Quote:
Originally Posted by fleury
I think I outlined my argument that it's possible now that Bill Peters played hardball with Neal and that snowballed to what we know happened. Chicken or the egg is the question at this point. I'd say that it's almost certain Neal was promised a certain amount of leverage. If Peters played hardball and didn't allow him to get out of his funk, or set him up to fail, then Neal just sulked because he could and said, f-this. Or it could be Neal deserved it right from the start and Peters benched him accordingly. With the allegations coming out now though, I'd gravitate towards the former, and if he is a disciple of old Mikey on the Leafs, he could've just said screw Treliving's promises, I'm the coach and I'm doing things my way. I maintain that my personal opinion is that Neal got pissed at management (whether Peters and/or Treliving), and they management took the side of the coach and it led to this. Getting Lucic I maintain was a massive cluster####, but that's another argument. What makes a player like Neal give up on a team that quickly? That's the main question that should be answered and if I'm connecting the dots it certainly points to some disgruntlement with management.
|
Your theory is one which would be possible. It is not, however, correct. Peters didn’t screw Neal. Treliving didn’t screw Neal. Neal screwed Neal. At best Treliving made a similar mistake as he did with Peters as far as not enough DD.