A new low in Stillwater??

Royaltreatment · Post by **Royaltreatment** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:38 am

Mounds View?? Tell me it isn't so..

wbmd · Post by **wbmd** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:11 am

Royaltreatment wrote:Mounds View?? Tell me it isn't so..

It appears it is!!

puckulence · Post by **puckulence** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:14 am

It makes it tough to win when you don't score...so yes I guess it is true.

Govs93 · Post by **Govs93** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:23 am

Is this really an upset? Stillwater was the blind squirrel that found a nut when they took a chunk out of Roseville earlier this year, but other than that, haven't they been laying eggs all season?

Royaltreatment · Post by **Royaltreatment** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:24 am

And Mounds View outshot and out played the Ponies. Housley's not getting much out of this group. It's going from bad to worse.. M.V would struggle to beat some of the Girls teams this year. What's going on??

ALSECORD · Post by **ALSECORD** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:59 am

Housley's not nearly the Coach, as he was a Player. That's what's going on.. You can just see as you watch this team. No direction what so ever.

Pioneerprideguy · Post by **Pioneerprideguy** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:01 am

Keep up the great work Phil, Hill Murray is pulling for ya.

DPA MacManus · Post by **DPA MacManus** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:06 am

Royaltreatment or Royal-ax-to-grind? No doubt a stinging loss for the Ponies, but I've seen this team play several times this year and have been impressed at how well they've played some of the tougher teams on a fairly challenging schedule. The chance to secure 3 or 4 wins have slipped-out-of-reach with an unfortunate bounce, penalty, injury, or goaltending miscue. Not to point a finger at the goalies, as both are outstanding young goalies that any team would be thrilled to have on the roster. There have simply been a couple of key soft-goals here and there, that 9 times out of 10, would never find the back of the net...with either goalie. Combined with frustrated offensive production, they just seem unable to overcome the obstacles. If the coach can keep them focused on achieving their potential, the players will find their way. So, grind-away Royaltreatment, my guess is that the Ponies still have plenty of giddy-up!

Neutron 14 · Post by **Neutron 14** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:08 am

Pioneerprideguy wrote:Keep up the great work Phil, Hill Murray is pulling for ya.

I find it hard to laugh at anothers misfortune. I've made an exception here!

cutanddrive · Post by **cutanddrive** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:19 am

Divide and conquer, guess it doesn't always work.

Royaltreatment · Post by **Royaltreatment** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:25 am

Mac.. Why does it always go back to having an axe to grind?? I'm calling a spade a spade. Housley's not getting it done. It's very simple.. It's more than just a bounce here a bounce there. Enough with the excuses. Have you looked at the standings latley?? It's guys like you that keep this program down. Your o.k with less than mediocre year after year. You sound like one of these guys that loves your coach just because he was star player. "i'm going to be a hero and stick up for my boy Phil" This was Mounds View. They haven't won 10 games in the last 5 year's.

DPA MacManus · Post by **DPA MacManus** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:20 pm

Spade a spade?? I'm still thinking axe. You say, "It's guys like you that keep this program down", last time I checked it never had a serious "up". I've played and coached enough to know that you cannot judge the performance of a coach based on one game or even one, two, or three seasons. You have to look at many different factors. If he came into a strong program and turned it into crap in three seasons, I'd start to worry. Since that was not the case, you have to let things play out longer. Whether you like the coach/player/person, or not, you cannot deny that he's likely forgotten more about hockey than what we have locked-up in our genius, hockey minds. Does that mean I'm "sticking up for my boy"? If you are seriously calling a spade a spade, I hope you can be honest enough to admit he may have a slight edge on you regarding hockey knowledge. Obviously, that doesn't automatically translate into great coaching ability, but if I'm going to give someone the benefit of the doubt, I'm fairly secure in doing that with Phil. Now fast-forward two or three years and they still have the same issues with little improvement...it's time to go in a new direction. My hunch is he'd be the first to understand that decision.

wbmd · Post by **wbmd** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:41 pm

