2014 Olympics Thread (2/12-2/23)
- Thread starter spintheblackcircle
- Start date
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,698
- 26,745
Actually, here I agree with Robert. The quoted is:
"When I needed the belief and trust, I didn’t get it, and I didn’t get it when it counted from numerous people."
That above sounds like like whining to me, too. I mean, as a Jackets fan, while JJ felt he needed the belief and trust, he doesn't seem to have played well enough to have earned it. And so if he was expecting it outright, well then I for one don't appreciate that sense of entitlement.
I really want to like and pull for JMFJ. But he just can't stop working.
“When I needed the belief and trust, I didn’t get it, and I didn’t get it when it counted from numerous people." --JJ
To me the veiled reference to his own coach is whining. =You do not publicly DISS your coach.= If others read it as "disappointed" then so be it. But I have higher expectations for a would-be captain.
What he should have said:
"I'm disappointed I didn't make the team. I had a slow start this year and look forward to contuing to improve my game and help the Jackets win."
To me the veiled reference to his own coach is whining. =You do not publicly DISS your coach.= If others read it as "disappointed" then so be it. But I have higher expectations for a would-be captain.
What he should have said:
"I'm disappointed I didn't make the team. I had a slow start this year and look forward to contuing to improve my game and help the Jackets win."
From Lori Schmidt, Fear the Hat:
“I know he feels not fully supported, and the only thing I can say is I was part of the conversations, I was part of the discussions, and in all my discussions, I supported Jack.â€
Todd Richards.
http://fearthehat.wordpress.com/2014/01/09/richards-i-supported-jack/
“I know he feels not fully supported, and the only thing I can say is I was part of the conversations, I was part of the discussions, and in all my discussions, I supported Jack.â€
Todd Richards.
http://fearthehat.wordpress.com/2014/01/09/richards-i-supported-jack/
I agree, Jf. I wonder if the assistant coaches had a "vote" or were limited to merely expressing their "support" for players under consideration? I didn't read all of the Allen/Burnside pieces, so I don't know how fully the process was laid out.
Is bizzz doing his thing again?
You don't complain to the media, especially when you weren't playing all that well. When you do, it gives people an impression.
This quote is pretty darn close to pathetic whining.
Oh boo freakin who. That's the kind of crap you say to your Mom when you are crying on the phone.
Just express your disappointment and say you'll leave the team no choice but to take you next time around.
I'm disappointed for JJ. But I didn't think he's done anything this season to earn it. I've dumped on other players as well.
It doesn't take a genius to look and see that his ice time as been decreasing every year since he got here.
Palinka
Registered User
- Dec 19, 2007
- 2,259
- 1
An open letter to Jack Johnson
Hi Jack,
You may not remember, but we've met once before in your draft year. Our interaction consisted of one fly-by question, and a one-sentence answer. Outside of that, we're strangers.
You may not know what goes into these meetings. I do. So let me explain a little bit.
Any scouting meeting involves pretty much the same setup. There's a person at the head of the table who leads it. This could be the GM, the scouting director, or the president of hockey ops, depending on which meeting it is and when. He leads, and everyone who has something to offer will contribute. I've been in these meetings before, back when the internet was in its relative infancy and independent guys like me were valuable. It's a bit different in the minor leagues because of the structure and the varying team goals, but in my best years I was meeting with several ECHL, AHL, and IHL teams who were looking to fill out the non-affiliated part of their rosters.
The biggest issue that one can face is bias and volume. There's an old saying that the person who knows the least knows it the loudest. In a meeting like this, it's possible for someone to basically dominate because they're belligerent and will defend "their guys" to the end. And on the part of the person actually directing the meeting, there's a bias of some type. If someone has come up with a couple of gems recently, his opinion automatically carries more weight. If someone is low-key in meetings, his opinion may be downgraded. If a head coach flat refuses to consider someone, he may trump everyone else because he's the one who has to have the daily interactions with the player. On a personal level, I've been on all sides of this. I failed to convince a GM to sign a kid who was interested in them because he interpreted my normal volume as meaning that I wasn't sold, I've had a GM sign a kid because I was in contrast with his loudmouth assistant, and I had a coach refuse to take on a player coming off a leg injury because he didn't like injured players being around at all. That's not the worst one. That title belongs to the one who didn't like players who went to church once a week because he thought it made them soft and of questionable commitment. Needless to say, he didn't last very long.
