Hockey CC: Spath & Bacon candidates list
Guys they've heard are candidates.
Hockey coaching candidates (in no order): Brian Wiseman, Billy Powers, Billy Muckalt, Mel Pearson, Enrico Blasi, Nate Leaman, Dave Hakstol.
— Michael Spath (@MichaelSpathITH) April 11, 2017
Hakstol would only be an option if he gets fired in Philly apparentlyCandidates for UM hockey include MTU's Mel Pearson, UM assistants Billy Powers and Brian Wiseman, and USHL's Bill Muckalt. All UMers.
— John U. Bacon (@Johnubacon) April 10, 2017
Hasn't heard anything about Bazin@goon48 @Siouxforever5 And if he doesn't in a week, have been told he would explore college options.
— Michael Spath (@MichaelSpathITH) April 11, 2017
@PuckingOff @ChrisDilks Yeah he's worth checking into though I haven't heard his name from Michigan folks.
— Michael Spath (@MichaelSpathITH) April 11, 2017
April 11th, 2017 at 10:50 AM ^
Come on. I really hope that Mr. Spath is as wrong about that as he has been about everything else regarding the Michigan hockey coach situation.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:22 AM ^
If they were the answer, things wouldn't have dropped off almost immediately after Mel left.
The 2011-12 season after he left was really bad during the first half but turned around with that 1-0 OT win at Alaska.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:42 PM ^
I totally expect him to get an interview out of respect for Red. Wouldn't expect it to be anywhere near the top of the list.
That same genius who told us Red was coaching another year? Remind me again, why aren't we pointing and laughing at his predictions right now?
Just spewing some icicles, but that's his job I get it. Any sightings on campus today?
and is usually way off base. He throws enough shit at the wall and eventually something sticks and then will say see I was right.
April 11th, 2017 at 10:57 AM ^
Is it just me or does this sound like a list of names you might give if you had never considered the question and were being asked on the spot for the first time (other than Leaman and Hakstol)? Really hope this is not the complete list.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:13 AM ^
Wiseman and powers are laughably bad candidates and muckalt isnt much better.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^
Weisman & Powers do not belong on Michigan's candidate list. You can make an argument for Muckalt, though. He has been an assistant at the NCAA level and a head coach at the USHL level, with some success. He probably doesn't have the full resume that you would need to coach at Michigan, but he is getting there.
He would be a better candidate for the #1 assistant position--the one that Powers is occupying now.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^
but Jeez he was a treat to watch on the ice. Smooth, slick and yet still fairly rugged. One of my Michigan top 3 players.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:25 AM ^
Oh gawd, the "Michigan Man" thing again.
Mike Babcock: "Hi Warde, my name is Mike Bab..."
Warde Manuel: "Let me stop you right there. Not a 'Michigan Man'...bu-bye." (click)
April 11th, 2017 at 11:29 AM ^
That Harbaugh guy just sucked didn't he? Michigan Man, Schmishigan Man!
April 11th, 2017 at 11:33 AM ^
Babcock is basically Harbaugh without being an alum. You know what he was saying.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:36 AM ^
Weirdly he had a record of success that would have made him a great hire regardless, his ties to Ann Arbor mostly helped recruit him. We're talking about guys who seemingly only are qualified BECAUSE they are tied to the program.
Nice try though.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:38 AM ^
I say Brady Hoke, Bill Freehan, Wilf Martin.
Mr. Harbaugh was actually qualified (over-qualified) for the job he was offered. But 3 of the 4 major men's sports at Michigan have had a recent disaster where they hired a coach just because of his association, as player or assistant coach, with the University of Michigan--even though they were not otherwise capable of doing the job.
If Michigan just hires somebody with a tie to the university but without relevant experience or proven competence, it could easily be a repeat of the Hoke/Freehan/Martin catastrophes. I would prefer to avoid that.
