[edn88]

My eyes are burning and my brain is hurting as a result of reading all of the pages in this thread. I'm in the hire Sutter camp, but that is because I think he is an awesome human being. I think his ability to turn the Kings from disappointments to 2x cup champs and his success here last time is a reason to hire him.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with hiring Peters. Of the coaches mentioned in the poll, there are none that I would want to hire. I'm in the camp that believes that the coach really only has a +/- 5% impact on the team.

When was the last time a coach made a real impact to push a team over the top. The only 2 I can think of are Sullivan in Pittsburgh and Sutter in LA. Maybe Cassidy in Boston. I don't think Leafs coach is that great compared to peers. There are a number of coaches that have gone to other markets (like Ruff) who were supposed to make those teams better and didn't (maybe Ruff is actually a terrible coach). I think Barry Trotz has a great hockey team, same with the Preds now. No one thought Torts was going to never coach again (and yet there are the Blue Jackets).

I don't think I read a single negative post that actually had any data or real observation that were not just opinion that backed up why Peters will cause the Flames to do any worse.
Will Peters be the tonic to cure the Flames woes? Who knows - I think that is a real crap shoot (just look at coaches hiring and firings that were supposed to make things better).
Lot's of arguments why he isn't that bad - how bad the Hurricanes are (seriously go look at their roster - sure we have some dead wood, but they have some real stiffs that are getting paid). And it is probably true that Treliving's next coach will seal his fate, then he is going to hire the coach that best gives him a chance to keep his job. If I am Tre, I am probably really disappointed in the quality of coaches available.

So if you don't like Peter's as a potential coach, at least back it up with some reasonable evidence of why you feel that way.