• Link to X
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to Pinterest
Fifteen Minutes With...
  • Dance
  • Film & TV
  • Art
  • Music
  • Literature
  • Science
  • Sports
  • Q and A
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Interviews from the world of film and television!

Art, Dance, Film & TV, Music, Science

Daniel Arsham – Ground Breaker


Written By: Michael D. McClellan | Daniel Arsham is a busy man.  The multidisciplinary artist is also prolifically multithreaded, his work ranging from his Future Relic series of mini-movies to his Rules of the Game stage collaboration with Pharrell Williams and choreographer Jonah Bokaer, to his ever-expanding universe of installations and exhibits.  His fascination with modern-day objects, specifically with how these objects might be perceived as if unearthed on some future archeological site, has captivated imaginations worldwide.  Arsham reimagines basketballs, cameras, teddy bears, and boom boxes as future relics, collapsing and expanding time by injecting decades of wear, neglect and abuse into familiar items from popular culture.  Nothing is off limits: An eroded American flag, tattered an worn; an eroded DeLorean, in the color of volcanic ash, scarred by the passage of time; Pharrell’s 1980s Casio MT-500 keyboard and drumkit, a fossilized relic of a bygone past.  Arsham explores all of it, playing with conventions of time and space in installations that infuse architecture and archeology with a surreal, paradoxical flavor.  That the items are uniformly white or grey and crumbling is in itself a paradox, given that the the man behind the art is equal parts Average Joe and Andy Warhol.

Daniel Arsham’s Crystal Toys, 2017.

“The further you get from a moment in time, the more closely things connect,” Arsham says, “so, 500 years from now, an iPhone and a phonograph will seem much closer together and relate more.  I try to think about all the objects in the show as if I could forget what they were, what they were used for, and try to imagine approaching them like an archaeologist would.”

While Arsham gets plenty of critical love for his work, he’s also developed some serious street cred.  When your films star actors like James Franco, Juliette Lewis, and Oscar winner Mahershala Ali, and you’re designing shoes for adidas, there’s little doubt you’ve transcended the traditional art world and cross-pollinated with pop culture.  Not an easy ask, especially given the art world’s tendency to snub its nose at other mediums.

“Pop culture is in some ways far more egalitarian than the art world,” Arsham says.  “I’m trying to investigate our current moment in time and the big ideas within our civilization.  I’ll do that through as many mediums as I can.”

The artist Daniel Arsham (right) and actor James Franco on set Photo: courtesy James Law

The Miami-raised, New York-based artist graduated from Manhattan’s Cooper Union in 2003.  While the private college at Cooper Square helped fuel Arsham’s inquisitive nature, his fascination with time crystallized when, at the age of 12, Hurricane Andrew destroyed his house and much of the community around him.  The disaster forced him to think about impermanence, the idea that everything is transient, that we are all essentially fossils or artifacts in waiting.

“Seeing architecture in a state of flux and movement, and in a state of decay and rebuilding after the storm, has influenced much of my practice – both in Snarkitecture and in my own work.”

Snarkitecture, a design studio co-founded in 2008 by Arsham and architect Alex Mustonen, reflects the artist’s appetite for interdisciplinary collaboration.  The name is drawn from Lewis Carroll’s The Hunting of The Snark, a poem describing the ‘impossible voyage of an improbable crew to find an inconceivable creature.’ The aim of Snarkitecture is to subvert existing materials within a space to find a new and imaginative purpose for that space.

“Snarkitecture fills a personal artistic need. There are some artists out there that can sit in a room and work and not care who ever sees it, but I am not that kind of artist,” Arsham explains. “I want to make work that people can engage with. The work is completed by people engaging with and experiencing it.”

~  ~  ~

Interrogating, disrupting, and transcending time is key to Arsham’s mission with 3018. The show’s items, each selected for its tie to a particular era or moment, have been dislodged from the past and projected into an imagined future – the eroded DeLorean from Back to the Future, the ‘60s Ferrari from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, a pile of random objects which includes electric guitars, microphones, cell phones, cameras, tires, phones, and more – hallmarks that have become a defining characteristic of his practice.  For Arsham, his sculptures are ‘future artifacts,’ each appearing to be in a state of erosion, with wound-like craters disrupting their pristine facades.  A ball rack of basketballs made out of glinting crystal?  A McDonald’s sign cast in obsidian?  A pyramid of baseballs, each ball formed from a different material (volcanic ash, steel, and glacial rock dust, much of which he orders on eBay)?  It’s all part of Arsham’s authenticity.

Daniel Arsham’s Eroded Delorean, 2018.Photo by Guillaume Ziccarelli. Courtesy of Perrotin.

“It’s not a trick,” Arsham says. “Let’s say a camera gets calcified over a thousand years in crystal. It would look just like the one I made, and the materiality will be the same.”

Arsham’s fascination with time is the strand that connects his multidisciplinary art.  His production company, Film the Future, is home to a nine-part series of short films collectively titled Future Relic.  Future Relic 01 was scored by hip-hop producer Swizz Beatz and has costuming by fashion designer Richard Chai.  Future Relic 02 stars actor and director James Franco, who plays the role of a worker who spends his days underground indexing and destroying objects from past society.  Future Relic 03 premiered at the 2015 TriBeCa Film Festival with music by Alexis Georgopoulos​, and stars Juliette Lewis in costuming by Richard Chai.  Other projects include a short film for Hennessy 250, and a short film for Jefferson Hack’s MOVEment series, shot in collaboration with fashion designer Calvin Klein, choreographer Jonah Bokaer, and ballet dancer Julie Kent.

“Working with film is similar to dance in some ways,” Arsham explains, “but film is infinitely more complex because you can watch it over and over again. You can pick things apart.”

The creatives behind Rules of the Game: Pharrell Williams, Daniel Arsham, Jonah Bokaer

Arsham’s collaborative spirit is reflected in a recent project, Rules of the Game, a multidisciplinary production with Pharrell and Bokaer.  Two years in the making, Rules highlights three mediums; art, music, and dance, all of it working and interacting with one another to assault the viewer’s senses.  Painstakingly ambitious, Rules of the Game is loosely based on Luigi Pirandello’s 1921 absurdist play Six Characters in Search of an Author.  It combines Arsham’s explosive visuals and design with Pharrell’s music, and dancers choreographed by Bokaer.  As grueling as it might be to get three distinct creative visions to work cohesively in one production, Rules is another example of Daniel Arsham’s cross-platform domination and resolute fearlessness.

“We worked on this project a very long time, so we had the time to experiment to see what might work and what wouldn’t,” he says.  “We all understood that this project would be a risk, but that’s part of creating art.”

~  ~  ~

Arsham’s profile leveled up with his Past, Present, Future adidas collaboration, moving him closer to pop culture icons Usher, Kanye and Swizz Beatz. The first release – a pair of trainers designed to look like they were chipped away at during an archaeological dig – were hugely successful, and coveted by collectors. The shoe features frayed sections, while the rubber sole appears to have been chipped away and left with jagged edges. Its white laces are finished with painted metal tips. The final installment in the series – the adidas Futurecraft 4D, which reveals hidden lettering under black light – generated a flurry of pre-release buzz, the hype culminating with a launch event, scavenger hunt, and the release of Arsham’s Hourglass Part III: Future short film.

The adidas Futurecraft 4D – Designed by Daniel Arsham

“Working with the adidas design team, we went back and forth on a number of iterations, slowly honing and simplifying the design,” Arsham says of the Futurecraft 4D. “My studio made a large contribution in the design of the packaging, socks and gloves as well as the sealing of the actual box.”

Now that the Past, Present, Future series with adidas is complete, will Arsham fill the hole in his busy schedule with some well-deserved R&R?

“I enjoy what I’m doing to much to take a break,” the multidisciplinary artists says with a smile. “I don’t look at what I do as work. Whether it’s sculpture, stage design, film, or footwear, I’m most content when I’m working on the next big thing.”

Good news for the rest of us. And spoken like a man who has no interest in becoming a relic himself.

You grew up in Miami.

I was born in Cleveland but moved to Miami a short time later. Miami was a great place to grow up, because I like to swim in the ocean. And to this day I really like Disney World. I try and do a regular pilgrimage to Disney World.


Who – or what – has had the greatest influence on your work?

Architecture as a general overarching theme is something that I am very interested in. Film has played a big part in my work. In terms of people I have been fortunate to work with many different talents across multiple disciplines. Choreographer Merce Cunningham is someone I worked with when I was very young. He gave me the chance to explore theatre, which is something I hadn’t worked in previously.


How did you meet Merce Cunningham?

Merce had seen an exhibition that I did at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Miami. This was like right before I left for New York. It was an exhibition of paintings, which is why it came as a complete shock that he would ask me to do a stage design. He got my number from the museum’s director, called and said, “I’m Merce Cunningham, are you familiar with what I do?”


From a practical standpoint, how did the two of you collaborate?

Merce had this very unique way of working. He would separate each portion of a performance into their own respective parts, allowing each person to work independently. He would make his choreography, I would make the set design, an artist would make the costumes, a musician would make the score, but none of us knew what the other was doing. I never knew what the dance was going to look like before the premiere. I could basically do anything I wanted. It was amazing and sort of terrifying at the same time. Also when I first started working with him, I was 24. He was 84.


You’re a multidisciplinary artist. What’s it like to venture into areas where you might not be completely comfortable?

When Merce asked me to work on my first stage design, he kept encouraging me. It was a large scale project, the largest I had done up to that point, but Merce gave me the confidence to pursue it.  A lot of other things I’ve worked on, the creation of the films, working with architecture, all of these things, they seem difficult from the outside – and they are – but often, the things I’ve pursued outside of my own practice are in collaboration with other people. In dance, stage and film, I’ve been able to find people who really know what they’re doing, and they’ve allowed me to make these things.


You mentioned film. Let’s talk about your Future Relic films.

Film for me encompasses all the things I’m interested in – architecture, performance, sculpture, and photography. People kept asking me questions about the work I was making, and that was really the trigger point, so I wrote a treatment for a film titled Future Relic, with nine different parts. The stories are all linked, but it feels like they’re very disconnected. The story jumps around in time and spans about 500 years. Each segment takes place in a different time period. It’s intended to be disorienting, but in the end it will all make sense.

Juliette Lewis – Future Relic 03

I’ve watched the first four. These films have a big-budget feel.

People often think that if an artist is making a film that it’s going to be some sort of art film with no story or very abstract. There are elements of Future Relic that are like that, but there is a story that is closer to a Hollywood style thing.


How difficult is it to create these cinematic vignettes?

It’s definitely a learning experience. Film, more than anything, is the most difficult thing I have ever tried to accomplish. If I show work in a gallery or museum I can easily control everything from the light, the way people enter, and obviously what the work looks like. In film, you have to control everything, every last detail. Everything that you place on the screen means something.  To achieve the mood or emotion that you’re trying to create is far harder than it looks.


Give me an example.

The creating or building of light. Light, in the Future Relic films, is as much of a character as the actual characters themselves. Trying to make light work in that way is far more difficult that it appears. There’s a scene in Future Relic 04 where the characters are in an airplane cockpit. We constructed the entire cockpit, and lighting was placed on the character’s faces to make it appear as if they are moving through clouds. Pulling that off was extremely difficult.


What inspiration did you draw on in order to create the world within Future Relic 01?

The visual language draws from Lawrence of Arabia. The film was shot entirely at dawn, which is the same technique that was used in the 1962 film, which helped us achieve this day-for-night quality. So we shot everything in the day and then the color was adjusted so it appears like moonlight.


Hip-hop artist Swizz Beatz did the score for the film.

This was something that was very outside of his normal way of working, but I think he really made a beautifully subtle piece that was very much in key with what I was looking for.


Future Relic 02 stars A-List actor James Franco. How did you end up working with Mr. Franco?

I’ve been fortunate to develop some great relationships through collaborations with my work. I wrote the entire treatment with a colleague of mine named Timothy Stanley. Most of the actors so far have come through my relationship with Al Moran, who is the co-founder of the OHWOW Gallery in Los Angeles. Al Moran has worked with James many times, so we were introduced. I spoke to James about our project and explained that I felt he was perfect for the role, and it turned out that he was interested. The role is challenging because there’s no dialogue at all. Everything is conveyed by the expressions on his face, and his movement.


Future Relic 03 stars the lovely Juliette Lewis.

I’m friends with her brother, who convinced her to see the film with James. She liked it a lot, and agreed to sign on. Having those connections helps, but there are still challenges that come with putting a film together. Being sensitive of their time was a prime driver; it was much easier to shoot these as vignettes because all the actors and talent are friends and are donating their time. I’m working around their schedules. And having the films made in short bursts is easier than dedicating months to work on it.


Let’s talk about your art. When did you become interested in the concept of being an “archeologist from the future?”

The summer of 2011. I was in Easter Island, which is a very small island in the South Pacific, and I was there making paintings that were later made into a book published by Louis Vuitton. There were also some archeologists working there at the same time.  They were excavating some of these famous statues and found objects left behind by previous archeologists that had excavated the site about 100 yeas ago. Looking at this gave me the idea of collapsing time within those two separate objects—the sculpture from 1,000 years ago and the more contemporary pool of artifacts. When I returned from Easter Island, I started making fictional archeology objects from our present – cameras, phones and things like that – that looked as if they had been reformed with geological material and uncovered at some point in the distant future. The decision was made to use geological materials, like volcanic ash, crystal, to convey this sense of time.

The Future Was Written falls into the categories of sculpture, architecture and performance. Photography courtesy of Daniel Arsham

What does the idea of “fictional archeology” means for you?

When I take a simple object – a Walkman, for example – that we all have, or used to have, and make it look like a fossil or an artifact, this makes us rethink our inscription in time. It challenges the ideas we have we constructed about time. To what extent do we believe, unconsciously, in progress, and linear development? It’s towards these kinds of questions that I want to lead my viewers. In placing them in the future, where the familiar objects of their everyday lives appear to them as though from an ancient moment. I want them to experience what Freud called the Uncanny.


Give me an example of your work that reflects this.

My 3018 exhibition at the Perrotin Gallery in Paris is based on a notion of fictional, archeological objects – objects more or less directly related to music. These are familiar objects presented as though they’ve come from another era, in the past. Although they would normally pass by unnoticed, they take on a new consistency. It’s the idea of the flow of time that is being called into question, because most of the objects I’m using are things that don’t exist in our everyday lives. They are things that are just slightly past, yet they already feel like they are from the past. That bridge in time is important in order to imagine these things as relics.  This archeology is based on a simple principle: Take a familiar object and make it undergo a treatment, and then finish the object so that it appears as something strange, something surprising.


Tell me about your treatment of these objects.

When I started these works, I could have taken a camera and painted it to look old, but something about this kind of alchemy—this shift of material—gives a greater weight to the objects, and gives a kind of truth to them that is more powerful. It was the only way to achieve a true authenticity.


Do you have a favorite material to work with?

Materials are always as important to the concept as the visuals they create. When you look at the car and it’s made of crystal, it isn’t as if I painted it to look degraded. Its material is something we associate with a geological time frame.


3018 has some very recognizable pieces.

Two of the pieces are cars. I always look for multiple entrance points so viewers can recognize them, and these two happen to be props from films: The DeLorean from Back to the Future and the Ferrari from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.


Pharrell Williams is a friend. How did you meet?

Emmanuelle Perrotin, who represents me in Paris, invited me to dinner at Pharrell’s house a number of years ago. There was a lot of conversation, and at some point he had someone from his team pull up my website. We were in his kitchen at the time.

Daniel Arsham unveils a full body cast of Pharrell for the G I R L exhibition at the Galerie Perrotin

It seems like the two of you hit it off.

Pharrell’s an amazing person on so many levels. I see someone who is engaged in so many disciplines, so there are some direct parallels with what I’ve pursued in my own practice. I would see him at Art Basel in Miami, and I would immediately notice that he wasn’t just content to be there. He was engaged. He would talk to the artists and designers, and not at a superficial level He would intently listen and ask questions, so that he understood what they were doing.

Daniel Arsham unveils a full body cast of Pharrell for the G I R L exhibition at the Galerie Perrotin

What’s the first thing your worked on together?

I asked him to tell me about something that was really important at the beginning of his music career – something that he made music on but didn’t have or use anymore. He then described his first keyboard that had these drum pads on it. I did a bunch of research and found out it that it was a Cassio MT NT500. That became the first piece, a relic of the original machine he made music on, and then I was fortunate enough to bring him into my world to create music for Rules of the Game.


How did you approach the stage design for Rules of the Game?

As an artist, if there are rules, I’m going to figure out how to break them. This project was heavy on the idea of mythology and legend, and so much of my work relates to archeology and history, so I set out to integrate those two things. Having objects shatter and then come back together is a play on the stretching out of time, and doing it with Greek and Roman masks and busts helped to heighten the effect. That’s what I was trying to get to with the scenography.


On Rules, you collaborated with Pharrell and the incomparable Jonah Bokaer. Did you work together, or independently from one another?

Both. With Jonah, I would usually present him with an idea: “There’s going to be thousands of balls, or a giant roll of paper, and I want it to form these giant icebergs on stage.” Then he develops the choreography and he uses the material as a way to motivate movement. The rolling of the balls, the masks, the shattering of these things as content in the work. So I’d throw out an idea and he’d come back and say, “I like these things,” or “Maybe this would work better if we did this.”


Let’s talk Snarkitecture. How did your partnership with Alex Mustonen come about?

Snarkitecture started when I was making pieces in public space that manipulated architecture. In a museum or gallery, I usually have carte blanche but my gestures are temporary. Public space requires a different knowledge base, so I hired Alex to help realize my pieces on a larger scale. We discovered an area closer to architecture than my own practice, so Snarkitecture emerged from that. It ultimately became its own entity with its own language.

Snarkitecture – Light-filled cave

Your latest exhibition, Moonstone, wrestles with concepts of space, exoplanets and time, all of it woven into Japanese gardens.

I was invited to spend some time at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, where I was allowed into a creative studio whose mission it is to communicate to the public some of the more complex discoveries they make. That could be anything from ice on Mars to exoplanets with multiple moons. So I started to integrate some of the forms I saw there, one of those being these exoplanet moons, which are kind of like invented planets.


You’ve spent some time in Japan. How did this inspire your exhibition?

