Eric,
 
I just wanted to drop you a note and let you know how I feel about
the comments you made about the Gophers, and the responses you have
gotten.
 
I can understand your frustration about the Gophers. I share it. They
played HORRIBLY last weekend against Northern Michigan, and if you
read my post about it, you will know how upset I was.
 
I was especially upset because the Gophers have so much talent this
year. As individuals, I think this year's team is better than last
year's (I was a season ticket holder both years, so i saw plenty of
both teams). But as a team, I think the Gophers from last year were
much better.
 
I am not sure that this problem is one of coaching. How much can Doug
Woog teach his players about feeling comfortable together? What can
he do to make the lines click?
 
It is certainly your right, as a fan, to question Doug Woog's
coaching. I do it all the time. If, for example, he starts Jeff Moen
in goal instead of Jeff Callinan, I can question whether or not that
is the best decision. If he chooses defense as something to
concentrate on instead of offense, I can question that as well.
 
But a person can hardly question the facts. The University of
Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey program, in 9 years under head coach
Doug Woog, has finished first or second in the WCHA, a historically
tough conference; has gone to the NCAA tournament all 9 years; has
gone to the NCAA finals once, losing in overtime.
 
What more can one ask for in a coach? A national championship? I
submit that a national championship is something won, quite often, by
luck as much as by skill. For example: Minnesota vs. Harvard in the
NCAA championship in 1989. The game ended in overtime: how many pipes
were hit in that game? How many times did the bounce of a puck over,
or on, a skate help out one team or the other. With just a little
luck, Minnesota could have had that championship. I find it difficult
to believe anyone complains about the outcome in an overtime
game--obviously the teams are evenly matched, or the game wouldn't
have gone into overtime. Luck, at this point, plays a much bigger
part.
 
For another example, lets take last years NCAA playoffs. Lake
Superior State University, the eventual champions, beat Northeastern
University 6-5 in overtime. It was determined, in retrospect by video
replay, that one of Northeastern's shots actually crossed the line of
the goal mouth, meaning they should have had a goal, meaning they
would have won in regulation. Now, discounting arguments about Lake
State's play being different had the goal been scored (it certainly
would have, but I am trying to keep this discussion fairly simple),
let us see what happens if Lake State loses that game. Northeastern
goes on to play Michigan, and we have Harvard playing a different
team in the final four. The championship game, between Boston
University and Harvard/Michigan/Northeastern is most likely not a
blowout, and either way we have a different national champion.
 
Should Jeff Jackson, Lake Superior's coach, get credit for the fact
that the goal was not declared a goal? Clearly, he should not. Should
he get credit for the championship? Yes, he should. He coached his
team well enough to get into the playoffs, and he (and the Lakers)
played each team that they faced very well.
 
Doug Woog has coached his teams well enough to ALWAYS get into the
tournament. Once there, many things can happen, and not all of them
should fall on the shoulders of the head coach. Some people can and
do claim that not much coaching goes into Woog's success: the talent
of the kids is sufficient to win enough games to get the team to the
tournament. I don't believe this is true. The is no debating that
Woog has an easy time recruiting: the best college rink in the
country; a winning team all but guaranteed to make the NCAA
tournament; the rich hockey tradition (playing for the University is
a dream for many Minnesota natives); the media exposure (the most
televised games of any college program); the talent of other students
also on the hockey team.
 
But winning games takes a good coach. The Minnesota players enjoy
playing for Woog. He teaches them things about playing hockey that
they might not otherwise know. He is a friendly, amiable man who
handles the press as well as he does a team practice.
 
I think that throughout the sporting world, too much blame is being
laid at the feet of the head coach for a team that fails to succeed
at the highest level. Being competitive is not enough: winning a
championship (for whatever sport: World Series, Stanley Cup, NBA
championship, NCAA from various sports) is the only thing that
matters. This is not, in my opinion, a valid belief, ESPECIALLY at
the college level. The entire student athlete issue brings up new
coaching challenges, and I don't just mean what lines to juggle if a
player becomes academically ineligible.
 
So bottom line: go ahead and wonder at Doug Woog's coaching
decisions. It certainly isn't a crime. But be sure to take the
positive side of his coaching into account, as well. Lots of schools
would be THRILLED to have what Minnesota has.
 
On another note: I agree about the goaltending this year. Greatly
decreased in talent from recent years. Of the goalies I have seen
this year, only one of two have truly stood out in my mind as being
fabulous, despite seeing many quality performances. For example: I
thought Brian Renfrew's performance in the Mariucci Classic was
spectacular. He is certainly one of the best goalies I have seen this
year (if not the best).
 
Callinan, despite his numbers, still is questionable in goal, as I
have said many times. He lets in too many soft goals. The goalie
tandems, like Herlofsky/Noble at BU, or Mullin/Wallenheimo at Denver,
or the CC pair are all pretty good. I think the Colorado College
pair, though, have been the beneficiaries of a strong offense and
defense in front of them.
 
 
It is a very difficult thing to do; differentiating the goalies'
abilities from a strong team in front of him. A good teams' goalie
always looks great. But when does a goalie's skills really
significantly help the team out? The best example I can think of is
Dwayne Roloson from Mass Lowell last year. He was clearly an integral
part of the team winning games.
 
And finally, expressing frustration at a team's failures is
understandable. But try to do it in a positive light; concentrate on
what the team can do better, or in what aspects of the game the other
team outperformed yours. Firing the coach, for example, is not always
the quickest way onto the road of success.
 
But if you love the game, you will stick with it, and get some reward
out of the good games. There is plenty of fun to be had here.
 
                                                Lee-nerd
                                                [log in to unmask]
 
"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent." --Isaac Asimov