The knock on gallant is that he was gifted power house teams, and even then they still managed to underwhelm in certain instances, as recently as this year's memorial cup.
1000% right. He ALMOST lost the Q championship last season against a much weaker Gatineau team. Got outcoached by Groulx like you wouldn't have believed it. Couldn't figure out Groulx' matchup strategy. And it almost blew up in his face.
This year, with the most talented lineup at the Mem Cup, his team just didn't show up at all.
Don't like that. The guys that didn't want Patrick Roy as coach, well, to be honest, Gerard Gallant was much worse than him. He had the best lineup a Q coach had since probably the Burns years in Hull.
Come on...The PLAYERS were the men behind their sucess...not the coaching staff. This is the Juniors we are talking about. And when you are stacked, you just are. Where was Mike Kelly in the Mem Cup?
Personnally, I have Houle ahead of Groulx while he's not THAT far behind. Houle is also younger and you would have more room to groom him slowly from let say assistant in Hamilton to coach and then join the NHL....unless somebody grabs him Boucher style which would not surprise me at all.
1000% right. He ALMOST lost the Q championship last season against a much weaker Gatineau team. Got outcoached by Groulx like you wouldn't have believed it. Couldn't figure out Groulx' matchup strategy. And it almost blew up in his face.
This year, with the most talented lineup at the Mem Cup, his team just didn't show up at all.
Don't like that. The guys that didn't want Patrick Roy as coach, well, to be honest, Gerard Gallant was much worse than him. He had the best lineup a Q coach had since probably the Burns years in Hull.
Don't disagree with any of this. Yet, I have a hard time seeing how Mike Kelly was THE man behind the success in St.John while some will say his St.John team underperformed....so what is it? When they played great it's all on Kelly, but when they underperformed, it's all on Gallant? I'm not ecstatic about that acquisition. I believe that if they go on a 2 assistants mode, that Jodoin would have been preferable than him based on the fact that he's a very well known tactician, and knows a lot of the guys we have here and are about to have. And then you add the d-man specialist/young guy in Daigneault for example. But my concern is bringing Jodoin and Gallant. Don't see the complementary skills....
Personnally, I have Houle ahead of Groulx while he's not THAT far behind. Houle is also younger and you would have more room to groom him slowly from let say assistant in Hamilton to coach and then join the NHL....unless somebody grabs him Boucher style which would not surprise me at all.
Houle is not ahead of Groulx, man. Wow, the kid is just starting. And the other guy has warped the league for many years. He's good, but not Groulx-like. Groulx SHOULDN'T even be in the Q. He's wasting his time if you ask me. And I think he's getting bored coaching in the Q.
Houle is not ahead of Groulx, man. Wow, the kid is just starting. And the other guy has warped the league for many years. He's good, but not Groulx-like. Groulx SHOULDN'T even be in the Q. He's wasting his time if you ask me. And I think he's getting bored coaching in the Q.
Well that's my understanding of Houle's potential. Let just say that I did go often in Blainville this year, and happened to be quite a few times behind the bench. Talked to a lot of people, saw and heard him work a bench, saw what he did with Lewiston, saw what he did with Blainville, he's CLEARLY a guy I don't want the Habs to let go. There are some questions marks with Groulx as far as being a tactician is concerned. And I personnally prefer Houle's approach as a player's coach than Groulx. Again, though, it's not like I'm talking about Bowman versus Bob Berry here. Just that I prefer, for the long run, to see the Habs retaining Houle than Groulx. But would have take those 2 guys with us any day of the week. My ideal trio in Hamilton would have been to see Lefebvre going with Houle and Groulx. Both of whom I have ahead of Tourigny.
Well that's my understanding of Houle's potential. Let just say that I did go often in Blainville this year, and happened to be quite a few times behind the bench. Talked to a lot of people, saw and heard him work a bench, saw what he did with Lewiston, saw what he did with Blainville, he's CLEARLY a guy I don't want the Habs to let go. There are some questions marks with Groulx as far as being a tactician is concerned. And I personnally prefer Houle's approach as a player's coach than Groulx. Again, though, it's not like I'm talking about Bowman versus Bob Berry here. Just that I prefer, for the long run, to see the Habs retaining Houle than Groulx. But would have take those 2 guys with us any day of the week. My ideal trio in Hamilton would have been to see Lefebvre going with Houle and Groulx. Both of whom I have ahead of Tourigny.
