Quote:
|
Not really relevant to my point, but okay. I think it is fair to say that had B. Sutter been able to do the same for his much more talented teams, the results would likely have been dramatically different.
|
It's relevant because people say that Sutter failed because he didn't adapt enough to what the players wanted. Yet we then hired Hartley who did adapt to a more offensive game and the team was still bad, so... was Sutter the real problem or, was the issue the one that Brent identified in the interview that the team just frankly wasn't good enough? If that was the case then why all the blame on Brent?
Quote:
|
Why shouldn't he shoulder some of the blame for this? If this were a simple process, then there wouldn't be a run on NHL calibre coaches. And no, he is not to blame for "trying to instill that type of responsibility and work ethic for the team," but for failing to produce results. Part of his job is figuring out how to get it done, and in the end he didn't.
|
Brent said it himself, sure he probably failed in getting the team into 8th. That the peak possible outcome for those teams.
If that's the case then results I wanted him to achieve were exactly what he was trying to do. Instilling responsibility and buying into a hard working championship level system. He tried and failed. Subsequently, it only worked when the last of the rotten core was shipped off and Hartley started with a relatively blank slate. Again, we're going to blame Brent for that?
Quote:
|
Again, I'm not sure what this has to do with my post. The problem to me was not that B. Sutter was "a stubborn guy", it was that he was not effective at some point in the translation and implementation of what he wanted to what actually happened on the ice. I agree that the players were in large part responsible for this not happening, but no way should B. Sutter get a free pass. Part of his job is to make his players believe in what he is telling them, and he didn't do that.
|
I actually give him alot of leniency on this front which is probably where the fundamental disagreement is. When you have a player that is bigger than the team. A player who is buddies with the owner. A player who just doesn't need to buy in then Dale Carnegie himself isn't going to be able to change the culture of that team.