radoran

you would think your "definitely a playoff team" would be able to TCOB with bottom feeders like Montreal and Columbus in "a playoff push". Instead they lose 15-6. To Columbus and Montreal. And we're "further along than we thought" and the "culture" is fixed and we have FALLEN IN LOVE WITH JOURNEYMAN WAIVER WIRE PICKUPS WHO ARE ESSENTIAL TO OUR CULTURAL REBUILD. It's insane.

Drysdale shouldn't be on the ice "for a playoff run" he should be sitting down and getting fully healthy for next year. He's a moment away from a career ending shoulder injury. This whole "playoff push" thing was the predictable disaster it has become. And this team's insistence upon shoving guys back onto the ice as soon as humanly possible for them to skate without falling over hasn't served them well - EVER. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

I call this "end of season goals"

Or the goalie's best friend when facing the Flyers - a crest on his chest to target...

I'd be shocked if they did, too. So, Chicago has three Cups this century and just added their second #1 overall amongst a boatload of high round picks. The Flyers... might make the playoffs this season and have a potential superstar that might come over in two years with a couple mid to late firsts... We'll pin this and see where these franchises have been in five years, shall we? (I am aware of the buts and the reasons and that draft picks don't always and etc... We'll see where this goes over the next five years, eh?)

Again, when some dumb fool is competing with you to make a stupid decision - LET THEM. You just might find out their agent is full of

How are you supposed to convince a journeyman goon to sign with you if you don't give him double and salary and double the length of any contract they've previously had? It's in the CBA - they have to do it...

Hey, now. He assisted on ALL THREE goals in that series. And the Flyers won a game! It was the goalie's fault... Top goalie prospect and the 1/2/3 draft picks to give the team a boost into the playoffs...

In fairness, the O's simply don't have the money to compete on the big level. Ownership has said it. The problem I have is essentially the same. Watching a franchise tread water for decades effectively makes every game more or less irrelevant. Are the games fun? Sure, they can be. It's a great sport. If you want to be entertained, that's one thing. Winning a Championship is different. The Phillies were irrelevant for 30 years save a miracle run in 1993. When they got Star players like Hamels, Rollins, Utley, and Howard it meant they were able to compete on a different - relevant - level. I mean no disrespect to our Wild posters on here when I compare us to them. Many of them say the same thing about their franchise. I believe Briere Jones LLP when they say their goal is to win a championship. I'm just not confident - at this point - that they are effectively moving in that direction. The unfortunate reality is that the damage done by the Fletcher regime in contracts and clauses continues to hamstring the organization. A top six center (14 - until he proves he can play again) and a top four D (55 - by contract) are two huge gaps on a salary cap. The team played above itself for 70 games and then ran out of gas while other teams were ramping up their second gear. Whocouldanode? And the first real stretch of adversity comes as bottom feeders are motivated to play spoiler. To your point, NOW is a good "tank" stretch. Dive down below Buffalo (like I am, under clouds, waiting for the clouds to darken this afternoon).

So, several people (Meltzer included) have pointed out to expect that: The Flyers would be super up for this game to: Make up for getting blown out Being at home Reaction to the Couturier scratch. They look strong and determined. And they damn well should. Beautiful watching the Leaves get out of the way of Frost's shot and leave their goalie hanging out to dry. Should have traded for Seeler. Flyers should also have been managing Couturier better. But they needed a #1 to stay on a playoff vector, then had to play a guy who should probably have sat down because they just gave him the C. Decisions being made strictly "to make the playoffs" this year may not in fact be best for the long term of the club. We shall, of course, see. Resting Couturier earlier in the season could easily have led to him not being completely out of gas in a totally predictable fashion when they just HAD to elevate the leadership group most likely "as part of the playoff push." Then sitting him now isn't "a story". It's simple maintenance for an important player. This is what I mean by "making the playoffs" not being the primary goal this season, until it suddenly was. Then decisions were made based on winning this season. It's fair. You want to reward players. Nashville just did the same thing. The Flyers look a heckuva lot more determined than the Islanders, which means staying ahead of the Capitals. Playoffs are a real, tangible goal. This season. I'm not "upset" that they are punching above their weight. It's fun to watch, especially punching Tronno in the nose. But I didn't "come back" to be a consistent 5-8 seed. And I don't think the current leadership on and off does either. I don't think the previous group did, either. I'll go to an old, but good one. If the cup is half empty, add ice. It's hockey.

Couturier got an injury in January and was playing ~20 minutes a night before that. Pretty safe to say he'd be getting the same minutes without the injury, given that they're in a "playoff race." When paid Flyers writer Bill Meltzer is questioning the move, I don't think it's a few posters on here going off reservation. This is Torts' game, as you point out. I'm not "concerned" any more than I have been when the Flyers have run other players - willingly - into the ground. One (who said it shortened his career) is being honored April 13. Finally, "to win the game" is specifically NOT what they said this season was about. It was about developing culture and obviously accountability for everyone is part of that. But benching your month-old captain IS a bold move.

Right, but it's just an unforced error. No need to have made the move to name a C. His game went off a cliff right after (more injury than the C). The idea a guy plays 74 hockey games in 3 years - including an entire season out - and he's out there for 20 minutes a game for the first five games? Unconventionally, he ducked the pregame presser. There have been other Fonzie issues - like benching Sanheim in front of his family (I think there was another example of this). Goes back to the "one playoff round win in 10 years" on his resume. Sure, it's the first one Columbus ever won...

First thing I thought of...

Returning from back injury? check. Has played 74 hockey games in 3 years? check Has been put into a position of great responsibility sooner than needed? check Was overplayed when he first came back? check Is now "disappointing" and a healthy scratch "to make a point"? check #neweraoforange

Maybe @CoachX is right, they should have made Laughton captain?

