What is the deal with Elliotte Friedman?

[TheChief]

these said players that are "threatening" to not come back if Sutter is still behind the bench can take a massive hike.



I'm 100% behind Sutter. They sure dont sound like that have any interest in contributing to a team.



These are types of guys you dont want in your locker room and who wants to bet its one of our new guys?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by TheChief

these said players that are "threatening" to not come back if Sutter is still behind the bench can take a massive hike.



I'm 100% behind Sutter. They sure dont sound like that have any interest in contributing to a team.



These are types of guys you dont want in your locker room and who wants to bet its one of our new guys?

…and you want Darryl Sutter in your locker room?

Hell no.

The coach and players can take a hike. Fire the coach, rebuild the team.

[Ferarri]

Originally Posted by TheChief

these said players that are "threatening" to not come back if Sutter is still behind the bench can take a massive hike.



I'm 100% behind Sutter. They sure dont sound like that have any interest in contributing to a team.



These are types of guys you dont want in your locker room and who wants to bet its one of our new guys?

This is exactly what needs to be preached to the fan base. Threatening management and ownership with these demands shows the character of the group.

There is 100% issues with Huberdeau. Just ask Florida. How many teams would willingly give up a guy who put up 115 points? They saw something that we are seeing now. There is no other way around it. This type of scenario doesn’t happen unless they know he isn’t capable of winning.

I too believe that the players who said that can take a hike.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by TheChief

these said players that are "threatening" to not come back if Sutter is still behind the bench can take a massive hike.



I'm 100% behind Sutter. They sure dont sound like that have any interest in contributing to a team.



These are types of guys you dont want in your locker room and who wants to bet its one of our new guys?

Originally Posted by ComixZone

…and you want Darryl Sutter in your locker room?

Hell no.

The coach and players can take a hike. Fire the coach, rebuild the team.

I think a lot of us fans are looking at this too emotionally, and overreacting.

Again, the supposed best player on the team is not playing good enough. And the main goaltender has been suspect. Despite that, the Flames still have a pulse in the playoff race in the final stage of the season.

Other players on the rosters are performing near their norms, or exceeding it.

If Huberdeau performed closer to a star caliber player that he's advertised as, if Markstrom could've stop sinking the team for the first three quarters of the season, and if the top PP actually looked like they knew how to play hockey with a man advantage more often, this team would most likely be top in the conference.

Sutter deserves blame since he is the face of the team, but if one of those things above were different, there wouldn't be this talk of getting rid of the reigning Jack Adams award coach.

Losing sucks, and pisses people off. Good. It's better than being apathetic.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

If there's one thing that this "era" (the Treliving years) has taught me is that timing with teams is everything.

I moved to Calgary in 2007. They've won a playoff round twice in that time (COVID doesn't count). Clearly it's more than timing or windows or any of the things people say to hold on to hope. The Flames haven't had a "window" in 15+ years.

The franchise salted away Iginla's and Kipper's careers and now are saddled with terrible, long term contracts.

Sure, there are teams that have a worse playoff record than that during that time frame, but is that really the yardstick one wants to use?

The team can't win and the team sucks at sucking.

I don't know how you lifers do it.

[Rutuu]

I said this in the game thread.

IPO the team and list it on the TSX, set a budget, and build your own arena.

When the Flames start operating like a real business with shareholders and accountability the product will improve.

The "family" angle, or billionaire plaything model is a load of crap.

Playing secret scrolls for the history of the franchise and the operations is total BS too. The only time we hear about the business side is when they need a barn, or when they threatened to sell / move the team. Going more corporate and transparent should clean up more of the HR issues as well that exist in this "hockey culture".

Carolina was scoffed at for some of the things they did to upset the cozy little club. With a natural disadvantage in fan obsession / tax Calgary needs to start disrupting. That's an identity I can get behind.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I moved to Calgary in 2007. They've won a playoff round twice in that time (COVID doesn't count). Clearly it's more than timing or windows or any of the things people say to hold on to hope. The Flames haven't had a "window" in 15+ years.

The franchise salted away Iginla's and Kipper's careers and now are saddled with terrible, long term contracts.

Sure, there are teams that have a worse playoff record than that during that time frame, but is that really the yardstick one wants to use?

The team can't win and the team sucks at sucking.

I don't know how you lifers do it.

The pre-salary cap years were fun because you could blame the uneven playing field. Now all you can blame is a small tax advantage (assuming you are a player with a half decent tax planner). It was better when you knew Niedermayer was not going to be a franchise center but you could blame the inequality in the league. Now it is divisive, team still sucks but some blame the players, some blame the coaches and some blame the GM and some blame the owners. Go back to a pre salary cap era so we can all be united.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The pre-salary cap years were fun because you could blame the uneven playing field. Now all you can blame is a small tax advantage (assuming you are a player with a half decent tax planner). It was better when you knew Niedermayer was not going to be a franchise center but you could blame the inequality in the league. Now it is divisive, team still sucks but some blame the players, some blame the coaches and some blame the GM and some blame the owners. Go back to a pre salary cap era so we can all be united.

There was something fun about it back then when you knew the team was always an underdog. Every victory felt awesome, even though the final season results were often disappointing. It was always David vs. Goliath. They seemed to use the uneven playing field as fuel and teams never liked playing against the Flames.

The Flames right now are not underdogs. They are a bunch of underachievers who give up easily. No team hates to walk into Calgary anymore.

Don't get me wrong, I am glad there is a salary cap now and the Flames can at least compete with big markets, but they were easier to like back when they failed because there were legitimate obstacles in the way. There ae still hurdles of course being a smaller market Canadian team, but they make it harder than it needs to be by never building the right way.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

…and you want Darryl Sutter in your locker room?

Hell no.

The coach and players can take a hike. Fire the coach, rebuild the team.

No guarantee ANY new set of selections is any better. And, one way or another, they are guaranteed to be "more expensive" because you're gonna pay Sutter to go and you're gonna pay other teams to take the deadbeats.

FAR better to surround Sutter - who is a good coach - with assistants who can actually coach (wouldn't it be nice to have a REAL PP?) and have a good heart-to-heart with Darryl about approach and style, and work with him to take the edge off. If he's not willing...that's a different story.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

No guarantee ANY new set of selections is any better. And, one way or another, they are guaranteed to be "more expensive" because you're gonna pay Sutter to go and you're gonna pay other teams to take the deadbeats.

FAR better to surround Sutter - who is a good coach - with assistants who can actually coach (wouldn't it be nice to have a REAL PP?) and have a good heart-to-heart with Darryl about approach and style, and work with him to take the edge off. If he's not willing...that's a different story.

I just don't think that's who Sutter is. Sutter was fired in LA for being a specific way and now he's right back to being that specific way if these reports are accurate.

So all of a sudden NOW he's going to change? We're not talking about a guy early in his career looking to make his name. Dude has made his name, he's won his championships. I'd be surprised if he was willing to alter his coaching strategy in any significant manner at this stage.

I just want to see:

- General Manager with clear marching orders to rebuild.
- Head Coach that is fully on-board with that rebuild.
- Players that are fully on-boarding with rebuilding.

I'm not saying 100% that Treliving and Sutter shouldn't be those guys, but it would be a massive change in plans for both I imagine. I don't think today that I'd be willing to risk the next era of Flames hockey with Darryl at the helm of the bench...but who knows what happens.