Poll: How satisfied are you with the Flames coaching

[Cecil Terwilliger]

7/10.

Good but not great. Obviously they over achieved last year and I’ll give the coaching staff credit for that. And this year they’re performing to expectations so it’s hard to penalize the coaching staff to have the team revert to where they should be performing.

I’m not even sure if I’d be happy if we had another over performing season because I’d rather have a high draft pick then finish eighth and squeak in or two points out of the playoff spot.

Similar to the rebuild poll my answer on a future question would be dependent on how the coaching staff handles a better roster. Right now they’re performing within expectations. Once we have a roster that is expected to easily make the playoffs or contend for a Stanley Cup my expectations will go up and I’ll write them accordingly.

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

I’d be interested to see that list.

I'd argue that the only u27 roster player that has improved since last season is Kevin Bahl. That's where the list begins and ends.

Originally Posted by VilleN

He's not escaping criticism for this year - however, I don't think much is warranted. This team has possibly the least talent on it's roster in the entire league. We don't have a single game breaker - not even close. And yet, to my eyes the team competes hard and are doing the best with what they have. I honestly don't understand the complaints about him, he's not perfect - but our roster is god awful, and the fact that most of the games are at least competitive says a lot about his ability as a coach. Despite the fact that we're at the bottom of a rebuild and the team seems to be trying hard, the group seems to have a great culture for a losing team... what more can you ask for?

We rank;
32nd in GF
30th in points
30th in goal differential

I think many of you are overstating how "competitive" we have been this year. We have an entire roster chalked full of underperforming talent and the stats and individual regressions bare that out. This by and large is the same roster that had 96 points just last season, so yes, Huska absolutely deserves criticism for the teams immense drop off in my opinion.

Most fan's want to see this team bottom out which is fine and it looks necessary, but I am not going to pretend this coach has really ever shown anything to suggest he's capable of winning or developing offense at this level. He's a fine enough placeholder but not the guy I expect to turn the ship around when needed.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

GG is the worst flame coach in the last 30 years. Ok, Gilbert would put up a fight for that title. But GG was terrible in his time here.

The worst coach the Calgary Flames ever had was Don Hay, and it wasn't even close. He didn't even last a year before getting fired, and they fired him even though they had nothing better than Greg Gilbert to replace him with.

[Matty81]

Mike Keenan was absolutely terrible for me. He was coaching like it was 20 years earlier, just didn't update his methods at all and for me those teams had talent and had shown they could win in the playoffs and he flopped. That team should have been good both years.

I get the critique of Huska's system and I would share the criticism if he is still playing like that with 2 or 3 skillers up front, but he's got a bunch of plough horses right now. The system suits the mandates and the plugs he has got. If he sticks with the north south system once he has 3 or 4 young stars then give him the boot, but right now playing a more creative style would be suicidal

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

When no matter what the same lot jumps to the defense of Huska regardless of what he does, yeah, you're getting the apologists label. That's what it implies. If you aren't that, then show it?

From my perspective and others who aren't under the mysterious spell of a mediocre rookie coach, being unable to dish criticism when it's warranted (and only deviate between apology and praise) shows a certain level of closed mindedness of its own.

There were posts in the other thread that blamed the player for getting benched or scratched, and then in the same breath praising Huska when they played too well to be denied. The double standard is silly.

Not sure calling something out for what it is is the textbook definition of "closed minded". Seems like "blunt" is a better descriptor. Irritatingly impartial also works.

And there were hurt feelings just as predicted over practically nothing, so oh well. Carry on with your Huska lovin' and lashing out at anybody who can actutally evaluate the guy by tougher than kindergarten standards.

So double down then?

I feel I show my work with every conversation.

Just make your point on Huska, nobody is stopping you. Don't confuse people disagreeing with flawed logic as being an apologist. It's weak and screams "I don't have a leg to stand on with my argument"

Anytime you have to label opposition it screams the argument is weak from your side and you need to provide air cover.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

GG is the worst flame coach in the last 30 years. Ok, Gilbert would put up a fight for that title. But GG was terrible in his time here.

Or maybe it was the team

Oilers PP under GG was consistently top 5
Dallas Stars record despite some key injuries is 33-14-9

It doesn't add up man.

