May 20, 2025 • 39 mins
Hosts Jim Connelly (@jimmyconnelly), Derek Schooley (@derekschooley), and Ed Trefzger (@EdTrefzger) review news from the AHCA convention and other offseason updates.
They discuss the highlights of the Frozen Four in St. Louis, notably Western Michigan's championship win. They delve into the underdog status of Western Michigan, their impressive post-New Year’s performance, and standout coaching strategies.
Another major topic is the NCAA's shift from the PairWise ranking system to the NCAA Power Index (NPI), aiming to simplify team selections for tournaments. The conversation also touches on the American Hockey Coaches Association Convention, where important updates like reducing the transfer portal window and potential roster limits were discussed.
Additionally, the discussion includes the possibility of NCAA hockey gaining more autonomy and the interest in NCAA coaches for NHL positions.
Lastly, there is a mention of future draft prospects and a nod to the retirements of key figures in college hockey coaching.
They discuss the highlights of the Frozen Four in St. Louis, notably Western Michigan's championship win. They delve into the underdog status of Western Michigan, their impressive post-New Year’s performance, and standout coaching strategies.
Another major topic is the NCAA's shift from the PairWise ranking system to the NCAA Power Index (NPI), aiming to simplify team selections for tournaments. The conversation also touches on the American Hockey Coaches Association Convention, where important updates like reducing the transfer portal window and potential roster limits were discussed.
Additionally, the discussion includes the possibility of NCAA hockey gaining more autonomy and the interest in NCAA coaches for NHL positions.
Lastly, there is a mention of future draft prospects and a nod to the retirements of key figures in college hockey coaching.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Usccho dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Welcome to us Echo Weekend Review. I'm ed Trefsker alongside
Jim Connolly and Derek Schooley, and gentlemen before we dive in.
We haven't talked together since the Frozen Four. We got
some quick thoughts on video right after the game finished
with Western Michigan's championship. Looking back on that, what really
(00:35):
stands out to you from the Frozen Four in Saint Louis.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Yeah, I think Western Michigan maybe was a team that
was overlooked at the start of the season. But as
this season played on and that team gained more experience.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
And kind of chopped up.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
The wins, went on some runs, and we're on some
really good winning streaks. I think they only had one
regular loss after New Year's which is really impressive. You know,
they just were playing really good hockey, and they played
like a championship team. You know, you hear teams that
are build for the postseason. It appeared that Western Michigan
(01:15):
felt like they mentally and on the ice, you know,
on paper, they were built for this postseason, and they
found ways to win close, tight games, two overtime games
in the first round, in the semi Finals, and then
they had in the NCCHC.
Speaker 5 (01:32):
They had to go to overtime to win the NCCHC Championship.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
So obviously coach Brecky and myself were really happy right
after the Frozen Four with our Western alums and really,
quite honestly, everybody keeps telling me, congratulations, I didn't do anything.
I did it in nineteen ninety, but really proud of
their program and proud of the job that Western did
(01:56):
and to be able to have that in my hometown,
have my alma mater win.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
Was pretty cool. But Western was the best team.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
I think we said it going into the tournament that
they were the best team, and the best team won
going into the whole thing.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Okay, can we just take a step back to and
realize that this is yet another national championship for the
nth eighth fee. I mean that ball out in Colorado Springs,
but they list of the ball. They haven't been around
very long. They're going to need another wall. The DISC
Conference is just finding ways to win in the right
time of the year.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
It's impressive.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
I saw a short clip of an interview that Broncos
head coach Pat Furschweiler did with the Hockey Think Tank
podcast talking about coaching, and something that stood out to me,
and that is that he said at the beginning of
the season they sat with each player and talk to
them about what they thought they were capable of, and
then left it in the hands of their peers to
(02:53):
try to push the guys to that level. What I
think stood out for me looking at it at the
end of the season is how many guys on that
team made huge leaps from the previous season.
Speaker 6 (03:07):
You'll hope, oh gosh, you hope that that that's how
it goes, especially as you get older, especially as you
get to go from a freshman year to a sophomore year,
or a junior to a senior.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
And like you said, Jimmy, a lot of guys made
some big jumps and they plugged holes too. They had
a lot of transfers and they came together. Sometimes as
many transfers as they had doesn't work out in this case,
their formula worked out and their culture worked out perfectly.
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Yeah, I mean, I don't have the numbers in front
of me right now, but yeah I had it. When
we were out of the throws and forty. They had
multiple players go from single digit points not just like
double their point, totally go from seven to fourteen. We're
talking like seven to like mid thirties in points. That's
a huge step. But he almost as a head coach, Derek,
(04:00):
and tell me if I'm wrong, But you hope things
like that are happening, but you can't count on that.
Those our massive jumps that you don't typically see. That's
almost to a level of extreme. But it certainly was
something to pay dividends.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Yeah, And those those are things that you look at
you go, Okay, you had ten points. You hope to
get twenty. You wouldn't like go into thirty and go
on from seven to thirty. And like Daniel Levins for
US when we went to our first NCAA tournament, he
had two points, one goal, one assist. Next year he
had forty points. You don't see that very often anymore.
(04:38):
And to be able to do that, the amount of players,
like you said, Jimmy, that did that for Western, that's
why they're national champions.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
We'll talk a little bit more about Pat fur Schweiler
and also David carl the coaches who were considered for
NHL jobs a little bit later on in the podcast,
but let's get to the Coaches Convention, the American Hockey
Coaches Association Convention every May in Bonita Springs, Florida. Derek,
you were at that too, and there was a lot
(05:06):
of news that came out of it. In the biggest
news was that the Men's Division One Ice Hockey Committee
favors using the NPI, the NCAA Power Index to select
the NCAA tournament field going forward. You had an opportunity
to speak to the guy who's the brains behind the
math for that. Maybe you can explain a little bit
(05:27):
about what's going on there.
Speaker 4 (05:29):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Tim Danahy, the name may be familiar to some, not
to all, but what you might associate him with is
the website he used to run College Hockey Stats. One
of the more intelligent mathematical people around the game. But
he's served as consultant to the NCAA in the committee
for a number of years to kind of help put
(05:50):
together what is a sensible selection criteria for the NCAA tournament.
This has been called the pair wise for a long time.
By changing it to the NCAA Power Index, the NPI,
you've changed the name. That's one thing. There are some
tweaks and there are significant tweaks. We're going to see
(06:11):
the elimination of multi criteria.
Speaker 4 (06:13):
The NPI, at the end.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Of the day will deliver one number, and that one
number is all you will need to know in terms
of ranking the teams for our large positions in the
NCAA tournament.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
So we're gonna be You're not.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Gonna have to worry about hearing about common opponent, to
hear about head to head matchups. Those are all taken
into consideration in the NPI. But you know, as Tim
Danahey said, he gave a good example. He said, under
the pair wise, you used to compare every single team
against every other single team in the country, and you
(06:48):
came out with sixty three comparisons for each club winning
that comparison, we get to a point in the pairwise.
Now you look at each of those comparisons and usually
they were pretty sensible. But the we pointed out last
year Princeton from the ECAC was they won their comparison
against Ohio State.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
I'm taking his word for it.
Speaker 3 (07:10):
I didn't looking this up before we got on the air,
but he said, would you say that Princeton was the better.
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Team than Ohio State last year?
Speaker 3 (07:17):
The obvious answer is no, So did this ranking system
kind of unfairly bumped down Ohio State and maybe bump
forward Princeton. So that's I think what the committee, the coaches,
I don't even want to say coaches. I'm going to
say committee because don't I don't want to speak for coaches, Derek.
But what they want to try to simplify is just
(07:38):
you know, eliminating the the one team can have their
entire tournament fate switched because of a single game, you know,
ahead to head game that changes one matchup. You just
won't have those extreme flips that we've had over the
course of the lights of the pair Wise NPI.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
I think simplifies things. But in the end of the day,
at the end of the day, I guess I should say.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I still feel like this is going to feel like
the pair Wise when all is said and downe, just.
Speaker 4 (08:08):
With a new name.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Yeah, I think people are going to keep continue to
call it at pair wise. They basically we've been told
it's better math, and that's what the whole thing goes.
There's still a lot to be determined. This is just
they're going to use it. They're determinate. Coaches had questions.