Do they invite coaches from other leagues to the combines, like they just did with Houle?
Do they invite coaches from other leagues to the combines, like they just did with Houle?
I believe that this is coming from plenty of journalists that were asking for that to happen. It is the first time that I see this, usually they use the Lawson of this work for skating and all, and Q junior coaches with no affiliations? I believe it's the first time but I may be wrong. They are just doing a favor to Q coaches in need of more things to learn. Great for them to do that. I hope they see Houle as more than that. I hope that he used his time to talk to Lefebvre.
And another things.....we need a calming influence behind the bench. If they indeed go with 2 assistants only, well at least, Jodoin will be that calming influence. 'Cause frankly, I don't want to replace the bench penalties for too many men on the ice by bench penalties for unsportsmanlike conduct. Gallant showed a whole lot of stupidity in the last Mem Cup when he put his team down 5 on 3 in a key situation because he was name calling the refs over and over and over again.
Would not have been my choice. Not that I dislike this hiring as is, but this is not how I portray a coaching staff unless we do intent to go with 4 assistant coaches. 1 upstairs and 2 beside Therrien, if so, I don't have that much of a problem with. If not, and if you bring Jodoin on top of that, there's 2 things missing....1 guy that will teach our d-men (and don't say Brisebois will do it please...) and 1 younger guy like Mulller or Gélinas who does have NHL experience and CLEARLY be the player's coach.
My ideal assistant duo would have been Laperričre and 1 of Daigneault or Robinson. Now, it surely looks like it would be Jodoin and Gallant...again....hoping it becomes 3 assistants with room for either the D specialist or the younger guy. Mind you, you get Daigneault, and you get the younger d-man guy....perfect choice in those circumstances....Somehow, I don't hold my breath.
Well the way I see is that the Habs have Therrien for veteran coach, then you add an up and coming coach(they chose Gallant) then you pick a former player for the D. That's where they could pick JJ Daigneault. And if they want Jodoin could be the guy upstairs.
Well that's my understanding of Houle's potential. Let just say that I did go often in Blainville this year, and happened to be quite a few times behind the bench. Talked to a lot of people, saw and heard him work a bench, saw what he did with Lewiston, saw what he did with Blainville, he's CLEARLY a guy I don't want the Habs to let go. There are some questions marks with Groulx as far as being a tactician is concerned. And I personnally prefer Houle's approach as a player's coach than Groulx. Again, though, it's not like I'm talking about Bowman versus Bob Berry here. Just that I prefer, for the long run, to see the Habs retaining Houle than Groulx. But would have take those 2 guys with us any day of the week. My ideal trio in Hamilton would have been to see Lefebvre going with Houle and Groulx. Both of whom I have ahead of Tourigny.
I doubt that Groulx would work as assistant in Hamilton though.
About Houle, he's good but he's just starting, the Habs will have plenty of time to get him.
And another things.....we need a calming influence behind the bench. If they indeed go with 2 assistants only, well at least, Jodoin will be that calming influence. 'Cause frankly, I don't want to replace the bench penalties for too many men on the ice by bench penalties for unsportsmanlike conduct. Gallant showed a whole lot of stupidity in the last Mem Cup when he put his team down 5 on 3 in a key situation because he was name calling the refs over and over and over again.
Come on...The PLAYERS were the men behind their sucess...not the coaching staff. This is the Juniors we are talking about. And when you are stacked, you just are. Where was Mike Kelly in the Mem Cup?
The real man in the Q is J-F Houle. Nobody else.
Uhhhh Kelly was lifting the Mem Cup after his hard work as GM who built this team through strong drafting and solid trades.
No, with the Sea Dogs he was absolutely terrible. He had an enormously stacked team in Saint John. It would have taken a special kind of idiot to mess up that roster.
I was a Sea Dog ticket holder and trust me when I say he was terrible. If it weren't for Mike Kelly things most likely would have gotten ugly.
I am not thrilled by this move. His answers will be a lot like Therrien's, working harder will be the solution for everything.