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The worst coach the Calgary Flames ever had was Don Hay, and it wasn't even close. He didn't even last a year before getting fired, and they fired him even though they had nothing better than Greg Gilbert to replace him with.

As bad as Hay was, had they kept Hay and not hired Gilbert they may have not chased their future #1 center away and lost him for absolutely nothing, then who knows where we would have ended up.

Gilbert was such an ass.

[Burning Beard]

GG was such a terrible coach that is was the only time in my life where I took a break from watching Flames hockey.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Super-Rye

As bad as Hay was, had they kept Hay and not hired Gilbert they may have not chased their future #1 center away and lost him for absolutely nothing, then who knows where we would have ended up.

Gilbert was such an ass.

Losing Savard for nothing was entirely on Craig Button. He could simply have fired Gilbert a few weeks earlier than he did. Or he could have traded Savard for actual assets instead of picking a name out of the Vladivostok phone book and settling for that.

There was, in any case, no way Hay would have lasted that long, because he was truly incompetent. People talk about coaches losing the room; Hay never had it.

[Knut]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

That's the problem though, there is like a cult following here of some very vocal posters who's opinion is only what Bingo says it is and they don't actually have an original thought of their own and when you have a differing opinion they will pile on you. I could give you a list but it's pretty easy to see who those posters are because they always back whatever Bingo says when someone disagrees, they immediately come to the rescue. We should see some shortly here.

It is more that when you have an opinion on something, intentional or not, you come across as though it is the only valid opinion. As you can see from the poll there is a very large spread in opinion on this. Only 1/5 have Bingo's opinion right now.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

That's the problem though, there is like a cult following here of some very vocal posters who's opinion is only what Bingo says it is and they don't actually have an original thought of their own and when you have a differing opinion they will pile on you. I could give you a list but it's pretty easy to see who those posters are because they always back whatever Bingo says when someone disagrees, they immediately come to the rescue. We should see some shortly here.

Oh man ...

This is weak too.

What if someone agrees with something I say? They can't push back on a flawed argument for fear of being accused by you of not having an original thought?

Those with weak arguments see alliances and collusion where there is none.

[shutout]

Very happy with Huska as a coach.
Seems to be very open and honest when dealing with players.
He is a good communicator in providing expectations and stepping in to help when those expectations are not met.
He is playing the long game when it comes to prospect development and putting players in situations where they can succeed instead of getting caved in.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

We rank;
32nd in GF
30th in points
30th in goal differential

I think many of you are overstating how "competitive" we have been this year. We have an entire roster chalked full of underperforming talent and the stats and individual regressions bare that out. This by and large is the same roster that had 96 points just last season, so yes, Huska absolutely deserves criticism for the teams immense drop off in my opinion.
.

He also has the team 10th in goals against and comes back to the question of if you think he is holding back offense or its team that doesn't have skill. I think it is a bad team.

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Losing Savard for nothing was entirely on Craig Button. He could simply have fired Gilbert two weeks earlier than he did. Or he could have traded Savard for actual assets instead of picking a name out of the Vladivostok phone book and settling for that.

There was, in any case, no way Hay would have lasted that long, because he was truly incompetent. People talk about coaches losing the room; Hay never had it.

That's very fair. I was pretty young at the time but I definitely remembering Hay being no good.

Also Craig Button and Doug Risebrough hold the title for worst GMs in Flames history in my book. That guy did nothing except screw up all the good Al Coates had done. Just awful, awful management.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Those with weak arguments see alliances and collusion where there is none.

When people's minds aren't open to evidence, they tend to think others are the same. Holding a different opinion must be the product of some sinister conspiracy. The idea that others might look at the facts and come to similar conclusions doesn't occur to them.

[Bingo]

I think Glen Gulutzan was always a good coach technically.

But from what I've gathered he didn't have the ability to manage the player side of things ... correcting behavior ... taking away ice time.

[Knut]

I loved when he threw the stick into the crowd. It was so unlike him that the players basically just laughed it off.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Chat GPT summary:
Raw distribution (grouped)

Very dissatisfied (1–4):

Votes: 25

Share: ~15%

Neutral (5):

Votes: 32

Share: ~20%

Satisfied (6–8):

Votes: 91

Share: ~56%

Very satisfied (9–10):

Votes: 15

Share: ~9%

Average score

Using the vote counts shown, the average rating is ~6.3 / 10.


