Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
There's randomness to playoff hockey that nobody can put a finger on.
If you're team isn't properly constructed you don't make the playoffs so it's a moot point anyway. If it is and they fall on their face repeatedly then you have to question leadership and character for sure.
This year's team was the best regular season team we've seen in Calgary in 35 years ... that's a step in the right direction under any measure.
What happened in the playoffs may be a sign that the team is flawed for playoff hockey, or a matter of learning. Up to you, won't tell you how to think.
But just like the 2004 team had no business winning three rounds, the Flames likely deserved better in 2017 than a sweep, but got what they deserved this Spring.
Who are they next year is why Treliving is paid the big bucks.
But I don't see Flames history as having any bearing at all.
|
Everything you've said here is correct. I'm not saying that history has any bearing on their success, though. That's not at all what I'm saying.
I'm just saying that their lack of success in the past has lowered my own personal expectations of what they will achieve. I have been conditioned to expect failure. I'm not saying that their failure is some sort of dooming curse. I just don't get optimistic about the team anymore because they haven't given me any reason to be. Add the saying goes, "I'll believe it when I see it"--and I haven't seen any of it. The failure is all I've ever known, so until it gets better in the playoffs, all of the regular-season success and the "best defenses in the league" don't mean a whole lot.
Perhaps that's irrational.