LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

[RapidsCity]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

You people have been giving Jim Roque one more year for the past 8 years. I give some of you apologists credit, you never are far from message, and will use about every excuse in the book, and some not in there, to keep your buddy in power. Anchors Away is right on the mark. It's good to see some people finally standing up to a bully up there.

The Truth Is Out There....
TBA

Like you know squat about hockey. You call 4th liners star players, lament 3rd string goalies and plead the case of a washed up coach who never met a place he couldn't get fired from. Nope, Roque's not winning enough. Not even close. But please tell us just who you think could win under the restrictions the program has. Fund a 10th place team, you get a 10th place team. Even Jeff Jackson has said it would be very difficult to replicate his prior success at LSSU. Your boy Frank illustrated that by winning just 21 percent of his games in round 2. If he were any good, he;d have at leasr seen double digits by year four. So please Truth Sisters, instead of doing nothing but crying, how about suggesting a solution?

 

[sm2pk]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

So exactly what changes need to be made to his program? How does it compare to other teams? Who are those best conditioned teams you want them to match up with?

I would think Roque being the guy who coaches the team most likely knows if he is actually conditioning the players . Rapid city. Have you ever actually workout over the years and you knew how hard and how decent of shape you were putting yourself in ? Most people do and most know if the conditioning is what is needed to be at their best . I hope Roque knows .

 

[Hammer]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Like you know squat about hockey. You call 4th liners star players, lament 3rd string goalies and plead the case of a washed up coach who never met a place he couldn't get fired from. Nope, Roque's not winning enough. Not even close. But please tell us just who you think could under the restrictions the program has. Fund a 10th place team, you get a 10th place team. Even Jeff Jackson has said it would be very difficult to replicate his prior success at LSSU. Your boy Frank illustrated that by winning just 21 percent of his games in round 2. If he were any good, he;d have at leasr seen double digits by year four. So please Truth Sisters, instead of doing nothing but crying, how about suggesting a solution?

His solution is simple: re-hire Billy Martin Jr. Now, no one's really sure as to what problem he's solving, even him, but that's his solution.

 

[Bill]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Fund a 10th place program, you get a 10th place program. I don't know what part of that the Truth sisters don't get. Some say get a USHL coach to come in, why would a USHL head coach take a pay cut to go to the Soo? An NAHL coach? If that coach is so good, why is he in the Tier II NAHL instead of the Tier I USHL? A D-III coach? Well, check and see just how many have made that jump and had success. The progression there is D-III Head Coach to D-I Assistant to D-I coach.

So by that logic, when the Lakers were typically finishing 1st thru 3rd in the CCHA during their heyday, they must have had the 1st thru 3rd highest hockey budget in the CCHA? Sure money is important, but it's not the only thing.

 

[davyd83]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

So by that logic, when the Lakers were typically finishing 1st thru 3rd in the CCHA during their heyday, they must have had the 1st thru 3rd highest hockey budget in the CCHA? Sure money is important, but it's not the only thing.

My guess would be that they didn't have a top budget, but the disparity is far greater now than it was then and the rules have changed as far as getting some kids eligible and into school. I don't think that money is the only thing. But you do have to invest in recruiting.

 

[DB Cooper]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Fund a 10th place program, you get a 10th place program. I don't know what part of that the Truth sisters don't get. Some say get a USHL coach to come in, why would a USHL head coach take a pay cut to go to the Soo? An NAHL coach? If that coach is so good, why is he in the Tier II NAHL instead of the Tier I USHL? A D-III coach? Well, check and see just how many have made that jump and had success. The progression there is D-III Head Coach to D-I Assistant to D-I coach.

Kind of tough to stick with the funding argument now I guess. Good coaches win. I will admit however that good coaches with good funding win more consistently.

 

[Truth Squad]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Like you know squat about hockey. You call 4th liners star players, lament 3rd string goalies and plead the case of a washed up coach who never met a place he couldn't get fired from. But please tell us just who you think could under the restrictions the program has. Fund a 10th place team, you get a 10th place team. Even Jeff Jackson has said it would be very difficult to replicate his prior success at LSSU. Your boy Frank illustrated that by winning just 21 percent of his games in round 2. If he were any good, he;d have at leasr seen double digits by year four. So please Truth Sisters, instead of doing nothing but crying, how about suggesting a solution?

Here is a solution...a new coach. I know you have to resort towards financial excuses, now that you and a few other Jimbo sheep on here, have ran the course on all the other ones. And I know you have to resort to name calling and vitriol towards former players, current goalies, NCAA Title winning coaches, and anyone else who doesn't support your buddy Roque. You people up there have done it for years, and it's ok, don't get so excited, you have your guy in there for many many years to come and you will be right back here next year and the year after, just like the previous 8, using all new excuses on why it went so wrong in Year #9 under this administration.

If you say it enough you will believe it, but I don't think everyone is buying it anymore. Even some people on here are questioning having him coach another year, fewer people are going to the games, etc. But they must not know squat as well.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

The Truth Is Out There....
TBA

 

[Lakerblue]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Good coaches win.

