Came here for Yanet. Was about to leave disappointed. I cannot leave disappointed after a Flames win, so it is my turn to step up (no DMac TM material here though, as I’m not that sophisticated).
Yamler, please do come back - a Flames win without a proper Yanet just doesn’t feel the same.
This stuff gets stated and often inaccurately.
Both Bingo and I were not fond of the Geoff Ward retention. And I said repeatedly that he should be fired. So why am I labeled as someone who came to the coaches defence time and time again?
And if I did. Who cares? Why is it so offensive to you that someone has a different opinion. Get over yourself.
What I have said is that I felt more of the accountability should rest with the players. And I still feel that way. But Sutter's impact so far has been surprising to me and I would like nothing more to be wrong, and he be the key ingredient in this team being a contender. Ultimately I don't care about being right - I care about this team winning.
But you describing me as someone who came to the coaches defense "time and time again" is lazy and inaccurate. And again- who cares if I did. People can have a different view and that should be OK.
Who I have defended is the GM. That should be Ok too.
Ultimately we are on the same page with caring most about them winning.
I think what I am trying to get at is not that posters disagree, of course not. It’s in HOW they disagree and in HOW they come across. Basically super dismissive and presuming that many people are simply idiots wherein in this case for example they were quite right.
I might actually have you mixed up with Textcritic, he’s another one that’s usually pretty dismissive of opinions generally. Anyway sorry if I offended you, I’m often wrong myself but I’m unafraid to admit it. I’m not sure about others though especially when it comes to the multiple years appeal to authority that this teams struggles were not the coaches. And I’m calling it out now, basically.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mr.Coffee For This Useful Post:
This stuff gets stated and often inaccurately.
Both Bingo and I were not fond of the Geoff Ward retention. And I said repeatedly that he should be fired. So why am I labeled as someone who came to the coaches defence time and time again?
And if I did. Who cares? Why is it so offensive to you that someone has a different opinion. Get over yourself.
What I have said is that I felt more of the accountability should rest with the players. And I still feel that way. But Sutter's impact so far has been surprising to me and I would like nothing more to be wrong, and he be the key ingredient in this team being a contender. Ultimately I don't care about being right - I care about this team winning.
But you describing me as someone who came to the coaches defense "time and time again" is lazy and inaccurate. And again- who cares if I did. People can have a different view and that should be OK.
Who I have defended is the GM. That should be Ok too.
From what I've gathered, none of the previous coaches under Treliving's tenure have worked intensively with the players on an individual level. From what I've seen, for the most part they've used a blanket system approach for a team full of very different players that bring different aspects to the team and left the skill guys to their own devices and to self-motivate, rather than working a more catered approach that brings the best out of said skill players, outside of the dreaded Gaudreau drop passes. The current system has better success principles while Sutter is working with guys individually to bring up the details of their games and increase the speed at which they play. As Darryl put it, some of these guys have never been shown to do things the right way in his mind, so that just tells you so much about the way the previous coaches went about things. Probably didn't ruffle too many feathers in the room, and preached the same message to the whole group ad nauseum which would always eventually fall upon deaf ears, while Sutter develops relationships with each and every one of his guys and learns what each responds best to. You see that in the segments around the Kings' winning teams. The other top coaches in the league probably operate in a similar way.
We were really just wasting/biding our time before Sutter entered the fold here. The other guys were playing house behind the bench. Peters and Hartley were slightly better motivators than the rest due to their tough love approach, but still couldn't adjust to opposing coaches effectively when faced with adversity.
We're blessed to have this man step back into the fold for us.
Agreed 100%
For me…if you subscribe to Sutter’s theory that the players needed to be taught how to play “the right way” it could definitely be considered an indictment of the preceding recent coaches or his motivation for stating what is becoming obvious….is Sutter just bluntly stating what he believes as Fact. If he’s proven right by a consistent level of elevated individual and Team play going forward…..some could argue that Tre himself is not aware of what “playing the right way” means….
I find it hilarious that people listen to Sutter’s criticisms of previous coaches and now all of a sudden they have an air of correctness about them.
So many (and I mean many…) posters on this very website levied the same criticisms or complaints about the previous coaches over those various times. And every time on this site it was met with the usual rejection and appeal to authority arguments constantly made by long term resident posters. How many times did Jiri or timbit, specifically and for example but also Bingo and others come to the coaches defence time and time again?
