Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

There have been numerous posts, good and bad, concerning the status of the program, the quality of the recruits and Scott and Ron's coaching abilities. I wanted to take a 35,000 foot view of the program and examine several areas.

By way of background, I have followed the program for about 20 years and consider myself having been very involved, much more than a casual fan. In the late '90's I was an NHL agent (NHLPA certified for 3 years) so I consider myself to have some knowledge of the game. By no means do I expect my opinions to be gospel - I hope that it provokes a critical and objective look at our program with the hope that it spurns some to greater involvement and support.

I was motivated to write this when in Columbus and listening to the radio, it was debated as to whether or not U of Indiana was a top 5 program. The radio announers laughed and said not a chance- if they were that good, more top coaches would apply for their vacancy. The point is looking at how close one's perspective is to reality. Here we go:

First, as fans, what are our goals and expectations and nare they reasonable? Are we happy with home ice and frequent visits to the Joe? Do we expect top 4 finishes with an occasional NCAA bid? Do we expect to be a dominate National player as in the 1980's? I pose that because as in business, the goals must be reasonable as well as adequately resourced.

Second, what type of support has hockey been given versus today by the University as well as the President? How exactly does this affect the direction and success of the program? Facilities? Recruiting budget? Has anybody spoken to Buddy as to his perspective? Are the resources there to be a successful program and if so how successful?

Third,as far as facilities - in my opinion, the arena does not sell many players and does not give an impression that you are entering a top program. People talk about Yost and how it's not any beytter than BGSU's. First it is - the atmosphere and historical tradition is second to none. Michigan could play at TAM'O Shanter in Sylvania and still be good - it's a top school and hostorically maybe the best program. We need something much better to overcome the advantages they have. If that is not true, why are so many top players there versus BGSU? When is the past time a kid turned down Mich to go here? These top programs feed the NHL, over the past 15 years, with a few success, our guys are going to the ECHL. Since our renovation in 1989, look at how many top facilities or renovations have occured in the CCHA. Mich and MSU have renovations. NMU, Neb-O, OSU and possibly Lake State have new arenas. Miami will open a new arena and Notre Dame is renovating. FSSU, and WMU I do not believe have done anything and I honestly have no clue about Alaska-Fairbanks. Honestly, if I went there I would go skiing. The point is, many facilities improvements have occured - heck check out the best conference, the WCHA and see what programs that were close to BGSU in the 1980's have done - check out the arenas at North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin. I am telling you it makes a difference. Now - you say some kids who came here said the arena is fine. Great. Now get an honest answer out of those kids who did not come to BGSU. We gotta step up and do something first class, not on the cheap. Make a kid breathe and live the hockey tradition and class!

Fourth - when was the last time BGSU had a good season? I want this program to be successful at the National level so I am talking the NCAA's. Try 1989-1990 loss versus Maine, nearly 20 years ago. Other than Alaska-F, every other CCHA team has been to the NCAA's.

Fifth, although the number of teams is greater under Scott versus Buddy and Jerry, check out the "average" place in the standings BGSU finished under these coaches: Jerry (3.8; 6.2 in last 5 years); Buddy: (in 8 years, 7.25); Scott: (in 4 years, 9.25). This means that over the past 17 years, on average less than a 6 place team. This shocked me and I am sorry it is not acceptable!

Sixth, how many NHL player and draft picks? Although it is not an exact science, it does matter and I will argue any day that it does. The top schools have CSB rated players and NHL picks - Mich, Wisc, No Dak, Minn - check it out. From 1983 to 1992 (20 years) there were 36 BGSU players drafted. From 1993 to present there were 11 drafted.Granted the Mike Johnsons and Alex Fosters slip through but can you really build a program on that basis?

Bottom line, this ship needs to be turned around fast. I wrote this not to be a jerk but it doesn't always seem that people are concerned. So many people picked us to be a top 4 team and even after this year are still optimistic. I am positvie but I let the numbers speak for themselves and I am objective. This analysis really startled me. We can live off of 1984 forever, that very successful boat (I mean this respectfully) has come and gone and kids don't think of that - it was 21 years ago. So when I complain about an old arena, small programs, small crowds - these things need to change. I like Scott and Ron and we need to do the things that make "our" program smell of success and respect, not just hoping we'll do better next year.

