Sutter is the problem

[flambers]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

As an aside, I wonder why he just doesn't write it? If its true and verified, then, what does he really have to lose? He doesn't play on the team.
If its something that will put someone in an undesirable situation then he should just stay quiet until he writes it.
Saying "ooooooohhhh I have some really good stuff to tell you, at another time" makes him come across (in my opinion anyway) as very "grade 6".

I listened to the interview, my guess he is waiting for the end of the season. To avoid this becoming a distraction

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I would rather have Keller than Johnny right now — cheaper and way younger. Schmaltz and Maccelli over Laine and Sillinger, too. Hayton and Johnson are close.

AZ certainly doesn't have a Werenski, though. Even when they had Chychrun I don't think he was in the same stratosphere.

This is why I have Columbus ahead. Werenski is a big part of that, Jiricek is also a big part of that but more than anything Columbus is last in the league right now. Worst they can pick is 3rd overall vs Arizona could pick as low as 9th overall based on current standings. After the lottery they could flip around who is better, but Columbus is positioned very well right now.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by Jing

Interesting that he says the franchise will be at a major cross roads in a matter of weeks. Not a hot take, but the way he says it does make it sound like the paths this franchise takes based on the season finish have already materialized.

Francis also inferred that ownership is learning (i.e. wouldn't spend a lot on a coach before, now spending it on Sutter). He mentioned that they wouldn't retool/rebuild, but wondering if they are realizing now that the way to a Stanley Cup is through the draft (tanking).

Should be an interesting off season!

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Impressive rant, but you could have ended your post there. That's all that needs to be said. This is old thinking that needs to die out.

Back when I was working in a corporation, I had a boss that would frequently express his subtle dissatisfaction with my work. There was almost never any praise even though my performance reviews reflected my good work (that he wrote). Occasionally, he would pull me aside and rip into me, yelling in my face. I would respond by showing some additional visible effort or something tangible in front of him for a short while, but it didn't actually improve my performance long-term.

I have had other bosses who expressed trust in me, allowed me to have autonomy over many aspects of my job, had frank conversations when things were not going well, but would never yell. That's where I put in my best work, again and again.

Being grumpy and yelling isn't a managerial tactic anymore than smoking in the office or having afternoon whiskies is. This ain't Mad Men. Time to modernize.

It's a different conversation when it's the scenario from the workers perspective than the boss'.

All of the posts like these are never the situation where the worker has been asked to complete task A dozens of times and rarely does and complete task B a certain way and does it a different way. They're always from the perspective of working hard and getting their work done and not getting any recognition or gratitude. So not wanting to work for the tough boss. I've been in that situation. It's not an environment you'd want to stick in.

However there are just as many employees who are driving their bosses insane because they're just not meeting the standard and are dragging the team down. My best friend's colleague just got fired for snoring at his desk every afternoon. Was the boss the problem? Every situation is different and it can be a combination of both.

There's a line of course for coaching. Hazing players and embarrassing them in front of their teammates. Berating them and treating them like toddlers for mistakes or lack of effort. Belittling them and insulting them. Intentionally ruining their careers, etc. These are leaps that posters are making when they're lumping Sutter in with past coaches that have been exposed for these things.

But breaking a stick against a CMU wall while alone in the hallway, not discussing the obvious with a vet when their ice time is reduced, being gruff with the media, etc isn't anything that worth getting worked up over to me.

[Major Major]

Wish people would stop trying to compare their office job life with a pro sports team. Next time you want to make that comparison, ask yourself, is there an organizational outcome that is so sweet that I would gladly give up every single drop of professional happiness to accomplish it? Didn't think so. The two are not comparable.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Wish people would stop trying to compare their office job life with a pro sports team. Next time you want to make that comparison, ask yourself, is there an organizational outcome that is so sweet that I would gladly give up every single drop of professional happiness to accomplish it? Didn't think so. The two are not comparable.

A $25 Safeway gift card isn't the thing worth giving it all for?

[Hockey_Ninja]

Eh. Players and coaches want to win. They’re gonna have times where they blow up at refs and break sticks. It’s just a natural human thing

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Wish people would stop trying to compare their office job life with a pro sports team. Next time you want to make that comparison, ask yourself, is there an organizational outcome that is so sweet that I would gladly give up every single drop of professional happiness to accomplish it? Didn't think so. The two are not comparable.

And in this case some of the "employees" are paid way more than the boss and often in much more stable positions than the boss.
The elite employees are also one in a million skillsets who can't just be replaced by the next resume.
We can't just go in Indeed and find another Huberdeau (wouldn't that be nice).