And now here you have Sutter trot out the exact same sentiments and it’s met with acceptance.
If a real NHL guy says things posters have been telling for a little, then of course, it will be lauded. Of course, it came straight from a mouth of a guy who has been around NHL-level folks and teams.
If anything, the posters should feel vindicated that a real hockey mind is able to identify what posters have identified for years.
Right. While I agree many responses to posters are dismissive and toxic, I don't think it is crazy to have the opinion that goes with a professional coach and against a random internet dude. Not that random internet dude is always wrong.
The toxicity is not a one-way street. If a poster (in particular a mod or owner) comes out in support of current management, he or she is a characterized as a shill for the Flames. Posters make up their minds that they "always" support BT and can't think for themselves, that sort of thing.
In this case, I can say that I was a supporter of Ward. Reason? I thought he was in a near impossible position, being hired half way through a year to replace a racist. A year which was halted due to covid and then restarted in a bubble. No training camp and then a year with no fans playing against 6 other teams. I thought Ward deserved a longer chance. Now with Sutter, I think he is a better coach. But I don't think that because of 6 games this year or some appeal to authority. I am just glad the Flames have him and feel no need to mark down personal wins and losses on an internet site when Flames wins and losses are all that matter (not that they matter all that much).
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fighting Banana Slug For This Useful Post:
Ultimately we are on the same page with caring most about them winning.
I think what I am trying to get at is not that posters disagree, of course not. It’s in HOW they disagree and in HOW they come across. Basically super dismissive and presuming that many people are simply idiots wherein in this case for example they were quite right.
I might actually have you mixed up with Textcritic, he’s another one that’s usually pretty dismissive of opinions generally. Anyway sorry if I offended you, I’m often wrong myself but I’m unafraid to admit it. I’m not sure about others though especially when it comes to the multiple years appeal to authority that this teams struggles were not the coaches. And I’m calling it out now, basically.
During the Gulutzan and Ward years I thought that plenty of people had legitimate criticism of the coaches, but what really coloured my responses to several of them was the endless nonsense about how they looked "scared" behind the bench, or would stare at the floor after a goal. It is the anecdotal mind reading that I have no time for, and I will continue to be dismissive of it.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
During the Gulutzan and Ward years I thought that plenty of people had legitimate criticism of the coaches, but what really coloured my responses to several of them was the endless nonsense about how they looked "scared" behind the bench, or would stare at the floor after a goal. It is the anecdotal mind reading that I have no time for, and I will continue to be dismissive of it.
My thing was that the criticisms were so broad and all-consuming they buried good ones. I mainly argued about criticisms that just weren’t based in fact.
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
During the Gulutzan and Ward years I thought that plenty of people had legitimate criticism of the coaches, but what really coloured my responses to several of them was the endless nonsense about how they looked "scared" behind the bench, or would stare at the floor after a goal. It is the anecdotal mind reading that I have no time for, and I will continue to be dismissive of it.
I know people have a tough time with opinions based on body language but the fact is a HUGE amount of communication is through body language.
These are human beings after all. You can generally tell when someone is happy, looks frustrated or angry or yes looks scared and intimidated. Reading people is a basic skill just about everybody learns at a pretty young age.
Ward looked like a deer in headlights (like, literally physically looked shocked and uncertain). If opinions based on this are like reading tarot cards that’s simply your opinion- but the reality is those opinions at the time were valid because they were correct.
During the Gulutzan and Ward years I thought that plenty of people had legitimate criticism of the coaches, but what really coloured my responses to several of them was the endless nonsense about how they looked "scared" behind the bench, or would stare at the floor after a goal. It is the anecdotal mind reading that I have no time for, and I will continue to be dismissive of it.
As an aside, aren't the coaches monitors in front of them on the floor behind the bench? Aren't they watching the replays to analyze what happened and not staring at their shoes in depression?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hack&Lube For This Useful Post:
As an aside, aren't the coaches monitors in front of them on the floor behind the bench? Aren't they watching the replays to analyze what happened and not staring at their shoes in depression?
Yup. And all coaches did it when they were first introduced as I recall.
