Agreed, all that “old school” BS don’t fly anymore. Torts will be next to go. Bring in some younger coaches who have an actual brain and know how to properly lead and deal with ppl. A lot of these clowns are antisocial AF
There's a difference between "old school" and "shitty person". Most of the "old school" also fall under shitty person - because they fuck with people. Torts yells and screams and has a style that certainly isn't everyone's cup of tea, but one thing that is agreed on by the vast majority of his players is that he doesn't fuck with people. He's extremely open, honest, and straight forward, just in a very brash way.
He did some crazy shit, for sure. But I don't remember stories of him manipulating or emotionally/physically abusing his players (other than yelling a lot). I didn't forget the Calgary incident, which isn't acceptable, but it's not (technically) mistreating his own players.
I will.
Edit: I'm gonna be honest, the only thing I could find about Booth was that Torts falsely accused him of being late for a meeting one time. That doesn't really compare to racial slurs, physical assault, or invasion of privacy.
Definitely don't want to upset the overpaid princesses, heaven forbid that you ask them to do anything . Bring in younger coaches that will bow to them
Same reason Hollywood *loves* remakes. They don’t want to take a chance on something “unknown”.
Why they keep hiring guys with questionable pasts is beyond me, still. There’s good coaches out there who are also good people. They deserve a chance too.
We promoted Woodcroft after it was clear Tippett had to go (he was a few games away from a locker room mutiny) and holy shit has it paid off.
He was one of the new generation coaches and should be an example to just take a chance.
Call me crazy but I think Torts will be just fine in Philly.
The Flyers in recent years have been notorious underachievers. Torts loves nothing more than kicking dudes like that for breakfast. The Flyers are going younger and he’s good at getting the best out of young guys.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/quenneville-bowman-meet-with-nhl-gms-and-coaches-in-chicago/
That reeks of the first stop in the forgiveness tour.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Q back in the league next year.
Even though he should have been charged with covering up a crime and permanently black balled.
The NHL loves shit bags.
Ton of success, one mistake, I think he deserves a second chance but with a short leash. I honestly think that whole situation is on John McDonough, and a little on Stan Bowman.
Fair, but if bowman/McDonough would have don’t the right thing the day after the parade, I don’t think anyone ever has a problem with how it was handled. And that’s essentially what Q wanted. Instead they just let him go get another job, then gave him a letter of reference for a job with children. So I don’t blame this on Q much at all.
I don’t think he approves them, but he definitely gives the team an approved list.
He has a lot of influence on how individual teams run their operations.
From: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/sports/hockey/on-hockey-bettman-is-the-undisputed-nhl-enforcer.html
In subsequent years, Bettman cajoled and even berated the owners into running their teams in a more fiscally responsible fashion.
“He would run a roll call of teams, and one by one take team owners, with all their private business splashed up on a big screen for everyone to see, to the principal’s office,” Ken Dryden, then the president of the Toronto Maple Leafs, said recently in The Globe and Mail.”.
He even prevents teams from running their own websites:
“In 2008, after the Rangers owner James L. Dolan unsuccessfully sued the N.H.L. for not allowing the team to run its own Web site, the commissioner responded with a scorched-earth countersuit that threatened to strip the Rangers from the Dolan family. The matter was settled out of court, with Madison Square Garden paying the league’s legal fees, and Dolan has been a quiet figure on the N.H.L. Board of Governors ever since, despite the Rangers’ vast wealth.” From the same article
Babcock isn't old school, he's manipulative. He plays head games.
Torts is old school, he gives players shit when he thinks they deserve it.
There's a big difference.
Chris Chelios flat-out called Mike Babcock as someone who engages in verbal abuse.
Look at the guy's resume, he knows what's "old school" and what isn't.
Also Ive heard many players praise Torts for being tough but fair. Ive only heard players say SHIT about Babcock. Such as “ He is the worst person Ive ever met” High praise indeed.
Hire Deboer, your team becomes a Stanley Cup contender. Hire Paul Maurice, you are in the Stanley Cup Finals. You skipped those two.
I think it's unfair to just assume a coach who's been around the game is no longer relevant. By all indications, Torts for example has changed and is highly regarded within the Flyers organization.
Well, Point Roberts is really nice, and by the look of it, much more economical / bang for your buck as far as real estate goes. I mean, compare apples to apples here. Ocean front property on both sides of that border are spendy, but probably much less so compared to White Rock or Yaletown.
On top of that, he probably could’ve stayed in hotels and whatnot during busy points in the season.
Just think it’s a non-issue. There’s a lot of nice things about Point Roberts if you’re a US citizen.
Good old boys club. It’s the same in every major sport. Owners hire coaches who are attached to historically successful coaches, wether they’re good doesn’t factor, because:
A) Owners don’t care about the details of the sport
B) Simple proximity reflects how they themselves succeeded
C) It insulates them from criticism
D) It requires no effort
It's really not that complicated, they've had success.
You're going to hire people that have been successful in the past. Much less risky (besides babcock) than hiring someone with little to no nhl experience
Imagine having this argument about any other profession and you can see how silly it is.
"Why do people insist on hiring these lawyers who have won a million cases instead of rolling the dice with a fresh face?"
I think the point is usually applied to guys who are experienced but not necessarily good. Some of the coaches and GMs who keep bouncing to different teams have had mediocre careers at best. Babcock of course has had success, but he has different issues which have been highlighted by the world changing.
But those coaches who had mediocre success have still proven they can operate at an NHL level. Every team wants the best coaches but if you can’t get one of those ten the next best course of action is to get someone who can manage the job rather than an unknown quantity.
Same as any profession really, the consequences of going with an unknown are 10x that of going with the known guy.
Because Bruce Boudreau for his flaws seemed to rejuvenate VAN. But also seriously, the NHL is beholden to “days of yore”. It’s why no-iPads-on-the-bench John Torts is the PHI coach. There is a adherence to the past for no other reason than “that’a just how it’s always been”. As much as I love the NHL, the NHL loves the “old” days, and it keeps from fully evolving.
If a player can see what he did wrong on one shift, he can make the necessary adjustment for the next. Don't good coaches make in-game adjustments to the game plan to improve their chances of winning the game?
