If Clarke was feeling burnout he should have really stepped down before we lost Dean Lombardi. The only reason I can see why he didn't is he wanted Holmgrem to replace him but Lombardi would have been a much better choice as far as building a solid young core in addition to what we already have. I mean he did get us a 2nd round pick but we also lost Hextall too.
It just really sucks we lost 2 really good staff members to the Kings right before our house cleaning.
I don't know I am a believer Snider stood behind Clarke. I mean how the hell is Holmgrem gonna be any better? There are no great GM's out there anymore so I don't see any reason why he would push Clarke out.
I don't know I am a believer Snider stood behind Clarke. I mean how the hell is Holmgrem gonna be any better? There are no great GM's out there anymore so I don't see any reason why he would push Clarke out.
He resigned under his own power. I'm pretty confident in that.
If Clarke was feeling burnout he should have really stepped down before we lost Dean Lombardi. The only reason I can see why he didn't is he wanted Holmgrem to replace him but Lombardi would have been a much better choice as far as building a solid young core in addition to what we already have. I mean he did get us a 2nd round pick but we also lost Hextall too.
It just really sucks we lost 2 really good staff members to the Kings right before our house cleaning.
The first thing to cross my mind was "Bring back Hexxy and Lombardi." Stevens may be a decent AHL coach, but he doesn't have the tools to get the job done in the NHL IMO. If he did, the Flyers wouldn't be 1-6-1, right now.
The first thing to cross my mind was "Bring back Hexxy and Lombardi." Stevens may be a decent AHL coach, but he doesn't have the tools to get the job done in the NHL IMO. If he did, the Flyers wouldn't be 1-6-1, right now.
So... what, is Stevens responsible for Hitch losing the team's ear? I don't think he could have really gone and done anything BUT what was a part of Hitch's strategy, or he would have been undermining the head coach and then he'd have been the one fired.
So... what, is Stevens responsible for Hitch losing the team's ear? I don't think he could have really gone and done anything BUT what was a part of Hitch's strategy, or he would have been undermining the head coach and then he'd have been the one fired.
I'm willing to bet my '96 Saturn that if Stevens had any significant words of wisdom on how to improve the power-play/chemistry/chances of Hitchcock NOT getting fired, he would have spoke, and Hitch would have listened. The fact that the Flyers continued to lose in embarassing fashion tells me that we don't have a Stanley Cup winning head coach in Stevens. And isn't that what this is all about- winning the Stanley Cup?
I'm willing to bet my '96 Saturn that if Stevens had any significant words of wisdom on how to improve the power-play/chemistry/chances of Hitchcock NOT getting fired, he would have spoke, and Hitch would have listened. The fact that the Flyers continued to lose in embarassing fashion tells me that we don't have a Stanley Cup winning head coach in Stevens. And isn't that what this is all about- winning the Stanley Cup?
I think for this season, what this is all about is not getting our ***** handed to us on a nightly basis.
If Clarke was feeling burnout he should have really stepped down before we lost Dean Lombardi. The only reason I can see why he didn't is he wanted Holmgrem to replace him but Lombardi would have been a much better choice as far as building a solid young core in addition to what we already have. I mean he did get us a 2nd round pick but we also lost Hextall too.
It just really sucks we lost 2 really good staff members to the Kings right before our house cleaning.
Hextall and Lombardi were more about the pro scouting side, while Holmgren has been focused more upon the amauteur scouting and the draft. Of late our draft record has been much better than our free agent pick-ups/trades.
I think Lombardi is more than just a good drafting GM. I think especially after having Clarke as a mentor he would be able to take his prior experience and new experience and put together a winner.
I don't think the owner was/is a big fan of Dean L. I forgot where I read it, but Dean does things his way and does not like having an owner looking over his shoulder...
One of the good things--for bad or good--the flyers have an owner who loves hockey and knows something about it--but--he is a little like Harrold Ballard of the Leafs--maybe too much in the picture sometimes
__________________
trying to fend off exwife number 2
45000/010113
GO SHARKS GO
I don't think the owner was/is a big fan of Dean L. I forgot where I read it, but Dean does things his way and does not like having an owner looking over his shoulder...
One of the good things--for bad or good--the flyers have an owner who loves hockey and knows something about it--but--he is a little like Harrold Ballard of the Leafs--maybe too much in the picture sometimes
To compare Ed Snider to Harold Ballard is a slap in the face. Ed Snider has always gone out of his way to try to bring winning hockey to Philadelphia. Yes, he had an arena that was sold out, but he also wanted to have the best team on the ice. That's the difference between him and Ballard and it's a very significant difference.
As for being an owner who might be too much in the picture, it's his team. He can do what he wants. Every team in the league should be lucky to have an owner like Snider who wants nothing more than to win.
I'm willing to bet my '96 Saturn that if Stevens had any significant words of wisdom on how to improve the power-play/chemistry/chances of Hitchcock NOT getting fired, he would have spoke, and Hitch would have listened. The fact that the Flyers continued to lose in embarassing fashion tells me that we don't have a Stanley Cup winning head coach in Stevens. And isn't that what this is all about- winning the Stanley Cup?
its not as simple as "giving a few words of wisdom". its about getting a fresh attitude and motivating your players in this case. there is a large difference in terms of influence between an assitant and head coach