A simple and very-true statement.

 

[RapidsCity]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Here is a solution...a new coach. I know you have to resort towards financial excuses, now that you and a few other Jimbo sheep on here, have ran the course on all the other ones. And I know you have to resort to name calling and vitriol towards former players, current goalies, NCAA Title winning coaches, and anyone else who doesn't support your buddy Roque. You people up there have done it for years, and it's ok, don't get so excited, you have your guy in there for many many years to come and you will be right back here next year and the year after, just like the previous 8, using all new excuses on why it went so wrong in Year #9 under this administration.

If you say it enough you will believe it, but I don't think everyone is buying it anymore. Even some people on here are questioning having him coach another year, fewer people are going to the games, etc. But they must not know squat as well.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

The Truth Is Out There....
TBA

It's nice how you eliminate a very key phrase from my post and then call me a Jimbo Sheep. Here is the portion you missed, that somehow disappeared from your post. Nope, Roque's not winning enough. Not even close. You're a beauty. Now you also fail to mention who you think could be a winner here. No one has won here since Jackson left. No one. Before you go and call Roque my buddy, make sure you include the whole post. Like I said, he hasn't won enough. Get together with your split personality and come up with a solution. Put your two screen named brains together and present viable candidates. And don't send up a USHL coach who would have to take a pay cut to do it. My chalenge in the prior post was please tell us just who you think could win under the restrictions the program has. Your Response, "a new coach." Hey, you're bordering on genius there." Your vitriol is old and tired. And has yet to make any sense.

 

[RapidsCity]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

Kind of tough to stick with the funding argument now I guess. Good coaches win. I will admit however that good coaches with good funding win more consistently.

I would be willing to place a strong wager that every one of those schools has a hockey budget that tops LSSU by at least 30% and coaches salaries that are much higher as well. I'd go so far as to say that St Cloud and UMass Lowell are no less than 50% above LSSU and more likely in the range of double the resources that LSSU outs into hockey. And don't let the name Quinnipiac fool you. That school has made a very strong effort to improve their athletic department and to upgrade the institution as a whole.

 

[blackswampboy]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

And don't let the name Quinnipiac fool you. That school has made a very strong effort to improve their athletic department and to upgrade the institution as a whole.

I'm still looking for comparative hockey budget data (like exists for MAC hoops), but it's tough when private schools don't have to disclose finances. for Q, there's this. and it only took Pecknold 18 years to get there...

"Pecknold has been offered other elite jobs. This past summer, he turned down UMass and renegotiated with Quinnipiac, which as a private university does not disclose financial terms. But it's safe to say Pecknold is now making closer to $300,000 a year than $6,831. John Micheletto, the former Vermont assistant who took the UMass job, reportedly signed a five-year contract with a base salary of $210,000. Quinnipiac surpassed the UMass offer to ensure Pecknold's return for a 19th season."

http://articles.courant.com/2013-03-29/sports/hc-quinnipiac-hockey-0330-20130329_1_quinnipiac-university-york-hill-campus-hamden-high

 

[davyd83]

I'm still looking for comparative hockey budget data (like exists for MAC hoops), but it's tough when private schools don't have to disclose finances. for Q, there's this. and it only took Pecknold 18 years to get there...

"Pecknold has been offered other elite jobs. This past summer, he turned down UMass and renegotiated with Quinnipiac, which as a private university does not disclose financial terms. But it's safe to say Pecknold is now making closer to $300,000 a year than $6,831. John Micheletto, the former Vermont assistant who took the UMass job, reportedly signed a five-year contract with a base salary of $210,000. Quinnipiac surpassed the UMass offer to ensure Pecknold's return for a 19th season."

http://articles.courant.com/2013-03-29/sports/hc-quinnipiac-hockey-0330-20130329_1_quinnipiac-university-york-hill-campus-hamden-high

St Cloud's Motzko is in the midst of. Six Year Deal that averages $166,667 per season, or close to double Roque's base.

 

[Flashy Man]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

St Cloud's Motzko is in the midst of. Six Year Deal that averages $166,667 per season, or close to double Roque's base.

Mel Pearson's salary is $275k a season.

 

[Anchors Aweigh]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

how about suggesting a solution?

When you know it isn't working, find out why. Once you know why, try something else.

What's the point with comparing salaries ?
If Roque was getting less than his value, he would have been offered more. The same if someone though he could do a better job with better means.
There are still coaches out there getting less, with no less achievements, but higher potential. Someone who will get 260000$ one day, but is happy to have 80000$ today.

Nothing personal, just common sense.

 

[LSSULaker889294]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

George Gwozdecky is now available.

 

[jnacc]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

. And don't send up a USHL coach who would have to take a pay cut to do it. My chalenge in the prior post was please tell us just who you think could win under the restrictions the program has.