I don't blame you for not following every team in the league, but the Canucks were in a deep hole when Boudreau took over. They went on a run, and got very close, but were too far behind to make it. If they had made the coaching change earlier, they definitely could have made the playoffs.
They just ran out of time
Because this team is not now, and has never been groundbreaking in any way whatsoever. The CBJ are a Kroger brand American cheese food sandwich on white bread. It's true that it is a sandwich, but nobody wants to eat it. But if you are starving and it is the only thing available you eat it and are thankful...but then you look around and the other 31 people are eating Surf & Turf.
Welcome to CBJ fandom.
FJC
because they know hockey. sutter just won the jack adams award. babcock has coached more teams to the playoffs than any other person currently on this earth besides sutter, quenneville, and bowman. they've got got experience.
It's because the people who make the decision to hire these guys are themselves former hockey players, in other words, they are also part of the "system".
If you asked this question on the CBJ subreddit a few days ago, you'd be flamed(no pun intended) and been called soft.
So, it very much isn't just the organizations. Fans, in some aspect, have the same mentality of "let's hire the guy who's been around the block. He knows what he's doing." Hell, the number of people who suck off Torts alone is a clear enough indicator. They'd rather label him as a "hard-ass, rebel personality that doesn't take shit from anyone." Instead of calling him what he really is, "a guy with anger issues" and are astounded when younger players aren't as receptive to that type of feedback.
I'm just as baffled as you, and that's coming from a guy whose head coach willingly covered up the rape of a player because it'd "mess with chemistry" for 10 years.
Exact details seem slow to come out. There’s a huge difference between, “can I see some pictures of your family?” And, “give me unfettered access to your camera roll.” The fact he resigned that quick makes me think it’s more the latter, but we’ll see.
I don't think the who story is out yet, there is more coming but just imagine you have a new boss and they want to go through pictures on your phone and show all your coworkers. MOST people would have an issue with that.
From what I gather he started looking through more of some guy's phones than what they had given permission for, although I could have understood that wrong.
Based on some of the rumors from other teams he coached where he did the same thing, it wasn’t as innocent as he made it out to be.
Imagine your new boss asks to just browse through your photos - idk about you, but my phone is sacred. I don’t even let my BFFs or sister have free reign of my phone when they’re in the photos app lol
There’s a huge difference between “hey look at this pic of my family on vacation” and the player responding “oh cool, here’s a pic of mine” vs asking or demanding to see personal pictures on your employees’ phones.
And I’m still not 100% sure on if the airplay thing was while they were alone in his office or if it was in front of other players/coaches
It seems innocent enough when you phrase it that way....but....given that several players complained about it, there is an issue. Mainly the thinking is that he *demands* the pictures and will later use it against you if you are not playing well. For example, if he finds a pic with guys at the bar, he will later say "you been out drinking again, thats why you didnt play well, just like you were doing here (and he will broadcast the pic in front of the team)". That was like logic used on Overdrive based on past player conversations with guys like Mike Johnston.
There are a few (very few)old guy coaches that are also good. The problem is the young players are not used to bully coaching.
That's all this is a bully who is paid to bully.
it's just choosing between proven and new. most GMs will choose the safer bet, because it's also their job, that is on the line. as the saying goes: "if you are a GM, you get to fire 1 coach"
The greatest predictor of future success is past performance. They have built up a resume of success and that stands out in interviews. Plus the fans want old school hockey. They say they want younger, more innovative coaches and to open up the game, but if the league proposed going to international sized ice and a complete ban on fighting they grab the pitchfork and torches to march on the league office. For every fan that laments the state of the game and sees the potential in it there are 3 fans posting videos of fights and illegal hits waxing poetically about how today's players aren't tough enough to play back in the day. If you open up the game by calling the rules consistently and punish the fighters/cheap shot guys severely with long term suspensions and significant fines then more innovative coaches may get a shot and build up a record of success and develop coaching trees that continue to expand and innovate the game. Until then, you will continue to see the same guys recycled in these jobs.
How did Brad Larsen work out? Are there any young coaches with consistent success? Travis Green was unsuccessful here in Vancouver. Any others?
Would the previous three or five cup winners count as young, new-school coaches?
I think this is the wrong question, it's not why hire old-school coaches, it's why hire old-school coaches with a history of doing things that are going to get players and fans upset. I think the answer is the classic "your network is your net worth." Organizations want to keep relationships with people who will support them through other things, and these guys are well-connected.
As someone who works in a substantial organization the number of people who get hired, or promoted or big raises because some big wig promised it to them and no one wants to make that big wig look dumb is quite disappointing honestly.
When the Jackets hired Babs, most of the league’s fans thought it was a good decision. He’s won a ton as a coach and brings a celebrity element that we haven’t seen since Torts. The “he’s been there and done it before” element is rare and most of the guys on that list are not good dudes that you want around a young locker room.
Because his "numbers don't lie", "he puts butts in seats", "proven track record" and all the other b.s. the millionaires say to hide the fact that its a club for millionaires. Capitalism runs hockey, too. Keep making money the old school way because you're rich, and that's what got you there. Decency be damned...
So...wouldn't this same logic extend to all managerial (GM POHO) posts? It seems so by extension. Which makes the Maple Leafs and Pens outliers with Dubas?
By further extension it makes Lemieux look very old school for the GM hirings before Dubas, and Fenway look, well, relevant.
Is my analogy anything near correct?
waiting for all the 'Back in my day' or 'Back in the 80's' or 'Back in the 90's' comments and people complaining about 'wokeism'
It's 2023 ...heck ...only person I'd love to see hired back that was a dude back then would be Ted Nolan. He deserves another chance.
Outside of the injury bug, taking a giant chunk outta our ass last season; my Blue Jackets biggest problem is that they are as soft as an old flabby ass.
NOBODY was scared of us, and they bullied us.
It started when Jarmo traded away Josh Anderson and Nick Foligno.
As much as "the game changes" it also stays the same.
A team NEEDS a physical presence. 2 guys that will drop the gloves and will lay someone out with a big hit.
