"What will happen in the future, at the end of the season, is that we will re-evaluate the whole file," Gauthier said. "As (owner Geoff) Molson said in his communique a week ago, it's very important to us that our head coach be bilingual. So that will be part of our decision at that point."
By saying this, it's basically saying that language is the number one issue. If language wasn't the most important criteria, he would have said something to the effect of "the most important thing is winning, and we'll try our best to keep language in mind when making these decisions."
So yeah, he never said "NO. 1 PRIORITY IS LANGUAGE" outright, and since you can only seem to understand things that are written in the most direct and literal sense, I can see how it might create problems for you.
.........
Of course Babcock isn't available. But if he was, the Habs would turn him down despite the fact that he's won almost everything there is to win as a coach. Why would they turn him down? Because he doesn't speak French (remember the quote I posted...)
Take a coach who's had similar success, just at lower levels (AHL, WJC, CHL etc.) will he even get a look if he doesn't speak French? Probably not.
No, from the mouth of general manager Pierre Gauthier. He said the coach WILL be bilingual, which means that the coach's linguistic skills are more important than his coaching skills.
No coach, no matter how good, will be considered unless he speaks French.
Your way of putting it is too simplistic. While the requirement for speaking French may eliminate a large number of unilingual applicants it's not a case of looking for a needle in a haystack. As you are no doubt aware, there are French-speaking coaches with solid hockey credentials. You may be sure that Gauthier would reject incompetent francophones.
There is absolutely no way to defend "Speaking French" as a relevant criteria for coaching a hockey team.
And yes, the whole 'French' circus here in Montreal is the team's Achilles heel.
That's a damn LIE, that you and people like yourselves like you perpetuate to make yourselves feel better about your french-hating.
Let's look at our bilingual coaches for the last 25 years and compare to other teams:
Canadiens coaches
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Jacques Demers: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Jacques Martin: Adams winner
Leafs coaches
Mike Nykoluk: ?
Dan Maloney: ?
John Brophy: ?
George Armstrong: ?
Doug Carpenter: ?
Tom Watt: ?
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mike Murphy: ?
Pat Quinn: SC finalist, Adams winner
Paul Maurice: SC finalist
Ron Wilson: SC finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Habs
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Red Wings
Nick Polano: ?
Brad Park: ?
Dave Lewis: ?
Introduced to the NHL by the Bruins
Gerry Cheevers: ?
Butch Goring: ?
Terry Oreilly: SC finalist
Mike Milbury: SC finalist
Steve Kasper: ?
Mike Sullivan: ?
Your way of putting it is too simplistic. While the requirement for speaking French may eliminate a large number of unilingual applicants it's not a case of looking for a needle in a haystack. As you are no doubt aware, there are French-speaking coaches with solid hockey credentials. You may be sure that Gauthier would reject incompetent francophones.
Any superstar who becomes a UFA is probably not going to come here. We don't have great teams, higher taxes, huge media pressure and language issues... Unless, they are a fan of the club growing up then I don't see why they'd choose us over a contender somewhere else. I don't think this will change until we actually build a team that's capable of doing something.
Only way we'll get UFAs right now (and they probably won't be top UFAs) is if we really overpay for them. It will be the Brian Gionta type guys who we'll pay more than they're worth.
That's a damn LIE, that you and people like yourselves like you perpetuate to make yourselves feel better about your french-hating.
Let's look at our bilingual coaches for the last 25 years and compare to other teams:
Canadiens coaches
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Jacques Demers: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Jacques Martin: Adams winner
Leafs coaches
Mike Nykoluk: ?
Dan Maloney: ?
John Brophy: ?
George Armstrong: ?
Doug Carpenter: ?
Tom Watt: ?
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mike Murphy: ?
Pat Quinn: SC finalist, Adams winner
Paul Maurice: SC finalist
Ron Wilson: SC finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Habs
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Red Wings
Nick Polano: ?
Brad Park: ?
Dave Lewis: ?
Introduced to the NHL by the Bruins
Gerry Cheevers: ?
Butch Goring: ?
Terry Oreilly: SC finalist
Mike Milbury: SC finalist
Steve Kasper: ?
Mike Sullivan: ?
Herb Brooks: ?
Ted Sator: ?
Ron Smith: ?
Colin Campbell: ?
Bryan Trottier: ?
Gee, what an Achilles' heel.