I’ve spent a lot of time in Japan over the last decade, and this repetitive act of raking the sand has always fascinated me. These gardens are fixed in time, in that they have been generally unchanged for hundreds of years, and yet they are remade every day. As I approached the exhibit from an early conceptual position, I envisioned the moons like some distant solar system or collection of planets, and the sand representing space-time or a ripple in a plane of space.


Japanese architecture has a certain timeless quality to it.

There are many buildings and temples that have remained unchanged for hundreds of years. The tea houses or temples look the same now as they did five hundred years ago, and maybe will five hundred years from now.


You recently released a monograph through Rizzoli.

My Rizzoli book reflects on the last 20 years of my work, all the way back to my thesis exhibition at Cooper Union. It’s one of the earliest things I created using architecture as a medium to play with –manipulating and creating a disconcerting, uncanny architecture.


Tell me a little about your Futurecraft collaboration with adidas.

When I approached the design of the Futurecraft sneaker, I was thinking more about the tools and materials that we use within the studio. The outfits we wear and the equipment that is related to the production of artwork. The tonality of the shoe is based on the green color that is used in the branding of the studio. This color is derived from many of the works that I was making, which use crushed, broken glass that becomes green – if you look at the edge of a sheet of glass, and you’re staring across it, you can see this greenish color. This comes from iron impurities in the actual glass, but if you look at the glass straight on it is completely clear.

Daniel Arsham

Final Question: If you had one piece of advice for other artists, what would that be? There are no shortcuts. Following your passion means doing the hard work and seeing your art through to its inevitable conclusion.

https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/the_daniel_arsham_interview.png 400 600 Michael McClellan https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FifteenMinutesWith_NewLogoPrototype.png Michael McClellan2019-02-10 18:19:412019-03-17 23:29:15Daniel Arsham – Ground Breaker
Dance, Film & TV, Music, Q and A

Big Daddy Kane – BDK Style

By:  Michael D. McClellan | Spending time with Grammy-winning rapper Big Daddy Kane is to spend time at the feet of hip-hop royalty.  He’s recorded with Tupac, posed nude with Madonna and Naomi Campbell, and mentored a gifted young rapper named Jay-Z.  His breakout hit, Ain’t No Half Steppin, ranks No. 24 on Rolling Stone’s list of the 50 greatest hip-hop songs of all time.  Cited by many as one of the greatest lyricists ever, respect for Kane is everywhere:  Eminem raps on Yellow Brick Road that “we was on the same shit, that Big Daddy Kane shit, where compound syllables sound combined,” while Ice-T flatly declares that he would pit Big Daddy Kane against any rapper in a battle.  Legend has it that the ‘80s greatest rapper, Rakim, turned down a challenge to go mic-to-mic with Kane.  So when the opportunity to interview Kane presents itself, you jump at the chance – and you do your homework.  There are the obvious nuggets – his tight friendship with fellow rapper Biz Markie, the velour suits punctuated by his iconic high-top fade and those four-finger rings, and that racy photo shoot for Madonna’s controversial Sex book – but to climb into the ring without fully immersing yourself in all things Kane is to do so at your own peril.  BDK doesn’t do fakers.

“I like working with people who are committed to their craft,” Kane says, the words delivered with the same richness that fuels his records.  “Everything else is a waste of time.”

Born in Brooklyn, Kane’s fierce presence behind the microphone was honed during his early years as a battle rapper.  His reputation as an MC later opened doors, while his nonpareil lyrical ingenuity set the bar for others who followed, including Pulitzer Prize-winning rapper Kendrick Lamar (whose earliest exposure to hip-hop was listening to Big Daddy Kane as a newborn on his way home from the hospital).  Kane’s tight friendship with Biz later led to a stint in the Queens-based Juice Crew, a collective headed by renowned producer Marley Marl.  It turned out to be his big break.

“Before I had a record deal I was going from project to project, block party to block party, battling other rappers,” Kane says, “and I’d perform at parties in Brooklyn as well, so I was already quite experienced by the point I got involved with Juice Crew.  Marley Marl, Roxanne Shante, MC Shan, TJ Swan, Kool G Rap, Biz…Juice Crew was groundbreaking, ahead of its time.”

Kane would soon break off on his own, signing with Len Fichtelberg’s Cold Chillin’ Records label in 1987.  The 12” underground hit single Raw was released a few months later, followed by his debut album, Long Live the Kane, in 1988.  The video for Ain’t No Half Steppin introduced the world to the Kane high-top fade and helped propel Yo! MTV Raps into the mainstream.

A year later, Kane released his most critically-acclaimed album, It’s a Daddy Thing, which included 1970s sample throwbacks like Smooth Operator and the Teddy Riley-produced track I Get the Job Done.  A red-hot Kane was also sought out by Prince, who asked him to guest rap a verse on the Batdance remix for the ’89 blockbuster movie Batman.

“Prince loved it, Warner Bros. shelved it,” Kane says.  “They thought it was too different, and not commercial enough at the time.”

In 1991, Kane won the Grammy Award for Best Rap Performance by a Duo or Group for his performance on the Quincy Jones collaborative track Back on the Block.  He also posed for Playgirl and appeared in Madonna’s Sex book during the ‘90s (we’ll get to that in a bit), and hired an unknown rapper named Jay-Z to tour with him.  Those crowd-pleasing freestyle raps during costume changes sold Kane on Hova’s vast potential.

“By that point, we were trying to shop Jay-Z to get him a record deal,” says Kane.  “In the middle of my show I would leave stage and have Jay-Z and Positive K come out.  They would rap on stage while I was changing clothes.  He wasn’t a hype man; he was part of the show.  It was clear back then that he was going to be a star.”

Tight: Big Daddy Kane and Jay-Z worked together in the early days, and remain friends to this day.

In ‘95, Kane recorded with MC Hammer and Tupac Shakur on the rap song Too Late Playa.  In 1998, he released his final solo album Veteran’z Day, before turning his attention to live performances and collaborative efforts with artists like A Tribe Called Quest, Wu-Tang Clan, and Busta Rhymes.  He’s also appeared in Dave Chappelle’s Block Party and acted in several films, including Posse, The Meteor Man, Just Another Day, and Exposed.

Kane’s legacy – and his place in the pantheon of hip-hop royalty – is secure.  The high-top fade and eyebrow cuts have long-since been retired but he continues to tour, both domestically and overseas, and the next generation of rappers continue to sing his praises.  He does the occasional feature for artists like Joell Ortiz and The Game, and he’s set to be an executive producer on a Netflix biopic of the Juice Crew (release date TBD).

All part of the mosaic.

A Big Daddy thing.

I’m geeked right now.  I’m sitting here with a legend, an icon, Brooklyn’s own Big Daddy Kane.  How are you?

I’m great, man.  Wonderful.


We’ve got a lot of ground to cover – Tupac, Madonna, Jay-Z, those limited edition BDK British Walkers.

Let’s cover it all.  I’m in a mood to go.


You got your start in your Brooklyn neighborhood.  Tell me about that.

I’m what you call a lyricist, but I started off as a battle rapper.  At an early age I wanted to get down with a cousin of mine – he was around 17, and I might have been 12 or 13 at the time.  He was telling me that I was too young, and he was rhyming with these other two guys.  I felt if I became nice enough to beat his friends, then he would have to put me down for a battle.  That’s how I started writing battle rhymes.


Who were some of the guys you battled in the early ‘80s?

Hardly any of the ones that I battled were known at that time.  There were a few artists that had records out – Mike Ski of Dismasters Crew and Disco Ritchie from Divine Sounds are a couple that come to mind – but the majority of them were just regular cats on the street.  Once I started making music and the world had a chance to hear me, nobody wanted to battle then.


One of those who did battle you was Biz Markie.  Tell me about that.

We had a mutual friend in Long Island, and this friend used to always come around telling me about his man Biz Markie D – he was Biz Markie back then, he was Biz Markie D.  He wouldn’t stop talking about him.  He’d say, “Biz said this funny rhyme about such and such,” or “Oh, he rocked this party here,” or “He did the human beatbox.”  One day he said, “My man Biz Markie D is at Albee Square Mall right now,” and I said, “Look, let’s go find him and we battling.  Then, you go tell this Biz dude about me from now on, because I’m going to eat his ass up.”  So we went over to the mall and battled.

Biz Markie and Big Daddy Kane: A rap battle blossomed into a brotherhood.

Who won?

[Laughs]  We were doing serious rhymes at first, and he saw that he didn’t stand a chance so he tried to do a funny rhyme about a girl.  And then I did a funny rhyme about a girl.  He started laughing, and he was like, “Okay, that was dope.  Yo man, you got a lot of different styles, you’re bad, you’re dope.”  And then he started telling me about parties that he was doing in Long Island and in the Bronx.  He was telling me that he should get down with me and do some of these parties together and make some money.  He said that we were going to get a record deal, and that we were going to be famous.  And he kept his word.


The start of a beautiful friendship.

Biz was that dude that believed in me.  After he signed his deal with Cold Chillin’ Records he brought me in to write the majority of his first album.  Then he got me a deal with the same label, so he’s responsible for me having a music career.


And it started from a battle.

[Laughs]  A lot of people that I’ve beaten in battles have never spoken to me again.  This cat got me a record deal.  I have the utmost respect for him, and anything that I can do for him I would be more than happy to do.  I owe so much to that brother.


MTV ranks you at No. 7 in its Greatest MCs Of All Time list.  What’s the difference between a rapper and an MC?

A rapper is someone who makes words rhyme.  You can consider Dr. Seuss a rapper, because he’s just putting words together and making them rhyme.  The biggest difference between an MC and a rapper is that the MC is the crowd controller.  When I say crowd controller, I mean the MC gets on the mic and demands the crowd’s attention, and he is able to have the crowd do whatever he wants them to do – throw your hands in the air, slide from side to side, or ream something out.  That’s what the MC does.  A lyrical MC is an MC that puts together complex lyrics that the average human being ain’t going to think to do, and probably can’t do.

Biz Markie, LL Cool J, Guru, and Big Daddy Kane.

Let’s talk hip-hop lineage.  Give me the Big Three the era preceding you, the era you came up in, and the era immediately after you.

It started off in the early ‘80s with Melle Mel, Grandmaster Caz, and Kool Moe Dee.  Then it became about myself, Rakim, and KRS-One.  And then after us it became about Biggie, Nas, and Tupac.  That takes you up the new millennium.


There is no Big Daddy Kane without…?

Everybody in hip-hop always refers to my family tree, and me being a student of Grandmaster Caz.  Once I heard Grandmaster Caz from the Cold Crush Brothers, I was blown away.  Not only is he a great lyricist, he sounded like that dude that would come in the barbershop or into the pool hall talking shit, the dude that the kids wanted to stick around and listen to.  So I’ve always had respect for Grandmaster Caz.  I learned a lot from him when it came to writing rhymes.


Without Big Daddy Kane, there is no…?

I think Biggie and Jay-Z took what I was doing lyrically to the next level.


How did you and Jay-Z hook up?

They were trying to get Jaz-O a record deal, and a producer named Fresh Gordon asked me to come in and make a tape.  We were at his crib, and Jaz-O asked me if his man could rhyme on the tape.  I was cool with that.  It turns out that his man was Jay-Z.  After we made the tape, Gordy asked me if I could work with Jaz-O, but I told him that I liked the other kid better.  That’s how me and Jay first connected.


Was Jay-Z your hype man?

Jay was never my hype man.  I went on tour with Patty LaBelle, and I saw something new that I hadn’t seen before – I saw people onstage doing outfit changes.  I was like, “I’ve got to do this in hip-hop.”  So when I came back off tour with Patty, I asked Jay-Z and Positive K to come on the road with me.  I would do half the show and then I would leave the stage to do an outfit change.  That’s when I would call out Jay-Z and Positive K, and just let them spit for about 10 minutes while I was changing clothes.  Then I would come back onstage in a different outfit and finish the show.  This was all during my Chocolate City Tour.


Sounds like a win-win for both you and Jay-Z.

His relationship with me was very similar to my relationship with Biz in the beginning. When Biz had the Make The Music Tour, he would call me onstage and I would just spit a rhyme to the crowd in the middle of his show.  It was the same type of thing with Jay.


Did you have any idea that Jay-Z would blow up like he did?

At the time, I had no idea of the impact that Jay-Z would make.  In my mind, I always thought of Jay-Z as a dope MC, and I thought that people would really love his skills.  But Jay is a really quiet and shy type of dude, so I never envisioned him becoming the megastar that he became.  I’m so happy for him because he really deserves it.


Are you and Jay-Z still tight?

We’re still tight.  Jay had me come and do Summer Jam with him one year, which was the time he mentioned me in his song and rapped about the cuts in my eyebrows.  And I performed with him at the Barclays Center when they opened it up.  So we are cool.


All artists have their negotiables and their non-negotiables.  What are your non-negotiables?

For one, no one is writing lyrics for me. That is a non-negotiable.  There are people out there who write songs for some of the greatest singers ever, they write for legends like Marvin Gaye and Luther Vandross.  Luther’s whole career was pretty much remakes.  Willie Nelson is a great singer, incredible, but a lot of the stuff that he recorded was Kris Kristofferson’s stuff.  Nobody is writing for me.  I don’t mind if somebody writes the hook on a song, but as far as my lyrics that I’m saying for my verse, no.  I feel that that goes against the code of a real MC.


You mentioned Tupac.  How did you meet?

In 1990, I took Digital Underground with me on my Chocolate City Tour.  They were actually the opening act, and Tupac was one of the dancers there at the time.  He used to hang with two of my dancers, Scoob and Scrap, all of the time.  So I would see him every day.

Big Daddy Kane and Tupac Shakur

Tupac wasn’t Tupac yet.

Not at all.  He would sometimes ride on our tour bus, and he was always talking.  I remember him telling me that he was getting ready to do his own solo stuff.  He said it wasn’t going to be like this funny stuff with Digital Underground, because he was a serious rapper and he was going to be doing some hard stuff.


Did he rhyme for you?

Yeah.  I felt like his flow was amazing.


Could you tell that he was going to be a star?

Yeah.  He was just a cool dude, very bright.  We would talk about hip-hop, how I got my start, things like that.  He was always asking questions – questions about the stage show, about why you do this and why you do that, how you handle your business in the rap game.  When he made his impact and became a superstar I was so proud of him.


You and Tupac have a Suge Knight connection.

The year before Tupac passed, Suge Knight was trying to start a Death Row East label and he wanted me to be on it.  We all met up out in L.A., and then we went to Vegas for a Tyson fight.  Then we came back to L.A. and recorded a song, so I have all kinds of crazy memories about that.  Tupac was a great guy.  It was sad to see what happened to him.


Do you think Tupac’s fate would have been different with different people around him?

If Pac had the right mentors, I think that a lot of the stuff that was going on could have been controlled.  He needed encouragement, and it needed to be reinforced.  I remember the trip back from Vegas, and he almost got into it with some drunk dude on the plane.  I got in front of him and told him to chill.  We talked about the situation and I explained to him why you don’t want to do stuff like that.  And he was like, “You’re right.  My bad.  I didn’t know what I was thinking.”


Madonna asked you to pose with her and Naomi Campbell in her Sex book.  How did that happen?

Warner Brothers had sent me, Madonna, and Color Me Bad out to do walkthroughs at three Manhattan hospitals.  We talked to kids in intensive care, took pictures with them, stuff like that to cheer them up.  Unfortunately for me, all of these hospitals were in upper class neighborhoods.  None of these young white kids knew who the hell I was.  At one particular hospital, Madonna was pointing to me and telling the kids that I was a famous rapper.  She was showing the kids how to sing Ain’t No Half Steppin’, and I’m just sitting there amazed.  It was like, “Wow, Madonna knows my shit.”  We talked afterward, and I thanked her for that, and that’s when she said that she was doing a book.  She wanted to know if I’d be interested posing in her book, which was all photos.  And I was like, “With you?  Hell yeah.  I would love to.  I would be honored.”  And she was like, “Well, it’s going to be a book of nude photos.”  And I was like, “Shit, even better.”  That’s how it happened.


Did you know that the photo would depict a Big Daddy Kane, Madonna, and Naomi Campbell threesome?

I knew there were going to be nude shots, but I didn’t know it was going to be a sexual thing.  I didn’t learn the title of the book until later.


What was the reaction when the book came out?

There were a lot of mixed feelings.  There were people who thought I shouldn’t be naked in pictures with a pop star.  And with my Islamic background, there were a lot of people who really had a problem with me being in those photos with a white girl.


What was your take?

Madonna is a great person, and a great artist.  She showed me a lot of respect, so I enjoyed being there.  She’s a multi-talented megastar, so I was also honored that she chose me to be a part of the book.


Let’s switch gears.  You’re still one of the most fashionable hip-hop artists in the game today.  Is there an NBA player, past or present, that reminds you of you?

Clyde Frazier all day.  If you didn’t know him, your first assumption is that this dude is a pimp.  He rolls in with the big brim hat, and the long, leather quarter field jacket with the fur collar.  His hat has got that lean to it, tilted to the side.  Oh man…


When did style become important to you?

Early in the game.  I just felt like, as an artist, you should never be onstage, look out in the crowd, and see somebody dressed like you.  You need to look unique.  Prince was Prince.  Michael Jackson had the glove, Cyndi Lauper came at you with that crazy colored hair, and Isaac Hayes had the bald head.  That stuff that was always important to me.

BDK Style

You recently helped design those BDK limited edition British Walkers.

It brought back a lot of memories.  We were rocking those British Walkers in the ‘70s, so I think bringing them back was a brilliant idea.  British Walkers were the official dress shoes for hip-hop.  You’re going to a party, you want that b-boy style, you want to be dressed up, you got your British Walkers on.  You put your British walkers and a double knit sweater on, and that was pretty much the equivalent of a three-piece suit for the adults.  You know what I’m saying?


What other shoes did you wear back in the day?

In the ‘70s it was either Clyde Pumas or the Pro-Keds 69ers.  In the early ‘80s I rocked those shell toe Adidas for a while, before switching over to Fila in the mid-80s and stayed with them until the late ‘90s.


Were sneakers a territorial thing in the New York hip-hop world?

Yeah.  You could look at someone’s feet and know where they were from.  You see someone in a pair of shell toes and you immediately know that they were from Queens.  You’d see those Air Force 1s and you knew that they were from Harlem.  If you saw the Filas, you knew they were from Brooklyn.  You saw Pumas, you knew they were from the Bronx.

