So why in the hell wouldn't Conroy offer him the associate title? This is turning into a coaching nightmare imo, the worst candidate got the HC job, Tanguay isn't coming to run the offence, out hot coaching prospect is looking elsewhere to be an assistant but won't take being an assistant here, sounds like Savard wants to stay as a HC in Windsor as opposed to an assistant in the NHL. Watch them bring back Muller and MacLean assistants. Hell, bring back Gilbert too just to put the cherry on top. This is beyond underwhelming.
Huska has been the good cop to these players since his first day with the big club. Leaving notes of positivity and improvement in the locker room for each guy. Maybe the big dog has some bite but I bet you the room will be lighter.
Huska will need to hire a PP/Offensive/Forwards coach 100%.
Isn't this exactly why assisstant coach promotions typically fail? Positivity is great and all, but I know eventually this team will need some edge. Then it is manufactured, then players lose respect for him. It's pretty easy to predict.
I frankly liked it better when I heard Muller was the good cop and Huska was a pretty honest, genuine relationship builder. When you are playing the good cop, you are acting.
This is a good hire for the same reasons Conroy was a good hire. They were not going to hire another taskmaster or expensive veteran coach. Anyone making predictions now on the season ahead is a little foolish because no one knows how the players will respond to Huska as head coach. End of the day, that's all that matters.
Hahaha. Making predictions? This is exactly what this team does time and time again.
__________________
I hate just about everyone and just about everything.
The thing that bothers me about this isn't necessarily the decision itself, per se. Like, I'm not enthusiastic about Huska as a coach, but I don't think even Scotty Bowman could squeeze results out of the mess Treliving left behind, so ultimately the coach won't matter until this team has a better, younger core to build around.
But what concerns me more is the philosophy being put on display here. How focused the local media and even the statements from Conroy himself are on Huska's tenure above his actual results, like this was some kind of loyalty hire for a guy who "paid his dues." That's such a spectacularly stupid way to do business, and completely on brand for this organization. I was really hoping that the off-ice changes would have herladed a change in approach from what we're used to, but it sounds exactly like what we've come to expect from the Edwards regime. Cheap out, take half-measures, hope to sneak in, and see what happens.
The team isn't taking any risks here, so I don't see why we should expect anything but more of the same.
Personally, I think hiring a rookie head coach for a roster with this many established vets is a big enough risk in itself.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bax For This Useful Post:
Isn't this exactly why assisstant coach promotions typically fail? Positivity is great and all, but I know eventually this team will need some edge. Then it is manufactured, then players lose respect for him. It's pretty easy to predict.
I frankly liked it better when I heard Muller was the good cop and Huska was a pretty honest, genuine relationship builder. When you are playing the good cop, you are acting.
Well, they are both NHL rookie head coaches. Last year, 1 was having success at the pro level, and 1 was opening Sutter's gates. Lotta bench minors last year.
The thing that bothers me about this isn't necessarily the decision itself, per se. Like, I'm not enthusiastic about Huska as a coach, but I don't think even Scotty Bowman could squeeze results out of the mess Treliving left behind, so ultimately the coach won't matter until this team has a better, younger core to build around.
But what concerns me more is the philosophy being put on display here. How focused the local media and even the statements from Conroy himself are on Huska's tenure above his actual results, like this was some kind of loyalty hire for a guy who "paid his dues." That's such a spectacularly stupid way to do business, and completely on brand for this organization. I was really hoping that the off-ice changes would have herladed a change in approach from what we're used to, but it sounds exactly like what we've come to expect from the Edwards regime. Cheap out, take half-measures, hope to sneak in, and see what happens.
The team isn't taking any risks here, so I don't see why we should expect anything but more of the same.
Pretty much my concern as well.
That "results" is as far down the totem pole of evaluation as it appears to be is deeply concerning.
