HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Notices

We got Hitch just in time

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-14-2006, 04:25 PM
  #51
falcor
Registered User
 
falcor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
He then said the new coach gets a bump of 15-20 games and then the players may revert to their old ways....if true, pay attention to our play after the 15th game...we will see if if his correct in case at least.
now, i never said that the players shouldn't be held accountable..because i think they should. especially when we started the season off looking like cup winners, then just petered out for no good reason.

however, my ..beef .. is with this quote right here. if players revert to their old ways after 15-20 games, then this means 1 of 2 things.

1)cup winners should hire a new coach every 20 games
2)cup winners have players who indeed do NOT need coaching.

if his quote is true, then we are one of a few teams that has crap for players..and i just can't buy that. sorry.

falcor is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 04:44 PM
  #52
PanniniClaus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,481
vCash: 500
Hitch is getting it done.

PanniniClaus is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 04:54 PM
  #53
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
Players quit all the time in modern professional sports? Is he supposed to ignore that?
they quit sports? or they quit on their coaches?

Melrose can say any idiotic, asinine thing he likes (and he continually proves that he can by doing so.) but to say that specifically about any team's players? about columbus? does he have sources? did he watch any games? what evidence does he base a judgement like that on?

i understand that this team had every reason in the world to hate GG and hate DM. they may or may not have quit on one or BOTH of them. but if they did quit on GG... it was justified, and they got what they wanted in the end. since they got what they wanted, why now would they quit again?

listen, pitz, Melrose is paid to talk, to be interesting when he talks, and to draw ratings. As far as expert experience goes, there is NO DOUBT he knows exactly what it feels like and looks like to have a team (with Gretzky on it) quit on you.

Repetion is good for memorizing: Melrose is a moron.

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 04:59 PM
  #54
Samkow
Global Moderator
Sidney Cosby
 
Samkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Columbus
Country: Colombia
Posts: 13,494
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Samkow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluckfur View Post
they quit sports? or they quit on their coaches?

Melrose can say any idiotic, asinine thing he likes (and he continually proves that he can by doing so.) but to say that specifically about any team's players? about columbus? does he have sources? did he watch any games? what evidence does he base a judgement like that on?

i understand that this team had every reason in the world to hate GG and hate DM. they may or may not have quit on one or BOTH of them. but if they did quit on GG... it was justified, and they got what they wanted in the end. since they got what they wanted, why now would they quit again?

listen, pitz, Melrose is paid to talk, to be interesting when he talks, and to draw ratings. As far as expert experience goes, there is NO DOUBT he knows exactly what it feels like and looks like to have a team (with Gretzky on it) quit on you.

Repetion is good for memorizing: Melrose is a moron.
Whatever. This isn't football, and players aren't going to go out and admit to it, but I think it was pretty clear towards the end that a few of our playerss weren't trying as hard as they could have, like they are now.

Samkow is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 05:01 PM
  #55
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
Whatever. This isn't football, and players aren't going to go out and admit to it, but I think it was pretty clear towards the end that a few of our playerss weren't trying as hard as they could have, like they are now.
exactly my point! whatever.

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 05:33 PM
  #56
DentonFreeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Uhh, I agree with Pistachio and Barry Melrose. The team looked like they had quit on Gallant. Fedorov basically did come out and say he didn't like the way the team was run but he'd go along with it. Now look at him, he's played his best hockey (just like the rest of the team) under Hitch. I don't think this is the kind of team that will stop playing well after 15-20 games under Hitch though.

Melrose isn't an idiot either, he knows a little something about hockey. He is paid to get ratings but he isn't just spouting gibberish half the time, the guy was in the league for awhile, he's more qualified to talk hockey than the rest of ESPN's analysts.

DentonFreeman is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 05:47 PM
  #57
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,143
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by falcor View Post
now, i never said that the players shouldn't be held accountable..because i think they should. especially when we started the season off looking like cup winners, then just petered out for no good reason.

however, my ..beef .. is with this quote right here. if players revert to their old ways after 15-20 games, then this means 1 of 2 things.