BIG DADDY KANE, RECORD PUBLICITY PORTRAIT, 1989. (C)REPRISE RECORDS. COURTESY:

You’ve been performing for a long time.  What’s the secret to your success?

One record can make you successful, just that one song.  It can make you successful enough to go down in history books.  Toni Basil has Mickey.  That’s all she needed.  She’s set for life.  You know what I’m saying?  So, one song can make you successful.  But if you are really a student of this craft, and you really respect what you are doing as an art form, you are going to be so deep into it that the song doesn’t even matter.  In the hip-hop world, it’s about rocking the mic and making other MCs  fear you.  It’s about making the crowd love you.  I’ve been doing that for 30 years.


If you had one piece of advice for other aspiring artists, what would that be?

Be yourself.  Don’t try to follow the trend and be like whatever is popping at the time, at the moment.  Be yourself.  Give your fans you.  If you follow what is trendy, once that trend is gone, you will be gone.  If you share what you’re really all about, they will ride with you until the end.



https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/the_big_daddy_kane_interview.png 400 600 Michael McClellan https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FifteenMinutesWith_NewLogoPrototype.png Michael McClellan2018-05-30 06:52:372019-09-12 01:52:21Big Daddy Kane – BDK Style
Film & TV, Music

Danny Rubin – Groundhog Day


By:  Michael D. McClellan |  Danny Rubin is jazzed, and for good reason.  The laid back screenwriter who, in 1993, broke it big with the existential Hollywood hit Groundhog Day, is basking in the success of his critically-acclaimed Groundhog Day The Musical, which, in 2017, garnered seven Tony Award nominations, including Best Musical.  Throw in eight Olivier nominations (and two wins) following a well-received run at London’s iconic Old Vic, and Rubin’s 24-year odyssey from film to stage not only proves the staying power of his beloved collaboration with Harold Ramis, it validates his longstanding belief that Groundhog Day always had the chops to charm live audiences.

“Originally, I thought it was such a strong and original way of telling a story, that it would deserve retelling in a variety of media,” Rubin explains.  “I’d been working on it for several years when I got British theatre director Matthew Warchus’ call.  Dozens of people had contacted me over the years, but this time it was a wonderful confluence of timing, taste and perception.”

Nearly everyone has seen the 1993 Bill Murray film on which this show is based, the story of a cynical weatherman trapped in a single repeating day.  When it was released on Feb. 12, 1993, Groundhog Day was considered little more than a better-than-average comedy.  Since then, the film has earned critical respect for its originality, while being regarded as a deceptively deep philosophical meditation on the meaning of life – a high-brow statement concealed in a low-brow wrapper.

“The movie was never intended, by me or by Harold, to be anything more than a good, heartfelt, entertaining story,” Rubin says.  “He and I had terrific conversations about Buddhism and reincarnation, about Superman and the ethics of not saving everybody constantly, and other philosophical ideas stimulated by the story.  Still, we never anticipated the impact the film would have. I did, however, feel from the very beginning that I’d stumbled upon a story with all the makings of a classic, so simple and true that it could be retold many different ways by many different storytellers.”

Rubin, in his own way, has been living and reliving Groundhog Day every day since the movie first hit the big screen.  With only four film credits to his name, Groundhog Day is by far the most successful.

“I’ve been called a one-hit wonder, but it’s not something that I view negatively,” he says.  “Groundhog Day is something I get asked about every day, whether that’s through interviews, fan email, or meetings with studio execs.  It’s a blessing, not a curse.  Doors open because of Groundhog Day.”

Following the surprising success of the Punxsutawney-based romantic comedy – which was made for $14.6 million and raked in a tidy $70.9 million – Rubin disappeared into the ether.  He moved his family to New Mexico, eschewing the glitz of Hollywood in favor of the serenity of Santa Fe.  He kept writing scripts for his own ideas, and he kept optioning them, steadily, over the years – to Universal, to Amblin, to Castle Rock, to Miramax – although none were ever produced.  And he continued to believe in the power of Groundhog Day as a musical.

“By the time Matthew Warchus called, I already had an outline, a rough draft of the book, about 30 song ideas I had winnowed down to 12, and a ream of scenes, themes, bits, gags, progressions, dialogue snippets and even some melodies.  But as someone from outside of the theatre community, I had no idea how to find a partner.  Fortunately, Matthew found me.”

Warchus introduced Rubin to Tim Minchin, the composer and lyricist for the Tony-winning smash Matilda The Musical.  The project gained momentum from there, and soon the charismatic Andy Karl was cast in the lead role.  Following its run at the Old Vic, Rubin’s brainchild premiered on Broadway at the August Wilson Theater on April 17, 2017.  During its five month run, Groundhog Day The Musical mesmerized audiences and critics alike, eventually garnering Rubin a Tony Award nomination for Best Book of a Musical.

Not bad for a guy who’s been living the same day since February 12, 1993.

 

Groundhog Day was your idea and your story, but it took collaboration to make it to the big screen.  What was it like working with the late, great Harold Ramis?

Danny Rubin:  I think that we were both just nice guys and we wanted to make a good movie.  We were also professionals who did what needed to be done.  We sat down and talked about interesting things, which made it fun.  I would go off and write, and he would react to that.

 

Was it hard to make creative concessions when editing Groundhog Day?

Danny Rubin:  ​It was challenging because I really liked the original script.  I was willing to make changes, but we both understood that you don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater, so there was a lot of back and forth.

 

Give me an example.

Danny Rubin:  For example, you don’t throw away the first act the way that I had it.  You start in the middle, which Harold had said that he loved.  You don’t create a reason for Phil Connors being stuck in the same day if you want to make an existentially flavored movie; you create a reason for the thing if you want to make a Saturday afternoon popcorn chopper.

 

Given your laid back personalities, I can’t imagine the two of you getting into heated arguments over the direction of the script.

Danny Rubin:  It was a more of an intellectual argument in that I was being protective of my material.  I wanted to let go early on, but I wasn’t getting a lot of assurances that this wasn’t going to become the stupidest movie ever.  Harold wanted to work with me because he was a decent guy.  He gave me plenty of room to work, rather than grabbing the script and making changes.  Ultimately, he felt that he needed to take it away and reshape it.

 

Harold Ramis knew what it took to make something funny.

 

Bill Murray was cast as weatherman Phil Connors.  Did he have any influence over the script?

Danny Rubin:  Bill actually liked the original draft more than what Harold had come up with, but the studio had already agreed to Harold’s draft.  That’s when they rehired me to work directly with Bill to get the script into a sort of intermediary place.  We did that, and then Bill had to start learning his lines and getting into character, leaving Harold and I to resolve some issues.  We ultimately hammered out a smooth draft that was all in his voice.  It came out pretty well.

 

Groundhog Day was your big break, but you earned your BA as a biology major at Brown University.  How did the creative side win out?

Danny Rubin:  I thought that they would be combined in some way.  There was a time when I thought the only job I could do was Ira Flatow’s job.  Ira Flatow is the guy that you hear on NPR on Fridays doing the science report.  He was and is absolutely wonderful at creating an entertaining production that teaches something that is fundamental and interesting that most people don’t know about in science.  I thought that could be me.  When I was in college, I had a radio show along those lines.  I would research a topic and produce a public affairs segment that taught somebody something about science.  I thought that was a great way to have a life of learning that did not include going to graduate school or being in academia.

 

Did you ever second-guess your decision to go away from your field of study?

Danny Rubin:  That never really crossed my mind, although journey was both exciting and hellish.  I was searching for something but I wasn’t completely focused.  I had recalibrated from being a science-oriented person to being someone interested in the arts and media, which opened up a lot of possibilities, but also introduced a lot of unknowns.  I always felt confident that I could do something creative, but I didn’t really know what.  I was living in Chicago and doing everything that came along – music, acting, comedy, writing.  When you’re going in a lot of different directions at once it becomes quite exhausting.

 

Rejection is a part of the entertainment business.  What was that like for you?

Danny Rubin:  When I was first looking to establish myself, I started a folder that I called “Independent Producer Correspondence.”  One day I was looking through it, and I realized that it was pretty much all rejection letters.  I was in my mid-twenties.  I was young, so rejection didn’t really bother me.

 

Did you ever get discouraged?

Danny Rubin:  The rejection letters usually came on letterhead from NBC Studios, or Columbia Pictures, or wherever, so they actually had the opposite effect.  It made me feel like I was in the business!  It’s these little psychological boosts that keep you going.  You have to have the right attitude to survive, and a lot of people who are very talented and creative don’t have the right temperament to struggle against a beast that’s impossible to truly understand.  I somehow had the right combination of timely luck, which kept me from total despair, and the right attitude to keep going.  You have to take the long view if you’re going to make it in this business.

 

Groundhog Day: The Musical garnered 7 Tony Award Nominations

 

Did you grow up dreaming of becoming a screenwriter?

Danny Rubin:  The dream wasn’t to become a great screenwriter.  At one point I figured I’d wind up on public television doing one of those fund drives or something like that [laughs].  I imagined them saying, “Danny, you are really good at this.”  And that would be that.  My dream was to have a satisfying life, whatever that meant.  I didn’t go into it thinking that I had to make a lot of money, that I needed to be important, or that I needed to work in a specific job.  It was just me pursuing things as they came along.  I got a lot of pleasure out of entertaining, and being creative.  I felt that if I pursued that, even if I failed, it would at least be an interesting, fun life, because I was doing something that I was interested in.

 

How did you break into the business?

Danny Rubin:  I just kept at it.  I was living in Chicago at the time, and while I didn’t know anybody in the industry, I knew people who knew people in the industry.  I’m not a shy person, so I approached a lot of these people at parties and other events, and asked for help in trying to find anybody who might want to read a screenplay.  Strangely, people want to help.  Someone would say, “My cousin drives a car in Hollywood, sometimes for famous people,” and I would pursue that lead.  There were a bunch of these.  One of them was a guy who had recently become an agent and had started representing somebody who I knew, so I sent him the script for a movie that eventually became Hear No Evil, starring Marlee Matlin.  That’s how I sold my first screenplay and wound up in the business.

 

Your next move is to Los Angeles.  Your agent wants another screenplay – a “calling-card script” – something fresh that would open doors and get you into the room with studio execs.  What happened next?

Danny Rubin:  I went to see a movie at the Writer’s Guild Theater in Los Angeles.  My wife was at home with our baby, so my companion that afternoon was a book about vampires, which I was reading while waiting for the lights to go down.  In was in this strange, cinematic netherworld that I started thinking about the concept of somebody living forever, and the potential for a person to change over the course of an eternal life, but I wasn’t sure how to set it up. My character would have to interact with history and then keep going into the future.  There would be worlds I would need to invent.  Such an interesting premise, but a very cumbersome movie to set up – and very expensive.  And then I remembered something that happened to be on my list of screenplay ideas, which happened to be about a guy repeating the same day over and over again.  That idea suddenly became very useful in the service of this first idea, about a young man’s very long journey through life.  I could put it all in the same day, and that made it doable.  That’s how I ended up writing Groundhog Day.

 

Urban legend has it that you hammered out the draft of Groundhog Day over a four day stretch.

Danny Rubin:  It’s an exaggeration to say that I wrote it all in four days.  It makes for a good story, but the four days was just the scripting part.  I had already spent almost two months coming up with all of the creative ideas and ironing out the structure.

 

Tell me about the process.

Danny Rubin:  I brainstormed a lot.  It was a stream of consciousness, page-after-page-after-page of what it would be like to be in that situation – what it would be fun to see, how the character would feel, the changes that would occur over time.  I would write out little dialogue sketches, trying to figure out who my characters were, what the rules were, things like that.  I finally felt like I had enough there, and that’s when I started focusing on the structure.  The rest came later as we developed it in the studio with Harold Ramis, which turned it into the movie that you saw.

 

How hard is it to sell a movie idea?

Danny Rubin:  I felt that I understood what would make an entertaining movie.  I didn’t really make any distinctions between whether that movie came from Ealing Studios in London, or from Hollywood.  Everywhere I took it, people said, “We love it, but we can’t make it.”  I didn’t want to appear like a guy from out of town, which I was, so I said, “Of course you can’t make it.”

 

How long did it take to get the green light?

Danny Rubin:  It took about six months.  My agent had quit and left the business, so I had to find a new agent and I was using Groundhog Day as a calling card.  I had gotten plenty of meetings with people and had actually gotten some work off of it, which was great.  And then, I got a call from this agent at Creative Artists Agency who said, “I read Groundhog Day and I loved it.  We can’t represent you, but do you mind if I send your script to some of our people?”  So, he wound up giving it to Trevor Alpert, who was a producing partner for Harold Ramis.  Trevor really loved it, so he gave it to Harold, and it took off from there.  Suddenly, I really was a Hollywood writer!

 

 

What was the negotiation like?

Danny Rubin:  Trevor wanted to do business with Harold, and I’m sure he said, “Do you think you can handle this script?  Can you turn Groundhog Day into a Harold Ramis script?” And the response was, “Hey, I’m Harold Ramis.”  I assume it happened something like that [laughs].

 

Groundhog Day never explains the thing that keeps Phil looped in that single, repeating day.

Danny Rubin:  I thought that it was boring and unnecessary.  I hated having to come up with an explanation for the event because I loved the mystery of it.  It felt arbitrary.  To me, the interesting thing is the character’s response to being stuck in this repeating situation.  It didn’t matter to me what it was, and I certainly didn’t want the story to be about Phil undoing the curse or fixing the time machine.  I wanted to start after the repetition.

 

How did you envision this repetition changing Phil Connors?

Danny Rubin:  I felt like Phil’s eternity would go in stages.  I imagined an adolescent stage, where he realizes that he can get away with anything.  When that becomes boring, he becomes more debauched and tries darker things.  And then, when he becomes so self-hating, he commits suicide – which he tries several times, unsuccessfully, in a lightly dark but funny way.  And then, once he’s completely empty, and he’s unsuccessfully killed himself, then what does he do?  Whether or not you’re a God for having all of these supernatural powers, you are still stuck in that day.  I imagined there would be a stage where he starts to fill the vessel, ultimately becoming a lovable person – and that’s when Rita falls in love with him.  We know that he’s changed, and that’s what gets him out of the thing, whatever that thing is.

 

Does the repetition change Phil, or does Rita change Phil?

Danny Rubin:  In my opinion, it was the repetition that changed Phil.  That’s what makes it a beautiful, pure, and unique experiment.  I think we all understand that we move through life and mature emotionally in part by how long we’ve lived.  Yet, I think this shows pretty clearly that we have this other experience, the day-to-day activities that we have, that plays a part in driving us to the next stage.  We all experience a certain kind of repetition, and that has a usefulness.

 

Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell

 

Does this mean that Phil’s repetition is circular and linear at the same time?

Danny Rubin:  Exactly.  A young man in his twenties might think of dating a new woman every night and figuring out how to get her in bed as a challenge, and quite possibly the best life ever.  And yet, by the time he’s in his thirties it starts to get tedious and boring.  It’s no longer fulfilling.  But you have to go through it.  You just can’t skip a step and say that I’m going to go one to the next step.  Even though it was the same repeating day, Phil had to grow through his experiences.

 

Groundhog Day opens in the TV studio, but the original idea was to start in the middle of the story.

Danny Rubin:  None of us were sure exactly what would make it all work.  In the drafts that Harold and I did together, we backed it up as far as the van moving into town, going from Pittsburgh, which gave us plenty of opportunities to set up the characters in the journey.  But we changed our minds after the audience screen test.  That’s when we made changes, did the re-shoots, and added the opening bit at the TV station.  If you think about it, the thing really does have two openings. There’s the opening, and then there’s the music, which is when the movie starts again.

 

How did tweaking the beginning of the film change character development?

Danny Rubin:  As far as the impact, it emphasized Rita a little bit more.  Rita was an element of the whole story, but Groundhog Day was very much Phil’s story in the original version.  The changes made the film more of a traditional Hollywood romantic comedy, and it wasn’t originally written that way.  That was part of what helped it fall together for Harold.  It helped him understand it, and in turn helped him explain it to an audience.  I’m glad that it worked, and it worked really, really well.

 

Tell me about Bill Murray’s character.

Danny Rubin:  It was a shared responsibility, and sometimes these things either magically come together or they don’t. I had originally imagined Phil as more of an average guy, not a particularly nasty guy.  He was young, in his mid-twenties, and sort of looked at things, like, “Well, if you were put in this situation you would do it, too.”  And that premise worked for my original concept.  And then they cast Bill Murray and decided to make the film more of a romantic comedy.  Bill’s sense of humor being what it is, he had his own take on Phil Connors, which was a guy working through middle-age issues and trying to escape the rut in his life.  Bill saw a struggling character, one that was maybe a little disillusioned with where the journey had taken him.  He decided to make Phil Connors a little bit more of an unsympathetic character, who was also an egotist and into only himself.  I didn’t disagree with those things, but I didn’t think they were necessary to tell the story.  You have to remember, I wasn’t writing a comedy when I sat down and came up with the concept.  I was writing Siddhartha.  It wasn’t supposed to feel like a sitcom.

 

Did Bill’s interpretation of Phil Connors ever become a point of contention?

Danny Rubin:  Harold gently walked me away from the ledge [laughs].  Actually, Harold reassured me that it would be okay.  Sometimes I was assured and sometimes I wasn’t, but we had what I think was a genial, friendly, but professional relationship.  This provided a cushion.  Through the years we spoke to each other every Groundhog Day.  Sometimes we’d make it a point to see each other and have a meal.

 

It sounds like the movie created a bond between writer and director.

Danny Rubin:  Over the years, as the film became more and more important in people’s minds and imaginations, there was more distance behind the process that made it, and more shared experience of the afterlife.  We met each other’s families, and talked about our kids and how things were going.  It was a very lovely, friendly relationship in the years that followed.

 

Did you write Ned Ryerson over-the-top, or did the actor bring that to the smarmy insurance salesman?

Danny Rubin:  It was on the page exactly as he said it, but nobody else brought that level of “scrape him off the pavement” that Stephen Tobolowsky did.  When discussing the role, he said something like, “You’re going to have to take me off pavement with a spatula.”  I never imagined it happening like it did, but in some ways he’s the most memorable character that I’ve ever created.

