RDS now is proposing Ronald Mcdonald. They base their choice on the fact that Mcdo serves French Fries.
Odjick!!
Saw Gino talk on l'Antichambre yesterday the guy has a good heart but he really has no brains. I've come to think over the year that RDS is really not at all a good source for hockey scoops. And they're trying their best to put something on the table every afternoon to get ratings. Whether it's pure specualtion or facts, they just give way too much information to the fans. Saying that Pat Brisson could become GM is the best example of pure speculation turned into evening news. Brisebois seems to be the only viable candidate for the job but I've got a feeling they'll turn to someone not yet mentioned in the media.
I just laugh @ Carbo trying to get a job really hard.
Wouldn't be totally against having him in the org. again, but it's just funny that he's pushing hard for a job on TV.
It's so true, although while a blatant plea, I also really respect the fact that he bleeds bleu, blanc, rouge. AC is so weird cuz they have him on RDS basically 2 years after ripping into him daily and then just making casual attacks on other coaches for many of the same reasons. There was no AC then (I don't think), but there was plenty of Carbo bashing.
another fun aspect of L'AC:
How does this mofo get to talk about our team, about headshots and even mention the name Josh "Georges" Gorges?!!!
How does this mofo get to talk about our team, about headshots and even mention the name Josh "Georges" Gorges?!!!
Totally forgot that hit. He then whines when the ref gives him a penalty? ****ing piece of ****. I wouldn't be surprised if that was a mild concussion for Gorges.
Really? Honestly, the only guys that would get interviews from other teams are Brisson, Brisebois, McGuire and maybe Giguere.
You can easily add Lacroix, Loiselle and Bergevin to your list. I'd even remove Mcguire and Giguere for the same reasons I wouldn't want Jacques Martin, but it doesn't mean they're not qualified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu
Any restriction that isn't hockey related reduces your talent pool. It's completely contradictory. Unless the top GM candidates are bilingual, your point fails.
Really? The contradiction is in this sentence that I've quoted! Because it's not hockey related, it reduces the talent pool? What? Can't those candidates be comparable? Don't they all have strengths and weaknesses? Come on now, you're reaching.
The fact remains that this is Montreal, in a unique market and if there are qualified people for the jobs, they must at the very least explore those options... whether you like it or not.
You can easily add Lacroix, Loiselle and Bergevin to your list. I'd even remove Mcguire and Giguere for the same reasons I wouldn't want Jacques Martin, but it doesn't mean they're not qualified.
How can you take out McGuire, who actually has been interviewed recently for GM positions (Minny)? And you can't add Lacroix, because a reputable member of the media hasn't confirmed Montreal has contacted him. If we're talking about hypothetical candidates, then I heard a rumour on here that Fenton was contacted.
Toronto media members I respect (like Cybulski) are of the opinion that Loiselle isn't really a leader and Bergevin is a rapid riser, but is pretty under-educated (only finishing grade 11) and has admitted he doesn't have a strong grasp of the Cap and contract structuring. Neither has ever interviewed for a GM position before (unlike McGuire and Giguere). Which isn't to say I'd prefer Giguere to Loiselle, I'm just saying that its very, VERY unlikely other teams would interview Bergevin and Loiselle over guys like Fenton, Benning, Kekäläinen, Kevin McDonald, Jeff Gorton or Jason Botterhill.
Last edited by Captain Smurf: 04-07-2012 at 08:05 AM.
Really? The contradiction is in this sentence that I've quoted! Because it's not hockey related, it reduces the talent pool? What? Can't those candidates be comparable? Don't they all have strengths and weaknesses? Come on now, you're reaching.
The fact remains that this is Montreal, in a unique market and if there are qualified people for the jobs, they must at the very least explore those options... whether you like it or not.
Let me simplify it for you: unless the top candidates are bilingual, you're not picking from the best. Ask yourself if they are or if you're picking the next GM based on language because you think they can do a good enough job. If it's the latter, you are selecting form a smaller group of candidates.
The question is for you or any others who have an answer.
How many former NHL players, coaches and GM have came back and had SUCCESS after having worked in the media (full time) for a good while (2 years and more) ?
How can you take out McGuire, who actually has been interviewed recently for GM positions (Minny)? And you can't add Lacroix, because a reputable member of the media hasn't confirmed Montreal has contacted him. If we're talking about hypothetical candidates, then I heard a rumour on here that Fenton was contacted.
Toronto media members I respect (like Cybulski) are of the opinion that Loiselle isn't really a leader and Bergevin is a rapid riser, but is pretty under-educated (only finishing grade 11) and has admitted he doesn't have a strong grasp of the Cap and contract structuring. Neither has ever interviewed for a GM position before (unlike McGuire and Giguere). Which isn't to say I'd prefer Giguere to Loiselle, I'm just saying that its very, VERY unlikely other teams would interview Bergevin and Loiselle over guys like Fenton, Benning, Kekäläinen, Kevin McDonald, Jeff Gorton or Jason Botterhill.
A couple of things here.
Because mainstreem media has not reported that someone has or has not been contacted doesn't mean that the candidate hasn't been contacted or won't be in the near future.
I see that you base your analysis on what some media (in this case Toronto) are saying. There's a reason why members of the media don't manage professional hockey teams. They're good (sometimes) at reporting, that's where it ends. They don't know the inside scoops.
Most GM's don't know the details of the cap. Every NHL team has specialists taking care of that aspect as it's too complex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu
Let me simplify it for you: unless the top candidates are bilingual, you're not picking from the best. Ask yourself if they are or if you're picking the next GM based on language because you think they can do a good enough job. If it's the latter, you are selecting form a smaller group of candidates.
But what if those candidates are as qualified as others, which I think they are? Is it still narrowing?
For the record, I'm not saying that they need to pickup a bilingual candidate at all cost here. I'm saying that the names rumoured are very much qualified for the job and perhaps amongst the best available. Big difference.
Because mainstreem media has not reported that someone has or has not been contacted doesn't mean that the candidate hasn't been contacted or won't be in the near future.
I see that you base your analysis on what some media (in this case Toronto) are saying. There's a reason why members of the media don't manage professional hockey teams. They're good (sometimes) at reporting, that's where it ends. They don't know the inside scoops.
Most GM's don't know the details of the cap. Every NHL team has specialists taking care of that aspect as it's too complex.
But what if those candidates are as qualified as others, which I think they are? Is it still narrowing?
For the record, I'm not saying that they need to pickup a bilingual candidate at all cost here. I'm saying that the names rumoured are very much qualified for the job and perhaps amongst the best available. Big difference.
Then by all means. If the only thing separating two equal candidates is language, go for it. But I'd suggest the best candidates don't speak French, i.e. Jim Nill.