I appreciate some respectful feedback.

Dublin Falcon wrote:There have been numerous posts, good and bad, concerning the status of the program, the quality of the recruits and Scott and Ron's coaching abilities. I wanted to take a 35,000 foot view of the program and examine several areas.

By way of background, I have followed the program for about 20 years and consider myself having been very involved, much more than a casual fan. In the late '90's I was an NHL agent (NHLPA certified for 3 years) so I consider myself to have some knowledge of the game. By no means do I expect my opinions to be gospel - I hope that it provokes a critical and objective look at our program with the hope that it spurns some to greater involvement and support.

I was motivated to write this when in Columbus and listening to the radio, it was debated as to whether or not U of Indiana was a top 5 program. The radio announers laughed and said not a chance- if they were that good, more top coaches would apply for their vacancy. The point is looking at how close one's perspective is to reality. Here we go:

First, as fans, what are our goals and expectations and nare they reasonable? Are we happy with home ice and frequent visits to the Joe? Do we expect top 4 finishes with an occasional NCAA bid? Do we expect to be a dominate National player as in the 1980's? I pose that because as in business, the goals must be reasonable as well as adequately resourced.

Second, what type of support has hockey been given versus today by the University as well as the President? How exactly does this affect the direction and success of the program? Facilities? Recruiting budget? Has anybody spoken to Buddy as to his perspective? Are the resources there to be a successful program and if so how successful?

Third,as far as facilities - in my opinion, the arena does not sell many players and does not give an impression that you are entering a top program. People talk about Yost and how it's not any beytter than BGSU's. First it is - the atmosphere and historical tradition is second to none. Michigan could play at TAM'O Shanter in Sylvania and still be good - it's a top school and hostorically maybe the best program. We need something much better to overcome the advantages they have. If that is not true, why are so many top players there versus BGSU? When is the past time a kid turned down Mich to go here? These top programs feed the NHL, over the past 15 years, with a few success, our guys are going to the ECHL. Since our renovation in 1989, look at how many top facilities or renovations have occured in the CCHA. Mich and MSU have renovations. NMU, Neb-O, OSU and possibly Lake State have new arenas. Miami will open a new arena and Notre Dame is renovating. FSSU, and WMU I do not believe have done anything and I honestly have no clue about Alaska-Fairbanks. Honestly, if I went there I would go skiing. The point is, many facilities improvements have occured - heck check out the best conference, the WCHA and see what programs that were close to BGSU in the 1980's have done - check out the arenas at North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin. I am telling you it makes a difference. Now - you say some kids who came here said the arena is fine. Great. Now get an honest answer out of those kids who did not come to BGSU. We gotta step up and do something first class, not on the cheap. Make a kid breathe and live the hockey tradition and class!

Fourth - when was the last time BGSU had a good season? I want this program to be successful at the National level so I am talking the NCAA's. Try 1989-1990 loss versus Maine, nearly 20 years ago. Other than Alaska-F, every other CCHA team has been to the NCAA's.

Fifth, although the number of teams is greater under Scott versus Buddy and Jerry, check out the "average" place in the standings BGSU finished under these coaches: Jerry (3.8; 6.2 in last 5 years); Buddy: (in 8 years, 7.25); Scott: (in 4 years, 9.25). This means that over the past 17 years, on average less than a 6 place team. This shocked me and I am sorry it is not acceptable!

Sixth, how many NHL player and draft picks? Although it is not an exact science, it does matter and I will argue any day that it does. The top schools have CSB rated players and NHL picks - Mich, Wisc, No Dak, Minn - check it out. From 1983 to 1992 (20 years) there were 36 BGSU players drafted. From 1993 to present there were 11 drafted.Granted the Mike Johnsons and Alex Fosters slip through but can you really build a program on that basis?

