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.
UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
- Thread starter Snively65
- Start date
- Status
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Hey, I'd like attribution on this idea! Here's my post in the Merrimack thread in early December "..If this were PREMIER LEAGUE Soccer, they'd get relegated to DIII"
jeteye1717
New member
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Oops, yes, that was a brain fart on my part. As I was typing I also remembered that when the corners were narrowed the goal lines were simultaneously pushed back closer to the end boards (thus widening center ice between the blue lines), and that somehow crept into my thinking re: behind-the-nets seating/sight lines; mea culpa ... Since the rink's length is already a regulation 200', it's only the 100' width that would need to be narrowed, presumably to the NHL standard 85' and not, say, 90' as at Agganis Arena at BU.
I can't imagine lowering the ice surface just a few inches would be worth the $$/trouble; you really need to depress the surface a good 7-8' in order to provide enough depth on the sides to install the tiered concrete risers forward of existing Row A that would extend the seating bowl to the relocated sideboards. If the sides are pulled in without also lowering the ice surface, then you're left with either a 10' wide aisle (as others have noted) between Row A and the glass (the existing ~ 2 1/2' + 7 1/2' = 1/2 of the 15' of rink shrinkage) or 2 rows of new seats at the same height as Row A; won't that make for optimal viewing :-( Player benches, penalty boxes, and the timekeeper's box would also have to be shifted inward, adding more aisle space in the seating bowl behind those areas too. It really is a complex engineering challenge, one reason I think it's been talked about, but never implemented, until these apparent issues with the refrigeration plant have forced their hand. If the cost and/or danger to existing infrastructure (as Snively65 suggests) of removing bedrock underneath the rink precludes that as a viable option, then you're left with either hyperwide aisles along the glass or fans staring into the backs of the heads of the fans in front of them - ugh to both scenarios. Which brings me to:
Yes; perhaps I was a bit too opaque earlier ... Consider Fenway Park. Built in 1912, it's showing its age, but all of the improvements added in recent years - wider concourses behind the seating bowl, the Monster Seats, added seating atop the right/left-field grandstands, etc. - were all done in such a way that they look like they were *always* there, i.e., an integral part of the ballpark and not something added haphazardly much later. That's what I meant by "appropriate sympathy for the old" - an understanding and respect for what came before and how that impacts the fan/game experience. Now the Whitt is certainly not an iconic structure like Fenway, but it was nonetheless designed initially as a coherent whole, with sight lines from all parts of the Arena mapped out for a 100' wide rink. Those sight lines will change dramatically if/when the rink is only 85' wide, especially for the unlucky folks in the first few rows nearest the glass if the ice surface is not depressed. My hope for the Whitt is that the pending renovations blend as seamlessly into the existing setup as they did at Fenway, that when you walk into the Arena you barely notice them, that whatever changes are made look like they were always there ...
As you and others have noted, $$ will be the driving force. If (more like since) there's only going to be so much money available, I'd be disappointed if Souza's insistence on, say, a player's lounge, dedicated weight room, etc. meant there was thus not enough money left to properly reconfigure the seating bowl with minimal sight line disruptions. I'm not opposed to enhancing player/coach amenities, but as Dan has noted time and again "smaller schools, with less, that make no excuses outperform big schools all the time. The ones with a constant answer for why, what and where they lack are the ones left behind" ...
Oops, yes, that was a brain fart on my part. As I was typing I also remembered that when the corners were narrowed the goal lines were simultaneously pushed back closer to the end boards (thus widening center ice between the blue lines), and that somehow crept into my thinking re: behind-the-nets seating/sight lines; mea culpa ... Since the rink's length is already a regulation 200', it's only the 100' width that would need to be narrowed, presumably to the NHL standard 85' and not, say, 90' as at Agganis Arena at BU.
