and... i like them? I think I like them.
You're being an asshole right now, and stop acting like you know everything about this team. You're a fan, you don't know how this team operates.
I think it's fairly obvious. First, he's too good a coach for one of his teams to be this consistently bad if they're paying any attention at all. Second, for the first time, really ever, Red has moments when he looks old out there. Sometimes a coach and his team just don't click. It doesn't make that coach a bad coach, it doesn't even always make that team a bad team. Heck, I don't know that Rick Comley ever didn't lose a team, his NCAA title run in 2007 with State, the team admitted they didn't pay any attention to him at all. I highly doubt that vintage, mid-90's Red would be having any more success with this team than he is right now (mostly becuase I don't think he's changed all that much).
Jeff Jackson at Notre Dame doesn't stack up that poorly against Red. He has rings galore, he coaches (now) at a brand name school, he has all the talent in the world at his disposal. He's missed the tournament, I think twice, in the last five years, with seasons that, while not quite as bad as Michigan's now, were still dismal. By his standard proven by his resume as a coach and by whatever mythical bar you want to set for Notre Dame on name alone. In between those years (during which they were expected to challenge for a title), they've challenged for national titles, some when they weren't supposed to and they're very much in the running this year. Next year, who knows?
I'm sorry you don't think 4 tournament berths, a championship game, a CCHA regular season title and a CCHA tournament title, 3 GLI titles and 109 wins, all in the last four years, still the most alumni in the NHL of any school and continuing to recruit at an elite level is good enough for Michigan. The rest of us do. That, not to mention his other feats, or that we believe he still very well may go out with yet another national title, is why we still support Red .
are hockey fans going to earn some type of badge of fandom by continuing to watch this team as much as possible this year?
The Badge of Fandom Resilience
The first time we've been swept in Kalamazoo since the year I was born. Relieved that I chose to go hang out and meet new people in Rochester Hills, rather than run the Michigan Hockey Net live-blog in Kalamazoo and cover this horrendous hockey. There are a lot of issues here: Janecyk clearly not being the answer; no secondary scoring to speak of; last but not least, no mental toughness when things go awry. The most troubling trend of all: we've had leads in just about all of these road losses. Streaks are made to be broken. You can't have 2-plus decades of dominance last forever. As a blogger, I have to be honest, but fair. As an Alumnus, it breaks my heart like nothing you know.
In any event, excited about what the U.S. NTDP is bequeathing us for next season!
Is this season a victim of a 40-Year Old Curse?*
This team now has one win in 2013 and needs to win at least twice between now and the end of the season to avoid what happened 40 years ago when the Wolverines went 2-15-1 after New Year’s Day.
In the 1972-73 hockey season, Michigan finished 6-27-1 overall (1-11 vs. Big Ten teams; 4-25-1 in the WCHA - and one win was by forfeit because Boston University used an ineligible player in their 7-3 win over the Wolverines on December 28 in the consolation game of the Great Lakes Invitational.)
Michigan won only two games during the 1973 part of that season: on January 12 (6-4 over Denver at home) and on March 3 (3-2 at North Dakota in the last game of the season, after having tied North Dakota 4-4 the night before.)
*There’s probably no 40-Year Curse, because the Wolverines were 10-4-0 in 1932-33.
+1 to the wanker negging me for no particular reason. I'm happy to know I matter enough for you to do that with everything post.
You're in Bolivia, calling someone else a "wanker," and you still wonder why you're getting negged?