[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

It's relevant because people say that Sutter failed because he didn't adapt enough to what the players wanted...

I don't care much whether this is what "people" have said. I didn't say it in my post. I said that his failure was in large part a problem with his inability to sell his system to the players.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

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?

I think he certainly shoulders a large part of the blame for this, but not just because of what happened in Calgary, but for his middling results in five years of NHL coaching. No, it's not all his fault, but this is a significant part of my posts that you are missing—the blame for what happened in Calgary during B. Sutter's tenure does not rest on one principal: it was a group effort that included Sutter. Again, I'm a little confused as to why you are so happy to absolve him for any responsibility.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

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.

If you are attempting to claim that any other NHL coach could not have effected a better response from Iginla, then I will have to disagree. There are better NHL coaches than B. Sutter—several, in fact. Iginla has now played for a few in a variety of different circumstances, be it in season, during the playoffs, and at the Olympics. He has arguably been a better, more team-committed player under practically every other coach than he was under B. Sutter. We can all speculate about the reasons for that, but I think it is more than fair to suggest that Sutter was not guiltless in this personality exchange.

But moreover, this is about more than just Sutter and Iginla. There were other players on the team upon whose ears B. Sutter's message fell with no effect. Is this all because of Iginla? I can't imagine that even a persona as big as his was so overwhelming in that dressing room so as to effectively muzzle Sutter.

Finally, it needs also to be pointed out that B. Sutter has not again coached in the NHL, and likely never will. It does not seem like this is because he had technical issues, or problems reading the game at a higher level. I would suggest that his overall record points to precisely what I have attempted to draw attention to: that he does not seem to be very effective at communicating his vision, and his message at that level. He has a history now of struggling with getting NHL players to play his way. That's all on him.