Jump to content

Fire Therrien!


C-Love
 Share

Recommended Posts

Might as well get this started now, so we'll have a place to go to November. This guy is not capable of coaching a team successfully in the NHL. He has a fairly good track record in the QMJHL, because he's style can be effective with kids. It doesn't hold true with men though. His record speaks for itself, and if he was capable he wouldn't have been without a job since 2009.

I am surprised and disappointed that Bergevin did not go after the best candidate for the job but rather picked the best (in his opinion) francophone for the job.

I was very optimistic about the upcoming season and this can only be seen as a serious setback, and will most likely give us more of the same from last year.

I know people will complain about this going on here this early, but we'll just see what those same people will be saying in November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, great thread! And if there is a "Fire Therrien" thread, we may as well get a "Fire Bergevin" thread going because he hired him and his ass will be next. While we're at it, get the "Tank for MacKinnon" going as well. I'm looking forward to another exciting season.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am surprised and disappointed that Bergevin did not go after the best candidate for the job but rather picked the best (in his opinion) francophone for the job.

WHO IS THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR THE JOB!?

Seriously. There are no good candidates this summer. This was the worst time to have needed a new coach. I would have preferred Martin for one more year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHO IS THE BEST CANDIDATE FOR THE JOB!?

Seriously. There are no good candidates this summer. This was the worst time to have needed a new coach. I would have preferred Martin for one more year.

Murray, McTavish, Sutter, Gallant, Wilson, Quinn, etc etc, the list of better canditates is actually quite long...cept the all-important cup-winning necessitity of pandering to media.

Must be one big party at RDS today, what a joke. Hope tis a quick fire.

With this hire the odds of drafting Mackinnon or Seth Jones just increased; but cant see many other positives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you actually list Pat Quinn over Michel Therrien?

I think that ends the discussion.

I am by no means a Pat Quinn supporter, and he wouldn't have been on my desired candidates list, BUT I certainly think there is a case to be made that he is a better head coach than Michel Therrien.

Frankly, it's quite comical to imply that Therrien is a better coach.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am by no means a Pat Quinn supporter, and he wouldn't have been on my desired candidates list, BUT I certainly think there is a case to be made that he is a better head coach than Michel Therrien.

Frankly, it's quite comical to imply that Therrien is a better coach.

You're blinded by hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're blinded by hate.

Not at all, I disagree with the hiring of Therrien, but to say he's in the same class as Quinn is ridiculous.

Pat Quinn, in his career, sits:

5th all-time in career games coached

4th all-time in career coaching wins

4th all-time in playoff games coached

5th all-time in playoff coaching wins

Again, i'm not saying we should have hired Quinn, but to say he's a worse option than Therrien really shows who is blinded here.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you want to be first to make this call and when it happens in a few years, because everyone in the position of coach will either get fired or move on, you will say I told you so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bergevin "seemingly" has backbone of a squid ? very disappointing unless mediocrity is goal?

I've tried to write three responses to this comment but they all just turn into point less rants.

How does picking a coach that has made it to the Stanley cup final, brought a team of young talent from bottom to the playoffs, and won a memorial cup hint at mediocrity?

Picking Roy was risky, Hartley wasn't really available. If I was an english coach.... I would not want to be in Montreal! The media is nuts! Any English coach would have had his job hampered because of the stress put on him. I really have a hard time imaging how someone could put aside that much media angst and do his job.

Coaches will not win you a cup. Coaches can make a team fall apart though, and picking a English coach with allllll the distractions he would have had or picking Roy with limited experience easily could result in the second option.

I dunno. That comment reallllllllly makes no sense, HF board worthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murray, McTavish, Sutter, Gallant, Wilson, Quinn, etc etc, the list of better canditates is actually quite long...cept the all-important cup-winning necessitity of pandering to media.

Must be one big party at RDS today, what a joke. Hope tis a quick fire.

With this hire the odds of drafting Mackinnon or Seth Jones just increased; but cant see many other positives?

I wouldn't call McTavish, Wilson, or Quinn better candidates. They are equally as bad as Therrien

Sutter is okay

Murray or Gallant would have been good.

But this isn't a language thing, cause I would have taken Groulx or Roy too, ahead of Therrien..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried to write three responses to this comment but they all just turn into point less rants.

How does picking a coach that has made it to the Stanley cup final, brought a team of young talent from bottom to the playoffs, and won a memorial cup hint at mediocrity?

