I didn't mean to come across that way. My point is the owners are fine with one round won because always making the playoffs means always selling out in the regular season and that's whats important to them. That's why you will never see a rebuild and why they will always get stuck signing older guys and drafting low round 1 unless they deal those picks for immediate help for the current season.
I do think Sweeney is trying to win. He won't be judged on that though by the owners if he doesn't though, even though Charlie says thats what the end result should be, but there is no accountability for not winning a cup. Chia was fired one season after appearing in two cups and being the best team in the league in 2014. It's because they didn't make the playoffs that year.
I think some of that is fair. There definitely seems to be immediate accountability for missing the playoffs. "Accountability for not winning the cup" is a tough one to prove. I mean, how do you fire a GM who's won GM of the year, has the most regular season wins during his tenure and been to G7 of the Stanley Cup Finals? Would any team fire their GM with that resume?
I remember you arguing in Sweeney's favor after that 2019 playoff run. I said it must keep Sweeney up at nights knowing that if he had traded for a RW he may well have a ring, and you said he built a team that got to G7, he did enough, the players choked. I mean, if you felt that way, it's reasonable to think the owners did too. And still do.
My other counterpoint would be, losing on purpose and drafting high isn't a silver bullet. Arizona, Buffalo, Ottawa, Detroit, Anaheim, Montreal, Jersey, Philly... how long did these teams struggle? How much longer will they have to struggle? When do they win the Cup? Meanwhile the 'only care about regular season wins" Bruins have never bottomed out and over the last 15 years have been to 3 Cup Finals and won a Championship. So, long story short (too late) I'm not convinced you have to be awful to be good.