Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Re: UNH Wildcats 2013-14 Season Thread
No offense taken, Ryan.
I know sometimes I'm my own worst enemy (and that's not even including predicting losing game scores correctly 
) but I do try to put some "meat on the bones" in discussing issues. I think (hope?) it gives us more to discuss. I'm probably about to "do a Chuck" again, so hang in there and we'll get through it.
So ... on to HockeyRef's post from earlier today, which brings us to the brink of some past popular (and at times polarizing) topics:
Those are some very tough - and very appropriate - questions. Some would say or suggest they are recurring questions, not just with this team, but with past UNH teams. And it seems these questions come up more often than not at this time of the season, and even more often in recent seasons.
Some would say that the recurrence of these issues over and over points you in the direction of the constant(s) in the equation, as opposed to the variables. Players change. For the most part, the coaches have not. Certainly the administration has not changed, but some of their policies have apparently changed. Arguably, the changes in admission policies may have impacted the talent level the coaches can effectively recruit. Some would say that on-ice results serve as the best recruiting tool of all - regardless of policy issues.
Others would suggest the constant - Coach Umile - is not a constant, age-wise. He is getting older than his players every year, and it is possible (and somewhat understandable) that in his mid-60's now, he is not able to relate as well to his players as he was when he first took the top job in Durham in his early 40's (with a year or two as an assistant under Coach Kullen before that). Look at the guys in the league now who are the emerging coaching stars ... Coach Leaman at PC is approaching 40 (if not there quite yet - I'm not sure?) and Coach Bazin at UML is in his early 40's. Coach Dennehy (MC) was also in his early 40's when he began Merrimack's turnaround (not withstanding this year's slump). Is there something to that? Could be. But Coach York and Coach Parker won the NCAA's when they were Coach Umile's age. Some would say they refreshed their assistants to keep them young and energized.
I'm not sure there are any easy answers, although I know there are a lot of folks who feel very strongly about why the UNH Men's Hockey program is where it is, and why these issues keep coming up. I used to be one of those folks too ... and while I do have an opinion or two on the questions, I'm less certain on those than I have been in the past. Maybe it does come down to expectations, and whether you feel:
* UNH should do everything possible to compete consistently at the highest level of D-1, as they did in the late '90's/early '00's; or
* UNH should be satisfied to be at the "second tier", where making the D-1 tourney is a good season, winning a HE title every decade or so is acceptable, and *maybe someday* you "catch lightning in a bottle" and win the whole enchilada (see Harvard, 1989).
We usually have this discussion right around this time of the season, and then again for the first few weeks of the offseason, after which we go away for a few months, hope/pray for divine intervention, and come the Fall it's usually same old, same old, with a few different players in to replace the departing players. We have posters who spend a lot of time assessing and reporting on incoming recruits, and while that's interesting and helpful ... you never know for sure until (1) the player actually arrives on campus, and (2) they begin to develop and find themselves at this "next level". God knows there have been many so-called "busts" over the years, while I don't recall too many doing cartwheels over a kid like Bobby Butler until well into his UNH career. More of those pesky variables.
So hopefully this just frames some of the issues HockeyRef's post raised. And despite some of those who feel even raising questions like these is "negative" ... I'd respectfully disagree, and suggest that if you've been around this program for long enough, you would almost have to be ... um, er, well ... kinda like an ostrich sticking their head in the sand NOT to at least have these questions.
I'm getting that "Groundhog's Day" feeling again, and go figure - it's actually coming up less than a week from now ...
No offense taken, Ryan.
I know sometimes I'm my own worst enemy (and that's not even including predicting losing game scores correctly ) but I do try to put some "meat on the bones" in discussing issues. I think (hope?) it gives us more to discuss. I'm probably about to "do a Chuck" again, so hang in there and we'll get through it. So ... on to HockeyRef's post from earlier today, which brings us to the brink of some past popular (and at times polarizing) topics:
Those are some very tough - and very appropriate - questions. Some would say or suggest they are recurring questions, not just with this team, but with past UNH teams. And it seems these questions come up more often than not at this time of the season, and even more often in recent seasons.
Some would say that the recurrence of these issues over and over points you in the direction of the constant(s) in the equation, as opposed to the variables. Players change. For the most part, the coaches have not. Certainly the administration has not changed, but some of their policies have apparently changed. Arguably, the changes in admission policies may have impacted the talent level the coaches can effectively recruit. Some would say that on-ice results serve as the best recruiting tool of all - regardless of policy issues.
Others would suggest the constant - Coach Umile - is not a constant, age-wise. He is getting older than his players every year, and it is possible (and somewhat understandable) that in his mid-60's now, he is not able to relate as well to his players as he was when he first took the top job in Durham in his early 40's (with a year or two as an assistant under Coach Kullen before that). Look at the guys in the league now who are the emerging coaching stars ... Coach Leaman at PC is approaching 40 (if not there quite yet - I'm not sure?) and Coach Bazin at UML is in his early 40's. Coach Dennehy (MC) was also in his early 40's when he began Merrimack's turnaround (not withstanding this year's slump). Is there something to that? Could be. But Coach York and Coach Parker won the NCAA's when they were Coach Umile's age. Some would say they refreshed their assistants to keep them young and energized.
I'm not sure there are any easy answers, although I know there are a lot of folks who feel very strongly about why the UNH Men's Hockey program is where it is, and why these issues keep coming up. I used to be one of those folks too ... and while I do have an opinion or two on the questions, I'm less certain on those than I have been in the past. Maybe it does come down to expectations, and whether you feel:
* UNH should do everything possible to compete consistently at the highest level of D-1, as they did in the late '90's/early '00's; or
* UNH should be satisfied to be at the "second tier", where making the D-1 tourney is a good season, winning a HE title every decade or so is acceptable, and *maybe someday* you "catch lightning in a bottle" and win the whole enchilada (see Harvard, 1989).
We usually have this discussion right around this time of the season, and then again for the first few weeks of the offseason, after which we go away for a few months, hope/pray for divine intervention, and come the Fall it's usually same old, same old, with a few different players in to replace the departing players. We have posters who spend a lot of time assessing and reporting on incoming recruits, and while that's interesting and helpful ... you never know for sure until (1) the player actually arrives on campus, and (2) they begin to develop and find themselves at this "next level". God knows there have been many so-called "busts" over the years, while I don't recall too many doing cartwheels over a kid like Bobby Butler until well into his UNH career. More of those pesky variables.
So hopefully this just frames some of the issues HockeyRef's post raised. And despite some of those who feel even raising questions like these is "negative" ... I'd respectfully disagree, and suggest that if you've been around this program for long enough, you would almost have to be ... um, er, well ... kinda like an ostrich sticking their head in the sand NOT to at least have these questions.
I'm getting that "Groundhog's Day" feeling again, and go figure - it's actually coming up less than a week from now ...
