Fair enough. I still don’t think it’s that big of a deal to players. Most go back home to train anyways,They can use team facilities but team staff, ie skills coaches, etc are no go or limited.
Fair enough. I still don’t think it’s that big of a deal to players. Most go back home to train anyways,They can use team facilities but team staff, ie skills coaches, etc are no go or limited.
Well Willie D is a two time NHL head coach and part of the "NHL coaching fraternity." So too is Marc Crawford who has a Stanley Cup and coached multiple teams. Are you suggesting that they are at the "top of their field" relative to a Jon Cooper? Paul Maurice? You think that had Cooper and Maurice been available these two need to interview at every single opening just in case their top choice didn't make them an offer? Do you think Mike Sullivan interviewed in Seattle or Vancouver "just in case" the Rangers didn't offer him the HC job?And I would disagree with that generalization, when you're in the NHL coaching fraternity every candidate is at the "top of their field" and there are limited jobs to go around, its pretty common for coaches to interview in multiple places....but by not being lazy and explaining it at least I have an idea of what you're saying, so thank you.
So is the MOU that expanded Rule 15.11 of the CBA still in effect,and if so did Ruthervin violate that when it was suggested Petey should stay in Vancouver this summer and work with Canucks resources?They can organize practices and use the facilities (including gym, food) but cannot have team personnel involved in any way. They can even have their own coaches but they can't be team affiliated.
Canucks were fined 2 years ago for having the Sedins on the ice with a few Canucks for informal summer on ice sessions.
So is the MOU that expanded Rule 15.11 of the CBA still in effect,and if so did Ruthervin violate that when it was suggested Petey should stay in Vancouver this summer and work with Canucks resources?
I think what you are suggesting is a false narrative...we're wandering off into the weeds of "what ifs" and examining coaches who aren't considered candidates for anything anymore.Well Willie D is a two time NHL head coach and part of the "NHL coaching fraternity." So too is Marc Crawford who has a Stanley Cup and coached multiple teams. Are you suggesting that they are at the "top of their field" relative to a Jon Cooper? Paul Maurice? You think that had Cooper and Maurice been available these two need to interview at every single opening just in case their top choice didn't make them an offer? Do you think Mike Sullivan interviewed in Seattle or Vancouver "just in case" the Rangers didn't offer him the HC job?
So is the MOU that expanded Rule 15.11 of the CBA still in effect,and if so did Ruthervin violate that when it was suggested Petey should stay in Vancouver this summer and work with Canucks resources?
Yes, it's still in effect. Merely suggesting it isn't going to get them in trouble.
Rutherford is an old man that can't remember the finer details of the CBA. Allvin got dinged once so he should know by now! (didn't know the 1st time)
Clubs are not permitted to request or encourage Players to come to the Club’s home city during the off-season to utilize the Club’s arena/training/practice facility(ies) and/or to train with Club Coaching or Hockey Operations personnel.
I'm hoping he requests Garland there.Went and took a look at the thread in Philly's forum and they aren't happy lol.
Here is Wagner on it, the previous time:
I presume the training staff are considered hockey operations
And I assume any facility arranged for by the club would qualify
But maybe I am missing something
I just want to add, 4 days later the twitter exchange I posted had a thread bump, since we discussed it for a bit here thought id share..
LOLOLOL
Michkov is going to get some reprogramming soonWent and took a look at the thread in Philly's forum and they aren't happy lol.
I am only going by what you wrote: "when you're in the NHL coaching fraternity every candidate is at the 'top of their field'"I think what you are suggesting is a false narrative...we're wandering off into the weeds of "what ifs" and examining coaches who aren't considered candidates for anything anymore.
You can believe what you want but Rutherford calling Sullivan up after he parted ways with the Penguins is not the same as an "interview."My opinion is that Mike Sullivan did "interview" for the Canucks job in likely the same fashion as Tocchet interviewed for the Kraken job...Management made a phone call had a discussion about the available opening, both Tocchet and Sullivan obliged the discussion and interest, but declined because they knew they had potential to coach elsewhere that was more desirable to them. I think it was as simple as that.
Why He Left
//
- Was looking to get a fresh start and go back East
- Had an incredible experience in Vancouver; shouts out the fans
- Hard to explain why when there were so many positives
- Would be lying if he said that not having a practice facility wasn’t a factor; it’s not that bad in Vancouver; UBC facility is nice and “not horrible”
- Jack Adams is a team award
- Had no problem with the media, loves them, and it’s a big fallacy that they chased him out of town
Don't really get this, the guy had 100 pts just 2 seasons ago, he's telling us that the game has changed that much in 2 years?
- What he meant by “reprogramming” was that Pettersson likes to slow the game down but today’s game takes room away fast; was talking about getting the puck and immediately taking off or attacking right after you beat pressure
He changed his game, it didnt work out, so he bouncedDon't really get this, the guy had 100 pts just 2 seasons ago, he's telling us that the game has changed that much in 2 years?
I argued with some people here in this thread (I think) where I said I thought Tochett was forced out, and that I think he's a stand-up guy who wouldn't walk out on his team. I was wrong. Good f***ing riddance.