I keep looking for similar praise for Fenton but came up empty.....
I'm sure if asked around the league Paul Fenton would be pretty highly regarded. Newspaper clippings are hardly a great argument as to why Fenton is not as good.
Our d core could definately use some improvement. Nashville has been a defence factory with him in Nashville.
He has been in charge of all player acquisitions since joining the Predators and managed the club’s Entry Draft efforts since 2003 (when the team selected Ryan Suter, Shea Weber, Kevin Klein and Alexander Sulzer),
Other Notables:Alexander Radulov
Pekka Rinne
Patric Hornqvist
Cody Franson
Jonathon Blum
Anders Lindback
Colin Wilson
Ryan Ellis
I'm sure if asked around the league Paul Fenton would be pretty highly regarded. Newspaper clippings are hardly a great argument as to why Fenton is not as good.
I never said it was the reason he was not as good......but I cannot find any recommendations anywhere for him. Brisebois has several from people and organizations that are knowledgeable and respected. This says a lot, doesn't it?
I mean, Yzerman, National anglophone publications, Liam McGuire.....they are not favouring a French candidate, they are favouring what they consider to be the best candidate....
I doubt these people are all wrong and ill-informed? I keep looking for similar praise for Fenton but came up empty.....
lol @ having to repost articles.
The fact is, if you bothered to even read all of the articles you posted, you would see that the Edmonton Journal blog also did a review of Fenton and gave him a higher praise than they did BriseBois.
I never said it was the reason he was not as good......but I cannot find any recommendations anywhere for him. Brisebois has several from people and organizations that are knowledgeable and respected. This says a lot, doesn't it?
I mean, Yzerman, National publications, Liam McGuire.....those are not favouring a French candidate, they are favouring the best candidate....
lol, Yzerman favoring brisebois means nothing. They work together, he will be pumping his assistants tires regardless. And its fine and dandy that the media thinks brisebois is the best but they are media, not people incharge of hockey decisions. There are a lot of candidates out there that are not getting public pushes but its not a popularity contest, so all those publications have no bearing on the interview process.
lol, Yzerman favoring brisebois means nothing. They work together, he will be pumping his assistants tires regardless. And its fine and dandy that the media thinks brisebois is the best but they are media, not people incharge of hockey decisions. There are a lot of candidates out there that are not getting public pushes but its not a popularity contest, so all those publications have no bearing on the interview process.
ahhh, but Fenton was sooooo superior.....unfortunately, no one seems to notice....and it does beat hearsay, does it not?
What are this candidate’s negatives? Like a lot of assistant general managers, BriseBois is something of a wildcard because we don’t really know what he’s going to do at the NHL level. For a team like Montreal – a team that has a long stretch of his work to judge – it’s easy to make a decision; it’s much less so for everyone else. Additionally, he doesn’t have the playing or coaching background that other candidates do.
What are this candidate’s negatives? There really aren’t a lot of things to point out. A closer look at Nashville’s draft record reveals a disturbing willingness to take the odd goaltender early on – such as Chet Pickard, the 18th overall selection in 2008 who finds himself as a subpar ECHL goaltender these days. Aside from that Nashville has largely been a picture-perfect small market franchise, and Fenton’s work is a big part of the reason why.
Anything else worth noting? I said in the title that Fenton will end up running an NHL team someday, and I have very little doubt that it’s true. His name always pops up in rumours, and he’s been interviewed before – by Minnesota before the wild opted to go with Chuck Fletcher – and given his resume he’s one of the most qualified guys around.
ahhh, but Fenton was sooooo superior.....unfortunately, no one seems to notice....
Actually people did notice. Like Macavoy said, the edmonton link you provided had a good write up of fenton as well. Good job. Again its not a popularity contest, its how people are regarded in the hockey circle and how they interview. They may very well end up hiring brisebois, but its not going to be because of the praise he gets in the media. It will be because they liked his work and his plan going forward. You need to realize a lot of the candidates don't want their names out in public and are not leaking it to anyone. So don't be surprised if we hire somebody thats name has not been in the spotlight.
Actually people did notice. Like Macavoy said, the edmonton link you provided had a good write up of fenton as well. Good job. Again its not a popularity contest, its how people are regarded in the hockey circle and how they interview. They may very well end up hiring brisebois, but its not going to be because of the praise he gets in the media. It will be because they liked his work and his plan going forward. You need to realize a lot of the candidates don't want their names out in public and are not leaking it to anyone. So don't be surprised if we hire somebody thats name has not been in the spotlight.
I have found no recommendations anywhere for Fenton to be the Habs GM. Not a page. Have you found one?
I have stopped at 5 for Brisbeois but there was several more google pages still to be reviewed.....Funny part is that a lot of the support Brisebois is getting is not from Quebec but from english Hockey media, personalities and experts.....
Dont forget, this discussion began on the premiss that Fenton was vastly superior to Brisebois. Oh...and about hearsay that Brisebois was a meanie with a player.....or at least, that is what the poster claimed.....
I have found no recommendations anywhere for Fenton to be the Habs GM. Not a page. Have you found one?
I have stopped at 5 for Brisbeois but there was several more google pages still to be reviewed.....Funny part is that a lot of the support Brisebois is getting is not from Quebec but from english Hockey media, personalities and experts.....
Dont forget, this discussion began on the premiss that Fenton was vastly superior to Brisebois.
Brisbois will get talked about more for the Habs GM position merely because he's french.
Also the discussion started out because Fenton has vastly more experience than Brisbois, not vastly superior than Brisbois. Don't try to twist things again.
