beliveau1 Posted June 4, 2006 Share Posted June 4, 2006 (edited) 1) We agree to disagree. 2) Being energic doesn't disapear on TV? You either are or not and he's not, case closed on that one. Don't need to know someone personally to know that. Its quite easy to say who's energic for anybody who appears on TV as often as he does. After seeing them a few times, you know if they're energic people or not, how complicated can that be to understand? 3) As for his comments, the guy would say things like "the Sharks of Anaheim" or the "the guy, what's his name, they have who's a good scorer" while talking about the best players of other teams, in fact top players in the league. He doesn't follow NHL anymore, he doesn't even no the teams and players properly. He may know the technical side of hockey, but his overall knowledge of today's hockey is very weak. That's what I meant and that would make him a lousy coach. How can you coach and not know the players in the league? 4) Could be usefull but won't happen. Obviously we disagree - so be it? Nerves on TV make people much different than in real life - his knowledge has nothing to do with whether he's wired for non stop action or as boring as grass growing in a cemetery. You have a certain perception of him that I 'm not about to change = your choice! Personally I don't get the show 110%(or whatever it is?) so I can't argue as to the validity of your opinions based on those shows. Have heard him a few times on TV and haven't seen that profound lack of knowledge you have noted. When I've heard him, he's always been well informed and seemed to know the fine parts of the game better than you or I ever will..... Met him once at a card signing and he seemed very easygoing/relaxed? However that in itself does not translate to being a poor coaching choice. By that grounds Gainey should not be as good a hockey man as he is, cause he could bore the socks off a corpse...... As an offensive consultant he wouldn't be there to deal with other players in the league, just to instruct the Habs players. As I said though, this isn't about to happen so we'll never really get a chance to prove which of us is right! Edited June 4, 2006 by beliveau1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Komisarek the Cruncher Posted June 4, 2006 Share Posted June 4, 2006 (edited) Obviously we disagree -so be it? Nerves on TV make people much different than in real life - his knowledge has nothing to do with whether he wired for non stop action or as boring as grass growing in a cemetery. You have a certain perception of him that I 'm not about to change = your choice! Personally I don't get the show 110%(or whatever it is?) so I can't argue as to the validity of your opinions based on those shows. Have heard him a few times on TV and haven't seen that profound lack of knowledge you have noted. When I've heard him, he's always been well informed and seemed to know the fine parts of the game better than you or I ever will..... Met him once at a card signing and he seemed very easygoing/relaxed? however that in itself does not translate to being a poor coaching choice. By that grounds Gainey should not be as good a hockey man as he is, cause he could bore the socks off a corpse...... As an offensive consultant he wouldn't be there to deal with other players in the league, just to instruct the Habs players. As I said though, this isn't about to happen so we'll never really get a chance to prove which of us is right! OK. Being boring/relaxed doesn't make a bad coach, the reason why I say he would not be Carbo's choice is because Carbo went on record that the #1 criteria is was looking for in his new coach would be someone highly motivated and energic that can crank up the troops, and Bossy doesn't fit that criteria. Edited June 4, 2006 by Komisarek the Cruncher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beliveau1 Posted June 4, 2006 Share Posted June 4, 2006 OK. Being boring/relaxed doesn't make a bad coach, the reason why I say he would not be Carbo's choice is because Carbo went on record that the #1 criteria is was looking for in his new coach would be someone highly motivated and energic that can crank up the troops, and Bossy doesn't fit that criteria. Obviously he isn't about to become an assistant coach in Montreal for several reasons, and the chief amongst them is the fact that he doesn't seem the least interested in doing it. It would be interesting to see him at work, but apparently he has such a bad back that he can't skate anymore? If so then obviously that in itself takes him right out of any picture, even as a consultant. Apparently that's one of the reasons he isn't involved much in the game anymore? So even if they may have wanted him it is basically not possible given that factor. Won't be a reality as far as I'm concerned, so we'll never know if he'd be good as a coach, or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Komisarek the Cruncher Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 According to Spector's, the race is now between Kirk Muller (who as confirmed having talked to Carbo), Mario Tremblay (played golf with Carbo last week) and Larry Robinson (was with Carbo last week-end). I still say go Kirk. Would be nice to see him behind the bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I like Larry Robinson. Successfull in his playing days. Successfull in his coaching days. Seems to be successfull in everything he does. Thats the kind of guys I like seeing coming into the Montreal Canadiens organization. Having said that, Muller would be alright as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Personally I don't get the show 110%(or whatever it is?) so I can't argue as to the validity of your opinions based on those shows. Have heard him a few times on TV and haven't seen that profound lack of knowledge you have noted. When I've heard him, he's always been well informed and seemed to know the fine parts of the game better than you or I ever will..... I watch 110% every once in a while for the same reasons I watch Don Cherry... for the comedy. :lool: The (usually) five or six people at the V-table don't really discuss stuff a whole lot. There's an awful lot of screaming that happens, putting down the other's opinion, trying to get a word in. Something that wouldn't be allowed in a proper discussion group or in a classroom.... in Parliament, maybe but not in a good discussion situation. You can't get a whole lot of info from this program... just the opinions of a half-dozen people bouncing around off the walls into your ears. :king: :hlogo: :king: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beliveau1 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 (edited) I watch 110% every once in a while for the same reasons I watch Don Cherry... for the comedy. :lool: The (usually) five or six people at the V-table don't really discuss stuff a whole lot. There's an awful lot of screaming that happens, putting down the other's opinion, trying to get a word in. Something that wouldn't be allowed in a proper discussion group or in a classroom.... in Parliament, maybe but not in a good discussion situation. You can't get a whole lot of info from this program... just the opinions of a half-dozen people bouncing around off the walls into your ears. :king: :hlogo: :king: love it!!!!! dying from laughter here as I roll about with plenty of guffaw, guffaw, guffaws...... so true Have never seen the show but guess I haven't missed anything? Edited June 7, 2006 by beliveau1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.