Feaster credibility with fan base on the line

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Karl Racki

Murray Edwards made his fortune running public companies. He is not a hockey guy.

Very interesting post. I enjoyed it a lot.

I'm just not sure that customers of an entertainment company are the same thing as investors. Maybe you agree with me and maybe your point is that Edwards doesn't get that.

But with that said, I think the pulse of the shareholders is fairly apparent at present. Unfortunately we don't have the ability to call a special meeting and deliver the ultimatum we all (or most of us) want to deliver to management. But unless you're Steve Jobs you don't run a company by running roughshod over your shareholders.

They have to be listening. Edwards is too savvy a businessman not to be.

As I said earlier, they need to tap into the large undercurrent of marketability of young players in this country. The WJCs are a huge deal because it's all about The Next Ones. People show up to see that and they've shown up on faith of that in Edmonton for a decade. You can sell that.

It's getting tougher and tougher for the Flames to be stubborn and sell a middling product with little to no hope for the future. I'll be shockingly disappointed if the trade deadline seems to indicate that management (both hockey ops and upper) is not alive to the pulse of their "shareholders" in this regard.

[Karl Racki]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Very interesting post. I enjoyed it a lot.

I'm just not sure that customers of an entertainment company are the same thing as investors. Maybe you agree with me and maybe your point is that Edwards doesn't get that.

But with that said, I think the pulse of the shareholders is fairly apparent at present. Unfortunately we don't have the ability to call a special meeting and deliver the ultimatum we all (or most of us) want to deliver to management. But unless you're Steve Jobs you don't run a company by running roughshod over your shareholders.

They have to be listening. Edwards is too savvy a businessman not to be.

As I said earlier, they need to tap into the large undercurrent of marketability of young players in this country. The WJCs are a huge deal because it's all about The Next Ones. People show up to see that and they've shown up on faith of that in Edmonton for a decade. You can sell that.

It's getting tougher and tougher for the Flames to be stubborn and sell a middling product with little to no hope for the future. I'll be shockingly disappointed if the trade deadline seems to indicate that management (both hockey ops and upper) is not alive to the pulse of their "shareholders" in this regard.

We are on same page. Thanks for your adds.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Are there any documented comments by or sightings of Feaster after the O'Reilly statement?

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Very interesting post. I enjoyed it a lot.

I'm just not sure that customers of an entertainment company are the same thing as investors. Maybe you agree with me and maybe your point is that Edwards doesn't get that.

But with that said, I think the pulse of the shareholders is fairly apparent at present. Unfortunately we don't have the ability to call a special meeting and deliver the ultimatum we all (or most of us) want to deliver to management. But unless you're Steve Jobs you don't run a company by running roughshod over your shareholders.

They have to be listening. Edwards is too savvy a businessman not to be.

As I said earlier, they need to tap into the large undercurrent of marketability of young players in this country. The WJCs are a huge deal because it's all about The Next Ones. People show up to see that and they've shown up on faith of that in Edmonton for a decade. You can sell that.

It's getting tougher and tougher for the Flames to be stubborn and sell a middling product with little to no hope for the future. I'll be shockingly disappointed if the trade deadline seems to indicate that management (both hockey ops and upper) is not alive to the pulse of their "shareholders" in this regard.

Lets call it "The Young Guns!"

[browna]

Originally Posted by Karl Racki

Murray Edwards made his fortune running public companies. He is not a hockey guy.

Public companies are focused almost exclusively on keeping investors (the equivalent of ticket and merchandise buying fans in hockey) happy and active and buying stock. They do that almost exclusively by keeping the share price high. Today. Every day. That makes investors money. And it makes those running public companies A LOT of money. Enough money to buy a professional hockey team in some cases.

