View Single Post
Old
01-20-2014, 09:26 AM
  #139
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consultant View Post
So we keep Eakins for at least two years? Was that the plan? And we're sticking to it?
Hypothetical, no chance but what if we lose every game here out? Then we'd have to fire him surely. But that won't happen...
What if he leads us to dead last? Got to at least consider it. Well friends we are nearly at the bottom, to me if you hit 30th in the NHL after 50 games you have to consider a coaching change, simple as that.
There has to be a line drawn. Firings happen cause they have to, not because you plan for them.
Fire Eakins today.

They signed him for 4 years so I think the plan was he stays around that long. The problem with firing him is that we've fired so many coaches and it's done so little to improve the team that it seems like firing another one wont give us any better results. Constantly changing the coaching hasnt done anything for the organization so why do we think changing it up again is suddenly going to work this time. If anything it's hurt the team, prevented the players from developing some consistency.

Really if it comes down to firing another coach then it's time to look at management. MacT and KLowe are proving they cant hire good people.

Halibut is offline