PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsin Hockey Vol. XXXIII: A Fanbase Gets Smarter When All The Idiots Jump Ship



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

Gurtholfin
05-06-2015, 11:40 PM
Solo's gonna lose his mind over this one... :eek:

:D

Badger Booster
05-06-2015, 11:56 PM
I thought it might be tough getting Osiecki back before reading that article. Now, outside of fat cash and a virtual guarantee of the head coach position when Eaves is gone, why would he come back now? Seems like Eaves also indirectly hosed Shuchuk by promoting him to the #1 spot when he wasn't ready and then had to fire him when the bottom fell out. Hire Osiecki back in 2013 and everyone probably has their job and maybe a couple of NCAA tourney wins along the way. This season still would have probably have been a down year, but not the historic trainwreck.

Is it me or does it seem like there isn't a Plan B if Osiecki turns them down?

ExileOnDaytonStreet
05-07-2015, 12:12 AM
That's an astonishing piece of information

HCSmooth
05-07-2015, 12:16 AM
I am not really one to call for a guy's firing the way reactionary fans can be whenever the slightest thing goes wrong to an otherwise successful program (Just look at the people always calling for Ted Thompson to be fired...sheesh).

That being said, I honestly cannot come up with a valid reason at this point as to why Mike Eaves still has his job as head coach of the UW. The last 5 years have been a disaster, culminating in a dumpster fire of a season just finished. Unless you were worried about him leaving again for another head job, you decide not to re-hire one of the very best assistant coaches in hockey who helped build a national champion and a national runner up and what seems like a dozen NHL defensemen? Really? That is a guy you back a Brinks truck up for. Unless for some reason he is just an insufferable human being you cannot work with anymore, in which case I guess there can be extenuating circumstances. But you want him back now, so that doesn't seem to be the case. How many ways can you screw the pooch in 5 years?

Almington
05-07-2015, 12:43 AM
That's an astonishing piece of information

I, on the otherhand, am not surprised at all. It fits the Eaves MO perfectly, absolutely perfectly.

Chuck Schwartz
05-07-2015, 02:13 AM
Inexcusable if true that Oz wanted to come back and Eaves went with Walsh. No other way around it.

Moving past that, I still think they can land Oz this time around. The other name that is hot, and I tried to give you guys a hint earlier, is Fred Harbinson from Penticton. If Mike pulls off that combo, UW could be back in business.

bucky15
05-07-2015, 08:12 AM
If true, the only thing I can think that would make sense is Eaves knew Oz wanted to try other things. Maybe at that moment Oz calling him was a safe move for Oz and Eaves thought his heart won't be there or would leave for advancement at first chance. Eaves' ego would never have seen how bad things would be getting 2-3 years down the road.

Now given the circumstances Eaves needs to stop the bleed and doesn't mind if Oz ends up pursuing greater things while a UW Asst coach.

I am just trying to toss a possible reasonable(Mike Eaves' thought process) explanation out there.

solovsfett
05-07-2015, 08:40 AM
Solo's gonna lose his mind over this one... :eek:

:D

Holy Effing *)*)@#%)(@)%(@% I almost burst a blood vessel when I read Eaves hired Walsh vs. bringing Osiecki back. I mean talk about teeing one up for the fans to go off on! Actually I have to stop thinking about that cause I might lose it and I want to have a good day...

so...if Chuck is right and *if* Eaves brings in Osiecki and the guy from Penticton, they could get something going again (unfortunately it would still involve Eaves as HC)...

markwojo
05-07-2015, 10:00 AM
Oz vs Walsh...can't make any sense of that other then maybe timing was a little off and not as seamless as it might appear from this story (could Walsh have been made a promise before Oz got fired?....I don't even want to do the research on dates to find out there is no plausible explanation other then Eaves picked a guy fresh off of coaching Bantam hockey over one of the most prominent college assistants available).

Fred Harbinson looks intriguing....was an assistant for Motzko at St Cloud for 5 years and a 1 year stint at Sioux City in the USHL as an assistant before that. That implies having some significant recruiting ties in Minnesota and the USHL. Born in Calgary and head coach for Penticton for last 6 years so checks off the Western Canada requirement in a big way. Couldn't hurt with Jost and Fabbro who interjected into the current roster would be an instant massive improvement in fall of 2016 over last year and likely this upcoming season.

ExileOnDaytonStreet
05-07-2015, 10:16 AM
If true, the only thing I can think that would make sense is Eaves knew Oz wanted to try other things. Maybe at that moment Oz calling him was a safe move for Oz and Eaves thought his heart won't be there or would leave for advancement at first chance. Eaves' ego would never have seen how bad things would be getting 2-3 years down the road.

Now given the circumstances Eaves needs to stop the bleed and doesn't mind if Oz ends up pursuing greater things while a UW Asst coach.

I am just trying to toss a possible reasonable(Mike Eaves' thought process) explanation out there.

There's probably a reasonable amount of merit to this line of thinking.

Wisko McBadgerton
05-07-2015, 10:40 AM
I'm not sure looking at it as Oz vs. Walsh is at all correct as they wouldn't have been hired for the same job. Hiring Oz would have more likely meant firing/demoting Shuchuk who would have completed his 3rd year on the staff in '13. So do you fire Shuchuk, who Eaves was clearly comfortable with, to hire back a guy that left you a few years earlier and (at the time) appeared to be looking for a stopover before another HC job was offered to him? In retrospect, sure, it looks good, but at the time I'm not sure it was very clear cut, or would have seemed like a very good move if you're thinking about long term stability in the program. Just saying there's a lot more to it than just Walsh or Oz.

