It's not hard to spot bias, when a poster comes in dead set against a guy, before there is any way of knowing how he would coach this team. Treliving has been reasonably transparent why Hartley was fired and what he wants in the new guy. Unless it can be demonstrated that the new guy does not fit the description, I don't think there is much to complain about. I get that the coaching record should matter, but it isn't a slam dunk conclusion that x candidate is worse than y candidate based on record. In particular when BT explains he is open to finding new talent and isn't looking for a retread (with a likely better record).
Looking back at the Hartley hire, I was not very happy. I thought he was a retread, living off the past of coaching a stacked team. Still, was willing to give the benefit of the doubt, and let him actually coach the team before making any declarations of "awful". As it turns out, I was quite impressed with how Hartley started and it was clear my first impression was not fair. I would only hope the new guy gets the same consideration.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
|