If Red Berenson Won't Retire, He Should Be Fired
[Patrick Barron]
So here's a post I absolutely never wanted to write. Despite being an e-site on the internet staffed by basement trolls, historically this space has been very slow to get on a soapbox and say FIRE THIS GUY. I was still barely on board with Rodriguez after his third season and only called for Hoke's firing after the Shane Morris concussion fiasco. Meanwhile other parts of the internet call us Beilein slaps, because other parts of the internet are dirt stupid Rome listeners. And I love not just Michigan hockey but damn the torpedoes, screw your trap, let's score a buttload of goals Red Berenson hockey. Without Berenson it's likely I'm not a hockey fan of any variety.
But I kind of have to write this, because apparently missing the tournament for the fourth time in five years with the worst team Red Berenson's had since the mid-80s isn't enough for everyone involved:
I think Red Berenson will be back for a final season. We'll see what happens with meeting later this week with Warde Manuel. @umichhockey
— George Sipple (@GeorgeSipple) April 2, 2017
George has a pretty good feel for these things. Have been told the chances of him retiring are growing slimmer by the day. https://t.co/1WshrO0XUz
— Michael Spath (@MichaelSpathITH) April 2, 2017
This is why I was fretting about Michigan's post-Frozen-Four decision date on Berenson. If there was a decision to make it should have been made midseason, probably after Michigan handed a Tom Anastos-led Michigan State team two of their three conference wins. If not then, then immediately after the season. And yet.
Red Berenson is no longer a good hockey coach. Michigan's decline has been near-constant for a decade, with two items obscuring that: walk-on goalie Shawn Hunwick turning in two of the program's best-ever years in goal and last year's near-unprecedented pile of NHL talent. While Berenson should get credit for each, those are blips as Michigan hockey slaloms downhill.
Even when Michigan has been at a relative peak during their decline, North Dakota pops up to remind us that Berenson's approach has been lapped by modern hockey coaches. The last two times Michigan and North Dakota have met in the NCAA tournament Michigan has gotten outshot two to one. They won one of those with the greatest single-game goalie performance in program history. Last year they lost, meekly, because they could not even get out of their own zone.
That should have been the last straw. Michigan is no longer a program that can go into any game against a top-end foe and expect to have an even game even if their entire power play should already be in the NHL. North Dakota flat-out embarrassed Michigan in that game, and they specifically embarrassed Michigan's coaching.
It was not the last straw, so Michigan fans were treated to a season in which the only thing keeping them from a single-digit-win season was outstanding goaltending. Michigan finished 57th of 60 D-I teams in even-strength Corsi*. Forgive me if I bring out my inner Jim Rome right now, but that is flat-out unacceptable. Michigan controlled their zones about as well as 5-31-3 Niagara, 7-21-6 Alaska-Anchorage, and second-year independent Arizona State—which is still using club players.
Talent is indisputably down, but not that much. There are nine NHL draft picks on the roster and a tenth player (Luke Martin) will go in the next one. It is distantly possible that you could build a case for Red to return if Michigan had missed the tournament by a hair. They did not. They missed it by a mile, and the underlying numbers are even worse than the record.
Michigan's coaching is not and has not been an asset since Mel Pearson left. Pearson is working with scraps and guys from places so remote that Houghton seems like a metropolis in comparison. He's made the tournament twice in the last three years, and finished in the top five of even strength Corsi all three years. His talent is at best average in the WCHA; he outperforms. Berenson's talent was at worst league-average in the Big Ten; he underperforms.
Meanwhile there are signs every year that nobody's afraid of Red anymore—that nobody even respects him. This year Cooper Marody was academically ineligible for the first half of the year, which hasn't happened since I've been paying attention. Every NHL talent flees the instant it's an option. Jon Merrill missed half a season with personal issues a few years back; things never should have gotten that bad with him. When Andrew Copp jumped to the NHL after his junior season, Red slammed his character and that of his father. When Mike Spath related this, Copp's furious father responded at length, explaining why Copp decided that another year in Ann Arbor would not be a positive for his hockey career.
The year Copp decided to leave Michigan excluded him from the hockey banquet entirely: not a mention of his name. For the captain of the team. Does that sound like a rational person?
[Bill Rapai]
Red Berenson is 77. His hockey team was horrendous this year. He appears increasingly incapable of controlling the kids on his team. He's been on his "final" season for three years now. If he won't retire he is RedPa. Warde Manuel should do him a favor and prevent that from happening.
*[Corsi is your percent of all shot attempts. It is broadly more predictive of future events than actual goals, which are lower in number and subject to goalie vagaries.]
a debt of gratitude and I have suggested do something like name the ice surface after him, but totally agree we don't allow him to just stick around and run this program into the dirt. Look being an AD can be tough and sometimes you have to make some tough decisions and do what may not be popular, but is best for the program.
