View Single Post
04-09-2013, 06:56 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,046
vCash: 140
Originally Posted by anleva View Post
So our hope is that Eric takes a page from George Constanza and does the opposite of his instincts or what he observed in his mentors. I guess that could work, it worked on Seinfeld. As for me I'd rather go with a guy with a successful recent track record or one who worked under a guy with a good recent successful track record. Tired of of going with inexperience in our GMs and coaches.

My concern with Pierre is his success came under an entirely different set of operational parameters than the team is faced with today and he hasn't yet figured out how to build a contending team in today's NHL. Seems to me he has been flailing away since 2005 at this point.
No. What I'm saying is don't punish the son for the father's sins. I'd like some hot shot proven gm to come in and rip it up for us , but if Eric is what we get, I'll give him the same chance I will anyone. Proven coaches doesn't guarantee success either, otherwise they'd never get fired.

Not that I'm saying Chenoweth or however it's spelt should be our hc, I'm just saying in terms of lacroix, if it's what we've got to work with next year he deserves a chance. He could build us a dynasty. At any rate we can't get any worse then the worst so whatever.

Either way this sort of season can't be pegged on any one individual. A coach is as good as the tools he has to work with withholding his own sense which sacco lacks. A Gm is only as good as his staff, etc .

Sheet is offline   Reply With Quote