We discussed it in our league meetings. First time in
(08:31):
Benita Springs, coming from Naples all the years. It's a
little bit north of Naples, south of Fort Myers. Beautiful
property that we're at, but this was this was probably
one of the bigger things that we talked about during
this convention as far as a national every league goes
in and they.
Speaker 5 (08:49):
Have some league issues they have to deal with.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
You meet as a league for a couple of days,
then you come to the national floor and then talk
about things on the national level.
Speaker 5 (08:57):
But the NPI, it didn't sound like it was even
up for discussion.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
It sounded like they were doing this and they just
need people's input on the dials and where everything's going
to be put together, on how much percentage goes into
home wins versus road wins. I think the biggest fault
in the wise, and I don't know the numbers, you
got more credit for losing an overtime game on the
(09:26):
road than the home team got for winning the overtime game,
and that was one of the reasons that there was
a problem with the shift of that. So I think
that they're going to meet with the coaches again talk
about where they're going. I believe they're in the NCAA
meetings right now, or maybe it was earlier this week,
(09:46):
the committee meetings, and they're going to meet with the
coaches talk about the dials, and their goal is to
have this all to the coaches finalized by the start
of the season, they said, end of August.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Really we talk about the dials. There are a lot
of parameters that can be changed. And let me preface
that by saying, if you've seen published from one of
the various outlets anything that says this is what it
would have looked like last year, that is not necessarily true.
It's probably not true because they haven't decided what these dials.
(10:20):
These parameters are going to be, and there's a bunch
of them. One of them is how much is your
winning percentage and how much is your strength of schedule?
That could vary. They're going to be quality win bonuses.
What's the multiplier? What level do you start getting a bonus?
There's going to be a multiplier for home in a way,
and from what we've been told, that could even differ
(10:42):
between conference games, non conference games, and conference postseason games.
They've also got to decide how to count an overtime
win and a loss. You mentioned about losing on the
road being worth more. At first it was fifty five
forty five for the split. Then they went to basically
sixty seven thirty three. How that shakes out is another thing.
(11:05):
So I have to think that they're going to present
some things and maybe look at what it would have
looked like last year.
Speaker 5 (11:11):
But there's a lot of stuff to fiddle with there.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
And I know that at us ECHO we've been running
an NPI for D one women and for D three
men and women, and so whatever numbers, whatever parameters they
come up with, we're going to be able to plug
in and do and have something to publish. But it
should leave not much up to question. When you see
(11:34):
that that number, it's the number, and that's what it is.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
You know, the funny thing you talk You threw that
out there. Sorry Jimmy, But right now there's a little
bit of rumblings from the coaching body to go back
to five on five overtime, just a little bit something
to pay attention. It's not a rule change year, but
this could be something moving forward that there are some
people that feel that we don't play enough games for
(12:01):
the three on three overtime and the overtime they call
it is a gimmick. You play a five on five
overtime and if it's tied, you go to a shootout,
and that's where it is. There is a little bit
of rumblings about that something to be aware of.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
So if you go to a five on five overtime,
any thought on that maybe being ten minutes so that
maybe you have enough time to settle it or is
it a case of what we see with overtimes, especially
in the playoffs a lot of times it happens in
the first couple of minutes.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
I don't know. I'm not even getting into this.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
This is all this is so you know high the
sky that we're going to go back to five on
five overtime.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
That's that's maybe something that's in there.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
Who cares, like, just just play and play and figure
out like every both teams are on the ice and
get it that coaches don't like losing. But you can't
protect yourself by losing by changing the parameters of the
game continuously until you get it the way you like.
I know that that there's something to be said for this.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
Not enough games play, but how many games than not.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
Do you have to play exactly eighty two or if
it's sixty eight, is that enough day? And I know
that thirty four isn't going to get you there, But
I do feel there's so much tinkering with a sport
that in one of a healthier state. I just I
never understand why there's always so much tinkering.
Speaker 1 (13:21):
See, I just threw you a complete curve ball. By
throwing that in, you had no idea that was coming.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
I did you.
Speaker 5 (13:26):
It goes on a ramp.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
I love it, which, well, you know you talk about tinkering.
That's what this NPI is supposed to stop. Although there'll
be turning dials from year to year. I'm sure just leave.
They've turned dials and added and taken out criteria in
the pair wise and the RPI over the years.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
Yeah, it doesn't stop that. You're still going to have
tons of tweaking. And when this team doesn't make it
and they were eliminated, so now we won't have you know,
one ten thousandth of a percentage point to now it'll
be like a tenth of a percentage point of one
hundred third percentage point. But the team that gets left
out by the one hundred thir percentage point, they're going
(14:08):
to find a way to complain and they'll want these
criteria tweets so that they could have made it. It's
it's it's an evil pattern that you always want to
perfect the system to favor you, and that's exactly what
easially happened in these types of situation.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
One good thing that came out of the playoffs this
year in the NCAA that they were happy about is
increased TV numbers. Just under six hundred thousand viewers watched
the game between Western Michigan and bu for the national championship.
That's up thirty percent from last year, but still over
forty percent down from the twenty twenty three game.
Speaker 5 (14:45):
And regional attendance.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
There's been a drum beating again as it does postseason
every year about going to on campus sites. But the
regional attendance was eighty four thousand and seven forty four,
which is the highest in the last four years. So
it was only helped by a host in one regional
and that's Penn State. And there were some good numbers
(15:08):
in the Thursday night UMass Minnesota game that had almost
one hundred and forty thousand viewers. So those are all
good numbers and good things for the sport.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
I think they're excellent things for the sport, and I
do want to go back to and I know I
threw it in the rundown that you know, this year's
game was still forty percent below the twenty twenty three
championship game. That Minnesota Quinnipiac National championship game, I believe
was the highest rated all time.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
That's a very high bar to try to get back to.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
But in you know, great numbers TV, and I think
the I think that we should every year be hearing
less and less about going to campus sites because attendance
at the region a lot couple of years has been
pretty strong. This year this is one of the strongest
regional attendance heres that I remember. And you know, I
(15:58):
was in Manchester, great atmosphere in that building for all
of the game. I's a really overthive building I think
for that event. But walking on TV, every building looked
like it had a good crowd, good electric atmosphere. So
I feel like I get that there's a fashion that
really wants to get the campus sites not always the
(16:18):
logistically the best solution, and I don't think that their
case is held by strong regional attendance this season.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Well, David Carl, imagine this, brought it up to Charlie Baker,
the president of the NCAA, who was spoke to the coaches,
who was a massive hockey fan. By the way, he
knew that Hobart had won three straight national championships. He
talked about hockey and no one watching Joe Britannia play
(16:47):
way back when. But David Carl brought it up to
Charlie Baker and he goes, well, it sounds like a
good idea of me. And then Steve Metcalf got up
and went the other way of why we need to
play regional regional sites. So yeah, there's the You would
think that would go away. Just like you talked about the.
Speaker 5 (17:08):
Five on five going away. It's not going to go
away because people keep bringing it up.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
It will get talked about a lot.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
And by the way, I want to give a credit
to Charlie Baker, former Massachusetts governor. I'm very familiar with him.
He's done a very good job. I think leading the
nc double A dre the most challenging time it's ever
been through.
Speaker 4 (17:31):
But to go down and kind of face the music,
face the coaches.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
I think that's exactly what a president of the NCAA
should be doing. Listen, that's a guy who was elected
governor in Massachusetts and very blue state as a Republican.
He was elected governor handily in a landslide. So he
knows how to win people and influence people. He can
(17:55):
win the room, and he knows what he's doing. I
think that his presence though down up Springs, that was
a good positive, I think to the ice hockey body.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
But we're going to take a break there and come
back more from the Coach's Convention and NCAA issues when
the US Echo Weekend Review continues. We're back with US
(18:28):
Echo Weekend Review. One of the things that coaches voted
on at the convention is shortening the window in which
players can enter the transfer portal. Right now, it's forty
five days. In fact, it just ended on May thirteenth
for this year. Coaches voted to have that go to
thirty days. What's the thinking behind that, Derek, And how
(18:51):
would that benefit everybody possibly by going to thirty days?