I can't imagine lowering the ice surface just a few inches would be worth the $$/trouble; you really need to depress the surface a good 7-8' in order to provide enough depth on the sides to install the tiered concrete risers forward of existing Row A that would extend the seating bowl to the relocated sideboards. If the sides are pulled in without also lowering the ice surface, then you're left with either a 10' wide aisle (as others have noted) between Row A and the glass (the existing ~ 2 1/2' + 7 1/2' = 1/2 of the 15' of rink shrinkage) or 2 rows of new seats at the same height as Row A; won't that make for optimal viewing :-( Player benches, penalty boxes, and the timekeeper's box would also have to be shifted inward, adding more aisle space in the seating bowl behind those areas too. It really is a complex engineering challenge, one reason I think it's been talked about, but never implemented, until these apparent issues with the refrigeration plant have forced their hand. If the cost and/or danger to existing infrastructure (as Snively65 suggests) of removing bedrock underneath the rink precludes that as a viable option, then you're left with either hyperwide aisles along the glass or fans staring into the backs of the heads of the fans in front of them - ugh to both scenarios. Which brings me to:
Yes; perhaps I was a bit too opaque earlier ... Consider Fenway Park. Built in 1912, it's showing its age, but all of the improvements added in recent years - wider concourses behind the seating bowl, the Monster Seats, added seating atop the right/left-field grandstands, etc. - were all done in such a way that they look like they were *always* there, i.e., an integral part of the ballpark and not something added haphazardly much later. That's what I meant by "appropriate sympathy for the old" - an understanding and respect for what came before and how that impacts the fan/game experience. Now the Whitt is certainly not an iconic structure like Fenway, but it was nonetheless designed initially as a coherent whole, with sight lines from all parts of the Arena mapped out for a 100' wide rink. Those sight lines will change dramatically if/when the rink is only 85' wide, especially for the unlucky folks in the first few rows nearest the glass if the ice surface is not depressed. My hope for the Whitt is that the pending renovations blend as seamlessly into the existing setup as they did at Fenway, that when you walk into the Arena you barely notice them, that whatever changes are made look like they were always there ...
As you and others have noted, $$ will be the driving force. If (more like since) there's only going to be so much money available, I'd be disappointed if Souza's insistence on, say, a player's lounge, dedicated weight room, etc. meant there was thus not enough money left to properly reconfigure the seating bowl with minimal sight line disruptions. I'm not opposed to enhancing player/coach amenities, but as Dan has noted time and again "smaller schools, with less, that make no excuses outperform big schools all the time. The ones with a constant answer for why, what and where they lack are the ones left behind" ...
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Up in Durham for meetings next two days. They aren’t shrinking the ice surface. Replacing the cooling system, lots of back-Office stuff (locker rooms, etc.) and revamping the suite section.
Also heard that the Family Day is an alleged sellout this Saturday.
Up in Durham for meetings next two days. They aren’t shrinking the ice surface. Replacing the cooling system, lots of back-Office stuff (locker rooms, etc.) and revamping the suite section.
Also heard that the Family Day is an alleged sellout this Saturday.
HockeyRef
Well-known member
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Cool! So will we see you at the game...or, Libby's
Cool! So will we see you at the game...or, Libby's
Ned Braden
Federal League All-Star
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Just for fun, went to unhwildcats.com and looked for tickets for Saturday. Here's what I got:
Available
Section Count
101 HKY 20+
102 HKY 20+
103 HKY 20+
104 HKY 16
105 HKY 20+
106 HKY 20+
107 HKY 20+
108 HKY 20+
109 HKY 6
110 HKY 20+
111 HKY 20+
112 HKY 20+
113 HKY 20+
114 HKY 20+
115 HKY 20+
116 HKY 20+
117 HKY 20+
118 HKY 20+
119 HKY 13
120 HKY 2
Just for fun, went to unhwildcats.com and looked for tickets for Saturday. Here's what I got:
Available
Section Count
101 HKY 20+
102 HKY 20+
103 HKY 20+
104 HKY 16
105 HKY 20+
106 HKY 20+
107 HKY 20+
108 HKY 20+
109 HKY 6
110 HKY 20+
111 HKY 20+
112 HKY 20+
113 HKY 20+
114 HKY 20+
115 HKY 20+
116 HKY 20+
117 HKY 20+
118 HKY 20+
119 HKY 13
120 HKY 2
Hence, allegedly. I wasn’t exactly buying it but I didn’t want to tamp the enthusiasm. It’s a LOT better this year, but it ain’t 2001.
Cool! So will we see you at the game...or, Libby's
Can’t do it - gotta get back to my wife and the little one. He’s still pre-flu shot, so don’t want to chance flying him up.
Not sure we have that kind of time, Dan. The fact that the Earth is ending just 12 years from now (got that one from a very reliable source) presents a clear existential threat to Souza’s turnaround timeline.
With our luck, the end will come on the Friday of the 2031 FF weekend, after we’ve dispatched with Arizona St. and Bentley has been stuffed by UConn, setting up a showdown for the ages. Oh what could have been....
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Dan -- I'm with you and some not:
Hate the excuses; have heard them all and probably made a few! Garbage...totally agree.
Also 100% agree -- coaching and recruiting make it happen, or not. I think UNH has proven that. Today, I think everybody has a sense of renewed faith and optimism in what the Sousa/Stewart/Giuliano leadership can do. UNH is a great school (I'm biased), great location, plenty of attributes that are easily sold, no argument there.