A struggling public company has few options. Being bought by another company or fund or selling off significant "non-core assets" for needed cash or massive cutting of staff/spending are the most common. Only companies that are on the verge of bankruptcy are likely to sell core assets, when there is NO other course of action available. Middling companies do a few things. Minor acquisitions/ asset sales to tweak their asset base and generate interest is one. Less drastic cost cutting measures to aid the bottom line is another. And unfortunately more often than should be the case manipulating results of operations to make them appear as good as possible to all but the most sophisticated investors is prevalent too. Investor relations personnel are key. Frustrated investors call and the investor relations group talks them off the cliff and tells them not only is everything going to be ok, its going to be great. Just be patient. We have a rock solid plan. All in the name of keeping the share price up. Today. Every day. This is how Murray Edwards has made his fortune. Running public companies. He does it well.

While I understand your points, Murray Edwards also hasn't made his fortune on pulling the wool over people's eyes with all talk and no substance, nor by running perpetually under-performing companies.

He's made decisions, tough ones, and came out ahead many more times then not, just based on his track record.

He doesn't deal with things day to day in the club, that's King's job. There are other multiple other owners, each with their own personal and business successes on their resume.

I don't doubt that there are many ways to turn this franchise around, and guys such as the owners the Flames have been around the block to see when something isn't right, and go about fixing it.

That said, while there is time for patience and letting things play out and run their course as a strategy, there are also times to make the tough decisions to advance and re-energize the business for the betterment of times ahead, and that could be coming sooner then later for the owners to act on. That includes the franchise forward and franchise goalie potentially, as well as the GM and even the GM's boss.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

But with that said, I think the pulse of the shareholders is fairly apparent at present. Unfortunately we don't have the ability to call a special meeting and deliver the ultimatum we all (or most of us) want to deliver to management. But unless you're Steve Jobs you don't run a company by running roughshod over your shareholders.

They have to be listening. Edwards is too savvy a businessman not to be.

I don't know. The Dome is full and there are big lineups at the concessions. Looks like the shareholders are happy campers. Why rock the boat? (speaking from Edwards point of view).

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

Uh, here you go dude. It may not be specific to a skills or size, but it is an identity: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=639743

Well then, case closed.

I wouldn't say that this is necessarily an identity, particularly when the article is chitter chattering about drafting philosophy. So, while yeah, that's great they have a drafting philosophy around drafting smart players, it doesn't necessarily percolate to the rest of the team, does it? Secondly, the quote below from the article (your emphasis):

"I would certainly say that is one of the more distinct changes we've made -- to really prioritize people that have hockey sense the way we define it, and have the ability to think and feel the game so that if their skills are in order, they'll have the rest of the pieces they need to compete at the highest level."

Isn't a very tangible quality to really build on as an identity. You can't even call this Flames team all that "intelligent" on the ice, and it sure as fata isn't intelligent in upper office (from what we can tell at this point).

I mean an actual tangible quality or skillset that you can visibly see and understand. Players being smart or not is first of all subjective and second of all not very measurable.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Well then, case closed.

I wouldn't say that this is necessarily an identity, particularly when the article is chitter chattering about drafting philosophy. So, while yeah, that's great they have a drafting philosophy around drafting smart players, it doesn't necessarily percolate to the rest of the team, does it? Secondly, the quote below from the article (your emphasis):

"I would certainly say that is one of the more distinct changes we've made -- to really prioritize people that have hockey sense the way we define it, and have the ability to think and feel the game so that if their skills are in order, they'll have the rest of the pieces they need to compete at the highest level."

Isn't a very tangible quality to really build on as an identity. You can't even call this Flames team all that "intelligent" on the ice, and it sure as fata isn't intelligent in upper office (from what we can tell at this point).

I mean an actual tangible quality or skillset that you can visibly see and understand. Players being smart or not is first of all subjective and second of all not very measurable.

I can't really dispute anything you said, but it is what it is. I don't however think there are a lot of teams that talk about their specific identity with the media, or what type of team they are trying to build. It just becomes self-evident over time. The quote was just a way of looking into their heads as they decide on what players to go after and why. That's as close as you're going to get I think.

I will say however that those players they're drafting will percolate to the team in a few years.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

I can't really dispute anything you said, but it is what it is. I don't however think there are a lot of teams that talk about their specific identity with the media, or what type of team they are trying to build. It just becomes self-evident over time. The quote was just a way of looking into their heads as they decide on what players to go after and why. That's as close as you're going to get I think.