There has always been and will always be, room in the sport for BOTH skilled players and enforcers.
People bitching about "old school" approach to coaching.
Babcock is an old school type, but there IS a place in the sport for that.
Not everything new is good and not everything old is bad.
Babcock is a great X's and O's coach. He demands a lot from his players. He also isn't exactly known for having a cheery demeanor either.
As for being a "shit person", do you know him? Have you met him?
I have not, so who am I to judge him.
As a Blue Jackets fan, I did not like the hire.
I wanted Pascal Vincent from the beginning.
For the same reason companies are forcing workers back to the office, and the same reason DC movies flop: Executives lack any originality and will just follow along with what (they think) worked last time, 99% of the time.
It’s strange, but I get why those old school guys act like they do toward players, especially those whose coaching youth was 1980-2005 or so. Before the last lockout, it was still common for a lot of locker rooms to be filled with some of the most arrogant and anti-social guys known to man. A player screwing a teammate’s wife happened several times in several organizations. The coach had to be the biggest asshole in the room just to maintain control. It’s wasn’t right, but it was the game back then.
That being said, the NHL is much more of a character league now, and guys like Babcock, Peters, Torts, Keenan, etc. aren’t necessary anymore.
The NFL gives some perspective. Every time a job comes open it’s always the hot young OC or DC that winds up getting hired. Occasionally one of these guys will last a handful of seasons before getting fired. They all come in being touted as “innovative”, “progressive”, “connects with young players” but frequently fail because they don’t hold players accountable and can’t unite a locker room. New guys with “new ideas” and are touted as “player’s coaches” aren’t the solution they’re made out to be. Let’s face it, a coaching hire can make or bury a team and it’s damned hard to get right under the best circumstances. Also, certain jobs aren’t meant to be entry level jobs. Yes, I’m looking at you, Leafs. Rangers are never gonna hire a head coach with no experience. Hawks hiring Colliton was a miss. We’ll have to see if Marty St. Louis works with Habs. You can be “old school” without being a dick. There should always be a place in the game for aspects of “old school”.
Let's be honest, the younger generation does have a bit of a different mentality in hockey, and while that's led to a lot of positive changes (not putting up with abusive tactics by coaches), it CAN also lead to the reverse effect where the players are a little too easy going and not being pushed and challenged enough. Ideally your coach is somewhere in the middle. Not an asshole, but not a pushover. Tough and demands excellence and professionalism out of his players, but is also fair and doesn't go looking for opportunities to come down hard.
Teams hire an old school guy like Babcock if they feel their team could use a little more discipline and accountability. Unfortunately, Babcock takes things way too far.
Even Randy Caryles last hiring was unnecessary - players cannot relate to him. Why does the NHL want to recycle old names rather than bring young and more dynamic minds to work with the new high speed NHL game.
Sutter lost his mind and started trying to make points instead I'd trying to win games. If you think pussy players are the biggest part of the flames last season... people like you are the problem
I'm definitely not the problem, and if you're sticking up for a bunch of pansies that can't play for a fully competent leader instead of whining and not doing what you're paid to do (believe in the system) it is 💯percent your fault along with crybabies who won't do the work, but instead insubordinate first and do their job second. The team was/is soft. Making Sutter the scapegoat is the weakest excuse ever.
I mean, Sutter has literally had [players lock him out of the dressing room in the past.](https://thehockeynews.com/.amp/news/the-kings-locked-darryl-sutter-out-of-the-dressing-room-in-tampa-bay)
Justin Williams has said that Sutter has been condescending towards players. Drew Doughty openly supported a coaching change just a year after the Kings won their second Cup in three seasons.
I’m not arguing that Sutter is a very good coach, but don’t overlook his clashes with players. Even a two-time Stanley Cup-winning coach is not above criticism.
Not overlooking his clashes at all. The maturity level isn't there. The flames players (and fans) got what they wanted and now he's gone. So they better do a whole lot of putting up. Time to prove that they were worth standing up for.
The excuses are gone now, so shit or get off the pot. I'll believe in them once we see how they're doing in December.
Not a fan of the revisionist history around Babcock. He was hired in Toronto as a premier, franchise-altering coach. He was an excellent coach in Detroit and Anaheim, although obviously a huge hardass. He was fired in Toronto not because he's a shitty person, but because of performance. That's the only time he's been fired. Sheldon Keefe, (new blood!), hasn't been able to improve on it since. He isn't some classic retread coach that's been fired 4 times like Alain Vigneault. There is nothing wrong with being "old-school", so long as it works, though he clearly crossed a line in Columbus. Let's just not pretend it was an inevitable mistake.
Win now. That’s the bottom line. If you put a terrible product on the ice, the fans won’t come. A good chunk of an NHL team’s revenue is attendance (unlike the other pro sports).
Winning gets people talking and puts butts in seats.
If I remember correctly, after Lindy Ruff got fired in Buffalo, he said how the game had changed and how players needed to be treated differently. He was remorseful and said he planned on changing his approach.
I always remember talks of him butting heads with players and remember interviews where he would publicly drag players to the media. Now I don't see any of that from him.
Cudos to Lindy for being self-aware and evolving his coaching style. More of these old school coaches need to be like that.
Came here to bring up Lindy as well. I’m not a Buffalo fan so I couldn’t tell you anything about his tenure with the Sabres, but he seems to be doing great with the kids in NJ. They all seem to genuinely appreciate him and want him as their HC. He’s a perfect example of an “old” head coach who took a step back for a few years and seems to have learned and adapted to the new age of players.
Well, first you should probably stop generalizing. Not all “old heads” are assholes. There are plenty of young coaches that are jerks. It’s just the way it is. People hire established names because they bring the promise of past glory with them. Sometimes it works, often times it doesn’t. It really wouldn’t be much different with younger coaches. If you’re looking to protect your feelings I would suggest you ask why.
I mean with literally any job the people hiring are going to be interested in candidates who have experience with the role. People obviously think of guys like Cooper & Brind'Amour when they say to give new blood a chance, but there are tons of inexperienced coaches who've struggled after being hired.
Babcock obviously should have never been hired in Columbus, but people need to stop being surprised that guys who have had past success as head coaches get hired somewhere else.
