Just when you thought you would never see him again.....

[joecct]

Wisconsin deputy AD Frazier named D-I hockey chair

http://www.uscho.com/2011/08/04/wisconsin-deputy-ad-frazier-named-d-i-hockey-chair/

[RSTuthill]

Hmmm .... No comment.

[drs1990]

I would comment, but I'd probably be banned!:mad::mad::mad:

[scottcomstock]

Echoing drs1990: If I said what I thought, I'd have to ban myself.

:lgt: :lgt: :lgt:

[vicb]

Another (fill in the blank) makes good on the diversity track. There go ahead and ban me.

[keener83]

Kiss an at-large bid goodbye!

[Cap]

Kiss an at-large bid goodbye!

Hockey isn't like basketball. There are no bids, persay, or a room of deciding who makes it and who doesn't. It is all strictly based on the PairWise rankings
You get "bids" for winning your conference tourney. What I mean is people don't sit in a room and discuss if team x or team y deserves to go. It's all based on that PWR ranking

[keener83]

Hockey isn't like basketball. There are no bids, persay, or a room of deciding who makes it and who doesn't. It is all strictly based on the PairWise rankings

He'll still find a way to screw us.

[Cap]

He'll still find a way to screw us.

He has a one-year term. Given that the average finish last 3 years is 9th in a 12-team league, worrying about NCAA screwing Clarkson is probably unneccesary

[dave techer]

That guy should be given less responsibilities (to screw up) not more. I heard his idea is to play the Frozen Four on an outside rink in Tampa.

[Cap]

What exactly did Sean Frazier do wrong at Clarkson?

He hired George Roll, who led the school to two NCAA appearances, a league tourney title and a regular-season title

He started the women's program

Yes, he left quickly, but other than that I have never understood all the venom. He clearly did not leave the school worse off than he found it

[RSTuthill]

Didn't support M^2, either pre or post.

[Bill'70]

Pardon my ignorance but what is M^2 ?

[drs1990]

What exactly did Sean Frazier do wrong at Clarkson?

He hired George Roll, who led the school to two NCAA appearances, a league tourney title and a regular-season title

He started the women's program

Yes, he left quickly, but other than that I have never understood all the venom. He clearly did not leave the school worse off than he found it

From what I heard at the time, he decided that TWCS shouldn't get paid to visit Clarkson and now they don't come around any more. I think the first year that local TV started carrying sports, there were 2-3 Clarkson games; then suddenly there weren't. I don't know why they still don't come, although several good reasons have been suggested either here or USCHO; but I think it started and ended with Frazier.

And M^2 (which I'm assuming means Mark Morris) - from the rumors I heard, Frazier was looking for reasons to get rid of him before the "incident".

[joecct]

What exactly did Sean Frazier do wrong at Clarkson?

He hired George Roll, who led the school to two NCAA appearances, a league tourney title and a regular-season title

He started the women's program

Yes, he left quickly, but other than that I have never understood all the venom. He clearly did not leave the school worse off than he found it
Cap

He hired George Roll because he (plus a few others) fired Mark Morris

Starting the women's program was a foregone conclusion, but yes, he was in charge when it started.

I would say that he (plus a few others) left CCT a few dollars short after the court settlement.

His eye was always on the greater prize. His career path has always reminded me of people I knew at work who would come in to a new job, stay 3 years to make a couple of changes, and then fly away to a promotion. After the person left, others had to clean up the mess. It is said that the Merrimack faithful all went to Mass the day he moved on.

Manhattanville (D-III) -> Clarkson (D-III with a play-up) -> Merrimack (D-II with a play-up) -> Wisconsin (D-I with lots of money).
Now he gets another resume builder as a D-I committee chair. Mark my words, in a year or so, he will be mentioned for some mid major D-I AD position.

[Cap]

TWC *only* goes to schools that buy airtime. Frazier bought it. Clarkson has declined to buy it since he left

[drs1990]

TWC *only* goes to schools that buy airtime. Frazier bought it. Clarkson has declined to buy it since he left

But I think Frazier also decided to stop buying it. I think he bought it for one season, 2-3 games, then stopped.

And I'll second what was said earlier about using us as a stepping stone - nobody likes to be stepped on!:rolleyes:

[Rick]

There's a very narrow range of external people who would fit in with the Clarkson hockey culture; Frazier wasn't one of them... of course, he was hired by Brown, who didn't fit either....