Unproven coaches love this and praise this because it gives them hope too as the hard working guys lost in the fold. Because most NHL teams wouldn't make hires like this unless on an interim basis after a firing.
It's not encouraging as far as a team that is looking to hit reset and have more success. Looks like more of what came before, except now on a budget.
It’s not really that outlandish. An assistant job in the NHL is still a pretty huge promotion. Huska has double the amount of experience as Love. It actually seems like a pretty logical move.
Yeah but on the same team? I don't think so.
Not everyone views things the same way.
Personally I would be a bit pissed off if I had the track record he has had in the AHL and got passed over for a guy that had middling results in the AHL.
I would have rather they brought in Rierden for this group of players. Huska or Love seems like a coin flip honestly I'm not sure how people can boast one would be better than the other when neither has head coached an NHL game before. I do feel the concerns the AHL teams success was due more to Wolf's numbers are fair as well. Can you imagine what the Flames would have looked like with a 932 save percetage last year?
The Following User Says Thank You to Burning Beard For This Useful Post:
I would have rather they brought in Rierden for this group of players. Huska or Love seems like a coin flip honestly I'm not sure how people can boast one would be better than the other when neither has head coached an NHL game before. I do feel the concerns the AHL teams success was due more to Wolf's numbers are fair as well. Can you imagine what the Flames would have looked like with a 932 save percetage last year?
.932 average start to finish? Probably the conference finals.
Old school coaches, no. Newer / younger coaches? Absolutely it does.
Lol, maybe I am misunderstanding what people mean by good cop. To me, a good cop is someone who gets to focus on positives growth and learning while there is another person that worries about accountability and negative consequences... There isn't a good cop head coach in the NHL.
It's hilarious that Huska was told winning wasn't important in the AHL. It's like he was bread to be the good cop.
Maybe they also told Love that winning wasn't important and he managed to develop players and win at the same time. If my boss told me winning wasn't important as a HC, I'd be pretty steamed.
Personally, I think hiring a rookie head coach for a roster with this many established vets is a big enough risk in itself.
But as every talking head in this city will tell you, the guy has been in this organization forever. He was the safest pick they could have made, a known quantity that runs through all of the "mushy middle" finishes and overt displays of being thoroughly outcoached when it matters. Not only that, we're getting indications that Edwards once again wanted whoever would come in cheap above all else.
It's the rationale behind the hiring that's concerning, not some expectation of immediate performance. Nobody was coming into a team so committed to a mediocre core on the wrong side of 30 and lighting the world on fire. It signals that nothing is going to fundamentally change with the way this organization operates, which has implications for future success that run far deeper than just Huska.
Huska is the guy you aren't afraid to break by subtracting from his roster and drafting in the top 10 but you have faith maybe he can make slight improvements to make it into the top 8 of the conference.
I also think Huska cares more for Calgary then Love does and you know the CARE factor is a big component of the flames..... just not from the players...cough Naz cough
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sec214 For This Useful Post:
Two pretty big claims here that I'm not sure are backed up by reports and evidence.
Love is constantly described as a top candidate, but, as far as I know, there were no reports that he interviewed for any NHL HC positions other than in Calgary, nor that any teams asked for permission to interview him.
Whereas we know that Huska got very close in the Detroit HC search last year, and that he also interviewed well with Chicago. Along with the the Calgary job he just got, that's three NHL HC interviews in the last two off-seasons. To me, that suggests he'd be in extremely high demand as an Assistant Coach if he hit the open market.
Love was a more appealing candidate to Flames fans because he's young and fresh and has had great recent results in the AHL. But almost all reporting we have suggests that Huska is a more appealing candidate to other teams, and has been for some time.
Love could be the better coach but you still have to win that interview process. Huska has some clear advantages as he can tell you what he plans to do with certain guys within the system. He also has likely learned a lot from Darryl Sutter that giving him a better understanding of the game, and adjustments. If Huska didn't have some strong advantages, Love likely would have been given serious consideration.
