Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
I think the disconnect is the assumption being made is if the Flames / Treliving knew about the type of coach Peter's is, the racism aside, that they wouldn't have hired him.
I'm going to guess, that the bullying that is being talked about now, or at least a fairly large % of it was known to the Flames when they hired him. I'm going to guess, it's also not unique to Peter's and is fairly common still in the NHL and hockey. We already know Babcock is in this boat, there was no shortage of Bob Hartley bully stories floating around (I smell chocolate) and we even have an image somewhere in here showing a current successful NHL coach punching a player in the helmet. I'm going to wager that his reputation was not anything the hockey world would find alarming (again only referring to the bullying) and was actually at least in part what BT was looking for when he hired a "hard nose coach" to replace the "players coach" this team totally shat the bed for.
I think it's also worth flagging, that Babcock was not fired because he was a bully, he was fired because he was losing, same with Bob Hartley when we let him go. If Peter's is let go later today or tomorrow it also won't be because he was a bully, it will be because they verified accounts of him being a racist.
Anyway, all this talk of did the BT or the Flames know is silly. If they knew about the racism...........then I'm very disappointed and others need to be held accountable also. As for the other stuff, I'd say it's safe to say the Flames new about at least some of his tactics.....tactics that have likely been quite acceptable for a long time in hockey.
Doesn't mean that we have to accept that moving forward, time for change, but I also don't think the Flames need to be drug to the mat for the decision to hire a hard nose coach, other than the fact that hiring one may not drive the on ice performance you'd like it to anymore in today's NHL.
|
You make some good points but this isn’t about hiring a “hard nosed” coach as I think we will learn that Peters reputation was worse than that.
The Hartley hire was a joke, hired only because he was close friends with the GM. That guy was done with the league and Feaster should be appropriately lit up over that hiring.
If Treliving thought Peters tactics would work in today’s NHL then I have no problem with him being held accountable for that decision. That doesn’t mean I’m firing him for it, but nor does it team he shouldn’t have to explain himself pretty thoroughly to the guys he works for. And if it was me, I’d have some tough questions for him.