Now if you hire Oz, you're talking multi-year commitment and bigger $$, so of course it makes a lot of sense in the longer view.

gwhinwi
05-07-2015, 10:44 AM
I'm not sure looking at it as Oz vs. Walsh is at all correct as they wouldn't have been hired for the same job. Hiring Oz would have more likely meant firing/demoting Shuchuk who would have completed his 3rd year on the staff in '13. So do you fire Shuchuk, who Eaves was clearly comfortable with, to hire back a guy that left you a few years earlier and (at the time) appeared to be looking for a stopover before another HC job was offered to him? In retrospect, sure, it looks good, but at the time I'm not sure it was very clear cut, or would have seemed like a very good move if you're thinking about long term stability in the program. Just saying there's a lot more to it than just Walsh or Oz.

Now if you hire Oz, you're talking multi-year commitment and bigger $$, so of course it makes a lot of sense in the longer view.

Well, according to the Baggot article, both of those things are possible.

"Alvarez has told Eaves he can offer a multi-year contract unprecedented for assistants at UW outside of football and made available to Eaves an undisclosed amount of extra salary money to secure a top assistant."

Associate Head Coach would be a great title for Oz.

Gurtholfin
05-07-2015, 10:50 AM
\

Associate Head Coach would be a great title for Oz.


Along with being told that you are next in line, whether that be a year from now or when Eaves retires on his own.

Wisko McBadgerton
05-07-2015, 11:12 AM
Along with being told that you are next in line, whether that be a year from now or when Eaves retires on his own.

Well of course you tell him that!

You just forget to put it in writing...

Timothy A
05-07-2015, 11:48 AM
I'm not sure looking at it as Oz vs. Walsh is at all correct as they wouldn't have been hired for the same job. Hiring Oz would have more likely meant firing/demoting Shuchuk who would have completed his 3rd year on the staff in '13. So do you fire Shuchuk, who Eaves was clearly comfortable with, to hire back a guy that left you a few years earlier and (at the time) appeared to be looking for a stopover before another HC job was offered to him?

You demote Shuchuck to #2 and make OZ #1, on the assurance from Oz we wants to stick around. That's a no brainer!

Gandalf the Red
05-07-2015, 12:07 PM
I honestly thought this whole thing had reached the bottom, and then this news comes out.

gwhinwi
05-07-2015, 12:34 PM
I honestly thought this whole thing had reached the bottom, and then this news comes out.

Mike Eaves: Taking you to the bottom, smirking, then showing you the cave underneath it.

Wisko McBadgerton
05-07-2015, 01:28 PM
You demote Shuchuck to #2 and make OZ #1, on the assurance from Oz we wants to stick around. That's a no brainer!

I agree that today it seems a no brainer. But then? I have to disagree it was clear cut at all.

How do you possibly get any assurance from Oz then when there was only one year contracts for assistants? Let alone the fact that his stock was still very high even after being fired and most believed he would be offered another HC job very soon. I don't see how any longer term commitment was possible from either side. Certainly not one that could be trusted.

Oz wasn't fired from OSU until 3 weeks after UW's season was done. It seems highly likely that Shuchuck was told he would be retained as top assistant before then. And remember, that it's 2013. Since Schuchuk was promoted to top assistant in the wake of the November Butters debacle, the Badgers had the best record in the country at 21-5-5, and several players certainly credited Shuchuk's steady hand in seeing them through to a turn around. And they had a loaded team coming back. So Eaves had just told Shuchuk he was the guy, but then three weeks later he was supposed to go back on his word to Shuchuk (who at that point could certainly be judged to have been successful in his duties) to take a $30k cut in pay and a demotion because Oz was suddenly without a job and available for the next year? (Which is probably ostensibly the same thing as firing him.) I just find that would have been a very, very difficult way to operate the business at the time.

Walsh's job was up for grabs to some extent and was posted. Obviously Oz wasn't going to apply for Walsh's job. So it wasn't Walsh instead of Oz.

Chuck Schwartz
05-07-2015, 01:40 PM
I agree that today it seems a no brainer. But then? I have to disagree it was clear cut at all.

How do you possibly get any assurance from Oz then when there was only one year contracts for assistants? Let alone the fact that his stock was still very high even after being fired and most believed he would be offered another HC job very soon. I don't see how any longer term commitment was possible from either side. Certainly not one that could be trusted.

Oz wasn't fired from OSU until 3 weeks after UW's season was done. It seems highly likely that Shuchuck was told he would be retained as top assistant before then. And remember, that it's 2013. Since Schuchuk was promoted to top assistant in the wake of the November Butters debacle, the Badgers had the best record in the country at 21-5-5, and several players certainly credited Shuchuk's steady hand in seeing them through to a turn around. And they had a loaded team coming back. So Eaves had just told Shuchuk he was the guy, but then three weeks later he was supposed to go back on his word to Shuchuk (who at that point could certainly be judged to have been successful in his duties) to take a $30k cut in pay and a demotion because Oz was suddenly without a job and available for the next year? (Which is probably ostensibly the same thing as firing him.) I just find that would have been a very, very difficult way to operate the business at the time.

Walsh's job was up for grabs to some extent and was posted. Obviously Oz wasn't going to apply for Walsh's job. So it wasn't Walsh instead of Oz.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you're making about a ton of assumptions here.

Wisko McBadgerton
05-07-2015, 01:50 PM
I'm not saying you're wrong, but you're making about a ton of assumptions here.

I agree. But probably not more than a statement that just simply says Eaves hired Walsh over Osiecki does.