Has the time come to name a Captain?

[Cyclones Rock]

Can any fan name an instance where having a captain would have benefited the team this season?

Haven't really thought that leadership has been an issue with the post-2012 disaster. In fact, resiliency has been probably the strongest point of the team.

Seems like a bigger issue to the fans/portzline than the team. This isn't the Grove City High School freshman football team. They don't need leaders.

In the NHL, 29 out of the 30 teams have captains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NHL_captains_and_alternate_captains

Organizations of almost every type require leadership. Leadership takes on many forms, but the man wearing the "C" in hockey carries weight among his teammates. The hockey culture has always placed great significance upon it's team captains. The Blue Jackets aren't going to alter this. Or maybe they're trying to emulate the Chicago Cubs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Coaches

The Jackets have already done a good enough job of emulating the Cubs

The lack of decisiveness of management in naming a Captain could be an issue with their leadership. It's not a decision that has to be permanent. Almost every type of organization seems to run better with some type of formal leadership. In hockey, it's the captaincy. The level of hockey doesn't seem to alter this fact.

 

[ClevelandJacketFan]

Leaders are leaders with or without a stupid letter on a jersey.

The rest is semantics. Do you really believe that putting a C on a guy's jersey and calling him captain is really going to suddenly give him magical leadership powers, or somehow enhance them?

The team knows who their leaders are, and the fans know who the team leaders are on the ice. C or no C, who cares? It means very little on the ice.

 

[blahblah]

I don't read AP much at all so I have not felt this subject has been worn out. But I can see how a hack like AP could do it.

I wasn't clear on that; AP talks about it when asked during his little weekly Q&A with the readers. The readers are obsessed with it.

Me? I frankly don't care if we ever have a captain. I kind of like the way things are working now.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

I wasn't clear on that; AP talks about it when asked during his little weekly Q&A with the readers. The readers are obsessed with it.

Me? I frankly don't care if we ever have a captain. I kind of like the way things are working now.

Ok, l've not experienced the obsession.

 

[db2011]

Leaders are leaders with or without a stupid letter on a jersey.

The rest is semantics. Do you really believe that putting a C on a guy's jersey and calling him captain is really going to suddenly give him magical leadership powers, or somehow enhance them?

The team knows who their leaders are, and the fans know who the team leaders are on the ice. C or no C, who cares? It means very little on the ice.

Look no further than 61 to find the answer to that (hint: it starts with N)

That said, I'd like to see a captain named.

 

[CBJfan4evr]

Maybe our future captain has yet to lace up his skates as a Bluejacket?

 

[Samkow]

In the NHL, 29 out of the 30 teams have captains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_NHL_captains_and_alternate_captains

Organizations of almost every type require leadership. Leadership takes on many forms, but the man wearing the "C" in hockey carries weight among his teammates. The hockey culture has always placed great significance upon it's team captains. The Blue Jackets aren't going to alter this. Or maybe they're trying to emulate the Chicago Cubs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Coaches

The Jackets have already done a good enough job of emulating the Cubs

The lack of decisiveness of management in naming a Captain could be an issue with their leadership. It's not a decision that has to be permanent. Almost every type of organization seems to run better with some type of formal leadership. In hockey, it's the captaincy. The level of hockey doesn't seem to alter this fact.

I'll rephrase a question I asked earlier and ask a new one:

1. Explain how you think the club is suffering/not benefitting by having no captain. Are we cup winners/something significantly better with a captain?

2. Do you feel the club's leadership is a problem at the moment?

 

[Fro]

i think Marcel Marceau said it best....

NO

 

[Socks]

I don't have the quote off hand but Cam made it clear last night that they consider Dubi their leader. I don't think putting a letter on his chest will change anything but when it does happen I think it's clear who it'll be.

 

[1857 Howitzer]

I don't have the quote off hand but Cam made it clear last night that they consider Dubi their leader. I don't think putting a letter on his chest will change anything but when it does happen I think it's clear who it'll be.

Cam's quote is in my OP.

"He's our leader, for sure. I think it's pretty obvious. I love playing with him" - Cam Atkinson

 

[Socks]

Cam's quote is in my OP.

"He's our leader, for sure. I think it's pretty obvious. I love playing with him" - Cam Atkinson

Lol I totally didn't see that.

 

[Jaxs]

Dubi for captain, name Dubi captain already.

 

[pete goegan]

I'll rephrase a question I asked earlier and ask a new one:

1. Explain how you think the club is suffering/not benefitting by having no captain. Are we cup winners/something significantly better with a captain?

2. Do you feel the club's leadership is a problem at the moment?

Have we won or contended for a Cup with a weak captain?
Are we among the top teams in the league, now, without one?
Has a team without a captain ever won the Cup?
Are there any other teams in the league without one?
Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel?

If they have been waiting for a leader to emerge, it appears to have happened. Pin the damn letter on and move forward!

 

[CBJx614]

Maybe our future captain has yet to lace up his skates as a Bluejacket?

