Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin
I don't think so. It would make ZERO sense for an organization to spend $70mil a year on player salaries, including paying players not to play, in the hopes of becoming a contender, then to stop at a $2mil coach and go "No, that's enough! No more money being spent, the $900k coach will do, even if it destroys everything we've built with the other $70mil".
C'mon man, why would you think that's what happened?
|
You can spend $70 million on a roster but if you cheap out on the head coach you could get exactly what the Flames are now. If that was the case then it appears the Flames biggest issue would be ownership and not management, coaching, or players. I simply don't believe they would limit the GM's ability to hire a coach based on money as that would be incredibly shortsighted as coaching matters as much as talent.