[FireKnight]

Hockey isn't like basketball. There are no bids, persay, or a room of deciding who makes it and who doesn't. It is all strictly based on the PairWise rankings
You get "bids" for winning your conference tourney. What I mean is people don't sit in a room and discuss if team x or team y deserves to go. It's all based on that PWR ranking

While that may be true, the Committee has gone against the PWR 2 or 3 times (including both men's and women's). Once, it actually went against CCT's women in favor of Dartmouth, although they had a compelling reason. I don't think Rome will be built in a day but if the CCT team has a chance at propelling itself to an NC$$ bid this year, it would likely be as the 15th team in, something Frazier could have an effect upon.

[joecct]

While that may be true, the Committee has gone against the PWR 2 or 3 times (including both men's and women's). Once, it actually went against CCT's women in favor of Dartmouth, although they had a compelling reason. I don't think Rome will be built in a day but if the CCT team has a chance at propelling itself to an NC$$ bid this year, it would likely be as the 15th team in, something Frazier could have an effect upon.

The OOC does not lend itself to an at large bid. IMO if CCT makes the tournament then they need to win out @ Atlantic City.


There's a very narrow range of external people who would fit in with the Clarkson hockey culture; Frazier wasn't one of them... of course, he was hired by Brown, who didn't fit either....

Anyone in the AD position has a difficult task of balancing the needs of the D-III teams that are overshadowed by the D-I programs. IIRC, not many of the D-III playups are successful in both divisions.

[Cap]

While that may be true, the Committee has gone against the PWR 2 or 3 times (including both men's and women's). Once, it actually went against CCT's women in favor of Dartmouth, although they had a compelling reason. I don't think Rome will be built in a day but if the CCT team has a chance at propelling itself to an NC$$ bid this year, it would likely be as the 15th team in, something Frazier could have an effect upon.

Since the PWR system has been used I cannot think of ONE instance where the men's field was not strictly based on these numbers. In fact, last year is proof that they only rely on them because had this been done like basketball it's highly unlikely an RPI team bounced in the first weekend of a three-weekend tournament would still have made it into the national tournament.

As for the women's example: Clarkson lost a semifinal in the ECAC's and Dartmouth won their semifinal. There is no third-place game in the women's tourney, so Clarkson was done. Dartmouth, which was ranked ahead of Clarkson after the semifinals, lost the championship game to the same team which defeated Clarkson. There was no way the NCAA was going to punish a team for WINNING a semifinal and then losing a championship game while rewarding a team, which after the semifinals was behind that team, for not having a game to play because they lost the previous day.

And, the main point I was making is: Even if Sean Frazier wanted to screw Clarkson (which is IMO a ridiculous stretch) he is not able to based on the way the current format is set up. The committee has very little to do as far as deciding who gets in, where teams go, etc. If you don't want to take my word for it go read the VERY detailed descriptions USCHO and College Hockey News do around March that describe the entire process.

[Cap]

But I think Frazier also decided to stop buying it. I think he bought it for one season, 2-3 games, then stopped.

And I'll second what was said earlier about using us as a stepping stone - nobody likes to be stepped on!:rolleyes:

and the TWC cable point was someone was blaming Frazier for Clarkson not being on TWC since he left.

He has NOTHING to do with Clarkson not having home games on TWC. The reason Clarkson has no home games on TWC is because the school has chosen not to BUY the airtime.

TWC does not just go to games it deems 'great' or of interest. If you give them the cash they want, they show up and do your game. It's that simple. Do you really think, for example, there's a huge viewing audience for a SUNY Potsdam men's basketball game? No. The only reason those get on is the school pays for the exposure.

That's also why you don't see the visiting team featured much during the telecast. Between period interviews are always just home team people. When Clarkson played at SLU a few years back and it was on TWC all the commercials were for SLU, they interviewed only SLU players and also the school president between periods. Only thing you saw of Clarkson was during the actual game.

[Cap]

Regarding the 'myth' that the NCAA men's field is selected on anything BUT the PWR rankings..here is a cut and paste of an email from Adam Wodon of College Hockey News, who knows a LOT about the process:
I asked him if, in men's hockey, any team has ever NOT made the tourney that belonged there based on the PWR (after the auto bids are filled in for tourney winners).
"That is 100% unequivocally false. Send them to me if you want. The committee has gone by the numbers, strictly, every year since PWR was in place. Ask them to point to the example if they don't agree. ... If this were not the case, CHN/USCHO wouldn't be 15 for 15 in "predicting" the field at the end of the last games."

[drs1990]

and the TWC cable point was someone was blaming Frazier for Clarkson not being on TWC since he left.

He has NOTHING to do with Clarkson not having home games on TWC. The reason Clarkson has no home games on TWC is because the school has chosen not to BUY the airtime.

TWC does not just go to games it deems 'great' or of interest. If you give them the cash they want, they show up and do your game. It's that simple. Do you really think, for example, there's a huge viewing audience for a SUNY Potsdam men's basketball game? No. The only reason those get on is the school pays for the exposure.