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Well, basketball and football have already done it, so we're
just kind of following the lead of basketball and football. Really,
the reason that we're talking about doing it is the
fact of you want to have it right when the
regionals probably start or end, where it only really affects
four teams, the teams that make the Frozen four.
Speaker 5 (19:16):
Right now.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It starts a little bit earlier, so it affects a
few more than what we would like. But also the
bigger thing is people get when they're on campus, you
really like where you're at, you like your feeling of campus,
and then you go home and you're away from campus,
and then other people get in your head and they
(19:37):
want a lot of the coaches really want people to
make those decisions while they're on campus because or have
to face the music while they're on campus as well.
So there's a lot of different factors behind it. But
forty five days is a long time. I don't think
I thought there was like three people maybe in the
last week that went in the transfer portal.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
If you're going to go in, you're gonna go by now,
you're going to go in right off the bat, and
you very rarely see people going at the end.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
So shortening it, I mean, obviously you can still take
people out of the transfer portal. They can still go
to different schools, it's just you can't enter the portal.
Speaker 5 (20:14):
And I think that makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
I think you nailed that, Derek. Thirty day is plenty
make your decision. I think the players have plenty of
control in this situation right now, So to take back
a little bit, if you're the coach, is to take
back a little bit of control.
Speaker 4 (20:32):
Nothing wrong with that, I think.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
You know, I think we've said I think basketball and
football they've already done this.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
They've throwed in the window.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
But I think what you pointed out there, Derek, you know,
making sure that the window doesn't start until after the
regionals is over a critical I think you put teams
in an unfair position. The four teams in the frozen four,
so they get in, they might feel like they get
behind the eight ball a little in the portal, but
(21:01):
they've also just reached the troth and for I don't
have as much sympathy for them, but I do kind
of sympathize that the other sixty teams should kind of
you see the portal starting at the same time, it
shouldn't be during this tournament. During that tournament, you could
have kids in concept entering during a league tournament.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
So I think that this makes tons of times.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
I hope this goes through, but I think it's the
most sensible approach to the portal.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Now we're still waiting for some final results from the
House versus NCAA settlement. One of the things the judge
did was send things back and say what about grandfathering
and players on programs that are going to cut rosters,
And it seems like hockey is in a different situation
than some other sports where they actually are having some
(21:52):
rosters grow.
Speaker 5 (21:54):
The number that has been.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Has been used as a roster limit of twenty six,
and Derek, we've talked about that a lot. That's something
that a lot of coaches don't like because it doesn't
leave you a lot of room, especially when you get
to goalie injuries. But it seems like coaches are assuming
there are not going to be limits coming up for
this coming season.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
Well, if you read everything, and I've followed it pretty closely,
because obviously worse we had to decrease to twenty six.
Our school is planning on opting in and we had
a decrease. I think what everybody's kind of looking at
doing is, and we still don't know because they're going
back and forth with different briefs. Everything looks to be
(22:38):
grandfathering the current players in and cycling it out. I
have no problem with the twenty six I just have
a problem with the way it was implemented to have
to immediately go right to it. If we can bring
it at a slower pace, and if every player is
counts as what they're calling a DSA designated student fleet
(23:00):
that they don't count their grandfathered in or their exempt
I think that that's a good way to go, and
I don't it would affect a whole bunch of players
in the sport, and quite honestly, I hope we stay
at twenty eight. I think what you're going to see
(23:20):
is you're going to see some teams at twenty six
right now that will increase their roster up to twenty
eight or twenty nine, and then gradually after work its
way back down.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
This is a sensible approach. I think I don't even
know what the approach is though right now. Derek, that's
the big problem. You're getting too close to next season
to potentially have this impact next season. And I'm speaking
as an outsider you're a coach, you're living in I
don't think as a coach, you want to be in
(23:52):
a position where you're thinking, boy, what if I have
to what if I have to cut? You want to
know today what next season looks like? Last season in
the past, So let's look to next season. I want
to see this applied practically. I think that this will
even if this is put in place accepted, I think
(24:15):
there's going to be room to change within a couple
of years because they'll be enough evidence that this is bad,
this is working, this isn't hold.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
So I think that that's a big part.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
And I don't know Derek, in any of the conversations
that were had down on Benita Springs. Isn't that flexibility
there that if we put these limitations in, can we
change them in a few years.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
You didn't even discuss it, quite honestly, because it's way way,
way above our pay grade. I think that people don't
People don't want it. Some will some carry twenty six,
some want to go a little bit higher. Some aren't
going to opt in. But I think the feeling is
eventually you're going to have to follow their rules. You
may not opt in now, but eventually, the Power for Conferences,
(24:58):
they're going to have sixty five percent of the voting
power in the NCAA and you're eventually going to have
to follow their rules at some point. So we're going
to have to work our way down and hope that
somebody with some that's a part of the Power for
sees that hockey is not at the right number eventually.
So it wasn't even discussed because this is something that
(25:21):
we can't really control. But you follow it and you
read it, and the way it's being read and the
way everybody's talking about right now is that it will
there will be some sort of grandfathering going on.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
But Derek, when you're looking at coaches right now, are
coaches doing this with the assumption that this season there
will be no limitation or do you feel like I mean,
you're you're operating yourself?
Speaker 4 (25:46):
How are you operating right now?
Speaker 5 (25:48):
Right now?
Speaker 1 (25:48):
I think that there's going to be some form of
grandfathering in. I'm not sure what, I'm not sure how,
But everything I've been told, I've talked to other coaches
at Power for schools that they're probably going to be
some sort of grandfathering in And I read the briefs
every day and.
Speaker 5 (26:06):
They're going to be.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
It'll be an interesting next couple of weeks, but I
think it's going to eventually come through. I thought for
a long time that we were going to be a
twenty six, and it changed quickly.
Speaker 5 (26:19):
So, Derek, I understand.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
One other thing that was brought up by NCAA President
Charlie Baker and his talk with all of you news
that there may come some more independence or more flexibility
within the sports separate from the NCAA hierarchy in general.
Speaker 5 (26:37):
Is there something going on with that.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
He talked about a new governance structure and some autonomy
for each sport, but didn't really go into much. He said,
you're going to find out a lot more over the
next coming weeks. It's like it's like a wait and see.
It was really neat that he was involved with us.
It was a ninety minute conversation. He was supposed to
be there in person, but he had a death in
(26:59):
his family, so he was there via zoom and there
were questions thrown. There was a panel of guy Getowski
was on. The panel was moderated by the Commission of
the Big Ten in charge of hockey, Adam I think
that there was a lot of good things going on,
but it's all kind of a wait and see. Once
(27:20):
the House settlement passes or gets approved, then you're going
to see a lot more happen.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
I feel like if hockey does get a time of me,
I'll believe it. Won't see it talked about. It's been
talked about a lot now. We if it happens, wonderful.
It certainly is the sport that deserved it. But I'll
believe it when I see it.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Two of the commissioners who've been pushing it for years
have been retired for a while now, so you can
tell how far back it goes. Now. Look, we mentioned
this earlier on a lot of talk about NCAA coaches
being sought for NHL jobs, and two of them that
came up were two very successful coaches, David Carl at
Denver and Pat Firschweiler at Western Michigan. Carl was very
(28:04):
public about withdrawing his name from being in the running
for the Chicago Blackhawks job, and the University of Denver
gave him what sounds like a really really nice contract extension.
I meanwhile, Pat Firschweiler, there's a poison pill attached to
his contract that has been made known in the press
(28:25):
a two point three million dollar buyout, which even for
an NHL club is a pretty big chunk of change.
Speaker 5 (28:32):
So what would these guys. Let's talk with David.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
About David carl First, He's made it very clear, with
a young family and a great situation in Denver, he's
in no rush.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
You know, when I look at this and I sit
there and with David Carl particularly, I wonder how much he,
you know, wanted to make sure he got an interview
or multiple injuews this year so that he could leverage
it for a better content than obviously he got a
great contract. The Pat First Wilder situation that I think
(29:04):
is becoming a more common approach in collegiate athletics to
build in some clause that if you leave early in
your contract that the student the university will get some
sort of financial renumeration. So it does make it a
situation that makes it a little harder for NHL teams
to go after these NCAA coaches. We're seeing more coaches
(29:28):
get chances though, you know, Jim Montgomery, Death Lashel, David Quinn.
