Francis Article On Lack of Toughness

[HarryH93]

Question for all of you who are suggesting that sticking up for our best players isn't necessary because it may result in a penalty: have you ever played a competitive sport in your life?

[The Fonz]

Know what's worse than killing a 2min instigating penalty? Doing nothing at all, and playing like a team of individuals.

When Gaudreau gets abused, someone needs to jump the offending player. The message that sends cannot be overstated, and I don't mean the message it sends to the other team; I mean the message it sends to your own team.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by HarryH93

Question for all of you who are suggesting that sticking up for our best players isn't necessary because it may result in a penalty: have you ever played a competitive sport in your life?

Curling? And I get super pissed when they don't respect our lead. Sometimes I won't crack jokes with the other team for a whole end. Hasn't cost our team yet.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Know what's worse than killing a 2min instigating penalty? Doing nothing at all, and playing like a team of individuals.

When Gaudreau gets abused, someone needs to jump the offending player. The message that sends cannot be overstated, and I don't mean the message it sends to the other team; I mean the message it sends to your own team.

Some offending players welcome that and most coaches love it. What is needed is a loud and clear message to the opposing bench, "you touch our skill you'll be scraping yours off the ice.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by transplant99

The instigator penalty was the worst decision the league ever made as far as on ice product and how it has affected everything.

Officials barely make that call these days. I've seen plenty of instigated fights where the instigator rule wasn't called. NHL officials barely even use the majority of the rules in the book and are more game managers than anything these days.

[Strange Brew]

Another way the Flames could be tougher is to not let perceived slights or missed calls get them off their game. It encourages teams to take liberties.

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Some offending players welcome that and most coaches love it. What is needed is a loud and clear message to the opposing bench, "you touch our skill you'll be scraping yours off the ice.

Agreed. You break my guys finger, I break your guys hand. In this game you have to fight back in any means.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by transplant99

You have literally no clue what you are talking about.

No need to keep proving it.

Then tell us how the instigator penalty has changed the game.

I only ever hear old men yelling at cloud type guys like Don Cherry make this argument without actually putting an argument forward.

Go ahead, tell me how it's changed the game.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by memphusk

Agreed. You break my guys finger, I break your guys hand. In this game you have to fight back in any means.

Yep it's one thing to advocate for violence for the sake of it, but the reality of it is the league is still that way and you need to be able to answer back. Staal and Komarov didn't even get 2 minutes for really hurting the whole Flames team by taking Johnny out of the game. As long as guys can still whack, slash and run around, you need to be able to send a message to minimize it.

And I think the instigator is there, but the reality is that's a non factor. It is not called that much, and even if it is, the Flames PK is like 81%. How many times in a year are you going to jump a guy for running around... maybe it costs the Flames a goal a year.

Having Johnny in the lineup for the time he lost with his broken hand/finger alone would be worth a goal against let alone all the other liberties.

I hate to say anything good about the Oilers, I despise them and all the handouts they've been given, but they added Maroon, Kassian and Lucic for nothing basically while Treliving sat on his hands. All those guys can play a regular shift. To me that is the biggest black mark on our GM's record, failing to address toughness with a very young and a bit undersized team while there were guys out there available.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Officials barely make that call these days. I've seen plenty of instigated fights where the instigator rule wasn't called. NHL officials barely even use the majority of the rules in the book and are more game managers than anything these days.

It's rarely ever called and anyone who thinks players don't react to hits because of the instigator penalty doesn't watch enough hockey.

Gio attacked Komarov right after a big hit and guess what? Gio didn't get an instigator and even if he did, do you think next time he wouldn't do the exact same thing? You bet he would.

[Mr.Coffee]

Fights, toughness, physicality, scrums, pushing, it all generates emotions and actually delivers the game in an entertaining way.

Since the NHL has been moving to a non-contact defensive shell dump and chase league with zero emotion or intensity anymore, that's why it is now boring as hell.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Fights, toughness, physicality, scrums, pushing, it all generates emotions and actually delivers the game in an entertaining way.