That's also why you don't see the visiting team featured much during the telecast. Between period interviews are always just home team people. When Clarkson played at SLU a few years back and it was on TWC all the commercials were for SLU, they interviewed only SLU players and also the school president between periods. Only thing you saw of Clarkson was during the actual game.

Cap, I agree with what you said. But what I also said was that Frazier was the one to decided to buy (and increase interest in the idea) then decided to not buy. I remember being able to watch a game from 4 hours away and thinking, this is so cool. then I couldn't, so I have bad feelings towards the person that stopped it. I also think negatively of the continued lack of buying time, but understand that isn't on Frazier.

[cutothefrozen4]

Defend him all you want but he got rid of the best thing Clarkson hockey had going for them.........That should be enough for any REAL Clarkson hockey fan to dislike him

[Cap]

Defend him all you want but he got rid of the best thing Clarkson hockey had going for them.........That should be enough for any REAL Clarkson hockey fan to dislike him

How exactly did Sean get rid of Morris?
1. Did he ask Zach Schwan to hit him?
2. Did he somehow then will Morris to hit back?
3. Did he then use mind control to cause Morris to refuse to speak to ANY investigator after the incident?

Morris's situation was sad. To lay the blame at ONE man, who I think had very little pull either way, is wrong. People pounced on the chance to get rid of him, but their rank was a LOT higher than AD

Also, the current admins could have brought him
back and didn't. That speaks volumes that this was not
a Frazier hit job that it went much higher

[Cap]

Sean had issues, all people do. I just have never understood the outright hate for a guy who did not really do anything to damage the school.
As I pointed out, he was the one who got the women's program rolling (whether it was discussed before or not HE was the one who made the hires and did the actual work).
He also improved Cheel Arena. One of the first things he did was bring Scott Smalling back to run the building and anyone who has not been to Cheel since 2002 would notice dramatic changes to the inside and those were a direct result of things Frazier set in motion.

I could see all this hate if he'd come in and slashed a bunch of programs, cut budgets, tried to get hockey downgraded to d3, etc.

But all he did is try to get another job. Jerry York did the same thing, I don't see tons of hatred for him. Len Ceglarski also left Clarkson for another job and same thing.

[joecct]

How exactly did Sean get rid of Morris?
1. Did he ask Zach Schwan to hit him?
2. Did he somehow then will Morris to hit back?
3. Did he then use mind control to cause Morris to refuse to speak to ANY investigator after the incident?

Morris's situation was sad. To lay the blame at ONE man, who I think had very little pull either way, is wrong. People pounced on the chance to get rid of him, but their rank was a LOT higher than AD

Also, the current admins could have brought him
back and didn't. That speaks volumes that this was not
a Frazier hit job that it went much higherBINGO!

But you can't go home again. I believe it was a wise decision not to bring MM back. There would have been too many distractions where the focus needs to be on righting the good ship Clarkson.

Question: was Mark the first coach (and only) coach fired by Clarkson? (George's contract was not renewed).

[Rick]

Question: was Mark the first coach (and only) coach fired by Clarkson? (George's contract was not renewed).
Cap Raeder was let go one way or another.

And, like I said, Frazier didn't fit in with the hockey culture up there.

[FireKnight]

Since the PWR system has been used I cannot think of ONE instance where the men's field was not strictly based on these numbers. In fact, last year is proof that they only rely on them because had this been done like basketball it's highly unlikely an RPI team bounced in the first weekend of a three-weekend tournament would still have made it into the national tournament.

As for the women's example: Clarkson lost a semifinal in the ECAC's and Dartmouth won their semifinal. There is no third-place game in the women's tourney, so Clarkson was done. Dartmouth, which was ranked ahead of Clarkson after the semifinals, lost the championship game to the same team which defeated Clarkson. There was no way the NCAA was going to punish a team for WINNING a semifinal and then losing a championship game while rewarding a team, which after the semifinals was behind that team, for not having a game to play because they lost the previous day.

And, the main point I was making is: Even if Sean Frazier wanted to screw Clarkson (which is IMO a ridiculous stretch) he is not able to based on the way the current format is set up. The committee has very little to do as far as deciding who gets in, where teams go, etc. If you don't want to take my word for it go read the VERY detailed descriptions USCHO and College Hockey News do around March that describe the entire process.

The Clarkson/Dartmouth example, as I said, had a compelling reason to go against the PWR. I was mad as **** at the time but I understand why it was made. There have been other cases where there have been discrepancies but that has had mainly to do with seeding, not putting a team in or out. However, the Clarkson/Dartmouth example does show that there is not 100% mandatory reliance on the PWR. I was only arguing that Frazier "could" influence a tournament decision not that he would or even that it's even mildly likely.