Jump to content

Per Botterill: Sabres have relieved Phil Housley of his Coaching Duties


Recommended Posts

Posted
8 hours ago, JJFIVEOH said:

I'm surprised that Botterill had the balls to do it. I never thought he would. Since he messed up on the O'Reilly trade and let Lehner go (I give Botts credit, perhaps Lehner wanted to leave, and for good reason). Since he is a "yes" man, perhaps it wasn't his decision. We'll see, the next few weeks should be fun. 

Then we'll all have to wait and talk about movies and Games of Thrones, lol. 

I will bet you money Robin Lehner will have regression next season. 

Posted
14 hours ago, Doohickie said:

I always thought that was a weird way to put it.

 

JBot:  "So Phil, you're not gonna be the coach anymore."

XHCPH:  "Boy, am I relieved!"

I wonder if the terminology is important in some legal sense. Why not "fired"?

Posted
12 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

I wonder if the terminology is important in some legal sense. Why not "fired"?

Contract is the reason I believe. He gone get paid. 

Posted
48 minutes ago, inkman said:

Contract is the reason I believe. He gone get paid. 

Of course. But not if he got "fired"?

I'd bet we never hear from Phil in the NHL again.

Posted
4 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Of course. But not if he got "fired"?

I'd bet we never hear from Phil in the NHL again.

He will get an assistant job soon enough

1 minute ago, Hoss said:

For anybody rooting for Boudreau, Fenton says he is staying in Minnesota.

Sounds like it's pretty much AV or McLellan then

Posted
Just now, WildCard said:

He will get an assistant job soon enough

I don't feel it. Back in Minny he and his wife will be big deals and at home. They took their shots at the bigs and failed. They're fine and will be happy. Just a hunch.

Posted
2 minutes ago, WildCard said:

He will get an assistant job soon enough

Sounds like it's pretty much AV or McLellan then

That's my thought as well.  I kind of like the idea of AV.  Why is everyone against that?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Derrico said:

That's my thought as well.  I kind of like the idea of AV.  Why is everyone against that?

True's observation that AV is all counter attack is terrifying

2 minutes ago, darksabre said:

I'm more in favor of AV than T-mac.

Same

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

I wonder if the terminology is important in some legal sense. Why not "fired"?

Legal stuff is funny.  Even though you might think of him as fired for failure to meet goals, he did meet the terms of his contract.  "Fired" is more generally reserved for either a breach of contract or immoral/illegal conduct.  Relieved of duties implies he doesn't lose any pay owed under the contract.*



*stayed at a Holiday Inn last night answer.

Edited by Doohickie
Posted
21 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

His handling of the NYR roster is about as inspiring as death. He was Bylsma. 

I thought he was excellent when coaching Vancouver and pretty good with Montreal too. Didn't he have one deep run with a mediocre Rags team as well?

Posted
1 minute ago, Derrico said:

I thought he was excellent when coaching Vancouver and pretty good with Montreal too. Didn't he have one deep run with a mediocre Rags team as well?

He went to the Cup with the Rangers. 

Posted
1 minute ago, WildCard said:

He went to the Cup with the Rangers. 

So he took two different teams, with different styles to the cup finals.  I really don't understand the hate.  The Rags were built with aging veterans.  I'm not sure how much blame he deserves for the end of his term with the Rags.  It's not like they lit the world on fire this year after he left.

His teams made the playoffs 11 of 15 years as a head coach.  If we're going with a guy having experience I would be more than fine with AV (I think I even prefer him to McLellan).

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

So it looks like AV took a 77 point Montreal team the year before to the second round of the playoffs in his first year.  Then, his next stint he took a 92 point Vancouver team (season before) to a 105 point team and again made it to the second round.  As for the Rags he had a similar record to the season before he arrived.  Those are some nice bumps with his arrival (ofcourse not looking into any roster moves that may have impacted the stats).

Edited by Derrico
Posted
3 minutes ago, Derrico said:

So it looks like AV took a 77 point Montreal team the year before to the second round of the playoffs in his first year.  Then, his next stint he took a 92 point Vancouver team (season before) to a 105 point team and again made it to the second round.  As for the Rags he had a similar record to the season before he arrived.  Those are some nice bumps with his arrival (ofcourse not looking into any roster moves that may have impacted the stats).

He did it back when the league was focused on being big and strong though, and offense was dead. The league just isn't like that anymore

Posted
Just now, WildCard said:

He did it back when the league was focused on being big and strong though, and offense was dead. The league just isn't like that anymore

When was Vancouver ever big and strong?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, WildCard said:

He did it back when the league was focused on being big and strong though, and offense was dead. The league just isn't like that anymore

His teams were bad the last two years but he went to the second round in 2017.  That's not that long ago.

Edit - Sorry, he was only bad for one season as Quinn coached last year.  Second round in 2017.

Edited by Derrico
Posted
5 minutes ago, darksabre said:

When was Vancouver ever big and strong?

I didn't say they were big and strong, I said they found a way to play in that league; if you're not big and strong and the other team is, then you can't cycle/maintain zone time as well. But, if you're small and fast, which his teams all were, they can at least counter attack

1 minute ago, Derrico said:

Google the 2016/2017 Rangers roster.  He took THAT team to the second round.....in 2017.

Well, Lundvist did

Posted
1 minute ago, WildCard said:

I didn't say they were big and strong, I said they found a way to play in that league; if you're not big and strong and the other team is, then you can't cycle/maintain zone time as well. But, if you're small and fast, which his teams all were, they can at least counter attack

Well, Lundvist did

I'm not sure what your point is then. Are you saying AV is good because he was able to coach to his team's strengths? 

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...