Torts Interview - I'm sure someone will take issue

[GrittyForever]

3 hours ago, CoachX said:

Pretty sure JVR will be responding from some other lockerroom,  so we won't hear whatever dumbass response comes out of his lopsided face

I did read something about Pittsburgh being interested in him, they just couldn't work around the salary. I suspect we will have to hold on to JVR until the deadline and then 50% retention will get him moved somewhere. Torts might have him in the press box long before that. 

[ruxpin]

19 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

So what are you gonna do? Just bitch and whine all season?

That's the plan. Though what you describe as bitch and whine is actually just reporting reality. If you don't like it that's entirely your problem, not mine.  

 

19 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

Why even watch then?

Exactly. I don't plan to and cannot imagine why I (or anyone would). The question is more appropriate to you, since you apparently think there's a reason to.   

 

19 hours ago, GrittyForever said:

Why be on this website?

Because

 

1) this is a hockey site, not just flyers. 

2) because I've been here from the start and still have friends here

3) the better question is why are you here? 

Edited September 12, 2022 by radoran
personal attacks

[Podein25]

29 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

2) because I've been here from the start and still have friends here

 

Speak for yourself!

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, Podein25 said:

 

Speak for yourself!

Ya cut me Pods. Ya cut me deep. Real deep.

 

I'm hurt.

 

Parfait has layers. Everybody like parfait.

[OccamsRazor]

5 hours ago, ruxpin said:

18 years OR. 

 

Better than 1975.

 

Sure he has bounced around a lot but who else would it be then??

 

Give me someone you would prefer than him then?

[ruxpin]

2 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

Better than 1975.

 

Sure he has bounced around a lot but who else would it be then??

 

Give me someone you would prefer than him then?

 

That's cheap.  

It's not my job to come up with someone else.  That's apparently not the GM's, either.    It's apparently a search firm that was given idiotic parameters so went and recommended an idiot.  

 

And why is "better than 1975" relevant?  (Hint:  it's not).  Any person old enough to win a cup as a head coach in 1975 would be at least 87 years old by now.   We're talking coaches, not organizations.   But yes, 2004 is better than 1975.   It's not impressive especially given the sh**show since.

 

 

Here's your list:

Jim Montgomery

Bruce Cassidy

Barry Trotz -- probbably could have had if they'd shown him the money and didn't use an idiotic search firm.

 

Among others.   The point is that Trotz was on my "not in a million years list" right next to another one idiots keep bringing up:  Mike Keenan.

 

[aziz]

19 hours ago, ruxpin said:

I swear Clarke secretly wants to remain the only flyer captain to raise the Cup.  The idea this is all deliberate is so much easier to comprehend.

 

you know......

 

we've all had more or less the same sense of the team having no plan or direction or character or real chance at rising to the top for more than 20 years now.  the entire roster has changed several times, coaching staff several several times, all of it over several GMs.

 

the only thing that has stayed the same is the owner of the team, but even there, the liaison between the owner and the team has itself changed.  and i don't believe comcast really cares one way or the other about the details, so long as money is made.

 

the idea that any of the above are the specific problem seems to me to have been debunked many times over.

 

clarke's influence, though, has been there through it all.

 

as mr. holmes said, if you've eliminated the impossible, what remains, no matter how improbable, has to be true.  whether its actually sabotage or just whispering the exact wrong things in ears because he doesn't understand the post-1980's game, no idea.  but he is the only practical common thread that i can see.

 

CLARKE MUST GO!!!

 

lol.  full circle.  

[CoachX]

[CoachX]

It seems to me that the Flyers as commodity was built into a financial success, on the backs of those who essentially founded the team (Snider). The fanbase was built into a loyal and dependable cash cow. The Comcast corporation has exploited that and running this strictly as a business. As long as the team makes money, they will continue to roll out Gritty and other gimmicks to get the merch purchased, consessions consumed, and games watched .

 

Only problem they will ultimately have to endure, fans aren't idiots. If the product sucks the revenue will fall.  They will be faced with this, and my hope is there will be a paradigm shift. If you watch any hockey movie where the business model collides with the game, you will get a clear picture of our Flyers

 

Maybe our Hanson Bros. will hit the lottery

[OccamsRazor]

12 hours ago, ruxpin said:

That's cheap.  

 

Well not trying to be. Just saying with this group it really doesn't matter who the coach is.

 

12 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Jim Montgomery

Bruce Cassidy

Barry Trotz

 

As before not sure they could win with this team the way it is constructed.

 

We want change I think Torts is the man to shake this place up.

 

if not well WGAF I won't be watching I am tired of being tired of this team.

 

I don't even care to argue about them any more and I am not trying to be an ass to you I just don't care till they make me care anymore.

[radoran]

28 minutes ago, aziz said:

i don't believe comcast really cares one way or the other about the details, so long as money is made.

 

I agree with this, but if attendance at the Big Bank Building looks like it did at the end of last year, they will start caring because money will not be being made.

 

 

[aziz]

43 minutes ago, radoran said:

I agree with this, but if attendance at the Big Bank Building looks like it did at the end of last year, they will start caring because money will not be being made.

