No, but perhaps it’s didactic.
1 Like
Miami is playing a bunch of Freshmen.
1 Like
Why is Miami playing a bunch of freshman in year 4 might be a question
3 Likes
Let’s consider average age in the NCHC, as it doesn’t really matter what college class a player is in, but instead the age of the player:
Western Mich 22.03
St. Cloud 22.00
Miami 21.77
NDak 21.63
CC 21.39
Omaha 21.22
Denver 21.15
Duluth 21.00
Miami is not significantly younger than other teams in the conference. What can we conclude from this? I am not sure. Perhaps Miami can’t hope to attract the 18 year old phenom. Can Miami attract fast and skilled 21 year olds to enter the program? I don’t see why they can’t if they adjust their approach. There are plenty of them playing all over the United States and Canada.
1 Like
Hard now since the team has been bad now for years. Can’t attract enough talent.
Deon Sanders at Colorado disagrees.
I’m sure this has been talked about in other threads but what caused this drop-off after the 2014-2015 season when Miami finished 2nd in the Regular Season and won the Conference Tournament? We seemed poised to at least be competitive when the league first started.
2 Likes
I was under the impression our success at recruiting began to fall away…eventually a HC change was made but four years into it we are in the cellar and getting blown out by the NCHC second division teams along with the front runners.
Another Lurker rant coming at you.
I’ve been following the conversation and agree with the points Observer and NESCACDAD made. Actually, I agree with most everyone except those that advocate for dropping the program. Please, just stop. You look silly. Like Bonk, I think we should stay in the NCHC. But folks, we need to do something about the coach. I want Bergeron to succeed here. He could be Miami University’s version of Jerry York. But he can’t win games in the NCHC. He can’t build a program that will be successful in the NCHC. I would buy the argument that Miami University hockey is in worse shape today than when Rico left were someone to make it.
Look around. There are examples of rebuilds that look like actual rebuilds. Year 1 stinks. Year 2 starts showing some progress. Year 3 shows the start of competing. Year 4 you’re over the hump and contending regularly (that does not mean winning it all, it means being competitive every year). It does not take 5+ years to rebuild a program. Think about it…after 4 years we’re still at year 1 and even if this freshman class is all that everyone here thinks it is we are still three (3!!) more years away. And that assumes subsequent classes will be equal to or better than this one. Who here wants to bet a paycheck on that happening?
Here are three examples of rebuilds that started AFTER Bergeron arrived:
Colorado College, year 2. Kris Mayotte and Peter Mannino are showing progress in year 2. Even though he’s been helped by Duluth and UND being down, read the CHN article and tell me that in year 4 Bergeron has shown the same amount of progress. Mind the Gap : College Hockey News
Maine, year 2. Ben Barr has the Bears at 8-4-1 since December 1. Bergeron has us at 2-8 since December 1. In year 2, Maine is 11-12-2. Miami is, well, you know.
St. Thomas, year 2. Rico. Yeah, THAT Rico. In year 2 he has the same record we do. He has the same number of wins we do. He’s 3-6-2 since December 1 and has beaten BUGS and Michigan Tech (who is ranked). He has a sweep. He has not been blown out twice in a single weekend. In year 2 St. Thomas is not the worst team in the CCHA. In year 4 Miami is once again the worst team in the NCHC.
Now every one of those coaches could regress next year. But no one can deny that those three programs have done in two years what Bergeron has failed to do in 4. So, what have you seen that leads you to believe that next year will suddenly be magical? Thank you Redsea for asking the money question as it cuts straight to the heart of what’s wrong with this program.
Berge has succeeded in graduating fine young men, runs a clean program, and brings the highest level of integrity to the rink every day and I respect the heck out of him. But when it comes to building a winning program, Chris Bergeron has failed. He needs to be fired but since he has 2 more years on his contract firing him right now is a nonstarter. We will have to suffer through at least one more year before we can make a much needed change at the top. Who knows, maybe I’ll have to eat crow next year when he makes the NCAAs. I’d be OK with that.