Jack, I understand that you're upset about two things. The first is not being named to the team. The second is the way that you found out. To the second point, let me be absolutely emphatic in stating that the universal opinion in the world of hockey is that USA Hockey screwed this up to an extreme extent. Back when I first started (1992), the organization was a complete cluster. Dealing with USA Hockey was like pulling teeth, and a lot of players shied away from playing internationally simply because it was a disaster. I remember talking to an IHLer one time who'd refused a World Championships invite because two of his former teammates had gotten the invite, then simply been told to be in this location by this time. No flight arrangements, no equipment arrangements, no hotel information, nothing. By the time the 1996 World Cup came around, USA Hockey had transformed itself into an absolute first-class operation, and in the last five years they've shown signs of going right back to the old ways. I completely understand the frustration and pain that finding out from TV carries. It's not just annoying and disrespectful to the players not on the team, but it's embarrassing as well. Jack, you don't like to be embarrassed. No one does. That takes me to the other point.
You may be wondering if you had support in that room. You've publicly questioned whether you did have support. Now, think about that for a minute. Todd Richards was in that room. And you may not know this, but he's taken a lot of heat for what he doesn't do - criticize his players. Look around the locker room in Columbus. Look in the mirror. If you're being honest, you know when you have and haven't played well. You know when your teammates have and haven't played well. How many times has Todd Richards criticized you in public? How many times has he criticized your teammates in public? He hasn't called out specific players at all; the farthest he'll go is with a vague generality that refers to a collective "we". He'll go to the gallows to not make a public statement of criticism toward a player, and trust me when I say that he's been criticized for most of his coaching career because of this.
Jack, look at the situation right now. You weren't named to the team, and that hurts. But by making the public statements that you have, you've now run the risk of damaging the Columbus locker room. Bobby Ryan said something about Brian Burke, and their paths haven't crossed in years. You said something about Todd Richards (directly or indirectly), and you see him every day. He's spent the last three seasons building up a particular relationship that what gets said behind closed doors stays behind closed doors, and that some things are not meant for the public to know. You're pissed off that what would normally stay behind closed doors was brought into the public, and yet you've done exactly the same thing to your own coach by questioning whether he had your back. You're pissed off that the way that you found out about not making the team embarrassed you and put you on the defensive, and by making public comments you've embarrassed your coach (publicly) and put him on the defensive.
I've seen locker rooms completely fall apart over less stuff than this. I know that your intention wasn't to cause a rift, but you can't control what your teammates think. A coach has had your back in public for three seasons even when you know it hasn't always been deserved, and you've basically put an axe in his back. I don't think you meant to, but that's the reality.
I'll tell you how to fix this. Don't say you were misquoted, don't say that anything was taken out of context. Don't even hint about it. Go into a room with Todd Richards and apologize. Apologize because what you said was wrong, and you know that it was. Apologize to your teammates because this has the potential to blow up and undo a lot of good things that have been happening with the team. And you don't need to make that known to the media, because screw the media. You don't owe the media a damned thing. The only us vs. them scenario that needs to play out is Columbus vs. the rest of the NHL, not pro-Richards and anti-Richards factions that may well form in the absence of making this right. Look at this very board, which has seen a division of sorts over what was said. Don't let that carry over into your own locker room.
We're all pulling for you. We're all on the same side.
Yours in hockey,
Palinka
Hi Jack,
You may not remember, but we've met once before in your draft year. Our interaction consisted of one fly-by question, and a one-sentence answer. Outside of that, we're strangers.
You may not know what goes into these meetings. I do. So let me explain a little bit.
Any scouting meeting involves pretty much the same setup. There's a person at the head of the table who leads it. This could be the GM, the scouting director, or the president of hockey ops, depending on which meeting it is and when. He leads, and everyone who has something to offer will contribute. I've been in these meetings before, back when the internet was in its relative infancy and independent guys like me were valuable. It's a bit different in the minor leagues because of the structure and the varying team goals, but in my best years I was meeting with several ECHL, AHL, and IHL teams who were looking to fill out the non-affiliated part of their rosters.
