Apoplectic Habs Fan
Registered User
- Aug 17, 2002
- 29,231
- 17,689
And yet, you cant really prove that the coaches who were fired to be replaced had a winning record.
and i didnt really try to say that.
And yet, you cant really prove that the coaches who were fired to be replaced had a winning record.
Don Cherry says "hi".
I was more poking fun at real world comments.
sports are a different world. Lot of friends doing business.
Im sure we have seen teams fire a coach and hire his replacement pretty much immediately at times.
Cant tell me most of the legwork wasnt done prior to the firing and somehow no one knew
and i didnt really try to say that.
Only example I've seen posted was Carlyle and Boudreau. It's an interesting case. But I'd speculate that the Ducks weren't overly concerned with maintaining the relationship with Carlyle. He was likely fired anyways, and if the Ducks missed out on Boudreau than the assistant coach would have been made the inter-rim (sp?).
A team like Montreal who management seems to be happy with their current coach are unlikely to interview Babcock because the consequences if he's not successfully signed are to great. The drop off of between quality coaching candidates from Bergevin's list from Therrien to Candidate X are likely to great.
Too much risk for MB to even entertain the notion of interviewing Babcock since the result is likely losing Therrien for a complete X factor.
Sure you did. Maybe you forgot, but you had a huge rant about how Bergevin should fire Therrien to.hire Babcock.
The only way and its not completely impossible its that Babcock reaches out to Montreal. Puts out a really good case of why he is the man for the job, and yes even with the great job that's has been done he has the expertise to bring its all to a new level. MT will get he's 8 million so I don't think there would be any problem there. Bab's will get he's 5-6. Everyone happy ohhhh expect some in the french media.
cute dream, but Babcock has a thing called class.
The argument is moronic. Even in the business world, you DO NOT fire someone with a winning record just because you have someone lined uo to take his place.
Who needs Babcock, when you have Pricer...Babcock is one of the best coaches in the league. His planning, preparation and ability to motivate is first rate. He's probably one of the few coaches that consistently gets the most out of the players.
Doesn't mean he can turn water into wine.
Actually...this happens ALL THE FREAKING TIME.
Ever heard of nepotism?
We finish 2nd in the league (without having the 2nd best roster) and were in round 2 of the playoffs. And you want to fire the coach after that?
For those calling him overrated, how do you explain 10 straight playoff appearances? How do you explain last years' playoff appearance despite his top 6 depleted by injury and Ericsson missing half a season?
We finish 2nd in the league (without having the 2nd best roster) and were in round 2 of the playoffs. And you want to fire the coach after that?
"No answer", yet Babcock's team was the one that blew a 3-2 series lead?
You asked and I provided and now you're just moving around the goalposts. I never said the situations were identical (and you never specified they had to be).
I'm not a fan of MTs systems or in game decisions but I can't see him getting the ax for anyone right now. He'd have to mess up with a cup contending team like he did with Pittsburg
Kind of funny that a year ago everyone on this board critized him all of the Olympics for benching PK now everyone wants him because he's the be all end all
I'm not a fan of MTs systems or in game decisions but I can't see him getting the ax for anyone right now. He'd have to mess up with a cup contending team like he did with Pittsburg
I need to get in on this. Hiring an NHL coach is not, and will never be, the same thing has hiring someone in the normal business world. Quite frankly, sports is almost as far from the real world as you can get.
There is no way a team who currently has a coach, is going to start interviewing Mike Babcock. This day in age it is not possible to keep it a secret. Interviewing another coach would destroy the relationship with the current.
What was stated in the first quote is spot on. No way a team who currently has a coach with whom management is happy with, will interview Babcock. It's guaranteed to get out, and then your stuck looking for another coach.
I want to replace my accountant I can go out and interview a bunch and he's likely to never know. He'll keep on working just like he always does and there won't be any effect. If I'm not able to hire Joe Super Accountant life goes on and Larry the Above Average Accountant is none the wiser. I publically announce throughout the office that I'm interviewing Joe Super Accountant for Larry's job, than Larry's work is going to suffer, and guess what, he's probably going to quit or leave as soon as he can.
Hiring an NHL coach like Babcock is a very public event. It's not like replacing someone in the real world at all.
If this is such a common practice, you boys certainly won't have any difficulties showing me just one example of a NHL team hiring a second coach before the first one was demoted ? Or even firing their own coach just to get in the derby for another coach ? I will accept any article/memory hinting that such a practice has even happened at the NHL level.
When teams demote their coaches, they do it because they are not satisfied with the results. They never do it to go after a big fish.