: News Article:
Sutter and Flames Part Ways
View Single Post
04-14-2012, 12:15 PM
Join Date: Jul 2006
Originally Posted by
I have a few comments about this, but I'm not particularly attacking you MVW. You're good stuff and all, but you and others have recently attacked the ownership about this whole deal.
1) Who in their right mind would let Feaster have an unlimited pass to a multi-million dollar business after knowing the guy for 2 years. The ownership would be pretty incompetent to just let their million dollar business be flipped over by a complete stranger. I think Feaster has just as much power as Daryll Sutter had, unless of course Daryll (or now Feaster) decided one afternoon to trade away all players for draft picks and lose 82 hockey games each season for the next half a decade. C'mon. These are business men and this a million dollar business. Of course Feaster can't make decisions about that kind of a rebuild.
No worries bro, there's alot of **** going on with this team right now and there's no reason why people can't have a healthy debate without flipping their tops on each other. With your first point, I kind of disagree. I think Darryl had alot of freedom in his time here, I say this because he was always one of the most active GM's in the league. He had been on record saying that he always had the owners support in whatever transaction he wanted. This was Darrly's team and he ran it the way he saw fit. With Feaster, this hasn't been quite the same case. Even when Darryl was let go, Feaster was named "in-term" GM. Feaster said he had to put forth a proposal forward to the owners and King for approval in regards to the direction he wanted the team to go in, Sutter never had to do this once. Feaster commented all season about how transactions were going to be made, guys were going to be moved out, and really in the end Bourque was the only guy that was moved. I think deadline day has to be viewed as a failure. I don't argue with your logic about a GM not having complete control (because you are right there), but to me I don't think there is any question that Darryl had more control than Feaster over this team. And I think the reason is because of the way Darryl ran it, is probably why.
2) I truly beleive they don't give a rats ass what the fans want. I know I wouldn't. Do you think Suncor is listening to what Albertans want? No. They'll bulldoze a herd of baby endangered deer if it meant making a buck. So what makes you think this ownership group is any different? Money makes the world go round (in economic paradigm).
Agree 100%. But it is a problem, the fans are the ones making the owners rich and paying the players wages. If they continue ignore the fans wishes, there is going to eventually be a disconnect between our fanbase and the team (and not all teams are ran this way). Look at what happened when Federik was running the Stamps. I'm not saying the Flames owners are anywhere near that level, but it does seem that they are ignoring what the city is asking for and that is a team that is capable of competing for the Cup. This team clearly isn't close.
3) Of course ownership wants a championship team. Who gets into this business to not maximize profits? If there was one way to win a championship, everybody would be doing it. I think we're seeing a "remodeling" right now, and ownership is going to try this way to see if it's successful. Businessmen like inovation, and instead of following the status quo "rebuild" model, maybe they're on to something here with a combination of youth injection while carrying a veteran core. It seems to be working for the Sens so far...
I think Feaster is doing the very best he can with the cards he has been dealt. And I commend him thus far. He has cut payroll, made the team younger, and kept his word on injecting some youth. With that said, I truly believe (and I am speculating) that Brent left because Feaster relayed to him that certain changes were not going to be made in order to improve this club. I agree of course our owners would want to win a championship, but I don't think they are prepared to do what is necessary in the short term to get there.
Or maybe ownership simply haven't saved up enough for the rainy days ahead during a rebuild. Maybe if the owners did what everyone is asking for, they might have to belly up if things go a little off schedule and take Columbus-long at winning a cup. Maybe they're preparing for the worst case scenario, and because they're doing that, we'll get keep our team when things get bad. Remember, there was once a time when we almost lost the Calgary Flames...
Let me be clear. I would prefer a championship team over perpetual 9th to 11th place finishes. I have my opinions how I feel it should be done, and reasons why, while others have theirs. I can't blame the owners for not wanting (if applicable) to go about certain routes to a Stanley Cup, but most importantly, I certaintly can't blame them for preventing Feaster from making certain rash decisions without approval first.
This I won't debate with you over. This indeed may be the case, although there is no way for anyone to be certain without inside information. Of course I will always cheer for the Flames, and of course I would ALWAYS prefer to be a fringe playoff team over having no team. And let me be clear, I DO NOT want a full scale rebuild either. I think given the circumstances that Iginla should remain a Flame and resign an extension. I do however think this team needs major fundamental change to completely reshape the look of this franchise. Again, I would keep Iginla (comparable to Alfy) and probably Cammy, Bouwmeester and Glencross and trade everyone else away except our young players for draft picks and prospects. All the in between fillers on our roster can be replaced thru FA. Next year may be painful, but I think the year after this team would be competing for a playoff spot. This city has lots of money to be a cap team, we have some good young players coming up ready for roles, I see reason why we can't turn this around in 2-3 seasons.
I will, however, cheer for this team. I'm not ***** about every single transaction (again, not attacking you MVW) because I'm not a stubborn facist who's fixated on one idea, and I'm not going to start cheering for another team. Although I would love it if certain other posters started cheering for other teams, then I don't have to be reminded on "how this organization sucks" every day.
I'm not attacking you at all either, its healthy to have debate and open discussion. I totally respect you and inparticular your last post. You made a ton of valid and good points. I'm not a conspiracy theorist either lol, but I do think the owners need to let a GM run a team and stay out of his business. I think they should be consulted before a major tranaction is going to be made for their approval, but they should trust the GM's vision of how to run the team, otherwise they should find someone else.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MVW