The biggest issue that one can face is bias and volume. There's an old saying that the person who knows the least knows it the loudest. In a meeting like this, it's possible for someone to basically dominate because they're belligerent and will defend "their guys" to the end. And on the part of the person actually directing the meeting, there's a bias of some type. If someone has come up with a couple of gems recently, his opinion automatically carries more weight. If someone is low-key in meetings, his opinion may be downgraded. If a head coach flat refuses to consider someone, he may trump everyone else because he's the one who has to have the daily interactions with the player. On a personal level, I've been on all sides of this. I failed to convince a GM to sign a kid who was interested in them because he interpreted my normal volume as meaning that I wasn't sold, I've had a GM sign a kid because I was in contrast with his loudmouth assistant, and I had a coach refuse to take on a player coming off a leg injury because he didn't like injured players being around at all. That's not the worst one. That title belongs to the one who didn't like players who went to church once a week because he thought it made them soft and of questionable commitment. Needless to say, he didn't last very long.
Jack, I understand that you're upset about two things. The first is not being named to the team. The second is the way that you found out. To the second point, let me be absolutely emphatic in stating that the universal opinion in the world of hockey is that USA Hockey screwed this up to an extreme extent. Back when I first started (1992), the organization was a complete cluster. Dealing with USA Hockey was like pulling teeth, and a lot of players shied away from playing internationally simply because it was a disaster. I remember talking to an IHLer one time who'd refused a World Championships invite because two of his former teammates had gotten the invite, then simply been told to be in this location by this time. No flight arrangements, no equipment arrangements, no hotel information, nothing. By the time the 1996 World Cup came around, USA Hockey had transformed itself into an absolute first-class operation, and in the last five years they've shown signs of going right back to the old ways. I completely understand the frustration and pain that finding out from TV carries. It's not just annoying and disrespectful to the players not on the team, but it's embarrassing as well. Jack, you don't like to be embarrassed. No one does. That takes me to the other point.
You may be wondering if you had support in that room. You've publicly questioned whether you did have support. Now, think about that for a minute. Todd Richards was in that room. And you may not know this, but he's taken a lot of heat for what he doesn't do - criticize his players. Look around the locker room in Columbus. Look in the mirror. If you're being honest, you know when you have and haven't played well. You know when your teammates have and haven't played well. How many times has Todd Richards criticized you in public? How many times has he criticized your teammates in public? He hasn't called out specific players at all; the farthest he'll go is with a vague generality that refers to a collective "we". He'll go to the gallows to not make a public statement of criticism toward a player, and trust me when I say that he's been criticized for most of his coaching career because of this.
Jack, look at the situation right now. You weren't named to the team, and that hurts. But by making the public statements that you have, you've now run the risk of damaging the Columbus locker room. Bobby Ryan said something about Brian Burke, and their paths haven't crossed in years. You said something about Todd Richards (directly or indirectly), and you see him every day. He's spent the last three seasons building up a particular relationship that what gets said behind closed doors stays behind closed doors, and that some things are not meant for the public to know. You're pissed off that what would normally stay behind closed doors was brought into the public, and yet you've done exactly the same thing to your own coach by questioning whether he had your back. You're pissed off that the way that you found out about not making the team embarrassed you and put you on the defensive, and by making public comments you've embarrassed your coach (publicly) and put him on the defensive.
I've seen locker rooms completely fall apart over less stuff than this. I know that your intention wasn't to cause a rift, but you can't control what your teammates think. A coach has had your back in public for three seasons even when you know it hasn't always been deserved, and you've basically put an axe in his back. I don't think you meant to, but that's the reality.
I'll tell you how to fix this. Don't say you were misquoted, don't say that anything was taken out of context. Don't even hint about it. Go into a room with Todd Richards and apologize. Apologize because what you said was wrong, and you know that it was. Apologize to your teammates because this has the potential to blow up and undo a lot of good things that have been happening with the team. And you don't need to make that known to the media, because screw the media. You don't owe the media a damned thing. The only us vs. them scenario that needs to play out is Columbus vs. the rest of the NHL, not pro-Richards and anti-Richards factions that may well form in the absence of making this right. Look at this very board, which has seen a division of sorts over what was said. Don't let that carry over into your own locker room.
We're all pulling for you. We're all on the same side.
Yours in hockey,
Palinka
Had some good points to be sure.
You just can't say that kind of stuff to the media. He left Richards attempting damage control. Hopefully this is forgotten soon, but JJ seems to be a bit of a diva. He wanted to be the man over here (some drama with his old team) and now he got left off the team and seems to have directed some of that at Richards.