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

No come out of your cave. I want to hear more how we allow adults to have temper tantrums in Sports but any other industry that wouldn't be tolerated.

{snip}


Call me a piss baby socialist or whatever but I just think all worker should have the safest working environment. *shrugs*

If we talk about wanting hockey culture to change and grow, these are the conversations we should be having.

Ha ha...I guess I shouldn't be ranting in a moment of extreme frustration with CRA (can I have temper tantrums with THEM at least? Please? ) while taking a break.

Actually, having spent some 40 years in senior management that isn't who I am at all..I too believe in a "safe" and supportive environment for people. I'm somewhat unconvinced, though, that someone getting upset is "unsafe". People can lose it for a bit...it happens (on the ice as well)...and I'm not sure that any hockey player is too terribly "scared" by a coach getting mad. After all, some hockey players fight for a living. All of them survive physical contact in which they CHOOSE to egage. So there's that.

Is losing it, screamng, yelling etc (if it actually happens) the ideal way to behave? No, of course not.

Is being demanding and ultra-clear about how you are failing "scary"? Some people would argue that it is, and they feel "unsupported" in that environment. I've had employees like that. And yet, there are many others who simply don't find a demanding, specific superior to be a problem. So, there's that.

Is being totally soft and gentle and asking permission to provide you with feedback the best course? Maybe...but I suspect that, too, is unworkable from a perspective of success.

Having said that, sports IS an arena of passion. That doesn't apply to a lot of jobs. Not sure if that's the reason that we DO allow for the kind of excesses we see (or don't see) there.

What's going on in Flamesland? Who the hell knows any more? Beats me.

Now, back to solving the problem with CRA and defending my client the best I can LOL. (And no, I don't rant at them...just about them.)

[1_Flames_Fan]

This story true or not has definitely blown up online. Just saw it on msn.

[Spinach]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

And in this case some of the "employees" are paid way more than the boss and often in much more stable positions than the boss.
The elite employees are also one in a million skillsets who can't just be replaced by the next resume.
We can't just go in Indeed and find another Huberdeau (wouldn't that be nice).

You're right; we can't go find another Huberdeau, because he's been invisible.

[All In Good Time]

Originally Posted by flambers

I listened to the interview, my guess he is waiting for the end of the season. To avoid this becoming a distraction

Sure, but then again, why say anything at all for another 3 weeks?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

This is why I have Columbus ahead. Werenski is a big part of that, Jiricek is also a big part of that but more than anything Columbus is last in the league right now. Worst they can pick is 3rd overall vs Arizona could pick as low as 9th overall based on current standings. After the lottery they could flip around who is better, but Columbus is positioned very well right now.

Well you also have to remember AZ might have two top-10 picks. Ottawa is almost certainly going to miss the playoffs by a significant amount. Aaaaand I'd rather have Cooley than Jiricek ... it's close.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

CRA

CRA is unbeaten all time so might as well mail it in and look towards the next one. No point in smashing sticks.

[Major Major]

Question for the pro happiness crowd. If it were Nathan MacKinnon on our team making players miserable, would you want to fire him too?

[TheScorpion]

MacKinnon offers significantly more tangible impact on a typical hockey game than basically any coach ever has or will.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

MacKinnon offers significantly more tangible impact on a typical hockey game than basically any coach ever has or will.

So in the world of pro sports is there an acceptable level of being incredibly demanding on your team / teammates if the outcomes are favorable?

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

Sure, but then again, why say anything at all for another 3 weeks?

He was asked specifically if the stuff about Kadri/Sutter was overblown and whether team tension is going to be a significant story for the off-season. Sounds like he knows for sure that someone is quitting and/or getting fired and he's respecting his sources.

[Buzzard]

I doubt that in the last 25 years or so Francis has been around he's ever once got my attention with his opinions and "news". For once, something he's said has piqued my interest.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I can tolerate it in players because they're out there getting roughed up in a physical game. Even the most level headed guy can get his emotions up if things get rough.

But a coach? Nah man, no pass from me. Control your emotions. You're not a child.

Devils advocate here, but why can't the coach lose it.

The Flames are horrid in overtime, they lose every game because of some stupid defensive mistake and have probably been told 20 times to not get caught behind the net. The players continue to make the same mistake and after every loss the coach gets #### on, so why shouldn't he lose it?

Just a question as you usually have excellent answers.