Randy Schmitz fired from Lakeville North??

Blackhawkfan · Post by **Blackhawkfan** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:18 pm

Can anyone confirm the rumor that Randy Schmitz has been let go as head coach at Lakeville North?

keepyourheadup · Post by **keepyourheadup** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:24 pm

My understanding is he was told to resign or he would be fired. While there has been traction to get rid of him for sometime, his performance over the last two years makes you wonder what more he was suppose to do. Ultimately I think his reluctance to get involved in the youth program was his down fall.

mulefarm · Post by **mulefarm** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 6:23 pm

Pretty rotten deal!

trippedovertheblueline · Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:41 pm

keepyourheadup wrote: Ultimately I think his reluctance to get involved in the youth program was his down fall.

Why do you suppose that would matter to his boss, the athletic director?

keepyourheadup · Post by **keepyourheadup** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:21 pm

First off, I have no horse in this race, I'm just passing along what I've heard. Its been common knowledge south of the river that there has been an on going effort to push Randy out. The reasons those behind it presented to the AD included the issue with the youth program. I think the guy got a raw deal but in todays hockey landscape it doesn't take too much to jetison a coach if his AD doesn't have his back. I really don't think you'll find a "smoking gun" in this case, more likely its the end result of a very determined group of parents to get their way.

trippedovertheblueline · Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:32 pm

keepyourheadup wrote:First off, I have no horse in this race, I'm just passing along what I've heard. Its been common knowledge south of the river that there has been an on going effort to push Randy out. The reasons those behind it presented to the AD included the issue with the youth program. I think the guy got a raw deal but in todays hockey landscape it doesn't take too much to jetison a coach if his AD doesn't have his back. I really don't think you'll find a "smoking gun" in this case, more likely its the end result of a very determined group of parents to get their way.

any names out there as possible replacements? I would think coach from prior lake would be a candidate they would go after.

keepyourheadup · Post by **keepyourheadup** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:35 pm

None that I am aware of but with the hiring of Darwitz at South I would think they'll be looking to make a splash.

trippedovertheblueline · Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:13 pm

keepyourheadup wrote:None that I am aware of but with the hiring of Darwitz at South I would think they'll be looking to make a splash.

I would rather see them go young and energetic, then name.
Perhaps they will do both.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 7:55 am

Never a dull day in Lakeville.

observer · Post by **observer** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 9:35 am

Nice. Will Rutt be named the head coach?

stopper1 · Post by **stopper1** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:15 am

Hockey1979 I take it that your son didn't get as much playing time as you thought he should have. You obviously don't know what went on when decisions were made. If I am not mistaken Rutt coached the forwards and his son is a defensemen which Rutt had nothing to do with. Just because you help get rid of a Great Hockey coach who has been there for years and cares for the program doesn't make your kid a better player.

stopper1 · Post by **stopper1** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:38 am

Last I checked they won the consolation state championship last year. Were in the state tournament the last two years and have been to around 8 section finals in a row. What more do want from a staff other than your kid getting more ice time. Rutt has been coaching there since before his kid was born and you think he is only there to promote his kid. Come on and quit comparing your kid to everyone else and encourage him to get better and work hard rather than blame the coaches for him not playing. That attitude will only hurt your kid not help him. (I am assuming this is what happened from what you write).

mulefarm · Post by **mulefarm** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 11:45 am

Hockey1979, You are a typical parent living through your son. You have no idea how a program is run and how decsions are make. You don't get to state tournaments by just being a great guy. The grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence. Too bad the AD doesn't have a backbone! I'm sure you in a year or two you'll be going after the next coach. Better idea, why don't you apply and, since you seem to have all the answers.

oldschoolpuckster · Post by **oldschoolpuckster** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 2:37 pm

stopper1 wrote:Last I checked they won the consolation state championship last year. Were in the state tournament the last two years and have been to around 8 section finals in a row. What more do want from a staff other than your kid getting more ice time. Rutt has been coaching there since before his kid was born and you think he is only there to promote his kid. Come on and quit comparing your kid to everyone else and encourage him to get better and work hard rather than blame the coaches for him not playing. That attitude will only hurt your kid not help him. (I am assuming this is what happened from what you write).