I'm missing a bunch of schools throw it a couple
more names, and a lot of guys are in and
around the league that have been there.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
In a lot of ten years.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
When the NCAA ranks the money very attractive.
Speaker 4 (29:47):
I've always said it the job security not.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
And that's I think what it comes down to is.
Speaker 1 (29:51):
I also think David might have been involved in anah
I'm a little bit too from what I've read, but
we had heard that the Frozen four about the the
Pat Firschweiler buyout. I think I told you that right
after the championship. It it's no secret Pat Firstwhiler to
play with Keith Jones. Keith Jones as the president of
the Flyers. I think he had a conversation or two
(30:14):
with him where I was lucky enough to go to
that there was a Western alum down in Benita Springs
that that has involved in a really neat new restaurant.
He had a thing for Western alums. We had Frank
Seratri there who went to Western, John Bernie Saunders, John
Saunder's brother was there from ESPN, and there were a
(30:38):
lot of people there. But I think it was more
of a Pat just had a conversation with Philadelphia, and
I think that does play into the fact two point
three two point four million dollars whatever it is, that's
a lot of money to buy out a coach.
Speaker 5 (30:52):
When I when I.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
Look at it schools, the only thing that ever is
attracted is the money, right, maybe not. I mean, people
do want to coach the NHL, but you know, I
know that there playing at the NHL.
Speaker 5 (31:05):
I'm sor the coaching goes into that too.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
But you can do the math pretty quick if you say,
let's just use three point five million for a number,
how many years If that's one year contact in the NHL,
how many years of college is unique or five NHL season?
You know it might be twenty five years it takes
to get to that number if you're a well paid
college code.
Speaker 4 (31:27):
So that's what always I think is the most attractive part.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
But I think that that's alf of the scariest part two,
because you know that you're getting this money but losing
so much security. I'm glad to see college coaches wanting
to find reasons to stay in the college game.
Speaker 4 (31:45):
There's there's some things right about our sport that we have.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
These relationships with these great coaches and we don't we
don't want to lose them. When you have those personalities,
you don't want to lose them to the next level.
Speaker 1 (31:58):
I mean, you just throughout three point five million dollars
as a coach in the NHL. I don't know if
we I haven't heard of any coaches yet getting into
the million dollar range in college hockey. So at the
very worst, you're getting a three for one, at very worst,
three for one, maybe even four for one.
Speaker 5 (32:17):
Potentially that's at money and coaching in the NHL.
Speaker 2 (32:20):
And knowing that you're going to be there maybe two
and a half years if you're lucky. The way they
change things, well, once you get into the whole roulette
wheel there, I mean, it's like other things. It's like
baseball managers. You mess up at one place, they hire
you another. You know, a guy like Gene Mack had
a great, mediocre career managing a whole bunch of baseball teams,
(32:44):
and you know, I guess that's just the way it works.
So once you get into the cycle, then maybe you're set.
But are there some other things for us to watch
this summer before we wrap up NHL Draft? A couple
of current college players are showing a high on prospect
list James Hagens from Boston College, Logan Hensley from Wisconsin
(33:07):
or among those, and certainly some juniors players, some national
team development program players that are in that mix. That's
always fun to watch.
Speaker 4 (33:18):
You know.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
Hagens is very interesting. He was predicted a season ago
to be the number one overall pick and it seemed consensus. Say,
let's say back in September play the season at Boston
College was good but not great, and he slipped. Now
he's kind of penciled at the top five. Meat he
could even slip.
Speaker 5 (33:39):
Out of that.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
He'll still go very high. He's still going to make
great money.
Speaker 3 (33:41):
That they're a big difference between being maclin Fellow Brini
Loft to the overall number one pick and being you know,
five six seven, So that'll be interesting to watch.
Speaker 4 (33:52):
I'm also interested.
Speaker 7 (33:53):
You know.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
It used to be when I'd look at the draft,
I would just cross out all of the CHL players
because they were never playing hockey. Now I'm kind of
interested in some of these CHL players who are highly
rated because of the fact that they could make a
decision at any point to change their commit and.
Speaker 4 (34:09):
Go to college.
Speaker 5 (34:09):
Things that I would be looking at.
Speaker 1 (34:11):
I think the house settlement obviously, I think you're going
to see I think there are a lot of players
out there that are committed from major junior that aren't
going to see where they get drafted first deciding if
they're going to come to college, or not talking to
their NHL teams. I still think there's a pocket of
(34:31):
people that are out there that might.
Speaker 5 (34:33):
Be doing that.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
I think you're going to see some surprises that are
going to come to college hockey. You're already seeing some
top ones going to Michigan or some of the Big
ten schools. I still think there's a lot more play
recruiting wise. I think that's right now upwards of like
one hundred and thirty committed CHL players to colleges. I
(34:56):
think you're going to probably see a good number more
potentially after draft, depending where kids get drafted. That's something
to watch, and still the house settlements are going to
be still something that everybody and all sports need to watch.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Is it possible we'll see a significant number of players
from the CHL not be able to get into college
because they weren't planning on it academically.
Speaker 5 (35:21):
That's possible. We've already dealt with a couple that.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
We've talked to eventually that did not have the right
grades and there's no way to go about it. All
from the NCAA Eligibility Center went and spoke to all
the teams at in all the league meetings and answered
questions about this.
Speaker 5 (35:43):
So I think that there's a lot.
Speaker 1 (35:44):
I think one of the things that you're also going
to see is you're going to see some guys that
played some games of professional hockey playing college hockey, whether
they signed an ATO or a PTO where they didn't
get paid above actual and necessary expenses. You might see
guys that have played three to four games in the
East Coast League or three to four games in the
(36:04):
American back in college hockey. I think that's going to
be something that people are going to have to really
wrap their head around a little bit.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
No more coaching vacancies unless somebody decides late in the
summer to retire or those have all been filled fairly quickly.
Speaker 5 (36:19):
There's always one anything, There's always one.
Speaker 1 (36:23):
I don't know who it is, but there's always one
out there that pops in late. And I think you're
seeing the coach in waiting right now a little bit
because you don't want to lose players to the transfer
portal and trying to find out ways to do it.
I mean, obviously, Ed, I told you all year, watch
what's going on at RIT, and you kept saying nope, nope, nope,
(36:44):
and I kept saying watch out.
Speaker 5 (36:47):
And who was right?
Speaker 2 (36:49):
Yeah, Like I told you you, college hockey coaches spread
rumors like seventh grade girls. So I guess I should
believe you next time you've got a juicy rumor. And
I told a few coaches that too, and most of
them laughed and agreed.
Speaker 5 (37:07):
So what do you can do?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
You know the funny thing about that, And I think
that's the way you're seeing it. You're seeing the coach
and waiting, and you're seeing a private kind of private
higher I mean, RIT basically at the end of the
day waited until they had another coach so that there
was not a mass exodus of players and they're still
the Boston two players after that with a new coach.
Speaker 5 (37:31):
So I think that there's a.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
Right now you may see one more, but then that
opens up a thirty day window for people to go
in the transfer portal if somebody, if somebody leaves.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
Yeah, I think the players that left were going to
be leaving anyway. I don't think the coaching change they
impacted that probably at all in that situation, but certainly
that is the concern. And I mean at Mercy Hurst
you already have a coach with the title on their
website head coach in waiting. He literally is the title
(38:03):
on the website. So in waiting is correct, it doesn't
say air apparent.
Speaker 5 (38:09):
We've lost six good coaches to retirement this year throughout
college hockey, and six outstanding people. I was fortunate enough
to work for Mike Shaeffer.
Speaker 1 (38:21):
He had a little get together and Bena Springs with
all the people that worked for him. You had, you
had Mike Shafer, you had Jeff Jackson, Brian Riley, who
else I mean missing George Roll retired former Clarkson coach,
has four? Who else I'm missing here Wayne, that's five
and Ja Bob Daniels.
Speaker 2 (38:43):
Bob Daniels. So we got seven if we throw in
Jack Arena after forty two years in Division three.
Speaker 7 (38:50):
Yeah, you know, I mean there's Rick Rick will go
next year, Rick Godkins. I mean it's it's it's changing
the guard, the old guard is. I'm going to be fortunate.
I'll probably we'll get brock Shean at Notre Dame this year,
at a very early stage in his head coaching career,
(39:11):
so hopefully he gets a win before he plays us.