 

Stephen Tobolowsky as insurance salesmen Ned Reyerson

 

Phil Connors seemed to relish punching Ned.

Danny Rubin:  What a cliché that the most obnoxious guy in town would be an insurance salesman.  And yet, I met several insurance salesmen in my early twenties who were exactly like that.  Someone like Ned Ryerson is the last person that I would ever want to be stuck anywhere with, so Phil slugging the guy would have been a perfectly reasonable way to deal with this eternity…well-deserved and, somehow, morally defensible.

 

Tell me about Rita, played by Andie MacDowell.

Danny Rubin:  I think Rita was a change agent for Phil.  She took him from his lowest point and set him on the right course for that one beat.  Until then, Phil’s mindset was “I am a god.”  After that point he suddenly contemplated what he wanted to do with his life.  To some extent, that sounds like a dishonest alteration from the experiment, but on the other hand, that was one of the conceits that Harold came up with that made the film feel like a romantic comedy.

 

After that scene, Phil stops looking at his predicament as a curse.

Danny Rubin:  It felt natural to go in that direction.  He could fill his days figuring out new ways to torture people, or new ways to create mayhem.  I think it felt more natural that he would have already done that and gotten over it.  We don’t see everything that happened to the character in the movie, but we understand that Phil had torn down every bit of who he was, and then started to fill himself up with something new.  I always imagined Phil as a vessel that gets emptied and refilled.

 

Refilled in a good way.

Danny Rubin:  Torture and mayhem doesn’t feel like a Harold Ramis movie [laughs].  Redemption was the only direction it could go.  We open our ears to civilization and we learn to develop skills and sensitivities, and we listen to the world and we pay attention to other people, and realize that we aren’t the only thing going.  We learn that being generous to other people can bring its own kind of satisfaction, which is arguably even more fulfilling than trying to satisfy yourself.  And that was Phil’s ultimate realization.

 

Let’s talk about Groundhog Day: The Musical.  What was it like taking the film to the stage?

Danny Rubin:  I always had it in my mind that Groundhog Day would make a great musical.  I just kind of kept that in the back of my head, because I figured I had a long career ahead of me and I wasn’t about to just start making more Groundhog stuff.  Eventually it bubbled up to the top of my pile, and I realized that it was now or never.

 

Old friends: Danny Rubin and Bill Murray at the Broadway premiere of Groundhog Day: The Musical

 

You needed the theatre equivalent of Harold Ramis to pull it off.

Danny Rubin:  It was at this same time that I found my partners, Tim Minchin and Matthew Warchus.  I loved their work on Matilda.  Both of them were people that I felt almost immediately that I could trust. They seemed to value my work and my input and wanted to create something really special as opposed to something that they could just capitalize on.

 

Was it important for them to stay true to the movie?

Danny Rubin:  They had their hearts in the right place.  Because Groundhog Day had become so huge in the public imagination, I felt like we had a responsibility to do something at least as good as the movie.  We were able to pull it off because we were all on the same page.

 

Did you write any of the songs?

Danny Rubin:  I didn’t try to write any songs.  I told Tim all of my song ideas, and we talked about where the songs would go, but I left that up to him.  I was able to help him evaluate where the play was emotionally before, during, and after a song. It was a great, great collaboration.

 

Groundhog Day has had incredible staying power.  How does it feel to be a part of something so beloved?

Danny Rubin:  Lucky.  Just incredibly fortunate.  I guess there are a couple of things that you could hope for in a life, or in a career, and doing something that actually affects other people in a way and becomes part of the conversation, it’s just an honor to be associated with a film like that.

 

If you had one piece of advice for others what would that be?

Danny Rubin:  I don’t think I’m supposed to do that.  People will figure that out for themselves.  I only do what I like or what I’m proud of, and I try to like what I do when I can’t control what I’m stuck doing.  And no matter what those big goal values are, you try to stick to them.  You’ve got to bend a little bit here and there.  I guess if I had one piece of advice is to remember that it’s life, and you’ve only got one of them.  Appreciate the miraculous nature of that in as many ways as you can, and as often as you can.  And don’t focus on all of those rejection letters.

https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/the_danny_rubin_interview.png 400 600 Michael McClellan https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FifteenMinutesWith_NewLogoPrototype.png Michael McClellan2018-04-22 18:13:132018-05-31 02:40:56Danny Rubin – Groundhog Day
Film & TV, Sports

Mike Eruzione – Miracle

By:  Michael D. McClellan |  This game never lets go.  Decades have passed since Mike Eruzione’s go-ahead goal gave the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team a 4-3 lead over the Soviet Union, a lead that would be fiercely tested over the final ten minutes of the final period, the Russians blasting shot after shot at goaltender Jim Craig until those final, frenetic seconds drained away, a young Al Michaels immortalizing the moment with his signature “Do you believe in miracles?  Yes!”, and chants of “U-S-A! U-S-A!” reverberating throughout the Lake Placid Olympic Fieldhouse.  There have been other sports moments to take our breath – moments punctuated with a Tiger Woods fist pump, or an Usain Bolt lightning bolt pose, or a Michael Phelps primal scream – but nothing to match what transpired on that sheet of ice during the height of the Cold War.  That’s what happens when a team executes the perfect game plan on the biggest stage against an unbeatable opponent.  Herb Brooks’ team did just that, shocking the Russians and creating a world where coaches everywhere were instantly and forever given license to dream aloud, inspiring their teams to do the impossible: Kids, let me tell you a story about a hockey game back in 1980.  Time marches on, yet this game hasn’t loosened its grip.  Lives turned on the outcome, and lives are affected still:  Heroes made, opportunities paved, careers set in motion.

Funny thing about the “Miracle on Ice”:  The average American didn’t give a damn about hockey heading into Lake Placid.  Hockey was a fringe sport, a curiosity to most, goons on skates from other countries mostly, the games rarely shown on TV.  People knew Gordie Howe and Bobby Orr.  After that, blank stares and confused looks.  Hockey was a big deal across the border in snowy Canada, and popular in cold weather cities like Detroit and Chicago, but football was king everywhere else, the NFL loaded with household names like Staubach, Simpson, and Swann.  Mike Eruzione?  He was just another nameless, faceless kid on a team constructed of nameless, faceless kids, unrecognizable to most unless you happened to be a hardcore hockey fan.

Brooks didn’t give a damn that we didn’t give a damn, and he could have cared less that his team was constructed with a bunch of no-names.  There were no stars on Brooks’ 1980 U.S. squad.  He knew that beating the Soviets – Olympic gold medalists in 1964, 1968, 1972 and 1976 – would require selfless players who could not only fit his system, but players who could be pushed beyond the limits of ordinary men.

Players like Mike Eruzione.

 

Mike Eruzione, named team captain by head coach Herb Brooks, was twice nearly cut from the team in the weeks leading up to Lake Placid. He would score the winning goal against the Soviet Union.

.

That Eruzione could even appear on Brooks’ radar is something of a miracle in itself, given that the Winthrop, Massachusetts native wasn’t the most fluid skater and dazzled nobody with his puck-handling.  Eruzione’s sports in high school were football and baseball.  He’d barely found his way onto a college hockey team, getting a scholarship offer the summer after finishing prep school and only after a recruit bailed on Boston University at the last minute.  He’d toiled for the Toledo Goaldiggers in the International Hockey League before getting an invite to the Olympic tryouts in Colorado Springs in the summer of 1979.  He’d made the team as much for his intangibles – an infectious, likable personality that had endeared himself to his teammates and that had caught the eye of team doctor George Nagobads, who had pushed Brooks to make him captain – as he did for his tireless work on the ice.  And when a scoring slump prompted Brooks to consider cutting him from the team not once, but twice, in the weeks leading up to Lake Placid, it was Eruzione’s servant leadership that saved him.  It’s hard to cut a guy whose never-say-die attitude helped keep a team together through six months of hellish practices and rugged exhibitions, all of it underpinned with Brooks’ relentless brand of psychological warfare.

“Eruzione’s your leader. You need a leader,” Gus Hendrickson – Brooks’ friend and the coach of Minnesota-Duluth at the time – said over dinner in late January, less than a month before the start of the Games.  “Herbie, don’t start screwing things up now.”

It’s been said that every coach has a gimmick, and Brooks’ gimmick was playing the role of hard-ass overlord, with mind games a huge part of the arsenal.  Struggle to put the puck in the net, especially the way Eruzione was struggling in the lead up to the XIII Winter Olympic Games, and Brooks wouldn’t hesitate to give other players a long look, even if those players hadn’t sacrificed and suffered like everyone else.  That’s the way Brooks rolled.  He was prickly, impatient, and unrelenting in his button-pushing.  No one on the team, including Mike Eruzione, was off limits.

 

“Herb would have cut his own grandchildren to gain an advantage.  He didn’t play favorites, and he didn’t get close to his players.  He was hard on everyone.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“Herb would have cut his own grandchildren to gain an advantage,” Eruzione says with a laugh.  “He didn’t play favorites, and he didn’t get close to his players.  He was hard on everyone.”

Eruzione might have been the captain and the unquestioned heart and soul of this team of nondescript overachievers, but, with the Olympics looming, he wasn’t performing at the level his coach demanded.  Brooks response:  Bring in a willing pair of freshman forwards from the University of Minnesota, where he’d coached the Gophers to three national championships, and hold open auditions less than three weeks ahead of the opening ceremonies.  That Tim Harrer and Aaron Broten would be brought in so late, without sacrifice, sat well with no one.  Eruzione knew that his roster spot was on the line, and that surviving Brooks’ boot-camp grind for six months ensured him nothing.  It took the team confronting Brooks for him to relent.

“If Herb had cut Eruzione, we weren’t going to go,” teammate John Harrington later insisted.  “We had become a family after everything we’d been through.  There was no way we were going to let Herb cut Rizzo.”

The show of unity spared Eruzione the same cruel fate that had befallen Brooks twenty years earlier, when, on the cusp of his own Olympic dream, he was singled out by his coach and sent home.  Jack Riley’s decision to replace Brooks on the roster hadn’t been an easy one.  He’d recruited 1956 Olympic standout Bill Cleary for months, and when Cleary finally agreed – on the condition that his brother, Bob, join him in Squaw Valley – Brooks was the odd man out.  The cut occurred just days before the start of the 1960 Winter Olympics, and a cutout of Bob Cleary’s head was pasted over Herb Brook’s body in the team picture.  Brooks watched on TV as the U.S. defeated the Soviets and Czechoslovakia in the medal round, winning the gold medal.

Keeping Eruzione meant that Brooks would gamble on his captain’s leadership instead of Harrer’s superior puck handling, but he still had choices to make in order to reach the twenty man roster limit.  The final cuts were Jack Hughes, a defenseman from Harvard, and Ralph Cox, a forward from the University of New Hampshire.  Brooks had his team.

Two weeks later, his team would shock the world.

 

HUMBLE BEGINNINGS


Decades before his iconic goal broke that 3-3 tie with ten minutes left in the medal round against the Soviets, a young Mike Eruzione was growing up in Winthrop, an old seaside town on a jutting piece of land a little east of Boston, bounded on the east by Massachusetts Bay and on the west by Logan Airport and the harbor, a compact place with 20,000 people jammed into a 1.6 square mile area, a postage stamp with rows of clapboard and shingled homes shoehorned together on lots not much bigger than a penalty box.  The Boston skyline rises up across the harbor but feels much farther away.  Revere – connected to Winthrop by a narrow isthmus, and named after Revolutionary War icon Paul Revere – is where Eruzione would get his start playing hockey.

“Winthrop didn’t have a youth hockey program of any kind back then,” he says. “We’d skate where we could – on flooded tennis courts or in sand traps that had frozen over – but we had to go to Revere to play organized hockey.  Today, Revere and Winthrop are big high school hockey rivals.  A lot has changed.”

From 1880 to 1920, an estimated 4 million Italian immigrants arrived in the United States, most from 1900 to 1914, and most from southern Italy and Sicily.  Italian unification in 1861 worsened conditions in those places, where the soil was exhausted, taxes and tariffs were high and young men were conscripted for seven years.  In 1880 about a thousand Italian immigrant families came to Boston, the first wave to the city bypassed by most Europeans save for the Irish.

These immigrants didn’t speak English.  They were forced to take low-wage jobs and exploited by middlemen.  They settled in ghettos known as Little Italies: Front Street in Hartford, Central End in Bridgeport, Shrewsbury Street in Worcester, the South End of Springfield, Mass.  The biggest Little Italies – the North End of Boston, Wooster Square in New Haven, Federal Hill in Providence – were once crowded tenement neighborhoods.  Today they have gentrified and are now tourist attractions.

 

Mike Eruzione’s dream would begin in Winthrop, MA. It would culminate with a gold medal in Lake Placid.

.

Eugene Eruzione – affectionately known as Jeep, and who worked as a maintenance man in a sewage treatment plant and as a waiter in Santarpio’s pizzeria in East Boston – was one of those Italian immigrants, settling in Winthrop with his wife, Helen, and quickly starting a family.  The Eruziones lived in a three-story family compound that had been subdivided into three apartments, the place always buzzing with activity, aunts and uncles and cousins coming and going, children playing all manner of sports, the air thick with the smell of pasta sauce.

“I had a great childhood,” Eruzione says.  “I had very loving parents.  I lived in a three-family home, which I actually live next door to now, so in a way I never really left.  We lived on the second floor, where I grew up with four sisters and a brother.  Upstairs from us was my mother’s brother – he married my father’s sister, and they lived on the third floor with their five kids, which was three girls and two boys.  On the first floor was my father’s other sister, who lived with her husband and their three kids.  So needless to say, there were a lot of kids in the house.

“Having three families under the same roof was a great way to grow up.  There was a lot of love, a lot of fun, a lot of singing, a lot of great food, and some pretty good competition among the boys in terms of sports that we were playing in the backyard.  Looking back it seems like a lot of people in one house, but growing up I thought that everybody lived in a three family home.  I wouldn’t change a thing about it, because my childhood was outstanding.”

Sports were a huge part of Eruzione’s childhood.  Anything with a stick or a ball.  His parents taught him to pursue and expect success, but to do it humbly and not to take anything for granted.  His name is the Italian word for “eruption,” and that’s how Eruzione went about everything from an early age:  Full throttle, with a spirit and energy that was equal parts Rudy Ruettiger and Rocky Balboa.  It was this same never-say-die attitude that would later propel him to Olympic greatness, but back then it was unleashed, without prejudice, on every sport Eruzione played.

 

“I didn’t start playing hockey until I was around eight or nine years old.  We had a big yard next door, so we played a lot of touch football and tackle football in that yard.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“I didn’t start playing hockey until I was around eight or nine years old,” Eruzione says.  “We had a big yard next door, so we were always playing something.  There was no soccer or lacrosse when I was a kid.  There was no youth football.  We just went outside and picked teams.  We played a lot of touch football and tackle football in that yard.  That’s how we got our football fix.

“During the summer months I played a lot of stick ball and Wiffle ball.  I also played a lot of something called hack ball, which is a game that a lot of people don’t know about.  What you do to play is cut a tennis ball in half, and then someone pitches it and you try to hit it with a broomstick handle.  That was a very popular game in my neighborhood when I was a kid.  When I got a little older and the cold weather came, we’d all get together and play hockey.  There was no rink in my hometown, so we had to skate outside.  We’d do that until baseball season started.  Even then I couldn’t wait to play baseball, which was my favorite sport to that point.  By the time I graduated high school I’d probably played more baseball in my life than hockey, but back then kids didn’t specialize in one sport.  They played whatever sport was in season.  So, in high school I played hockey, baseball and football.  I have a lot of great memories from that period in my life.”

Wearing his older sister’s white hand-me-down figure skates, Eruzione begged his mother to let him skate on the lake with the older kids.  Helen eventually agreed, redeeming her stash of S&H green stamps to buy him a pair of hockey skates.  And then, when he wanted to sign up for organized hockey, she agreed to that, too, with one stipulation:  Quitting wasn’t an option.

“Neither was pouting,” Eruzione says with a laugh.  “If you didn’t get into the game or didn’t score any goals, you still worked hard and you had fun.  Winthrop didn’t have a hockey team, so I actually got my start with the Revere Youth Hockey Association.  In winter we had league play in Revere, where we could go skate on Saturday mornings from 6 o’clock until 8 am.  That was our ice time.  Mark Buckley and a handful of other guys used to run a couple of great programs – the Learn to Skate program and the Revere Youth Hockey program.  It was a great way to learn, but we didn’t have a team that played anywhere.  By the time I was around nine or ten years old I was starting to become a pretty good player, and that’s when I was finally old enough to play on a team in the town of Revere. A couple of years later Winthrop started up a hockey program, so I went back and started playing in Winthrop.”

Throughout his childhood, Eruzione’s natural athleticism fueled his passion for sports, but he never thought of himself as a star athlete.  He wasn’t cocky, and didn’t need anyone stroking his ego.

“I never looked at it that way. I wouldn’t come home and say ‘I’m the best player on the team,’ or ‘I’m going to be a pro player because I’m better than the next guy.’  I always took things in stride and was part of a team.  To me, the team was always more important than how well I was playing.”

Eruzione may have been humble and fun-loving, but he also had a competitive streak a mile wide.  This trait, which helped propel a tough kid from Massachusetts to the Olympic stage, was easy to spot during those early years.

“It’s interesting what you remember from your days playing sports as a kid.  I enjoyed playing baseball and football because I enjoyed the changing seasons, which allowed me to get away from the rink.  Fortunately for me I was a pretty good player in both sports.  We won the town championship when I was in Little League, which was pretty cool.  I remember playing baseball in the Boston Record-American league when I was fifteen, which is when I made the Hearst All-Stars and got to play two games at Fenway Park.  That was a pretty exciting accomplishment for me, because kids from all over New England tried out for this team and they only selected a handful.  Getting an invite to play at Fenway was a proud moment.  Unfortunately, the Record-American folded after that, and they were one of the largest sponsors.  In high school I got to play football in the Agganis All-Star game, which is now the Massachusetts Shriners All-Star game.  I was a defensive back.  I have a lot of great moments and memories of the sports that I played.

“I think those experiences helped me to become a better hockey player,” Eruzione continues.  “I look back on those fun moments fondly, because I was fortunate to play on some very good teams.  My senior year we won our conference in both hockey and in baseball, and our football team only lost one game. Unfortunately, Swampscott was the team that that beat us, and they went undefeated and kept us out of the playoffs.  It’s funny, I graduated from high school in 1972, and I still remember every play of the one football game that we lost.”

