Richard S. Tuthill wrote:
>       Excuse me,  but I am having just a little bit of a hard time swallowing
> Union's culpability in this matter.   Are we supposed to believe that Moore
> didn't know the situation at Union before he went there?   Come on,  he was
> at Colgate as an assistant,  a member of the ECAC,  situated an hour and a
> half away.   He didn't know what the situation was?
 
According to sources close to the situation at the time, Stan was
promised significant program upgrades, including a new rink.  He was
the perfect coach for an up-and-coming program, but Stan is too good
to bother with a nominal D1 team (in terms of administrative support).
 
> And,  are we supposed to swallow his leaving at the eleventh hour
> before the season as something folks of high integrity would routinely do?
> I don't think so!!  Sleazy at best.
 
Considering that neither Stan nor Union is saying much about the
situation, we don't really know how eleventh-hour his departure
was.  Since Sneddon was the leading candidate for the Colgate assistant's
job, it wouldn't surprise me if Union knew they would lose one coach,
and chose to lose Stan since he seemed likely to leave in the near
future no matter what.  If Stan agreed to take the Colgate job (which
*is* a step down for him, remember) in order to give Sneddon his chance
as a head coach (which I don't think he would be in line for anywhere
besides Union for a few years), that's pretty noble.  I really hope
it works out well for both of them, and for both teams.  I know
the Colgate players are thrilled to have Stan back, and it sounds
like the Union squad are glad to be keeping Sneddon.
 
just some thoughts,
James
 
----------
James Clippinger
[log in to unmask]
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~james/
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.