Coaching isn't susceptible to a bad form cycle. Queenville's shortcomings aren't going to magically get better, and some hockey-fairy isn't going to come down and gift the Hawks wins because its coach won a Cup a couple years ago. It's nonsensical to watch the Hawks' special teams and defensive systems and conclude that a change of leadership isn't warranted.
There's no question that Quenneville was the right guy to hire at the right time.
But after his name was engraved on that cup, he more or less retired. The tenacity in his style is gone, and he has become tolerant of mediocrity. We used to hear how, after a bad game, Q would chew the team out. Now all we hear from him is, "meh, maybe next game we'll show up." I was no fan of Savard, but there's a reason why "Commit to the Indian" is still part of Blackhawks fandom vernacular. He wasn't a very good X's and O's coach, but he cared if the team put out an embarrassing effort. Last season was arguably the most embarrassing performance from an NHL team since Colorado choked that year they signed Selanne and Kariya. This team is too talented to perform as poorly as they have.
Q is a great coach who has never had a team finish under .500
He is one of the games best and the Hawks struggles though partly related to the coaching choices he made has more to do with the players on ice not him
There I said it ,, That is my final statement on subject
You are all welcome to blast me for it but Q is not problem with this team
There's no question that Quenneville was the right guy to hire at the right time.
But after his name was engraved on that cup, he more or less retired. The tenacity in his style is gone, and he has become tolerant of mediocrity. We used to hear how, after a bad game, Q would chew the team out. Now all we hear from him is, "meh, maybe next game we'll show up." I was no fan of Savard, but there's a reason why "Commit to the Indian" is still part of Blackhawks fandom vernacular. He wasn't a very good X's and O's coach, but he cared if the team put out an embarrassing effort. Last season was arguably the most embarrassing performance from an NHL team since Colorado choked that year they signed Selanne and Kariya. This team is too talented to perform as poorly as they have.
Wouldn't mind hearing this from time to time this season...seems appropriate.
Nice strawman argument. I never said Haviland would lead the Hawks to a Cup.
If Bowman finds the balls to fire Q, you stay with someone the team know at this point in the season which means Haviland. If Haviland can't cut it, Stan has all sumemr to find a coach. One who knows how to run a PK/PP , nor go into the shell and play soft no hit defense.
You are insinuating that Haviland could do a better job coaching the Hawks than Quenville. Equally as worthy as saying Haviland would lead the Hawks to a cup.
The Hawks got rid of Dennis freaking Savard about 12 games into the season and replaced him with Q. Organizationaly they have ZERO problem axing a coach if they feel its needed. They havn't fired Q, so they obviously top to bottom, dont feel its necessary
Q is a great coach who has never had a team finish under .500
He is one of the games best and the Hawks struggles though partly related to the coaching choices he made has more to do with the players on ice not him
There I said it ,, That is my final statement on subject
You are all welcome to blast me for it but Q is not problem with this team
I agree with Teemu. Q has had a great career, but he seems to have lost this team. We've seen it over and over both this year and last year.
If he has lost the room, or has grown to accept medocrity as Teemu alluded to, he has to go. I realize those are both IFs as we on the outside will never know, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least at this point. I'll say it again, if people think that this team has been well-coached this year, they need to wake up.
You are insinuating that Haviland could do a better job coaching the Hawks than Quenville. Equally as worthy as saying Haviland would lead the Hawks to a cup.
The Hawks got rid of Dennis freaking Savard about 12 games into the season and replaced him with Q. Organizationaly they have ZERO problem axing a coach if they feel its needed. They havn't fired Q, so they obviously top to bottom, dont feel its necessary
Q would have started the season coaching that team, if not for his DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE charges. That made it a PR nightmare to make him the head coach before the season started. Once the news about the drunk driving charges subsided, they axed Savard as soon as they possibly could. It was four games into the season, by the way. The Hawks had no intention of keeping Savard as the head coach to start the season, but Q's problem with the booze forced their hand. Or do you guys really believe that the Blackhawks hired Joel Quenneville as a "scout"?
I wonder if we could cite Q for Coaching Under the Influence?
You are insinuating that Haviland could do a better job coaching the Hawks than Quenville. Equally as worthy as saying Haviland would lead the Hawks to a cup.
The Hawks got rid of Dennis freaking Savard about 12 games into the season and replaced him with Q. Organizationaly they have ZERO problem axing a coach if they feel its needed. They havn't fired Q, so they obviously top to bottom, dont feel its necessary
Yeah Q is doing such a great job the last 2 years. Barely squeaking into the playoffs and just getting blown out this year in numerous games. That PK is just AWESOME. Q's middle name should be Shell for the amount of time this team plays not to win with the lead.
Haviland doing a better job than Q is equal to Haviland would lead the Hawks to the SC?
Specious Reasoning at it's best. I have a rock that have kept wild Tigers out of Chicago for 30 years. Would you like to buy it?
Yeah Q is doing such a great job the last 2 years. Barely squeaking into the playoffs and just getting blown out this year in numerous games. That PK is just AWESOME. Q's middle name should be Shell for the amount of time this team plays not to win with the lead.