Well, just to balance things out I too was a Sea Dog season ticket holder and I thought he was absolutely brilliant. That's not taking anything away from Mike Kelly, but Gerard Gallant did a hell of a job in SJ.
And I'm not the only one who thinks so - In spite of being 'absolutely terrible', He was nominated for the Ron Lapointe Trophy all three years he was here, winning the award twice. But obviously, like the Habs, the Q brass didn't have a clue either, is that what you're saying??
Players loved playing for him, in fact just yesterday Mike Kelly was quoted saying " It's imperative that a head coach establish an environment where players are having fun and enjoying the experience yet still held accountable. He brings that as well as anyone I've seen".
As a STH, you must have seen the Dogs play the odd listless period as I did. I knew full well they'd come back out like madmen after Gallant had a word with them, and that's exactly the way it worked. Again, no credit to Gallant though, right?
The amount of negativity surrounding this hire baffles me. I for one am thrilled with the admin team being assembled here, right from Bergevin on down. Sad that after last seasons mess, the clean up is in full effect and there is still complaints. I guess that's just the way it always will be in Habland.
Last edited by JohnnyB11: 06-15-2012 at 07:37 AM.
Reason: Forgot to mention he won the Kilrea award once too, CHL coach of the year. Despite being 'absolutely terrible'. What a joke.
Well, just to balance things out I too was a Sea Dog season ticket holder and I thought he was absolutely brilliant. That's not taking anything away from Mike Kelly, but Gerard Gallant did a hell of a job in SJ.
And I'm not the only one who thinks so - In spite of being 'absolutely terrible', He was nominated for the Ron Lapointe Trophy all three years he was here, winning the award twice. But obviously, like the Habs, the Q brass didn't have a clue either, is that what you're saying??
Players loved playing for him, in fact just yesterday Mike Kelly was quoted saying " It's imperative that a head coach establish an environment where players are having fun and enjoying the experience yet still held accountable. He brings that as well as anyone I've seen".
As a STH, you must have seen the Dogs play the odd listless period as I did. I knew full well they'd come back out like madmen after Gallant had a word with them, and that's exactly the way it worked. Again, no credit to Gallant though, right?
The amount of negativity surrounding this hire baffles me. I for one am thrilled with the admin team being assembled here, right from Bergevin on down. Sad that after last seasons mess, the clean up is in full effect and there is still complaints. I guess that's just the way it always will be in Habland.
No, I didn't say that the Q brass doesn't have a clue, but like many awards, a teams record plays a huge role in the decision making. I could of won coach of the year with that team. Gallants practices and in game tactical strategies were amateurish at best. Kelly was the x's and o's guy without question. This isn't even debatable.
Gallant brings more of exactly what Therrien brings and that include very little system and more work harder, work harder mantra.
I am not complaining about everything. I am, however, very skeptical of some of the recent hirings. Gallant being one of the worst.
No, I didn't say that the Q brass doesn't have a clue, but like many awards, a teams record plays a huge role in the decision making. I could of won coach of the year with that team. Gallants practices and in game tactical strategies were amateurish at best. Kelly was the x's and o's guy without question. This isn't even debatable.
Gallant brings more of exactly what Therrien brings and that include very little system and more work harder, work harder mantra.
I am not complaining about everything. I am, however, very skeptical of some of the recent hirings. Gallant being one of the worst.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. I feel you seem to think a talented team will run itself - a lot of egos there, even as teenagers (or maybe I should say 'especially' as teenagers). A lot of these kids were the superstars of their teams growing up, and without superior coaching you can have a real mess on your hands. Think about this past season, how much time was missed by the teams top talent, and still able to take top spot in the Q. Have a look at the names in the box scores if you don't remember, again coaching has a lot to do with that. And just as I don't shortchange Kelly in all that, you can't just skip over Gallant's role.
Your team doesn't have to have the best record to have a coach be considered for a coaching award. At the same time, you can't penalize a coach if his team is terrific and call his coaching absolutely terrible.
And with all due respect, I highly doubt that you could have won coach of the year with the Sea Dogs, any more than I could have.
Huberdeau congratulated Gallant on Twitter before it's announced.
