Housley Should Have Until End of December

[JJFIVEOH]

I'm not going to pretend to think the Sabres were going to make the playoffs this year. But if you're lucky enough to have a 10 game win streak, you'd better have a good enough coach to get you there. 

He's soft, doesn't stick up for his team and sits back takes it. 

I'm fed up with him. The Sabres have consistently hired coaches who were labeled as "teachers". The last time we had a coach that had some balls and made the team show up night after night was Ted Nolan. 

Hire somebody with Balls. Goober didn't have any. Rolston didn't have any. Housley doesn't have any.  

[Stoner]

17 minutes ago, JJFIVEOH said:

I'm not going to pretend to think the Sabres were going to make the playoffs this year. But if you're lucky enough to have a 10 game win streak, you'd better have a good enough coach to get you there. 

He's soft, doesn't stick up for his team and sits back takes it. 

I'm fed up with him. The Sabres have consistently hired coaches who were labeled as "teachers". The last time we had a coach that had some balls and made the team show up night after night was Ted Nolan. 

Hire somebody with Balls. Goober didn't have any. Rolston didn't have any. Housley doesn't have any.  

They were fine, young men though — but not clappers, which is curious.

[eman]

On 1/13/2019 at 11:58 AM, Carmel Corn said:

Agree that the roster is not a perfect match for the system and it will take more work for JB to fill the gaps.  I also don't believe you make a HC change just for the sake of change and unless you have a strong sense that you have a better coach lined up, you proceed with caution (ex. Coach Q is not a given). 

That being said, I believe it is fair to judge Housley on the PP effectiveness.  It has struggled in the bottom half or third of the league since he took over from his predecessor.   An "offensive" minded coach should be accountable for at least showing improvement in the PP, but I feel in our case coach Phil has failed.  He has the tools to work with here and it is fair game to be critical of the team's performance here.

If they contact coach Q and he says yes on the phone, you have a better coach than Phil. No argument. The Hawks are old now and beat up from prolonged seasons of either winning the Cup or contending for one. This is why they are struggling now. They need to rebuild.

[...]

4 minutes ago, eman said:

If they contact coach Q and he says yes on the phone, you have a better coach than Phil. No argument. The Hawks are old now and beat up from prolonged seasons of either winning the Cup or contending for one. This is why they are struggling now. They need to rebuild.

If coach Q were worth keeping for the rebuild, don't you think they would have done so?  Or was the Chicago organization throwing meat to the fans because the roster can't play at a competitive level anymore?  

This is ridiculous.  You all want Quenneville, but he was fired from a team that was under-performing.  Is it that he looks more angry on TV? That, sometimes, the camera will catch him grabbing his own package as a sign of enmity towards the refs? 

Oh, I know, the canned response is "he has three Cups."  He does indeed, but he also had a roster that was perfectly tuned to play the game he wanted them to play - until his core could no longer play it.

In all honesty, I wouldn't mind seeing Quenneville behind our bench, and I like the idea of a spry coach.  However, his own team dumped him when they clearly need to rebuild.  Does that say something about Q?  Does that say something about the organization?  What about the fans who wanted to fire the coach who brought them three Cups and could be in on the rebuild of the next generation Blackhawks?  Something is especially stupid here.

 

 

 

 

[eman]

2 minutes ago, ... said:

If coach Q were worth keeping for the rebuild, don't you think they would have done so?  Or was the Chicago organization throwing meat to the fans because the roster can't play at a competitive level anymore?  

This is ridiculous.  You all want Quenneville, but he was fired from a team that was under-performing.  Is it that he looks more angry on TV? That, sometimes, the camera will catch him grabbing his own package as a sign of enmity towards the refs? 

Oh, I know, the canned response is "he has three Cups."  He does indeed, but he also had a roster that was perfectly tuned to play the game he wanted them to play - until his core could no longer play it.

In all honesty, I wouldn't mind seeing Quenneville behind our bench, and I like the idea of a spry coach.  However, his own team dumped him when they clearly need to rebuild.  Does that say something about Q?  Does that say something about the organization?  What about the fans who wanted to fire the coach who brought them three Cups and could be in on the rebuild of the next generation Blackhawks?  Something is especially stupid here.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely every coach on this league has a "best before date", every coach. What I like about Quenneville is that he's tough (no way you can convince me Phil is) You make a huge screw up, you sit, keep screwing up, you get press box time. Babcock does this- he did it with Gardiner the other night is the same. The refs screwed you, you at least chew their ass out and maybe take a fine. It means also having your players back. As for assembling an "all-star roster" and coasting as a coach to get results, what makes anyone think here that we can actually get a roster the calibre of the Hawks or Caps etc? I already think we have some decent talent assembled here (not Hawks quality but certainly way better than the results are showing) This is why I continuously harp on coach Phil. 2nd season now with a horrid power play! The defense looks lost in the last 20 games....again! I'll take coach Q hands down.

[LGR4GM]

Most won't like this but if were are dropping Phil in season, I vote for Chris Taylor to be brought in. The Americans seem to be doing well. They aren't the most talented AHL team but they find ways to win. 

