[Rumour] G.Gulutzan front-runner for Flames HC - UPD: Hasn't been officially offered contract

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Bar-Down

^ Sounds exactly like the guy Treliving has been looking for. Hard worker who has paid his dues, won at certain levels and worked his way up. He failed in Dallas but after continuous learning and striving to be better he could be a perfect fit here with the young core.

Hire Gulutzan and a strong associate (possibly even Reirden) and I think our coaching ranks will be set-up perfectly.

I've seen a few of these ideas with other up and comer or old vets being an associate coaches along a new head coach. I disagree, I think you have to give the new guy the room & the team. Not have him looking over his shoulder.

[N26]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I'm sure it's pretty well a done deal. It's possible they are assembling staff and don't want the cat out of the bag until everything is in place. It took them several days to admit they signed Rittich. This new regime likes things announced on their own schedule.

What makes you pretty sure? All we really have is Heath Brown. No one else has said he was anything but a finalist.

I'm not anti-Gulutzan or critcizing you. I just think several on this post have totally jumped the gun. So I am interested to hear what makes you quite certain if you're willing to spell it out

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by 868904

I have no qualms about how he treated the players. Really the only players who should have anything negative to say about Hartley are Hiller and Raymond.

LOL that's nice of you to pass judgement on how players were treated in the locker room when you had never, ever been there or have any knowledge of how certain players were treated. The fact is that Hartley is a hard ass coach and it appears that his approach was starting to wear thin on some players. How are the Flames discrediting Hartley when it's widely known that he's hard on his players as there's plenty of ex-players that will tell you that as well as players with clauses where they can't be traded to a Hartley coached team? Treliving wants a teacher coach over a dictator style coach and it sounds like the players exit interviews probably reinforced that.

Bob seemed like a great guy from his media dealings and I give him credit for never trashing players in the media but seeing I never worked under him I'm not willing to say he was a great guy to work for and nor should you unless you walked in those shoes.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by N26

What makes you pretty sure? All we really have is Heath Brown. No one else has said he was anything but a finalist.

I'm not anti-Gulutzan or critcizing you. I just think several on this post have totally jumped the gun. So I am interested to hear what makes you quite certain if you're willing to spell it out

There's a lot of smoke here as its been speculated he was in town to meet with the owners which indicates the final stage of the process after being chosen by the GM. Until it's officially announced it's not certain but I would be willing to bet on it.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

There's a lot of smoke here as its been speculated he was in town to meet with the owners which indicates the final stage of the process after being chosen by the GM. Until it's officially announced it's not certain but I would be willing to bet on it.

Aww snap!!! Pubes???

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by 868904

Yeah I don't buy the tuning out thing, I think all these rumours is just Flames brass taking a page out of the Bruins playbook and trying to discredit Hartley. There really is no need to play these games and say these things, the intelligent hockey fan knows that Hartley failed to implement a winning and sustainable system of play and possession and that is reason enough for his dismissal.

I have no qualms about how he treated the players. Really the only players who should have anything negative to say about Hartley are Hiller and Raymond.

Flames brass have never said anything like that to my knowledge (it's all been external speculation). Do you have any quotes from management to support that?

[ComixZone]

Kevin Woodley ‏@KevinisInGoal 6m6 minutes ago Surrey, British Columbia
Happy to hear Glen Gulutzan will be named Flames coach today; not only because he's great person but my SV% will go up @ Monday Night Hockey

Works for NHL.com covering the Canucks.

[IgiTang]

Well, its Thursday!!! New Coach Please!

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Well now after being meh on him a week ago, I'll be disappointed if he isn't our coach.

Posts like this are exactly why some fans look silly (not you, I mean fans in general) when they have a crazy reaction to any coaching/GM/player signing. All it takes is a good video or article to sway some people. And this is all the more reason to trust a shrewd GM like Treliving to make the right decision. Fact is, none of have an idea of the personality of most NHL personnel. We don't know what happens behind closed doors. We "know" what we see on TV and whatever articles are written up and put in the papers. That's it.

I admittedly had never heard of the guy until I saw his name on the thread title on CP. So I truthfully can't take a stance on whether it will be a good or bad signing, because like everyone here I know sweet #### all about him. All I can say is that I trust BT to have made the right choice, and I'm willing to give GG a chance.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Works for NHL.com covering the Canucks.

I don't get it?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Posts like this are exactly why some fans look silly (not you, I mean fans in general) when they have a crazy reaction to any coaching/GM/player signing. All it takes is a good video or article to sway some people. And this is all the more reason to trust a shrewd GM like Treliving to make the right decision. Fact is, none of have an idea of the personality of most NHL personnel. We don't know what happens behind closed doors. We "know" what we see on TV and whatever articles are written up and put in the papers. That's it.

