Is everyone in agreement UMass Lowell HC Norm Bazin should replace Red?
And Mel pearson is a Michigan tech alum but he's coming according to your logic. Money talks and Michigan is in a different stratosphere than the UML job.
It does not bode well when a post here begins with "Is everyone is agreement...". If we have seen one thing on MGoBlog consistently, it's that there is never consensus on anything.
Let's completely ignore the fact that Mel was in Ann Arbor for over two decades and was pretty much Red's appointed heir... But... OK, man.
If anything, the knock on Mel these days is that he's already 58. The time was 10 years ago.
I'm not completely ignoring anything. People leave their alma maters for better jobs and more money all the time in sports. Seems like you're the one ignoring that if anyone is ignoring anything.
Mel is over the hill. At the age of 58, he is only good for another 10 - 15 years. /s
Coaching carousel looks like this...
Actually it does. Norm Bazin makes less than 250K at UML. He could make three times that amount at Michigan if not more. That is nothing to sneeze at. I don't care what profession you are in, if you have the chance to triple your salary and take a better job most every person in this country is going to jump at that opportunity. This was Brian's point on the podcast.
I agree with this. College hockey generally hasn't seen a lot of money thrown around because it's a low-dollar sport. However, the B1G teams that care about hockey have a fair amount of revenue to throw around and they could, if they were inclined, throw money at coaches that nobody else could match.
I'm surprised Minnesota hasn't done this, and I'll be mildly disappointed if Michigan doesn't.
You're overestimating salaries. $250,000 is the average salary around college hockey. Red makes $238,000. Mel Pearson makes $275,000.
Unless they're going to make Norm Bazin the highest paid coach in college hockey and give him $500,000 the salary argument is a moot point.
I think Michigan should consider approaching that kind of money. Granted, they shouldn't run a program deficit just to hire a coach, and I'm not sure what the program's financial makeup is, but this is where you invest.
Which Brian mentioned Michigan could very well do on the podcast in order to land a guy like Bazin.
That salary for Red probably doesn't reflect bonuses. When Lloyd Carr was the coach here, his base salary in that U of M salary generator was barely over six figures. His actual salary was over $1M/yr.
This article talks about base salaries and bonuses.
http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2014/12/michigans_head_coaches_bank_43.html
As someone who lives in New England and knows the schools and college hockey landscape around here, I would be shocked if he never left.
UMASS Lowell will never be considered a top school. That might not matter to Bazin or the players but it will the future of the program. They have done a good job of taking UMaine and UNH spot in hockey east but those programs have better history. The success is not sustainable long term.
Good perspective. On top of that many people in college hockey consider Michigan to be the best job in the country. There's just no comparison to a program like UML.
Michigan's a great hockey program, but it's not the best job in the country. That job is unquestionably Minnesota. Also probably better: North Dakota.
I think an argument could be made for either but neither school has the national brand or deep pockets and resources Michigan does. And there are more Michigan born players in the NHL right now than any other state and that includes Minnesota.
Minnesota has the same B1G money flowing into the athletic department, revenues from football and basketball that aren't the same but are pretty good, and a highly profitable hockey program with a fantastic arena that does a lot better than Michigan in hockey-specific revenue. They have a deal with the local Fox Sports station, they actually get discussed on big-time sports radio (the highly rated shows that talk about them in the Cities are simulcast throughout the state), and they lead the sports news when they have big success.
Michigan's a good hockey state, but Minnesota is a great hockey state, and there is simply no comparison. It is embedded in the culture here in a way that it is not in Michigan. And while Michigan has a lot of players in the NHL, those players take a lot of different paths to get there, including a lot that go through the OHL. In contrast, virtually every good prospect in Minnesota goes into college hockey, and Minnesota is the kaiju of programs in the state.
Michigan has a terrific hockey fanbase with strong facilities in a good hockey state, but Minnesota (and to a lesser extent North Dakota) have larger fanbases with more hockey revenue (and hockey revenue is where the coaching budget comes from) and a recruiting base that is even better.
