Ok, this is more a follow up to Goon's
He said What? piece earlier.
My stance is pretty arrogant and biased, but here it is. I believe the WCHA to be the best NCAA hockey has to offer. I believe that only a handful of teams in other conferences (most notably Michigan, BC, and BU) would be able to keep up with the WCHA. Sure, every conference has its strengths and weaknesses, but I think the WCHA is on the cusp of being the elite conference.
There are only two entities holding the WCHA back: Its administration and its officiating. Despite myself lobbying for McLeod's ouster, I think he's the lesser of two evils overall. I know this is hard because he's the one that hired the worst evil that the WCHA knows as of yet. The ONE thing holding the WCHA back. That's WCHA Director of Officials Greg Shepherd.
Let's speak positives. There's very few involved with the WCHA that hasn't positive memories of Greg Shepherd while he was an on-ice official. I've never witnessed him officiate a game, but I've also yet to hear anything negative about his on-ice performance overall. That being said, Kevin McHale was a great player for the NBA. How did his work as a GM work out for the Timberpuppies?
The big catch-word in today's business (which, like it or not, hockey is) is the word "accountability." Accountable employees tend to be more efficient if given the right support and environment to work in. Those who are not held accountable, or accountability standards aren't enforced, tend to satisfice, or simply work hard enough for it to be considered "good enough." There is no need to improve. No need to criticize what could have been, trace mistakes and work to improve on them. This is bad enough when you are low on the corporate ladder, so to speak. However, when this is displayed by administration, this is devastating, because it is self-perpetuating. An administator who seeks the "good enough" stance, like McLeod and Shepherd do, install officials that reflect on this belief. There is no need to improve because they haven't been called out too harshly by the ADs and coaches of the league at meetings held, conveniently, after the season. Coincidentally, something like par or subpar officiating is hardly an issue when other things are on the docket. And if it is brought up, the rapport with the ADs and coaches will usually be enough to smooth most of it over. Time and empty promises will smooth the rest.
So, with compromised hiring (and firing) practices and a satisficing Administrative leadership, what about the on-ice officials? Hello, "Good 'ole boy" network. This is a big time conference with Beer League Accountability. "Don't do it again or you'll pay." Even then, though, it's not enough. That didn't work for Don Adam. In the span of 5 years, he's watched two incredibly illegal, damaging hits to players and made no attempt to be decisive on a call. He called Paukovich for boarding Bina despite the other facts in the case (Paukovich charged Bina from center ice and crushed him at full speed, he made no attempt to slow down, and the puck should have been blown dead after the Sioux player behind the net touched up the puck due to a penalty on the Sioux having been called) and was convinced to call a 5 minute major as a sort of make up call type set up after Hextall went ballistic on Marvin and, even then, did not bother to even find out who actually did the illegal hitting until after the period was over. But the key to the whole Adam affair is the phrase "span of 5 years." Randy Schmidt made the same mistake twice in a season and was fired for it.
So, there's your precedent. Don Adam will be fine provided he doesn't watch two players get seriously injured in the same year. Maybe it would have to be the same team getting the injury without a call to end Adam's WCHA tenure. Don't forget that, though unsubstantiated, Don Adam left for the HEA at one point and was FIRED or NOT retained. I would assume that's not true if Adam didn't have a history of being THE most dangerous official with regards to player safety in the WCHA. Face it folks, every other official in the WCHA blows games now and then, but only Don Adam allows serious injuries to go relatively unanswered.
Then there is the issue with NCAA Crackdowns. Why do Crackdowns take place? Has anyone read the crackdowns? If you had, you'd probably notice that NONE of them impose NEW RULES. Why would the NCAA have to tell the WCHA to enforce the rulebook if the officials were doing a good enough job, even taking human error into account, on their own? I can't prove that the obstruction crackdown was meant to counter WCHA ineptitude, but you can't tell me the CFB Crackdown wasn't. And even then, it's now a joke. Cheap hits cannot be defended by the teams. No fighting is allowed. So... it falls on the officiating. If players walk onto the ice knowing that any cheap stuff will be met severely, they won't do it or if they do, they'll pay and so will their team. McLeod brags about how the WCHA doesn't give out more than 2 game suspensions. He's right. I can only think of one 2 game suspension the WCHA has handed out. I believe it was earlier this year to an MSUM player? Or maybe it was C. Smith of UW. I can't remember clearly. Paukovich got 1 game, not even a misconduct for the game he did the hit on, and DU added 1 game because, as Gwozdecky rationalized, Paukovich needed a little extra time to get over the circumstances. In other words, had Paukovich not been somewhat human, 1 game is all he'd have sat. I guess it was ok to sit him as it was only going to be missing a game vs. Bemidji. I've never rooted for a long shot harder in my life.
There are a bunch of solutions to this:
1. This offseason, dismiss Greg Shepherd (heck, offer him early retirement, I don't care). Put McLeod on dismissal watch.
2. Hire a consultant to comb through policies and procedures, personnel interviews, performance records, etc. and suggest immediate and long term solutions to the administrative aspect of officiating and the league.
3. Hire someone with NHL credentials to lead the officials.
4. Separate league goals from officiating goals. No more institution-enforced parity. No more situation officiating.
5. Install the NHL's standards (or a variation therein) of hiring, firing, and performance standards for all on-ice and off-ice officials (such as video replay judges, scoring table people, etc.)
6. Start enforcing the rule book as the rule book is written. No more leeway to coaches regardless of the school's standing.
7. Mandate a 24 hour response period towards serious infractions. If the college doesn't give a serious enough response (within reason) to an illegal action either on or off ice, the league will impose a harsh punishment. No more "talking to's" will be accepted as a punishment.
8. Move league offices out of cities that hold member schools. McLeod should not have his office in or near Denver, CO. I suggest Chicago, IL. If the other Directors wish to not consolidate their stance, then the Head of officiating should be headquartered in someplace like Milwaukee, WI or even someplace more out of the way like Detroit, MI. That way, if Gwozdecky wants to get ahold of McLeod, he has to do the same thing Eaves or Hakstol or Lucia has to do: Email, phone, or hop on a plane. The best place I'd've recommended would have been Omaha, NE, but now that UNO has entered the WCHA, that's out.
9. Appraisal of Officiating or on-ice issues should be discussed at a separate time AFTER the post season meetings. Get the "big deals" done first and then approach this issue as THE priority on the agenda. The first order of business? League wide mandated and enforced accountability standards for ALL WCHA officials from the newest AR to the Head of Officiating himself. Heck.. MAKE THAT PUBLIC. Punitive action can be kept private, but the hiring practices and accountability standards are hardly confidential and should be right there for perusal. And, for the following 5 years post-ratification, the standards should be revisited ANNUALLY. After that, every 5 years unless 3 schools make a motion at the post season meetings to revisit it prior to that time.
10. Reverse review officials. This would be a two-tiered appraisal process in which surveys would first go out to ADs, Coaches, and the officials themselves (as a form of self-assessment). I'd love for the fans to be involved, but that would be a disaster. I don't see much more than 1 or 2 officials actually losing their jobs. The only one who'd probably lose his job would probably be Don Adam. The rest should just go on probation and see where they stand. Those new to the league would be exempt from this as it's too early to see a trend. So, no free passes. It doesn't matter if you played hockey for 20 years and then officiated up until today. You're a nobody until proven by the new accountability standards.
11. Might want to investigate disallowing any on-ice official to officiate his alma mater. We can call this the Mason Rule if tUMD fans wish it.
END RANT???
