HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Partying prompted parting?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-25-2011, 10:29 AM
  #51
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
Whatever was going on in what he said, it definitely isn't the way he should have handled it. Even if you think he's not trying to be malicious, he didn't do himself any favors.
He rarely does....but what do you expect from somebody who has a questionable past with drinking himself and who sometimes operates as though he's a dry drunk for those familiar with the symptoms.

I'm sure it was tough for him to deal with this issue on a personal and intimate level and how it affected two of his cornerstone players. Holmgren is all about giving people second, third etc chances...but at some point you have to cut your losses and in this case Snider probably forced his hand and had enough possibly influenced by some of the exit interviews offered up by the vets which may have included the "leakers."

FreshPerspective is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:33 AM
  #52
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
He rarely does....but what do you expect from somebody who has a questionable past with drinking himself and who sometimes operates as though he's a dry drunk for those familiar with the symptoms.

I'm sure it was tough for him to deal with this issue on a personal and intimate level and how it affected two of his cornerstone players. Holmgren is all about giving people second, third etc chances...but at some point you have to cut your losses and in this case Snider probably forced his hand and had enough possibly influenced by some of the exit interviews offered up by the vets which may have included the "leakers."
This.

I can't help but get the feeling that this was a painful in-house issue really. Whatever was going on, it still seemed to really bug Holmgren letting the two go. At the press conference, he almost gave the impression of a father cutting off his two sons. It was really painful to watch the whole thing.

That's also why I'm shocked that people claim this would hurt the Flyers' credibility as one of the most upstanding organizations in the league. The Flyers take care of their own, and if they can't, they usually do what's in the best interest of the player.

CS is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:34 AM
  #53
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 39,480
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
Then I got to thinking that no comment might actually be the worst response. In his statement, he goes to great length to indicate that this wasn't just a Richie & Carter thing, that other players also did not participate. If he just says no comment, it could be construed as a deafening silence, and the only players called out would be those two.
A more satisfactory response for him, even if what could be described as colorless, would have been "That policy did exist and more than one player chose not to be included. It wasn't mandatory. However, like many activities that take part in the enclosed surroundings of a dressing room, that is an internal matter and it will remain that way."

Again, it is key to know who was aware whether limited to team personnel or if outsiders had/have knowledge. And as we both said, a transcript or audio would help.


Last edited by MiamiScreamingEagles: 07-25-2011 at 10:42 AM.
MiamiScreamingEagles is online now  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:36 AM
  #54
DumpyD
Registered User
 
DumpyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
Here:

Given that there are stories, photos, etc. about the OCC's excessive partying going back years (heck, the fact that the name OCC exists at all is damning), it seems more likely than not that Lavy didn't bring this in with him, but instead implemented it in order to respond to a problem he was seeing with the room. That's my bit of speculation. One based on things other than my imagination.
That's not speculating. That's using the language the writer chose to put in his story. He certainly didn't clarify that the policy was put into place as some kind of ploy solely to bring Richards and Carter around to teetotalism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
In his statement, he goes to great length to indicate that this wasn't just a Richie & Carter thing, that other players also did not participate.
So I guess those players were outed by accident, since the whole thing was only aimed at the two that were mentioned?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
I don't know how to read Homer's comments. I do wish I could hear the audio, how he says those words can change what I think he's doing here 180 degrees.

At first, no comment would seem to be the appropriate response. Him confirming the policy even existed, and going into such detail with the reporter about it, would seem at first to be his way of leaking info out there in a half-sneaky way to make the two players look worse. Of course, if that is the case, why didn't he do this a month ago? Why did he seem genuinely upset at trading both guys? And why wouldn't he just leak this to a sports writer, as GMs usually do when they are trying to smear a player?

Then I got to thinking that no comment might actually be the worst response. In his statement, he goes to great length to indicate that this wasn't just a Richie & Carter thing, that other players also did not participate. If he just says no comment, it could be construed as a deafening silence, and the only players called out would be those two.

Whatever was going on in what he said, it definitely isn't the way he should have handled it. Even if you think he's not trying to be malicious, he didn't do himself any favors.
Seems like a wealth of unfounded speculation and imagination to me.

DumpyD is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:40 AM
  #55
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mja View Post
I don't know how to read Homer's comments. I do wish I could hear the audio, how he says those words can change what I think he's doing here 180 degrees.

