Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

They brought in one of the best to play college hockey this millennium.

With all the changes in NCAA rules about paying players I'm counting on Max Domi being eligible next year. We already know he looks good in Red!


This year doesn't change the fact that BU is similarly situated to UW as an overall program and still had a terrible year last year.

 

[solovsfett]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

To help you understand my views, and to help me understand your views, here is a list of records. I'll mark what i think are "down" and you do the same. Let's see where that gets us

2002-03 / Mike Eaves / 13-23-4 / 7-17-4 / 8th
2003-04 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-8 / 14-7-7 / 3rd / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2004-05 / Mike Eaves / 23-14-4 / 16-9-3 / T-3rd / NCAA First Round
2005-06 / Mike Eaves / 30-10-3 / 17-8-3 / T-2nd / NCAA Champion
2006-07 / Mike Eaves / 19-18-4 / 12-13-3 / T-6th
2007-08 / Mike Eaves / 16-17-7 / 11-12-5 / 6th / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2008-09 / Mike Eaves / 20-16-4 / 14-11-3 / T-3rd
2009-10 / Mike Eaves / 28-11-4 / 17-8-3 / 2nd / NCAA Finalist
2010-11 / Mike Eaves / 21-16-4 / 12-13-3 / 7th
2011-12 / Mike Eaves / 17-18-2 / 11-15-2 / 10th
2012-13 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-7 / 13-8-7 / 4th / NCAA First Round
2013-14 / Mike Eaves / 24-11-2 / 13-6-3 / 2nd / NCAA First Round

02-03 - down year, first year for new coach
03-04 - good year
04-05 - good year
05-06 - GREAT year
06-07 - average/down year
07-08 - average regular season - good end result
08-09 - average year
09-10 - GREAT year
10-11 - average/down year
11-12 - down year
12-13 - good year
13-14 - good year
*14-15 - way down year

Out of 13 years; I see 1 way down year (yeah, this year is really rough and if you want to can a coach based on a single year of performance, then this would be that year), a couple of down years, a couple of average years, a couple of good years, and a couple of great years.

So yeah, I stand by my statement of 1 down every 4 years. Please identify which 2 or 3 of every 4 years you would classify as down years? I guess if you pick specific segments of 4 years (08-12) then yeah, you could justify that 3 of those specific 4 years were down, but you could also look at 03-07 and say that it was a fantastic run with 3 NCAA appearances and finishing above .500 every year.

Here's where part of the problem is for me

2005-06 / Mike Eaves / 30-10-3 / 17-8-3 / T-2nd / NCAA Champion
2006-07 / Mike Eaves / 19-18-4 / 12-13-3 / T-6th
2007-08 / Mike Eaves / 16-17-7 / 11-12-5 / 6th / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2008-09 / Mike Eaves / 20-16-4 / 14-11-3 / T-3rd
2009-10 / Mike Eaves / 28-11-4 / 17-8-3 / 2nd / NCAA Finalist
2010-11 / Mike Eaves / 21-16-4 / 12-13-3 / 7th
2011-12 / Mike Eaves / 17-18-2 / 11-15-2 / 10th
2012-13 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-7 / 13-8-7 / 4th / NCAA First Round
2013-14 / Mike Eaves / 24-11-2 / 13-6-3 / 2nd / NCAA First Round

note what happens in bold. the downward swings after a good season or 2 good seasons are getting worse and that impacts recruiting. Not only that but there should never be a Wisconsin Hockey team EVER sitting with 2 gd wins at the end of January, I don't care if the entire effing roster is freshman. Get serious. A down year for UW should be .500 or maybe 3-4 games under .500 but what we're seeing now is atrocious. Well, beyond that actually but I can't find an appropriate descriptive word for it

Getting back to recruiting and the unbalanced classes and Christian Dvorak and Brock Boeser and on and on. Oh, nevermind just read back several pages.

Eaves had a great plan for the first 4 years. It appears his plan as to what to do after you actually did climb the mountain is "holy crap we did it?!?!??? now what?"

 

[WiscTJK]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

UWs bad years are at worse, .500 teams. This season is just a bump. Miami had a dismal year like this last year or the year before. 13K at the Kohl Center Saturday is great for college hockey, I don't care what you say. The freshmen this year have underperformed, no doubting that. That's because they lack hockey smarts and size.