But, some very real things -- that wire to program success -- support shrinking the rink (in my honest and crappy opinion):
First, the big sheet complicates recruiting and adds an element of risk that standard-sheet schools do not have to deal with. Say a program tracks a kid at 15, 16, 17; playing almost exclusively on 200x85. The kid gets offered and the coaches just hope (and pray) that he can make the adjustment to the extra real estate; especially true for D. Not every kid can do adjust, so then as a coach, you bite the bullet with a pile of hope and coach the kid up -- not ideal. NHL coaches/GMs have discussed this same risk (in reverse) in drafting European players. Some can adjust their game to 200x85, some can't. The point is, it's an added recruiting complication that creates a disadvantage. (And FWIW, I have personally had a D3 head coach tell me he would not want to recruit for a big sheet.)
Forwards playing on the big sheet are forced to re-learn their attack angles. Good center-out defense can make the outer edges seem like another zip code; forwards pushed wide lose their angles; they flatten out more so than on 200x85. It is different and takes an adjustment. Not every kid can figure that out. So as a coach/recruiter, you take your chances that the kid doesn't fall in love with the surplus space, and thus never pushes play toward the middle.
Certainly all this gives the big-sheet schools a home-ice advantge. Everybody in this thread has probably preached that at some point -- and it's true -- nice and fun until your team makes it to the NCAA regionals, when you are highly unlikely to see 200x100 again. I could be wrong, cuz I'm old, but I think I recall multiple times when Umile took the team to Exeter or Dover to practice on 200x85 in advance of a meaningful NCAA game(s). So here again, a complication -- granted, not a real big deal -- but complication anyway that other schools don't need to mess with.
Last thought... Is getting commitment from Swede and German kids solely because "that's where the talent is", or does 200x100 come into play in recruiting strategy; those kids will essentially have NO adjustment to make, thus a less risky recruit (assuming they didn't play pro or nuked by admissions)? Gotta be a little of both.
And as a fan, selfishly, I prefer the 200x85 game. It's quicker, more intense, fewer dull "ragging-the-puck" events on the outside 7.5'. Trust me, I loved the 200x100 Whit with my first season seats in 1994 -- just loved it. Still do, just think the program benefits if it were shrunk.
Either way -- agreed -- time will tell!
Cheers...
Dan -- I'm with you and some not:
Hate the excuses; have heard them all and probably made a few! Garbage...totally agree.
Also 100% agree -- coaching and recruiting make it happen, or not. I think UNH has proven that. Today, I think everybody has a sense of renewed faith and optimism in what the Sousa/Stewart/Giuliano leadership can do. UNH is a great school (I'm biased), great location, plenty of attributes that are easily sold, no argument there.
But, some very real things -- that wire to program success -- support shrinking the rink (in my honest and crappy opinion):
First, the big sheet complicates recruiting and adds an element of risk that standard-sheet schools do not have to deal with. Say a program tracks a kid at 15, 16, 17; playing almost exclusively on 200x85. The kid gets offered and the coaches just hope (and pray) that he can make the adjustment to the extra real estate; especially true for D. Not every kid can do adjust, so then as a coach, you bite the bullet with a pile of hope and coach the kid up -- not ideal. NHL coaches/GMs have discussed this same risk (in reverse) in drafting European players. Some can adjust their game to 200x85, some can't. The point is, it's an added recruiting complication that creates a disadvantage. (And FWIW, I have personally had a D3 head coach tell me he would not want to recruit for a big sheet.)
Forwards playing on the big sheet are forced to re-learn their attack angles. Good center-out defense can make the outer edges seem like another zip code; forwards pushed wide lose their angles; they flatten out more so than on 200x85. It is different and takes an adjustment. Not every kid can figure that out. So as a coach/recruiter, you take your chances that the kid doesn't fall in love with the surplus space, and thus never pushes play toward the middle.
Certainly all this gives the big-sheet schools a home-ice advantge. Everybody in this thread has probably preached that at some point -- and it's true -- nice and fun until your team makes it to the NCAA regionals, when you are highly unlikely to see 200x100 again. I could be wrong, cuz I'm old, but I think I recall multiple times when Umile took the team to Exeter or Dover to practice on 200x85 in advance of a meaningful NCAA game(s). So here again, a complication -- granted, not a real big deal -- but complication anyway that other schools don't need to mess with.