I will say however that those players they're drafting will percolate to the team in a few years.

You do have to think that if that is the philosophy for draft picks, it should be similar for the existing roster.

That is what must be very difficult for management, the mixed signals.

Tanguay can be silky smooth with passing and creative, but somehow on the defensive end seems to be having difficulty this year. And this is odd, because he has generally been decent in that regard.

Bouwmeester has really stepped up offensively, and being as he was always able to jump up and get back, has done more of that and been rewarded. But in his own zone, he seems to have a lot of trouble processing all of the simultaneous activity between watching the puck carrier, and seeing how the opposition is moving in to and out of scoring areas.

Glencross is showing that he can be a 30 goal scorer. Drives the net at times, and defensively seems aloof at times.

Comeau has had energy but some horrendous d-zone coverage in sevveral instances resulting in goals when it appeared he was playing post faceoff as the C.

Hartley said after the Stars game, paraphrasing, that the Stars didn't earn their 4 goals, they were given to them by the Flames. I can see Hartley's frustration. And Feaster's.

If these guys all are alert and intelligent defensively, these things don't become an issue.

This is what made guys like Lidstrom and Gretzky stand above the rest, their ability to read the ice and anticipate.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

I can't really dispute anything you said, but it is what it is. I don't however think there are a lot of teams that talk about their specific identity with the media, or what type of team they are trying to build. It just becomes self-evident over time. The quote was just a way of looking into their heads as they decide on what players to go after and why. That's as close as you're going to get I think.

Actually, I think a lot of teams talk about what they look for in players, and these days they pretty much all talk about drafting "smart" players, guys with good hockey sense, good attitude etc. It's always interesting to hear what the team is looking for straight from the brass's mouth, but it means very little if it isn't reflected by the players they draft (not saying that the Flames since Weisbrod haven't drafted smart players).

With that said, I wouldn't go so far as calling it an identity. Being a "smart" hockey team isn't exactly an identity unless you purposely built a team that makes better decisions with the puck than others or have players who have a more natural feel for the game as a whole than other teams (not really a possibility I don't think). It's nice to know that Weisbrod has seemingly set a direction for the team's scouts. But it doesn't mean the team has an idenity.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Well, Feaster outlined his vision for the team to the media when he was officially made GM. So let's take a trip down memory lane...

Jay Feaster: "It is to be a consistent Stanley Cup challenger. It is to be a team with an identity. We want to get back to the identity of a hard-working team, a difficult team to play against."


Now, you can argue that 'hard to play against' means 'small and skilled', rather than 'big and tough', but he also specifically said he wants to 'get back to' that identity. And the previous identity the Flames espoused was as a hard-working team that was difficult to play against because they were a big and tough team. Essentially, he wated to recapture the identity the club had from 2003 to 2008-ish.

So... Is the team a consistent Stanley Cup contender?
Is the team decidedly hard working when compared to other NHL teams?
Is the club hard to play against from a physical perspective? How about from any perspective?

So Feaster clearly hasn't been able to implement the vision and identity he outlined.

Or he was talking out his butt, and had no intention of following the plan he described. And I'm cool with that too, as long as the plan you're following makes sense and delivers results. But when you promise a tough, hard working, winning team, and you deliver a small, inconsistent, and losing team, I'm not so cool with that.

Feaster's credibility with me is pretty close to zero right now.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

@ BACKCHECK. I think he means tenacious and hard working, not necessarily a "tough" or "physical" team. I will say that when the Flames are playing their game they ARE that team in 2 of the 3 zones. It's just baffling to me that they all forget how to play hockey in their own zone.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by browna

While I understand your points, Murray Edwards also hasn't made his fortune on pulling the wool over people's eyes with all talk and no substance, nor by running perpetually under-performing companies.

He's made decisions, tough ones, and came out ahead many more times then not, just based on his track record.

He doesn't deal with things day to day in the club, that's King's job. There are other multiple other owners, each with their own personal and business successes on their resume.

I don't doubt that there are many ways to turn this franchise around, and guys such as the owners the Flames have been around the block to see when something isn't right, and go about fixing it.