Bottom line, this ship needs to be turned around fast. I wrote this not to be a jerk but it doesn't always seem that people are concerned. So many people picked us to be a top 4 team and even after this year are still optimistic. I am positvie but I let the numbers speak for themselves and I am objective. This analysis really startled me. We can live off of 1984 forever, that very successful boat (I mean this respectfully) has come and gone and kids don't think of that - it was 21 years ago. So when I complain about an old arena, small programs, small crowds - these things need to change. I like Scott and Ron and we need to do the things that make "our" program smell of success and respect, not just hoping we'll do better next year.

I appreciate some respectful feedback.

Well said DublinFalcon, I've been thinking the same thing as well, but I dare not post anything like the above post or I'd get flamed till high heaven. Your especially right on bout too many fans here on hanging by a thread on to that ONE national championship we had 21 years ago in '84. You'd think that a school that won a national championship once would be a much better program than what we are now, but I guess that goes to show that you have to have full school support, the right coach , good decent and on par facilites to stay on top or near the top, which we haven't been able to do since that great year of '84. I should probably stop now while I'm ahead.

Would you guys mind taking this negative crap somewhere else? I'm sick and tired of everyone dissing the program, the players, the coaches, and everyone who supports the school.

You don't want to support the team? Don't, but don't take pot shots here.

BGDrew wrote:Would you guys mind taking this negative crap somewhere else? I'm sick and tired of everyone dissing the program, the players, the coaches, and everyone who supports the school.

You don't want to support the team? Don't, but don't take pot shots here.

Oh, I don't know. I think Dublin brings up some pretty intersting points to consider. Obvious points, but it makes for good discussions.

I didn't really read much, "this program sucks" bellyaching which can occur during on the fans' behalf during a challenging slump.

All of these posts seem eerily similar to the crap being posted over at the Hoops forum.

You can't expect a program to get turned around over night. Let's not forget that Paluch has had to dig this program out of the cellar.

I took the time to analyze many parts of this program for better or worse. At the very least you could respond accordingly rather than make a blanket staement that we'll be good some day. My dog (Ginger Ziggy Zoomba) can do better than that.

I more equate the hoops forum as a bunch of Queen of Hearts running around shouting, "off with their heads!"

I didn't get that same tone from Dublins. I guess it's because there was some logic and substance behind what he had to post.

Dublin Falcon wrote: First, as fans, what are our goals and expectations and nare they reasonable? Are we happy with home ice and frequent visits to the Joe? Do we expect top 4 finishes with an occasional NCAA bid? Do we expect to be a dominate National player as in the 1980's? I pose that because as in business, the goals must be reasonable as well as adequately resourced.

I see our goals in the following order:

• 1. Have Fun
  2. Winning season
  2. Top 4 in CCHA
  3. Post season CCHA Champions
  4. NCAA Bid
  5. NCAA Champions

Some may see these as lofty goals. Some may say I'm looking through orange glasses. These are goals that every team must have. Otherwise, if you set your goals low, what do you do if you reach them? What is your motivation after that?

Dublin Falcon wrote:
Third,as far as facilities -.......

I believe every team in the CCHA (not sure about ND) has made significant improvements to their arenas since BG expanded with the north end seating. Yes, the lockerroom has been renovated/expanded, but other than general maintenance, the Ice Arena itself has not had anything done to it. Is it hurting recruiting? In my opinion, in a roundabout way, yes. The lack of renovation combined with the dismal seasons of late have hurt attendance a lot. A lot of the atmosphere that made the Ice Arena so good is gone. Do we need a new arena? No. We need some way to bring back the atmosphere that existed 10-20 years ago. That atmosphere will help bring in the top recruits.

Dublin Falcon wrote: Fourth - when was the last time BGSU had a good season? I want this program to be successful at the National level so I am talking the NCAA's. Try 1989-1990 loss versus Maine, nearly 20 years ago. Other than Alaska-F, every other CCHA team has been to the NCAA's.

