Flames' Management Structure

[AcGold]

What I like is that Burke is a man of his word and he's bluntly honest. Its a good structure, polar opposite of how things were with previous GMs that would feed the public rhetoric while trying to save their jobs.

I expect Burke to make a number of trades for bigger players, then when a few of them can play regular shifts Burke will shift gears to sowing up holes in specific positions and roles. He has about 4 years to grow a d-core around Giordano and a long time to build an offensive core out of right now mostly Monahan. Burke is in charge of the show, Treliving is his man on the phone.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by MattyC

What confuses me is why they keep pumping their chests telling us its a new thing. Doesn't Boston, St. Louis, and Columbus all have these structures? I'm sure there's more.

Because it is a new thing. They're not claiming to have invented it, but they can certainly claim to be one of the first few teams to have adopted it (which is what they have actually claimed).

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I expect Burke to make a number of trades for bigger players, then when a few of them can play regular shifts Burke will shift gears to sowing up holes in specific positions and roles. He has about 4 years to grow a d-core around Giordano and a long time to build an offensive core out of right now mostly Monahan. Burke is in charge of the show, Treliving is his man on the phone.

I might be splitting hairs here but if this is management by committee, which is the impression I am getting from most of the posts here, you can't just go expecting Burke to be making all of the trades, and taking all of the credit for every trade, isn't that supposed to be Treliving's job?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Trevor Linden does not provide this same buffer.

How about Sakic? Shanahan?

Three hall of fame players without much management experience hired as Presidents of NHL teams in the last 12 months. Then there's LaFontaine and Neely. None of those guys have as much hockey management acumen as their subordinates in the GM chair.

There's definitely a marketing and corporate status angle here.There weren't as many former superstar players in top executive positions in the NHL 10 years ago. Franchises today want a superstar face to the management team. Since most of these guys don't have the experience (or perhaps the acumen) to be GMs in the modern era, teams bring them in as President, where they can have a prominent public position while being one step removed from day-to-day job of NHL team management.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by MattyC

What confuses me is why they keep pumping their chests telling us its a new thing. Doesn't Boston, St. Louis, and Columbus all have these structures? I'm sure there's more.

St Louis does not, they have a standard President/GM setup.

Columbus does. Based on the way Burke and King have described things, the Oilers were the first team to move in this direction, Columbus was second, and the Flames are third.

Like Shanahan in Toronto, Neely is the full President of the Bruins, in charge of both business and hockey operations. As I understand it, his role is somewhere in between King's and Burke's roles.

Every team in the league has a slightly different organizational structure from every other team in the league, so it's tough to pin down exactly what each role does. The same job title on three different organizations might have three different job descriptions; and the same job description on three different organizations might have three different job titles.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Burke is there to maintain a organizational team identity. So if Treliving doesn't work out you still have players that fit the organizational needs and don't have to spend the year getting players who fit the new gm type guys.

But what if Burke doesn't work out? By which I mean what if Burke ends up being the problem. Does Ken King end up firing Burke and keeping Treliving... for some reason I doubt it. I don't like the prospect of having rot at the top that can dodge accountability with more ease.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by UKflames

I might be splitting hairs here but if this is management by committee, which is the impression I am getting from most of the posts here, you can't just go expecting Burke to be making all of the trades, and taking all of the credit for every trade, isn't that supposed to be Treliving's job?

I was insinuating quite the opposite, expect Burke to mandate the longterm goals while Treliving is the one making deals and Burke approves them.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Parallex

But what if Burke doesn't work out? By which I mean what if Burke ends up being the problem. Does Ken King end up firing Burke and keeping Treliving... for some reason I doubt it. I don't like the prospect of having rot at the top that can dodge accountability with more ease.

The way I see it is GM's usually get to fire and hire at least 1 coach. I think PHO will get to fire at least 1 GM before getting canned. King sold this job to Burke as a job he can have for 10 years or longer. Most GM's get at least 3 years before they are fired and I think a PHO will have closer to 7-10 years to run the team.

Like a GM with a coach the new PHO will get to decide if he is keeping the current GM or bring in his own guy. Where i see a PHO getting fired is if he disagrees with the direction of the owners, an ownership change or long periods of sucking/mismanagement (like Oiler fans wanting Lowe to take the fall for their garbage past 8 years)

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I was insinuating quite the opposite, expect Burke to mandate the longterm goals while Treliving is the one making deals and Burke approves them.

You see i don't understand this Burke sets the long term vision and Treliving deals with the here and now, both should dealt with by the one person otherwise we could have this conflict of interests, both pulling in different directions.

If Burke needs to approve all of the deals what is the point in having Treliving?

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by UKflames

You see i don't understand this Burke sets the long term vision and Treliving deals with the here and now, both should dealt with by the one person otherwise we could have this conflict of interests, both pulling in different directions.

If Burke needs to approve all of the deals what is the point in having Treliving?