At first, no comment would seem to be the appropriate response. Him confirming the policy even existed, and going into such detail with the reporter about it, would seem at first to be his way of leaking info out there in a half-sneaky way to make the two players look worse. Of course, if that is the case, why didn't he do this a month ago? Why did he seem genuinely upset at trading both guys? And why wouldn't he just leak this to a sports writer, as GMs usually do when they are trying to smear a player?

Then I got to thinking that no comment might actually be the worst response. In his statement, he goes to great length to indicate that this wasn't just a Richie & Carter thing, that other players also did not participate. If he just says no comment, it could be construed as a deafening silence, and the only players called out would be those two.

Whatever was going on in what he said, it definitely isn't the way he should have handled it. Even if you think he's not trying to be malicious, he didn't do himself any favors.
This is no different than the way he handled the incident where Pronger was yelling at Giroux. None of the media knew who Pronger was yelling at, for a couple of days all they said was Pronger was yelling "some people never learn" or something like that. Then someone mentioned it to Homer and he said "Claude, yes". Why say anything unless you want it out there? Is it strategy or is he just stupid?

MsWoof is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:49 AM
  #56
Unstable
Registered User
 
Unstable's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Exiled in NoVA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,105
vCash: 500
Shrug. We basically knew this already. I suspect that drinking was the tip of the iceberg and we'll never know the whole story...

Unstable is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:49 AM
  #57
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,091
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiScreamingEagles View Post
A more satisfactory response for him, even if what could be described as colorless, would have been "That policy did exist and more than one player chose not to be included. It wasn't mandatory. However, like many activities that take part in the enclosed surroundings of a dressing room, that is an internal matter and it will remain that way."

Again, it is key to know who was aware whether limited to team personnel or if outsiders had/have knowledge. And as we both said, a transcript or audio would help.
I think his response was calculated and prepared. They would have known this story was coming in advance, so they knew what they wanted to say.

It serves the Flyers' interests to have this story out there, whether they wanted it out there or not. It will stop all the Carter and Richards sympathizers from questioning the trades. If the team starts slowly, the questions won't be there. If the team comes out like a house on fire, the questions won't be there (except, why didn't you do it sooner?).

The truth never hurts you when you are on the right side of the issue.

Homer has been protecting them, by claiming it was purely a hockey trade. This just helps address the elephant in the room - we all know it wasn't just a hockey issue.

Thanks. End of story.

So, how about them Flyers? Can't wait to see Bryzgalov, Voracek, Schenn, Jagr, Talbot and Simmonds in action!


Last edited by Larry44: 07-25-2011 at 10:57 AM.
Larry44 is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:55 AM
  #58
Viller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,044
vCash: 500
This is some kind of "closure" to me... If it was a problem to the point where the coach had to get the whole team to stop drinking and they wouldn't play along, then I understand the moves alot more now.

The problem was clearly not only between 18, 17 and the coach. Other players were definately involved.

Viller is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:57 AM
  #59
MiamiScreamingEagles
Global Moderator
A Fistful of Dollars
 
MiamiScreamingEagles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 39,480
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I think his response was calculated and prepared. They would have known this story was coming in advance, so they knew what they wanted to say.

It serves the Flyers' interests to have this story out there, whether they wanted it out there or not. It will stop all the Carter and Richards sympathizers from questioning the trades. If the team starts slowly, the questions won't be there. If the team comes out like a house on fire, the questions won't be there.

The truth never hurts you when you are on the right side of the issue.

Homer has been protecting them, by claiming it was purely a hockey trade. This just helps address the elephant in the room - we all know it wasn't just a hockey issue.

Thanks. End of story.

So, how about them Flyers? Can't wait to see Bryzgalov, Voracek, Schenn, Jagr, Talbot and Simmonds in action!
He is also quoted as saying that he is "really upset that this is out there. That's our locker room. Our inner sanctum. Our board. Someone's crossing a line here."

MiamiScreamingEagles is online now  
Old
07-25-2011, 10:58 AM
  #60
Murphy7
Drop the puck
 
Murphy7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country:
Posts: 1,635
vCash: 500
Larry Bird would never sign up for Dry Island. Two beers every day. He turned out just fine.