Also, I wouldn't have Hastings in my top 3. Granato, Johnson, Osiecki, and Gwoz would be before him.

first there might have been 13k paid, but not there- did you watch the game. Are they going to keep buying tickets with that effort?

Second the team lacks the top end talent, grittyness, and leadership that we need. Maybe it is coaching kids incorrectly, or he has lost them. I don't know, but there has been no effort in multiple games. There is a few glimpses here and there but mostly, blah. And the scorer for next year decommitted. This is layed squarely on the coaches feet.

I could live with Don Granato, he would be my second choice with Osieki. Gwoz is not a long term solution and I don't think Mark Johnson is the right answer. He has been away from the men's game for almost 15 years. I want the best coach for mens, and not the best Wisconsin guy.

Worst year ever in the program's history and you still want to keep him...

 

[WiscTJK]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

Here's where part of the problem is for me

2005-06 / Mike Eaves / 30-10-3 / 17-8-3 / T-2nd / NCAA Champion
2006-07 / Mike Eaves / 19-18-4 / 12-13-3 / T-6th
2007-08 / Mike Eaves / 16-17-7 / 11-12-5 / 6th / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2008-09 / Mike Eaves / 20-16-4 / 14-11-3 / T-3rd
2009-10 / Mike Eaves / 28-11-4 / 17-8-3 / 2nd / NCAA Finalist
2010-11 / Mike Eaves / 21-16-4 / 12-13-3 / 7th
2011-12 / Mike Eaves / 17-18-2 / 11-15-2 / 10th
2012-13 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-7 / 13-8-7 / 4th / NCAA First Round
2013-14 / Mike Eaves / 24-11-2 / 13-6-3 / 2nd / NCAA First Round

note what happens in bold. the downward swings after a good season or 2 good seasons are getting worse and that impacts recruiting. Not only that but there should never be a Wisconsin Hockey team EVER sitting with 2 gd wins at the end of January, I don't care if the entire effing roster is freshman. Get serious. A down year for UW should be .500 or maybe 3-4 games under .500 but what we're seeing now is atrocious. Well, beyond that actually but I can't find an appropriate descriptive word for it

Getting back to recruiting and the unbalanced classes and Christian Dvorak and Brock Boeser and on and on. Oh, nevermind just read back several pages.

Eaves had a great plan for the first 4 years. It appears his plan as to what to do after you actually did climb the mountain is "holy crap we did it?!?!??? now what?"

On top of this, he won the title in 2006, with the leadership of a class he didn't recruit. to be fair they bought into his system and it worked. It's just not working now.

After the 2006 championship and the nice run in 2010, they have disappointed in NCAA tournaments if they even get there....

 

[Almington]

To help you understand my views, and to help me understand your views, here is a list of records. I'll mark what i think are "down" and you do the same. Let's see where that gets us

2002-03 / Mike Eaves / 13-23-4 / 7-17-4 / 8th
2003-04 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-8 / 14-7-7 / 3rd / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2004-05 / Mike Eaves / 23-14-4 / 16-9-3 / T-3rd / NCAA First Round
2005-06 / Mike Eaves / 30-10-3 / 17-8-3 / T-2nd / NCAA Champion
2006-07 / Mike Eaves / 19-18-4 / 12-13-3 / T-6th
2007-08 / Mike Eaves / 16-17-7 / 11-12-5 / 6th / NCAA Quarterfinalist
2008-09 / Mike Eaves / 20-16-4 / 14-11-3 / T-3rd
2009-10 / Mike Eaves / 28-11-4 / 17-8-3 / 2nd / NCAA Finalist
2010-11 / Mike Eaves / 21-16-4 / 12-13-3 / 7th
2011-12 / Mike Eaves / 17-18-2 / 11-15-2 / 10th
2012-13 / Mike Eaves / 22-13-7 / 13-8-7 / 4th / NCAA First Round
2013-14 / Mike Eaves / 24-11-2 / 13-6-3 / 2nd / NCAA First Round

02-03 - down year, first year for new coach
03-04 - average year
04-05 - average year
05-06 - Good year
06-07 - down year
07-08 - down year
08-09 - average year
09-10 - Good year
10-11 - down year
11-12 - down year
12-13 - average year
13-14 - average year
*14-15 - way down year

20-25 wins should be normal at UW. a 0.500 is a down year, not an average year.