Firing Red is what is best for the program, what has happened over the last 5-6 years is unacceptable and if he had only been here for 10 years people wouldn't have a second thought of letting him go. You can only live on the past for so long and that good will is now all used up.
of a coach that has contributed so much might not be equal to the program but he's pretty damn important. That it is apparently coming to this speaks to the mismanagement of the AD. All of these details should have already been ironed out over the last few years and the decision gracefully made.
Not to equate the two, not even close, but to invoke reductio ad absurdum to hopefully clarify the argument that a coach does NOT have the right to hang around forever at a program he built:
Joe Paterno.
Penn State football would be nothing without him. But now thanks in part to him, it's by far the most disgraced program in the country, and always will be. (Not that PSU fans seem to mind because apparently PSU football fans are the worst fans in the world by a shocking margin, but it's certainly something we'd never tolerate.)
I mean, this could be a case where there's a point too far and Red hasn't crossed it. He certainly didn't cross it in any way resembling Pedo State. BUT, I bring this up to dispute the argument that a coach inherently has the right undo whatever they built during their tenure.
I don't buy it. If you build a house, kudos, but that doesn't give you the right to burn it back down, even if you own it, because at some point, people move into it and live in there. It's not the house to which you have responsibility, but the people who came to you.
But it's not happening. He'll go out on his own terms.
So I fear you wasted valuable time with this piece.
As everyone knows, pixels are a scarce and endangered resource.
So many wasted bits! Bits of storage! Transmission bits! Parity bits!
Won't somebody please think of the bits?!
Norm Bazin please.
Thanks for saying what needed to be said. I'm not sure if anyone that has anything to do with this decision is paying attention though.
How weird is it that we get a front page post about a terrible hockey team, but not even a whiff of a follow for women's basketball which just won a tournament title (WNIT, I know, but that wasn't exactly the WBB team's fault).
Not weird at all.
This is Brian's site and he's made it clear in the past that hockey is probably his #2 sport at Michigan (or least it was in the mid-2000s when the site was starting up). It's probably 3rd most popular amongst readers based on unscientific reading of front page posts and MGoBoard activity.
The fact that a team won the NIT - and did not even make the regular NCAA tournament for that sport - is not some glaring oversight, especially a sport that is probably 5th or lower in the Michigan sports heirarchy (Football, 2/3 - MBB/Hockey, Softball?, whoever else)...
5th is being very generous.
The rankings are probably more like this:
1 Football
2 Men's Basketball
3 Hockey
4 Softball
5 Baseball
6 Men's Swimming
7 Men's Gymnastics
8 Wrestling
9 Women's Basketball??? or Men's Soccer? or... Women's Gymnastics?
Hell, putting Men's Swimming and Gymnastics at 6 and 7 are selling them short considering how dominant they are.
I was being generous and didn't want to sound like a jerk. I would probably put my list in this order:
Football, Hockey/Basketball, Softball, Baseball, M&W Swimming, M&W Gymnastics, Wresting, Women's Basketball, etc.
The point stands: making the NCAA playoffs should be the minimum for 'successful' season in most UM sports, especially in basketball where it seems like we have a strong combination of institutional prestige & support, facilities, location, competition, and other various recruiting factors. I'm not asking them to turn into UConn or even Notre Dame or Baylor but making the field should be a minimum; not missing it and then implying some sort of gender bias contributed to not having a front page post is silly.
I know we're on an upward trajectory, and that's great, but I wasn't throwing any parties with subs when the men's team won the NIT.
Because, frankly, no one is all that interested.
That's the same reason that content for football heavily outweighs content for basketball.
Maybe because women's basketball is the worst spectator sport in the history of earth, and the interest level is on par with competitive bowling.
I've watched more women's college bowling this season than women's college basketball.
That the WNBA ever appeared on prime time television is sufficient evidence that the estro-mafia exists.
Insert eye-rolliest of eye-roll gifs.
Like, I don't go out of my way to watch women's hoops, but it's not like the WNBA (or the awesome UConn-Miss St. game Saturday night) kept something more important off of prime time TV. Other than baseball, what else is ESPN2 going to show in the summer? And, why does it bother you so much? Just, like, don't watch it.
Either way, it's sports. I like sports. If it happens to be on, I'll watch. Hell, I'll even take my kids to a game, because as others have mentioned, it's cheap and you can get great seats. And though I don't think a WNIT championship is worth a front page article (just like a swimming, gymnastics, or volleyball championship wouldn't), I'm not going to spit on a Michigan team that just won a championship and gets to hang a banner.
Go Blue.