DPA MacManus wrote:Spade a spade?? I'm still thinking axe. You say, "It's guys like you that keep this program down", last time I checked it never had a serious "up". I've played and coached enough to know that you cannot judge the performance of a coach based on one game or even one, two, or three seasons. You have to look at many different factors. If he came into a strong program and turned it into crap in three seasons, I'd start to worry. Since that was not the case, you have to let things play out longer. Whether you like the coach/player/person, or not, you cannot deny that he's likely forgotten more about hockey than what we have locked-up in our genius, hockey minds. Does that mean I'm "sticking up for my boy"? If you are seriously calling a spade a spade, I hope you can be honest enough to admit he may have a slight edge on you regarding hockey knowledge. Obviously, that doesn't automatically translate into great coaching ability, but if I'm going to give someone the benefit of the doubt, I'm fairly secure in doing that with Phil. Now fast-forward two or three years and they still have the same issues with little improvement...it's time to go in a new direction. My hunch is he'd be the first to understand that decision.

Very well said.

Royaltreatment · Post by **Royaltreatment** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:41 pm

Not so fast on the "he may have a slight edge on the hockey knowledge" He needs to prove it first.. Being a great player does not mean your a plethra of hockey knowledge. He's been here what, 4 year's now? The best he can do is 5th place? Now he's got the ship heading back the other direction.. Kids will continue to leave this program until Mr. Housley can prove he's capable. 4 year's and I for 1 can tell you my paitence is running thin. If they showed any amount of improvement i might be excited, but again we have to put up with parents and a community that seems to be o.k with less than average year after year. Just so we can say are kids are coached by an All Star..

puckulence · Post by **puckulence** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:51 pm

Royaltreatment wrote:Not so fast on the "he may have a slight edge on the hockey knowledge" He needs to prove it first.. Being a great player does not mean your a plethra of hockey knowledge. He's been here what, 4 year's now? The best he can do is 5th place? Now he's got the ship heading back the other direction.. Kids will continue to leave this program until Mr. Housley can prove he's capable. 4 year's and I for 1 can tell you my paitence is running thin. If they showed any amount of improvement i might be excited, but again we have to put up with parents and a community that seems to be o.k with less than average year after year. Just so we can say are kids are coached by an All Star..

WOW are you serious he has to prove it. I vote to set up a hockey knowledge test between the two of you. And my prediction is you can't even hold Phil's jock strap when he is done with you.

I think anyone who plays in the NHL for as long as he did would pick up some hockey knowledge some where along the lines, since you pick it up in the stands I am guessing he picked it up while he played PROFESSIONALLY.

wbmd · Post by **wbmd** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:05 pm

Royaltreatment wrote:Not so fast on the "he may have a slight edge on the hockey knowledge" He needs to prove it first.. Being a great player does not mean your a plethra of hockey knowledge. He's been here what, 4 year's now? The best he can do is 5th place? Now he's got the ship heading back the other direction.. Kids will continue to leave this program until Mr. Housley can prove he's capable. 4 year's and I for 1 can tell you my paitence is running thin. If they showed any amount of improvement i might be excited, but again we have to put up with parents and a community that seems to be o.k with less than average year after year. Just so we can say are kids are coached by an All Star..

Maybe you should offer to coach with Housley - or maybe even take his spot for a game or two and see what happens.

whitebearsuperfanB · Post by **whitebearsuperfanB** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:21 pm

Anyone consider that it may not be his lack of hockey knowledge thats the problem but how rude he is. I've heard that his is mean to a lot of his players and i was told that after the White Bear, Stillwater game on fsn he wouldn't even shake hands with most of our players..

PPREZ · Post by **PPREZ** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:27 pm

Doesn't really matter. Good, bad, or indifferent, he will leave as soon as his son is done with the program. Interesting enough, he unwittingly has been a nice advocate for Hill-Murray's hockey program. I think the White Bear youth program is pretty happy too.