Speaker 5 (39:14):
Well.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
With that, we'll wrap up this special spring edition. I
guess we'll call it a spring edition of Weekend Review.
Maybe we'll hop on later in the summer if there's
enough news. If not, we'll see you back here in
the fall. For Jim Connelly, for Derek Schooley. I'm Ed
Trevsker and this has been us e h O Weekend Review.
Usccho dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Welcome to us Echo Weekend Review. I'm ed Trefsker alongside
Jim Connolly and Derek Schooley, and gentlemen before we dive in.
We haven't talked together since the Frozen Four. We got
some quick thoughts on video right after the game finished
with Western Michigan's championship. Looking back on that, what really
(00:35):
stands out to you from the Frozen Four in Saint Louis.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Yeah, I think Western Michigan maybe was a team that
was overlooked at the start of the season. But as
this season played on and that team gained more experience.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
And kind of chopped up.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
The wins, went on some runs, and we're on some
really good winning streaks. I think they only had one
regular loss after New Year's which is really impressive. You know,
they just were playing really good hockey, and they played
like a championship team. You know, you hear teams that
are build for the postseason. It appeared that Western Michigan
(01:15):
felt like they mentally and on the ice, you know,
on paper, they were built for this postseason, and they
found ways to win close, tight games, two overtime games
in the first round, in the semi Finals, and then
they had in the NCCHC.
Speaker 5 (01:32):
They had to go to overtime to win the NCCHC Championship.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
So obviously coach Brecky and myself were really happy right
after the Frozen Four with our Western alums and really,
quite honestly, everybody keeps telling me, congratulations, I didn't do anything.
I did it in nineteen ninety, but really proud of
their program and proud of the job that Western did
(01:56):
and to be able to have that in my hometown,
have my alma mater win.
Speaker 5 (02:01):
Was pretty cool. But Western was the best team.
Speaker 1 (02:04):
I think we said it going into the tournament that
they were the best team, and the best team won
going into the whole thing.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Okay, can we just take a step back to and
realize that this is yet another national championship for the
nth eighth fee. I mean that ball out in Colorado Springs,
but they list of the ball. They haven't been around
very long. They're going to need another wall. The DISC
Conference is just finding ways to win in the right
time of the year.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
It's impressive.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
I saw a short clip of an interview that Broncos
head coach Pat Furschweiler did with the Hockey Think Tank
podcast talking about coaching, and something that stood out to me,
and that is that he said at the beginning of
the season they sat with each player and talk to
them about what they thought they were capable of, and
then left it in the hands of their peers to
(02:53):
try to push the guys to that level. What I
think stood out for me looking at it at the
end of the season is how many guys on that
team made huge leaps from the previous season.
Speaker 6 (03:07):
You'll hope, oh gosh, you hope that that that's how
it goes, especially as you get older, especially as you
get to go from a freshman year to a sophomore year,
or a junior to a senior.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
And like you said, Jimmy, a lot of guys made
some big jumps and they plugged holes too. They had
a lot of transfers and they came together. Sometimes as
many transfers as they had doesn't work out in this case,
their formula worked out and their culture worked out perfectly.
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Yeah, I mean, I don't have the numbers in front
of me right now, but yeah I had it. When
we were out of the throws and forty. They had
multiple players go from single digit points not just like
double their point, totally go from seven to fourteen. We're
talking like seven to like mid thirties in points. That's
a huge step. But he almost as a head coach, Derek,
(04:00):
and tell me if I'm wrong, But you hope things
like that are happening, but you can't count on that.
Those our massive jumps that you don't typically see. That's
almost to a level of extreme. But it certainly was
something to pay dividends.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Yeah, And those those are things that you look at
you go, Okay, you had ten points. You hope to
get twenty. You wouldn't like go into thirty and go
on from seven to thirty. And like Daniel Levins for
US when we went to our first NCAA tournament, he
had two points, one goal, one assist. Next year he
had forty points. You don't see that very often anymore.
(04:38):
And to be able to do that, the amount of players,
like you said, Jimmy, that did that for Western, that's
why they're national champions.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
We'll talk a little bit more about Pat fur Schweiler
and also David carl the coaches who were considered for
NHL jobs a little bit later on in the podcast,
but let's get to the Coaches Convention, the American Hockey
Coaches Association Convention every May in Bonita Springs, Florida. Derek,
you were at that too, and there was a lot
(05:06):
of news that came out of it. In the biggest
news was that the Men's Division One Ice Hockey Committee
favors using the NPI, the NCAA Power Index to select
the NCAA tournament field going forward. You had an opportunity
to speak to the guy who's the brains behind the
math for that. Maybe you can explain a little bit
(05:27):
about what's going on there.
Speaker 4 (05:29):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Tim Danahy, the name may be familiar to some, not
to all, but what you might associate him with is
the website he used to run College Hockey Stats. One
of the more intelligent mathematical people around the game. But
he's served as consultant to the NCAA in the committee
for a number of years to kind of help put
(05:50):
together what is a sensible selection criteria for the NCAA tournament.
This has been called the pair wise for a long time.
By changing it to the NCAA Power Index, the NPI,
you've changed the name. That's one thing. There are some
tweaks and there are significant tweaks. We're going to see
(06:11):
the elimination of multi criteria.
Speaker 4 (06:13):
The NPI, at the end.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Of the day will deliver one number, and that one
number is all you will need to know in terms
of ranking the teams for our large positions in the
NCAA tournament.
Speaker 4 (06:25):
So we're gonna be You're not.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
Gonna have to worry about hearing about common opponent, to
hear about head to head matchups. Those are all taken
into consideration in the NPI. But you know, as Tim
Danahey said, he gave a good example. He said, under
the pair wise, you used to compare every single team
against every other single team in the country, and you
(06:48):
came out with sixty three comparisons for each club winning
that comparison, we get to a point in the pairwise.
Now you look at each of those comparisons and usually
they were pretty sensible. But the we pointed out last
year Princeton from the ECAC was they won their comparison
against Ohio State.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
I'm taking his word for it.
Speaker 3 (07:10):
I didn't looking this up before we got on the air,
but he said, would you say that Princeton was the better.
Speaker 4 (07:15):
Team than Ohio State last year?
Speaker 3 (07:17):
The obvious answer is no, So did this ranking system
kind of unfairly bumped down Ohio State and maybe bump
forward Princeton. So that's I think what the committee, the coaches,
I don't even want to say coaches. I'm going to
say committee because don't I don't want to speak for coaches, Derek.
But what they want to try to simplify is just
(07:38):
you know, eliminating the the one team can have their
entire tournament fate switched because of a single game, you know,
ahead to head game that changes one matchup. You just
won't have those extreme flips that we've had over the
course of the lights of the pair Wise NPI.
Speaker 4 (07:58):
I think simplifies things. But in the end of the day,
at the end of the day, I guess I should say.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
I still feel like this is going to feel like
the pair Wise when all is said and downe, just.
Speaker 4 (08:08):
With a new name.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Yeah, I think people are going to keep continue to
call it at pair wise. They basically we've been told
it's better math, and that's what the whole thing goes.
There's still a lot to be determined. This is just
they're going to use it. They're determinate. Coaches had questions.
We discussed it in our league meetings. First time in
(08:31):
Benita Springs, coming from Naples all the years. It's a
little bit north of Naples, south of Fort Myers. Beautiful
property that we're at, but this was this was probably
one of the bigger things that we talked about during
this convention as far as a national every league goes
in and they.
Speaker 5 (08:49):
Have some league issues they have to deal with.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
You meet as a league for a couple of days,
then you come to the national floor and then talk
about things on the national level.
Speaker 5 (08:57):
But the NPI, it didn't sound like it was even
up for discussion.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
It sounded like they were doing this and they just
need people's input on the dials and where everything's going
to be put together, on how much percentage goes into
home wins versus road wins. I think the biggest fault
in the wise, and I don't know the numbers, you
got more credit for losing an overtime game on the
(09:26):
road than the home team got for winning the overtime game,
and that was one of the reasons that there was
a problem with the shift of that. So I think
that they're going to meet with the coaches again talk
about where they're going. I believe they're in the NCAA
meetings right now, or maybe it was earlier this week,
(09:46):
the committee meetings, and they're going to meet with the
coaches talk about the dials, and their goal is to
have this all to the coaches finalized by the start
of the season, they said, end of August.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Really we talk about the dials. There are a lot
of parameters that can be changed. And let me preface
that by saying, if you've seen published from one of
the various outlets anything that says this is what it
would have looked like last year, that is not necessarily true.
