interesting perspectives. while i agree philosophically with rr (i don't feel this team has consistently played good structural hockey), the coach gets the benefit when the players on the ice come together and make something happen. this is what we saw two seasons ago. if you grade that team on consistency, effort, structure... they failed miserably. otoh, there was enough chemistry, at least early on, to get the team to the playoffs and provide some exciting hockey for the fans. dineen, as a result, benefited. the story of the year, for us at least, was really that the panthers made the playoffs. i could easily write that season off with the phrase "even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes". last season was clearly a lost cause personnel and injury wise. if this year's roster manages to stay healthy and win some games, i fear he'll stick around even if it's clear we still are not playing good hockey. i hope i'm wrong, though - i hope either the guys come together and execute whatever dineen's trying to teach (i.e., play some good hockey) or tallon cans his ass.
another way to look at it - in an ideal world, your coach will bring the best out of each and every player and pull all the individuals on your roster into a cohesive whole. however, in the real world, if your roster can bumble its way to the playoffs, the politics around firing your coach are not super attractive.