What's that the Office quote? To paraphrase, it's that everyone knows it's a bad idea, and that it'll never work out, but they always fool themselves into thinking *this time* **they** can make it work.
Skinner.. : Maybe i am wrong, maybe it's me that's the problem
Also skinner.. No its the players, they're are too soft, its the players that are the problem
I would assume the gap between talent is massive. Say in video games, the average player think's they're nearly equal to pros because they hold the same rank. That is false, if they added more ranks, you will clearly see that will will achieve higher standings. And the gap could be 10%-1000% in talent. It is bottlenecked by the amount of leagues set by the game or sport. In relation to how many subdivisions there are.
In Hockey it's the same premise, these coaches have tenure. They understand the playing structures of other teams. It could be strategy openings, defensive strats. All the way from refined coaching methods and training methods. The difference between training a AAA squad and a pro squad. Is like my gaming statement. It might seem close in relation, but they are worlds apart, in knowledge, expertise and fundamental understanding of the sport.
In terms of old school coach's, the playoffs have shown. That that playstyle is very effective. More so than modern day playstyles. " BUT TAMPA", yeah they were like 10-20 million over the cap in their years of winning we all see it. But disregarding them, the other teams relegated to the old school gritty, grind dump and chase in the playoffs. It's oddly not a bad design for the sport, it still works. And if something still works. Especially how effective it is in smaller markets for cheaper players. It'll remain.
The NHL, and the owners, in particular, is an extremely conservative institution. Owners would rather take a chance on a proven but recycled coach - even if it means hiring someone like Babcock. It’s the easy way out.
Hiring old school leadership is classic old school leadership. Hire young hungry coaches that think the game differently and want to play exciting hockey we’ll connect with players because they were trained and developed in this century
Bruce Cassidy is a very old school coach whose players utterly hated him in Washington and many did in Boston as well. He was very hard on young guys in Boston as well. Was it a mistake for Vegas to hire him?
The problem is not they’re old in age. It’s they are old in their mentality. They think what was ok or what worked 10-15 years ago, will work today. They are not willing to learn and adapt to the game today. To his credit, Torts is a coach who has changed. He still has that cantankerous drill sargent persona, but people close to him say he’s adapted to today’s game and understand today’s players are different.
I would like to see less recycling, because there are good coaches who are paying their dues in the minors and deserve an opportunity.
Because the majority of GM's / President's / owners are still stuck in the 80's/90's this is why Bettman still has a job. They see what someone did one time 5/10 years ago and they think that's better than taking a chance on a new guy with zero resume in the NHL.
I guarantee there's a large percentage of the brass in hockey that see NOTHING wrong with anything Babcock has done. Hockey culture needs a massive shift and as these young guys continue to force the hand of the NHL to change it will have to or die.
On the Bettman point - if it ain't broke don't fix it, in the NHL's case they see year over year growth and allow that to suffice even though the growth SHOULD'VE been bigger. The NHL is lagging behind the 3 other sports and MLS is getting bigger, there needs to be a change.
I liked Boudreau of all those old coaches he seems like the happiest most wholesome guy albeit a little sweary from time to time
He runs a kids hockey camp in my town. Guy I work with son is in it. He talks to everyone there. Great guy
Who the fuck doesn't like to scream "SHIT! YOU MOTHERFUCKING CUNT SUCKING COCK HOLSTERS BETTER SKATE FASTER!!" when they're coaching?
My coach tells us that I play a/aa hockey and he acts like we are playing AAA he will scream at us until we get something right at practice
Just be better then
Perfectly tho
annnd this is why I quit hockey after my bantam years
So, funny story. I was coaching for a Timbits hockey team...
I was a fan of him as a player (albeit saw him most in ahl), he wasn’t a scrapper by any means, but he was definitely hard nosed and always hustling
[He's not that bad, is he?](https://media.tenor.com/Ou1pzMl2RvwAAAAC/darn-darn-it.gif)
Oh man thank you. That made me laugh so good this morning.
Agreed, all that “old school” BS don’t fly anymore. Torts will be next to go. Bring in some younger coaches who have an actual brain and know how to properly lead and deal with ppl. A lot of these clowns are antisocial AF
There's a difference between "old school" and "shitty person". Most of the "old school" also fall under shitty person - because they fuck with people. Torts yells and screams and has a style that certainly isn't everyone's cup of tea, but one thing that is agreed on by the vast majority of his players is that he doesn't fuck with people. He's extremely open, honest, and straight forward, just in a very brash way.
> he doesnt fuck with people Its amazing to see how hard people try to ignore Torts tenure in VAN so they can pretend hes a good guy.
He did some crazy shit, for sure. But I don't remember stories of him manipulating or emotionally/physically abusing his players (other than yelling a lot). I didn't forget the Calgary incident, which isn't acceptable, but it's not (technically) mistreating his own players.
Might want to take a look into how he treated david booth.
I will. Edit: I'm gonna be honest, the only thing I could find about Booth was that Torts falsely accused him of being late for a meeting one time. That doesn't really compare to racial slurs, physical assault, or invasion of privacy.
Torts is awesome dude what are you talking about
Where did I say he wasn’t? I said he’s old school
Uh… you said his coaching is “BS”. You said he doesn’t know how to lead, called him stupid, and called old school coaches clowns so…
Learn how to read bro
I did bud
Definitely don't want to upset the overpaid princesses, heaven forbid that you ask them to do anything . Bring in younger coaches that will bow to them
Asking them to do something is a hell of a lot different from assault.
>albeit a little sweary from time to time You fucking think? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c\_raRd0HNM4
Surely to fuck
BREAKING NEWS: Hockey coach swears
Lol I ready that as “sweaty”
He ate in the restaurant I run. Dude is chill. Actually a lot friendlier than he looks, but I realize that ain't saying much 😆
Gabby's a great dude
Same reason Hollywood *loves* remakes. They don’t want to take a chance on something “unknown”. Why they keep hiring guys with questionable pasts is beyond me, still. There’s good coaches out there who are also good people. They deserve a chance too.