Last thought... Is getting commitment from Swede and German kids solely because "that's where the talent is", or does 200x100 come into play in recruiting strategy; those kids will essentially have NO adjustment to make, thus a less risky recruit (assuming they didn't play pro or nuked by admissions)? Gotta be a little of both.
And as a fan, selfishly, I prefer the 200x85 game. It's quicker, more intense, fewer dull "ragging-the-puck" events on the outside 7.5'. Trust me, I loved the 200x100 Whit with my first season seats in 1994 -- just loved it. Still do, just think the program benefits if it were shrunk.
Either way -- agreed -- time will tell!
Cheers...
Good stuff, jeteye. But, why would two additional rows on each side require such a large lowering as 7-8 feet? Seems to me that 14-15 inches would be sufficient, based on standard 7" per riser. I do not think that viewing into the near-side corners would be any worse than now, which is the main reason I prefer seats at lest 10-12 rows above the boards. First row end zones would be a bit higher off the ice.
I have a friend who has had season tickets at Fenway for over 40 years, great field box seats half way between the Sox dugout and Pesky Pole (cheapest of the field boxes with great views). I get to a game or two each season with him, and have attended a game or two each season since as early as the 1950's, but I visit other MLB parks as well, and I still think that Fenway is a dump. And, I still think that new ownership should have built a new MLB park on the waterfront when the opportunity was there.
Bakchk, I have been in favor of a standard width rink for over a decade now, with the possible exception of a couple seasons watching TyK wheeling and dealing with the extra width. But, even during the regular season we play half of our games on a narrow sheet, so our adjustments for away games must more or less offset adjustments other teams need to make when they visit the Whitt. Like you, I remember that Umile had his teams practice on nearby narrow sheets in the area when going deep into the postseason.
Last edited:
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
It's really as simple as this. Dan is right. The rink size is just one of a string of excuses that have been trotted out in recent years to excuse why UNH was falling behind in the D-1 hockey world. No Jumbotron, no state-of-the-art weight room, admissions too tight, the State doesn't provide the U with enough $$, etc. ad nauseum. It's almost enough to make one forget that Umile turned the program around playing in the antiquated shed with the arched roof and virtually zero (0) amenities almost 30 years ago now.
Dan has also outlined the many other programs who seem to have dealt with Olympic sized ice just fine.
Let Souza coach, let him and his team go out and recruit. Early returns seem to be pretty favorable, no?
No more lame ***** excuses around this program any more, please ...
It's really as simple as this. Dan is right. The rink size is just one of a string of excuses that have been trotted out in recent years to excuse why UNH was falling behind in the D-1 hockey world. No Jumbotron, no state-of-the-art weight room, admissions too tight, the State doesn't provide the U with enough $$, etc. ad nauseum. It's almost enough to make one forget that Umile turned the program around playing in the antiquated shed with the arched roof and virtually zero (0) amenities almost 30 years ago now.
Dan has also outlined the many other programs who seem to have dealt with Olympic sized ice just fine.
Let Souza coach, let him and his team go out and recruit. Early returns seem to be pretty favorable, no?
No more lame ***** excuses around this program any more, please ...
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Paragraph 2(a) of my relegation proposal specifically exempts Merrimack, due to the so-called "495 Rule".
UVM may also be able to invoke Provision GL(6), which was added to Section 89 unanimously recently.
This is a complex thing. Even more so than my "NICC West Repurposing" venture from not too long ago.
Paragraph 2(a) of my relegation proposal specifically exempts Merrimack, due to the so-called "495 Rule".
UVM may also be able to invoke Provision GL(6), which was added to Section 89 unanimously recently.
This is a complex thing. Even more so than my "NICC West Repurposing" venture from not too long ago.
Key stretch of 6 games across three weekends. While I’ve watched this season less concerned about the record and more concerned about development and advancement, you can’t argue that winning isn’t a nice recruiting tool.
I think the worst-case scenario is 6pts, best is 10pts. I can’t see us winning in Hartford AND sweeping Maine AND taking two up at the Gut. Something will give along the way.
I’ll guess 9pts and hope for upside going into NU/UML.
HockeyRef
Well-known member
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Not thinking we would do all of the above but it was nice, for a change, to see UNH at least get the nod that they are coming along. Silly I know to give a darn about what others think but alittle validation isn't a bad thing. The results tho have to come on the ice. Lots can happen in a hockey season....
Not thinking we would do all of the above but it was nice, for a change, to see UNH at least get the nod that they are coming along. Silly I know to give a darn about what others think but alittle validation isn't a bad thing. The results tho have to come on the ice. Lots can happen in a hockey season....