1. Mild approval, not enthusiasm

An average just over 6 suggests fans are generally okay with the coaching, but far from thrilled. This is not a “home run” result — it’s more “acceptable, but not inspiring.”

2. The center of gravity is 5–8

Nearly three-quarters of voters landed between neutral and moderately satisfied (5–8). That tells you:

Most fans don’t think coaching is actively hurting the team

But few feel it’s clearly elevating them either

3. Strong polarization is absent

Only ~15% are clearly unhappy (1–4), and only ~9% are strongly positive (9–10).
That lack of extremes usually means:

Coaching is not the primary fan frustration

The fanbase sees coaching as competent but limited

4. “Extremely satisfied” is rare

Just 8 voters (4.9%) gave a 10. That’s telling — even supporters aren’t pounding the table for the coaching staff as elite or difference-making.


Big takeaway

Flames fans see the coaching as “fine,” not special.
It’s viewed as:

Stable

Generally acceptable

Unlikely to be the main reason for success or failure

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

That's the problem though, there is like a cult following here of some very vocal posters who's opinion is only what Bingo says it is and they don't actually have an original thought of their own and when you have a differing opinion they will pile on you. I could give you a list but it's pretty easy to see who those posters are because they always back whatever Bingo says when someone disagrees, they immediately come to the rescue. We should see some shortly here.

Most of us who have been here a long time aren't easily worked up, but I just don't like the negative pile on when it's clearly a younger poster who is a bit more emotional - they get held to a high standard and picked apart sometimes if they have the gall to keep posting contrasting views. I don't know if it's a recent thing or I just didn't notice before but there are a couple lately who seem like they are the 5th or 6th comment in every thread that can't be avoided and just waiting to fly off the handle at them especially about anything negative about the flames. The responses instead of focusing on the hockey stuff feel like they start to seep into you're an idiot or your opinion is stupid territory. Often starting replies with comments like "good lord" like they are so insanely frustrated and can't believe there's another perspective when they don't agree with you. I think it probably just drives some of the younger fans to X, Reddit or comment sections on insta etc which is a shame for the community long run. Not everybody writes a masters thesis on every post or has read every article on the topic before they express an opinion and that's ok to spout off a bit. Also I think the flames mgmt taking heat is a very valid perspective, look at where the team is at - they deserve to eat some #### honestly.

But I think it's a smaller group who pile on and there are mostly just tons of great people to chat flames with. Most people are still pretty respectful even if they don't agree with you. It just feels more prevalent when you recently have gotten dragged into a couple of those pissing matches.

People are entitled to other opinions and I enjoy debate, what the hell else are we gonna do while we wait for the next 3 years for them to get decent again, we're all flames fans who probably care more than most and suffering through the same stuff. I say just enjoy debating it with people and try to steer clear of the personal stuff or ignore the people who take it there.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Most of us who have been here a long time aren't easily worked up, but I just don't like the negative pile on when it's clearly a younger poster who is a bit more emotional - they get held to a high standard and picked apart sometimes if they have the gall to keep posting contrasting views.

Not sure if you are talking about me or not, but what I tend to jump on is not contrasting views, but rather when views are expressed as facts, facts are manipulated, or things are said that simply are not true. This includes misrepresenting what other posters have said. And it probably annoys me more than ever because of how much of an issue manipulating facts and leaning into conjecture over evidence is everywhere right now, including within much more important discussions than hockey. But it's the same issue. The erosion of facts. Incorrect things get said as facts and that becomes a weird manipulated version of the truth that people think is correct.

We can debate opinions. But we should be able to agree on facts. Sadly though that's become really hard in this world now.

And I get annoyed where posters are in a rush to criticize instead of understanding.

A good example is the recent scratching of Bru and the "classic Huska" posts. instead of wondering why he was being scratched (for which there was a perfectly reasonable and valid reason) there is a rush to criticize Huska.

People can fly off the handle, vent, and do all those things. But there seems to be a great deal of confusion over what is opinion and what is fact. And ultimately I value evidenced based debate. People can hold any opinion, but part of debate is then being challenged on the evidence of it.

I think one of the posters you are likely talking about is in their 20s. This ain't some kid.