Nice section.....I wouldn't read too much into that fact. It is clearly the easiest road to State.

keepyourheadup · Post by **keepyourheadup** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:32 pm

You're right...it is the easiest road to state in AA, but the fact remains he got there with the second best team two years in a row, surprised its not the south coach with his feet in the fire. As for Randy, it seems parents hoped for more from him than they were getting..ie..youth involvement, promoting players for the next level and an overall a strong figurehead for the program. Its difficult for old school coaches to deal with the demands of today's hockey parents, there is an awful lot more interference and manipulation going on now than when coach Schmidtz started his career. One thing this coach did know how to do was play a style of hockey that allowed under manned teams to compete...sometimes I think he pioneered the chip it out, pack it in low system they have had so much success with. The Rutt argument has some great background, he open enrolled from Lakeville South. Like an earlier poster said "never a dull moment in Lakeville"

mulefarm · Post by **mulefarm** » Fri Aug 26, 2011 3:33 pm

oldschoolpuckster wrote:
stopper1 wrote:Last I checked they won the consolation state championship last year. Were in the state tournament the last two years and have been to around 8 section finals in a row. What more do want from a staff other than your kid getting more ice time. Rutt has been coaching there since before his kid was born and you think he is only there to promote his kid. Come on and quit comparing your kid to everyone else and encourage him to get better and work hard rather than blame the coaches for him not playing. That attitude will only hurt your kid not help him. (I am assuming this is what happened from what you write).
Nice section.....I wouldn't read too much into that fact. It is clearly the easiest road to State.

Your point?

hockey1979 · Post by **hockey1979** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:07 am

mulefarm wrote:
oldschoolpuckster wrote:
stopper1 wrote:Last I checked they won the consolation state championship last year. Were in the state tournament the last two years and have been to around 8 section finals in a row. What more do want from a staff other than your kid getting more ice time. Rutt has been coaching there since before his kid was born and you think he is only there to promote his kid. Come on and quit comparing your kid to everyone else and encourage him to get better and work hard rather than blame the coaches for him not playing. That attitude will only hurt your kid not help him. (I am assuming this is what happened from what you write).
Nice section.....I wouldn't read too much into that fact. It is clearly the easiest road to State.
Your point?

Lakeville North went to State for 2 years largely because of a weaker section and an outstanding goalie ! Randy Schmitz contract was not renewed . It was time for a change . The assitant coach did have his sons open enroll in Lakeville North so he could coach them . I don't think its possible to coach your own kids without huge biases

The Other Bash Brother · Tue Aug 30, 2011 10:26 am

hockey1979 wrote:
mulefarm wrote:
oldschoolpuckster wrote: Nice section.....I wouldn't read too much into that fact. It is clearly the easiest road to State.
Your point?
Lakeville North went to State for 2 years largely because of a weaker section and an outstanding goalie ! Randy Schmitz contract was not renewed . It was time for a change . The assitant coach did have his sons open enroll in Lakeville North so he could coach them . I don't think its possible to coach your own kids without huge biases

Yes it is

mulefarm · Post by **mulefarm** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:04 am

Coaches who coach their own sons are usually harder on them than the other players. Most coaching contracts are issued in May. Why did they wait so long?

hockey1979 · Post by **hockey1979** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 12:24 pm

mulefarm wrote:Coaches who coach their own sons are usually harder on them than the other players. Most coaching contracts are issued in May. Why did they wait so long?

yes some coaches are harder on their own sons that however is not the case with this particular one .Too much favoristism is given

deacon64 · Post by **deacon64** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:33 pm

Would agree, more often favoritism. Can not only spoil a player but wreck a program.

Parents should not coach their kid if possible.

hockey1979 · Post by **hockey1979** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:57 pm

deacon64 wrote:Would agree, more often favoritism. Can not only spoil a player but wreck a program.

Parents should not coach their kid if possible.

I agree a sometimes a parent can't help but coach their kid but in this case the parent had both sons open enroll in the school he was coaching when they live in a diffrent school border ??

stopper1 · Post by **stopper1** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 6:37 pm

I am sure that a 30 year veteran coach to the community and the school district had his contract not renewed because a few parents complain that their kids aren't playing enough or not on the varsity or both and use the assitant coach's kid as an excuse. Even if Rutt's kid wasn't playing I am sure there were other kids better than the one's whose parents were complaining. The problem is parents always see there kid as being better than they are and its too bad because it causes conflict rather than encouragement to get better and work harder. Ask a typical parent about the systems in a hockey game and where they should be on the ice and they probably have no idea. Maybe some kids don't play because they are constantly out of position and don't listen when the coaches ask them and teach them where to be. Thats the part that parents don't get. My kid is faster shoots harder, hits harder, so he should play over so and so, but maybe he is always in the wrong spot and gives up more goals/chances for the other team or takes more penalties than the team can afford. Its too bad a few bad parents have to go after a good man who has been involved for so long and given so much over the years. Whats even worse is the parents complaining won't even be involved in the program in the next few years if not less.

Tigers33 · Post by **Tigers33** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:14 pm

A lot of times the parents dont know what their kid is like in practice or in the locker room. sometimes kids dont get much ice time because of their attitude or lack of effort. A player-coach meeting is held, but the kid never tells his parents. Than a parent complains about communication.

Parents NEVER know the truth or the whole story. Its one sided and admin people have no spine these days. Its sad!

The Other Bash Brother · Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:45 pm

I assume you guys are the same type of people that think Tony Lucia was never good enough for the Gophers and his dad just pulled strings.