If Michigan is only a "good" hockey state then the 48 other states not named Minnesota are pitiful. Michigan has more NHL talent right now than Minnesota. That is not a debate. The USA hockey program choose to move to Michigan, not Minnesota. It doesn't reallly matter how much revenue the hockey program brings in, Michigan's AD operating budget blows ND or Minny's out of the water because they are a money making powerhouse. And that's why they can afford a 500K dollar coach if they want whereas the other two can't because they can't afford it. You are severely underestimating hockey in Michigan. Little Caesars, Belle Tire, Compuware, Honeybaked, Victory Honda, etc are the best AAA youth programs in the country. Yes, Minny HS hockey is bigger but overall Michigan is every bit the hockey state Minny is and thats not up for debate.
When you say "The USA hockey program [chose] to move to Michigan, not Minnesota," you are implying something that isn't really true--that they chose Michigan for talent reasons.
The USA hockey development program had several requirements: (1) good, fairly large school district, (2) nearby hub airport, (3) plenty of ice sheets, and (4) couldn't be in Minnesota or Massachusetts for political reasons.
They put it in Michigan because Massachusetts would have found it completely unacceptable for it to be in Minnesota, and vice versa.
USA hockey moved to Michigan in part because hockey was there but also in part for facilities and (this is significant) in part because it split the difference between the hockey hotbeds in New England and Minnesota. Or don't you remember the fake-but-accurate east-west sniping in Miracle?
Michigan develops hockey players well. It has good development programs. The path for development is completely different than in Minnesota (which is the only place where high school hockey is considered a great way to get to the next level) and it produces a lot of terrific players.
But the number of pro prospects alone (a number you say is not up for debate but that you have not sourced) does not a hockey state make. Minnesota has more registered players than Michigan and just as importantly a hockey-centric culture that Michigan can't match.
And I know, because I've lived in both places and I am biased towards Michigan. And I'm afraid there is no comparison.
Michigan has a solid hockey subculture. But that's what it is--a subculture. If you like hockey you have teams to watch and places to play and fans to connect with. In Minnesota, there is a hockey culture unlike anywhere in the US. Regular folks who have never worn skates a day in their lives (though that's less common here) care about all levels of hockey. The high school hockey tournament is a cultural event every year that people care about whether their team is participating or not. Casual sports fans actually fill out NCAA hockey tournament brackets. Middle school kids on busses spontaneously talk about Stanley Cup finals that don't involve their favorite teams. And people play seriously and casually both. It's not just kids making a holistic commitment to hockey year-round; people who don't own skates play boot hockey, people who used to play in high school play pickup at the local parks (in Duluth we have 20-ish outdoor rinks in public parks and we have the cold weather that makes them viable for most of the winter). Kids that never play in high school have played pickup for a year or two the way people in other places play soccer or tee-ball.
And players that are good, that do have a chance to play at higher levels, almost all go to college. Because that's what they do here. Guys going to Major Junior are almost unheard of.
And that brings us back to the root question, which is not which state has a more robust hockey culture, but what is the best job in college hockey. And that is the program that has an incredible arena, a huge stream of hockey-specific revenue, a massive fanbase, a major source of metropolitan media coverage, and a base of recruits for whom they are the dream school. That is Minnesota.
Michigan is also great. But the hockey culture isn't quite as rich, and the headwinds with the OHL kicking around are a bit stronger, and 97.1 won't be doing a segment about Michigan Hockey's February outlook. And, importantly, Michigan hockey does face headwinds (such as the OHL) that Minnesota doesn't. It's just the way it is.
I was flying to MSP (the Minneapolis-St Paul airport) a few months ago. Guy in row behind me was college-aged and wearing a Minnesota (Gophers) hat. Old guy is seated next to him, asks if he's a student at Minnesota. Yes, he is. Old guy then asks kid where he went to high school. The kid's answer to the question then inspired a (literally) 50-minute discussion of high school hockey, with equal enthusiasm from both people.
Think about that for a while. If a Michigan hat or sweatshirt inspired an extended discussion of sports, what are the odds that the sport would be high school hockey? Or hockey at any level?
No, Minnesota is different. Very different.
True or not, I can't believe you cited a movie scene(s). If it's true, cite the actual event or debates. Using the movie pretty much devalues your point.
March 28th, 2017 at 11:32 AM ^
Transferred from UM to attend architecture school. This was in the early seventies brfore the new school on north campus was built.
