Does anybody else believe that there's a new voice that's affecting things behind the scenes with the Habs? I was listening to Shaun Campbell on TSN 990 and he mentioned it as well, that something looks different with how our team is being managed. What have we seen change since the beginning of the year?
1) We're not sitting back. We're continuing to attack our opponent. Two of our losses have come with 40+ shots for.
2) Cole wasn't on the power play. Since it was brought up in the media, he's playing an active role.
3) Pearn was fired. Martin has less of a safety net now moving forward. More accountability.
4) Gauthier's statement that things are going to be different. That they're going to start thinking "outside the box."
5) Last game against the Bruins had a much higher level of aggressiveness than last season. We saw Moen clearing the front of the net at the end of the game and giving Lucic a few jabs. We saw Gorges with his arms spread out after Price made a save to block traffic from going to the net.
6) We've seen a sudden change on the 4th line. Nokelainen and Blunden in, Engqvist and Palushaj out.
7) A sudden reply by management after Price wasn't able to get the coaches' attention when he wanted to leave the net in the final minute, and Eller being unaware that there was a goalie change in the Toronto game.
There's definitely somebody of influence making different decisions with this team. I for one like the new direction. It's about time. We've only been saying it for a few years now. At least now they're listening.
Has anybody else seen a shift to more attack, more battling on the ice, more size, etc.?
If any body it was likely Gainey, PG or JM. One of them told the players (and if it was PG and Gainey the coaching staff) to get on their ***** and play the game.
I dont believe in any new voice. I think the players collectively knew that they couldn't fall any further back, and certain players elevated their level of urgency.
Management simply used pearn as a sacrificial lamb in order to get the player's attention if the poor record wasn't enough. You also saw a trade for some centre depth and faceoff help.
The coach simply made some roster adjustments as coaches normally do when things arent going well.
Its a collection of these things that have made a short term difference.... but that's business as usual, not some supposed new voice.
There's still alot of work to be done. The defensive zone remains a big issue for both the forwards and the d-men..... Price is just asked to be too sharp too often because of needless defensive zone turnovers
I think you are right about the new voice theory, and it finally puts the firing of Pearn in perspective.
Like any management team the style of play is a committee decision arrived at by the GM, coarch and the assistant coaches. With the departure of Muller, Pearn may have had the leeway to espouse the style the Canadians started the sezson with, and which failed so miserably. When the decision was made by the management committee to review and revamp the style of play, Pearn did not support the change and as a result was odd man out. Just the new assistants exercising a little more influence and a confirmation to Gautier that in the obvious divergence of opinion betwwen Muller and Pearn last year, Muller may have been in the right. The Canadiens started this year backing the wrong man and wrong game plan and appear to have taken steps to remedy both. Assistant coaches do not in themselves decide club policy, but rather have to work as part of a united team to decide and implement these policies. If you don't believe in the concensus policy and are unwilling to fully buy into and help implement these policies then it becomes time to make changes.
I don't see a change to be honest. Aside from Spacek coming back and settling down the D I don't see much different.
We lost three games to goalies alone. Sabres, Pens and Panthers all were out shot and IMO outplayed yet got the wins because of their goalies. Had we won those games we'd all be talking about how great this team is.
Look at it carefully, we haven't done much different except go with a bigger 4th line and add Spacek. We weren't playing badly just not winning.
I think this team may have a new voice and leader in the dressing room, players probably were always following Gionta, Cammalleri, Plekanec, Gorges and Gill. But, I think with Cole there and the emergence Pacioretty the team has two other leaders there playing a different role than they have been use to see in the past.
This team was built with speed and skill, so an attack style of game only makes sense to play. When the D gets healthy that style will only translate that much better too.
the biggest difference i could see is on the for-check, which is what ive been asking for for ages...
some players like cammy have a harder time adjusting to this 2-man aggressive for-check but in general this is the way to go with speedy players like pleks cole gio and patches...
chara had an awful game because of the constant pressure we were doing and im glad we continued doing so even with the lead late in the game...
more turnovers will come because of this, resulting into many more 5 on 5 goals, and spending less time in our d-zone
the biggest difference i could see is on the for-check, which is what ive been asking for for ages...
some players like cammy have a harder time adjusting to this 2-man aggressive for-check but in general this is the way to go with speedy players like pleks cole gio and patches...
chara had an awful game because of the constant pressure we were doing and im glad we continued doing so even with the lead late in the game...
more turnovers will come because of this, resulting into many more 5 on 5 goals, and spending less time in our d-zone
Exactly. Our new fore-check is a coaching change, not just players collectively deciding to pick up their game. We know Martin likes to sit back. This isn't the traditional Martin style. Something's changed internally for there to be that big a change in the game plan. That divergence from the Martin style doesn't happen just with a player meeting.
I have listened to the whole Gauthier press conference and what struck me is how much time he spent to talk to the medias (which is not in his habits) and how voluble and lively he was, compared to what we're used to.
Maybe someone told him that the days of managing the team from an ivory tower, without listening to the fans and explaining himself to the medias were over?
We're winning as opposed to losing. Had the Habs lost against Boston (and it was a 1 goal game, so it could have easily gone either way) this place would be flooded with sarcastic posts about how Perry Pearn's firing 'really changed things'. There really isn't that much difference between how the team played the last two games and (on average) the first 8.
Fortunately, I believe that level of play will only lead to more wins, so keep it up!
I feel that with Pearn gone and 'the Randys' being default co-assistants of sort they may have more of a voice.
On the other hand it might be on the ice as well, as we now have a more 'meat and potatoes' fourth line, an added 800+ games expereience back on d and players that are finding chemistry (I loathe whomever chose not to make any cuts before preseason).
I have listened to the whole Gauthier press conference and what struck me is how much time he spent to talk to the medias (which is not in his habits) and how voluble and lively he was, compared to what we're used to.
Maybe someone told him that the days of managing the team from an ivory tower, without listening to the fans and explaining himself to the medias were over?
I wouldn't say that. Our fan base can be crazy. Montreal media and fan base have to be treated in a special way, and sometimes that means staying quiet. But I agree that there's going to be more accountability moving forward.
He's the marketing guy. His first campaign is awful ("Rise together" with the face mashups), but I give him props for bringing the organ player back on saturdays.
There has indeed been a change this year. I think we've all noticed the transition into a more skating oriented, attack-the-puck-in-all-zones game plan this year. Albeit, we've only seen it in a smattering of games since the start of the season, which is why I used the word "transition".
It must have to do with the 2 Randys. I don't think PG or Molson have any direct impact on the way the team is coached. The Randy's probably wanted to spice things up a bit, Pearn fought them, the team kept losing, someone had to go.
Makes sense, no?
If you heard MAG's interview on TSN-Habs the other night. He said that Pearn was let go because JM was only taking advice from Pearn & dis-missing other ideas.
Did the Randy's bring this attention to the brass?
Is there a mystery man upstairs taking notes? Is BIG Brother watching? Someone is eyeballing that's for sure, but who?
If you heard MAG's interview on TSN-Habs the other night. He said that Pearn was let go because JM was only taking advice from Pearn & dis-missing other ideas.
Did the Randy's bring this attention to the brass?
Is there a mystery man upstairs taking notes? Is BIG Brother watching? Someone is eyeballing that's for sure, but who?