It is quite simple to understand when you look at the last 2 regimes in Calgary. You look at the team Sutter built and when Feaster took over he completely changed the type of team the flames were. He emphasized skill over size because the flames were known as a big bruising team and you could see how the 2011 draft was vastly different than any of Sutters drafts.

Feaster went so far in the other direction bringing acquiring mostly small players to the point the flames went from one of he biggest teams to one of the smallest in 3 years. These large shifts in direction are eliminated with the pho position. A key for the GM in this situation is he needs to be aligned with his president like a coach needs to be aligned with his GM.

Additionally if a GM is desperate and potentially mortgaging the future to save his job a pho likely blocks The move. Sutters 48hrs of desperation that set the franchise back 2-3 years may have been avoided but Darryl was fighting for his job.

Treliving is working for the here and now with vision to the future where Burke's vision will eventually be in the here and now with his focus bein long term sustainability of a winning franchise

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by UKflames

If Burke needs to approve all of the deals what is the point in having Treliving?

because of the Bouwmeester, Iginla and Phaneuf botched trades is why. Need someone with the overall status of the team to moderate the short term in case the GM is trying to trade our bluechip star players for nothing (Bouwmeester/Phaneuf) or in the opposite scenario a GM won't trade a star player when his value is plummeting (Iginla) because he's afraid of losing his job. We should have had atleast 3 major assets out of those three guys and we don't. Also in case the GM is trying to make offer sheets that get us nothing and lose us assets.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The way I see it is GM's usually get to fire and hire at least 1 coach. I think PHO will get to fire at least 1 GM before getting canned.

Yes, I think that's likely and that it's a bad thing.

I think if the hockey product is poor then the guy in charge of the hockey product ought to be the primary person to hold accountable as soon as possible, not allowed to use someone else as a fall guy and then just continue on.

It just seems like a set-up that will end up with problems being prolonged (and potentially made worse) in the long-run.

Originally Posted by Vinny01

These large shifts in direction are eliminated with the pho position.

Okey, but what happens when a large shift in direction is needed (or just an improvement on the current direction)? Eliminating them isn't a defacto positive, it's just as likely to be a negative.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Yes, I think that's likely and that it's a bad thing.

I think if the hockey product is poor then the guy in charge of the hockey product ought to be the primary person to hold accountable as soon as possible, not allowed to use someone else as a fall guy and then just continue on.

It just seems like a set-up that will end up with problems being prolonged (and potentially made worse) in the long-run.

Or it is a set up that will promote consistency and a long-term commitment to a vision and a plan.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Or it is a set up that will promote consistency and a long-term commitment to a vision and a plan.

And if the vision is faulty and the plan poor, what then?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Parallex

And if the vision is faulty and the plan poor, what then?

He was hired because they aren't

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

He was hired because they aren't

Nobody is ever hired thinking they are but they almost all at least eventually become so. I don't think it's prudent to assume otherwise. Burke is not infallable... he wouldn't be on his 5th organization if he was.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Nobody is ever hired thinking they are but they almost all at least eventually become so. I don't think it's prudent to assume otherwise. Burke is not infallable... he wouldn't be on his 5th organization if he was.

No one is infallible. And Burke won't be in the job forever.

But the people that matter - ownership - hired him because they think he is the right guy. Period.

Therefore he is.

There is no perfect solution. But there are guys who are qualified. He is one of them. And he was chosen. Therefore it will be his plan and vision for the foreseeable future.

And it will be at least 8 to 10 years before we have enough info to know whether or not he was the right choice.

So relax and enjoy.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No one is infallible. And Burke won't be in the job forever.

It's not being in the job forever that I fear, nothing lasts forever... it's being in the job too long and the resulting long-term harm it could cause.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So relax and enjoy.

I've no other choice really. But that's not going to stop me from having trepidation and doubt about this whole management structure in general.

[redforever]

If you become too top heavy in management, then you become like AHS, and their track record has been abysmal to say the least.

[FeyWest]

There's never going to be one perfect way of managing things as there are way to many variables and stipulations that can cause a management team to succeed or fail. However, I think the biggest thing that causes teams to fail (Not every time ofc) is many periods of flux and never having one direction for a decent period of time.

Parallax, I understand your feelings of trepidation and doubt but the previous structure never seemed to work either and I think it was time for change. It's the first time we've ever had a hockey mind in a "president-like" position it's always been King, how many years have we been wandering the desert (being non-consistent competitiveness)?

I'm excited and still have reservations at the ready in case Burke/Treliving don't have success. I'll give them 2~3 years to show what they have in mind and to showcase this new structure. Fans have an effect on the team too, just look at Edm and Van, fan outrage and lack of support doesn't breed confidence to the players, they are people too and aren't immune to the effects of fans. That's one of my reasons why the Flames did as well they did they wanted to work hard because we as fans were so excited to watch them play even though they maybe weren't the pundits "Best" team out there.

This is my opinion and its good having all sorts otherwise there's no interesting discussions. This a new era for Flames fans and I'm ready for the ride GFG!