Eruzione’s focus on sports didn’t leave much time for anything else, but he still managed to have a blast in high school.  Popular and fun-loving, he made friends easily, even if he wasn’t always up on the latest pop culture trends.

“Winthrop is a small town, so everybody knew everybody,” Eruzione says.  “I loved my high school days – I was the treasurer of my senior class, and I was pretty active in a lot of things at my school.  Socially, I hung out with my friends when I wasn’t playing sports.  I didn’t have a stereo or what they later called boom boxes, so I listened to whatever was playing on the radio.  I really wasn’t a big music guy.  I didn’t spend a lot of time in music stores flipping through albums.  At home my father would listen to singers like Jimmy Roselli, or Jerry Vale, or Connie Francis.  I had some great teachers, but I think I probably spent a little more time in the gym and outside playing sports than I did in the classroom.  But I think that was an era when you could get away with doing that.  That isn’t the case today.  My high school years were nothing but fun.”

That Eruzione has stayed put – he lives on a sloping street not more than 100 yards from Winthrop Golf Club and not even a mile from Winthrop High School, walking distance from the houses he and his wife, Donna, grew up in – gives testament to his love of the area.  He holds a day job at his alma mater, Boston University, and he’s also one of the most sought-after speakers in the country, hired by corporations of all sizes to inspire and motivate.

 

Mike Eruzione defied the odds to become the captain and career scoring leader at Boston University.

.

“The requests have kept coming, even though Lake Placid happened so long ago.  The demand never lets up.”

Nor has he tired of telling it.  He’s shared the same story countless times through the years and it never gets old, not when he tells it as if it happened yesterday.  He’s completely at ease reliving the miracle, although he doesn’t consider it one, not when that 1980 U.S. hockey team was in better condition than the rest of the field at Lake Placid, and not after all of the sacrifices made by the team to get there.  An upset for the ages, perhaps, but an earned upset, nonetheless.

“We were prepared, mentally and physically,” he says.  “We approached each game like we deserved to be there, knowing that we would eventually wear down the other team.  It was the same approach when we played the Soviets.  We kept skating and they didn’t have an answer.”

Eruzione gives dozens of speeches each year.  He speaks in a thick Boston accent, the audience rapt, every eye fixed on a beloved hero who refutes the idea that winning gold was about any one individual standing out above the others.  Sports Illustrated selected the “Miracle on Ice” as the greatest sports moment in history, bigger than Jesse Owens’ gold medal on Adolph Hitler’s home turf, bigger than Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier, bigger than any magical moment fashioned by Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods or Muhammad Ali.  Eruzione knows this when he strides briskly onstage and takes control of a room.  It’s clear that he’s immensely proud of what the team accomplished, and he enjoys telling the story as much as the audience enjoys hearing it, but he doesn’t assign himself any special celebrity.  Spend any time with him at all and you’ll quickly learn that Mike Eruzione is a lunch pail guy, a hard hat guy, a blue collar guy.  He’s never been one to put athletes on pedestals, least of all himself.

“I didn’t have a lot of sports heroes growing up, mainly because we didn’t have a television when I was kid.  We never really knew what was going on in the sports world.  My uncle always had the radio on, so I’d occasionally listen to Johnny Most when the Celtics were playing, but that was about it.  You’d hear a name but you didn’t know much about them, other than they played for the Boston Red Sox, or the Boston Bruins, or the Boston Celtics, or the New England Patriots.

 

“Back then my heroes were the people that I looked up to, which were the school teachers and police officers in my hometown, because I really didn’t know a lot about the athletes.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“Back then my heroes were the people that I looked up to, which were the school teachers and police officers in my hometown, because I really didn’t know a lot about the athletes.  Bill Russell was someone that I knew about, obviously.  My dad would talk about guys like Ted Williams, Bob Cousy and John Havlicek, and I admired all of them because of the stories that my father would tell.  I remember guys like Gino Capalletti and Babe Perilli because my dad and my uncle would talk about them, too.  Carl Yastrzemski is another one, but I was a little older when Yaz was playing, and by then we had television. I think I was around 13 years old at the time, but even then I didn’t really watch a lot of TV.  Bobby Orr was someone else that I admired greatly – I was in high school when Bobby came on the scene.”

The winter sport of choice in town during Mike Eruzione’s childhood was basketball.  He grew up at the height of the Bill Russell Dynasty, when the Celtics were busy winning eleven NBA Championships in thirteen years.  Eruzione has long admired Red Auerbach’s team-first approach, with Russell leading the way and the Celtics putting the collective effort above individual stats and accolades, principles that resonated with him as he transitioned from youth hockey to high school sports, and then later when he survived Brooks’ tryouts in Colorado Springs.

“I was a big fan of Bill Russell and those great teams they had during the Sixties,” Eruzione says.  “I went to see the Celtics play years later.  A friend of mine had season tickets and I used to go to the Boston Garden with him when Larry Bird was playing.  The biggest moment for me came right after the 1980 Olympics, when Red Auerbach and the Celtics contacted me to be introduced at a Celtics game.  I actually sat next to John Havlicek – I’d met John at that point through some of the celebrity events that we both attended in Boston.  It was unbelievable to be the guest of honor and to be introduced at a Celtics game, especially with Mr. Havlicek, as I called him back then, sitting next to me.

“I would go to a few games a year when Larry Bird played, but over the years I’ve become something of a homebody.  I really like sitting at home and watching the games on television, or going down to the golf club or the local bar with my buddies and watching sporting events there.  High definition television has changed everything.  Back when the Celtics were winning all of those titles in the Sixties and the Celtics were on TV, and I was watching Sam Jones and KC Jones and that whole crew of players, there was no way you could see it like you see it today.  Maybe in those days it was better going to the games live, but now it’s so much more enjoyable sitting at home and watching it on the big screen.”

At Winthrop Senior High School, Eruzione was the unquestioned leader of an overachieving team that reached the state tournament.  Larry Bird on skates.  He was all of five feet six inches and 145 pounds at the time, but his teammates will tell you a disproportionate amount of the weight was heart.

“High school hockey was a good experience for me, because we were one of the first hockey teams in the town – I think we’d only had hockey at Winthrop for four or five years at that point.  We were the first hockey team at Winthrop Senior to make the state tournament.  That was my junior year.  Making the tournament was pretty exciting for the town and for the future hockey, because it helped inspire other kids to play the game.  I was fortunate to play with some really good players.  High school hockey is like any high school sport – it’s exciting, because you’re representing your town, and you are kind of like the cool kid in school, because everybody knows you’re on the hockey team, or the baseball team, or whatever.  You get accepted more easily because everybody knows you.”

 

COLLEGE LIFE


Mike Eruzione graduated from high school with a plan, and it didn’t include becoming the spark plug for the greatest upset in Olympic history.  He’d been a multi-sport jock at Winthrop Senior High, his world oscillating from shoulder pads to ice skates to baseball bats, and he envisioned more of the same in college.  Surely a school would see what he saw in himself and take a chance.

Turns out no one did.

Athletic enough to play collegiately, but not athletic enough to turn heads at the Division I level, Eruzione found himself being recruited by no one.  Hustle and heart go a long way at the high school level, but it only gets you so far in the world of big-time college sports.  Forced into Plan B, Eruzione decided to prep for college at Berwick Academy in Maine.

“My cousin had gone to Worcester Academy as a post graduate, and the post graduate route struck me as a good idea and a pretty good opportunity,” Eruzione says.  “I wasn’t a very big guy coming out of high school – I was about 155 pounds my senior year – and I knew that I needed another year of physical growth if I wanted to play college sports.  I also knew that I needed to get another year of academics under my belt if I wanted to make it in the classroom.  Berwick provide me an opportunity to do both.

“My goal was to use Berwick as a springboard to go to the University of New Hampshire.  I thought that UNH would be a perfect place for me, because I wanted to go to a school where I could play three sports.  So I played football, hockey and baseball at Berwick, while dreaming of playing three sports at UNH.  Going there was a great decision not only from an athletic standpoint, but from an academic standpoint.  It helped me to prioritize education above sports.  I was fortunate to go to Berwick Academy.”

Eruzione emerged from that year at Berwick four inches taller and 40 pounds heavier, and optimistic about his chances of landing a scholarship.  He’d stayed in touch with the coaches at his dream school, worked hard in the both the weight room and the classroom, and grown more confident after a year spent competing at a higher level of competition.  And then, just as he felt that his athletic career was back on track, Mike Eruzione got another dose of reality.

“Like I said, I wanted to go to the University of New Hampshire.  The football and baseball coaches both thought I was a pretty good athlete.  Unfortunately, the hockey coach didn’t think that I was a Division I player.   Well, I’d put all of my eggs in one basket – for me it was the University of New Hampshire or bust.  I thought it was a slam dunk.  How could they not want me?  I was a really good athlete, and two of the coaches liked me, so I just assumed that the hockey coach would like me also. As it turns out, none of the three coaches offered me a scholarship.  It was a major wakeup call.  The only school that had shown any genuine interest in me was Merrimack College.  They were a Division II hockey school at the time, and I didn’t have a lot of options.  So I swallowed my pride.  I decided that I wasn’t going to be able to play baseball and football.  I decided that I’d go to Merrimack and only play hockey.”

It was during the summer of 1973 that Eruzione’s life would change forever, even though there was no way to predict it at the time.

“I didn’t play much hockey during the summer because I played a lot of baseball, but a friend of mine called me and said, ‘A bunch of guys are going to Cape Cod for the weekend, would you be interested in playing some hockey with us?’  And I said, ‘If you’re looking for someone, sure, I’ll play.’  So I went to Cape Cod and played even though I hadn’t been on the ice since hockey season had ended.”

 

Mike Eruzione, Jack Parker, and Rick Meagher – ECAC Championship at the Boston Garden, March 12, 1977.

.

“It turned out that the guy refereeing the game was a guy named Jack Parker.  Jack was the assistant coach at Boston University, and after the game he pulled me aside and wanted to know where I was going to school.  I told him that I was going to Merrimack, and he said, ‘I remember you from high school, where did you go last year?’  I told him that I went to Berwick Academy, and he goes, ‘We have a kid from Canada that decided not to come to BU, and now we have a scholarship available.  Would you like to come to Boston University?’  I went home that night and talked to my dad.  He asked me if it was a full scholarship.  I explained that it was for $3,500 bucks, which in 1973 was a lot of money, and I told father that I was going to BU.  He was happy for me, but he wanted to know if I thought I could play for a big-time program like that.  I didn’t hesitate.  I told him that I could do it.  The next day I went into Jack Parker’s office, sat down with him, and told him I was coming to Boston University.”

Parker, who would retire from Boston University following the 2013 season, capping a 40-season tenure that saw him amass more wins than any hockey coach at the same institution in the country, had just taken over the BU B-team and was scrambling for players.  He’d seen Eruzione play before and hadn’t been overly impressed, but came away from that summer league game intrigued.

“The head coach at the time was a guy named Leon Abbott.  It was early in the year, and I was playing on the fourth line – we were practicing but the season hadn’t started yet.  In those days the season started a lot later than it does now.  Well, Leon Abbott ended up getting fired right before Christmas and Jack Parker became the head coach.  I went from being the center on the fourth line to second line left-wing and ended up leading the team in goals scored that year.  I was very fortunate and blessed to have Jack Parker in my life.”

Eruzione arrived at BU two years ahead of Olympic teammate Jack O’Callahan and three years ahead of Dave Silk and Jim Craig.  He would go on to become BU’s all-time leading scorer, with 208 points – averaging more than 20 goals per season – a record that Eruzione is proud of, but one that he doesn’t spend a lot of time dwelling on.

“The school scoring record means that I played with some good players,” Eruzione says quickly.  “In team sports – especially in the sport of ice hockey – you don’t do things by yourself.  I had a great center, a kid by the name of Rick Meagher, who was a three-time All-American and just a great, great college hockey player.  He played in the National Hockey League for quite a while.  I was fortunate to have Rick as my center man, and we kind of hit it off right away, from the first time we stepped on the ice together.  He graduated as the all-time leading scorer by one point ahead of me, deservingly so, because he was a better college player than I was.  You think of how fortunate you are to play with great players like Rick, and then you can’t help but think about what a privilege it was to play on those teams.  When I was at BU we won four straight league championships. We went to the Frozen Four all four years.  Unfortunately, we didn’t win it while I was there – and then I graduate and they win the national championship the very next year [laughs].  That tells you something about timing, but again, I was fortunate to play with great players, and anytime anyone gets the distinction of leading a team in scoring, or whatever, it’s because of the people you play with.”

In addition to the scoring record, Eruzione played in 127 consecutive games for the Terriers, never missing a contest in his four years on the team.

“That means I was lucky,” Eruzione insists.  “I didn’t get hurt.  I’m not a real deep person when it comes to my career and what I did on the ice.  I just always did what I was told.  The coach wants you to go out and play so you go out and you play.  You don’t ask questions.  I played as hard as I could every single game.  And I guess I was somewhat lucky that I never got bruised up, or banged up, and that I was able to take a shift every time that I played for four straight years.  I had some stitches here and there, but hockey players usually tend to play through those.  Those types of things weren’t a big issue.  I never had any knee problems until after college, at which point I had a couple of games where I got banged up a little and missed a couple of games here and there.  But for the most part I was healthy.  I wanted to be in the lineup every night and I wanted to play in every game.”

Even though those Eruzione-led BU teams came up short of a national championship, the Frozen Four format back then allowed for a consolation game.  Today there’s a quaint nostalgia associated with a contest to essentially determine who finishes third, but talk to Eruzione and it’s easy to see why it has gone the way of the helmetless hockey player.

“I’d like to tell you that we were all excited about playing the game, but both teams were pretty frustrated and pretty depressed by the fact that they didn’t win,” Eruzione says.  “I’m not going to say that we went through the motions, but the intensity in the consolation game is nowhere near the intensity in the championship game.  I think that most of the players on both teams felt an intense disappointment that they weren’t in the championship game.  You still have some pride, and you want to go out there and play as hard as you can, but it was such a letdown to come up short and then go out to see who was going to come out on top in a consolation game.  They don’t even do consolation games anymore, and I think it’s because they realized that nobody’s really into playing for third place at that point in the season.”

As college rivalries go, the animosity that existed between the hockey programs at Boston University and the University of Minnesota during the 1970s was as intense as any rivalry in sports.  BU had beaten the Gophers for the title in 1971 and had repeated as champions the following year.  Minnesota – known simply as “The U” – would win the school’s first national championship in 1974, and grab its second title two years later, both with Herb Brooks as head coach.

“I think most of the intensity between the schools developed out of the tournament format in place at the time,” Eruzione says.  “There were regional bragging rights involved.  There was a tremendous amount of pride at stake, and to be able to say you were the Eastern champion was a pretty big thing.  And then to win a national championship over a Western rival was the ultimate prize.  The format has changed and you don’t have that same mentality today.  Today, you could have two Western teams meeting in the finals or two Eastern teams could meet.  Those teams want to win, sure, but those bitter rivalries don’t exist.  When I played, the winners from the East played the winners from the West, so you went into that championship game trying to prove that your league or conference was better than theirs.

The teams would meet in the Frozen Four a total of four times during the 1970s, with none more memorable than the 1976 National Semifinal.

“That game was famous – infamous – for a bench-clearing brawl,” Eruzione says.  “It was the frustrating one for us, because that was the year that we thought we were going to win the national championship.  We were the number one team in college hockey all year, and we went out to Denver and played against a Minnesota team coached by Herb Brooks, four years before I got to play under Herb on the Olympic Team.

“Three or four minutes into the game a fight erupts, and it went on for what seemed like a good half hour before both teams got settled. If a melee like that happened today, both teams would be thrown out of the tournament.  We ended up losing, 4-2, and Minnesota went on to win the national championship.  I still look back on it and wonder if that was their game plan all along, to start this big fight to try to get us off our game.  If that was Herb’s strategy it worked.  It was very frustrating, because it was one of the better teams that I ever played on.  That loss was one of the biggest disappointments of my hockey career.”

Despite the hard feelings, Eruzione would come to learn that Jack Parker and Herb Brooks were very much alike in many ways.

 

“I really didn’t know anything about Herb at that time, other than I knew that he was a very intense coach, similar to my college hockey coach, Jack Parker.  I think that Herb was maybe a little more creative offensively, while Jack was more of a stickler for defense and playing both ends of the ice.  Other than that, they were pretty much cut from the same cloth.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“I really didn’t know anything about Herb at that time, other than I knew that he was a very intense coach, similar to my college hockey coach, Jack Parker.  That’s how coaches coached in that era.  They were very intense.  You could see Herb’s mannerisms on the bench and could tell that he was very intense and very demanding.  I think they were both very similar. Herb was from Minnesota, and coached the University of Minnesota.  Jack was from Boston, and coached at Boston University.  Herb played hockey at the University of Minnesota, and Jack played at Boston University.  They both had a passion to coach and teach.  They were both strict disciplinarians.  They were both in-your-face type of coaches.  I think that Herb was maybe a little more creative offensively, while Jack was more of a stickler for defense and playing both ends of the ice.  Other than that, they were pretty much cut from the same cloth.”

That Eruzione was elected co-captain as a senior at BU again speaks volumes about his leadership.

“My teammates respected me, and my coaches respected me,” Eruzione says.  “As I’ve said, I don’t put a lot into things like that.  It was nice that I had the title of captain, but it didn’t change me or the way I played or the type of person that I was going to be, or the type of teammate that I was going to be.  I think that sometimes people become captains and they change, and they become different, and that’s the biggest mistake that you can make.  The reason you’re elected captain is because of who you are as a person.  Your teammates will know immediately if you’re not genuine and authentic.  It was nice to selected as caption, but again, it wasn’t a huge thing for me.”

~  ~  ~

Each February, Boston’s TD Garden is the site of the traditional showdown between four of the city’s college hockey programs.  When Eruzione played, the venue was the old Boston Garden.  The Beanpot, as it’s known, has been going strong for more than 65 years, and the tournament has emerged with a lore uniquely its own.