Murphy7 is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:01 AM
  #61
Viller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphy7 View Post
Larry Bird would never sign up for Dry Island. Two beers every day. He turned out just fine.
Theres a difference between 2 beers and getting drunk...

Viller is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:07 AM
  #62
tuckrr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,552
vCash: 500
Management was concerned about their "habits" and didn't like the idea of 20 years of NTC between the two.

The 2nd priority was the sweet return they got back

And 3rd was the cap it freed up.

That's the order of it, whether people on here like it or not.

That's the entire story.

tuckrr is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:13 AM
  #63
Bob Clarke Fan Club
Registered User
 
Bob Clarke Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckrr View Post
Management was concerned about their "habits" and didn't like the idea of 20 years of NTC between the two.

The 2nd priority was the sweet return they got back

And 3rd was the cap it freed up.

That's the order of it, whether people on here like it or not.

That's the entire story.



Yeah, have to agree with this. If there were problems that couldn't be fixed as of last year, can't blame management for getting cold feet with lengthy contracts and NTC handed to them. There was more than 1 reason to make these deals.

Bob Clarke Fan Club is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:18 AM
  #64
Jumping
Registered User
 
Jumping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta Ga
Country: United States
Posts: 1,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpyD View Post
Bill's right in the regard that if they do their job, which Richie and Carter were quite good at, it's nobody's business if they stopped at a bar on their way home. I know my employer has no insight on my dealings after work, and I would never adhere to a policy that allows them.

His blunders in this past offseason and this ridiculous policy have me seriously questioning Laviolette. I'd say the organization too for taking his side over their captain, but I already know they have retards in charge. Lavi really better pull this team together and make something respectable out of them this season.
Your employer might feel differently if it is affecting your job. And the job is not just the game, but it is practice (yes Allen Iverson), your ability to recover from injuries and your interaction with teammates and other members of the organization. And that is what I think Flyers management thought.

It is pretty much known that players who drink a lot compromise their ability to perform at a high level for a long time. You are paying these two guys 5+ million dollars a year until President Bieber takes over the government so you are selling high (no pun intended).

Jumping is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:19 AM
  #65
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,532
vCash: 156
I'd be pretty disgruntled about my boss telling me what to do in my free time, especially if it isn't affecting my job.

I wouldn't say that it was affecting how either Carter or Richards did their job. Richards' wrist injury sure as hell did though.

This is exactly the kind of team policy/initiative that is ONLY going to cause a split in the locker room or between players and coach, and it strikes me as being very ill advised.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:19 AM
  #66
Jumping
Registered User
 
Jumping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Atlanta Ga
Country: United States
Posts: 1,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiScreamingEagles View Post
He is also quoted as saying that he is "really upset that this is out there. That's our locker room. Our inner sanctum. Our board. Someone's crossing a line here."
Didn't deny it though.

Jumping is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:22 AM
  #67
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,532
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jumping View Post
Didn't deny it though.
Which is actually sorta nice. We can be pretty sure nobody has outright lied.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:30 AM
  #68
FlyerX
Registered User
 
FlyerX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 814
vCash: 500
Vic Hadfield, who most of you aren't old enough to remember, kept a diary turned book for the 1972-73 Rangers season and he wrote that among the players they had a agreement to sharply curtail their drinking through the entire season. Not abstaining totally, but limiting to one or two a night. It's been an issue on teams for a long time, nothing entirely new about it. He also described his post-concussion syndrome at length.

FlyerX is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:33 AM
  #69
DumpyD
Registered User
 
DumpyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I'd be pretty disgruntled about my boss telling me what to do in my free time, especially if it isn't affecting my job.

I wouldn't say that it was affecting how either Carter or Richards did their job. Richards' wrist injury sure as hell did though.

This is exactly the kind of team policy/initiative that is ONLY going to cause a split in the locker room or between players and coach, and it strikes me as being very ill advised.
Agreed. It'd be very interesting if the Flyers have a disappointing season and people start to call for Laviolette's head.

DumpyD is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:45 AM
  #70
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpyD View Post
Agreed. It'd be very interesting if the Flyers have a disappointing season and people start to call for Laviolette's head.
Why?

We knew we had Stanley Cup caliber talent.

We know now that we really don't anymore.