All the minnesota hs hockey tournament games were televised back then. It seemed like they were all one goal games. Bigger than the Michigan HS basketball tournament ever was. Never saw anything like it.
However he local Minnesota professional fan base are real homers. They will not turn out unless they are good. The North Stars even left because of this. This is not the case for HS Hockey.
Herb Brooks was the Minn coach. Their facility sat 7000 and was located in the other end of Williams area from the basketball court. They won the national championship in 1974 when I was there.
I was a big fan at Michigan even though we were a perennial last place team. This was before Red. We would get a bunch of guys from the dorm and attend the game. We would entertain the crowd between periods playing the fight song on our kazoos. The arena sat maybe 2000.
Now that is a great stat!
I'd also add that he's built UML differently than how he would have to build a Michigan team. Not saying that he couldn't succeed at Michigan, but he'd have to recruit guys right out of school or at a younger age, rather than getting older guys who are more physically developed. This is one of the big differences in recruiting within college hockey.
Bazin, Leaman, and Pearson are three guys I'd consider, FOR SURE.
That said, Bazin is a UMass alum with no connection to UM (that I know of), so I would think odds are low that he'd want to move.
Houghton is in the middle of nowhere near the top of the UP.
They have the same amount of tournament appearances as we do with severely less talent since Mel took over. That's a miracle.
They had one winning season (one game above .500) pre-Mel since 1996-97.
They had 11 single-digit win seasons in a 16 year span.
It's not like Lowell, Massachusetts is away from civilization and impossible to recruit to like Houghton is.
And Mel was one of 'em. Grew up in the Twin Cities and chose Tech. He seems happy up there because he genuinely loves the place. But, let's keep citing statistics.
Yikes...and people accuse ME of publishing spreadsheets that no one can read. I saw this and thought, "Wow, I am much worse off in the vision department than my prescription would indicate..."
I don't know whether this helps or hurts my argument... but it definitely hurts my eyes
There are some guys in Minnesota that grow up in remote places, but most of the best players grow up in the suburbs in families that can afford to support hockey where there are rinks and teams to develop on. This is true almost everywhere in America.
Mel went to Tech, but eventually settled in Ann Arbor and only left reluctantly. The evidence available suggests that places like the UP schools (all three have won national championships) will never reach their former levels of success again, because players just aren't going there. The recruiting profile of college teams is completely different than it was 30 years ago or 50 years ago.
Hockey recruiting in general is a funny thing, because you're drawing guys from such widely disparate backgrounds (lower level junior kids in Canada, USHL, Minnesota high school, etc) and you have to recruit against other leagues as well as against other schools. In the 2000s Red was more likely to lose a recruit to the OHL than to Michigan State.
Yes, everyone knows hockey players are hatched from eggs that are incubated beneath the surface at athlete plantations in Nunavut. They have no regard for the same frivolous amenities as regular people. They like napping in igloos and they curl in their spare time. They can ice sculpt with their bare hands and don't require coats. In most cases, they are easily startled by such commonplace items like DVDs or kitchen utensils.
Frankly, I'm surprised any of these ice people ever even consider Ann Arbor.
This is a bad comment and you should feel bad about making it.
It was an awesome comment.
Tech's roster is predominantly kids from Western Canada and Minnesota... Houghton is just like home to them. My brother went to Tech and I seriously considered it, so I've been there numerous times, I wouldn't describe it as away from civilization... especially for a kid from small town Canada or Minnesota/Wisconsin.
Exactly.
They're not getting the big time players from outside their little region.
Tech has a really strong hockey program historically.
Have you even been to Houghton? It's not Deadwood on a glacier or something.
Tech has a very strong program when you normalize the results to their resource base. When a larger school (such as Minn) wants to go head-to-head for a certain recruit, they are just as committed (possibly moreso) with a greater amount of support behind it. One of the arguements being made on this board is that, if UM were to actually put the kind of emphasis on its hockey program that Minn does, they would probably be in one of the strongest positions in the country for attracting college talent. However, as was remarked, hockey is more of a subculture whereas football is mainstream.
Also, yes Houghton-Hancock is a nice place. I've been there many times in both summer and winter (and almost went there for undergrad instead of UM). However, after about 1-2 days you've see just about everything there is. Not exactly a hotbed of social and cultural activity.