Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Flames will not succeed with Murray Edwards

Calgary4LIfe · 12-02-2025, 05:41 PM

What owner WANTS a rebuild? There exactly zero owners in the NHL that want a rebuild.

Now go look at the ages of many owners (including some of the ones here in Calgary), and tell me that they should so easily accept a 5 year rebuild. Pretty tough to do, right?

Calgary is rebuilding. I believe the owners are all wise and experienced enough to understand that sports are cyclical in nature - at least sports with a draft anyway. Rules change for European Football, as it is all about scouting young players and building up their academies for the most part. Hockey is a cyclical sport, however. We are talking about people who have built multi-million (and billion) dollar companies.

I am fairly confident that they don't base their entire plans on ensuring that the Flames get 2 playoff games every season and "that's all they care about". Seriously? Even if this was true, then wouldn't it be logical to assume that they simply would prefer a Cup winner - or at least a finalist - if playoff revenue was all it was?

I just find a lot of the arguments being made about the owners all fall back to the same thing: We have to assume that the owners are all morons to make most of these arguments work. That's where it all falls apart for me personally. I just doubt that they are.

Here is another argument to chew over:

Lots of arguments came up when Feaster was here, and one of them was that Feaster "wasn't a hockey guy". By the time he arrived in Calgary, he had already been involved in hockey for 20 or 30 years, no? Or is he not a hockey guy because he never played. At what point do the owners become an "experienced ownership group"? Sounds like Murray Edwards is much more involved in league-wide matters than most owners are, so I would contest that he is much more a 'hockey guy' than most owners by now.

I don't know what the owners do or don't do when it comes to the Flames. I just find a lot of the arguments being made to be rather lazy and reliant on the assumption that the owners are all idiots for the most part. That's why I always ask for any direct evidence of an owner doing this or that, and how it has impacted the Flames (even with hindsight).

Heck, the only thing that I knew for sure was that one of the owners made the statement: "What about Darryl Sutter?" when the Treliving fired Gulutzan. Maybe he wasn't available, maybe he would have made himself available - point is, that was a better fricken option than Bill Peters with hindsight, right?

Point is, I would love to hear about concrete examples of why the owners suck. Everything I have heard and read is really vague.

12-02-2025, 05:41 PM	#152
Calgary4LIfe Franchise Player Join Date: Jun 2010 Exp:	What owner WANTS a rebuild? There exactly zero owners in the NHL that want a rebuild. Now go look at the ages of many owners (including some of the ones here in Calgary), and tell me that they should so easily accept a 5 year rebuild. Pretty tough to do, right? Calgary is rebuilding. I believe the owners are all wise and experienced enough to understand that sports are cyclical in nature - at least sports with a draft anyway. Rules change for European Football, as it is all about scouting young players and building up their academies for the most part. Hockey is a cyclical sport, however. We are talking about people who have built multi-million (and billion) dollar companies. I am fairly confident that they don't base their entire plans on ensuring that the Flames get 2 playoff games every season and "that's all they care about". Seriously? Even if this was true, then wouldn't it be logical to assume that they simply would prefer a Cup winner - or at least a finalist - if playoff revenue was all it was? I just find a lot of the arguments being made about the owners all fall back to the same thing: We have to assume that the owners are all morons to make most of these arguments work. That's where it all falls apart for me personally. I just doubt that they are. Here is another argument to chew over: Lots of arguments came up when Feaster was here, and one of them was that Feaster "wasn't a hockey guy". By the time he arrived in Calgary, he had already been involved in hockey for 20 or 30 years, no? Or is he not a hockey guy because he never played. At what point do the owners become an "experienced ownership group"? Sounds like Murray Edwards is much more involved in league-wide matters than most owners are, so I would contest that he is much more a 'hockey guy' than most owners by now. I don't know what the owners do or don't do when it comes to the Flames. I just find a lot of the arguments being made to be rather lazy and reliant on the assumption that the owners are all idiots for the most part. That's why I always ask for any direct evidence of an owner doing this or that, and how it has impacted the Flames (even with hindsight). Heck, the only thing that I knew for sure was that one of the owners made the statement: "What about Darryl Sutter?" when the Treliving fired Gulutzan. Maybe he wasn't available, maybe he would have made himself available - point is, that was a better fricken option than Bill Peters with hindsight, right? Point is, I would love to hear about concrete examples of why the owners suck. Everything I have heard and read is really vague.