View Single Post
11-04-2003, 09:47 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Republic of Alberta
Posts: 2,651
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by djhn579
Yeah... right....

When most of the team is not playing with emotion, it is the coaches fault. When a team plays with emotion, but still can't win, it's a lack of talent or just plain bad luck, if a team competes and they lose because a player makes a mistake, or several players make mistakes, then it is the players fault.

A coaches job is to teach and motivate. He determines who plays and he designs a game plan that best utilizes the talents of the players on the roster.

From what I have been reading, Drury's attitude and practice habits have had a big effect on a number of players, which is why I'm inclined to believe that he is more responsible for the way the Sabres are playing lately. The big question then is how come Ruff couldn't get the players to play as hard and motivate them to play towards a goal (such as, making the playoffs...)

How is this biased?
It is both a coach's job and a player's job to perform. Did Drury's attitude and practice habits have a big effect in Vancouver too? It's biased because you are giving credit to Drury (note the success of the Flames last year, too) when the Sabres play well and none to Ruff, but all the blame to Ruff when we suck.

There are many reasons why a team's play falters. We among the best team in calendar year 1998, but started to falter in 1999. Then we dealt the cancer Barnaby away and improved immediately.

We don't need a Pee-Wee coach to inspire the Sabres.