What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

Hearing that there are a number of players on the interview team, which from what I'm told is substantially large. Do you think the AD will listen to who the players feel is the best of the 4 candidates? Considering this is their future and that those already here can't really go any where, they have a lot to win/lose in this process.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

RegalFan said:
Hearing that there are a number of players on the interview team, which from what I'm told is substantially large. Do you think the AD will listen to who the players feel is the best of the 4 candidates? Considering this is their future and that those already here can't really go any where, they have a lot to win/lose in this process.
Click to expand...

It seems wrong to me for current players to be involved -- you don't hire your boss. Alums, even current seniors is fine, but not players who will play for him.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

If it’s just a cursory thing, ok, but you don’t have players who will be gone in 1,2,3 yrs. have a voice in this. Maybe it’s like the Hobey voting where the fans vote is 1%.....but hey, we included you.
 
Ralph Baer said:
It seems wrong to me for current players to be involved -- you don't hire your boss. Alums, even current seniors is fine, but not players who will play for him.
Click to expand...

I can see the players giving some input, like an end of season interview so to speak. Responding to what worked or did not but in the actual interview? Not sure about that. In the end no matter who is chosen, the question is funding.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

Tough 2 days for #26. Yesterday Foo & today DeSimone, who just signed with SJ.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

turk181 said:
If it’s just a cursory thing, ok, but you don’t have players who will be gone in 1,2,3 yrs. have a voice in this. Maybe it’s like the Hobey voting where the fans vote is 1%.....but hey, we included you.
Click to expand...

Why? When picking a school they are really picking a coach to play for so why then not have their input? Ultimately the AD is going to make the final decision. And many corporations today have the employee involved in interviewing their bosses, its really pretty common. Why should the opinion of the janitorial staff or financial aid officials or professors weigh more than the student athlete? If you believe the players shouldn't be involved then how do you feel about the current Assistant Coaches? They're involved in the process, they want to keep their jobs so wouldn't you think Nolan Graham is going to push for Ben Barr since they were teammates and the likelihood of him staying on would be greater? Today's player knows what it takes to win and what their short comings are, shouldn't they at least be afforded the opportunity to make a case for the candidate they feel is best for them and the institution going forward? Just like any business hiring the CEO or in this case the AD is going to make the final decision. In the case of SLU, they hired a coach that the players were not supportive of and if you talk to the parents of those players it hasn't been a good match. IMO and its just my opinion the student athletes currently involved have the most at stake and they should at least be listened to. I'm not saying they should make the decision but their opinions should at least have a voice. And RPI is not the only school that has players as a part of the process. This again is common practice.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

What player knows what connections (for recruiting) a candidate has to say, BC or Ontario or Sweden, etc. Yeah, the current players will be playing for the new HC this year (Seniors anyway) but what about down the road? I just don’t see the need for players to be involved.....at least not in the final decision. Graham’s offensive schemes were woefully inadequate so I’m hoping the new HC will be bringing in someone new.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

RegalFan said:
Why? When picking a school they are really picking a coach to play for so why then not have their input? Ultimately the AD is going to make the final decision. And many corporations today have the employee involved in interviewing their bosses, its really pretty common. Why should the opinion of the janitorial staff or financial aid officials or professors weigh more than the student athlete? If you believe the players shouldn't be involved then how do you feel about the current Assistant Coaches? They're involved in the process, they want to keep their jobs so wouldn't you think Nolan Graham is going to push for Ben Barr since they were teammates and the likelihood of him staying on would be greater? Today's player knows what it takes to win and what their short comings are, shouldn't they at least be afforded the opportunity to make a case for the candidate they feel is best for them and the institution going forward? Just like any business hiring the CEO or in this case the AD is going to make the final decision. In the case of SLU, they hired a coach that the players were not supportive of and if you talk to the parents of those players it hasn't been a good match. IMO and its just my opinion the student athletes currently involved have the most at stake and they should at least be listened to. I'm not saying they should make the decision but their opinions should at least have a voice. And RPI is not the only school that has players as a part of the process. This again is common practice.
Click to expand...

I agree with turk that it is OK for players to give some input, but they shouldn't be interviewing. As to Graham staying on, wouldn't one of the assistants have to be able to coach goalies?
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

Ralph Baer said:
I agree with turk that it is OK for players to give some input, but they shouldn't be interviewing. As to Graham staying on, wouldn't one of the assistants have to be able to coach goalies?
Click to expand...
....bring back Darren Puppa AND Oatesy!!!!! :rolleyes:
 
Ralph Baer said:
I agree with turk that it is OK for players to give some input, but they shouldn't be interviewing. As to Graham staying on, wouldn't one of the assistants have to be able to coach goalies?
Click to expand...

usually it's a HC decision who he keeps or wants as AC. He may keep one for continuity but otherwise they clean house typically
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

Ralph Baer said:
I agree with turk that it is OK for players to give some input, but they shouldn't be interviewing. As to Graham staying on, wouldn't one of the assistants have to be able to coach goalies?
Click to expand...


It is input nothing more. As for interviewing one can't provide input unless they are part of the process. As for a Goalie Coach, Volunteer AC for many teams are the goalie coaches but yes one of the coaches should be coaching the goalies.
 
Re: RPI 2017 Off-Season: We March 4th into the Future

VERY interesting article on twitter via WAP about PO`d alum are with program .someone better than me on the computer might want to get it posted into this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top