How do we define "Good Season?" Winning season? CCHA Champions? Regular Season Champions? NCAA's? There needs to be a definition of what a good season is. My definition of a good season is too dificult to explain in writing. Basically, you need to look at all aspects of the season. From beginning to end. Consider high points and low points. My definition leaves this past season as a low mediocre season. We finished last. We were one of the highest scoring teams in the nation. We were one of the worst teams defensively. We had a lot of inconsistency throughout the year. But we showed potential for what this team can be.

Dublin Falcon wrote: Fifth, although the number of teams is greater under Scott versus Buddy and Jerry, check out the "average" place in the standings BGSU finished under these coaches: Jerry (3.8; 6.2 in last 5 years); Buddy: (in 8 years, 7.25); Scott: (in 4 years, 9.25). This means that over the past 17 years, on average less than a 6 place team. This shocked me and I am sorry it is not acceptable!

Look at the state of the team when each coach took over. Jerry took over an awesome team from Ron Mason. Buddy took over a team that finished 2nd in the regular season his first year. Paluch took over a last place team. Last year, he had a middle of the pack team. This season, last place. One step forward, two steps back. I know this year's team did not meet my preseason expectations. But, I do see a more talented team than three years ago. I believe the program will turn around and I believe Paluch is the coach to do it.

Dublin Falcon wrote: Sixth, how many NHL player and draft picks? Although it is not an exact science, it does matter and I will argue any day that it does. The top schools have CSB rated players and NHL picks - Mich, Wisc, No Dak, Minn - check it out. From 1983 to 1992 (20 years) there were 36 BGSU players drafted. From 1993 to present there were 11 drafted.Granted the Mike Johnsons and Alex Fosters slip through but can you really build a program on that basis?

I don't judge the success of a program by how many players go on to play professionally. How many of the 83-84 team members went on to have lucrative professional careers? (Also look at how many of the 1980 Olympic team members had lucrative NHL careers). I would prefer a team of no-names that play as a team and are successful as a team, than a bunch of highly talented individuals trying to carry a team themselves. It won't work. Having 4 equally talented lines is better than having two decent lines and two lines that are there just to fill a roster. Of course, overall talent level does come into the equation here, but you get the point. As I said earlier, as a team, we are more talented than 5 years ago.

Dublin Falcon wrote: Bottom line, this ship needs to be turned around fast. I wrote this not to be a jerk but it doesn't always seem that people are concerned. So many people picked us to be a top 4 team and even after this year are still optimistic. I am positvie but I let the numbers speak for themselves and I am objective. This analysis really startled me. We can live off of 1984 forever, that very successful boat (I mean this respectfully) has come and gone and kids don't think of that - it was 21 years ago. So when I complain about an old arena, small programs, small crowds - these things need to change. I like Scott and Ron and we need to do the things that make "our" program smell of success and respect, not just hoping we'll do better next year.

I appreciate some respectful feedback.

Bottom line is the progam is always changing. It's a roller coaster ride throughout the years. We'll have our ups, we'll have our downs. Right now we're having a down. But we're at the bottom of a big hill and starting to climb upwards. We will get there someday. How long will it take? Hopefully not long, but you never know. Just look at Miami. They used to be one of the league's whipping boys. Now, they're whipping everybody else.

Teams like Miami are the reason I still love college hockey. The little guys can compete with the big dogs every night. Seeing Miami grow like they have the past few years leaves me very optimistic for BG.

Great post - in comparison to the 1984 team, I know Galley and Ellet had good pro careers. I also know that as a rule, college hockey is putting many more players into the NHL than in 1984, which would make that comparison a bit difficult or dicey. I would also suggest - compare the height and weight of the 1984 team versus now - IMO, they were biggger then and the results showed.

Dublin Falcon wrote:There have been numerous posts, good and bad, concerning the status of the program, the quality of the recruits and Scott and Ron's coaching abilities. I wanted to take a 35,000 foot view of the program and examine several areas.

