Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
That's debatable as they are currently fourth from the bottom in attendance for Women's D1
That's debatable as they are currently fourth from the bottom in attendance for Women's D1
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.
Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
- Thread starter Beantown Puckfan
- Start date
HockeyEast33
New member
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
When you only have 2 Division 1 programs, the school definitely wants them to be high visibility. But that visibility only comes when the program wins, not because the school hopes for it. Sure attendance is low. They don't win, so students/residents aren't interested unless they have a friend on the team. If they win (which would require better recruiting and/or coaching - the subject of this discussion around Coach Barcomb), applications of kids interested in women's hockey go up, more get in, more attendance, more alumni giving, program gets more attention, and a positive cycle of winning/recuiting success and attendance improvement/alumni giving occurs. All sorts of examples of this in programs across many sports that have been successful. The real trick is getting that first really good season to raise awareness and recruiting. Union under Barcomb hasn't been able to do that yet after 6 seasons, so that puts her at risk.
When you only have 2 Division 1 programs, the school definitely wants them to be high visibility. But that visibility only comes when the program wins, not because the school hopes for it. Sure attendance is low. They don't win, so students/residents aren't interested unless they have a friend on the team. If they win (which would require better recruiting and/or coaching - the subject of this discussion around Coach Barcomb), applications of kids interested in women's hockey go up, more get in, more attendance, more alumni giving, program gets more attention, and a positive cycle of winning/recuiting success and attendance improvement/alumni giving occurs. All sorts of examples of this in programs across many sports that have been successful. The real trick is getting that first really good season to raise awareness and recruiting. Union under Barcomb hasn't been able to do that yet after 6 seasons, so that puts her at risk.
Hux
Alfond to Ridder & rinks in between
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
BC wins and no one goes. Northeastern wins and no one goes. Union could win all it wants and I would bet that attendance would only go up by a few handfuls. Just the way it is.
BC wins and no one goes. Northeastern wins and no one goes. Union could win all it wants and I would bet that attendance would only go up by a few handfuls. Just the way it is.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
What does that tell you? Most workers in most jobs aren't that happy with their bosses either. If the old boss/coach goes and a new one enters, after a while, the worker bees are back to being mostly unhappy. It is only after one has had the experience of being a coach/boss that it begins to sink in that maybe the task wasn't as easy as once thought. A player has a different perspective than a coach. Everything for the player is filtered through, "How does this impact me?" The coach has a team full of players, people in administration, and fans to try to appease, while still trying to win games. Thus, not every decision is going to be in the best interest of every player. Coaches are professionals, and by and large, they are doing their best.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
And this is the terrible situation the good coaches find themselves in. There are professional, honorable people doing a great job as a coach but leaves players and parents unsatisfied, disappointed and often much worse.
There are also plenty of bad coaches out there who really need to be dismissed but won't be.
And this is the terrible situation the good coaches find themselves in. There are professional, honorable people doing a great job as a coach but leaves players and parents unsatisfied, disappointed and often much worse.
There are also plenty of bad coaches out there who really need to be dismissed but won't be.
hockeydad09
New member
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
I would agree that Barcomb's job is in jeopardy. Anyone looking at Union just needs to go to a game and it would convince you to take your daugther elsewhere....that's what I did.
I would agree that Barcomb's job is in jeopardy. Anyone looking at Union just needs to go to a game and it would convince you to take your daugther elsewhere....that's what I did.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
Excellent point, very well stated.
Also correct, although I'm a little uncomfortable with the word "plenty." I'd choose the word "some."
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
True enough.
But using the work analogy, there are very important differences vs. a hockey team.
(1) People work because they have to, and many people are in jobs or careers they never really enjoyed to begin with, but pursue because it pays the bills. By contrast, pretty much everyone on a hockey team has a passion for the game to begin with, so they at least start out really happy and motivated to achieve.
(2) Coaches (unless they are new) usually have the luxury of picking their entire team, while most bosses inherit theirs. Manager don't have the opportunity to choose for optimal personality and skill match except for new hires in case of turnover, not do they typically have unconstrained authority to get rid of those they don't like without cause or significant remedial action over a period of time.