In the 80's and early 90's, UFAs would have fallen over themselves to come play here. What's changed? Not our francophone coaches, that's for sure.
But but.. you're putting restrictions on like .. the interviews man.. I don't know what I'm talking about but man... interviews.. french and coach don't rime.. what ?
Seriously, beautiful post! It's unfortunately wasted on this xenophobic crowd however.
Your way of putting it is too simplistic. While the requirement for speaking French may eliminate a large number of unilingual applicants it's not a case of looking for a needle in a haystack. As you are no doubt aware, there are French-speaking coaches with solid hockey credentials. You may be sure that Gauthier would reject incompetent francophones.
There is no denying that if you eliminate all the unilingual anglophones, you have drastically reduce the pool of candidates, and there is a chance you may have eliminated the best candidate for the job without even giving him a fair chance.
Right now I really don't have a problem with having to have a bilingual coach btw. I see no reason not to do this. We aren't winning anyway and there are enough qualified guys out there that we can search through to handle the job.
As for the GM, well that's another story... much smaller pool to pick from. The guy they hire should be willing to learn French (or at least try) but we shouldn't limit it to somebody who knows the language already. That's the position we really need to worry about.
If we ever manage to build a contending team and we suddenly need to get a coach and a Mike Babcock is available, I thik there will be much less of a hoopla over things. It's one thing to get the best coach out there when you have a great team, it's a whole other ball of wax when you hire some rookie anglo with a terrible club. The reaction was entirely predictable even if it was way over the top. This is just common sense stuff.
There is no denying that if you eliminate all the unilingual anglophones, you have drastically reduce the pool of candidates, and there is a chance you may have eliminated the best candidate for the job without even giving him a fair chance.
This is just basic logic.
Your basic logic hasn't translated into reality because a lot of the best coaches speak french.
Not only that, but the habs have shown that they will put an unilingual anglophone coach in place by replacing Martin with an average coach like Cunneyworth.
In truth...
1) We aren't even sure if the habs see speaking french as a requirement. It's only a consideration from EVERYTHING I've seen, and as such, no unilingual anglo have been eliminated yet.
2) Even if it were so, there's a pretty huge pool of french speaking coaches to choose from. And hiring french speaking coaches hasn't hindered us in the past in any way shape or form.
I think you'd find the francophone speaking medias/fans a lot more inclined to accept an unilingual coach if he was indeed the best candidate. If you believe RC to be that man you're hopeless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy
Right now I really don't have a problem with having to have a bilingual coach btw. I see no reason not to do this. We aren't winning anyway and there are enough qualified guys out there that we can search through to handle the job.
As for the GM, well that's another story... much smaller pool to pick from. The guy they hire should be willing to learn French (or at least try) but we shouldn't limit it to somebody who knows the language already. That's the position we really need to worry about.
If we ever manage to build a contending team and we suddenly need to get a coach and a Mike Babcock is available, I thik there will be much less of a hoopla over things. It's one thing to get the best coach out there when you have a great team, it's a whole other ball of wax when you hire some rookie anglo with a terrible club. The reaction was entirely predictable even if it was way over the top. This is just common sense stuff.
Et voila. This is really the crux of the issue right there.
Your basic logic hasn't translated into reality because a lot of the best coaches speak french.
I'm not saying to only consider English coaches.... I'm saying to consider ALL coaches.
This means you'd still pick the best coach, whether they spoke French or not.
Its obvious that Cunneyworth is not the best coach.
If you do your search and believe Roy is the best coach, then fine, hire him....
But why you'd eliminate Carlyle without even looking at him I dont know.
One of the best coaches in the league this year is Ken Hitchcock. Another great hire was Paul MacLean in Ottawa. These are two guys who Montreal never would have considered.
Nor would they have considered Mike Babcock, Lindy Ruff, Barry Trotz, Dan Bylsma or a number of other excellent NHL coaches.
I just dont see how limiting your options makes any sense. There is no argument you can come up with that it does make sense to limit your options. Even if their are great french speaking coaches, you haven't eliminated them by opening up the number of candidates.
Naive ? cause I cant read people's mind like you do ? sure, if you say so...
No, you're naive because you think French WONT be the number one priority after the media **** storm that just happened, and after Gauthier's comments.
Your way of putting it is too simplistic. While the requirement for speaking French may eliminate a large number of unilingual applicants it's not a case of looking for a needle in a haystack. As you are no doubt aware, there are French-speaking coaches with solid hockey credentials. You may be sure that Gauthier would reject incompetent francophones.