Since the NHL has been moving to a non-contact defensive shell dump and chase league with zero emotion or intensity anymore, that's why it is now boring as hell.

welcome to the "player safety" era.

ill be vilified for even saying that, but it is wimpy and sucks to watch.

I wish i truly appreciated what i got to watch when i was 12 years old.

[Oil Stain]

The Oilers always had lots of goons on the team through their losing years. Now they have toughness throughout their lineup which is better but the media only ever talks about this kind of stuff when a team is losing.

If a team doesn't have tough top six players and loses its because they get pushed out of games.

If a team doesn't have tough top six players and wins it's because they battle through adversity or blah blah blah.

Chicago has won without really having much toughness. Red Wings. Penguins.

It's really not necessary. I personally would prefer to watch a tough team because it's a great feeling when your team manhandles another but it doesn't matter to results.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by HarryH93

Question for all of you who are suggesting that sticking up for our best players isn't necessary because it may result in a penalty: have you ever played a competitive sport in your life?

Lol.

I guess we all know who the guy is that treats his beer league like game 7 of the finals.

[LTH]

Johnny is not "half-assing" anything. i see a young guy with the weight of an entire organization on him and in an impossible situation with the way the team has played around him and the strategies employed (Chaisson being his RW). That guy gives his all and he is frustrated beyond belief. This has cause his mind to sometimes be in the wrong place and make bad decisions. Is there anyone here that doesn't think this has be the most trying and difficult time of his hockey life?

The other notion that is bothering me about this thread is that it has to be GOONs running around sticking up for him. No, it has to be team wide toughness. Everyone has to pick it up. you can't just sit there and say 'well the refs need to do their job'. From a players standpoint that is passing the buck. They can only control their own actions. They need to step up their tough play and stick up Johnny. He is incredibly gifted player that can control the play like one of the best in the league given the time and space. Other teams are NATURALLY going to take as many liberties and push the line as far as they are allowed by either the officials or the Flames themselves. Other teams need to know that they cannot take liberties on johnny without consequence. This does not mean making "GOON" plays. A little scrum with some hurtful words after the play doesn't really cut it. IMO the Flames are allowing other teams to render Johnny ineffective.

[Bourque's Twin]

The 2004 Flames were the toughest team in the NHL. It brought success, morale, and entertainment. I hope Burke practices what he preaches and adds some toughness. Brouwer and Chiasson aren't doing as much as they should. Ferland needs a kick in the ass.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin

The 2004 Flames were the toughest team in the NHL. It brought success, morale, and entertainment. I hope Burke practices what he preaches and adds some toughness. Brouwer and Chiasson aren't doing as much as they should. Ferland needs a kick in the ass.

Possibly my favorite part of the 04 run was the Flames gooning it up at the end of every loss (when the outcome was no longer in doubt).

Good times

[GGG]

Here's the problem with the logic that being tougher would make Gaudreau better.

Situation 1: Gaudreau gets whacked, plays worse we don't retaliate, Gaudreau gets whacked

Situation 2: Gaudreau gets whacked, plays worse we retaliate, Gaudreau still gets whacked because it stops Gaudreau.

We should be a team that's harder to play against because it makes it more difficult on the other teams stars. The way other teams treat Johnny isn't going to change because it's effective. The entire notion of punish the other team for hurting your stars doesn't make any sense. You should always be punishing the other team if it is effective.

[Badgers Nose]

Team toughness is a concern. Not sure how you can watch a game and not see it, just finish a check the way Frolik does, that would be a nice start for about half the roster.

It's less about gooning, and more about finding ways of wearing down the other team and taking the fight out of them, the way teams seem to be doing to the Flames.

You know, like in that game we used to watch called hockey.

[killer_carlson]

Will be interesting to see how the Flames respond vs Minnesota this week. Guarantee to be a lot of stick work on the hands in that game.