I admittedly had never heard of the guy until I saw his name on the thread title on CP. So I truthfully can't take a stance on whether it will be a good or bad signing, because like everyone here I know sweet #### all about him. All I can say is that I trust BT to have made the right choice, and I'm willing to give GG a chance.

The fickle nature of my post was really my intent.

[Demaeon]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I don't get it?

I'm assuming they played in the same men's league on Monday nights in BC.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

I admittedly had never heard of the guy until I saw his name on the thread title on CP. So I truthfully can't take a stance on whether it will be a good or bad signing, because like everyone here I know sweet #### all about him. All I can say is that I trust BT to have made the right choice, and I'm willing to give GG a chance.

This is where I'm at too. I'm not sure I could have name more than two people who were assistant coaches on any team last year, excluding Calgary. What gives me confidence in the next head coach is that Treliving will do what he thinks is right. He's shown he's been a hard worker, and has made some good moves since being in Calgary. He's going to give himself the best chance for success by hiring the coach he believes can turn Calgary into a winner. If he doesn't, then Treliving will likely be fired in a couple years. He's not going to just take a flyer on a coach, that could ultimately hurt his own career.

[Weitz]

Weren't they looking for improvement in special teams and what not? Wasn't GG below average in those departments?

Or is it expected the assistants will be running them?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

LOL that's nice of you to pass judgement on how players were treated in the locker room when you had never, ever been there or have any knowledge of how certain players were treated. The fact is that Hartley is a hard ass coach and it appears that his approach was starting to wear thin on some players. How are the Flames discrediting Hartley when it's widely known that he's hard on his players as there's plenty of ex-players that will tell you that as well as players with clauses where they can't be traded to a Hartley coached team? Treliving wants a teacher coach over a dictator style coach and it sounds like the players exit interviews probably reinforced that.

Bob seemed like a great guy from his media dealings and I give him credit for never trashing players in the media but seeing I never worked under him I'm not willing to say he was a great guy to work for and nor should you unless you walked in those shoes.

A bit of a nitpick here, but Hartley was a teaching coach, as well as a dictator coach. The media from opposing teams routinely marveled at how much time Hartley spent pulling players aside and actually teaching players, and they said this wasn't seen too often any more in today's NHL within the coaching fraternity, and Hartley was probably the best in the business in that regard.

I think you meant a players coach vs a dictator-type coach.

[dissentowner]

Gulutzan would also be amazing with Johnny because he understands that forwards want candy.

[Bingo]

You never know what's going on behind the scenes but if any thing I've seen, read or witnessed from Gaudreau and Monahan has any bearing then I consider it highly unlikely that they quit on a coach, insisted he be let go, or threatened to change contract terms because of Hartley.

Doesn't add up to me at all.

Personally I think Treliving was planning on a disastrous 2014-15 followed by Hartley's dismissal.

Bugger got them tot he playoffs and won coach of the year instead.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You never know what's going on behind the scenes but if any thing I've seen, read or witnessed from Gaudreau and Monahan has any bearing then I consider it highly unlikely that they quit on a coach, insisted he be let go, or threatened to change contract terms because of Hartley.

Doesn't add up to me at all.

Personally I think Treliving was planning on a disastrous 2014-15 followed by Hartley's dismissal.

Bugger got them tot he playoffs and won coach of the year instead.

Agreed. And to add.. This probably gave Hartley the confidence to challenge BT the following season, that is shown in the goalie situation where they clearly didnt agree on who should be the guy between the pipes.

Clearly Hartley lost the challenge eventually and was fired as a result, or at least a contributory result in his dismissal.


Edit: To add, this is probably indicative of the issue being between the GM and Coach and not necessarily so much the guys in the room and the coach.

[jaikorven]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You never know what's going on behind the scenes but if any thing I've seen, read or witnessed from Gaudreau and Monahan has any bearing then I consider it highly unlikely that they quit on a coach, insisted he be let go, or threatened to change contract terms because of Hartley.

Doesn't add up to me at all.

Personally I think Treliving was planning on a disastrous 2014-15 followed by Hartley's dismissal.

Bugger got them tot he playoffs and won coach of the year instead.

If we are going to go with a conspiracy theory...this one actually makes the most sense to me...lol

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You never know what's going on behind the scenes but if any thing I've seen, read or witnessed from Gaudreau and Monahan has any bearing then I consider it highly unlikely that they quit on a coach, insisted he be let go, or threatened to change contract terms because of Hartley.

Doesn't add up to me at all.

Personally I think Treliving was planning on a disastrous 2014-15 followed by Hartley's dismissal.

Bugger got them tot he playoffs and won coach of the year instead.

Then why did he extend Hartley and go out of his way to credit Hartley at every press conference? That doesn't add up