This sucks. Back to lurking.
3 Likes
Always enjoy your perspective, Lurker…just have one question that has been answered elsewhere on the board but would appreciate your expanded thoughts: why is it so important that we stay in the NCHC?
2 Likes
Here’s my personal answer on this: would the worst team in the SEC or Big ever consider leaving? I get it. It’s not an apples to apples comparison. But still…also like, mother, Lurker knows best. But unlike mother, Lurker is in the shadows lurking. Well wait, actually…
1 Like
Just my personal preference, and I certainly understand the other side of it, but I’d rather have to fight our way out of the basement of the best conference in the country rather than the hope of more consistent success in a lesser conference.
That is an unfair comparison because the financial benefits if being in the SEC and Big 10 are immense.
There is no financial benefit to being in the NCHC. In fact travel expenses are probably higher
4 Likes
Indeed. But, if that wasn’t the financial case, I think the worst school would still want to stay Because of ego… History proves me right here. Well except for U of Chicago in The Big Ten.
1 Like
I’d like to see us win on a consistent basis, wherever that might be…not much fun to see your team creamed day in and day out for 8 years and counting. If we can somehow manage to start doing it in NCHC, fine, but I am seeing little evidence of that happening in the next few years.
As noted above, comparisons to P5 leagues in other sports are not really all that relevant as there are enormous financial benefits to being in the B10 or SEC, no matter how lousy you are in football. We derive no such benefits while being a doormat in the NCHC.
He has two years on his contract, but the buyout is only one year’s salary. It also includes a mitigation clause. No reason to think we couldn’t fire him after this season.
4 Likes
Again lets analyze why the Western M program is so successful and we are not- does anyone on this site have detailed info on how/why WMU is doing so much better than we are in the NCHC ? I have not followed hockey as closely as others on this site have but there must be some objective/ factual reasons why our hockey program cannot at least match the WMU program- switching leagues does not appear to be a solution to a problem that may be much be more complex. From my perspective the last few weeks of extremely poor performance is simply unacceptable.
I don’t understand the travel cost argument. Last year, the team spent $274k on travel, which was the second most only behind football. But realistically, how much would that be reduced? 50% seems overly ambitious and that’s only $137k saved. That’s a decent chunk of change but not a game changer really.
1 Like
I think the answer to your question is simple. There are highly qualified coaches who know how to win in the NCHC who would kill to be the head coach here. We can hire one. I believe we can be successful in the NCHC if we get the right person in charge.
And to the question “What does Western have that we don’t have?” the short, flippant answer is Andy Murray and Pat Ferschweiler. But reread the Observer and NESCACDAD posts for more details and nuance as they accurately describe what happens behind the scenes and explain why skill kids don’t want to come down here. The result is we’re stuck with ECHL caliber kids playing against NHL/AHL caliber kids. It’s no wonder we get pounded every weekend.
Back to lurking.
2 Likes
I could be wrong here (I often am), but once we lost the excitement of playing B10 hockey programs, I don’t think that many Miami students and alums (other than the few that are very hockey savvy) care all that much about whether we are playing the likes of Omaha and company vs. CCHA teams. I get that the conference affiliation affects our ability to recruit talent, tho.
Unless we are going to miraculously as e d back to the top 3-4 of the NCHC, we are not likely to experience winning records. In a lesser conference like CCHA, it would seem we could win more often and have a much easier path to the top 3 and eventually compete for an NCAA berth. I don’t think the student body would complain much if we substituted CCHA schools for NCHC schools, so long as we start winning some games and making the Goggin fun again.
That said, from what has been shared by the hockey knowledgeable among us, we can’t afford the exit fee for NCHC, so all our discussions here are merely hypothetical in nature. It sounds like the only way out of NCHC is this rumored break up of hockey conferences w Miami someday perhaps headed to a MAC sponsored, more regional in nature conference.
4 Likes