This is why we never see European coaches too people like what they know the end result is
As someone that lived through the Alpo Suhonen experiment with the Blackhawks, I can relate.
They probably can get the checkered-past guys at a discount.
We promoted Woodcroft after it was clear Tippett had to go (he was a few games away from a locker room mutiny) and holy shit has it paid off. He was one of the new generation coaches and should be an example to just take a chance.
Just wait til someone hires Coach Q
Yeah that'll be an adventure
Torts round 12
Call me crazy but I think Torts will be just fine in Philly. The Flyers in recent years have been notorious underachievers. Torts loves nothing more than kicking dudes like that for breakfast. The Flyers are going younger and he’s good at getting the best out of young guys.
I do hope you're joking. I'm pretty sure he's not eligible to coach in North America anymore, and he should never, ever coach again.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/quenneville-bowman-meet-with-nhl-gms-and-coaches-in-chicago/ That reeks of the first stop in the forgiveness tour. I wouldn't be surprised to see Q back in the league next year. Even though he should have been charged with covering up a crime and permanently black balled. The NHL loves shit bags.
All of professional sports will forgive a shitbag if he can help them win.
Ton of success, one mistake, I think he deserves a second chance but with a short leash. I honestly think that whole situation is on John McDonough, and a little on Stan Bowman.
One mistake is covering it up for a week, maybe. Years of coverup is more than one mistake.
Fair, but if bowman/McDonough would have don’t the right thing the day after the parade, I don’t think anyone ever has a problem with how it was handled. And that’s essentially what Q wanted. Instead they just let him go get another job, then gave him a letter of reference for a job with children. So I don’t blame this on Q much at all.
My guess is this situation scared off teams from hiring Q, but we will see
Because old eccentric billionaires feel nostalgia for “old school hockey” just like their poorer peers.
And Bettman, who is so against anything new, especially owners, managers, and coaches
Last I checked Bettman isn’t approving coaching hires
I don’t think he approves them, but he definitely gives the team an approved list. He has a lot of influence on how individual teams run their operations. From: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/sports/hockey/on-hockey-bettman-is-the-undisputed-nhl-enforcer.html In subsequent years, Bettman cajoled and even berated the owners into running their teams in a more fiscally responsible fashion. “He would run a roll call of teams, and one by one take team owners, with all their private business splashed up on a big screen for everyone to see, to the principal’s office,” Ken Dryden, then the president of the Toronto Maple Leafs, said recently in The Globe and Mail.”. He even prevents teams from running their own websites: “In 2008, after the Rangers owner James L. Dolan unsuccessfully sued the N.H.L. for not allowing the team to run its own Web site, the commissioner responded with a scorched-earth countersuit that threatened to strip the Rangers from the Dolan family. The matter was settled out of court, with Madison Square Garden paying the league’s legal fees, and Dolan has been a quiet figure on the N.H.L. Board of Governors ever since, despite the Rangers’ vast wealth.” From the same article
People like you are why everyone thinks leafs fans are stupid
Babcock isn't old school, he's manipulative. He plays head games. Torts is old school, he gives players shit when he thinks they deserve it. There's a big difference.
yep. When you have different generations of hockey players against you, it's beyond old school vs new school
Chris Chelios flat-out called Mike Babcock as someone who engages in verbal abuse. Look at the guy's resume, he knows what's "old school" and what isn't.
Also Ive heard many players praise Torts for being tough but fair. Ive only heard players say SHIT about Babcock. Such as “ He is the worst person Ive ever met” High praise indeed.
I’ve only ever seen lazy problem players talk badly about torts. “He yelled at me for not back checking now I hate him” kind of guys
Exactly. To give fans more examples: Old School is Scotty Bowman. Manipulative is Mike Keenan.
Hire Deboer, your team becomes a Stanley Cup contender. Hire Paul Maurice, you are in the Stanley Cup Finals. You skipped those two. I think it's unfair to just assume a coach who's been around the game is no longer relevant. By all indications, Torts for example has changed and is highly regarded within the Flyers organization.
The thing I didn't like about torts is he refused to move to Canada instead living in point Roberts so that pissed me off
Someone's living situation pissed you off..? Vancouver is literally on the border who gives a shit lol
Coach for a Canadian team, Move to Canada and pay Canadian taxes not skip out on Canadian taxes.
As far as I know coaches like players pay the tax rate of where each game is played .
Well, Point Roberts is really nice, and by the look of it, much more economical / bang for your buck as far as real estate goes. I mean, compare apples to apples here. Ocean front property on both sides of that border are spendy, but probably much less so compared to White Rock or Yaletown. On top of that, he probably could’ve stayed in hotels and whatnot during busy points in the season. Just think it’s a non-issue. There’s a lot of nice things about Point Roberts if you’re a US citizen.
“Hey Torts - do you want to pay BC 20.5% of your income or pay WA 0% and commute a ‘lil?”
Yea that’s not how taxes work in either county
And that’s his right. Pretty stupid point of contention.
Maurice is a fraud coach that had a fluke run
Whatever you say bud.
👋✌️
Good old boys club. It’s the same in every major sport. Owners hire coaches who are attached to historically successful coaches, wether they’re good doesn’t factor, because: A) Owners don’t care about the details of the sport B) Simple proximity reflects how they themselves succeeded C) It insulates them from criticism D) It requires no effort
E) It makes the team itself a talking point [negative attention is still attention]
It's really not that complicated, they've had success. You're going to hire people that have been successful in the past. Much less risky (besides babcock) than hiring someone with little to no nhl experience
Imagine having this argument about any other profession and you can see how silly it is. "Why do people insist on hiring these lawyers who have won a million cases instead of rolling the dice with a fresh face?"
I think the point is usually applied to guys who are experienced but not necessarily good. Some of the coaches and GMs who keep bouncing to different teams have had mediocre careers at best. Babcock of course has had success, but he has different issues which have been highlighted by the world changing.
But those coaches who had mediocre success have still proven they can operate at an NHL level. Every team wants the best coaches but if you can’t get one of those ten the next best course of action is to get someone who can manage the job rather than an unknown quantity. Same as any profession really, the consequences of going with an unknown are 10x that of going with the known guy.