Thus in 12 years (I'm willing to give Eaves a pass on the first year) UW has had 2 good years, 5 average years, and 5 down years.

If I only meet my minimum standard at work 7 of 12 times, I'd be looking for a new job, as Eaves should be.

 

[UWisco]

first there might have been 13k paid, but not there- did you watch the game. Are they going to keep buying tickets with that effort?

Second the team lacks the top end talent, grittyness, and leadership that we need. Maybe it is coaching kids incorrectly, or he has lost them. I don't know, but there has been no effort in multiple games. There is a few glimpses here and there but mostly, blah. And the scorer for next year decommitted. This is layed squarely on the coaches feet.

I could live with Don Granato, he would be my second choice with Osieki. Gwoz is not a long term solution and I don't think Mark Johnson is the right answer. He has been away from the men's game for almost 15 years. I want the best coach for mens, and not the best Wisconsin guy.

Worst year ever in the program's history and you still want to keep him...

When we get gritty grinders all I hear is whining...

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

If I only meet my minimum standard at work 7 of 12 times, I'd be looking for a new job, as Eaves should be.

Your post is valid but this is slightly misleading.

Technically I believe there are only two teams in D-1 that have met the "minimum standard" in each of the last 12 years. One won 20 last year playing 9 games against the bottom 20 PWR, and neither has appeared in a title game in 10 years.

 

[Gurtholfin]

02-03 - down year, first year for new coach
03-04 - average year
04-05 - average year
05-06 - Good year
06-07 - down year
07-08 - down year
08-09 - average year
09-10 - Good year
10-11 - down year
11-12 - down year
12-13 - average year
13-14 - average year
*14-15 - way down year

20-25 wins should be normal at UW. a 0.500 is a down year, not an average year.

Thus in 12 years (I'm willing to give Eaves a pass on the first year) UW has had 2 good years, 5 average years, and 5 down years.

If I only meet my minimum standard at work 7 of 12 times, I'd be looking for a new job, as Eaves should be.

.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Your post is valid but this is slightly misleading.

Technically I believe there are only two teams in D-1 that have met the "minimum standard" in each of the last 12 years. One won 20 last year playing 9 games against the bottom 20 PWR, and neither has appeared in a title game in 10 years.

Your argument is often - "No one else has (or only a select few have) that, so we shouldn't strive for it."

Why can't we have anything nice?

 

[Bonin21]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

Records are one thing, but I'd be more ****ed about the lack of banner hanging. No regular season titles, and only two conference playoff championships which are "easier" to win. I'd have performance goals in mind like conference championship every x years, playoff championship every y years, and a rough guideline on natty championships every z years.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

Your argument is often - "No one else has (or only a select few have) that, so we shouldn't strive for it."

Why can't we have anything nice?

Because Ned Harkness is not available to take over. I think he's dead.

Of course we should strive to be the best. But it's a little silly to me to say we're a terrible program because we're not doing something no one else in our position has been able to do either.

 

[Almington]

Your post is valid but this is slightly misleading.

Technically I believe there are only two teams in D-1 that have met the "minimum standard" in each of the last 12 years. One won 20 last year playing 9 games against the bottom 20 PWR, and neither has appeared in a title game in 10 years.

I don't care about other programs and if they meet my standards for UW. My experience is that most Gopher and Soiux fans consider any season they don't win 20 games and make the NCAA tournament an absolute failure. Why shouldn't Badger fans expect the same?

UW should win 20+ games in 10 of 12 seasons and should NEVER under ANY circumstances have a season where they finish with fewer than 10 wins, PERIOD. In fact, failure to win 10 games should be grounds for an automatic dismissal of the HC.

 

[Gurtholfin]

I don't care about other programs and if they meet my standards for UW. My experience is that most Gopher and Soiux fans consider any season they don't win 20 games and make the NCAA tournament an absolute failure. Why shouldn't Badger fans expect the same?

UW should win 20+ games in 10 of 12 seasons and should NEVER under ANY circumstances have a season where they finish with fewer than 10 wins, PERIOD. In fact, failure to win 10 games should be grounds for an automatic dismissal of the HC.

You get another "."

