Quote:
Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler
Let me beat this dead horse one more time. I will give you the roster holes for argument's sake.
This still does not excuse the terribly designed system. This team went D heavy. So, given your lack of forwards and abundance of skill on D, you would think our offense would be designed to reflect those strengths and weaknesses... no? Fast transitions, D leading/supporting the attack, etc. That's what we are doing, right? A coach that cannot adapt to the tools he is given is not a good coach. GG must have spent his formative years watching the Soviet national team and the Red Wings in their heyday. That 5 man unit thing was great. Someone should tell GG he has Brouwer instead of Datsyuk....
|
Sure, Gulutzan sucks.
He sucks because he can't make a terrible roster less terrible.
So they fire the coach. The team gets more entertaining. I don't doubt for a second that the team would be more entertaining with a less demanding systems coach.
They've gone all in on a defensive roster. hire a coach to get the most out of that stacked defense, right?
Hire Tippet?
Do you honestly believe the flames owners are going to pony up 3+ million a year on a coach when they will be paying GG a million to sit at home?
Is there a way to make defensive hockey entertaining? i'm not sure there is. So if you want entertaining hockey, doesn't that mean you have to like, go against the grain of the team Treliving has built?
Like, does career high in goals of 5 Travis Hamonic become a 10 goal guy playing for Marc Crawford or John Stevens or Guy Boucher?
This is what I don't understand; how can anyone look at a roster full of plumbers and think Gretzky or Dallas Eakins or whoever is going to be able to win with them at the same time as letting them play loose?
Fire all the coaches. Is Joel Quennville really,
really going to entertain coming to the flames? Are the Flames ready to pay him 5 million dollars a year to coach for them?
I just don't see it. It's the organization that is the problem.