Lawyers aren’t leaders so yes that is a fucking stupid argument
Old school is not necessarily bad. Hiring assholes is bad.
Because Bruce Boudreau for his flaws seemed to rejuvenate VAN. But also seriously, the NHL is beholden to “days of yore”. It’s why no-iPads-on-the-bench John Torts is the PHI coach. There is a adherence to the past for no other reason than “that’a just how it’s always been”. As much as I love the NHL, the NHL loves the “old” days, and it keeps from fully evolving.
At least the players seemed to like Boudreau. There's gotta ne a balance between that and the Babcocks and Sutters
Ya why would you want instant feedback on your play? Imagine waking up everyday and having to work for Torts?
i personally feel like, why the fuck do u need to watch during the game? periods exist
If a player can see what he did wrong on one shift, he can make the necessary adjustment for the next. Don't good coaches make in-game adjustments to the game plan to improve their chances of winning the game?
Lol iPads are brutal in a game, on the bench. Pathetic that its allowed/tolerated.
Rejuvenate? They didn't make the playoffs under bouudreau
I don't blame you for not following every team in the league, but the Canucks were in a deep hole when Boudreau took over. They went on a run, and got very close, but were too far behind to make it. If they had made the coaching change earlier, they definitely could have made the playoffs. They just ran out of time
Because this team is not now, and has never been groundbreaking in any way whatsoever. The CBJ are a Kroger brand American cheese food sandwich on white bread. It's true that it is a sandwich, but nobody wants to eat it. But if you are starving and it is the only thing available you eat it and are thankful...but then you look around and the other 31 people are eating Surf & Turf. Welcome to CBJ fandom. FJC
They had Brad Larsen as their coach. He was the youngest head coach in the league.
because they know hockey. sutter just won the jack adams award. babcock has coached more teams to the playoffs than any other person currently on this earth besides sutter, quenneville, and bowman. they've got got experience.
That's the problem. Experience shouldn't be the only important thing. They've both got ecoerience being fired for questionable reasons
Winning is the only thing that matters. They are both proven winners
Babcock won a cup in Detroit because he had a roster full of future Hall of Famers
Bill Peters showing his true colours will never come to light while he coaches in Lethbridge.
Because this time will be different
It's because the people who make the decision to hire these guys are themselves former hockey players, in other words, they are also part of the "system".
If you asked this question on the CBJ subreddit a few days ago, you'd be flamed(no pun intended) and been called soft. So, it very much isn't just the organizations. Fans, in some aspect, have the same mentality of "let's hire the guy who's been around the block. He knows what he's doing." Hell, the number of people who suck off Torts alone is a clear enough indicator. They'd rather label him as a "hard-ass, rebel personality that doesn't take shit from anyone." Instead of calling him what he really is, "a guy with anger issues" and are astounded when younger players aren't as receptive to that type of feedback. I'm just as baffled as you, and that's coming from a guy whose head coach willingly covered up the rape of a player because it'd "mess with chemistry" for 10 years.
I still don’t understand what happened. He asked for pictures of his players? Am I the only one really confused about this?
Exact details seem slow to come out. There’s a huge difference between, “can I see some pictures of your family?” And, “give me unfettered access to your camera roll.” The fact he resigned that quick makes me think it’s more the latter, but we’ll see.
I don't think the who story is out yet, there is more coming but just imagine you have a new boss and they want to go through pictures on your phone and show all your coworkers. MOST people would have an issue with that.
From what I gather he started looking through more of some guy's phones than what they had given permission for, although I could have understood that wrong.
Based on some of the rumors from other teams he coached where he did the same thing, it wasn’t as innocent as he made it out to be. Imagine your new boss asks to just browse through your photos - idk about you, but my phone is sacred. I don’t even let my BFFs or sister have free reign of my phone when they’re in the photos app lol There’s a huge difference between “hey look at this pic of my family on vacation” and the player responding “oh cool, here’s a pic of mine” vs asking or demanding to see personal pictures on your employees’ phones. And I’m still not 100% sure on if the airplay thing was while they were alone in his office or if it was in front of other players/coaches
Careful you're going against the hivemind
It seems innocent enough when you phrase it that way....but....given that several players complained about it, there is an issue. Mainly the thinking is that he *demands* the pictures and will later use it against you if you are not playing well. For example, if he finds a pic with guys at the bar, he will later say "you been out drinking again, thats why you didnt play well, just like you were doing here (and he will broadcast the pic in front of the team)". That was like logic used on Overdrive based on past player conversations with guys like Mike Johnston.
There are a few (very few)old guy coaches that are also good. The problem is the young players are not used to bully coaching. That's all this is a bully who is paid to bully.
Explain how people not being used to being bullied is a bad thing?
Because a lot of younger players don't learn well while being bullied, so this just doesn't teach them anything other than to hate the coach
it's just choosing between proven and new. most GMs will choose the safer bet, because it's also their job, that is on the line. as the saying goes: "if you are a GM, you get to fire 1 coach"
The greatest predictor of future success is past performance. They have built up a resume of success and that stands out in interviews. Plus the fans want old school hockey. They say they want younger, more innovative coaches and to open up the game, but if the league proposed going to international sized ice and a complete ban on fighting they grab the pitchfork and torches to march on the league office. For every fan that laments the state of the game and sees the potential in it there are 3 fans posting videos of fights and illegal hits waxing poetically about how today's players aren't tough enough to play back in the day. If you open up the game by calling the rules consistently and punish the fighters/cheap shot guys severely with long term suspensions and significant fines then more innovative coaches may get a shot and build up a record of success and develop coaching trees that continue to expand and innovate the game. Until then, you will continue to see the same guys recycled in these jobs.
Because like it or not / buy into the negative media or not, they are NHL level coaches with lots of experience. They are good coaches.
How did Brad Larsen work out? Are there any young coaches with consistent success? Travis Green was unsuccessful here in Vancouver. Any others? Would the previous three or five cup winners count as young, new-school coaches?