Picking Roy was risky, Hartley wasn't really available. If I was an english coach.... I would not want to be in Montreal! The media is nuts! Any English coach would have had his job hampered because of the stress put on him. I really have a hard time imaging how someone could put aside that much media angst and do his job.

Coaches will not win you a cup. Coaches can make a team fall apart though, and picking a English coach with allllll the distractions he would have had or picking Roy with limited experience easily could result in the second option.

I dunno. That comment reallllllllly makes no sense, HF board worthy.

I appreciate you actually seeing as a super hire and somehow seeing the positive.

And you could rant all you like, wouldnt change my opinion one bit.

A sports organization managed to placate/pander to whims of media and politicians, as the first priority over team success; is doomed to struggle, or at best be handicapped to compete with 29 other teams who can actually have a rational and modern hiring process, unhindered by bigotry and 19th century language laws.

My expectations for 2012-13 just took a kick in the nuts, but will hope for best as always, but seems just another Martin hire all over again, cept Terrian is a kookier dude isnt he?

But, I really got nothing constructive to say on hire, so will get off my soapbox now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried to write three responses to this comment but they all just turn into point less rants.

How does picking a coach that has made it to the Stanley cup final, brought a team of young talent from bottom to the playoffs, and won a memorial cup hint at mediocrity?

Picking Roy was risky, Hartley wasn't really available. If I was an english coach.... I would not want to be in Montreal! The media is nuts! Any English coach would have had his job hampered because of the stress put on him. I really have a hard time imaging how someone could put aside that much media angst and do his job.

Coaches will not win you a cup. Coaches can make a team fall apart though, and picking a English coach with allllll the distractions he would have had or picking Roy with limited experience easily could result in the second option.

I dunno. That comment reallllllllly makes no sense, HF board worthy.

I agree with that... the political climate makes hiring an english coach untenable... the first 2 or 3 game losing streak and the knives will come out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you want to be first to make this call and when it happens in a few years, because everyone in the position of coach will either get fired or move on, you will say I told you so.

A FEW YEARS????? Noone could say "I told you so after a few years". He won't last the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I am beginning to calm down a bit, and now I want to take a step back and try to think positively. I really don't want to go through another season like last year, and I don't want to have a terrible attitude going into this one. Maybe Michel went into this interview and said he has learnt a lot from previous jobs and realized his approach needs to change. Maybe sitting on his hands for 3 years has given him some perspective and will effect his style.

People said on here earlier that they are going to give Bergevin the benefit of the doubt, and maybe he does deserve that. We have no idea with Michel said in his many interviews, maybe he is the best guy.

At the end of the day, I am very skeptical about this hire, but I don't want to lose faith in Bergevin yet, and I WANT to be optimistic, so I am going to force myself to let this play out.

I was thrilled with the Bergevin signing, so I will try and assume he did a good job. Let's see what happens with the number 3 pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't call McTavish, Wilson, or Quinn better candidates. They are equally as bad as Therrien

Sutter is okay

Murray or Gallant would have been good.

But this isn't a language thing, cause I would have taken Groulx or Roy too, ahead of Therrien..

Groulx and Roy would be rookies. I am not sure I want to keep training rookies for later success elsewhere.

I am not convinced Murry or Sutter would have any interest in coaching in Montreal. Did they ever indicate interest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think this is a ridiculous thread. Michel Therrien is a very good coach and he has proved it at every level he has coached at. Some people simply refuse to look at the positive accomplishments he has achieved.

For example: in junior he had a winning percentage of over 700 during a 4 year period. Shabby? I don't think so!

In 2003 he led Pittsburgh’s AHL team, Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, to the AHL finals. A bad coach? Not even close!

The next year he coached that same AHL team to a 92 point season. Anyone would take that, gladly!!

And the year after that his team started out with an AHL record of 15 straight wins and a record of 21-1-2-1, and the Penguins immediately promoted him and in his second year coaching in the NHL he was a finalist for coach of the year with a 105 point season. Was he able to do all that because he was a bad coach?

If he was a bad coach he could never have accomplished those things. Instead he was voted one of the very best coaches in the NHL.

And what happened after that??? Only that the next year Pittsburgh went out, under his system and coaching, and had another 102 point regular season and made it to the Stanley Cup final, where they lost a six-game series to a powerful Detroit Red Wings. Bad coaching? I don't think so.

Those are facts. That is his track record. Nothing is made up. So why in the world, after a very strong front office staff went through all the interviews and could have chosen any one of the other candidates, why do you think they chose Michel Therrien? Because they wanted to fail and lose their jobs and be critized?? Maybe it was because these experienced, very good evaluators of talent, came to the conclusion that he was the best candidate and would do a great job.