Hopefully it's nothing, we really don't need that kind of drama.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
In the 1971 Cup Final, Montreal lost Game 5 to go down 3-2 in the series to Chicago. Having spent most of the game on the bench, aging Habs star Henri Richard (in his 17th season) referred to rookie coach Al MacNeil as "incompetent. The worst coach I have ever played for." MacNeil and his family needed police protection the rest of the series (which the Habs came back and won), and was demoted to the AHL after the season ended.
A rookie coach wins an extremely unexpected Stanley Cup (their first round opponent was Boston, one of the greatest single-season teams in history), then gets buried back in the AHL because a 17-year-veteran said something. Years later, Frank Mahovlich asked Richard why he'd said that, since he liked MacNeil. Richard just said, "I don't know; I was mad and said that."
*Notes on the 1970-71 Bruins. They scored 108 goals more than the next-best team and had an overall goal differential of +192. Their 27.7% power play easily led the league, and they had the second-best PK (84.23% compared to 84.64%). However, they also had 25 shorthanded goals, nearly double the next-best. The top two goal scorers and three of the top four were all Bruins; the top five players in assists were all Bruins; the top four scorers overall were Bruins; four players were higher than +70 (led by Bobby Orr's +124). Al MacNeil started Ken Dryden in their first-round playoff series...Dryden had exactly six games of NHL experience.
Can someone enlighten me, how do you know that JMFJ meant Richards when he was talking about the lack of support? To get invited he needed support from David Poile, Brian Burke, Ray Shero, Dan Bylsma - they're the main decision makers. Maybe I don't understand English well enough, but I haven't seen that Jonson was blaming directly Richards and not someone else.
What is he talking about? Not that I really care...
Robert
Foligno family
The world is turning upside down lately... we are on the same page over several subjects of late.. To be honest JJ's best days were when we first got him... the so called MFJJ was short lived, the dude needs to man up and so far tonight (Carolina) he seems to be playing better.. Johnson has the abilty, he needs the motivation to excel..
Dr. Fire
What, me worry?
I mentioned before, that the selection process never makes any sense. For instance. In my view, Dubinsky is better than Stepan. Both have similar numbers scoring wise, with Stepan around 27 pts and Dubi around 29. Dubi is +7, while Stepan is -3. I can only imagine the conversation.
"Hey guys, Stepan and Dubinsky are real close scoring wise, but Dubi is way better with a +7 over Stepans -3.
Selection committee: "Hmmmmm"
"Guys, Stepan plays for New York, while Dubinsky plays for small market Columbus"
Selection Committee: "Hmmmmmm.......................Take Stepan!"
Makes as much sense as anything else they do.
"Hey guys, Stepan and Dubinsky are real close scoring wise, but Dubi is way better with a +7 over Stepans -3.
Selection committee: "Hmmmmm"
"Guys, Stepan plays for New York, while Dubinsky plays for small market Columbus"
Selection Committee: "Hmmmmmm.......................Take Stepan!"
Makes as much sense as anything else they do.
Johnson has less to complain about than Ryan. I know a lot of plusses and minuses have to get discussed when choosing a team, but GM's of Burke's and Poikle's level ought to know better than to invite the press into the room when the tough decisions have to be discussed about who gets cut. That's just stupid. Nobody deserves to be humiliated in the press with the behind closed doors discussions about their flaws. Not being chosen to play for your country is bad enough. No need to rip guys.
If Chris Pronger's wife hadn't forced the move out of Edmonton, Anaheim wouldn't have won the cup and Brian Burke wouldn't have the resume to warrant him choosing Olympic rosters.
If Chris Pronger's wife hadn't forced the move out of Edmonton, Anaheim wouldn't have won the cup and Brian Burke wouldn't have the resume to warrant him choosing Olympic rosters.
To the bolded, I don't think anyone does know that definitively. The Richards quote that Pete posted suggests Richards isn't totally clear, either.
But I'm not sure how much it matters that we can't prove he was talking about Richards. In the absence of further information, you have to assume he's talking about his own head coach.
But ultimately, it doesn't matter who he's really talking about since it sounds like he's blaming others and not looking at himself.
edit: I don't know what blah is talking about. Whatever your "thing" is, I appreciate it and find it insightful/valuable. Your nationalism I take with a grain of salt.