By way of background, I have followed the program for about 20 years and consider myself having been very involved, much more than a casual fan. In the late '90's I was an NHL agent (NHLPA certified for 3 years) so I consider myself to have some knowledge of the game. By no means do I expect my opinions to be gospel - I hope that it provokes a critical and objective look at our program with the hope that it spurns some to greater involvement and support.

First, you're going to be more informed than I am. That I will completely agree with you on.

Dublin Falcon wrote:I was motivated to write this when in Columbus and listening to the radio, it was debated as to whether or not U of Indiana was a top 5 program. The radio announers laughed and said not a chance- if they were that good, more top coaches would apply for their vacancy. The point is looking at how close one's perspective is to reality. Here we go:

First, as fans, what are our goals and expectations and nare they reasonable? Are we happy with home ice and frequent visits to the Joe? Do we expect top 4 finishes with an occasional NCAA bid? Do we expect to be a dominate National player as in the 1980's? I pose that because as in business, the goals must be reasonable as well as adequately resourced.

I think this program is honestly trying to strive for all of that. At our best we could give the best teams in the nation a run. At our worse we could probably get beat by the high school. Inconsistency was a problem with this team.

Dublin Falcon wrote:Second, what type of support has hockey been given versus today by the University as well as the President? How exactly does this affect the direction and success of the program? Facilities? Recruiting budget? Has anybody spoken to Buddy as to his perspective? Are the resources there to be a successful program and if so how successful?

There's support within the AD but outside? Not so much.

Dublin Falcon wrote:Third,as far as facilities - in my opinion, the arena does not sell many players and does not give an impression that you are entering a top program. People talk about Yost and how it's not any beytter than BGSU's. First it is - the atmosphere and historical tradition is second to none. Michigan could play at TAM'O Shanter in Sylvania and still be good - it's a top school and hostorically maybe the best program. We need something much better to overcome the advantages they have. If that is not true, why are so many top players there versus BGSU? When is the past time a kid turned down Mich to go here? These top programs feed the NHL, over the past 15 years, with a few success, our guys are going to the ECHL. Since our renovation in 1989, look at how many top facilities or renovations have occured in the CCHA. Mich and MSU have renovations. NMU, Neb-O, OSU and possibly Lake State have new arenas. Miami will open a new arena and Notre Dame is renovating. FSSU, and WMU I do not believe have done anything and I honestly have no clue about Alaska-Fairbanks. Honestly, if I went there I would go skiing. The point is, many facilities improvements have occured - heck check out the best conference, the WCHA and see what programs that were close to BGSU in the 1980's have done - check out the arenas at North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin. I am telling you it makes a difference. Now - you say some kids who came here said the arena is fine. Great. Now get an honest answer out of those kids who did not come to BGSU. We gotta step up and do something first class, not on the cheap. Make a kid breathe and live the hockey tradition and class!

I'm an advocate that we need to put in a "competition" sheet. I'd love to see something similar to what Miami will be playing in next year.

Dublin Falcon wrote:Fourth - when was the last time BGSU had a good season? I want this program to be successful at the National level so I am talking the NCAA's. Try 1989-1990 loss versus Maine, nearly 20 years ago. Other than Alaska-F, every other CCHA team has been to the NCAA's.

I think the program was led to a pretty dark place under the previous coaches which Pooch has had to help bring back. I'll agree, I'd love to see us in the NCAA's.

Dublin Falcon wrote:Fifth, although the number of teams is greater under Scott versus Buddy and Jerry, check out the "average" place in the standings BGSU finished under these coaches: Jerry (3.8; 6.2 in last 5 years); Buddy: (in 8 years, 7.25); Scott: (in 4 years, 9.25). This means that over the past 17 years, on average less than a 6 place team. This shocked me and I am sorry it is not acceptable!

This is the part that I start to get pissed off at. What exactly do you suggest we do to fix this?

