[News Roundup] Flames head coach search. Friedman: Huska is the leading contender

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Buff

Love hurts

Love scars

[Toonage]

Love in an elevator. Not sure if I'm doing this right.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Because my opinion would be that hire would turn into epic failure. Then you said someone had to have hired a coach before to have an opinion on coaches which is laughably stupid. How many coaches have you hired? None? So why are you even speculating then, if that is the standard you believe one must have to be able to have an opinion on a coach you have no reason to be discussing it. Adios.

You jumped right to epic failure. You didn't stop at go you didn't collect $200 you just went straight to epic failure.

Your comments didn't attempt to foster legitimate conversions. It was an open and shut case of over the top negativity coming from you. Go cheer for a different team and pollute their message board with your toxic attitude.

That's why I took issue with your post.

I can have a decent discussion about Huska. I'm not sold on him either but I'm not willing to shut the door on possibilities based on nothing more than a rumor. Yes, the rumor has legs and there is a likelihood that it is Huska. We have another source who thinks otherwise.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Love in an elevator. Not sure if I'm doing this right.

No. You aren't....

Lovin' an alligator!

[Hockey_Ninja]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

Were we all bamboozled by Sec???

Seems like Sec was bamboozled by his OJ actually. He’s been fairly accurate on everything else that’s happened

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

Love scars

Love is a battlefield.

[Buff]

Well, we have Friedman saying he thinks Huska will get the gig. We also have an insider sharing tidbits who is leading us to believe that Love is the guy.

I remember Huska getting a lot of hype several years ago. Many here were happy that we have him and were hoping he'd get the job one day. This fan base's love for Huska has obviously simmered down quite a bit (pardon the pun). Being an assistant for the big club has taken him out of the limelight a bit so we don't seem him being the bus driver. He's just been following the boss's directions. Can Huska be an NHL head coach? Is he right for the Flames? There is that train of thought that hiring the assistant to become the head coach isn't a good move. It's better to become the head coach for a different team. There are examples of where it worked though so the door can't be shut on that either.


Since we're getting an inexperienced head coach people have been wanting Love because his track record looks better than Huska's. Is Love better? Honestly, I don't know. He seems like he has way more success and he has done all that in a relatively short time. Based on that it seems like he should be the guy in the lead. Is he? We don't truly know what Conroy and crew are thinking. Perhaps they do want Love but Love or Conroy want Love to have more experience or maybe have a mentor to help him make the step. We did hear that Gallant was being talked to and we did hear that it could have been as more of a coaching advisor and we heard that Gallant won't be hired and now we're hearing that Huska could be the guy.

[HighLifeMan]

Huska is just such a "bleh" candidate.

He's already been here for five seasons under three different head coaches and has had a complete mixed bag of results. His AHL record is mediocre to poor at best.

Why keep going back to the same well?

Huska clearly couldn't act as a liaison between the players and Sutter last season, yet we expect him to come in here and command the entire room?

I really, really, don't like it. I understand he has done some nice things with the defense, but this team needs a new voice and set of eyes.

This would be such a half measure in my opinion.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Huska coached the Heat through the Flames' rebuild. If anything, that's when the prospect pool was the deepest, and that's when the team should have been the best.

The thing with a rebuild is, while you have your best prospect pool, your best prospects generally skip the AHL. Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, and Tkachuk have a combined 0 AHL games played.

[ForeverFlameFan]

I don't mind Love or Huska. Love has the better track record in the AHL, that makes him an attractive candidate.

Huska I am 50/50 on. Can he lead? Is he heavily considered because he's been a part of the locker room already with many of these players for a number of years? Can he make the adjustments that Sutter didn't/couldn't? Will he play the youngsters? Does Huska provide more of an offensive mind than Love? Can he fix the PP?

[dustygoon]

Let me put my Love into you.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

I don't mind Love or Huska. Love has the better track record in the AHL, that makes him an attractive candidate.

Huska I am 50/50 on. Can he lead? Is he heavily considered because he's been a part of the locker room already with many of these players for a number of years? Can he make the adjustments that Sutter didn't/couldn't? Will he play the youngsters? Does Huska provide more of an offensive mind than Love? Can he fix the PP?

The biggest differnce between Love and Huska when it comes to success in the AHL is Wolf. Huska did not have Wolf, so he probably isn't getting a fair assessment here vs Love because of Love's success in the AHL.

[Toonage]

Love Rollercoaster amirite?

[devo22]

still hoping for Love. If it's Huska, I'll be in his corner 100%, but if we do promote from within, the two-time AHL coach of the year simply makes more sense to me. Nothing against Huska and we, as fans, obviously have a limited view on things, but to me it would certainly be a bit underwhelming to simply promote the assistant coach. I have no issues with Huska staying on the coaching staff, but as for the HC? Give me Love.

[Ashes]

If we are doing some sort of re-build on the fly this off-season and trading Lindholm, Toffoli, Tanev, etc. for promising prospects and younger up and coming guys, then I have no problem with Huska running with it. He seems to be adept at helping young defensemen step into their identities at the very least. And if that's the strategy and we have a miserable season, at least there's a high pick to look forward to at the end and then we can re-evaluate the position down the line. I think no matter the result, I can get behind Huska being the HC if that's the direction the GM takes.

But.. if this is another year where we are going to move around some deck chairs and go for it.. I think there's more suitable coaching options with a winning pedigree such as Boudreau, Gallant, heck even Love has more recent AHL success. And right now I have a hard time seeing Huska as the guy to unlock Huberdeau this season and implement a new creative offensive system, which is what Conroy said he wanted in his GM Press Conference.. I could totally be out to lunch and he's the second coming of Cooper and Bednar, but any way you slice it.. it's interesting times again in Flames land.

[mile]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1667200338070499330

[Textcritic]

What do I know for NHL coaching?

If it is Huska, it certainly does feel underwhelming from the outside looking in.

However, this is the guy that was almost tagged to be the head coach in Detroit, by the same GM who promoted Jon Cooper to his first (and only) NHL job.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

Huska is just such a "bleh" candidate.

He's already been here for five seasons under three different head coaches and has had a complete mixed bag of results. His AHL record is mediocre to poor at best.

Why keep going back to the same well?

Huska clearly couldn't act as a liaison between the players and Sutter last season, yet we expect him to come in here and command the entire room?

I really, really, don't like it. I understand he has done some nice things with the defense, but this team needs a new voice and set of eyes.

This would be such a half measure in my opinion.

Huska isn’t particularly exciting but I’m not sure how anyone could really, really dislike it.

What do we actually know? Well, he’s been with the organization a while (and worked with Conroy).

The positives angles we could look at this from::
- The PK has been good
- The Flames are prioritizing a good GM/coach relationship and that seems to exist with Huska
- He’s got a good reputation for his work with defencemen
- He’s been part of the coaching staff during seasons of a lot of success
- Defencemen taken outside the 1st round have become top 4 guys during his time here

The negative angles we could look at this from:
- He’s been part of the coaching staff during seasons of no success
- He was part of the staff that the players completely quit on
- His AHL record is mediocre

We know that AHL success =/= NHL success, so that’s kind of a wash. What we don’t know is why (or even if) he couldn’t act as a liaison, whether he can “command the room,” or whether he qualifies as a new voice. I get that people want to throw the baby out with the bath water just to be safe here, and Huska isn’t a sexy pick by any means, but I think it’s probably fair to say there’s no use in pretending we know things we don’t or can’t know.

Whether it’s Huska, Love, Gallant, Tanguay, or whoever else, we’re just making up opinions based on limited or outright unfounded information. Every guy is going to require a wait-and-see approach, so why not Huska?

Conroy laid out what he wanted and I think we were all excited by it (I was). If he thinks Huska can deliver that… then maybe we’re wrong and Huska can deliver that. He at least deserves more than a complete write off from the get-go.

[Strange Brew]

If this is some sort of signal that the organization is actually committed to building from within, I guess that's a good sign. It's not the sexy choice but a commitment to this approach with respect to players is overdue.

[Yeah_Baby]

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if Love gets promoted too under Huska but who knows.