We're hoping for the best, but really unless everyone exceeds expectations (unless our expectations are extremely high as some of us know we are putting them) we're on a 2-3 road trip to see what the future of this team is going to be.

There's absolutely no reason to call for Laviolette's head.


Would we be here had Stevens remained the head coach? Richards and Carter would possibly still be with the team.

Would we have had a Stanley Cup bid with Stevens as a head coach? Possibly. We made it to the Eastern Conference Finals.

Was it still the right choice to let Stevens go? Yes.



Based on the reactions by the players after the trades though, I'm far more at ease about this now than on D-day. I think we're ready to move forward, and if this was causing problems, then it's a good thing to move forward from.

CS is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:48 AM
  #71
Bob Clarke Fan Club
Registered User
 
Bob Clarke Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beef Invictus View Post
I'd be pretty disgruntled about my boss telling me what to do in my free time, especially if it isn't affecting my job.

I wouldn't say that it was affecting how either Carter or Richards did their job. Richards' wrist injury sure as hell did though.

This is exactly the kind of team policy/initiative that is ONLY going to cause a split in the locker room or between players and coach, and it strikes me as being very ill advised.






Obviously Homer and possibly even snider and Lavi thought it was affecting their job in some way, shape or form.

Bob Clarke Fan Club is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:52 AM
  #72
Bob Clarke Fan Club
Registered User
 
Bob Clarke Fan Club's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,985
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpyD View Post
Agreed. It'd be very interesting if the Flyers have a disappointing season and people start to call for Laviolette's head.


Lavi got outcoached almost as badly as the Flyers got outplayed by the Bruins. Snider and fans will want a much more organized and cohesive ship this year. If we sputter and things aren't working out, I'll call for his head along with everyone else. Still not going to make me regret these trades though. The next head coach will appreciate the moves as well.

Bob Clarke Fan Club is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:52 AM
  #73
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Clarke Fan Club View Post
[/B]

Obviously Homer and possibly even snider and Lavi thought it was affecting their job in some way, shape or form.
And possibly everyone else's ability to do their job.

You have to remember that this job is not like everyone else's. They're paid millions of dollars not to do things detrimental to their body.

Granted, I think being alcohol NAZIs is not the way to go. I personally think that a no-tolerance stance is too strict. However, we're not told this is a no-tolerance stance. We're just being led to believe that "partying" was a problem.

Knowing what I know about Ovechkin's journeys over to Russia-house down here, I can tell you that a little bit of partying is not outside of the norm for young hockey players. Hell, I can tell you that it's not outside of the norm for young professional.

That said, at what point does this "partying" become detrimental? When it becomes repetitive? When it becomes habitual? When it crosses the substance line?

These are details we don't know and will never know.

In the meantime we can neither assume that their partying was excessive nor can we assume their partying was minor. We just don't know. All we know is that there are reports that "partying" took place.

CS is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:53 AM
  #74
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,532
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Clarke Fan Club View Post
[/B]



Obviously Homer and possibly even snider and Lavi thought it was affecting their job in some way, shape or form.
As I mentioned, the policy itself could have caused a split in the locker room. Perhaps that's what made Snider decide to ship them out.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
07-25-2011, 11:53 AM
  #75
DumpyD
Registered User
 
DumpyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Why?

We knew we had Stanley Cup caliber talent.

We know now that we really don't anymore.

We're hoping for the best, but really unless everyone exceeds expectations (unless our expectations are extremely high as some of us know we are putting them) we're on a 2-3 road trip to see what the future of this team is going to be.

There's absolutely no reason to call for Laviolette's head.


Would we be here had Stevens remained the head coach? Richards and Carter would possibly still be with the team.

Would we have had a Stanley Cup bid with Stevens as a head coach? Possibly. We made it to the Eastern Conference Finals.

Was it still the right choice to let Stevens go? Yes.



Based on the reactions by the players after the trades though, I'm far more at ease about this now than on D-day. I think we're ready to move forward, and if this was causing problems, then it's a good thing to move forward from.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not alleging that the Flyers will miss the playoffs or that if they do, Laviolette should necessarily be fired. But we all know how wild the Philly media runs rampant, and how a large portion of the philly fanbase gobbles that garbage up.

It would be very interesting should such a situation arise where the flyers are not succeeding and we have to read articles every week about how the management mistakenly took the side of the coach over the talent.

DumpyD is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.