Royaltreatment · Post by **Royaltreatment** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:30 pm

This is the "State of Hockey" correct? Everyone's an expert. I would offer to help him coach, but no Coach want's an assistant that knows more than he does. They all want puppets today.. It is what it is boy's. Phil Housley was a much better player than he is a coach. Micky Mouse could have coached this team to at least 1 goal against the Mighty Mustangs. (pinch me. I still can't believe it) This should have been his year to prove himself. The confrence is weak, and he still can't get it done. I say you give him 1 more year. If things don't change i say bring in Harold Schnepps. He was an All Star in 1979. That's all that matters. Right?? Who cares if the kids learn anything..

wbmd · Post by **wbmd** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:35 pm

Royaltreatment wrote:This is the "State of Hockey" correct? Everyone's an expert. I would offer to help him coach, but no Coach want's an assistant that knows more than he does. They all want puppets today.. It is what it is boy's. Phil Housley was a much better player than he is a coach. Micky Mouse could have coached this team to at least 1 goal against the Mighty Mustangs. (pinch me. I still can't believe it) This should have been his year to prove himself. The confrence is weak, and he still can't get it done. I say you give him 1 more year. If things don't change i say bring in Harold Schnepps. He was an All Star in 1979. That's all that matters. Right?? Who cares if the kids learn anything..

You have to remember that Mounds View's main strength is in goal this year.

who_b_dat · Post by **who_b_dat** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:37 pm

I've seen this age group of players a number of times over the past half dozen years and it is a bit shocking that they now reside among the bottom feeders. They have been better than that along the way. Is it coaching? I don't see them enough to know but something has went awry.

WayOutWest · Post by **WayOutWest** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:39 pm

Royaltreatment wrote:This is the "State of Hockey" correct? Everyone's an expert. I would offer to help him coach, but no Coach want's an assistant that knows more than he does. They all want puppets today.. It is what it is boy's. Phil Housley was a much better player than he is a coach. Micky Mouse could have coached this team to at least 1 goal against the Mighty Mustangs. (pinch me. I still can't believe it) This should have been his year to prove himself. The confrence is weak, and he still can't get it done. I say you give him 1 more year. If things don't change i say bring in Harold Schnepps. He was an All Star in 1979. That's all that matters. Right?? Who cares if the kids learn anything..

I agree with your stance, Royal. High School hockey coaches, in general, are WAY too comfortable, these days. If that coach is a celebrity, like Housley, it is going to be next to impossible to unseat him, based on public opinion, because people see the name, and not the results.

There are much lesser "renowned" coaches leading Minnesota High School teams which are also shamefully underachieving and employing some, at best, curious methods.

A former NHL star, regardless of his significant experience and hockey knowledge, does NOT automatically qualify as a great coach, leader, or teacher. In this, and other cases..........poor performance on the ice may ABSOLUTELY be tied to the coaching staff, and not to the players. Enough of the "free passes" for coaches, already. They should be subject to even more scrutiny than the kids that are chatted up in this very board, day in, day out.

packerboy · Post by **packerboy** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:51 pm

I agree with the idea that just because a guy was a NHL player , doesn't mean he will be a good coach.

But I have seen Stillwater twice this year and they just are a little undermanned talent wise. They play hard and do the right thngs, they just aren't that good yet.

I dont associate the Ponies results with coaching at all.

wbmd · Post by **wbmd** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:58 pm

Is Matt Johnson still out?

Charliedog · Post by **Charliedog** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:57 pm

I don't know what Housley's deal is, but I agree that 4 years is long enough to turn a team around. At least he can't blame Hill-Murray for his problems. Hill only has one varsity player from Stillwater and he is a 10th grade defender. Pretty much an even trade for Jake Brown who left Hill to play at Stillwater.

It just doesn't sound like a good situation. The players are frustrated, the forum posters are sharing their disappointment and the Stillwater youth program is trying to recover from last year's political battle with Housley over who gets to wear a "C" on their jersey.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

A new low in Stillwater??

A new low in Stillwater??

Re: A new low in Stillwater??