I have found no recommendations anywhere for Fenton to be the Habs GM. Not a page. Have you found one?
I have stopped at 5 for Brisbeois but there was several more google pages still to be reviewed.....Funny part is that a lot of the support Brisebois is getting is not from Quebec but from english Hockey media, personalities and experts.....
Dont forget, this discussion began on the premiss that Fenton was vastly superior to Brisebois. Oh...and about hearsay that Brisebois was a meanie with a player.....or at least, that is what the poster claimed.....
Well the common thinking in most parts of the media is that the habs GM should be bilingual. So thats why you aren't seeing names like Fenton and Benning being talked about a lot. Again, I hardly care what the media thinks, if you wanted too you could take a lot of headlines and recommendations the media has made over the years and find plenty of opinions that turned out to be wrong. So this is really a nothing argument if you are solely going to use press clippings. Next.
Brisbois will get talked about more for the Habs GM position merely because he's french.
Also the discussion started out because Fenton has vastly more experience than Brisbois, not vastly superior than Brisbois. Don't try to twist things again.
Well, seems like aside the few here, the world does not agree with Fenton being a better candidate than Brisebois.....facts in hand, it was so demonstrated...
I do not doubt that one day Fenton will get a GM position but Montreal requires a more rounded and complete GM....
Fenton would be great if you are ready to accept a string of years with a defensive-mind/no offense Habs squad. Preds have nothing as forwards.
Habs have always been a team that won Stanley Cups thanks to their hall of fame goaltenders, and their superstar defensemen. We rarely relied on top scoring forwards.
When people say identity, that's our identity.
__________________
"Our priority is finding the best possible person to help us win." - Geoff Molson
The D is two player away from being pretty good. Markov, Subban, Gorges and Emelin is the core of that D. Get two big shutdown Ds to join them and we have a pretty good D. I suspect Tinordi will eventually be one of those guys....will probably have to hire the other....
I think most people agree that Robitaille is not likely to be a good GM. I think they want to leave no rocks unturned. I suspect they already know who they want anyway.....
I sorta chuckle at why Roy is to "fiery" to coach in Montreal .
I don't think anyone has a problem with 'fiery'. I think people have a problem with emotional immaturity. Pat Burns had none of the baggage that Roy had. He was a former cop for Pete's sake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake
It is indeed mind boggling. You have to think that they are looking at anything to discredit Roy while it would make him just different that the dull guys we had in the past.
You're talking like we start from the premise of 'I don't like Patrick Roy' and then come up with things to support this no matter what. That's not the case.
Roy has demonstrated a lack of emotional maturity (most polite way I can put it) throughout his life. That's why we don't like him for coach... not the other way around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake
But hey Burns was quiet.....so is Tortorella.....
You're being silly here. Fiery is fine. Immature is not. If the GM wants a fiery coach, I don't think anyone will have a problem with that as long as they know their stuff.
Personally, I think after the regime we just had, we'd be better off with a 'players' coach' type guy (like Demers used to be) but that's just my opinion.
Fiery or not though, I don't think Roy is the guy. And I don't need to go scrounging for reasons. The reasons are there in your face.
Habs have always been a team that won Stanley Cups thanks to their hall of fame goaltenders, and their superstar defensemen. We rarely relied on top scoring forwards.
When people say identity, that's our identity.
Yeah, we were never called the 'Flying Frenchman.' We were never known for lethal offense or forcing the league to change the PP rules. We never had the best offensive players in the league like:
Malone
Lalonde
Stewart
Morenz
Joliat
Blake
Richard
Lach
Geoffrion
Beliveau
Moore
Lafleur
Shutt
Unfortunately, our firewagon turned into a milk truck. Yes we managed to get arguably the best goalie of all time to fluke us into two cups but we were never dominant in the way we were when we had that crazy scoring.
Always makes me laugh when I hear 'defense wins cups'. Of course that's true but so does offense. And the best clubs have BOTH.
Any one hear anything about Bobby Smith? Big dominant player and leader in his day for the Habs. Did have some management experience in his day with the NHLPA I believe and also GM or assistant GM for a brief time with ???
I don't think anyone has a problem with 'fiery'. I think people have a problem with emotional immaturity. Pat Burns had none of the baggage that Roy had. He was a former cop for Pete's sake.
You're talking like we start from the premise of 'I don't like Patrick Roy' and then come up with things to support this no matter what. That's not the case.
Roy has demonstrated a lack of emotional maturity (most polite way I can put it) throughout his life. That's why we don't like him for coach... not the other way around.
You're being silly here. Fiery is fine. Immature is not. If the GM wants a fiery coach, I don't think anyone will have a problem with that as long as they know their stuff.
Personally, I think after the regime we just had, we'd be better off with a 'players' coach' type guy (like Demers used to be) but that's just my opinion.
Fiery or not though, I don't think Roy is the guy. And I don't need to go scrounging for reasons. The reasons are there in your face.
I don't agree with that. I think we need a strong coach will not allow some of the players to do as they please....much like we seen this year. We need a coach who will get the players to buy into the system and play their part to the best of their abilities. Funny enough, that is one of Roy strong point. After over a decade of consistently demonstrating that with the Remparts.....
Roy has not been much of a different coach than Burns in Junior. Back then, I was at most Olympics games and Burns was pushing the limit frequently (what you call immaturity). If we compare apples to apples, then Roy and Burns during their junior terms where very much the same in terms of personality....
However, I do respect that you have an opinion about Roy.....he leaves no one indifferent...thats for sure...