April 11th, 2017 at 11:40 AM ^
Harbaugh was the absolute best candidate even if he had no connection at all. With his deep background and connection, it just made it a better fit. Sure, the Michigan connection means something and should defintely tip the balance for similar candidates, but you should not make that a requirement. You target the best candidates and then give them added points if they have connections.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
If harbaugh had went to stanford instead of michigan he still would have been far and away the best candidate.
Of course, but the scary part is...would we have even given him an interview??
April 11th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^
April 11th, 2017 at 12:19 PM ^
Hoke needed a Michigan connection to even get through the door at Michigan. Michigan needed a Harbaugh connection to even get through the door with Harbaugh.
In one case, we picked an underqualified candidate only because he was a Michigan Man. In the other, we landed an overqualified candidate only because he was a Michigan Man. That's the difference.
That's the Michigan Difference.
FTFY
defiinitely has a smell of nepotism and in-bredness
April 11th, 2017 at 11:45 AM ^
Maybe there is a division already between him and warde? /s
April 11th, 2017 at 11:45 AM ^
Hockey coaching candidates (in no order): Brian Wiseman, Billy Powers, Billy Muckalt, Mel Pearson, Enrico Blasi, Nate Leaman, Dave Hakstol. — Michael Spath (@MichaelSpathITH) April 11, 2017Hard no on Wiseman, Powers, and Blasi. I hope Wiseman and Powers are just being interviewed as courtesy. Why Blasi would be on this list is beyond me. Maybe if someone had started hibernating in 2009 and just woke up again
April 11th, 2017 at 11:48 AM ^
I'm okay with this
April 11th, 2017 at 11:49 AM ^
April 11th, 2017 at 11:59 AM ^
They're going to hire Mel Pearson, which is fine I guess, but the refusal to even look at qualified non UMers is indicative of such a longstanding dysfunction in this AD. Basically this is Michigan athletics version of affirmative action.
Montgomer, Bazin, and Hakstoll would be my first three calls.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:05 PM ^
Thats why i didnt like the manuel hire, he was brought up in the dumb ad culture of micigan where only michigan men are suppose to coach at michigan. He was actually a huge benefeciary of this culture and primarliy got the ad job because of it. He has a chance to prove me wrong and i hope he does.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:08 PM ^
Just seems weird to be looking at Hakstol and not Bazin/Leaman.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^
You call it weird I call it professional malpractice. Mel Pearson is damn near 60 years old. I just don't get it.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^
We don't necessarily need another lifer. We need someone who will get this thing back on track and where it should be.
Maybe Mel puts in 5-6 years, retires and then Mike Babcock takes over.
Dead serious. Now that Red actually mentioned him, I think we can all now say that those rumors were real.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:28 PM ^
Hiring a coach with the plan on him being here 5-6 years is incredibly bad business. Babcock isn't leaving his hometown original 6 team where he's making over $6 million a year and gets to coach Auston Matthews for Michigan. He's just not. Maybe in 10 years he decides it's something he wants to do, but it's not happening in the foreseeable future.
This is a top 5 job and it shouldn't be limitied to guys with Michigan ties who have extremely thin coaching resumes or to someone who is pushing 60 years old.
There is no guarantee that Babcock will last that long in Toronto. They are so desperate for a Cup that if they don't win it soon, he may be fired and they will move on. If that happens, he may become available. I think this is more likely to happen than him winning one and staying in Toronto for 10 yrs.
If he wins a Cup, then all bets are off, he will live off of that halo effect for years and he could retire there. But you could also speculate that if he achieves that goal he may move on to coach somewhere else that's on his bucket list, like UM.
Sounds like wishful thinking.
Just saying his seat is pretty hot, so it's possble. And he can opt out in 5 yrs (4 more yrs) of the original 8 yr $50M contract, and his salary is front loaded.
His seat is not hot at all. He just signed an 8 year $50 million contract. The Leafs were one of the worst teams in the NHL a year ago and he's already got them in the playoffs, and they're only going to get better as guys like Matthews, Nylander, and Marner get older.