Let's try supporting their choice and at least give him a chance to succeed. It's a much better way to live life.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Groulx and Roy would be rookies. I am not sure I want to keep training rookies for later success elsewhere.

I am not convinced Murry or Sutter would have any interest in coaching in Montreal. Did they ever indicate interest?

Roy a rookie? this is ridiculous ! he may have never coached at the NHL level, but he is not a "rookie".

20 years in the NHL

10 years as GM&coach

4 Stanley Cups, 1 Calder Cup, 1 Memorial Cup

Hall of famer, jersey retired with Habs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roy a rookie? this is ridiculous ! he may have never coached at the NHL level, but he is not a "rookie".

20 years in the NHL

10 years as GM&coach

4 Stanley Cups, 1 Calder Cup, 1 Memorial Cup

Hall of famer, jersey retired with Habs

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Patrick_Roy

Sorry to disagree 100% with info above.

GM/coach of teenagers is not the same, Roy has zero experiance coaching pro athletes and we all know a player's career has little to do with coaching ability. And it is the grinders and plumbers of league who tend to be best coachs and all-star player are usually flops as coachs. So we dodged one bullet but got smoked by another in a retread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to disagree 100% with info above.

GM/coach of teenagers is not the same, Roy has zero experiance coaching pro athletes and we all know a player's career has little to do with coaching ability. And it is the grinders and plumbers of league who tend to be best coachs and all-star player are usually flops as coachs. So we dodged one bullet but got smoked by another in a retread.

Sorry Sir. you are right that success as a player doesn't translate to coaching abilities.

However, the fact that he has handled the GM&coaching positions exceptionnally well in the Junior shows he would be more than capable at a NHL level to handle those position.

Roy wasn't only successful in the NHL, he was a leader amongst teams packed with superstars.

He is going to have a successful career in the NHL. It is only appropriate it should be with the Canadiens. Unfortunately for the Habs, it will be elsewhere and Habs tradition is going down the toilet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murray, McTavish, Sutter, Gallant, Wilson, Quinn, etc etc, the list of better canditates is actually quite long...cept the all-important cup-winning necessitity of pandering to media.

Must be one big party at RDS today, what a joke. Hope tis a quick fire.

With this hire the odds of drafting Mackinnon or Seth Jones just increased; but cant see many other positives?

Isn't Gallant french too? I can't believe people are willing to throw Therrien under the bus already. The sad fact is in Montreal we've had some quality coaches over the years, it just seems like when the team gets in a rut, management always panics and fires them. I think we should all be hoping that Bergevin and company have the patience to remain calm and give this guy a few years. I think players will respond better to a coach when they know he's not going to be fired at the drop of a hat, too. By the way, there are now 4 french head coaches in the NHL. Did the other 3 teams hire them just because they are french too?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Groulx and Roy would be rookies. I am not sure I want to keep training rookies for later success elsewhere.

I am not convinced Murry or Sutter would have any interest in coaching in Montreal. Did they ever indicate interest?

Andy Murray would be very interested.

Brent Sutter was never contacted.

Isn't Gallant french too? I can't believe people are willing to throw Therrien under the bus already. The sad fact is in Montreal we've had some quality coaches over the years, it just seems like when the team gets in a rut, management always panics and fires them. I think we should all be hoping that Bergevin and company have the patience to remain calm and give this guy a few years. I think players will respond better to a coach when they know he's not going to be fired at the drop of a hat, too. By the way, there are now 4 french head coaches in the NHL. Did the other 3 teams hire them just because they are french too?

Gallant doesn't speak it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Sir. you are right that success as a player doesn't translate to coaching abilities.

However, the fact that he has handled the GM&coaching positions exceptionnally well in the Junior shows he would be more than capable at a NHL level to handle those position.

Roy wasn't only successful in the NHL, he was a leader amongst teams packed with superstars.

He is going to have a successful career in the NHL. It is only appropriate it should be with the Canadiens. Unfortunately for the Habs, it will be elsewhere and Habs tradition is going down the toilet.

So did Therrien.

I find it funny how people point to junior success and then when we get the coach they bash them for not having NHL experience.

We are not the place for a rookie coach. We are a franchise that deserves someone with experience. For example, let Muller learn the big boy ropes down in Carolina. Maybe in two years he will be ready to come back.

We want an NHL experienced coach.

As for all the anglophones willing to take the job.. well, I doubt it. If they are really qualified, they will get a job away from this circus. They don't need this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...