well we could fire him and hire him the next day, so we'll pay him 2 times, he deserve itI mean yea but..... if you fire Mike Sullivan you need to find another Mike Sullivan.
well we could fire him and hire him the next day, so we'll pay him 2 times, he deserve itI mean yea but..... if you fire Mike Sullivan you need to find another Mike Sullivan.
How much of that was coaching though? I thought it was more Dick Tarnstrom imposing his will and there wasn't a damn thing the other teams could do about it.That 03/04 powerplay was top 10 that year. At least he's smart enough to figure out that part of the game, which makes him more qualified than our current entire coaching staff.
a twenty sided dice would run the team better than Sullivan
My heart says YES, but my brain and gut say no. This team doesn't have the ponies anymore to be a high-tempo run-and-gun offense. Otherwise, you just hire Bruce Boudreau. I think they need a Paul Maurice—someone who implements a system that preaches defensive responsibility and structure.Crosby, Malkin and Letang have already gone through the Michel Therrien coaching style. At their ages, they would want no part of that now. So I don't think hiring Claude Julien or Jacques Martin now is the way to go.
But you would think that a fresh young coach with OFFENSIVE ideas would be right up their alley. That guy in Saginaw in the OHL, for example. I never remember his name. But I could get behind doing something like that. Yes, this defense needs to get fixed. But if we actually played the right goaltender, improved the PP and got the first line back to the levels we are used to, that the team is used to, then at least we could compete. You always need to play to your strengths, and to your identity. Mike Sullivan's identity clashes so badly with how this team actually needs to play to be successful. Hence why we never replaced Phil Kessel.
but as always, the point is moot because the coach is secure.
I'm totally on board with that. At this point, 87/71/58 should be too. I can't imagine they've particularly enjoyed the past couple seasons from a team-success standpoint, so they of all people should be open to a new coaching philosophy.My heart says YES, but my brain and gut say no. This team doesn't have the ponies anymore to be a high-tempo run-and-gun offense. Otherwise, you just hire Bruce Boudreau. I think they need a Paul Maurice—someone who implements a system that preaches defensive responsibility and structure.
Imagine what a new coach with fresh ideas could do if he implements a system that lowers the number of missed defensive assignments and odd-man rushes could do for this team. Combine that with just the general bump in energy that comes with a new coach.I'm totally on board with that. At this point, 87/71/58 should be too. I can't imagine they've particularly enjoyed the past couple seasons from a team-success standpoint, so they of all people should be open to a new coaching philosophy.
Edit: Also, if anything, a coaching change would give them some glimmer of hope that this thing is salvageable