It's probably not true because they haven't decided what these dials.
(10:20):
These parameters are going to be, and there's a bunch
of them. One of them is how much is your
winning percentage and how much is your strength of schedule?
That could vary. They're going to be quality win bonuses.
What's the multiplier? What level do you start getting a bonus?
There's going to be a multiplier for home in a way,
and from what we've been told, that could even differ
(10:42):
between conference games, non conference games, and conference postseason games.
They've also got to decide how to count an overtime
win and a loss. You mentioned about losing on the
road being worth more. At first it was fifty five
forty five for the split. Then they went to basically
sixty seven thirty three. How that shakes out is another thing.
(11:05):
So I have to think that they're going to present
some things and maybe look at what it would have
looked like last year.
Speaker 5 (11:11):
But there's a lot of stuff to fiddle with there.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
And I know that at us ECHO we've been running
an NPI for D one women and for D three
men and women, and so whatever numbers, whatever parameters they
come up with, we're going to be able to plug
in and do and have something to publish. But it
should leave not much up to question. When you see
(11:34):
that that number, it's the number, and that's what it is.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
You know, the funny thing you talk You threw that
out there. Sorry Jimmy, But right now there's a little
bit of rumblings from the coaching body to go back
to five on five overtime, just a little bit something
to pay attention. It's not a rule change year, but
this could be something moving forward that there are some
people that feel that we don't play enough games for
(12:01):
the three on three overtime and the overtime they call
it is a gimmick. You play a five on five
overtime and if it's tied, you go to a shootout,
and that's where it is. There is a little bit
of rumblings about that something to be aware of.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
So if you go to a five on five overtime,
any thought on that maybe being ten minutes so that
maybe you have enough time to settle it or is
it a case of what we see with overtimes, especially
in the playoffs a lot of times it happens in
the first couple of minutes.
Speaker 4 (12:30):
I don't know. I'm not even getting into this.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
This is all this is so you know high the
sky that we're going to go back to five on
five overtime.
Speaker 4 (12:38):
That's that's maybe something that's in there.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
Who cares, like, just just play and play and figure
out like every both teams are on the ice and
get it that coaches don't like losing. But you can't
protect yourself by losing by changing the parameters of the
game continuously until you get it the way you like.
I know that that there's something to be said for this.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
Not enough games play, but how many games than not.
Speaker 3 (13:01):
Do you have to play exactly eighty two or if
it's sixty eight, is that enough day? And I know
that thirty four isn't going to get you there, But
I do feel there's so much tinkering with a sport
that in one of a healthier state. I just I
never understand why there's always so much tinkering.
Speaker 1 (13:21):
See, I just threw you a complete curve ball. By
throwing that in, you had no idea that was coming.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
I did you.
Speaker 5 (13:26):
It goes on a ramp.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
I love it, which, well, you know you talk about tinkering.
That's what this NPI is supposed to stop. Although there'll
be turning dials from year to year. I'm sure just leave.
They've turned dials and added and taken out criteria in
the pair wise and the RPI over the years.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
Yeah, it doesn't stop that. You're still going to have
tons of tweaking. And when this team doesn't make it
and they were eliminated, so now we won't have you know,
one ten thousandth of a percentage point to now it'll
be like a tenth of a percentage point of one
hundred third percentage point. But the team that gets left
out by the one hundred thir percentage point, they're going
(14:08):
to find a way to complain and they'll want these
criteria tweets so that they could have made it. It's
it's it's an evil pattern that you always want to
perfect the system to favor you, and that's exactly what
easially happened in these types of situation.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
One good thing that came out of the playoffs this
year in the NCAA that they were happy about is
increased TV numbers. Just under six hundred thousand viewers watched
the game between Western Michigan and bu for the national championship.
That's up thirty percent from last year, but still over
forty percent down from the twenty twenty three game.
Speaker 5 (14:45):
And regional attendance.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
There's been a drum beating again as it does postseason
every year about going to on campus sites. But the
regional attendance was eighty four thousand and seven forty four,
which is the highest in the last four years. So
it was only helped by a host in one regional
and that's Penn State. And there were some good numbers
(15:08):
in the Thursday night UMass Minnesota game that had almost
one hundred and forty thousand viewers. So those are all
good numbers and good things for the sport.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
I think they're excellent things for the sport, and I
do want to go back to and I know I
threw it in the rundown that you know, this year's
game was still forty percent below the twenty twenty three
championship game. That Minnesota Quinnipiac National championship game, I believe
was the highest rated all time.
Speaker 4 (15:34):
That's a very high bar to try to get back to.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
But in you know, great numbers TV, and I think
the I think that we should every year be hearing
less and less about going to campus sites because attendance
at the region a lot couple of years has been
pretty strong. This year this is one of the strongest
regional attendance heres that I remember. And you know, I
(15:58):
was in Manchester, great atmosphere in that building for all
of the game. I's a really overthive building I think
for that event. But walking on TV, every building looked
like it had a good crowd, good electric atmosphere. So
I feel like I get that there's a fashion that
really wants to get the campus sites not always the
(16:18):
logistically the best solution, and I don't think that their
case is held by strong regional attendance this season.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Well, David Carl, imagine this, brought it up to Charlie Baker,
the president of the NCAA, who was spoke to the coaches,
who was a massive hockey fan. By the way, he
knew that Hobart had won three straight national championships. He
talked about hockey and no one watching Joe Britannia play
(16:47):
way back when. But David Carl brought it up to
Charlie Baker and he goes, well, it sounds like a
good idea of me. And then Steve Metcalf got up
and went the other way of why we need to
play regional regional sites. So yeah, there's the You would
think that would go away. Just like you talked about the.
Speaker 5 (17:08):
Five on five going away. It's not going to go
away because people keep bringing it up.
Speaker 4 (17:13):
It will get talked about a lot.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
And by the way, I want to give a credit
to Charlie Baker, former Massachusetts governor. I'm very familiar with him.
He's done a very good job. I think leading the
nc double A dre the most challenging time it's ever
been through.
Speaker 4 (17:31):
But to go down and kind of face the music,
face the coaches.
Speaker 3 (17:34):
I think that's exactly what a president of the NCAA
should be doing. Listen, that's a guy who was elected
governor in Massachusetts and very blue state as a Republican.
He was elected governor handily in a landslide. So he
knows how to win people and influence people. He can
(17:55):
win the room, and he knows what he's doing. I
think that his presence though down up Springs, that was
a good positive, I think to the ice hockey body.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
But we're going to take a break there and come
back more from the Coach's Convention and NCAA issues when
the US Echo Weekend Review continues. We're back with US
(18:28):
Echo Weekend Review. One of the things that coaches voted
on at the convention is shortening the window in which
players can enter the transfer portal. Right now, it's forty
five days. In fact, it just ended on May thirteenth
for this year. Coaches voted to have that go to
thirty days. What's the thinking behind that, Derek, And how
(18:51):
would that benefit everybody possibly by going to thirty days?
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Well, basketball and football have already done it, so we're
just kind of following the lead of basketball and football. Really,
the reason that we're talking about doing it is the
fact of you want to have it right when the
regionals probably start or end, where it only really affects
four teams, the teams that make the Frozen four.
Speaker 5 (19:16):
Right now.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
It starts a little bit earlier, so it affects a
few more than what we would like. But also the
bigger thing is people get when they're on campus, you
really like where you're at, you like your feeling of campus,
and then you go home and you're away from campus,
and then other people get in your head and they
(19:37):
want a lot of the coaches really want people to
make those decisions while they're on campus because or have
to face the music while they're on campus as well.
So there's a lot of different factors behind it. But
forty five days is a long time. I don't think
I thought there was like three people maybe in the
last week that went in the transfer portal.
Speaker 5 (19:58):
If you're going to go in, you're gonna go by now,
you're going to go in right off the bat, and
you very rarely see people going at the end.