Would that we could so easily erase 40 years...

And the icing on the cake is a (fairly) successful franchise in - checks notes - Winnipeg. Aside from the "Top 10 media market" it's hard to understand why there MUST BE HOCKEY IN ARIZONA.

I'm not at all saying that they're "puppet mastering" the situation. Briere and Jones are in charge. The SHAs are sitting next to the current GM and the President of Hockey Operations in the press box. They do still have offices. They are still involved. So, if I have some well-placed, well-earned skepticism I don't think it's surprising. I'm positive about where Briere has gone so far, I'm not on the ledge about "a fourth rounder for a 35-year-old" (rental). I do question whether or not the rebuild path that they are on will get them to their declared destination - only because it hasn't worked for anyone else. You referenced Scott (who continually said he deferred to the SHA, fwiw) trying to move the franchise forward without respect for the past. The Flyers "culture" that needed to be "found" again - who would you say represents the Flyers' pre-loss-of-it "culture" better than the Senior Hockey Advisors? Is that what we're "trying to get back" to? #halloffame? The question at hand is are we getting "back to" the "Flyers culture" we had for the last 25 years or are we building upon the foundation of what that culture "meant/s" - accountability, determination, grit(ty) - in pursuit of a truly new direction? I'm saying I don't know that yet. I guarantee you if they make the playoffs someone - coach/GM/President/player - says "anything can happen."

Didn't say that. Said the organization says the entire culture was eroded and destroyed. Said if that's true, then building upon guys that were there when it happened might not be the most effective thing to do. Clearly none of this is true. Also said Coots was given the C immediately upon G's departure, except for the fact that he was injured. And that decision also predates the "New Era of Orange." Completely agree with this. The "definitely a playoff team" mantra came from the top down. I think you're skimming over the impact of the Senior Hockey Advisors who selected Fletcher, Hextall, and Holmgren And who are - checks notes - still there. Which is why we're all looking to make sure that the "culture" has actually "changed". And why there are some that are intensely, reactively suspicious of it. I honestly don't think I'm in the same camp as @flyercanuck, but I'm also not in the "everything is good news for the Flyers" camp, either. The problem that this organization* has is that it tries to declare what reality is, instead of living in reality. That's when a guy who's never been a captain and never been a center becomes your #1C longest serving captain in franchise history overseeing the worst stretch of hockey in franchise history. And that includes the "we need Nick Seeler and Scott Laughton or the whole thing falls apart" mantra.

They've got nine 1/2 picks over the next two years and they've had ten 1/2 picks over the past two years (1-7-13-19-25). The Flyers had three firsts (7-5-22) - one of which won't be available for at least the next two years and another decided he wouldn't play for the Flyers so they traded for a top ten pick who has played 35 games in the past two seasons - and a second. But we've got Nick Seeler, Scott Laughton, a couple of middle range firsts, two likely 25+ firsts, and we're a bubble playoff team!

They didn't get "handouts" they were terrible. The thing about "lotteries" is that they are "random" and don't guarantee results.

That the entire culture of the organization was completely destroyed by the longest serving captain in the history of the franchise and that no one else in the room had anything else to do with it. Blaming the players who were on the roster in leadership positions for the weaknesses of the leadership of the roster is a farfetched proposition? Couturier wore an A, you know? Thing is, I'm not actually blaming them. The organization is, and they don't even realize they're doing it. I'm saying that if the company line that the entire foundation of the organization's culture was completely and utterly destroyed after a decade under the leadership of the longest serving captain in the history of the franchise is correct then the idea that three guys who were sitting in leadership roles during that time might not be the best foundation upon which to build the "New Era." Of course, that's all horsehockey. Which is exactly why three guys who have grown up in the Flyers system are the ones being chosen to take it forward. And that's where the question of whether or not this is a "New Era" remains open. We're not even through Year One.

Edmonton wasn't a bubble playoff team for 10 years. Edmonton legit sucked for 10 years. They made the Final first year after the lockout and then didn't make the playoffs for a decade. It's how you get multiple high picks. It's also a cautionary tale because it doesn't always work. Likewise the Devils were 7/8 in the division for four years. They weren't "lucky" they were terrible.

So it was the longest tenured captain in the history of the franchise that oversaw the complete and total hollowing out of team culture and the other players in the room had nothing to do with it? I'm saying I don't buy the company line on that whole situation. I'm not feigning surprise at all. I wasn't surprised. I'm not surprised. I'm saying that when you look at it through anything but "always good news for the Flyers" there is reason to be circumspect and continue to see how things develop. Listen, I've been to GAMES this season for the first time in years. My first game back was the Owen Tippett hat trick last season. My current avatar is the sticker they give you when you sit in the Gritty section. They're an ENJOYABLE hockey team. Whether they're the foundation of a Cup winner remains to be seen.

Staal was the EJohnson signing of its day. Veteran presence to stabilize the locker room and do exactly the: This team isn't supposed to be in the hunt for the playoffs. Briere didn't put this roster together thinking "playoffs". Cue: Mora, Jim A lot of things have gone the Flyers way this season. And a lot of things have gone badly for other teams. They are running hard and they aren't quitting and they just simply don't have the horses to compete in this race. It's not their fault. They could surprise people. They play with heart and determination. They're not going to win 16 playoff games. They probably won't win four. They may not play any. Keeping Walker wouldn't have significantly tipped that needle. Neither would losing Laughton or Seeler. Wudder under the bridge at this point. I could.see Danny shipping ol' Laughts out "for his chance at the Cup" before next year's deadline. Even money on him back the next season...