Chuck Murray
WIS & Effingwoods Hockey Almanac
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Snively65, I know you track these things, but I can't find our discussion about the over/under today on when we'd hear from Luce through his mouthpiece at the Courant, Mike Anthony. Apparently those two aren't on the same wavelength any more, since the latter hasn't written about the former in about 90 days.
But that did not stop our boy Luce, no sir-ee … the crafty balding little bugger found a new way to get his special message to the masses before this weekend's epic tilt with his protégé (Coach Umile's <s>son</s> <s>nephew</s> hand-picked successor), Mike Souza. Looks like Alex Hall of the Union Leader is the latest to come under Luce's spell, as evidenced by his midweek article:
https://www.unionleader.com/sports/...cle_947edfae-a4c0-5c43-b680-6f8c6fa57411.html
Yes, there is the obligatory Jerry York reference (check), and there is another doozie of a description of the reasoning behind Luce's original hiring of Souza, which I'll share here (hold onto your tray-tables, boys & girls):
Cavanaugh hired Souza with the goal of seeing Souza become UNH’s head coach when Dick Umile retired.
Souza served on Umile’s staff the previous three campaigns before becoming head coach when Umile retired at the end of last season.
“Mike was a diligent recruiter and passionate coach during his time here at UConn,” Cavanaugh said in a statement. “I thought he was very deserving of the opportunity to become the head coach at UNH and I was thrilled when he got it. He is doing an outstanding job there this year and we are certainly excited to compete against his team this weekend.”
Cavanaugh is in his sixth season leading the Huskies and previously spent 18 seasons on Boston College coach Jerry York’s staff, during which the Eagles won four national titles.
Hall's article goes on to explain that Souza probably paid as much (if not more) attention to the way UConn national championship hoops and field hockey teams ran their programs, practices, etc.
I'm tempted to give Hall the benefit of the doubt (or just poor wordsmithing), and say he didn't mean Luce literally hired Souza with the primary goal of setting him up to be UNH's future head coach. I mean, that's nuts, right? Does anyone think Souza just hired Guiliano so that Jeff can someday be the guy who replaces York down at his alma mater? Or did he hire JG because he thinks the guy can do the job for his program (UNH)? Y'know, like most HC's do when they pick their assistant coaches? Understanding, yeah, someday he may want to move on to a HC position? But the idea he was hired specifically with that in mind … ?!?
This just keeps happening with Luce. Either that, or one of you guys are actually Alex Hall (is that you, Dan? ) and I'm getting punked in a major way. If so, bravo - that's an "A" for super creativity.
Otherwise, it's just Luce being Luce. Look for UNH to sweep this weekend. UConn for relegation to AH!!
Snively65, I know you track these things, but I can't find our discussion about the over/under today on when we'd hear from Luce through his mouthpiece at the Courant, Mike Anthony. Apparently those two aren't on the same wavelength any more, since the latter hasn't written about the former in about 90 days.
But that did not stop our boy Luce, no sir-ee … the crafty balding little bugger found a new way to get his special message to the masses before this weekend's epic tilt with his protégé (Coach Umile's <s>son</s> <s>nephew</s> hand-picked successor), Mike Souza. Looks like Alex Hall of the Union Leader is the latest to come under Luce's spell, as evidenced by his midweek article:https://www.unionleader.com/sports/...cle_947edfae-a4c0-5c43-b680-6f8c6fa57411.html
Yes, there is the obligatory Jerry York reference (check), and there is another doozie of a description of the reasoning behind Luce's original hiring of Souza, which I'll share here (hold onto your tray-tables, boys & girls):
Cavanaugh hired Souza with the goal of seeing Souza become UNH’s head coach when Dick Umile retired.
Souza served on Umile’s staff the previous three campaigns before becoming head coach when Umile retired at the end of last season.“Mike was a diligent recruiter and passionate coach during his time here at UConn,” Cavanaugh said in a statement. “I thought he was very deserving of the opportunity to become the head coach at UNH and I was thrilled when he got it. He is doing an outstanding job there this year and we are certainly excited to compete against his team this weekend.”
Cavanaugh is in his sixth season leading the Huskies and previously spent 18 seasons on Boston College coach Jerry York’s staff, during which the Eagles won four national titles.
Hall's article goes on to explain that Souza probably paid as much (if not more) attention to the way UConn national championship hoops and field hockey teams ran their programs, practices, etc.