1)cup winners should hire a new coach every 20 games
2)cup winners have players who indeed do NOT need coaching.

if his quote is true, then we are one of a few teams that has crap for players..and i just can't buy that. sorry.
Barry said may revert...... Lookie here now... teams lose for two reasons, bad players or bad head coach.... In our case we had a coach who was coaching bad...he's not bad but his coaching must have been..we only know that now because the players are doing well under Hitch...Melrose simply described a process and he is correct. If our players tank after 15 games then it's more than Gallant, it could be both players and coach....

But in our case it's not the players being bad they just did not buy into Gallant so we will not be one of the teams that drop off 15 games after a coaching change... I HOPE.

Robert is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 05:56 PM
  #58
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentonFreeman View Post
Uhh, I agree with Pistachio and Barry Melrose. The team looked like they had quit on Gallant. Fedorov basically did come out and say he didn't like the way the team was run but he'd go along with it. Now look at him, he's played his best hockey (just like the rest of the team) under Hitch. I don't think this is the kind of team that will stop playing well after 15-20 games under Hitch though.

Melrose isn't an idiot either, he knows a little something about hockey. He is paid to get ratings but he isn't just spouting gibberish half the time, the guy was in the league for awhile, he's more qualified to talk hockey than the rest of ESPN's analysts.
barry melrose had about 60 points in his entire professional hockey career, far more impressively he managed to pull down 1000+ PIMs. He was coach of a stanley cup finals team that had Jari Kuri, Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey and he STILL COULDN'T win it.

Frankly, Denton, I really think it would be wiser of you to NOT back up your theory of Melrose knowing what he's talking about in hockey by saying he's ESPN's best hockey commentator. uhh, sorry kid, but that just ain't gonna cut it - everyone knows ESPN DOESN'T COVER HOCKEY IN ANY ASPECT NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY INTENTION OF EVER DOING SO.

But, other than that, think what you like

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:00 PM
  #59
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
Barry said may revert...... Lookie here now... teams lose for two reasons, bad players or bad head coach.... In our case we had a coach who was coaching bad...he's not bad but his coaching must have been..we only know that now because the players are doing well under Hitch...Melrose simply described a process and he is correct. If our players tank after 15 games then it's more than Gallant, it could be both players and coach....

But in our case it's not the players being bad they just did not buy into Gallant so we will not be one of the teams that drop off 15 games after a coaching change... I HOPE.
if the players quit they did so for one reason: they wanted Gallant out. mission accomplished. case closed.

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:02 PM
  #60
Samkow
Global Moderator
Sidney Cosby
 
Samkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Columbus
Country: Colombia
Posts: 13,494
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Samkow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluckfur View Post
barry melrose had about 60 points in his entire professional hockey career, far more impressively he managed to pull down 1000+ PIMs. He was coach of a stanley cup finals team that had Jari Kuri, Wayne Gretzky and Paul Coffey and he STILL COULDN'T win it.

Frankly, Denton, I really think it would be wiser of you to NOT back up your theory of Melrose knowing what he's talking about in hockey by saying he's ESPN's best hockey commentator. uhh, sorry kid, but that just ain't gonna cut it - everyone knows ESPN DOESN'T COVER HOCKEY IN ANY ASPECT NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY INTENTION OF EVER DOING SO.

But, other than that, think what you like
Did Barry Melrose beat you up or something? I'm really curious about the logic that Melrose being an idiot because his employers poor hockey coverage? I enjoy reading Buccigross, and I still respect Melrose's hockey opinion. He was at one time a fairly decent coach, so I'd think he knows something about how players tune out coaches. Sure ESPN's coverage sucks, but that doesn't mean everyone who works for them is automatically wrong.