“Growing up in Boston and being able to play in the Beanpot – and being able to play in the Boston Garden, where the Bruins played – was pretty amazing,” Eruzione says.  “The building was a complete sellout and packed with hockey fans rooting for one of the four Boston-area schools:  Harvard, Boston College, Boston University, and Northeastern.  The Beanpot is still going on today, and it’s still held the first two Mondays in February.  It’s an impossible ticket to get because of the rivalries of the schools and the bragging rights of the city.  It’s a big recruiting tool.  To be able to say that you’ve just won the Beanpot is a big selling point for your school.  Huge.  And for the players, it’s a memory that will last forever.  The big thing for me was to be able to play in front of my family and friends.  There were some years when I would get 50 or 60 tickets because we had so many people that wanted to come and watch.  You always got a little extra excited when those first two Mondays in February came around.”

The first Beanpot drew 5,105 fans.  By 1960, the tournament topped 10,000 in attendance.  A year later, the Beanpot filled Boston Garden.  Eruzione had graduated by the time the Blizzard of ’78 hit, dumping 27.1 inches of snow, postponing the final until March 1.

 

The Blizzard of 1978 paralyzed the City of Boston and postponed the ’78 Beanpot.

.

“I was living in Toledo Ohio at the time, but and I heard stories about it from people that I knew back home.  The bus was supposed to drop the team off at the rink so they could get rid of the equipment, but the storm was so bad that the bus couldn’t make it to the BU campus.  They had to let them off halfway up Commonwealth Avenue.  All the guys got off the bus and went to the campus bar across the street, which is where most of them stayed the night.”

While at BU, Eruzione also played for Team USA at the 1975 and 1976 Ice Hockey World Championship tournaments, giving him his first taste of international competition.

“We were a bunch of college players, along with a couple of ex-NHL players and players who were playing in Europe, so we were in way over our heads.  I think the first year we were 0-and-10. The Soviets beat us 13 to 3.  We even lost to Poland that year.  The losing was difficult to deal with, but for me it was just a great opportunity to represent your country.  That was the first time that I had ever put on a jersey that had ‘USA’ across the front.  Regardless of the fact that we weren’t very successful on the ice, just to be there and to be able to travel and see the world a little was very exciting.  It was also great to meet a lot of guys from different parts of the country.  There were a bunch of Minnesota guys on that team, guys like Buzz Schneider.  Buzzy and I ended up teammates together later in the Olympics.”

Eruzione then spent two seasons with the Toledo Goaldiggers of the International Hockey League, being named the Rookie of the Year in 1978 while leading the team to the Turner Cup Championship.

“It was a great experience for me,” he says quickly.  “It helped me to see a different level of competition that what I’d played against in college.  I also learned a lot about how to prepare for an opponent, which really helped me in the Olympics.  And I met a lot of great people during my time in Toledo.”

One of those people was Jim McCabe, who centered a line with Eruzione.  McCabe led the Goaldiggers to two Turner Cup championships over six seasons, and connected instantly with the player everyone referred to as “Rizzo”.

“He was my winger for half a season,” McCabe says.  “We got to be real good friends. He helped paint my house.  He’s a great guy and he deserved everything he got.  He was very patriotic.  I remember him holding his hand on his heart during the National Anthem.  Some of us Canadians made fun of him, but we knew that he wasn’t putting on a show.  We knew that he loved his country.  So for him to be a part of that 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team, it couldn’t have worked out any better.  I was very happy to see him win the gold medal.”

 

USA HOCKEY


Herb Brooks had a plan.

He applied for the Team USA coaching job in 1978, fresh off the third of three national championships he would win at The U, and he’d studied the Russian style of play for years.  He was obsessed with the beauty of their game, which was predicated on speed and passing, and he’d long admired the way they attacked at every opportunity, wearing down teams by sheer force of will.  The Soviets were fast, strong, and above all else, skilled.  Brooks knew that beating them would not only take perfection, it would take total commitment and outside-the-box thinking.  He also knew that, if given the opportunity, he was as qualified as anyone to flip the script on the Russians.

Brooks may have been supremely confident in his abilities, but there was a problem:  He wasn’t the first choice to lead the American men into an Olympic tournament that the Soviets were heavily favored to win.  That distinction went to Bill Cleary – ironically, the same Bill Cleary that had cost Brooks a roster spot on that 1960 gold medal-winning team in Squaw Valley.  Cleary would ultimately decline the offer, instead choosing to focus on a new coaching gig at Harvard.  The decision opened the door for Brooks, who arranged a meeting with Walter Bush, the GM of the 1964 Olympic team Brooks played on, and the head of the Team USA search committee.  Bush was keenly aware of Brooks’ résumé, and was impressed by the way he’d inherited a downtrodden program at The U and had quickly turned it into a national power.  But Bush was also aware of Brooks’ reputation as a lone wolf, whose my-way-or-the-highway attitude had alienated many.  Despite the trepidation, Bush decided to grant an interview.

 

Herb Brooks arrived in Colorado Springs with a plan; six months later, the U.S. would shock the world by beating the Russians and winning the gold medal.

.

“Jack Parker also interviewed for the job,” Eruzione says.  “They were two of the best college hockey coaches at the time and both had done some amazing things, so I’m sure that it wasn’t an easy decision for the committee to make.”

Brooks arrived prepared.  Armed with binders stuffed with details, he presented a radical plan to turn USA Hockey on its head, challenging conventional wisdom on everything from player selection to staffing, conditioning and pre-Olympic scheduling.  Most dramatic of all, he wanted the United States to abandon the traditional, linear, dump-and-chase style of hockey that had been popular in North America for decades.  The Russians’ style, predicated on speed and weaving, took advantage of the Olympic ice sheet, which was fifteen feet wider than the rinks used in the NHL.  Brooks wanted to adopt the same style without sacrificing the physicality of the teams he’d coached.  He called this new model a hybrid style – taking the best aspects of the Soviet game and blending it with the best qualities of North American hockey.

Walter Bush and the selection committee walked away impressed not only by the level of detail, but also by the paradigm-changing approach that Brooks was proposing.  It was enough to sway the committee in his favor despite concerns that he might be difficult to work with.  Two days later, they offered the job to Brooks.

“I don’t think they realized how stubborn Herb was going to be,” Eruzione says with a chuckle.  “But once he got the job, he was a man of his word.  He said that he was going to do it his way, and that’s exactly what he did.”

Brooks next step was selecting a team.  He went to the Second Annual National Sports Festival in Colorado Springs in the summer of 1979, where a round robin tournament and championship playoff was being held, to do just that.  Sixty-eight of the nation’s best were invited, and it was here that Brooks would select the 26 men who would compete to represent the United States at Lake Placid.  While there was plenty of individual talent on the ice, Brooks wasn’t necessarily looking for the most talented players or the most prolific scorers.  He understood that all-star teams didn’t win games, especially against the Soviets – the NHL All-Stars found that out the hard way, losing 6-0 against them in a high-profile game at Madison Square Garden the year before.  He needed hockey players willing to reconstruct their games to fit his system.

Eruzione fit that mold to a T.

“I had an opportunity to try out,” Eruzione says.  “I wasn’t alone – there were a lot of people who had opportunities to make the team, because there were a lot of open tryouts.  I just think my past experience – my college career, and what I did when I played in Toledo, helped to get me noticed.  I think those were the things that led Herb Brooks to extend an invite to Colorado Springs.  There were no guarantees.  I got invited along with 68 other guys.  We went to Colorado Springs and competed against each other over two weeks, out of which Herb selected selected the players who would vie for a shot at the 1980 Olympic Games.  Twenty-six of us made up the team.  Unfortunately, only 20 could go to Lake Placid.  I was just happy to be one of the 26 who made that first cut.”

The festival ran for two weeks, with Brooks and a nine-man advisory panel assessing the talent assembled in Colorado Springs.  Nothing was left to chance.  Brooks ran them through grueling skating and stick-handling drills, and had them complete a 300-question test to assess their psychological makeup.  That he finalized the roster without consulting the advisory panel sat well with no one, but Brooks refused to budge.

“Herb knew exactly what he wanted,” Eruzione says.  “The selection committee didn’t understand what was going on in his head, but he had a very clear vision of what it was going to take to beat the Russians.”

Trimming the roster down to twenty was an early priority, but the more immediate problem facing Brooks was the intense rivalry between the players from Minnesota and Boston University.  That 1976 NCAA semifinal brawl was still fresh in the minds of most, and it wasn’t long before the players were trading punches in Colorado Springs.

 

“The ice was a dangerous place to be those first couple of weeks.  There wasn’t much trust, and there was plenty of hostility.  Guys were out there looking to even the score for what happened in ’76.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“The ice was a dangerous place to be those first couple of weeks,” Eruzione says.  “There wasn’t much trust, and there was plenty of hostility.  Guys were out there looking to even the score for what happened in ’76.”

Brooks responded by giving the players a common enemy:  Herb Brooks.

“He was so hard on us that we didn’t have time to worry about settling old scores.  He pushed us.  He played mind games with us.  He kept us wondering whether we were going to make the team.  I’m sure it was all part of his plan to bring us together.  We couldn’t hate each other if we were busy hating him.”

While Brooks refused to become even remotely connected to the team on a personal level, he did have the foresight to hire an assistant coach with great relational skills.  Craig Patrick, a former All-American and Brooks’ teammate on the 1967 U.S. national team, was a perfect counterpoint to the combative, fire and brimstone spewing coach from The U.  Easy-going and naturally likable, Patrick quickly forged close bonds with the players.  Brooks, on the other hand, kept his emotions behind an impenetrable fortress.  He cared about the young men on his roster.  He just didn’t show it.

“He absolutely did.  He didn’t show it outwardly, but we knew that he cared for us very much,” Eruzione says.  “Herb made a conscious decision from the very beginning that he wasn’t going to be close to this team.  He didn’t feel that he could get the very best out of us if he was busy trying to be our friend.  So Herb stayed away from us.  He let us develop a chemistry on the ice and away from it.  I think Herb would’ve loved to have been close to this hockey team, but he couldn’t do that and also demand our very best, so he chose to take the path where he was going to stay away.  Craig Patrick was our assistant coach, and he was a very, very important part of our success.  Herb played the part of the bad cop, and he let Craig Patrick be the good cop.”

Following an August training camp in Lake Placid, Brooks whisked the team away to Europe for three weeks of games that served two primary purposes:  Gauge the team’s progress in adopting his hybrid style of play, and steer clear of NHL scouts who might try to poach his roster.

“The NHL training camps were opening up, and Herb didn’t want his players tempted by contract offers.  He was paranoid about that.  By the time we returned from Europe the camps had opened.  Herb thought of everything.  He left nothing to chance.”

In the Disney movie Miracle, the turning point when the players drop regional bias and become a family occurs during that European trip.  Playing Norway, the Americans slog their way to a 3-3 tie in a game that shouldn’t have been close.  Brooks, disgusted with his team’s lack of effort, famously thunders:  “If you don’t want to skate during the game, then you’ll skate after it.”  He then orders them to the end line, where they skate suicides – Herbies, as they became known – end line to blue line and back, end line to red line and back, end line to opposite blue line and back, and end line to end line and back.  The crowd filed out and the Americans skated.  The custodians turned out the lights and the Americans skated.  On and on it went, Brooks commanding Patrick to blow the whistle time and again, ignoring team doctor George Nagobads’ pleas to stop.  In the pivotal scene, Brooks relents only after Mike Eruzione shouts his name and allegiance to country, an epiphany that had been eluding the players due to those bitter college grudges.  It galvanizes them.  From that moment forward, the Americans play hockey with a common purpose.

“I don’t know that that’s what galvanized the team, especially the way that it was portrayed in the movie.  In that scene I didn’t say, ‘Mike Eruzione, United States of America.’  And if I’d thought of it, I would have said it after the first suicide sprint, it wouldn’t have taken an hour and fifteen minutes to figure it out [laughs].  Still, it was probably one of the moments that helped galvanize the team, but I don’t think it was the key moment.  For one thing it happened so early – it was in September or maybe October when that took place – but it was definitely one of the teaching tools that Herb used throughout the year that helped to bond our team together.”

The next night, the teams played again.

The United States won, 9-0.

“Let’s just say that we were focused,” Eruzione says with a laugh.  “I don’t think any of us wanted to skate Herbies again.”

~  ~  ~

The Americans would grind through a total of sixty-one games between that August training camp and the start of the 1980 Olympics the following February.  They played amateur teams in Europe.  They played against professional teams in the Central Hockey League.  They played a series of exhibition games against NHL clubs – a first for a U.S. Olympic team.  Through it all, Brooks continued to refine his hybrid system, with varying degrees of success.  Victories over Sweden, Czechoslovakia and Canada provided encouraging signs.  The 3-3 tie with Norway ate at him like a cancer.

“The one thing that struck me right away was how innovative Herb was.  He changed the way we played the game.  He was determined to take a blend of old style hockey and a blend of the European game and combine it together.  It was fun.  It’s nice to try something completely different – change is good sometimes, and I think for us, as a team, Herb’s blend of the two styles fit our strengths. I loved the creativity that he gave us.  The game plan was completely different from anything that I’d been a part of before, and that was exciting and new for me.

In the midst of this, Eruzione was named captain.  The son of a sewage plant worker from Winthrop, the player who couldn’t convince a major college program to take a chance, the skater with what scouts considered average speed…was selected by Brooks to be captain.

“I didn’t expect to be named captain,” Eruzione says.  “I’ll go back to what I said about being named captain at Boston University – it was nice, but it wasn’t a big thing.  I played on an Olympic team in 1980 that had 15 college captains on it.  And I can guarantee you that the five who weren’t captains of their college teams were captains of their high school teams.  I’ve said over the years that I was a captain among captains. I was just fortunate to play on a team.  These guys weren’t just great players, they are great people.  It was an honor to be the captain of that team, but like I said, it really wasn’t that big of a deal.”

Eventually, Brooks cut the roster down to twenty, with Eruzione being spared at the eleventh hour, but not before taking the team to hell and back.

“There was also a familiarity to Herb that helped keep me centered, because he was no different than Jack in terms of his discipline and intensity,” he says.  “Practices were very intense and very demanding.  That’s just the way Herb handled it, and it was clear that that’s the way it was going to be all year.  The scenario was that you either dealt with it or you quit.  Well, we weren’t going to quit.  We were going to do whatever he wanted us to do.  We were going to fight through any type of adversity, perform well, and do anything that we could to keep him happy.”

That didn’t stop the players – including Eruzione – from trading horror stories over beers after practice.  To them, Brooks was as cold as the ice on which they skated.  The Eastern players thought he was being hard on them because they hadn’t played for him at The U.  The Minnesota players, who had long lived with his dark and demanding ways, had never seen this level of diabolicalness from their coach.  Despite Brooks’ heavy vibe, there were lighter moments; when the team exchanged gag gifts at Christmas before the Olympics, the players gave Patrick a plastic whistle and Brooks a whip.

 

GEARING UP


The prequel played out five days before the start of the 1980 Winter Olympics, on a wintry day in New York City, the Americans and Soviets squaring off in a hockey game at Madison Square Garden.  For some of the 11,243 who showed up, the game was about venting political feelings associated with the ongoing war in Afghanistan.  For Brooks, the game was about getting the jitters out.  He knew his players were in awe of the Russians, and for good reason:  Vladimir Petrov, Boris Mikhailov, and Valery Kharlamov constituted the team’s No. 1 line, the best unit in the world.  Petrov was 32, a two-time Olympic gold medalist and a nine-time world champion, and one of the strongest players on the team.  His weapon of choice was the slap shot, uncommon among Russian players of the day, many of whom favored the wrist shot instead.  Mikhailov, the Soviet’s fabled captain, carried himself with a Cold War confidence that permeated every nook and cranny of country’s hockey program.  The speedy and smooth-skating Kharlamov, elite in his own right, completed a line that had been together for nine years and had attained unparalleled success.

 

Team photo of the 1980 Russian hockey team, widely considered the best hockey team in the world.

.

“It was hard not to be in awe of them,” Eruzione says.  “They were almost mythical.  They’d skated circles around the NHL All-Stars.”

Behind them was Vladislav Tretiak, long considered the best goaltender on the planet.  He was protecting the net during the most dominant era of Soviet hockey, shutting down opponents on the way to gold medals at the 1970, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1978 and 1979 World Championships.  He was there when the Soviets won Olympic gold in 1972 and 1976.  His reputation was as ironclad as his goal tending.  You simply didn’t score on Tretiak.

On the bench was Viktor Tikhonov, Soviet Olympic coach.  Tikhonov, known for talking incessantly during games, was Brooks’ equal in terms of his dictatorial coaching style, exercising nearly absolute control over his players’ lives.  His teams practiced eleven months a year while being confined to barracks when not on the ice.

The Soviets built a 4-0 lead by the end of the first period.  Eruzione put the U.S. on board by scoring a goal on Tretiak’s stick side, but the game was 6-1 by the end of two.  After Phil Verchota scored just 3:25 into the third period, making it 6-2, the Soviets responded by scoring three goals in rapid-fire succession.  If felt as if they could put fifteen more in the net if they wanted.  The final score was is 10-3.

“I don’t mean to sound defeatist,” Brooks was quoted as saying afterwards, “but you’ve got to combine idealism with pragmatism, and practically speaking, we don’t have a chance to beat the Russians.  We’ve got 10 kids who could still be playing in college, and they’ve got a team that beat the NHL’s best players last year, a team with half-a-dozen guys from ‘72 still playing.”

After the annihilation, the reclusive Tikhonov surprised almost everyone by agreeing to meet with the press.  Hair still cemented in place, he used the time to arrogantly dismiss the Americans.

“We showed what we can do, and they didn’t,” Tikhonov said through an interpreter.

Asked what this game had revealed about his own team’s readiness for Lake Placid, Tikhonov replied:  “To know the real strengths of a team, you must play against strong opposition.”

When asked if his team approached the game as nothing more than a glorified scrimmage, and that the Soviet skaters hadn’t tried their hardest, Tikhonov smiled smugly and said, “You are quite correct.”

If the trash talk angered Brooks, he wasn’t showing it.  And when it came to his rationale for scheduling this game so close to the start of the Games, he treated it like any of the sixty other games he’d scheduled leading up to the opening ceremonies.

“I told them it doesn’t mean anything,” said Brooks at the time.  “It’s our last game of spring training.  We’ve played sixty games in this training time, and none of them means anything.  Tuesday, it means something.”