Speaker 1 (20:07):
So shortening it, I mean, obviously you can still take
people out of the transfer portal. They can still go
to different schools, it's just you can't enter the portal.
Speaker 5 (20:14):
And I think that makes a lot of sense.
Speaker 3 (20:18):
I think you nailed that, Derek. Thirty day is plenty
make your decision. I think the players have plenty of
control in this situation right now, So to take back
a little bit, if you're the coach, is to take
back a little bit of control.
Speaker 4 (20:32):
Nothing wrong with that, I think.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
You know, I think we've said I think basketball and
football they've already done this.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
They've throwed in the window.
Speaker 3 (20:40):
But I think what you pointed out there, Derek, you know,
making sure that the window doesn't start until after the
regionals is over a critical I think you put teams
in an unfair position. The four teams in the frozen four,
so they get in, they might feel like they get
behind the eight ball a little in the portal, but
(21:01):
they've also just reached the troth and for I don't
have as much sympathy for them, but I do kind
of sympathize that the other sixty teams should kind of
you see the portal starting at the same time, it
shouldn't be during this tournament. During that tournament, you could
have kids in concept entering during a league tournament.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
So I think that this makes tons of times.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
I hope this goes through, but I think it's the
most sensible approach to the portal.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Now we're still waiting for some final results from the
House versus NCAA settlement. One of the things the judge
did was send things back and say what about grandfathering
and players on programs that are going to cut rosters,
And it seems like hockey is in a different situation
than some other sports where they actually are having some
(21:52):
rosters grow.
Speaker 5 (21:54):
The number that has been.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Has been used as a roster limit of twenty six,
and Derek, we've talked about that a lot. That's something
that a lot of coaches don't like because it doesn't
leave you a lot of room, especially when you get
to goalie injuries. But it seems like coaches are assuming
there are not going to be limits coming up for
this coming season.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
Well, if you read everything, and I've followed it pretty closely,
because obviously worse we had to decrease to twenty six.
Our school is planning on opting in and we had
a decrease. I think what everybody's kind of looking at
doing is, and we still don't know because they're going
back and forth with different briefs. Everything looks to be
(22:38):
grandfathering the current players in and cycling it out. I
have no problem with the twenty six I just have
a problem with the way it was implemented to have
to immediately go right to it. If we can bring
it at a slower pace, and if every player is
counts as what they're calling a DSA designated student fleet
(23:00):
that they don't count their grandfathered in or their exempt
I think that that's a good way to go, and
I don't it would affect a whole bunch of players
in the sport, and quite honestly, I hope we stay
at twenty eight. I think what you're going to see
(23:20):
is you're going to see some teams at twenty six
right now that will increase their roster up to twenty
eight or twenty nine, and then gradually after work its
way back down.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
This is a sensible approach. I think I don't even
know what the approach is though right now. Derek, that's
the big problem. You're getting too close to next season
to potentially have this impact next season. And I'm speaking
as an outsider you're a coach, you're living in I
don't think as a coach, you want to be in
(23:52):
a position where you're thinking, boy, what if I have
to what if I have to cut? You want to
know today what next season looks like? Last season in
the past, So let's look to next season. I want
to see this applied practically. I think that this will
even if this is put in place accepted, I think
(24:15):
there's going to be room to change within a couple
of years because they'll be enough evidence that this is bad,
this is working, this isn't hold.
Speaker 4 (24:23):
So I think that that's a big part.
Speaker 3 (24:24):
And I don't know Derek, in any of the conversations
that were had down on Benita Springs. Isn't that flexibility
there that if we put these limitations in, can we
change them in a few years.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
You didn't even discuss it, quite honestly, because it's way way,
way above our pay grade. I think that people don't
People don't want it. Some will some carry twenty six,
some want to go a little bit higher. Some aren't
going to opt in. But I think the feeling is
eventually you're going to have to follow their rules. You
may not opt in now, but eventually, the Power for Conferences,
(24:58):
they're going to have sixty five percent of the voting
power in the NCAA and you're eventually going to have
to follow their rules at some point. So we're going
to have to work our way down and hope that
somebody with some that's a part of the Power for
sees that hockey is not at the right number eventually.
So it wasn't even discussed because this is something that
(25:21):
we can't really control. But you follow it and you
read it, and the way it's being read and the
way everybody's talking about right now is that it will
there will be some sort of grandfathering going on.
Speaker 3 (25:34):
But Derek, when you're looking at coaches right now, are
coaches doing this with the assumption that this season there
will be no limitation or do you feel like I mean,
you're you're operating yourself?
Speaker 4 (25:46):
How are you operating right now?
Speaker 5 (25:48):
Right now?
Speaker 1 (25:48):
I think that there's going to be some form of
grandfathering in. I'm not sure what, I'm not sure how,
But everything I've been told, I've talked to other coaches
at Power for schools that they're probably going to be
some sort of grandfathering in And I read the briefs
every day and.
Speaker 5 (26:06):
They're going to be.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
It'll be an interesting next couple of weeks, but I
think it's going to eventually come through. I thought for
a long time that we were going to be a
twenty six, and it changed quickly.
Speaker 5 (26:19):
So, Derek, I understand.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
One other thing that was brought up by NCAA President
Charlie Baker and his talk with all of you news
that there may come some more independence or more flexibility
within the sports separate from the NCAA hierarchy in general.
Speaker 5 (26:37):
Is there something going on with that.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
He talked about a new governance structure and some autonomy
for each sport, but didn't really go into much. He said,
you're going to find out a lot more over the
next coming weeks. It's like it's like a wait and see.
It was really neat that he was involved with us.
It was a ninety minute conversation. He was supposed to
be there in person, but he had a death in
(26:59):
his family, so he was there via zoom and there
were questions thrown. There was a panel of guy Getowski
was on. The panel was moderated by the Commission of
the Big Ten in charge of hockey, Adam I think
that there was a lot of good things going on,
but it's all kind of a wait and see. Once
(27:20):
the House settlement passes or gets approved, then you're going
to see a lot more happen.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
I feel like if hockey does get a time of me,
I'll believe it. Won't see it talked about. It's been
talked about a lot now. We if it happens, wonderful.
It certainly is the sport that deserved it. But I'll
believe it when I see it.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Two of the commissioners who've been pushing it for years
have been retired for a while now, so you can
tell how far back it goes. Now. Look, we mentioned
this earlier on a lot of talk about NCAA coaches
being sought for NHL jobs, and two of them that
came up were two very successful coaches, David Carl at
Denver and Pat Firschweiler at Western Michigan. Carl was very
(28:04):
public about withdrawing his name from being in the running
for the Chicago Blackhawks job, and the University of Denver
gave him what sounds like a really really nice contract extension.
I meanwhile, Pat Firschweiler, there's a poison pill attached to
his contract that has been made known in the press
(28:25):
a two point three million dollar buyout, which even for
an NHL club is a pretty big chunk of change.
Speaker 5 (28:32):
So what would these guys. Let's talk with David.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
About David carl First, He's made it very clear, with
a young family and a great situation in Denver, he's
in no rush.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
You know, when I look at this and I sit
there and with David Carl particularly, I wonder how much he,
you know, wanted to make sure he got an interview
or multiple injuews this year so that he could leverage
it for a better content than obviously he got a
great contract. The Pat First Wilder situation that I think
(29:04):
is becoming a more common approach in collegiate athletics to
build in some clause that if you leave early in
your contract that the student the university will get some
sort of financial renumeration. So it does make it a
situation that makes it a little harder for NHL teams
to go after these NCAA coaches. We're seeing more coaches
(29:28):
get chances though, you know, Jim Montgomery, Death Lashel, David Quinn.
I'm missing a bunch of schools throw it a couple
more names, and a lot of guys are in and
around the league that have been there.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
In a lot of ten years.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
When the NCAA ranks the money very attractive.
Speaker 4 (29:47):
I've always said it the job security not.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
And that's I think what it comes down to is.
Speaker 1 (29:51):
I also think David might have been involved in anah
I'm a little bit too from what I've read, but
we had heard that the Frozen four about the the
Pat Firschweiler buyout. I think I told you that right
after the championship. It it's no secret Pat Firstwhiler to
play with Keith Jones. Keith Jones as the president of
the Flyers. I think he had a conversation or two
(30:14):
with him where I was lucky enough to go to
that there was a Western alum down in Benita Springs
that that has involved in a really neat new restaurant.