I'm tempted to give Hall the benefit of the doubt (or just poor wordsmithing), and say he didn't mean Luce literally hired Souza with the primary goal of setting him up to be UNH's future head coach. I mean, that's nuts, right? Does anyone think Souza just hired Guiliano so that Jeff can someday be the guy who replaces York down at his alma mater? Or did he hire JG because he thinks the guy can do the job for his program (UNH)? Y'know, like most HC's do when they pick their assistant coaches? Understanding, yeah, someday he may want to move on to a HC position? But the idea he was hired specifically with that in mind … ?!?
This just keeps happening with Luce. Either that, or one of you guys are actually Alex Hall (is that you, Dan?
) and I'm getting punked in a major way. If so, bravo - that's an "A" for super creativity.Otherwise, it's just Luce being Luce. Look for UNH to sweep this weekend. UConn for relegation to AH!!
Re: UNH Wildcats 2018-2019: Souza the Opportunity or Louza the Opportunity
Sure, I wouldn't deny that there are challenges UNH faces related to its ice size - but every school faces challenges and there are also inherent advantages. I'd argue that the concern over whether recruits translate is much more related to the jump from one level to the next. That's always going to be a concern and the extra time and space afforded from the large ice surface could help that transition as much as it hinders. Every school has pros and cons to offer recruits and every school has strengths and weaknesses that they have to deal with on the road to success. Its all about maximizing your strengths and pros and acting like or believing you are a program with a lot to offer. UNH has a lot to offer. In the late Umile years, however, they certainly didn't seem to always believe that they did. I guess that still frustrates me. Souza has not played that card and I applaud him for it. For example, there is nothing wrong with him wanting a players lounge and an on-site weight room. It would probably help, but I just will never buy that having to walk across the street to the field house costs them recruits (when I've seen so many other programs win a lot of games and NCs dealing with similar or even FAR worse situations)...
I can think of a number of players who came to UNH for the ice surface and flourished because of it. I can't think of many (any) for whom the extra space was a real reason they passed on UNH or whode UNH careers were derailed primarily by the Olympic surface. As for practicing on nearby NHL rinks - I would certainly agree thats an inconvenience, but a minor one. When I was at Michigan State 15 years ago, they were already spending half their practices working cross ice anyway. Thats certainly something UNH must do a lot of to mimic the lack of space when translating to NHL rinks (and probably a practice habit that serves them very well on their own rink). Its much easier to toss out some cones and limit playing areas than it would be to try to practice on an NHL sheet for critical Olympic away games.
I think you could sell recruits that playing on an Olympic Sheet would be a real advantage - you can develop your skating and vision skills at home, while developing other skills on the road. You can really become a versatile and creative player when you're forced to adapt to different circumstances on any given night. What an opportunity to well-round your game. At UNH you will have the extra space to develop one side of your game and we will also focus consistently on playing in small spaces around the rink to make you better in that regard. Its the best of both worlds. Again, its all about how these things are presented and what you believe as a coach/recruiter when your trying to sell your players/prospects. So, I can't argue with your points. They are well thought out and legitimate arguments - but I do think there are also a number of advantages to the larger surface and as you state, a good coach/recruiter maximizes those rather than really worrying about any downside (even if there are things they'd like to change or build on)...
It seems that our legitimate arguments for both sides of the ice surface debate extend from what type of hockey were prefer. I love watching international hockey - the best players on big ice. The skill takes over, its a faster game from a skating stand point and the scoring chances and play development is a joy for me to watch. Its the style of game I prefer. If I could change anything about the Whitt's ice surface - I'd honestly open the corners back up and lean in hard on the big ice. Embrace it and love it! Its not for everyone.
I definitely love college games on the NHL sheet, also - watching Denver play their style on the smaller rink is a treat. To each their own. Still, I always get jazzed when an NCHC game moves to 3-on-3 OT and the promise of space and never-ending scoring chances becomes a reality. Im not sure how I'd feel about three-on-three OT if if decided anything truly important for a team I rooted for - but man is it fun. Similarly, in the past I always knew a 4-on-4 at the Whitt (or anywhere) meant a huge UNH advantage and I miss those days. I think UNH has simply not been as talented or skilled in recent years due to recruiting failures. That makes them even worse on the big ice than the smaller ice. That leads to a lot of lamentations on the short coming of 200X100 surfaces and arguments to change. Start recruiting skill again. Start winning again. And we can all embrace the Lake Whittemore surface again. That's what I'd prefer to see...