Last edited:
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
we don't know...the part i went from was the ESPN article, said at one point Poile asked about JJ and i think the quote was that no one stood up for him...which would suggest that richards did not as part of the calls and meetings...
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
Relevant quotes here:
These both come from the November 25 conference call, which also included Brian Burke's infamous comments about Bobby Ryan.
However, notice the key words: "the three coaches". There are four coaches on this team: Dan Bylsma, Peter Laviolette, Todd Richards, and Tony Granato.
...and...
That accounts for two of them, but not Richards and Granato. Where were they on November 25? Granato is an assistant with Pittsburgh, who had a game on November 25 on the road against Boston. But Columbus also had a game that night, on the road against Toronto. Is it more likely that Bylsma and Granato were both participating from the same room? We know from the articule that Ray Shero was participating in this conference call as well; would Granato really have been able to weasel his way out of it while his head coach and GM were both in on it?
I think it's reasonable to deduce that Todd Richards was not in on the November 25 conference call.
There was a later meeting that saw Johnson bumped further down the list into the 9th/10th spot. Participants in the meeting were:
It doesn't look like any coaches were in on this one.
Now, let's go to the next time Johnson was on the table, which was at a meeting that took place either December 16 or 17.
That puts eight people in the room. Poile, Lombardi, Burke, Johansson, and Waddell are all mentioned by name. Columbus had a home game on December 16, then the next two days off before flying to Philadelphia for a December 19 game. Pittsburgh had a home game on December 16, and likely traveled the next day to New York for a game against the Rangers on December 18. Peter Laviolette's whereabouts aren't known. Stan Bowman was not present on the call, but would be the next day.
Bowman was added to the group, which makes nine.
There's a key quote from an earlier meeting, which was:
This was in the same meeting where Burke said that "If Keith Yandle goes in our top four, I think everyone we play is excited". For Lombardi to have swayed an entire room in the face of initial hostility would seem to indicate that exactly what was suggested above is true; that one person can carry undue influence in a room through whatever means happen to speak to the people in that room.
I believe Todd Richards when he says that he supported Johnson. I don't think there's an actual point where it can conclusively be stated that Richards did not support Johnson, or a point where it be reasonably deduced, or a point where there's greater than a 50:50 chance that Richards didn't support Johnson.
yeah, I'm 100% in this camp fwiw.
I don't mind the guy laying it out there for the media and the fans as long as its done respectfully, and imo that's how Jack handled it....as opposed to the Burke/Ryan soap opera. He's a 26 year old highly competitive professional athlete, he's a bit salty atm.
And I'm not a blind homer, tbh if I was adding another dman today it would be Yandle.
So, no one can prove that JJ was speaking about Richards (and MB proved that he didn't even have a reason to do so), but a bunch of people who probably consider themselves a "real men" blame him for questioning selections, whining and taking a shot at his head coach. They're acting like Russians, cause in the US you're innocent till proved guilty.
It always looks funny when some internet warriors incriminate an NHL player in not being a man. JJ is blaming himself as well. He admits that he played poorly. Also watching last night game I thought that Wiz looked as a better candidate for a spot on the US team roster.
And I'm not a Russian nationalist by any means, it's completely opposite. I just try to balance opinions on the countries sometimes, in fact I consider Russia as an evil empire in relation to my country, even though I have a lot of friends over there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Robert
Foligno family
Poile admitted some mistakes... but passing on JJ was smart imo, he has had his chance on the world stage and did little to earn another... hell, for example, Ryan Miller's greatest fear this season was getting passed over for being stuck on the Sabres-yet he has played his ass off to make the USA team and succeeded...
Robert
Foligno family
Not sure if this comment should go here but it's about the Olympics...
The Olympic commercial running on NBC with Danielle Bradbery singing "My Day" is secoind to none...
Go USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Olympic commercial running on NBC with Danielle Bradbery singing "My Day" is secoind to none...
Go USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
Date Game Time (ET) Live TV
Thu, Feb. 13 Slovakia vs. United States 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Sat, Feb. 15 United States vs. Russia 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Sun, Feb. 16 Slovenia vs. United States 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Thu, Feb. 13 Slovakia vs. United States 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Sat, Feb. 15 United States vs. Russia 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Sun, Feb. 16 Slovenia vs. United States 7:30 a.m. NBCSN
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Speculation: Potential Coaching Replacements for Jim Montgomery- Latest: BigBadBruins7708