Haviland doing a better job than Q is equal to Haviland would lead the Hawks to the SC?
Specious Reasoning at it's best. I have a rock that have kept wild Tigers out of Chicago for 30 years. Would you like to buy it?
Colorado also had serious problems with going into a shell and blowing third period leads when he was there.
There's no question that Quenneville was the right guy to hire at the right time.
But after his name was engraved on that cup, he more or less retired. The tenacity in his style is gone, and he has become tolerant of mediocrity. We used to hear how, after a bad game, Q would chew the team out. Now all we hear from him is, "meh, maybe next game we'll show up." I was no fan of Savard, but there's a reason why "Commit to the Indian" is still part of Blackhawks fandom vernacular. He wasn't a very good X's and O's coach, but he cared if the team put out an embarrassing effort. Last season was arguably the most embarrassing performance from an NHL team since Colorado choked that year they signed Selanne and Kariya. This team is too talented to perform as poorly as they have.
Well said Teemu.
If this poor play continues for much longer, and Q truly wants to do what is best for the club, he needs to do an assessment and ask himself if the team is performing under the current coaching staff. The answer, obviously being no, he needs to ask why. Are his 2 assistants doing a good job? If the answer is no for either or both, he needs to act and prompt Stan to get one or both out of here. If the answer is yes, he needs to look at himself in the mirror and admit that he is the problem and that it’s time for him to resign and leave with his dignity intact.
He should be fired. The line today at practice was Toews-Kane-Shaw.
Most ridiculous thing i've ever seen.
I don't understand what Shaw has done to be rewarded with top six minutes. At all.
Q does one smart thing, in putting Bolland between Sharp and Hossa. Then he counters it with three stupid decisions.
Leddy/Montador and Hammer/O'Donnell - Because OD is capable of playing top 4 minutes at this point in his career, right? More unjustified Montador hate too. Cool. More 30 minute a night games for Keith and Seabrook.
Kruger/Morrison/Stalberg - Let's reward Stalberg's improvement and hard work by putting him with a guy who couldn't break Calgary's lineup, and a rookie that's struggling. Nice. That should send him the right message?
Bickell/Mayers/Frolik - A soft, defensively sound, finesse player, that can't win a board battle, should fit a fourth line role nicely. In what world is Frolik a fourth liner? Joel Quenneville's world, of course.
Let's see if he actually uses the Bolland line properly. If so, it might be enough to counteract all the other stupidity happening, but not likely.
He should be fired. The line today at practice was Toews-Kane-Shaw.
Most ridiculous thing i've ever seen.
Maybe he is trying to do something to make this team harder to stop. As it stands now, we have 2 solid scoring lines, and that's it. Teams focus on those, we have trouble scoring goals.
Bolland to #2C is a smart moves and makes that line even more potent (finally). I also HOPE that this 2nd line is also considered the "shutdown" line while Bolland is there. Between him and Hossa, and Sharp isn't terrible at D, there's no reason they can't take the other team's top line out of the game and score on them as well.
The 3rd line has been a weak spot all year, and hasn't been a scoring line. Bolland was never given solid linemates. Perhaps the plan here, is that Morrison can still produce and make some things happen with the Hawks, and that Stalberg has been solid enough that he makes the 3rd line a legitimate threat. At least his speed gives them something to think about. The thing about Stalberg has been...he has done well on ANY of the 4 lines this season. So why not see if he can't help Morrinson and the 3rd line?
I don't take that as a demotion, as much as a vote of confidence in Stalberg. Maybe they can get some chances going against Colorado and give teams 3 lines to consider for the time being....
Q is a great coach who has never had a team finish under .500
He is one of the games best and the Hawks struggles though partly related to the coaching choices he made has more to do with the players on ice not him
There I said it ,, That is my final statement on subject
You are all welcome to blast me for it but Q is not problem with this team
Before anyone continues commenting on this statement. Full lines at practice:
65-19-88
10-36-81
25-17-16
29-22-67
QFT? If that's our fourth line... we shouldn't be play a fourth line at all, scratch SOD, play 5 defense man, and put 4 forwards and 1 d man as a make shift fourth line.
25-17-16-22
5
At least that way there'd be some actual production.
And why the **** is Hayes still not called up? Unbelievable...
QFT? If that's our fourth line... we shouldn't be play a fourth line at all, scratch SOD, play 5 defense man, and put 4 forwards and 1 d man as a make shift fourth line.
25-17-16-22
5
At least that way there'd be some actual production.
And why the **** is Hayes still not called up? Unbelievable...
Fourth line isn't that bad. Bickell didn't have that bad of a game against the flames and Frolik...well...idk. Hayes won't be called up because Bowman's only "roster" players to be traded are Frolik and Bickell. He is hoping to have them pick up production and showcase them for teams.
Expecct Hayes up after TD if Bickell and/or Frolik isn't traded.
worthy as saying Haviland would lead the Hawks to a cup.
:
