The Athletic: How Sutter lost the room and his job

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I think the Zadorov quote in the article said it best. The personalities of the new stars (Weager, Huby, Kadri) didn't mesh with Sutter and either Sutter or the players had to go . The organization was always going to chose the players on the $60m-$80m contracts over the coach.

The 'old' stars who he supposedly meshed with Sutter all wanted out after a year and a half. They lived through 1.5 years of it and peaced out.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

From everything I've heard about this incident, it wasn't so much that Pelletier was hurt by this comment but the rest of the team was hurt by what they saw was unprofessional treatment of him by Sutter.

If you are on a team and a new, cheerful, happy young guy joins the team and gets publicaly dumped on by the boss, you want to stick up for the guy.

I also heard from insiders that everyone from players to coaching and front office staff were pissed off by Sutter's treatment of Pelletier's parents. Tre brought him up from the farm and everyone kept asking when his first game would be so they could schedule the parents to come be at the game and Sutter kept giving non-answers and jerking the family around because he was either playing his mind-games or didn't want to play him at all.

Finally someone up top said "what are we doing here" and then Sutter played him and they got his family in to see his first game but just to get back at his hand being forced, he developed that grouchy attitude that led to the dismissive press conference about Pelletier and maybe some other incidents.

Ok, well... yeah no one should have any for crap like that. That's garbage.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I have said it before and will say it again, this franchise is going to do absolutely nothing in terms of performance and winning with a top down culture that allows this level of stupidity I don't know if it's ownership directly, upper management in CSEC or what but they are getting exposed. Famous Warren Buffett quote " It’s only when the tide goes out that you learn who has been swimming naked"

S*** has hit the fan for this team for years and they are getting exposed. You COULD have an excellent coach in Sutter without his high level of garbage that he has brought to this organization on multiple front's. The organization CHOOSES to not do that. I don't care what people say, when your employer is paying you $4 million a year, the employer has leverage. Sutter may not need the money but he isn't returning the chq's to ownership either. It's a straight up, knock this crap out approach and issue a directive.

These type of stupid thinking has allowed this team to do absolutely nothing in a very long time. I don't care how successful these owners and upper management are in other roles in other businesses. If they were this stupid in their primary business, they would not have lasted this long and been kicked to the curb for poor performance.

I am too lazy to look up the stats but in the post lockout era, the Flames have to be one of the few cap teams with the lowest amount of playoff wins. Great overall performance!

The guy got fired from the Kings for the same thing. Its his personality. If you tell him to change and be nicer (or whatever) - he probably says get lost and goes back to the farm.

He's not some young guy who needs the job. He's older, has money and appears to like being on his farm. You aren't going to have the guy change his ways for any length of time.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Really disappointing to read some of the takes and its actually wild some people continue to blame Huberdeau and Markstrom for Sutter being fired.

Those people will never get it. Imagine waking up and going into your workplace no matter how many million you make and you are anxious and nervous about how your boss will treat you that day, that is abuse.

We can appreciate what Sutter did for the franchise and also acknowledge that he went overboard the last few years.

Listening to Jarome talk yesterday its great to have those types of people back in the organization, understanding these are people and each person reacts to everything in their own way and that doesn't make you a snowflake or crybaby.

[Mathgod]

A perfectly good season wasted by completely preventable things. Why Darryl, why???

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

LOL. Apparently you don't deal with contracts. Unless there is an abatement clause, he is getting his full due.

You are incorrect that I don't deal with contracts but correct that I definitely don't deal with these specific types of contracts. Thanks for the info though.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I think the players that didn't like Sutter were looking for reasons to turn opinion against Sutter both internally and externally. Same thing as "three players" alleged Sutter kicked a player on the bench.

I also think a lot of "poor play" is being pinned on Sutter and toxic dressing room, when in actuality it mostly comes down to Marky and Huby playing like ass.

I think it is more on Sutter, he didn't build trust and show faith in the players that came in. Too much ego and not enough of the type of qualities that a good coaching needs. The players had enough and Marky, Huberdeau had no confidence. Pretty sure Huberdeau felt it every single time Lucic was put out there ahead of him when the Flames needed a goal.

Was hoping to hear Sutter say he was sorry and that he had a terrible year by his standards and that he should take some responsibility considering the players that left, the players that wanted to leave and the hardship he caused Treliving and the organization.. Instead hel defended himself and brought up how well the team played. All that while he got paid for a job he didn't finish.

Sutter is a good person he has done a lot of good things but in the end he steam rolled over a lot of people he was supposed to be "working with".

[bluejays]

Aside from the November incident, there didn't seem to be much new in that article, and it was a bit drawn out. Anyway, what really pisses me off about hockey culture was captured there. Everyone knows about this stuff, yet people in upper management did #### about it. Treliving lived through the Peters fiasco, everyone talks well in public about how important it is to hear people out, etc., but you have crazy #### going on where coaches are hitting people and throwing chairs in front of others, yet nobody in upper management knows about this stuff? Give me a break. Willful ignorance is the only answer I have for that nonsense. I know this isn't your typical office environment but there's a certain line that's reasonable and if you want to punch your boss in the face each day in any walk of life, the line was probably crossed. Surely if they had a captain it wouldn't have made any difference whatsoever. You still have an agent to talk to, and teammates. Upper management and ownership is square to blame.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by bluejays

Aside from the November incident, there didn't seem to be much new in that article, and it was a bit drawn out. Anyway, what really pisses me off about hockey culture was captured there. Everyone knows about this stuff, yet people in upper management did #### about it. Treliving lived through the Peters fiasco, everyone talks well in public about how important it is to hear people out, etc., but you have crazy #### going on where coaches are hitting people and throwing chairs in front of others, yet nobody in upper management knows about this stuff? Give me a break. Willful ignorance is the only answer I have for that nonsense. I know this isn't your typical office environment but there's a certain line that's reasonable and if you want to punch your boss in the face each day in any walk of life, the line was probably crossed. Surely if they had a captain it wouldn't have made any difference whatsoever. You still have an agent to talk to, and teammates. Upper management and ownership is square to blame.

What are you suggesting here? Try to fire the coach with cause for an ambiguous physical incident and throwing chairs? Or fire the coach without cause and eat $8M for an ambiguous physical incident and throwing chairs?


While it's easy to say that it shouldn't be that hard to determine where the line of reasonable behaviour is, but that's simply not true in reality when it comes to firing someone in the ####ed up world of pro sports.

[schteve_d]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

What are you suggesting here? Try to fire the coach with cause for an ambiguous physical incident and throwing chairs? Or fire the coach without cause and eat $8M for an ambiguous physical incident and throwing chairs?


While it's easy to say that it shouldn't be that hard to determine where the line of reasonable behaviour is, but that's simply not true in reality when it comes to firing someone in the ####ed up world of pro sports.

It's hockey culture and it is hanging on by a thread. Organizations that represent a proud nation very recently covered up sexual harassment by players; allegedly of course but c'mon, stuff went on.

Men are still allowed to punch each other in the face to the roar of the crowd. Where else can that happen?

A coach throws a couple of chairs and now everyone is appalled? I'm older, and I'm old school but the times they are 'a changin'! This type of behaviour by your boss is no longer being put up with in any industry, for some time now, and it's trickling down to these last holdouts of the old ways; hockey being probably the best (?) example of it, at least in the Western world. I'm sure throwing chairs and garbage cans was a lot more prevalent by coaches in hockey, and many other sports, not oh so long ago.

Edit: Sorry, probably should have posted this in the drunkpuck thread, seems rambly and disjointed! Made sense to me so I hope everyone can make sense of it.

[timun]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Sutter may not need the money but he isn't returning the chq's

Spell the god-damned word out, your ####ed-up abbreviation with its misplaced apostrophe is an abomination.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Where did anyone say they have to be gentle?
Just don't be abusive.

If you are labelling Sutter an abusive coach, I disagree.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I just don't think that abuse on any level is tolerable, but a lot of players in the NHL are so deeply embedded in a culture that has promoted it for so long that many of them are not even aware it is happening, and how damaging it is.

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

The entire league is full of it. We've all heard players mic'd up. Every NHL shift is f-bomb after f-bomb directed at players, coaches and refs. There's no respect. Remember that HBO documentary with Boudreau dropping the f bombs?

So now suddenly coaches have to be gentle?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not excusing any kind of physical contact, but I'm having trouble with all the criticism when bad behavior by everyone around the league is the norm.

You cannot equate the rink or a dressing room to a downtown office.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Where did anyone say they have to be gentle?
Just don't be abusive.

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

If you are labelling Sutter an abusive coach, I disagree.

There's the string of posts.
You responded to someone who was referring broadly to not tolerating abuse, to which you said suddenly coaches have to be gentle.

I didn't say anything about Sutter.

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

There's the string of posts.
You responded to someone who was referring broadly to not tolerating abuse, to which you said suddenly coaches have to be gentle.

I didn't say anything about Sutter.

Fair enough.

[memphusk]

Iginla ends up President at some point. He and Conroy will end up beaking at eachother publicly. They are competitive people and it looks a bit promising. They both played for Sutter and it rubbed off on them. Win.