I'm gonna catch a lot of flak from this but I think we maintain the 4 A's this season, and then by Christmas next season Ryan Murray is named captain. He was not only drafted for his ability on the ice, but his character off the ice as well. He has been named captain of every team he has EVER played for. And was the youngest captain in Everett's history. I think everyone is slowly starting to see how much potential this kid has and by next season he'll be ready to take the next step.

 

[5StringBuzz]

I really don't want to trade Johnson or Dubinski or have either of them request a trade, so let's just leave them with their "A's" for now

 

[Samkow]

Have we won or contended for a Cup with a weak captain?

Remember when everyone used to whine about Euro's being named captain because they never won the cup? Chara, Lidstrom, etc. all sorta defied the conventional mold of a captain and they did just fine. And I wouldn't exactly call Crosby a leader of men. Maybe having one guy with a C on his jersey doesn't mean much?

Are we among the top teams in the league, now, without one?

Does anything really change on ice with or without a captain? Why meddle with anything off ice? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Has a team without a captain ever won the Cup?

No. But why not try to be the first? I'd love to see a rock-paper-scissors game between Johnson and Dubi to see who gets handed the cup first.

Are there any other teams in the league without one?

No, but Buffalo has sort of an unconventional setup. I know they're not exactly a team to emulate but dual-captaincy might be a good idea for this team.

Why are we trying to reinvent the wheel?

Just the same, why are we making an issue out of something that isn't an issue?

If they have been waiting for a leader to emerge, it appears to have happened. Pin the damn letter on and move forward![/QUOTE]

Moral of my question-filled replies to this post. Are the small benefits of having a captain really worth potentially upsetting the locker room chemistry of the room?

 

[CBJfan4evr]

Nathan Horton, gritty game, long term contract, etc, etc.... Play with 4 A's and let it sort itself out. In the end Dubinsky or Horton will wear the C IMHO.

 

[pete goegan]

Moral of my question-filled replies to this post. Are the small benefits of having a captain really worth potentially upsetting the locker room chemistry of the room?

Why would we assume it would be upsetting? Have even one of these guys ever played on a team without a captain? Is it not just as likely that they may be uncomfortable with the team leadership being unrecognized?

To be honest, I'm pretty much just looking at this on a theoretical level, I don't really care who or if a captain is named. Seems to me that it's inevitable, though, Richards doesn't strike me as the revolutionary sort who will go against all hockey precedence and forego the captaincy.

 

[skimp]

Fine. I'll do it.

 

[IBleedUnionBlue]

I'm gonna catch a lot of flak from this but I think we maintain the 4 A's this season, and then by Christmas next season Ryan Murray is named captain. He was not only drafted for his ability on the ice, but his character off the ice as well. He has been named captain of every team he has EVER played for. And was the youngest captain in Everett's history. I think everyone is slowly starting to see how much potential this kid has and by next season he'll be ready to take the next step.

Boone Jenner was captain at Oshawa. Only point I would make is that both Murray and Jenner are still young, and I would give it a couple years to see which of these two might evolve into NHL captain material.

 

[EspenK]

Why would we assume it would be upsetting? Have even one of these guys ever played on a team without a captain? Is it not just as likely that they may be uncomfortable with the team leadership being unrecognized?

To be honest, I'm pretty much just looking at this on a theoretical level, I don't really care who or if a captain is named. Seems to me that it's inevitable, though, Richards doesn't strike me as the revolutionary sort who will go against all hockey precedence and forego the captaincy.

Rumor had it that Dubi was upset that Callahan was named C over him and his subsequent "decline" in NY was somewhat related. Just something I've read on Rangers' board but it could be true.

To me I could care less if the Jackets have a C, but I'd vote for Dubi over JJ when the time comes. Just seems like their is more fire in Dubi.

 

[cbjfaninmo]

I really don't want to trade Johnson or Dubinski or have either of them request a trade, so let's just leave them with their "A's" for now

Maybe you're on to something... JK Is leaving the door open for a possible trade, so there is no need to name a C until he has decided to keep one or both of JJ and Dubi

 

[Iron Balls McGinty]

Maybe you're on to something... JK Is leaving the door open for a possible trade, so there is no need to name a C until he has decided to keep one or both of JJ and Dubi

Let's be serious here for a moment, if these are the guys worthy of wearing a C, why would you consider trading them.

Additionally, not naming a C because you "might" trade one is ludicrous. Making a decision like that is bad in both regards.

I seriously doubt the Red Wings ever wavered on naming Stevie Y captain because they considered trading him. if the thought of trading one of them comes up, its because they obviously don't see them as captain material.

 

[Fro]

IBM

I believe it was a backhanded Foote and Nash joke...not serious

 

[pete goegan]

Rumor had it that Dubi was upset that Callahan was named C over him and his subsequent "decline" in NY was somewhat related. Just something I've read on Rangers' board but it could be true.

Interesting, I hadn't read that. Then again, I've visited some Rangers fan sites and they are every bit as deranged as fans are, here, so I'm not sure how much stock to put in these reports!