For Eruzione, playing the Soviets so close to the Olympics wasn’t about Cold War politics or thinly-veiled mind games, nor was it about overcoming nerves so that they’d be ready to face the Russians when it counted.

“I think it was maybe just Herb trying to get us another game against a real quality team.  We didn’t even know if we were going to play the Soviets in the Olympics, so it wasn’t like Herb said, ‘Let’s play them now, so that we can be ready for when we play them at Lake Placid.’  Maybe Herb thought that we needed a pretty good ass kicking, and said to himself, ‘Let’s play the Soviets and we’ll get it.’  I never really asked him about why that game was scheduled.  It was something that, when the game was over, it was never really talked about again.”

 

LAKE PLACID


The field of 12 teams were split into two divisions, with a round-robin format being played and the top two teams in each division advancing to the medal round.  The U.S. was placed in the Blue Division, which included Czechoslovakia, Sweden, West Germany, Romania and Norway; the Russians were opposite the U.S. in the Red Division, along with Canada, Finland, Holland, Poland and Japan.

Sweden was the first U.S. opponent, on February 12, the day before the opening ceremonies, and Brooks’ team immediately found itself in a dogfight.  Down 2-1 late in the third period, Brooks ordered Jim Craig to vacate the goal in favor of an extra skater.  Then, with the Olympic Fieldhouse scoreboard showing 27 seconds remaining, defenseman Bill Baker scored on an improbable slap shot, turning a damaging loss into a valuable tie and setting off a jubilant celebration in the middle of the rink, where it looked like a 19-man human pyramid had just collapsed.

Not everyone was happy.  Brooks lashed out at his team between the first and second periods, and was still upset when the game was over.

 

Bill Baker on the attack against Sweden.

.

“I can’t tell you what I said between periods, there were too many bleeps in it,” he would say afterward.  “But the essence was, I said if you guys want to play this game effectively you better report out there with a hard hat and a lunch pail.  If you don’t you might as well go watch some old men ice fishing.”

Game 2 was played on Valentine’s Day, a day after the U.S. athletes marched in opening ceremonies in cowboy boots, sheepskin coats and blue jeans, competing against a Czechoslovakian team considered to be the second best in the world.  The Czechs, skilled and physical, found themselves ambushed by a pack of hungry American wolves.  The final score was 7-3.  A mostly American and highly energized crowd of 7,125 people fell in love with the U.S. hockey team on the spot, emotions that would play out in living rooms and bars across the country.

“Youthfulness breeds hungriness,” Brooks said in the post-game press conference.  “And in my opinion, the hungry will inherit the medals.”

Over in the Red Division, the Soviets were busy taking care of business.  They opened with games against Japan and Holland, winning by a combined score of 33-4.  Despite their brilliance, it was hard not to notice what the scrappy, feisty American had just done to the Czechs.  The kids didn’t just beat them. They trounced them.

“We were clicking on all cylinders,” Eruzione says.  “Everyone was playing together, every line was going out and doing its job.  Once we got on a roll it felt like we were skating downhill.”

And just like that, the story unfolding in Lake Placid transformed itself into something far bigger than hockey.

~  ~  ~

Heading into Lake Placid, the Russians had not lost an Olympic hockey game since 1968.  In the previous four Olympiads, their record was 27-1-1, their goal differential 175-44.  In the two decades that had passed since the U.S. team had upset them in Squaw Valley, the Russians had beaten the Americans by an aggregate score of 28-7.  Absolutely no one gave Herb Brooks’ team a chance to beat the Soviet Union, but the 7-3 demolition of the Czechs completely changed the narrative.  Maybe the Americans could compete with Tikhonov’s hockey machine after all.

Game 3 was against Norway, and the underdog Americans found themselves favored for the first time.  It was a role that didn’t sit well with Brooks, and after a sluggish first period in which Norway scored the only goal, it was easy to understand way.  Then, just 41 seconds into the second period, Eruzione scored to spark his team to a three-goal second period.  The U.S. never looked back, beating the Norwegians, 5-1.

 

Eric Strobel and Team USA beat Norway 5-1 in a game that scared coach Herb Brooks.

.

“That was a funny game,” Eruzione recalls.  “We started off flat and fell behind 1-0, but in the second period we came out and played with a lot of energy and emotion.  That was the difference.  When we played without emotion, we were just an average hockey team.  It was something that Herb reminded us about all the time.”

Momentum was on the American side when it faced Romania in Game 4.  The resulting 7-2 romp put the team at 3-0-1 in the Blue Division, tied with Sweden for first place.  The tone was set by the “Coneheads” line of Buzz Schneider, Mark Pavelich and John Harrington, with Schneider getting two goals and an assist, Harrington two assists and Pavelich one.

A game later, the U.S. upended West Germany 4-2 to advance to the medal round.  The Americans fell behind 2-0 in the first period when Craig allowed a 70-foot slap shot goal 1:17 into the game, and a 60-foot power-play slap shot goal just 15 seconds from the end of the first period.  The U.S. was still down two goals as the game reached the halfway point, and then erupted for two goals in each of the final two periods.  Rob McClanahan started the scoring and then netted the game-winner, which came with 1:17 remaining in the final period.

 

Buzz Schneider falls over Romania goalie Valerian Netedu during Team USAs 7-2 romp.

.

The game was not without a moment of high drama:  Eruzione shot hit Craig in the neck during warm-ups and knocked him out cold.  Brooks ordered the backup goalie, Steve Janaszak, to start warming up.  Craig recovered after a few minutes and went on to play, giving up those two early goals before slamming the door.

“It was a scary moment when Jim went down,” Eruzione says.  “Our first thoughts were about his health, obviously, and we were relieved when he came to, because he seemed okay.  We had faith in Janaszak to step in if Jim couldn’t play, but it worked out.  We gave up those two quick goals and that was it.”

Improbably, the undefeated Americans were 48 hours away from a date with the Russians in the medal round.

~  ~  ~

Players deal with pressure in different ways.  For Mike Eruzione did what any good Italian would do:  Spending time with family and friends.

“We all hung out at a camp site the night before the game against the Russians,” he says with a smile.  “It wasn’t a big deal, really.  It was just an opportunity to see my cousin, my high school football coach, my father, and some people who meant a lot to me.  I didn’t want to sit in that Lake Placid trailer waiting for the game to begin.  I thought it would be a good opportunity to spend some time with some of the people who meant the most to me.  It was great to relax, have a few beers, have a hot dog and a cheeseburger, and still make curfew – which I think I might have missed anyway [laughs].  Yeah, I may have been a little late, but I don’t think Herb had to worry too much about me staying out all night partying.  It was just a way for me to spend some time with friends and family.  It was a lot of fun.”

There was plenty of pressure on everyone by the time the Americans arrived at Olympic Fieldhouse, and Brooks could sense it as his players assembled in the home team’s locker room.  For six months he’d been a prick, the man demanded the best from his team at all costs.  He’d kept his players at arm’s length, refusing them even the faintest hint of love.  Now – if only for this moment – he knew he had to remove the wall long enough for his players to see past his own Iron Curtain.  They had to look in his eyes and know that he cared, that he’d been on this journey with them all along.  That he’d been so hard on them because of this moment right here.

Brooks walked into the deathly quiet locker room.  He wore brown plaid pants and a camel hair jacket, and the look of a man carrying the burden of a great secret.  He pulled out a yellow scrap of paper.

“Great moments are born from great opportunity,” Brooks began, and you could hear a pin drop.  He paced the room like a panther.  When he finally speaks, it’s in short, defiant bursts.  “That’s what you have here, tonight.  That’s what you’ve earned here tonight.

“One game.  If we played them ten times they might win nine.  But not this game.  Not tonight.  Tonight we skate with them.  Tonight, we stay with them.  And we shut them down because we can.  Tonight, we are the greatest hockey team in the world.  You were born to be hockey players.  Each and every one of you.  You were meant to be here tonight.  This is your time.  Their time is done.  It’s over.  I’m sick and tired of hearing about what a great team the Soviets have.  Screw ‘em.  This is your time.  Now go out there and take it.”

Brooks’ words soaked the nerves out of the room.

“Herb’s speech struck the right chord, because if you’re an athlete and you think you are going to lose, then you probably will,” Eruzione says.  “We knew how hard it was going to be, and we knew we had to play really well.  We knew we had to play pretty much the perfect hockey game, which I think we basically did.  Herb reminded us of that we need to play with maximum effort.”

 

MIRACLE ON ICE


The Olympic Fieldhouse was jammed to the rafters, easily over its 8,500 seat capacity, the crowd mostly raucous Americans hoping for a miracle.  Petrov won the opening draw from Johnson, and the Soviets controlled the puck from the outset.  An early shot on goal by forward Viktor Zhluktov tested Craig early, a wrist shot that he blocked and covered up.

The Russians kept up the pressure.  When the U.S. didn’t have the puck – which was often in the early going – Brooks had all five skaters collapse into the U.S. zone on defense.  Even then, the Americans had trouble keeping the puck away from the net.

 

The Russians dictated tempo early, but the Americans proved themselves up to the challenge.

.

“I think we were nervous and excited,” Eruzione says of weathering the early storm.  “I think we had every kind of feeling that you can have before a big game, and then there were the butterflies that come at the very start.  But we were in the game the whole time, thankfully that’s the way it played out for us, so we never got into a panic situation.  We never had the thought of, ‘Oh my God, we’re getting killed out here, what are we going to do?’  So, I think we were very confident.  And as the game played on, we were gaining more confidence.  Remember that old adage, the one where they put their pants on the same way that we do, one leg at a time?  As good as they were, that night we felt that we were just as good, and it turned out that we were maybe just a little better.”

The first U.S. scoring chance came when defenseman Bill Baker and winger Phil Verchota hooked up on the right side, but Tretiak made a sprawling stop to shut down the threat.  Back on offense, Petrov surged into open space and ripped a shot wide right.  A hooking penalty by Mikhailov gave the U.S. its first power play and a chance to take an early lead, but the Soviets emerged unscathed.

The game was still scoreless, but Tikhonov’s hockey machine was very much in control.  Both teams exchanged shots, one by Russian defenseman Viacheslav Fetisov, and one by left wing Buzz Schneider.  And then, with just over ten minutes remaining in the opening period, Schneider found himself behind his own net with the puck.  As he began to make his move, forward Vladimir Krutov knocked the puck loose.  It skidded ahead to defenseman Alexei Kasatonov, who immediately fired a shot in Craig’s direction.  Krutov alertly extended his stick and deflected it into the net.  There was no celebration when Krutov scored.  Krutov simply headed to the bench, a Terminator on skates.

 

“Krutov’s goal was textbook Soviet hockey.  We knew we couldn’t let them get away from us, because that’s what they did to teams.  They would score that first goal, and then you’d look up and there would be five more on the scoreboard.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“Krutov’s goal was textbook Soviet hockey,” Eruzione says.  “We knew we couldn’t let them get away from us, because that’s what they did to teams.  They would score that first goal, and then you’d look up and there would be five more on the scoreboard.”

The tension in the crowd, already palpable, grew heavier after Krutov’s deflection.  A shot by Valery Vasiliev went wide seconds after play resumed, and then a rebound shot by Aleksandr Golikov was blocked by Craig.  The Russians were dictating tempo.

“We needed something to change the momentum,” Eruzione says.  “That first goal by Buzz really helped to take some of the pressure off of us.”

The goal – a missile off of a pass from Mark Pavelich in open space – caught Tretiak guessing, a rare mistake from the best goaltender on the planet.  Schneider’s goal wasn’t the result of Soviet-style artistry – intricate passes, deft skating and quick wrist shots.  It was old-fashioned pond hockey, a booming slap shot from far beyond the blue line.  The opening was tight, and at a sharp angle.  Schneider let it fly.  Tie game.  The crowd erupted.

The Soviets shrugged off the goal and quickly went back to work.  Forward Aleksandr Skvortsov retaliated, getting away with a slash on Schneider.  The separation allowed Skvortsov to take a pass from Helmut Balderis, elude Dave Christian and fire a shot at Craig, who kicked the puck away with his skate.  Balderis was there to snatch up the rebound, but his shot went wide of the net.  Zhluktov recovered the puck and rifled another shot.  Baker flung himself to the ice in an effort to break it up.  Kharlamov fired a wrist shot not long after, but Craig was up to the task, making a spearing, sprawling stab with his glove.

The game was being played almost exclusively on the U.S. side of the ice, with relentless pressure applied by the Soviets.  A twenty-foot Neal Broten wrist shot sent a jolt through the crowd, but Tretiak was up to the task, blocking it away.

With three minutes to play in the opening period, Sergei Makarov found himself with the puck and a shot at the net.  Craig kicked it away with his skate, but Makarov wasn’t finished.  He attacked hard on the next trip down, slicing between Ken Morrow and Mark Johnson to free himself for a drop pass from Vladimir Golikov.  Makarov attempted to pass it back to Golikov, but the puck ricocheted off Morrow’s skate and back to Makarov, who ripped a shot over Craig’s glove in the upper right corner.

And just like that, the Soviets were back on top.

“We knew that they would keep coming at us,” Eruzione says, “and we knew we needed to skate with them.  Herb kept reminding us to not let up.”

With less than thirty seconds remaining in the first period, Eruzione shot the puck toward the goal, but the Soviets cleared it into the U.S. zone.  Morrow recovered the puck with seven seconds left and dropped it back to Christian, who skated across the U.S. blue line.  Morrow screamed for him to shoot.  Mikhailov relaxed, if only for an instant, possibly convinced that the Americans didn’t have enough time to score.  Christian launched a desperation shot from a hundred feet out, a shot that Tretiak blocked away easily, but also carelessly, the puck rebounding in front of the net instead of into a corner.

 

Mike Eruzione in action during a short shift against the Russians.

.

Mark Johnson, who had just hopped onto the ice after a late line change, skated as hard as he could to get into position.  He was in the right place at the right time when Tretiak’s rebound slid into open space in front of the net.  He went after Tretiak, who had skated away from the net, juking instead of shooting, and catching Tretiak guessing, flicking the puck into the net as time expired in the period.

Tikhonov was incredulous.  The referees huddled with the timekeeper while Tikhonov argued that time had run out.  After several tense moments, it was ruled that the goal had been scored with one second remaining on the clock.

“That was a game changer,” Eruzione says with a smile.  “Instead of going into the second period down a goal, we were tied, 2-2.  That was huge.”

~  ~  ~

Outplayed by the Russians but tied with them nonetheless, the Americans hurried to their locker room, carried there by the raucous chants from the crowd.  They were euphoric.  The blowout at Madison Square Garden was but a distant memory, the Soviet intimidation no longer a factor, their air of invincibility punctured.  Maybe Brooks had been right all along.  Maybe they could skate with the greatest hockey team on earth.

In the other locker room a different story was unfolding.  Tikhonov was busy ripping his star goaltender and preparing to bench him in favor of his backup, Vladimir Myshkin.  Myshkin didn’t have the same renown as Tretiak, but he had shut out the NHL All-Stars the year before, and he certainly had the game to slam the door on the net.  Still, the decision shocked Tretiak’s teammates, who had won at every level behind Tretiak’s otherworldly goal tending.  Never mind that Tretiak had a track record of playing better after giving up a goal; Tikhonov had just benched his star player.  It was as if Tom Brady had been yanked in a tie game with the Super Bowl on the line.

“We were very surprised when Tikhonov pulled Tretiak,” Eruzione says, “so I can only imagine what it was like for Tretiak’s teammates.  Herb pointed it out to us immediately.  It gave our confidence another boost.”

With Tretiak parked forlornly at the end of the bench, the second period began with the Valery Kharlamov and John Harrington getting tangled up, Harrington hooking Kharlamov and both of them spilling to the ice.  The Russian hockey juggernaut had its first power play.  Brooks, well aware that surviving the next two minutes was crucial, countered with speed by sending out Mark Johnson, Ken Morrow, Mike Ramsey and Rob McClanahan.  Craig, dialed in, snuffed out Vladimir Golikov’s high shot on the left side.  Then McClanahan got in on the action, blocking a shot by Zinetula Bilyaletdinov and trapping it along the boards.

The Americans’ attempt to control the puck was short-lived.  Dave Christian passed to Bill Baker, who in turn attempted a dangerous pass to Neal Broten in the middle.  The puck was deflected to Krutov, who flipped over to a speeding Aleksandr Maltsev.  Maltsev blew past Christian and Baker, closed in on Craig and drilled a shot off the post and into the net.  The collision between Maltsev and Craig left Craig sprawled on the ice, woozy, the score off of the power play putting the Americans in the hole yet again.

Three to two, Soviet Union.

“Things were going their way,” Eruzione says.  “They were skating fast and scoring goals, but we were hanging with them.  We knew we had work to do.”

Craig got up and shook away the cobwebs.  He’d play magnificently to that point, but he’d still given up three goals and the second period was barely underway.  If the Americans were somehow going to salvage a tie – an outright win still seemed unthinkable – then Craig would have to play perfect hockey the rest of the way.

The first test would come when Aleksandr Skvortsov deflected the puck away from right-winger Eric Strobel, who was trying to clear it from behind Craig’s net.  Balderis swooped in with a punch shot.  Craig blocked it away with his stick.  Zhluktov attempted to put the rebound into the net, but Phil Verchota and Mark Wells were there to stymie the effort.

Rob McClanahan took a perfect pass from Dave Christian, who was streaking up the middle, and drew a bead on Myshkin.  The crowd roared.  Valery Vasiliev skated back on the play and delivered a check and disrupt the shot, and Myshkin was able to direct it to a teammate.

Several minutes of tense hockey followed.  The U.S. controlled the puck out of a face-off in the neutral zone, before it ended up on Krutov’s stick.  Krutov made his move, sprinting into the U.S. zone, but Morrow was there to meet him.  The violent collision dislodged the puck and stopped Krutov cold, sending Morrow to the ice.

“We wanted them to know we weren’t backing down, that we were going to punch back,” says Eruzione.

Trailing by a goal and being out-shot 3-1, the Americans passed crisply on a sustained possession that came up empty.  To this point, Eruzione hadn’t been much of a factor on offense.  He crossed the red line with the puck and passed it to Christian, who in turn swept it over to Broten.  The crowd, jolted by the rare scoring opportunity, sprang to its feet.  Broten’s slap shot missed to the right.