Samkow is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:08 PM
  #61
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pistachio View Post
Did Barry Melrose beat you up or something? I'm really curious as too the logic of Melrose being an idiot because his employers poor hockey coverage? I enjoy reading Buccigross, and I still respect Melrose's hockey opinion. He was at one time a fairly decent coach, so I'd think he knows something about how players tune out coaches.
I already credited him with knowing what a team who quits on their coach looks like due to his firsthand experience with such. He may be a little bitter about Gretzky getting him fired in LA still and that's understandable.

None of that in any way affects my logic or my understanding that Melrose is an intellectual 'tard and a horribly spastic HAM.

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:19 PM
  #62
DentonFreeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
I'd have to say that anyone who can coach a team to the Stanley Cup Finals is a very good head coach. There are guys who have been great head coaches and never made it there. A bad point to bring up is how his hockey career wasn't much to write home about either. IIRC, Gerard Gallant had a pretty good career, and where is he now? Hell, how about Gretzky? Best player ever, but his team is pretty damn bad.

I respect Barry Melrose because he knows good hockey. He's been around good hockey, he's coached good hockey. That's all I need to know to default to him on a hockey related issue. I don't agree with everything he says, but I'm not going, "this guy's an idiot, what the hell does he know!" when I don't agree with him. Especially since I'd say he's dead on with his description of how our team was performing and how to handle that kind of performance. People don't like him because he's paid by ESPN, and ESPN has shoved hockey aside for years. I'm sure TSN would love to have him, or OLN for that matter.

Also, what has Melrose said or written that makes you believe he doesn't know what he's talking about? I've asked this before and no one gave me an example so I'll ask it again.

DentonFreeman is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:33 PM
  #63
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentonFreeman View Post
I'd have to say that anyone who can coach a team to the Stanley Cup Finals is a very good head coach. There are guys who have been great head coaches and never made it there. A bad point to bring up is how his hockey career wasn't much to write home about either. If I recall correctly, Gerard Gallant had a pretty good career, and where is he now? Hell, how about Gretzky? Best player ever, but his team is pretty damn bad.

I respect Barry Melrose because he knows good hockey. He's been around good hockey, he's coached good hockey. That's all I need to know to default to him on a hockey related issue. I don't agree with everything he says, but I'm not going, "this guy's an idiot, what the hell does he know!" when I don't agree with him. Especially since I'd say he's dead on with his description of how our team was performing and how to handle that kind of performance. People don't like him because he's paid by ESPN, and ESPN has shoved hockey aside for years. I'm sure TSN would love to have him, or OLN for that matter.

Also, what has Melrose said or written that makes you believe he doesn't know what he's talking about? I've asked this before and no one gave me an example so I'll ask it again.
Denton, I expained all that (his playing career, his coaching career, his preferance for stupid mullets and zoots suits over substance.) Clearly I had no respect for Mr. Melrose loooong before the subject came up in this thread. I initially asked what evidence/ information Melrose was in possession of that would allow him to state on the record that the Columbus Blue Jackets "quit" on Gerard Gallant. If he has reasons for his beliefs, and he states those beliefs in public, then I have the right to judge his statements as true or false and ask what logic or inside information he bases his judgements on. Simple.

Jackets, Denton... whoever you are this week, just because your daddy works in the front office doesn't make YOU an expert either. As far as the team quitting? I said that's what they did ... there are a half dozen or so public posts of mine from the past two months that intimate as much. I watched this team, I saw what was happening and *i* made a judgement. It seems fair to me to question other's judgement until i hear the reasons for their verdict.

and, besides, Melrose IS a moron. Every once in a great while, even a blind squirrel turns up a nut.


Last edited by Pluckfur: 12-14-2006 at 06:45 PM.
Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 06:54 PM
  #64
DentonFreeman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluckfur View Post

Jackets, Denton... whoever you are this week, just because your daddy works in the front office doesn't make YOU an expert either. As far as the team quitting? I said that's what they did ... there are a half dozen or so public posts of mine from the past two months that intimate as much. I watched this team, I saw what was happening and *i* made a judgement. It seems fair to me to question other's judgement until i hear their reasons for their verdict.

and, besides, Melrose IS a moron.
Uhh... I've changed my name once in the nearly two years I've been a member here. Hardly means I change my name weekly, but kudos to you on the stupid joke. And my daddy doesn't work in the front office, and never has. A good friend of mine's dad does though, so you can refer to him next time you'd like to insult me if you like. But you know what, I don't care. If you (and guys like Pubs) have to insult or belittle someone in an attempt to win an argument, go ahead. I know more about hockey than you Pluck, the whole damn board knows more than you do.