He had a thing for Western alums. We had Frank
Seratri there who went to Western, John Bernie Saunders, John
Saunder's brother was there from ESPN, and there were a
(30:38):
lot of people there. But I think it was more
of a Pat just had a conversation with Philadelphia, and
I think that does play into the fact two point
three two point four million dollars whatever it is, that's
a lot of money to buy out a coach.
Speaker 5 (30:52):
When I when I.
Speaker 3 (30:53):
Look at it schools, the only thing that ever is
attracted is the money, right, maybe not. I mean, people
do want to coach the NHL, but you know, I
know that there playing at the NHL.
Speaker 5 (31:05):
I'm sor the coaching goes into that too.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
But you can do the math pretty quick if you say,
let's just use three point five million for a number,
how many years If that's one year contact in the NHL,
how many years of college is unique or five NHL season?
You know it might be twenty five years it takes
to get to that number if you're a well paid
college code.
Speaker 4 (31:27):
So that's what always I think is the most attractive part.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
But I think that that's alf of the scariest part two,
because you know that you're getting this money but losing
so much security. I'm glad to see college coaches wanting
to find reasons to stay in the college game.
Speaker 4 (31:45):
There's there's some things right about our sport that we have.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
These relationships with these great coaches and we don't we
don't want to lose them. When you have those personalities,
you don't want to lose them to the next level.
Speaker 1 (31:58):
I mean, you just throughout three point five million dollars
as a coach in the NHL. I don't know if
we I haven't heard of any coaches yet getting into
the million dollar range in college hockey. So at the
very worst, you're getting a three for one, at very worst,
three for one, maybe even four for one.
Speaker 5 (32:17):
Potentially that's at money and coaching in the NHL.
Speaker 2 (32:20):
And knowing that you're going to be there maybe two
and a half years if you're lucky. The way they
change things, well, once you get into the whole roulette
wheel there, I mean, it's like other things. It's like
baseball managers. You mess up at one place, they hire
you another. You know, a guy like Gene Mack had
a great, mediocre career managing a whole bunch of baseball teams,
(32:44):
and you know, I guess that's just the way it works.
So once you get into the cycle, then maybe you're set.
But are there some other things for us to watch
this summer before we wrap up NHL Draft? A couple
of current college players are showing a high on prospect
list James Hagens from Boston College, Logan Hensley from Wisconsin
(33:07):
or among those, and certainly some juniors players, some national
team development program players that are in that mix. That's
always fun to watch.
Speaker 4 (33:18):
You know.
Speaker 3 (33:18):
Hagens is very interesting. He was predicted a season ago
to be the number one overall pick and it seemed consensus. Say,
let's say back in September play the season at Boston
College was good but not great, and he slipped. Now
he's kind of penciled at the top five. Meat he
could even slip.
Speaker 5 (33:39):
Out of that.
Speaker 4 (33:39):
He'll still go very high. He's still going to make
great money.
Speaker 3 (33:41):
That they're a big difference between being maclin Fellow Brini
Loft to the overall number one pick and being you know,
five six seven, So that'll be interesting to watch.
Speaker 4 (33:52):
I'm also interested.
Speaker 7 (33:53):
You know.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
It used to be when I'd look at the draft,
I would just cross out all of the CHL players
because they were never playing hockey. Now I'm kind of
interested in some of these CHL players who are highly
rated because of the fact that they could make a
decision at any point to change their commit and.
Speaker 4 (34:09):
Go to college.
Speaker 5 (34:09):
Things that I would be looking at.
Speaker 1 (34:11):
I think the house settlement obviously, I think you're going
to see I think there are a lot of players
out there that are committed from major junior that aren't
going to see where they get drafted first deciding if
they're going to come to college, or not talking to
their NHL teams. I still think there's a pocket of
(34:31):
people that are out there that might.
Speaker 5 (34:33):
Be doing that.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
I think you're going to see some surprises that are
going to come to college hockey. You're already seeing some
top ones going to Michigan or some of the Big
ten schools. I still think there's a lot more play
recruiting wise. I think that's right now upwards of like
one hundred and thirty committed CHL players to colleges. I
(34:56):
think you're going to probably see a good number more
potentially after draft, depending where kids get drafted. That's something
to watch, and still the house settlements are going to
be still something that everybody and all sports need to watch.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Is it possible we'll see a significant number of players
from the CHL not be able to get into college
because they weren't planning on it academically.
Speaker 5 (35:21):
That's possible. We've already dealt with a couple that.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
We've talked to eventually that did not have the right
grades and there's no way to go about it. All
from the NCAA Eligibility Center went and spoke to all
the teams at in all the league meetings and answered
questions about this.
Speaker 5 (35:43):
So I think that there's a lot.
Speaker 1 (35:44):
I think one of the things that you're also going
to see is you're going to see some guys that
played some games of professional hockey playing college hockey, whether
they signed an ATO or a PTO where they didn't
get paid above actual and necessary expenses. You might see
guys that have played three to four games in the
East Coast League or three to four games in the
(36:04):
American back in college hockey. I think that's going to
be something that people are going to have to really
wrap their head around a little bit.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
No more coaching vacancies unless somebody decides late in the
summer to retire or those have all been filled fairly quickly.
Speaker 5 (36:19):
There's always one anything, There's always one.
Speaker 1 (36:23):
I don't know who it is, but there's always one
out there that pops in late. And I think you're
seeing the coach in waiting right now a little bit
because you don't want to lose players to the transfer
portal and trying to find out ways to do it.
I mean, obviously, Ed, I told you all year, watch
what's going on at RIT, and you kept saying nope, nope, nope,
(36:44):
and I kept saying watch out.
Speaker 5 (36:47):
And who was right?
Speaker 2 (36:49):
Yeah, Like I told you you, college hockey coaches spread
rumors like seventh grade girls. So I guess I should
believe you next time you've got a juicy rumor. And
I told a few coaches that too, and most of
them laughed and agreed.
Speaker 5 (37:07):
So what do you can do?
Speaker 1 (37:08):
You know the funny thing about that, And I think
that's the way you're seeing it. You're seeing the coach
and waiting, and you're seeing a private kind of private
higher I mean, RIT basically at the end of the
day waited until they had another coach so that there
was not a mass exodus of players and they're still
the Boston two players after that with a new coach.
Speaker 5 (37:31):
So I think that there's a.
Speaker 1 (37:33):
Right now you may see one more, but then that
opens up a thirty day window for people to go
in the transfer portal if somebody, if somebody leaves.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
Yeah, I think the players that left were going to
be leaving anyway. I don't think the coaching change they
impacted that probably at all in that situation, but certainly
that is the concern. And I mean at Mercy Hurst
you already have a coach with the title on their
website head coach in waiting. He literally is the title
(38:03):
on the website. So in waiting is correct, it doesn't
say air apparent.
Speaker 5 (38:09):
We've lost six good coaches to retirement this year throughout
college hockey, and six outstanding people. I was fortunate enough
to work for Mike Shaeffer.
Speaker 1 (38:21):
He had a little get together and Bena Springs with
all the people that worked for him. You had, you
had Mike Shafer, you had Jeff Jackson, Brian Riley, who
else I mean missing George Roll retired former Clarkson coach,
has four? Who else I'm missing here Wayne, that's five
and Ja Bob Daniels.
Speaker 2 (38:43):
Bob Daniels. So we got seven if we throw in
Jack Arena after forty two years in Division three.
Speaker 7 (38:50):
Yeah, you know, I mean there's Rick Rick will go
next year, Rick Godkins. I mean it's it's it's changing
the guard, the old guard is. I'm going to be fortunate.
I'll probably we'll get brock Shean at Notre Dame this year,
at a very early stage in his head coaching career,
(39:11):
so hopefully he gets a win before he plays us.
Speaker 5 (39:14):
Well.
Speaker 2 (39:14):
With that, we'll wrap up this special spring edition. I
guess we'll call it a spring edition of Weekend Review.
Maybe we'll hop on later in the summer if there's
enough news. If not, we'll see you back here in
the fall. For Jim Connelly, for Derek Schooley. I'm Ed
Trevsker and this has been us e h O Weekend Review.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.