 

“We weren’t getting a lot of clean looks at the net.  Broten’s shot just missed, but we knew we had to put it out of our minds and keep skating.” – Mike Eruzione

 

“We weren’t getting a lot of clean looks at the net,” Eruzione continues.  “Broten’s shot just missed, but we knew we had to put it out of our minds and keep skating.”

The Russians responded by dialing up their own pressure.  They were skating at a sprinter’s pace, attempting to wear down an American team that looked vastly different than the young, intimidated squad that provided little resistance at Madison Square Garden.  The U.S. skaters hadn’t shown up on that night.  At the Olympic Fieldhouse they hadn’t just shown up, they’d brought plenty of pluck and grit and determination with them.

Grit was one thing.  Shots on goal was another.  The Russians were the best in the world for a reason, and rare was the game where an opponent got off more shots than them.  With so few scoring opportunities, continuing to match the Soviet’s energy was critical.

Through all of this, Myshkin remained The Great Unknown.  He’d been on the ice for nearly ten minutes, yet he hadn’t been tested.  If the Americans could somehow get a clean look at the net, would he be up to the task?

The answer would have to wait.  Craig, whistled for delay of game, put the Americans in survival mode for the next two minutes.  The power play could have been disastrous, but Mark Johnson was everywhere – blocking Fetisov’s slap shot, getting a stick on Petrov’s close range blast, going down to the ice to disrupt another shot by Petrov.

Five minutes remained in the period.

Four.

The two teams continued to go at each other, Craig turning away shots and his teammates doing their part to help him out.  Strobel received a pass from Ramsey, speeding past Yuri Lebedev and into open ice.  The crowd reacted wildly, but the Russians quickly recovered, forcing a face-off.  Broten, Christoff and Eruzione returned, only to see Kasatonov fire a shot that Craig was somehow able to smother.  Krutov went after the puck, but Morrow was having none of it; he cross-checked Krutov from behind, a body shot that sent Krutov crashing into Craig, and Craig crashing to the ice.  A scrum erupted in front of the net.  Morrow and Lebedev went after each other behind it.  Craig, meanwhile, lay flat on his back.  Steve Janaszak, who hadn’t played a single minute in these Olympics, suddenly faced the very real possibility of having his number called.

 

Down but not out: Jim Craig would recover from a violent collision to turn in one of the greatest performances in the history of Olympic hockey.

.

“Jim was red hot, and seeing him go down like that was a scary moment,” Eruzione says.

All eyes were on Brooks’ star goaltender.  Craig finally pulled himself up to a seated position, flipped the puck to the referee, and then slowly made his way to his feet.  After a quick check, he signaled that he was ready to go.

~  ~  ~

Order restored and Craig upright, both Morrow and Lebedev were sent to the penalty box for their roles in the melee and the teams skated four-on-four.  Three minutes remained in the period.  Brooks elected to go with speed, sending Mark Johnson to take the face-off.  He was joined on the ice by McClanahan, Christian, and Baker.  Tikhonov countered with Petrov, Mikhailov, Vasiliev, and defenseman Sergei Starikov.  Neither team could score.  There were under two minutes remaining.  Brooks, who had been keeping the shifts short in order to keep fresh legs on the ice, continued shuttling players in and out.  The Americans weren’t finding the net, or even getting a clean look, but neither were the Russians.  The constant pressure was beginning to take its toll.

~  ~  ~

The teams were back at full strength, and less than sixty seconds remained in the second period.  Krutov and Lebedev attacked, the puck on Krutov’s stick, the pass on its way.  O’Callahan dove at Krutov to break up the pass.  Ramsey dove to disrupt Lebedev’s shot.  At the beginning of training camp, Brooks had famously said that the legs feed the wolf.

“I can’t promise you that we’ll be the best team at Lake Placid,” Brooks had told them at the time, “but we will be the best-conditioned team, that I will promise you.”

Both teams were skating hard, the way teams skate during the final, frenzied moments at the end of regulation.  Craig absorbed a slap shot by defenseman Vasili Pervukhin.  The horn sounded.  The chants of “U-S-A! U-S-A!” reverberated throughout Olympic Fieldhouse as Craig skated slowly out of goal, removing his mask as he went.

~  ~  ~

In the locker room, the Americans prepared for the final period knowing that Craig was playing the game of his life.  In the first period he had faced 18 shots and had stopped 16; in the second he’d turned away 11 of twelve.  Twenty minutes remained.  Brooks sensed that the Russians were beginning to wear down.  This was the opening he’d preached about since that first day in Colorado Springs.  He called Nagobads into his office and handed him a stopwatch.

“We need short shifts,” Brooks told him during that second intermission.  “No shift can go more than thirty-five seconds.”

The players in the other locker room were convinced that the Americans had expended too much energy to keep up in the third, and for good reason:  The Soviets had owned the third period for more than a decade.  Wills were broken in that final period.  Box scores were littered with teams that had tried to keep up and had failed, teams that had entered the third with hope and had exited on the butt end of a blowout.

With Nagobads running the watch, the Americans skated full throttle for the 35 seconds and then hopped off the ice, fresh legs replacing spent ones.  With just over thirteen minutes remaining, a sense of urgency was beginning to take hold.  Myshkin had been in the net for 27 minutes, and yet he’d only faced two shots on goal, and none in the third period.

Krutov fired the puck diagonally across the ice.  Neal Broten chased it down along the boards, navigating his way behind the U.S. net, gathering speed, looking for an opening.  Krutov gave chase, bumping Morrow before slapping Broten with his stick.  The Americans had their first power play since the opening minutes of the game.

“It came at the right time for us,” Eruzione says.  “We were tired, but the short shifts helped keep us a little fresher than the Russians. We were out-skating them in that third period.”

In control of the puck, Broten passed to Ramsey who in turn fired a shot at Myshkin.  Eruzione tried to knock the rebound into the net, but it bounced wide.  Bilyaletdinov slapped it along the boards, where Vladimir Golikov chased it down and raced across the U.S. blue line.  Ramsey dropped to the ice to thwart the Soviet’s shot.

The hectic pace of the power play favored the Americans, but there was no organization to their effort.  They were running out of time.  Baker, behind his own net, passed to Silk, who worked his way along the left side and into the Soviet zone.  Vasiliev met him there, going low to the body and dislodging the puck from Silk’s stick and sending him down to the ice.  Somehow, Silk managed to get a stick on the puck and pushed it toward Mark Johnson, who was waiting in front of the Soviet net.  Starikov tried to control it, but the puck bounced off his skates and into Johnson’s wheelhouse.  Johnson wasted no time.  He fired the shot at Myshkin, who was late to react.  He dropped down, legs split, the puck sliding through and into the net.

Goal.

Three to three.

Olympic Fieldhouse was deafening.  Brooks thrust both arms overhead, fists clenched, exalting in his team’s effort.  Tikhonov barked orders and wore a look of shock on his face.  With just over ten minutes in the game, Harrington dug for control of the puck along the boards.  It trickled over to Pavelich, who flicked the puck to the middle of the ice as he was falling down.  Eruzione, who had just come on, skated over and caught up to it, wasting no time going on the attack.  From twenty-five feet away, he rifled a wrist shot at the net, his line mates, Broten and Christoff, still making their way onto the ice.  Vasili Pervukhin went down to block it.  Myshkin hunched low and tried to pick up its flight.  The puck was on him before he could react, whizzing between his right arm and his body, landing safely in the net.

Goal.

Eruzione threw up his arms and ran along the boards, dancing joyfully, the crowd erupting.  Al Michaels leaned into the microphone and shouted:  “Now we have bedlam!”

 

Mike Eruzione celebrates after scoring the goal that gives the US a 4-3 lead with 10 minutes to play.

.

The entire team raced onto the ice to celebrate.  Brooks again thrust his arms overhead.  A tight-lipped smile began to form until his suppressed it.  He hitched up his pants and savored the moment.  Tikhonov stood in silence, trying to process what had just happened.

On the clock, exactly ten minutes remained.

~  ~  ~

Behind for the first time, the Soviets began to play with a sense of urgency that they hadn’t shown all night.  A shot from Maltsev hit the outside of the right post and ricocheted away from the net.  Another Maltsev shot went wide.  Vladimir Golikov flew in on the left and backhanded a shot at the net, but Craig blocked it.  Aleksandr Golikov fought hard for the rebound, checking Schneider into the boards.  The Soviet attack was suddenly blast furnace hot.  Jim Craig was under siege.

 

Jim Craig would be fiercely tested by the Soviets, but he would play the game of his life and help lead the U.S. to the greatest upset in sports history.

.

“As a team, we just continued to do the things that we were doing throughout the game,” Eruzione says.  “Herb kept saying the same thing to us many times:  ‘Play your game.’  ‘Play your game.’  And that’s what we did.  It was just a case not getting too high or too low, but rather consistently doing the things that we were doing throughout the game that put us in the position to have the lead.”

Eight minutes remained.  Ramsey hurtled toward Kharlamov on the boards and leveled him.  Kasatonov got his stick on the puck and fired.  Craig gloved it.  Petrov let loose with a shot from sixty feet.  Craig kicked it away.

“Play your game.  Play your game,” Brooks kept repeating, this over the din of the crowd.

“You didn’t hear anything when you were on the ice,” Eruzione says.  “The only thing you heard out there was a teammate looking for a pass, or Herb yelling for us to change up.  The only time you heard the chants of ‘USA!  USA!’ , was when you were on the bench, maybe, and sometimes you weren’t even listening to it then because you were so focused on what was going on in front of you.  It’s amazing how you can block things out – not so much intentionally, but because you’re so into the moment.  I remember being dialed in and prepared for when Herb Brooks screaming out ‘You’re up for the next line change.’  So, other than the odd occasion, I don’t remember the chants so much as I remember Herb screaming out instructions and keeping us focused on the task at hand.”

Five minutes remained.

The chants continued as Nagobads continued to track time on his stopwatch, players shuttling on and off the ice, the Russians desperately trying to manufacture a goal.  Lebedev shot a pass across the ice but Pavelich beat everyone else to it, dictating tempo.  Harrington pulled the trigger on a shot.  Myshkin gloved it.

The Americans were swarming.  The Russians were panicking.

Two minutes.

One minute.

Tikhonov froze.  The situation called for an extra skater, but Tikhonov didn’t pull Myshkin.  Mikhailov moved the puck to Bilyaletdinov, who shot it along the boards.  Petrov managed to blast another slap shot, but Craig kicked it away.

Thirty seconds.

Kharlamov flipped the puck, but Johnson got to it first.  He passed it in the direction of Ramsey, who slammed into Bilyaletdinov.  McClanahan raced to the corner, beating Kharlamov to the puck, and backhanded it along the boards to Johnson.  With nine seconds remaining, Morrow cleared the puck, hitting Silk in the arm.

Five seconds.  Four.  Three.

Silk swiped at the puck.  Johnson pushed it out of the U.S. zone.  In the ABC booth, Al Michaels immortalized the moment:  “Do you believe in miracles?  Yes!”

The horn sounded.

The celebration that followed was one for the ages, a joyful release of emotion eight months in the making.  Players raced over to Jim Craig, swallowing him whole.  Assistant coach Craig Patrick joined them on the ice.  Nagobads, too.  In the stands, rapturous jubilation.  Brooks?  Nowhere to be found.  He rushed past a pair of tearful state troopers and disappeared into the locker room.  Once there, he locked himself inside a dilapidated toilet stall and cried.

 

It was nothing short of a miracle – the US hockey team pounces on goalie Jim Craig after a 4-3 victory against the Soviets in the 1980 Olympics.

 

~  ~  ~

There was still another game to be played.

The Americans would beat Finland, completing the miracle and winning the most improbable gold medal in Olympic history.

“Two things stand out for me after all of these years,” Eruzione says.  “First, we didn’t go to the Olympics to win one game.  We had to win a lot of games even before that game against the Russians just to get to the medal round.  We played Sweden, Czechoslovakia, and West Germany.  Those were huge hockey games for us to win.  If we don’t win any of those we’re not even thinking about the Soviet Union.  Second, the practice that we had after the Soviet game was one of the hardest practices that we had all year.  I think Herb was just making us aware that we had another game to play.  And I think as a team, we realized that.  We had no problem getting ready to play against Finland on Sunday.”

Eruzione cherished the moment back then, and he still cherishes it today.

“I think we take great pride in that, because it’s the Olympic Games and you are representing your country.  This is not Boston or Chicago or Los Angeles, and I think that’s what separated our moment from other great sports moments in other sporting events.  It wasn’t about a city or a town, it was about our country, and I think that’s what makes the Olympic Games so special.  When we put that jersey on we’re representing our country, and the people who support us feel as if they’re competing with us, too.”

Time marches on.  Eruzione keeps in touch with his teammates, some more than others.  Regardless of how often they see each other, their bond remains unbreakable.

 

LAKE PLACID, NY – FEBRUARY 24: The United States celebrates winning the gold medal against Finland on February 24, 1980 in Lake Placid, New York. The United States won 4-2. (Photo by: Steve Powell/Getty Images)

.

“I don’t see Jim that often – he’s down in Tampa now – but I played one year with Jim at Boston University and he was a solid goaltender and a good teammate.  But that’s what makes this team so special.  We had a team of great teammates.  It wasn’t me, or Jim, or Mark Johnson.  It was about 20 guys, and everybody had to do something for us to win, whether it was Mark Johnson scoring every possible big goal that we needed, or Kenny Morrow and our defense making great plays, or Jimmy making big saves at the net.  Teams win championships, and that’s what we were.”

The weeks and months that followed were a blur.  The Sports Illustrated cover shot, the instant celebrity…Eruzione enjoyed the doors that opened but didn’t let it change him.  He was still the same Italian kid from Winthrop, blue collar and hardworking, humble to a fault.

“It was crazy.  I traveled around quite a bit.  I did a lot of speaking engagements, some golf tournaments, got to do a bunch of TV shows.  It was a whirlwind tour, but it was pretty exciting.  It’s been a great adventure over the years, and still is today – I’ve gotten to go to places that I had never been to before, and I’ve met a lot of incredible people along the way.  I’m very blessed to have been a part of that team.”

Not a day goes by that Eruzione isn’t asked about what happened in Lake Placid all those years ago.  Not that he minds.  He’s long since grown comfortable with the fact that he’ll always be remembered for one thing.

“Beating the Russians and winning gold means that we accomplished everything that we’d worked so hard for all year long.  We had six months of grueling training and countless hours of practice, and to have everything come to fruition at the end is a very proud of feeling.  I look back on it and know that it’s such a special part of my life.  It’s something that I’m very fortunate to have been part of.”

 

PARTING SHOTS


On August 11, 2003, Herb Brooks died in a single-car accident near Forest Lake, Minnesota, on Interstate 35.  He was returning home from a golf tournament and fundraiser for the U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame.  It’s believed that he fell asleep behind the wheel.  An estimated 2,500 people visited the Cathedral of St. Paul six days later to pay their respects, among them the twenty men that he coached to glory in 1980.  This was only the second time the entire team had been together since February 25, 1980, when they left Lake Placid for the White House, their worlds forever changed.  They came to honor the complicated man who’d pushed them to be the very best.  Eruzione stood in the pulpit and delivered a eulogy.  It was unscripted, plainspoken, from the heart.  He spoke on behalf of all the players when he said that Brooks was like a father whom you love deeply but don’t necessarily like all of the time because of how hard he was on you.

“I was on a plane coming back from New York when I learned what had happened,” Eruzione says.  “The plane landed, and when I turned my phone on I had fifty-something messages.  My heart jumped into my throat, and my first thought was, ‘Oh my God, something’s happened to my wife or kids or something’s happened at home.’  I saw the first message and called the guy back, and he said, ‘I’m so sorry about your loss.’  And I said, ‘What are you talking about?’  And he said, ‘You don’t know?’  That’s when he told me that Herb had been involved in a terrible car accident and had died.  I was in shock.  Our team had experienced nothing but great moments up until that point.  It was very hard.  Herb was a young man.  He had grandkids, and he was still coaching with the Pittsburgh Penguins at the time.  He had a lot of good years ahead of him.  It was very sad.”

~  ~  ~

Much has changed for Mike Eruzione – “Rizzo” to those who know him best.  He’s older now, thicker, but in many ways he hasn’t changed a bit.  The world’s become a more complicated place, and the people in it connected in ways that he couldn’t have even fathomed in 1980.  Fax machines have given way to cloud computing, telegrams to email, word-of-mouth to social media.  For Eruzione, times may change, but some things never go out of style.

“Work hard for your dreams.  I’ve never met a person who is successful because they were lucky.  People are successful because they have a work ethic – what I like to call old-fashioned values.  If you want something you have to work for it.  I think those are things that my dad taught me at a young age. My dad worked three jobs, and he always said to me, ‘If you understand the value of hard work, you are going to be successful.’  So when I travel and do speaking engagements, I talk about that a lot.  To me hard work is the most important key to success.”

 

Mission Accomplished: The 1980 U.S. hockey team won as a team and celebrated as a team, crowding onto the podium during the medal ceremony.

 

https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/the_mike_eruzione_interview2.png 400 600 Michael McClellan https://www.fifteenminuteswith.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FifteenMinutesWith_NewLogoPrototype.png Michael McClellan2017-05-30 23:46:002019-03-17 23:29:50Mike Eruzione – Miracle
Page 11 of 14«‹910111213›»
Search Search

:15 Minutes With

Al Jarreau Ben Johnson Big Daddy Kane Bill Rodgers Bill Russell Biz Markie Bob Cousy Bryan Demore Carol Woods Clyde Drexler Colin Chilvers Craig Chaquico Daniel Arsham Dan Jansen Danny Rubin David Kaplan David T. Walker Desmond Mason Galen Hooks Groundhog Day Henri Matisse Ingrid Chavez Jim Kelly Johnny Staats Julie Sarkissian Julius Erving Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Keb' Mo' Larry Groce Magic Johnson Meissa Hampton Melissa Manchester Michael Haskew Mike Eruzione Mountain Stage Ne-Yo Pharrell Williams Rayburn Sananda Maitreya Sophie Matisse Steve Stephens Tamar Slay Terence Trent D'Arby Travis Freeman Wayne Federman

follow michael d mcclellan

follow michael d mcclellan

Google Analytics

Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top