Women's basketball is perhaps the worst women's sport to put on TV because there's no wider gap in entertainment value between men's and women's sports than in basketball. Women's softball, volleyball, and soccer are all entertaining on their own. I even enjoy water polo from time to time. Women's basketball is awful. It's like watching high school basketball with less athleticism.
Unfortunately I have to agree. Nothing against the hardworking ladies on the team who represent Michigan extremely well, but women's basketball is just not that entertaining to me. Softball, soccer, field hockey, volleyball - if I'm being honest those are all going to rank higher.
What percentage of mgoblog's readership has watched a women's basketball game in the last few years? 1%? Frankly, no one cares about WBB
Well, Mgoblog's readership should expand their horizons a bit and attend some WBB games. We bought season tickets - super cheap at $40 - (and all lower bowl) and have seen some amazing games this year. WBB is anything but boring. Three games this year where Michigan scored over 100 points. When is the last time you saw a college game like that? Crazy accurate 3 point shooting, tons of steals, lots of transition baskets.
No you don't see any dunks. But after all of those missed dunks in MBB this year, I think that might be overrated. You do see a lot more fundamental play and a faster paced game.
The WNIT Championship game was one of the best that I've ever seen in any sport. Triple overtime, last second shots to tie, missed FT with 0.6 sec left, and a crowd so loud my ears were ringing at the end. Three players with 52+ min of time toughing it out. Rough play for any sport. And Blue prevailed at the end.
So get off your lazy posteriors and go to those WBB games instead of bitching about it. And while you're at it, start showing up to the MBB games which are always half empty.
...the women's games are terrific. great seats are available and inexpensive. literally the only thing missing is dunks.
WNIT, man. It was ridiculous that the women didn't make the tournament this year--going 1-4 down the stretch with two losses to MSU was what did it, but the team still finished 11-5 in the Big Ten with a 22-9 record, better than most at-large teams.
For a program with absolutely ZERO history of quality play, the WBB team has done some great things in recent seasons. Got completely hosed by the NCAA committee, then instead of wallowing in disappointment, used it as fuel to run through the WNIT without one of their emerging star players. It was gutty and inspiring (4 players with over 50 minutes played in the 3OT championship game). For those who haven't ever paid attention (because the program wasn't worthy, frankly), but who love all (other) things M, it's worth knowing there's another basketball team on campus these days.
IIRC, they were 0-6 against the RPI top 50 (maybe top 100). Everyone knows selection committees love to look at top-50/100 RPI wins. Can't go 0-fer and expect an invite.
As a casual hockey fan, I have to agree. Red deserved to come back this year so he could leave on his own terms. I would even be OK-not thrilled, but OK-with him getting next year as a farewell tour, provided that it was clear to everyone that's what it was. He has done SO much for Michigan and Michigan hockey, I'm willing to give him that. When I was in school in the early 80's, the team was horrendous-and is fast slipping back toward that. Hopefully Red leaves before the arc completes itself.
I'd be more open to your idea if it didn't already feel like the last few years were farewell tours. At this point it would be as if Lloyd Carr had kept coaching into 2009/2010.
Like imagine 3 straight years of Lloyd going 6-6. I think Brian would have died of pure existential dread somewhere in year 2.
Ur head has gotten huge,I could make the same points about ur participation on this blog. Its time for u tk retire...oh thats right, u already have.
brian's back on the #hottake train
I hate to say it, but I'm on board. Red's been a shadow on the bench for years--watch him in action. The old "lean over and strongly tell them exactly what you're thinking" in anticipation of tearing them an absolute new one in the locker room later on is completely gone. He just stands there. Everything feels increasingly moribund, chasing the late-90s dragon in an increasingly futile way. Even in his prime, Red was riding 96/98 to the bank--look at those rosters between 2000 and 2009. It's baffling, even with the injustices of one-and-done tournament hockey, that none of those teams won a championship.
For me, the start was the Air Force loss in the 2009 tournament. Yes, the Hunwick run, but that was a fluke. This program embarked quietly off into the sunset as soon as that team got pantsed by a 4-seed in the first round. The usual "let's wait until January to give a shit" thing got worse. Players started playing me-hockey. Red started getting visibly bored. The Mel Pearson ship (apparently) sailed. It was never the same.
I think the grouping of the whole of the 2000s is unfair; the early teams were quite good and frankly we should have won the title in 2003. The Hunwick seasons weren't just a fluke with some good goaltending--the team, from my distant perspective, legitimately adapted to its skillset and got the most out of what it had on the ice from the moment Hogan went down to the flukey loss to Cornell in Green Bay that I attended. Of course, it is notable that Mel Pearson was on the bench at the time.
Meanwhile, the 06 and 07 rosters were as loaded as the mid-to-late 90s teams (TJ Hensick! Jack Johnson! Kevin Porter! Chad Kolarik!) and while goaltending was a key weakness nothing about the way the teams played at any point of any of those seasons led fans to believe that they were a genuine national title threat.