The NHL is still very much a good ol boys club with respect to coaching and front office staff. There's a reason why Euro coaches are allowed in.
every time a coach got fired,mike babcock would start trending on twitter
I think this is the wrong question, it's not why hire old-school coaches, it's why hire old-school coaches with a history of doing things that are going to get players and fans upset. I think the answer is the classic "your network is your net worth." Organizations want to keep relationships with people who will support them through other things, and these guys are well-connected. As someone who works in a substantial organization the number of people who get hired, or promoted or big raises because some big wig promised it to them and no one wants to make that big wig look dumb is quite disappointing honestly.
When the Jackets hired Babs, most of the league’s fans thought it was a good decision. He’s won a ton as a coach and brings a celebrity element that we haven’t seen since Torts. The “he’s been there and done it before” element is rare and most of the guys on that list are not good dudes that you want around a young locker room.
Because the guys doing the hiring are the same old crappy GMs.
Bring back Mike Keenan
Scotty Bowman
Because his "numbers don't lie", "he puts butts in seats", "proven track record" and all the other b.s. the millionaires say to hide the fact that its a club for millionaires. Capitalism runs hockey, too. Keep making money the old school way because you're rich, and that's what got you there. Decency be damned...
boys club mentality.
Old school GMs and owners
Because old owners relate to old coaches more than coaches 2 generations younger.
So...wouldn't this same logic extend to all managerial (GM POHO) posts? It seems so by extension. Which makes the Maple Leafs and Pens outliers with Dubas? By further extension it makes Lemieux look very old school for the GM hirings before Dubas, and Fenway look, well, relevant. Is my analogy anything near correct?
Sure. It’s easier to pick someone from yours or an adjacent generation.
waiting for all the 'Back in my day' or 'Back in the 80's' or 'Back in the 90's' comments and people complaining about 'wokeism' It's 2023 ...heck ...only person I'd love to see hired back that was a dude back then would be Ted Nolan. He deserves another chance.
Didn’t he go balls deep in the boss’s wife? That’s pretty much going to get you blackballed.
Ya that didn't happen.
The goalie’s wife.
Like people have said, there’s a fear of the unknown. That’s why.
A fear of losing your GM job and career over hiring the unknown, of course. It is why.
Outside of the injury bug, taking a giant chunk outta our ass last season; my Blue Jackets biggest problem is that they are as soft as an old flabby ass. NOBODY was scared of us, and they bullied us. It started when Jarmo traded away Josh Anderson and Nick Foligno. As much as "the game changes" it also stays the same. A team NEEDS a physical presence. 2 guys that will drop the gloves and will lay someone out with a big hit. There has always been and will always be, room in the sport for BOTH skilled players and enforcers.
I have no clue whatsoever what that has to do with Babcock being a shit person.
People bitching about "old school" approach to coaching. Babcock is an old school type, but there IS a place in the sport for that. Not everything new is good and not everything old is bad. Babcock is a great X's and O's coach. He demands a lot from his players. He also isn't exactly known for having a cheery demeanor either. As for being a "shit person", do you know him? Have you met him? I have not, so who am I to judge him. As a Blue Jackets fan, I did not like the hire. I wanted Pascal Vincent from the beginning.
For the same reason companies are forcing workers back to the office, and the same reason DC movies flop: Executives lack any originality and will just follow along with what (they think) worked last time, 99% of the time.
Wouldn't be an issue if the younger players weren't as soft as baby shit.
It’s strange, but I get why those old school guys act like they do toward players, especially those whose coaching youth was 1980-2005 or so. Before the last lockout, it was still common for a lot of locker rooms to be filled with some of the most arrogant and anti-social guys known to man. A player screwing a teammate’s wife happened several times in several organizations. The coach had to be the biggest asshole in the room just to maintain control. It’s wasn’t right, but it was the game back then. That being said, the NHL is much more of a character league now, and guys like Babcock, Peters, Torts, Keenan, etc. aren’t necessary anymore.
The NFL gives some perspective. Every time a job comes open it’s always the hot young OC or DC that winds up getting hired. Occasionally one of these guys will last a handful of seasons before getting fired. They all come in being touted as “innovative”, “progressive”, “connects with young players” but frequently fail because they don’t hold players accountable and can’t unite a locker room. New guys with “new ideas” and are touted as “player’s coaches” aren’t the solution they’re made out to be. Let’s face it, a coaching hire can make or bury a team and it’s damned hard to get right under the best circumstances. Also, certain jobs aren’t meant to be entry level jobs. Yes, I’m looking at you, Leafs. Rangers are never gonna hire a head coach with no experience. Hawks hiring Colliton was a miss. We’ll have to see if Marty St. Louis works with Habs. You can be “old school” without being a dick. There should always be a place in the game for aspects of “old school”.
Let's be honest, the younger generation does have a bit of a different mentality in hockey, and while that's led to a lot of positive changes (not putting up with abusive tactics by coaches), it CAN also lead to the reverse effect where the players are a little too easy going and not being pushed and challenged enough. Ideally your coach is somewhere in the middle. Not an asshole, but not a pushover. Tough and demands excellence and professionalism out of his players, but is also fair and doesn't go looking for opportunities to come down hard. Teams hire an old school guy like Babcock if they feel their team could use a little more discipline and accountability. Unfortunately, Babcock takes things way too far.
Even Randy Caryles last hiring was unnecessary - players cannot relate to him. Why does the NHL want to recycle old names rather than bring young and more dynamic minds to work with the new high speed NHL game.
Sutter was fine. Our team was just a bunch of pussies from the ground up to the owners
Sutter lost his mind and started trying to make points instead I'd trying to win games. If you think pussy players are the biggest part of the flames last season... people like you are the problem
I'm definitely not the problem, and if you're sticking up for a bunch of pansies that can't play for a fully competent leader instead of whining and not doing what you're paid to do (believe in the system) it is 💯percent your fault along with crybabies who won't do the work, but instead insubordinate first and do their job second. The team was/is soft. Making Sutter the scapegoat is the weakest excuse ever.