Dublin Falcon wrote:Sixth, how many NHL player and draft picks? Although it is not an exact science, it does matter and I will argue any day that it does. The top schools have CSB rated players and NHL picks - Mich, Wisc, No Dak, Minn - check it out. From 1983 to 1992 (20 years) there were 36 BGSU players drafted. From 1993 to present there were 11 drafted.Granted the Mike Johnsons and Alex Fosters slip through but can you really build a program on that basis?

What about the Sigalet's? One of which dressed for an NHL game his first season at the pro level? What about Matsumoto who will definitely be playing at the pro level one day? You say nothing about those players.

Dublin Falcon wrote:Bottom line, this ship needs to be turned around fast. I wrote this not to be a jerk but it doesn't always seem that people are concerned. So many people picked us to be a top 4 team and even after this year are still optimistic. I am positvie but I let the numbers speak for themselves and I am objective. This analysis really startled me. We can live off of 1984 forever, that very successful boat (I mean this respectfully) has come and gone and kids don't think of that - it was 21 years ago. So when I complain about an old arena, small programs, small crowds - these things need to change. I like Scott and Ron and we need to do the things that make "our" program smell of success and respect, not just hoping we'll do better next year.

I appreciate some respectful feedback.

Pooch has improved his record at the school every year but this last one after losing a hell of a Senior class including one of the best GK's to put on the brown and orange. Let's give him a few more years before we're ready to throw him under the bus.

Thanks for your analysis. Siggy SR was recruited by Buddy, and IMO, his brother came to play with him. Nothing against Scott but Buddy making the choice on the goalie was key. Red Berenson admitted that he was a great catch by BG. Matso is good - but he was not drafted so when I ran the numbers I could not include him. Great recruit but does one guy tip the scales?

I need to make one thing clear, and I appreciate you bringing this up - I do not have a vendatta against Scott. I actually told Krebs to hire him over Pat Ford (Wis) and Casey Jones @OSU. Yea, I'm really sure my opinion counted!!! Their seems to have been some bad funk w/ the senior class that brought the whole team down. The seruious question that I would ask is of the JR's and below - what do you think of Scott and Ron? By the way - that is NOTa loaded Q - I really don't know what they think.

Next season will be a telling season. It will be the first season with all of Paluch's own recruits. These recruits knew what to expect from this coaching staff coming into the program. The caliber of player is much higher and I don't believe that the loss of Foster will hurt us as much as many may think. Paluch seems to have a very good eye for talent (regardless of the league) and is bringing in the talent we need to move the program forward. For a whole Research on Ice article to be dedicated to one of our incoming recruits (Kai Katana) says volumes about the work that the coaches are doing to bring these players in here.

As for the facilities....I think that renovations are coming. There has been a feasability study done and plans have been drawn up. The only question that remains is when. There have been more and more grumblings in recent years concerning this from all levels of those who use the facility, and some people are finally starting to listen.

I *gasp!* agree with RUIT, and am very glad to see this thread come back around to a give and take. It's a perfect example of the "Hammb Hypothesis", which states 'you can hate on a program all you want, but as long as you back it up and show a logical passion, we cool'.

I obviously don't spend as much time around the program as some of the rest of ya, but I think to an extent, it's all about baby steps (and getting the baby steps in the right direction) until we get our footing back. As far as 1984 goes, there's nothing wrong with the fans being super proud of that moment, and the program as a whole should be, too. That said, and I think it's what you were getting at DF, it can't really be used as a 'recruiting tool' right now. However, once we start winning again, I say we without a doubt use that title and every NHLer to come through the system from Mike Liut to presumably Alex Foster to push the program ahead.

why BGDREW do you have to get mad at anything said on this forum. People like DublinFalcon are on here asking questions seeing what can be done to right the ship. We cant turn things around if you believe things are fine. WE JUST FINISHED IN LAST PLACE and falcon fans want a more competitive team. we need to make some adjustments.

If you're going to question me personally please PM, but to answer your question this is how threads turn into a pissing match. These forums have progressively declined in the amount of constructive discussion and I don't want to see that crap here at the Hockey forum.

My apologies to Dublin Falcon if I over reacted.