It can be argued then that an unhappy team should not be nearly as commonplace.
In good companies, employee engagement and satisfaction is measured. Managers are rated against one another based on employee feedback and corrective action is taken as appropriate, to either improve their leadership skills or find better managers. These companies know that a motivated and engaged workforce is more productive and successful. Good leaders pay attention to employee motivation, and spend time on clear communication, because these things are important to achieving the best possible business results.
If as an employer you don't care about communication, motivation, or employee satisfaction, and choose not to measure it, it's not a surprise that you will end up with coaches/leaders who don't either, and teams who are more likely to underachieve and be unhappy.
True enough.
But using the work analogy, there are very important differences vs. a hockey team.
(1) People work because they have to, and many people are in jobs or careers they never really enjoyed to begin with, but pursue because it pays the bills. By contrast, pretty much everyone on a hockey team has a passion for the game to begin with, so they at least start out really happy and motivated to achieve.
(2) Coaches (unless they are new) usually have the luxury of picking their entire team, while most bosses inherit theirs. Manager don't have the opportunity to choose for optimal personality and skill match except for new hires in case of turnover, not do they typically have unconstrained authority to get rid of those they don't like without cause or significant remedial action over a period of time.
It can be argued then that an unhappy team should not be nearly as commonplace.
In good companies, employee engagement and satisfaction is measured. Managers are rated against one another based on employee feedback and corrective action is taken as appropriate, to either improve their leadership skills or find better managers. These companies know that a motivated and engaged workforce is more productive and successful. Good leaders pay attention to employee motivation, and spend time on clear communication, because these things are important to achieving the best possible business results.
If as an employer you don't care about communication, motivation, or employee satisfaction, and choose not to measure it, it's not a surprise that you will end up with coaches/leaders who don't either, and teams who are more likely to underachieve and be unhappy.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
In very few companies is anyone graded as harshly and consistently as is everyone connected with a sports team. Wins and losses. Ice time. All of this is not only measured directly and obviously but it matters. I've worked one of those jobs where your performance is quantitatively evaluated every single day. The stress of that, and thus being in competition with everyone around you all the time, can get out of control even when things are going well.
In very few companies is anyone graded as harshly and consistently as is everyone connected with a sports team. Wins and losses. Ice time. All of this is not only measured directly and obviously but it matters. I've worked one of those jobs where your performance is quantitatively evaluated every single day. The stress of that, and thus being in competition with everyone around you all the time, can get out of control even when things are going well.
Blackbeard
Well-known member
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
c'mon. i mean i agree it's unlikely she was going anywhere after one bad season, but to heap praise upon anyone other than brittany ott after giving up 75 shots on goal in a 64 minute game is a little crazy. tonight was proof that she had a **** good goaltender that she's going to have to replace somehow.
c'mon. i mean i agree it's unlikely she was going anywhere after one bad season, but to heap praise upon anyone other than brittany ott after giving up 75 shots on goal in a 64 minute game is a little crazy. tonight was proof that she had a **** good goaltender that she's going to have to replace somehow.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
A week ago, Maine got a 49-save performance from sophomore Meghann Treacy in a 2-2 tie with UNH, so it isn't like Lewis has zip returning in net.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
True. One never knows how a kid will respond when they become the number one in net. Some rise to the challenge; others struggle with the pressure. In general, goalies do better when they get more opportunity to play regularly.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
Season is over, hopefully the clock doesn't tick too long before there is some news.
Season is over, hopefully the clock doesn't tick too long before there is some news.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Who goes first Lewis or Linstad?
http://www.collegehockeystats.net/1213/rosters/mnew
I make enough errors on my own. Thanks for the correction; redshirts are tricky.
I am not responsible for errors on collegehockeystats:
http://www.collegehockeystats.net/1213/rosters/mnew
I make enough errors on my own. Thanks for the correction; redshirts are tricky.