That said, while there is time for patience and letting things play out and run their course as a strategy, there are also times to make the tough decisions to advance and re-energize the business for the betterment of times ahead, and that could be coming sooner then later for the owners to act on. That includes the franchise forward and franchise goalie potentially, as well as the GM and even the GM's boss.

As of right now Ken King may as well be wearing a teflon suit. He is going absolutely nowhere at least until the shovels come out for construction of a new building. Feaster like Darryl will be the fall guy for the mess as on that inevitable day of Feaster's firing Ken will dust off the same speach he used in December 2010 telling us what a great guy Jay is, how valuable he has been to the organization, how this is one of the hardest days in his life but we will move forward with a different administration, blah, blah...

Really it remains to be seen if this ownership group can make any tough decisions as all they have shown us is that they prefer the easy way of putting the franchise in cruise control while sacrificing coaches and GM's for not delivering on their unattainable mandate.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

As of right now Ken King may as well be wearing a teflon suit. He is going absolutely nowhere at least until the shovels come out for construction of a new building. Feaster like Darryl will be the fall guy for the mess as on that inevitable day of Feaster's firing Ken will dust off the same speach he used in December 2010 telling us what a great guy Jay is, how valuable he has been to the organization, how this is one of the hardest days in his life but we will move forward with a different administration, blah, blah...

Really it remains to be seen if this ownership group can make any tough decisions as all they have shown us is that they prefer the easy way of putting the franchise in cruise control while sacrificing coaches and GM's for not delivering on their unattainable mandate.

I like Darryl a lot, but it's hard to say he was made the fall guy. He really pooped the bed that year around the trade deadline.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Wrong thread.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by 868904

I like Darryl a lot, but it's hard to say he was made the fall guy. He really pooped the bed that year around the trade deadline.

Yeah he does deserve his share of the blame but one has to wonder what pressure he was getting from above as he had made some fairly astute moves in his initial years then in the last year it was like he was posessed by a mad man GM. Since he was fired the team has continued to make the same type of quick fix maneuvers so Darryl was only part of the problem in my eyes. The team still doesn't have a 2nd round pick in the upcoming draft for crying out loud.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by 868904

I like Darryl a lot, but it's hard to say he was made the fall guy. He really pooped the bed that year around the trade deadline.

Sutter's complete inability to rejuvenate the team through the draft or trades was a massive failure on his part, and it was more than one year or one trade deadline. It was years of stubbornness and clinging to a pre-2005 mindset.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Sutter's complete inability to rejuvenate the team through the draft or trades was a massive failure on his part, and it was more than one year or one trade deadline. It was years of stubbornness and clinging to a pre-2005 mindset.

The further the team gets away from Darryl and his tenure the less judgemental I am of the job he did.

The team is doing the same bloody things and he hasn't been around for 2 years.

Trade a 2nd rounder, re-sign 4th line guys, bring back re-treads, rely on veterans over young players, find players to play with Iginla, trade down at the draft to recoup 2nd round pick.

If I didn't know any better, I'd swear Darryl was the GM for the last two years.

[temple5]

I still dont think Feaster is making the moves he wants to. I think there is ALOT of backroom ownership intervention in Calgary that prevents him from likely doing what needs to be done.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by temple5

I still dont think Feaster is making the moves he wants to. I think there is ALOT of backroom ownership intervention in Calgary that prevents him from likely doing what needs to be done.

If you think Feaster wants to rebuild and ownership is preventing him, think again. Feaster hates being a seller. He is a buyer and is at his best buying. Feaster is the type to trade a 1st for someone like Shane O'Brien or the #4 pick for a 20 goal scorer. Feaster hated the fact he needed to trade Brad Richards, even though almost the entire hockey world saw that there was no way to keep Lecavalier, St. Louis, and Richards and have the depth to be competitive. Feaster wasn't lying when he said that if the Flames were looking for a guy to dismantle the team he wasn't the right man. Feaster doesn't make too many deals where a draft pick comes back his way. Heck he even gave up a 2nd when he traded Regehr, which was suppose to be a "sell" rather than a "buy" situation.