While it's true that head coaches in the USHL make over 100k a year(those who serve as dual coach/GM but the few who are just coaches make less), that is only about 10-12 k more than what the current Laker coach makes. Yes, that is a hair cut but I'm sure that a lot of those USHL coaches would love the opportunity to take a D-1 position. Of course a new coach does not have to come from the USHL ranks as there are several D-3 worthy candidates as well as many assistant D-1 coaches. It's ridiculous to say "yes Roque isn't good enough but we can't afford anyone else" as there are always other potential candidates out there.

 

[sm2pk]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

I don't care if Roque is making 30,000 a year. After 8 years and arguments that the talent level is better than what the results have been tells me 30,000 or 100,000 isn't the issue . Seems maybe the game plan that Roque has been going with doesn't work. Roque wants a bigger better program that pays more than Lake State and he isn't producing bigger better results on the ice isn't going to get him looked at by many other teams. Roque has to get to the bottom of this A team B team nightmare that has taken over the program . Are the players just not as strong or conditioned as they need to be ? Roque has to get to the bottom of what's is going on and improve the areas that the team needs improvement in and if he becomes a winner,he will have a chance for bigger teams and better pay .

 

[Lakerblue]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

While it's true that head coaches in the USHL make over 100k a year(those who serve as dual coach/GM but the few who are just coaches make less), that is only about 10-12 k more than what the current Laker coach makes. Yes, that is a hair cut but I'm sure that a lot of those USHL coaches would love the opportunity to take a D-1 position. Of course a new coach does not have to come from the USHL ranks as there are several D-3 worthy candidates as well as many assistant D-1 coaches. It's ridiculous to say "yes Roque isn't good enough but we can't afford anyone else" as there are always other potential candidates out there.

The fact is this: Winning coaches win. Jackson didn't win at LSSU because of budget -- he won because he was a fantastic coach. Gwozdecky won at Miami with no budget -- he built the program (virtually). And then he went and won at Denver. He was let go today not because of budget, but because he stopped providing Denver with NCAA wins and titles. Don Lucia with the horid gophers wins -- he won at UAF, he won at CC despte CC being bone-terrible for a generation, and he won at Minnesota. On a smaller scale, Guy Gadowski won at UAF (he was an alleged low-priced nobody when UAF hired him) -- then Gadowski won at Princeton for the first time in a generation -- then parlayed those low-budget wins into a big paycheck at Penn State.

Who was Gwozdecky, Lucia, or Gadowski before their first coaching gig? Would LSSU take one of those coaches now?

Where am I going with this? I guess my point is this: Winning coaches win. The only thing the budget limits is how long you can keep a stud coach.

So has coach Roque, budget or otherwise, distinguished himself as an up and coming coach?

Here is the test: Are we constantly hearing rumors of other teams showing "interest" in our coach? Are we hearing about how we can't aford to keep our coach, and "as much as he loves LSSU, he just can't turn down that sort of opportunity . . . "?

No. We are not.

After 8 years, you should either be hearing those rumors -- or looking for a new head coach.

Just my opinion.

Salary is meaningless in this sort of debate. Winning coaches win. Then you have to figure out how to pay them . . . . after they win.

 

[Bill]

Re: LSSU Laker Hockey 2012-2013, Part 2

What's the point with comparing salaries ?

It provides a way of deflecting blame/responsibility.

 

[davyd83]

The fact is this: Winning coaches win. Jackson didn't win at LSSU because of budget -- he won because he was a fantastic coach. Gwozdecky won at Miami with no budget -- he built the program (virtually). And then he went and won at Denver. He was let go today not because of budget, but because he stopped providing Denver with NCAA wins and titles. Don Lucia with the horid gophers wins -- he won at UAF, he won at CC despte CC being bone-terrible for a generation, and he won at Minnesota. On a smaller scale, Guy Gadowski won at UAF (he was an alleged low-priced nobody when UAF hired him) -- then Gadowski won at Princeton for the first time in a generation -- then parlayed those low-budget wins into a big paycheck at Penn State.

Who was Gwozdecky, Lucia, or Gadowski before their first coaching gig? Would LSSU take one of those coaches now?

Where am I going with this? I guess my point is this: Winning coaches win. The only thing the budget limits is how long you can keep a stud coach.

So has coach Roque, budget or otherwise, distinguished himself as an up and coming coach?

Here is the test: Are we constantly hearing rumors of other teams showing "interest" in our coach? Are we hearing about how we can't aford to keep our coach, and "as much as he loves LSSU, he just can't turn down that sort of opportunity . . . "?

No. We are not.

After 8 years, you should either be hearing those rumors -- or looking for a new head coach.

Just my opinion.

Salary is meaningless in this sort of debate. Winning coaches win. Then you have to figure out how to pay them . . . . after they win.

If the budgets are not a big deal, and things are equal as far as budgets and recruiting rules, how do you explain that from 75-94, Seven smaller schools won the NCAA (3 to LSSU) and five more made the final. And since the Lakers won in 94, only UMD has won it and only 2 more have made it to the final.