---
One more story, regarding the facilities in recruiting argument. When Miami started to burst onto the upper-echelon, college hockey scene in the early 2000's they were still playing in arguably the worst arena in NCAA Hockey (the old Goggin), but they had to ELITE recruiting assistant coaches. One was Jeff Blashill who would move on to rejuvenate Western Michigan, than the AHL and finally the NHL with the Red Wings. The other was Chris Bergeron who has done amazing work at a Bowling Green program that was on the verge of shutting down when he took over. Certainly, the subsequent announcement and building of the new Goggin assisted them in continuing to recruit at a high-level and even improve on previous classes. However, thats more an example of an added benefit aiding to already elite recruiting talents than something that was needed for them to do their job at a high level.
Now both former assistants have moved on to bigger and better things - and despite now/still having one of the absolute BEST facilities in college hockey (huge locker room, pre-dressing room, on-site weight room, two ice surfaces, a shooting room, large training rooms, players lounge, etc - all in a BEAUTIFUL building) Miami recruiting has fallen off dramatically with less experienced and less talented recruiters. Its just so easy to talk about what you don't have and how that hurts you when youre not getting the job done. Guys like Blashill, Bergeron and McCloskey can recruit to any school, anywhere, anytime...
Sure, I wouldn't deny that there are challenges UNH faces related to its ice size - but every school faces challenges and there are also inherent advantages. I'd argue that the concern over whether recruits translate is much more related to the jump from one level to the next. That's always going to be a concern and the extra time and space afforded from the large ice surface could help that transition as much as it hinders. Every school has pros and cons to offer recruits and every school has strengths and weaknesses that they have to deal with on the road to success. Its all about maximizing your strengths and pros and acting like or believing you are a program with a lot to offer. UNH has a lot to offer. In the late Umile years, however, they certainly didn't seem to always believe that they did. I guess that still frustrates me. Souza has not played that card and I applaud him for it. For example, there is nothing wrong with him wanting a players lounge and an on-site weight room. It would probably help, but I just will never buy that having to walk across the street to the field house costs them recruits (when I've seen so many other programs win a lot of games and NCs dealing with similar or even FAR worse situations)...
I can think of a number of players who came to UNH for the ice surface and flourished because of it. I can't think of many (any) for whom the extra space was a real reason they passed on UNH or whode UNH careers were derailed primarily by the Olympic surface. As for practicing on nearby NHL rinks - I would certainly agree thats an inconvenience, but a minor one. When I was at Michigan State 15 years ago, they were already spending half their practices working cross ice anyway. Thats certainly something UNH must do a lot of to mimic the lack of space when translating to NHL rinks (and probably a practice habit that serves them very well on their own rink). Its much easier to toss out some cones and limit playing areas than it would be to try to practice on an NHL sheet for critical Olympic away games.
I think you could sell recruits that playing on an Olympic Sheet would be a real advantage - you can develop your skating and vision skills at home, while developing other skills on the road. You can really become a versatile and creative player when you're forced to adapt to different circumstances on any given night. What an opportunity to well-round your game. At UNH you will have the extra space to develop one side of your game and we will also focus consistently on playing in small spaces around the rink to make you better in that regard. Its the best of both worlds. Again, its all about how these things are presented and what you believe as a coach/recruiter when your trying to sell your players/prospects. So, I can't argue with your points. They are well thought out and legitimate arguments - but I do think there are also a number of advantages to the larger surface and as you state, a good coach/recruiter maximizes those rather than really worrying about any downside (even if there are things they'd like to change or build on)...
It seems that our legitimate arguments for both sides of the ice surface debate extend from what type of hockey were prefer. I love watching international hockey - the best players on big ice. The skill takes over, its a faster game from a skating stand point and the scoring chances and play development is a joy for me to watch. Its the style of game I prefer. If I could change anything about the Whitt's ice surface - I'd honestly open the corners back up and lean in hard on the big ice. Embrace it and love it! Its not for everyone.
I definitely love college games on the NHL sheet, also - watching Denver play their style on the smaller rink is a treat. To each their own. Still, I always get jazzed when an NCHC game moves to 3-on-3 OT and the promise of space and never-ending scoring chances becomes a reality. Im not sure how I'd feel about three-on-three OT if if decided anything truly important for a team I rooted for - but man is it fun. Similarly, in the past I always knew a 4-on-4 at the Whitt (or anywhere) meant a huge UNH advantage and I miss those days. I think UNH has simply not been as talented or skilled in recent years due to recruiting failures. That makes them even worse on the big ice than the smaller ice. That leads to a lot of lamentations on the short coming of 200X100 surfaces and arguments to change. Start recruiting skill again. Start winning again. And we can all embrace the Lake Whittemore surface again. That's what I'd prefer to see...
