruiting interaction than some others who simply could never manage to hide how full of themselves they are on a good day. Nor was he alone in being distrusted. Though they successfully get away with it for a few years, eventually it does catch up to them. It's no surprise that quite a few teams previously consistently among national contenders started having struggles in recent years.

The game and talent depth is infinitely more competitive than it was 10 years ago, when it was solely about good recruiting. The average fan (and AD to the extent they even care) still equates recruiting success (and therefore winning records) with great coaching. But gone are the days when simply being able to recruit two or three national team players and playing them to death is enough to win titles, and widespread coaching deficiencies at the D1 level are finally being unmasked over time. While there are still "haves and have nots" at both extremes, now more than ever you have to be able to get the most out of all the talent you do have to break out of the pack in the middle.

Remember that at one point, Laura Hallderson, Digit Murphy and Shannon Miller were revered for their long records of success and considered untouchable. Brian McCloskey and Rick Sealey were also highly admired for their winning programs. Times change.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

The game and talent depth is infinitely more competitive than it was 10 years ago, when it was solely about good recruiting. The average fan (and AD to the extent they even care) still equates recruiting success (and therefore winning records) with great coaching. But gone are the days when simply being able to recruit two or three national team players and playing them to death is enough to win titles, and widespread coaching deficiencies at the D1 level are finally being unmasked over time. While there are still "haves and have nots" at both extremes, now more than ever you have to be able to get the most out of all the talent you do have to break out of the pack in the middle.

Remember that at one point, Laura Hallderson, Digit Murphy and Shannon Miller were revered for their long records of success and considered untouchable. Brian McCloskey and Rick Sealey were also highly admired for their winning programs. Times change.

Couple of good points you make. Like to add one important aspect. One other reason the coaching methods of 20-25 years ago do not longer work is the advent of social media. Kids talk. Secrets are no more. Coaches need to adapt from a hard nosed/old school style to a "proper communication style". A big part of good coaching is effective communication to all your players and to treat them as individuals. A hard edge style might work for player one, but would be counter productive for player two......does not mean you cannot be hard on them at times, but it has be done the right way and at the right moments. Sometimes easier said than done.

Coaches who can adapt over time and learn to adjust are the ones that will be succesful over the long term.

 

[zoofer]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

A very valid point OnMAA......and I do agree with Trillium, especially here.... "But gone are the days when simply being able to recruit two or three national team players and playing them to death is enough to win titles, and widespread coaching deficiencies at the D1 level are finally being unmasked over time. While there are still "haves and have nots" at both extremes, now more than ever you have to be able to get the most out of all the talent you do have to break out of the pack in the middle."

 

[ARM]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

While we focus a lot on the programs that win the most, I think there is more than one way to run a successful program. For example, St. Lawrence hasn't had a lot of national team players in recent years, and outside of one run through the ECAC tourney four years ago, they haven't seen much of the NCAA Tournament lately. But the Saints play an entertaining style of hockey, and their kids seem to enjoy the varsity hockey experience, which is really why the NCAA sport exists in the first place. I think coaches that provide opportunities, teach the game, and help develop young adults can be doing a great job even if they aren't raising banners all of the time.

 

[Trillium]

While we focus a lot on the programs that win the most, I think there is more than one way to run a successful program. For example, St. Lawrence hasn't had a lot of national team players in recent years, and outside of one run through the ECAC tourney four years ago, they haven't seen much of the NCAA Tournament lately. But the Saints play an entertaining style of hockey, and their kids seem to enjoy the varsity hockey experience, which is really why the NCAA sport exists in the first place. I think coaches that provide opportunities, teach the game, and help develop young adults can be doing a great job even if they aren't raising banners all of the time.

Couldn't agree more with all of this. SLU is an excellent example that proves the point. Lots to suggest that the team is well coached--he gets the most out the talent he has to achieve success rather than rely on great recruiting. As a matter of fact, SLU has historically been far less aggressive than most programs on the recruiting and early commitment front. They'd prefer kids who are passionate about the school on their own

 

[OnMAA]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

they'd prefer kids who are passionate about the school on their own

this !

 

[Skate79]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

Couple of good points you make. Like to add one important aspect. One other reason the coaching methods of 20-25 years ago do not longer work is the advent of social media. Kids talk. Secrets are no more. Coaches need to adapt from a hard nosed/old school style to a "proper communication style". A big part of good coaching is effective communication to all your players and to treat them as individuals. A hard edge style might work for player one, but would be counter productive for player two......does not mean you cannot be hard on them at times, but it has be done the right way and at the right moments. Sometimes easier said than done.

Coaches who can adapt over time and learn to adjust are the ones that will be succesful over the long term.

This is a great point. Social media has changed the nature of communication for kids today. You have to work much harder and have the flexibility to adapt in order to get and keep their attention. I applaud SLU for wanting kids who want to be at the school rather than making it about championships. To me, it's still the finances. I don't know how you can get away from it especially if you are an Ivy school. Degrees do not bring the same cache today as they did in years past and the kids know it. So do the parents. If the money isn't there from the school, parents and kids will look elsewhere. My nephews are going through it as I write this and money is a big factor.

 

[ne7minder]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

. . . their kids seem to enjoy the varsity hockey experience, which is really why the NCAA sport exists in the first place . . .

What a novel concept! Games should be played because they are fun and kids should go to college for an education? You won't get far in this modern world with an attitude like that!

 

[pakidnyc]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

I am surprised no one has posted this here: http://www.collegian.psu.edu/sports/women_hockey/article_45d0a17a-ea1f-11e5-a8a4-8f159be0e461.html

 

[shelfit]

I am surprised no one has posted this here: http://www.collegian.psu.edu/sports/women_hockey/article_45d0a17a-ea1f-11e5-a8a4-8f159be0e461.html

That wannabe reporter doesn't have too big of an axe to grind. I don't think the coach is worried about what a student reporter thinks.

 

[Skate79]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

I am surprised no one has posted this here: http://www.collegian.psu.edu/sports/women_hockey/article_45d0a17a-ea1f-11e5-a8a4-8f159be0e461.html

This kid has no clue about college hockey. Never heard of two captains? Really?

 

[pokechecker]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

This kid has no clue about college hockey. Never heard of two captains? Really?

That grabbed my eye too:

"The two-captain system is a unique one that I have never seen before, and it’s hard not to wonder if that created a divide between the forward and defensive units as each had its own captain."

I think the kid just blew any opportunity he may have had as an intern as a sports reporter

 

[shelfit]

Re: D1 Coaches At Risk

This kid has no clue about college hockey. Never heard of two captains? Really?

I know. What a moron! Everyone's a hockey expert especially parents and people like this nut job almost all of whom have never played the game before or certainly not at any sort of high level. He's obviously trying hard to stir up something but he's failing miserably and becoming a laughing stock at the same time. So much for any future hockey credibility. LOL!