Red's ability to handle players behind the scenes has been suspect for years. He never really adapted to the issue of players leaving early (he tried, even giving Jeff Jillson an endorsed sendoff to the pros, but it was unnatural to him) and as guys joined the team that were headstrong he seemed to have a hard time dealing with it.
I'll agree with all of this but your assessment of the mid-2000s teams. Don't remember it that way at all, and I went to every home game and a good chunk of the away games for those years. Yes, the goaltending was spotty, but they were expected to do a hell of a lot more than they did. "Nothing about the way those teams played" made people think they were a "genuine national title threat"?
Uh... What?
I guess I'm not communicating this well. The Jack Johnson / TJ Hensick teams were absurdly talented but kept producing headscratching poor performances, and both of the times that they entered the NCAA tournament it felt (to me) like it would take a string of unusually good and consistent performances for them to win it all, or even advance to the FF. I was disappointed but not surprised by both North Dakota losses.
But my opinion on those years is worth relatively little due to what was, at the time, a rather remote point of observation in California with less access to the games.
Well, it didn't help that the first NoDak matchup was the committee shipping the team up to Grand Forks, and the second was the Hensick game where the mid-major ref didn't like a potty mouth. I was at both of 'em. The first was sort of predictable for the circumstances, the second was totally infuriating in a "this is out of their hands" kind of way.
I guess I just don't remember this the way you do. Those teams had every inch of talent and possibility to make a run if not for tournament hockey being tournament hockey.
I totally agree that they had all of that talent, and if I give the impression otherwise that is a mistake. It is that incredible level of talent and ability that made those seasons infuriating to me, because there was never a point in those two years where it appeared to me that the team came together and played up to its potential. They just never got it together.
Single elimination is, in fact, totally random. A lot of the people in this thread have been at games, mouths agape, as Michigan lost in OT or in flukey circumstances in the tournament. All it takes is one play over 60 (or, often, more) minutes to turn the game.
Michigan has underperformed for a long time, but a large amount of that underperformance has taken place in seasons in which Michigan never even made the tournament. Meanwhile, Michigan was flat out robbed in Fort Wayne and came oh-so-close to winning it all in 2011; 2012 was another flukey game where a waved-off goal that would have put Michigan up by 2 turned the tide, and they lose in OT.
They've made the tournament once since then.
Outshot them like mad and still lost 2-0. I agree that it felt like the first of many teams that had a bunch of talent and just looked a bit lifeless. Sans Hunwick, that's how 2010-2016 felt (and even Hunwick's 1st year saw the team leaving Hogan out to dry constantly until they finally realized they had to step up for Hunwick). 2017 was finally when all that staleness seemed to catch up. It was a season we all knew was on the horizon over the past few years
Red departs of his own volition, or he is let go. Either way, I would hope that the team does well enough next year so he departs on a high note.
I know, wishful thinking.
This is so sad...and yet I agree with all of it.
Also, I had forgotten about the whole Copp situation...bizarre. Spath deserved that smackdown, too.
I'm remembering (and appreciating) when Brian and mgoblog took on Dave Brandon. . .and won.
Yes, Red has made a hall-of-fame like contribution to the program. In fact, if the team moves to a new facility, I wouldn't object it being called Berenson Arena.
But he has to go. It's just that simple.
I can understand the hesitation to write this the past few years but great googly moogly we sucked this year.
Old people get really bad at doing things, almost all things. Including recognizing what they aren't good at doing anymore. Maybe he thinks the moment he stops coaching he's a dead man walking.
Regardless, it's been time for three years now. I interviewed him when I was a CCHA intern (Tom Anastos was a pretty nice guy to a lowly stats intern and a good administrator, BTW) at the preseason media days, he already seemed like that Grandpa that was just tough to be a tough SOB, not so much a great hockey mind anymore.
It's sad that it's come to this but Ward's gotta show him the door if he doesn't leave on his own this year, and soon, before everybody else has either signed with their new team or signed to stay where they are.
I agree, there are better examples of aging coaches that hung on too long that don't put Red in the same category as someone that allowed child molestation. Obviously that's not the intent here, but still, ick.
Yeah, I get Brian's intent there, but the Paterno name is just so tainted now. Kinda like bringing up Hitler in a discussion of innovative moustache styles.
Why is it inappropriate? The other poster should only have been negged if he said something like Red enables pedophiles like Joe Pa. Both Joe Pa and Red hung on too long is the comparison ts true.
The horrible PSU crimes aside, it's worth remembering that Michigan hockey won seven national titles before Red took over as coach. He's more like our hockey program's Bo Schembechler (a coach who revived a once-proud program) than Paterno or Bowden.
Comments