You, among others, don't like Melrose (or me from the sound of things). Your reasons for not liking him are ridiculous compared to the other reasons I've heard. He had a great coaching career, yet he's still a moron and doesn't know a thing about hockey? Please. I agree that he's not a great analyst, but I'll still listen to the guy when he's talking about hockey because he isn't clueless.

Also, wouldn't agreeing with a moron's analysis of something make you a moron as well? Just throwin' that out there.

DentonFreeman is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 07:38 PM
  #65
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentonFreeman View Post
Uhh... I've changed my name once in the nearly two years I've been a member here. Hardly means I change my name weekly, but kudos to you on the stupid joke. And my daddy doesn't work in the front office, and never has. A good friend of mine's dad does though, so you can refer to him next time you'd like to insult me if you like. But you know what, I don't care. If you (and guys like Pubs) have to insult or belittle someone in an attempt to win an argument, go ahead. I know more about hockey than you Pluck, the whole damn board knows more than you do.

You, among others, don't like Melrose (or me from the sound of things). Your reasons for not liking him are ridiculous compared to the other reasons I've heard. He had a great coaching career, yet he's still a moron and doesn't know a thing about hockey? Please. I agree that he's not a great analyst, but I'll still listen to the guy when he's talking about hockey because he isn't clueless.

Also, wouldn't agreeing with a moron's analysis of something make you a moron as well? Just throwin' that out there.
throw didn't make it off the porch, kid. Note* the blind squirrel comment. dur.

I didn't insult you, and believe me if i had? you'd know.

As to differing opinions ... variety is the spice of life and I've already given you permission to think as you like

So, in summation, I would like to quote our beloved and wise beyond his years Moderator, Pistachio:

whatever.

And have a nice day

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 07:42 PM
  #66
Pluckfur
Registered User
 
Pluckfur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 7,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentonFreeman View Post
Uhh... I've changed my name once in the nearly two years I've been a member here. Hardly means I change my name weekly, but kudos to you on the stupid joke. And my daddy doesn't work in the front office, and never has. A good friend of mine's dad does though, so you can refer to him next time you'd like to insult me if you like. But you know what, I don't care. If you (and guys like Pubs) have to insult or belittle someone in an attempt to win an argument, go ahead. I know more about hockey than you Pluck, the whole damn board knows more than you do.

You, among others, don't like Melrose (or me from the sound of things). Your reasons for not liking him are ridiculous compared to the other reasons I've heard. He had a great coaching career, yet he's still a moron and doesn't know a thing about hockey? Please. I agree that he's not a great analyst, but I'll still listen to the guy when he's talking about hockey because he isn't clueless.

Also, wouldn't agreeing with a moron's analysis of something make you a moron as well? Just throwin' that out there.
And for future reference, Jackets/Denton the above highlighted text is a personal attack/insult. Just so you know, I'm not reporting you because ... I'm a generous and benevolent soul. Now sack up, kid.

Pluckfur is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 07:51 PM
  #67
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,143
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluckfur View Post
if the players quit they did so for one reason: they wanted Gallant out. mission accomplished. case closed.
Thats the bottom line but it must be clearified that "not buying in" and "wanting him out" are not identical terms.... And just to mention, the process of team/coach evolution Melrose described is not new or special to the NHL....it's a tool of the sport trade.

Robert is offline  
Old
12-14-2006, 07:55 PM
  #68
X0ssbar
 
X0ssbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: ...on a star!
Country: United States
Posts: 13,011
vCash: 500
Locked.

X0ssbar 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 01:26 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.