[darksabre]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Most won't like this but if were are dropping Phil in season, I vote for Chris Taylor to be brought in. The Americans seem to be doing well. They aren't the most talented AHL team but they find ways to win. 

This is why Phil wont be dropped until the off-season. If Botterill has Taylor penciled in as the replacement then he's not going to screw up the Americans success this year just to bail out the Sabres.

[Eleven]

16 hours ago, Brawndo said:

By the way, do you want an example of a coach who was average at best but is in the Hall Of Fame because he rode his rosters? 

Marv Levy

With the possible exception of the innovation of the K-Gun (I'm not sure how much was Levy and how much was Marchibroda), absolutely.

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, darksabre said:

This is why Phil wont be dropped until the off-season. If Botterill has Taylor penciled in as the replacement then he's not going to screw up the Americans success this year just to bail out the Sabres.

Sure he will. It gives him 2-3 months time to evaluate Taylor in the NHL role. 

[...]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

Sure he will. It gives him 2-3 months time to evaluate Taylor in the NHL role. 

And more for the fans to bitch about.  Especially if he's a bust in the NHL like Rolston.  Then we have the summer to find a guy.  Nice roller coaster you got there!  

[Taro T]

10 minutes ago, Eleven said:

With the possible exception of the innovation of the K-Gun (I'm not sure how much was Levy and how much was Marchibroda), absolutely.

Allindications are the K-Gun was Marchibroda's brain child.

Also, a bit of morning trivia, the "K" in K-Gun was Keith McKeller, not Jim Kelly.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, ... said:

And more for the fans to bitch about.  Especially if he's a bust in the NHL like Rolston.  Then we have the summer to find a guy.  Nice roller coaster you got there!  

If you are flaming out anyways, it doesn't matter. Taylor doesn't strike me as Rolston though. The other good part is he is running the same system. Sadly, I don't think Phil is on the hot seat. I think we will sit here and watch him not make adjustments and bench Pilut for a veteran over and over until the seasons end. 

[PromoTheRobot]

My question is how many ex-Sabre coaches are still getting paid? Is there room for one more?

[...]

 

[Eleven]

18 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Allindications are the K-Gun was Marchibroda's brain child.

Also, a bit of morning trivia, the "K" in K-Gun was Keith McKeller, not Jim Kelly.

Yes, because it heavily relied on McKeller's versatility.

Back to Housley:  Again, some folks seem not to have learned the lesson of seven years ago.  No coach is taking this roster to the Finals.  Not Joel Quenneville and not Chris Taylor.  He's got a decent system and a roster that needs improvement and development.  Leave it alone.  Quit changing coaches every 1.5 years already.  He's not an obvious loser like Rolston; he's not a guy without a system like Nolan; he's *got* to be better than Bylsma, right?

Just now, ... said:

 

And then Hamilton replied that he's heard him yelling from the other side of the door.

[darksabre]

30 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Sure he will. It gives him 2-3 months time to evaluate Taylor in the NHL role. 

It's just not gonna happen. Botterill isn't gonna mess with the Amerks.

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, darksabre said:

It's just not gonna happen. Botterill isn't gonna mess with the Amerks.

I don't think that is the logic. I think it is more Botterill isn't going to fire Housley in season. 

[darksabre]

Just now, LGR4GM said:

I don't think that is the logic. I think it is more Botterill isn't going to fire Housley in season. 

It's both. Because firing Housley just to name some random guy interim isn't going to be productive. And neither would replacing him with Taylor.

So any change is only ever going to happen in the off season.

[LGR4GM]

Just now, darksabre said:

It's both. Because firing Housley just to name some random guy interim isn't going to be productive. And neither would replacing him with Taylor.

So any change is only ever going to happen in the off season.

But the reason it is not happening isn't because of "messing with rochester". 

[...]

This guys has it correct with the idea of hiring Quenneville.  A lot of you think it's as easy as ordering a new coach from Amazon.

 

[darksabre]

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

But the reason it is not happening isn't because of "messing with rochester". 

Sure it is.

2 minutes ago, ... said:

This guys has it correct with the idea of hiring Quenneville.  A lot of you think it's as easy as ordering a new coach from Amazon.

 

Yup. Anyone who wants Q better sit tight till June.

[LGR4GM]

Just now, darksabre said:

Sure it is.

That means that you think or are implying Botterill would rather protect Rochester than help the Sabres. I don't see that. The only time he protects Rochester is when he deliberatly leaves guys down there to develop. 

[eman]

3 minutes ago, darksabre said:

Sure it is.

Yup. Anyone who wants Q better sit tight till June.

and unfortunately, watch him go to another club who will be more successful than we are next season and we can all wonder when Chris Taylor gets his shot........................but, I could be wrong on this.

[darksabre]

5 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

That means that you think or are implying Botterill would rather protect Rochester than help the Sabres. I don't see that. The only time he protects Rochester is when he deliberatly leaves guys down there to develop. 

I don't think he'd rather protect Rochester. I think it's just the reality of the situation. There's nothing that taking guys, including coaches, from Rochester can really do to help the Sabres right now. So he's not going to do it. It doesn't make much sense.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

If he really wants to help Roch instead of the Sabres.....send Casey and TT down to develop. Bring up Wilson and let Dahlin play forward the rest of the year.