Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
So the GM that just came off a 1st place conference finish and had to fire his coach because of something that happened in the Hawks system is being circumvented by team ownership after handling the Peters thing with class?
And I'm the one with the agenda?
Ok ...
And honestly sure it could have been an owner reaching out to Sutter for sure (past relationships etc). But it wasn't the step in over Treliving narrative that was being walked out when Sutter was hired.
|
You're the one making all the assumptions here... What agenda could I possibly have in merely pointing out that the article definitely does not confirm anything about that story?
Who says it was circumventing? The Peters thing happened quick, absolutely. In the aftermath of all of that, is it really so strange to believe that someone like Conroy, or one of the owners who Sutter has a relationship with, reached out on an unofficial basis to test the waters? Whether or not Treliving did it is not confirmed, that's all I am saying. And thus it cannot possibly counter the former narrative (which, incidentally, is also just a narrative with no real proof.)
If I was in that scenario, I would personally build a list of potential candidates I knew to then bring to the table to discuss onboarding. It may involving reaching out to some of them to understand where they're at. Doesn't mean they are actually offered the job.
Sutter says in the article that he was talking to the team in March 2020. That is it.
" I had talked to the Flames off and on for over a year, just to be able to watch them"
It's so vague it could literally mean that he was trading #### texts about our play with Conroy or something. Or maybe Murray Edwards was asking for an honest opinion or two. OR maybe Treliving was trying to lure him in. Who knows. Who actually cares. But saying this "confirms" it is dumb.