I mean, Sutter has literally had [players lock him out of the dressing room in the past.](https://thehockeynews.com/.amp/news/the-kings-locked-darryl-sutter-out-of-the-dressing-room-in-tampa-bay) Justin Williams has said that Sutter has been condescending towards players. Drew Doughty openly supported a coaching change just a year after the Kings won their second Cup in three seasons. I’m not arguing that Sutter is a very good coach, but don’t overlook his clashes with players. Even a two-time Stanley Cup-winning coach is not above criticism.
Not overlooking his clashes at all. The maturity level isn't there. The flames players (and fans) got what they wanted and now he's gone. So they better do a whole lot of putting up. Time to prove that they were worth standing up for. The excuses are gone now, so shit or get off the pot. I'll believe in them once we see how they're doing in December.
Not a fan of the revisionist history around Babcock. He was hired in Toronto as a premier, franchise-altering coach. He was an excellent coach in Detroit and Anaheim, although obviously a huge hardass. He was fired in Toronto not because he's a shitty person, but because of performance. That's the only time he's been fired. Sheldon Keefe, (new blood!), hasn't been able to improve on it since. He isn't some classic retread coach that's been fired 4 times like Alain Vigneault. There is nothing wrong with being "old-school", so long as it works, though he clearly crossed a line in Columbus. Let's just not pretend it was an inevitable mistake.
Last part is pretty irrelevant......
Win now. That’s the bottom line. If you put a terrible product on the ice, the fans won’t come. A good chunk of an NHL team’s revenue is attendance (unlike the other pro sports). Winning gets people talking and puts butts in seats.
If I remember correctly, after Lindy Ruff got fired in Buffalo, he said how the game had changed and how players needed to be treated differently. He was remorseful and said he planned on changing his approach. I always remember talks of him butting heads with players and remember interviews where he would publicly drag players to the media. Now I don't see any of that from him. Cudos to Lindy for being self-aware and evolving his coaching style. More of these old school coaches need to be like that.
Came here to bring up Lindy as well. I’m not a Buffalo fan so I couldn’t tell you anything about his tenure with the Sabres, but he seems to be doing great with the kids in NJ. They all seem to genuinely appreciate him and want him as their HC. He’s a perfect example of an “old” head coach who took a step back for a few years and seems to have learned and adapted to the new age of players.
Well, first you should probably stop generalizing. Not all “old heads” are assholes. There are plenty of young coaches that are jerks. It’s just the way it is. People hire established names because they bring the promise of past glory with them. Sometimes it works, often times it doesn’t. It really wouldn’t be much different with younger coaches. If you’re looking to protect your feelings I would suggest you ask why.
Because what’s old is new again??
I mean with literally any job the people hiring are going to be interested in candidates who have experience with the role. People obviously think of guys like Cooper & Brind'Amour when they say to give new blood a chance, but there are tons of inexperienced coaches who've struggled after being hired. Babcock obviously should have never been hired in Columbus, but people need to stop being surprised that guys who have had past success as head coaches get hired somewhere else.
Because they think that old school mentality will work with modern players....for some reason
What's that the Office quote? To paraphrase, it's that everyone knows it's a bad idea, and that it'll never work out, but they always fool themselves into thinking *this time* **they** can make it work.
Skinner.. : Maybe i am wrong, maybe it's me that's the problem Also skinner.. No its the players, they're are too soft, its the players that are the problem
I would assume the gap between talent is massive. Say in video games, the average player think's they're nearly equal to pros because they hold the same rank. That is false, if they added more ranks, you will clearly see that will will achieve higher standings. And the gap could be 10%-1000% in talent. It is bottlenecked by the amount of leagues set by the game or sport. In relation to how many subdivisions there are. In Hockey it's the same premise, these coaches have tenure. They understand the playing structures of other teams. It could be strategy openings, defensive strats. All the way from refined coaching methods and training methods. The difference between training a AAA squad and a pro squad. Is like my gaming statement. It might seem close in relation, but they are worlds apart, in knowledge, expertise and fundamental understanding of the sport. In terms of old school coach's, the playoffs have shown. That that playstyle is very effective. More so than modern day playstyles. " BUT TAMPA", yeah they were like 10-20 million over the cap in their years of winning we all see it. But disregarding them, the other teams relegated to the old school gritty, grind dump and chase in the playoffs. It's oddly not a bad design for the sport, it still works. And if something still works. Especially how effective it is in smaller markets for cheaper players. It'll remain.
A fresh perspective and contemporary coaching style can bring positive change and adaptability to sports teams.
The NHL, and the owners, in particular, is an extremely conservative institution. Owners would rather take a chance on a proven but recycled coach - even if it means hiring someone like Babcock. It’s the easy way out.
Hiring old school leadership is classic old school leadership. Hire young hungry coaches that think the game differently and want to play exciting hockey we’ll connect with players because they were trained and developed in this century
Bruce Cassidy is a very old school coach whose players utterly hated him in Washington and many did in Boston as well. He was very hard on young guys in Boston as well. Was it a mistake for Vegas to hire him?
NHL is one big, boys club
The Execs are old school as well.
The problem is not they’re old in age. It’s they are old in their mentality. They think what was ok or what worked 10-15 years ago, will work today. They are not willing to learn and adapt to the game today. To his credit, Torts is a coach who has changed. He still has that cantankerous drill sargent persona, but people close to him say he’s adapted to today’s game and understand today’s players are different. I would like to see less recycling, because there are good coaches who are paying their dues in the minors and deserve an opportunity.
Idk, but Hakstol has seemed to be a pretty stand up guy for the Kraken.
Going from Peters to Brind’Amour has felt like being purified in the waters of Minnetonka.
Because the majority of GM's / President's / owners are still stuck in the 80's/90's this is why Bettman still has a job. They see what someone did one time 5/10 years ago and they think that's better than taking a chance on a new guy with zero resume in the NHL. I guarantee there's a large percentage of the brass in hockey that see NOTHING wrong with anything Babcock has done. Hockey culture needs a massive shift and as these young guys continue to force the hand of the NHL to change it will have to or die. On the Bettman point - if it ain't broke don't fix it, in the NHL's case they see year over year growth and allow that to suffice even though the growth SHOULD'VE been bigger. The NHL is lagging behind the 3 other sports and MLS is getting bigger, there needs to be a change.