Never said there were no good French coaches. The best coach for the team may be a French coach, and the guy I'm hoping they hire in the off-season is French (Roy)
I'm saying that you're SEVERELY limiting your options when language becomes a priority. You've eliminated ALL the coaches in the WHL, the OHL, and as far as I know, a large portion of the coaches in AHL.
If you won't even be looking there, how will you know you have the best guy for the team? And how is this going to look for UFAs looking to join a winner? They'll either stay away, or need an even bigger overpayment than they already get from this team.
Your basic logic hasn't translated into reality because a lot of the best coaches speak french.
And a lot of them also speak English. But they won't be getting looked at this offseason.
Quote:
Not only that, but the habs have shown that they will put an unilingual anglophone coach in place by replacing Martin with an average coach like Cunneyworth.
And look what happened...
Quote:
In truth...
1) We aren't even sure if the habs see speaking french as a requirement. It's only a consideration from EVERYTHING I've seen, and as such, no unilingual anglo have been eliminated yet.
After the last few months, there's no way in hell they don't hire a French coach. If you think there's even a possibility that they give the job to an English guy you're fooling yourself.
Quote:
2) Even if it were so, there's a pretty huge pool of french speaking coaches to choose from. And hiring french speaking coaches hasn't hindered us in the past in any way shape or form.
That's debatable. And just because it may not have hurt in the past, doesn't mean it would be a good idea.
Quote:
Et voila. This is really the crux of the issue right there.
So if this team becomes a contender and they ditch they're French coach for a guy like Babcock, you think the media won't have anything to say about it?
No, you're naive because you think French WONT be the number one priority after the media **** storm that just happened, and after Gauthier's comments.
So what you're saying is you already have your excuse for whenever we have a bad stretch next season, I see.
That's a damn LIE, that you and people like yourselves like you perpetuate to make yourselves feel better about your french-hating.
Let's look at our bilingual coaches for the last 25 years and compare to other teams:
Canadiens coaches
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Jacques Demers: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Jacques Martin: Adams winner
Leafs coaches
Mike Nykoluk: ?
Dan Maloney: ?
John Brophy: ?
George Armstrong: ?
Doug Carpenter: ?
Tom Watt: ?
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mike Murphy: ?
Pat Quinn: SC finalist, Adams winner
Paul Maurice: SC finalist
Ron Wilson: SC finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Habs
Jacques Lemaire: SC winner, Adams winner
Jean Perron: SC winner
Pat Burns: SC winner, Adams winner
Mario Tremblay: ?
Alain Vigneault: SC finalist, Adams winner
Michel Therrien: SC finalist
Claude Julien: SC winner, Adams winner
Guy Carbonneau: Adams finalist
Introduced to the NHL by the Red Wings
Nick Polano: ?
Brad Park: ?
Dave Lewis: ?
Introduced to the NHL by the Bruins
Gerry Cheevers: ?
Butch Goring: ?
Terry Oreilly: SC finalist
Mike Milbury: SC finalist
Steve Kasper: ?
Mike Sullivan: ?
Herb Brooks: ?
Ted Sator: ?
Ron Smith: ?
Colin Campbell: ?
Bryan Trottier: ?
Gee, what an Achilles' heel.
In the 80's and early 90's, UFAs would have fallen over themselves to come play here. What's changed? Not our francophone coaches, that's for sure.
GREAT job. I'm not big on the language debate, because I think it is a futile one on ANY board, let alone this one here. Fact of the matter is the organisation WILL have a bilingual one. The players' opinions don't matter. The posters' opinions don't matter. Only does that of Geoff Molson and he's been pretty clear of the subject. We should then all move along to the next debate.
Montreal has had the audacity and the open mind to hire inexperience, yet VERY talented coaches over the last 50 years. Let's all remember that while he did good with St.Louis as a young coach, Scotty Bowman was still pretty young to coach a team that had traditionally relied on older characters to coach. And after that, in most of the cases, they developed some pretty solid coaches, HOF material coaches.
As for the circus thing, you might think that most players hate it. But the fact of the matter is: tons of them like to be superstars in a market. And there aren't many markets in the league where you can be as big as here. What gets to players and coaches and the organisation, is the numerous press scrums or press conferences all the time, even after a practice. But hey! Go to NYC and see what it's like for its football teams. It's the same.