---
One more story, regarding the facilities in recruiting argument. When Miami started to burst onto the upper-echelon, college hockey scene in the early 2000's they were still playing in arguably the worst arena in NCAA Hockey (the old Goggin), but they had to ELITE recruiting assistant coaches. One was Jeff Blashill who would move on to rejuvenate Western Michigan, than the AHL and finally the NHL with the Red Wings. The other was Chris Bergeron who has done amazing work at a Bowling Green program that was on the verge of shutting down when he took over. Certainly, the subsequent announcement and building of the new Goggin assisted them in continuing to recruit at a high-level and even improve on previous classes. However, thats more an example of an added benefit aiding to already elite recruiting talents than something that was needed for them to do their job at a high level.
Now both former assistants have moved on to bigger and better things - and despite now/still having one of the absolute BEST facilities in college hockey (huge locker room, pre-dressing room, on-site weight room, two ice surfaces, a shooting room, large training rooms, players lounge, etc - all in a BEAUTIFUL building) Miami recruiting has fallen off dramatically with less experienced and less talented recruiters. Its just so easy to talk about what you don't have and how that hurts you when youre not getting the job done. Guys like Blashill, Bergeron and McCloskey can recruit to any school, anywhere, anytime...
Last edited:
Snively65, I know you track these things, but I can't find our discussion about the over/under today on when we'd hear from Luce through his mouthpiece at the Courant, Mike Anthony. Apparently those two aren't on the same wavelength any more, since the latter hasn't written about the former in about 90 days.
https://www.unionleader.com/sports/...cle_947edfae-a4c0-5c43-b680-6f8c6fa57411.html
Yes, there is the obligatory Jerry York reference (check), and there is another doozie of a description of the reasoning behind Luce's original hiring of Souza, which I'll share here (hold onto your tray-tables, boys & girls):
Cavanaugh hired Souza with the goal of seeing Souza become UNH’s head coach when Dick Umile retired.
“Mike was a diligent recruiter and passionate coach during his time here at UConn,” Cavanaugh said in a statement. “I thought he was very deserving of the opportunity to become the head coach at UNH and I was thrilled when he got it. He is doing an outstanding job there this year and we are certainly excited to compete against his team this weekend.”
Cavanaugh is in his sixth season leading the Huskies and previously spent 18 seasons on Boston College coach Jerry York’s staff, during which the Eagles won four national titles.
Hall's article goes on to explain that Souza probably paid as much (if not more) attention to the way UConn national championship hoops and field hockey teams ran their programs, practices, etc.
I'm tempted to give Hall the benefit of the doubt (or just poor wordsmithing), and say he didn't mean Luce literally hired Souza with the primary goal of setting him up to be UNH's future head coach. I mean, that's nuts, right? Does anyone think Souza just hired Guiliano so that Jeff can someday be the guy who replaces York down at his alma mater? Or did he hire JG because he thinks the guy can do the job for his program (UNH)? Y'know, like most HC's do when they pick their assistant coaches? Understanding, yeah, someday he may want to move on to a HC position? But the idea he was hired specifically with that in mind … ?!?
This just keeps happening with Luce. Either that, or one of you guys are actually Alex Hall (is that you, Dan?
Otherwise, it's just Luce being Luce. Look for UNH to sweep this weekend. UConn for relegation to AH!!
LOL too, too funny! I guess that you simply cannot make up this stuff. Reality trumps fantasy every time.
I believe that the over/under on Luce getting quoted about Souza in the Hartford Courant, the nation's oldest continuously published newspaper BTW, was 5:30 this morning. But, wouldn't you know it that the HC got scooped by the MUL's Alex Hall, whom the best that I can sleuth from the internets [sic] has been a local sports reporter for at least the past three months.
I really like Souza's quote that he has stolen coaching ideas from Luce, among others. I wonder if planting two forwards behind the net on the 5 on 3 PP was stolen from Luce? Which reminds me, no one answered my earlier question about our forward positioning when we scored the 5-3 PPG a couple or three games back? I need to get back to seeing games.
Yes, the 5x3 goal against Maine feature two forwards behind the net. One passinfbg the puck to Gildon for an initial scoring chance before he collected his own rebound and worked the top of the zone, before finding the other (Blackburn) sneaking across the goal line for an easy finish...
It's not a bad strategy of the players move - Switch places, back and forth from in front to behind, etc. it's the stationary positioning that is often the problem. As with any PP. If they move like they did in this instance I'm fine with it.
Thankfully you missed the WJC when the Swiss scored a couple 5x3 / PP goals using this strategy and many hockey pundits loudly exclaimed they'd been pushing for years for more of this strategy...
- Status