 

[Chuck Schwartz]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

I don't care about other programs and if they meet my standards for UW. My experience is that most Gopher and Soiux fans consider any season they don't win 20 games and make the NCAA tournament an absolute failure. Why shouldn't Badger fans expect the same?

UW should win 20+ games in 10 of 12 seasons and should NEVER under ANY circumstances have a season where they finish with fewer than 10 wins, PERIOD. In fact, failure to win 10 games should be grounds for an automatic dismissal of the HC.

Well said.

I'll add that even Penn State won 11 games against D1 teams in its first year of existence and 8 in its second. I'm struggling to project Wisconsin ending up with more than 5 wins this season. Strength of schedules may not align, but you get my point. What a joke this season has been.

 

[Almington]

Well said.

I'll add that even Penn State won 11 games against D1 teams in its first year and 8 in its second. I'm struggling to project Wisconsin ending up with more than 5 wins this season. What a joke this season has been.

jokes are supposed to be funny, this season is just embarrassing.

What has become clear to me is that Eaves' system is just never going to be consistently successful at the college level. Player turn-over is to high (25-40% per year) and it takes incoming players far longer than acceptable to get proficient. I don't know if the system is so radically different or demanding than other systems or if it's just that Eaves insists on rebuilding players habits from the ground up to fix bad habits/decision making.

Sometimes I wonder if Eaves is running an overly sophisticated system designed more to negate NHL level players that is just overkill at the NCAA level and if that is why former players do so well in the pro ranks.

Given that often these players almost appear confused and panicked with the puck, something is amiss because based off talent alone (and IMHO this team does have plenty of RAW talent) this team should be significantly better.

 

[Badger Booster]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

05-06 - Good year
09-10 - Good year

I have my own issues with the state of the program right now, but in defense of Eaves, shouldn't these years at least merit Great year?

 

[XYZ]

To help you understand my views, and to help me understand your views, here is a list of records. I'll mark what i think are "down" and you do the same

Your first mistake is to call .500 seasons "average." From there it's not worth addressing considering your premise is wrong. If at a place like Wisconsin a coach cannot run the program at a level where .500 is a down year, he isn't good enough to be coaching at Wisconsin. This has been covered ad nauseum in here and UW fans tend to be a fairly realistic bunch, but the fact there are fans out there who are willing to call .500 average is evidence enough as to how low the bar now is.

The peaks will continue to get lower and the valleys deeper, but it's like the old frog in the boiling water thing. Those who still refuse to admit it will eventually just roll over and die, oblivious as to why. Probably because they were busy writing posts about how postgame analogies discussing ships, sails, puppies, mountains, fish, boats, and crapping on carpets are so refreshing that they excuse abject failure.

Wisconsin Hockey: Always finding new ways to ****shine a turd.

 

[Almington]

I have my own issues with the state of the program right now, but in defense of Eaves, shouldn't these years at least merit Great year?

Depends how much value you place on the NCAA tournament over the regular season.

2005-06 should have gone down as one of the most successful Badger teams ever, yet with Elliott's injury they hit a rough patch and only finished 3rd in regular season and 3rd in the conference tournament. Plus, I can STILL hear the sound of Cornell hitting iron in OT.

What did 2008-09 win? 2nd in regular season, 3rd at the F5, and 2nd at the F4.

To me, a great team MUST win the conference regular season title along with making the F4.

Winning the NCAA tournament is great, but that alone does not make you a great team. Sometimes you are great, but you are almost always also a bit lucky.

 

[Timothy A]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

02-03 - down year, first year for new coach
05-06 - Good year

I'd call this a great year, but other than that I agree 100% In fact you could all a bunch of the average years disappointing years, like 13-14 and 12-13.

So what exactly is the problem? Talent issues, scheme, execution?

 

[solovsfett]

Re: Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXII: No Where To Go But Up!

I don't care about other programs and if they meet my standards for UW. My experience is that most Gopher and Soiux fans consider any season they don't win 20 games and make the NCAA tournament an absolute failure. Why shouldn't Badger fans expect the same?

UW should win 20+ games in 10 of 12 seasons and should NEVER under ANY circumstances have a season where they finish with fewer than 10 wins, PERIOD. In fact, failure to win 10 games should be grounds for an automatic dismissal of the HC.

Exactly.