I disagree, it's like managing the Yankees. He's still in the honeymoon phase. If he doesn't start to contend every year, he won't last. Why is this news? Pro coaches usually don't stay in one place very long. He lasted in Detroit since he won the cup early on in 2008, but if the Leafs don't win one in in 3-4 yrs, his seat will get very hot.
Which is it, is his seat hot or is he in the honeymoon phase. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. This discussion is ridiculous because he's not going to be the coach at Michigan next year.
Seat is hot, will get hotter unless he wins A LOT. I'm just speculating that he could be the next coach if the one that is hired now doesn't work out, that's all.
Why is hiring 58-year-old Mel Pearson just a temporary, "get back on track", 5-year stop-gap, because he's considered old as all hell,
But hiring then 58-year-old Mike Babcock in 5 years is landing the holy grail of hockey coaching?
If you only want Babcock for 5 years as well, then this is fine I suppose. It just feels like you're overlooking the birthday math.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^
Looking at Hakstol means he's willing to look outside of the Michigan family. But it's strange that it doesn't include Bazin and Leaman. Maybe they'll still be looked at, we'll see.
We don't really know who they're looking at; we know who Bacon and Spath have said are on the list. There are various wild rumors of a number of guys that they haven't mentioned.
Montgomery is, however, "rumored" to be connected with a head job in the NHL, which Michigan can't compete with.
Muckalt is not as bad of a hire as you let on, but you're being oddly harsh on Narduzzi, a successful assistant who has done a good job at Pitt. He isn't the same thing as Ron English or Mike Debord at all. Wiseman and Powers would be a considerably worse option than Narduzzi, but the English/Debord analogy is pretty spot on.
Chryst didn't get fired, he left to take the head coaching job at Wisconsin. They then took Narduzzi, and while they lost some games, they also beat B1G champion Penn State and national champion Clemson (on the road!) last season. He's working out ok.
Your clarification on the subsequent post is helpful. Narduzzi isn't a great analogy for Muckalt, in my view, but it's not way off base either. Given that Michigan hockey is not Pitt football, I can go with that.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^
It's hardly "malpractice" to hand the keys over to a successful head coach who was probably Red's chosen successor 6 years ago and seems to have been the linchpin of the team's success in the oughts.
At worst you could say he's a high-floor, low-ceiling guy with possibly less than 10 years of coaching left. But I'm not sure he really is "low-ceiling" and anyway is low-risk really such a bad thing when you know you're in a rebuilding mode? 10 years is hardly peanuts - lucking into a multi-decade head coach is awesome but hardly something you ought to count on.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:59 PM ^
Those in college hockey circles know how great a coach Mel is. Having Mel for 7-8 years? Are you kidding? Sign me up! I think some folks here are underestimating his abilities and playing too much into his age. Also save your Brady Hoke comparisons, too lazy to dive down that rabbit hole. FWIW - Michigan Tech won 15 games combined (FIFTEEENNNNNN!!!) in the three years (THREEEEE!) prior to Mel's arrival in Houghton. While the new WCHA is much less compettive after realignment, no other member (hold Mankato) has reached Techs level of success. Fun Fact: Tech has more NCAA appearances than Michigan the past 5 seasons. Hiring Mel is not lazy by any means. We have a world class coach on our doorstep. Do the right thing.
April 11th, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^
I think you're jumping the gun quite a bit to say that Mel is definitely going to be the one hired, and you're being unecessarily harsh about him if he is.
Mel is old and that's suboptimal for me. Like you, I would prefer a strong national hire. But Mel actually is well-qualified for the position based both upon his long tenure here (he understands the culture, reduces some of the transition shock, was surmised to be a big reason for Michigan's on-ice success prior to his departure, and can recruit) and his tremendously impressive tenure at MTU, where he took a moribund can't-win program and brought it to heights it has not seen in decades.
I would prefer a Bazin/Montgomery/Leaman hire. I can handle a Mel hire and would prefer that to some of the other options.
I personally think the guy with a whole drawer, excuse me, walk-in closet, full of shiny michigan championship rings ( I counted like, 26...correct me if I'm wrong) deserves the job. Just sayin..