robertocarlos
Registered User
- Sep 19, 2014
- 26,344
- 14,031
Yes, he probably needs a side woman considering his team-mates.You're suggesting Mark should limit himself to just one?
Yes, he probably needs a side woman considering his team-mates.You're suggesting Mark should limit himself to just one?
A Maurice student will give you the same result.The problem is the Jets did change the coach and the results are much worse under the new guy. So that should give everyone some pause that juat changing the coaching again will magically fix everything.
The coach openly admitted the other night that the players are not playing the game he is telling them to play. The players have chosen to ignore this coach.The problem is the Jets did change the coach and the results are much worse under the new guy. So that should give everyone some pause that juat changing the coaching again will magically fix everything.
The coach openly admitted the other night that the players are not playing the game he is telling them to play. The players have chosen to ignore this coach.
You hire a coach who isn't going to put up with it anymore. One willing to sit any bum on the team who doesn't follow his instructions, get these clowns to start playing like a team.Agreed, so what makes you think they will listen to the next one? I think we definitely need a new coach but I'm not taking it as a given that a new coach is going to turn this thing around. I think other things need to happen as well.
These guys for the most part are adults screaming and yelling rarely works, ice time or lack of gets the message across quite nicely, sound objective criticism sometimes works, positive reinforcement works to an degree but stapling an athletes ass to the bench is what gets the attention the quickest. Sometimes the reaction is positive sometimes they ask for a trade.
These guys for the most part are adults screaming and yelling rarely works, ice time or lack of gets the message across quite nicely, sound objective criticism sometimes works, positive reinforcement works to an degree but stapling an athletes ass to the bench is what gets the attention the quickest. Sometimes the reaction is positive sometimes they ask for a trade.
Sometimes players don't want to be held accountable -You hire a coach who isn't going to put up with it anymore. One willing to sit any bum on the team who doesn't follow his instructions, get these clowns to start playing like a team.
He doesn't need to come in to scream and yell like a Tortorella or Babcock, he just needs to set a standard of expected play and hold everyone accountable to it.
Seriously why is Heinola and Samberg not in the lineup, season is over let them play and make mistakes without fear of being yanked out of the lineup.That and being ready and willing to promote young hungry guys right up the lineup.
Or another goat!Chipman pulled some strings and got 55 that sweetheart MPIC gig. This has lessened the sulking due to low pay. Now all he needs is a gf.
Based on merit how would you rank the wingers on this team? Who should receive more opportunity? I’d say Ehlers has a case. Anyone else? Or is it just a matter of poor winger depth?Yup its why I don't believe the scream type will work. All these young guys have little time for hierarchies and waiting years for specific roles.
I think the biggest thing is whoever comes in is fair. He rewards players for good plays and used a largely merit based system with regards to roles and opportunities. The new coach has to hold everyone to the same standards as well.
Sometimes players don't want to be held accountable -
I recall that game where Mo sat Scheif for 10 minutes in the third - earlier this season.
Scheif said the coach was wrong in the decision - he learned nothing.
If you have players that don't get it, you have a problem that is beyond coaching -
Players like that will impact the room - they will poison the group and separate the players
You can spend a season or seasons making your point via benching's, lectures, whatever -
And in the end, you likely have a worse problem because now you've pissed off the guys that bring it
every night. Now you potentially have players wanting out - the bad ones because they don't get it and the good ones because they are not willing to sit through a "lesson" in accountability
Sometimes a new coach isn't the answer
Not 6'7 enough.Seriously why is Heinola and Samberg not in the lineup, season is over let them play and make mistakes without fear of being yanked out of the lineup.
Seriously why is Heinola and Samberg not in the lineup, season is over let them play and make mistakes without fear of being yanked out of the lineup.
Based on merit how would you rank the wingers on this team? Who should receive more opportunity? I’d say Ehlers has a case. Anyone else? Or is it just a matter of poor winger depth?
Sometimes players don't want to be held accountable -
I recall that game where Mo sat Scheif for 10 minutes in the third - earlier this season.
Scheif said the coach was wrong in the decision - he learned nothing.
If you have players that don't get it, you have a problem that is beyond coaching -
Players like that will impact the room - they will poison the group and separate the players
You can spend a season or seasons making your point via benching's, lectures, whatever -
And in the end, you likely have a worse problem because now you've pissed off the guys that bring it
every night. Now you potentially have players wanting out - the bad ones because they don't get it and the good ones because they are not willing to sit through a "lesson" in accountability
Sometimes a new coach isn't the answer
The thing is you need to set the tone and the expectations right away and players respect it. You can't talk about building statues of a guy for years and giving him no accountability whatsoever then start trying to discipline him.
Or another goat!
Yes you can, a new coach holding them accountable would be different than the current coaches trying to do it. Any player who refuses to buy in to a new coach gets moved next year.That as well, after years of zero accountability you can't all of a sudden do it and expect it to work.
I also agree about lack of competition. It has been years since a young player was allowed to steal a job. Mark and Blake have had their roles no matter what.
Clearly the Jets value size in a defenseman, just look how huge Morrissey, Pionk, Schmidt and Demelo are.Not 6'7 enough.
When did we ever try boring low event hockey? Since like 2018? The Jets have been super conservative on the forecheck for years. In all honesty Murat didn’t reveal some new wrinkle the Jets have been employing, some of use have been pointing it out for years. We do not engage our D in the rush or transition, other than as @surixon points, when Morrissey is unshackled with the Jets trailing late. Having our D individually rush the odd time is not akin to engaging our D. They are rarely part of the rush and they rarely jump deep or switch off in the offensive zone with any regularity. We’ve been a low to high, throw it at the net team for years, sadly with a bunch of perimeter forwards.When did we ever try boring low event hockey? This team has played man coverage D since day one and NEVER had a neutral zone system... we have always engaged the D to rush...
As for Julien, the Cdns were hot to start that season and went on a mini-losing streak - nothing compared to the ones we have seen here - and Julien was canned... I think with Helle that Julien's system would work well.
They valued size in Stanley, no? It’s his main calling card, you can’t really deny that. You also can’t deny it helps him very little in being an effective player.Clearly the Jets value size in a defenseman, just look how huge Morrissey, Pionk, Schmidt and Demelo are.
I don’t see why you think they value size so much in Stanley but don’t value size when it comes to their top 4 defenseman yet for some reason it’s the deciding factor for their sixth defenseman.They valued size in Stanley, no? It’s his main calling card, you can’t really deny that. You also can’t deny it helps him very little in being an effective player.
Whether the Jets routinely have that blind spot isn’t the question. They had it with Stanley and it’s manifesting itself at the moment.
6’3 190 isn’t 6’7, 230. Samberg brings more than Stanley. The tipping point for him was aways size. Was always going to be a project they hoped would turn into a regular NHL player but his size was the big appeal. It ignored a lot of question marks as a result.I don’t see why you think they value size so much in Stanley but don’t value size when it comes to their top 4 defenseman yet for some reason it’s the deciding factor for their sixth defenseman.
I’d much rather see Samberg playing over Stanley but I’m not convinced size is the deciding factor when it comes to playing Stanley over Samberg, and it’s not exactly like Samberg isn’t pretty big himself.