 

it's true.  and interesting.  because that is the ONLY thing they care about.  they couldn't care less what bobby clarke did for the flyers 45 years ago.  it's the one situation where callous and inhuman corporate bean counting might be the best thing possible.  if it gets bad enough, i can see them forcing him out of any and all official positions, and trespassing him from the building, if they get the idea he is the contagion.  or whomever else has been suckling for four decades.

[elmatus]

I can imagine the "locker room" situation is probably even worse now that Giroux is gone. How bad it was before his departure is hard to say, but he was captain for an awful long time. Whether he was the greatest captain or just an okay one, it's still a hole to fill when that kind of guy is lost.

 

As far as Torts goes, I do worry there's an awful lot of just flat out anger going around, and Torts has become this sort of beating stick to channel the frustration of a fanbase. Whether that type of thing is needed, I don't know. Whether it's going to be effective at much, I also don't know. It does seem to just be tapping into anger for the sake of anger though. It's almost like folks want to watch a Flyers reality tv show where no one really wins, but we get to laugh and scream at the tv for a while and feel some sort of misguided vindication.

 

Ultimately, unless Torts plans to suit up and score a hat trick each game, it's not likely to matter all that much in terms of the team's fortunes on the actual ice surface and in the standings.

Edited September 12, 2022 by elmatus

[aziz]

8 minutes ago, elmatus said:

It's almost like folks want to watch a Flyers reality tv show where no one really wins, but we get to laugh and scream at the tv for a while and feel some sort of misguided vindication.

 

you literally just described life as a flyers fan over the last 25 years.

[FLYERS67]

Did anyone else see the guy in the stands at the Eagles/Detroit game wearing a Flyers jersey surrounded by Lions fans?

[radoran]

1 hour ago, aziz said:

 

it's true.  and interesting.  because that is the ONLY thing they care about.  they couldn't care less what bobby clarke did for the flyers 45 years ago.  it's the one situation where callous and inhuman corporate bean counting might be the best thing possible.  if it gets bad enough, i can see them forcing him out of any and all official positions, and trespassing him from the building, if they get the idea he is the contagion.  or whomever else has been suckling for four decades.

 

I don't think "it's Clarke" 100% - it's just that he and Homer represent the "way we've always done things" thinking that has gotten them to where they are today.

 

Honestly, I think it's more Dave Scott trying to do what he thinks Homer and Clarke would want him to do, than the two of them orchestrating everything.

 

Don't get me wrong, their influence is all over it.

 

I just think that a team that has been out of the first round once in a decade and hasn't won an actual Cup since 1975 should maybe stop thinking "the way we've always done things" is the only way they c/should be done.

 

Instead they go out and sign journeyman goon Nick Deslauriers to a four year deal worth 80% of his entire previous salary combined. Look, I'm sure he's a nice guy unless you're the other goon, and he's got some endearing qualities, but that's just freaking insane.

 

So it might just not be the old guys in the room, but the non-hockey guy trying desperately to secure their approval.

 

[ruxpin]

3 hours ago, aziz said:

CLARKE MUST GO!!!

 

Yeah, this is pretty much where I've been.    I'm unhappy with Comcast both because of the Flyers and because I don't have cable options.   But the real gut urge to want them to sell is so the new ownership can come in and wipe out Clarke, Barber and Holmgren and their zombie hires.

 

But if we can jettison Clarke without the sale, I'll settle for that.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

Mike Johnson on TSN talked about Tortorella and his experience with him and Mike said that you have to realize that Tortorella isn't coming from a place of vindictiveness. Rather, he's coming from a place where he sees players who play on a team, but not together. Everything he does is built around the concept of team and yes, he'll challenge you, because he wants you to but into the concept of team. 

 

Honestly, this is a group who hasn't played as a 'team', but as a collecting of individuals. Not only that, there have been players that have been 'gifted' ice time, special teams play, etc..... Those days are gone. Will he be a difference maker? I don't know. However, you watch interviews with most players who played for him and they have nothing but good things to say about him. So, something has to give. If he can root out the people who don't want to be there, then it's a win. Once again, it's about little victories moving forward.

[ruxpin]

9 hours ago, CoachX said:

fans aren't idiots

You sure?

 

The rest of your post I'm on board with.  The Flyers are to Comcast as Star Wars is to Disney:  all that's left are the idiots.

[ruxpin]

15 minutes ago, FireDillabaugh said:

And, once again, Comcast isn't going anywhere folks.  It doesn't matter how much you want them gone

Yep. Facts are facts. Sadly.

[MaineFlyFan]

On 9/11/2022 at 7:13 AM, ruxpin said:

the flavor of the kcups in the GM office

And you KNOW Chuck Fletcher is the kind of "man" who drinks flavored Coffee........

 

Also, you have a way with words. Funny, yet depressing.

[ruxpin]

25 minutes ago, FireDillabaugh said:

Ever since Holmgren was brought back into the organization as director of pro scouting in '95-96.  Until he's completely gone(and not just demoted or moved to another position), along with a few others, nothing will change.

 

All the individuals here talking about Clarke simply don't know Bob and don't know the facts.

I'm willing to believe this. I actually think it's likely accurate.

 

We previously sparred over Clarke.  I differentiate between Clarke the player and Clarke the GM.  I IDOLIZED the player. Pre -cap GM was strong but with a significant blind spot.   Cap era, he was basically as anachronistic as my 90-year old father in law.

 

But I'm okay with pointing the finger at Holmgren (i do think Clarke is the moron whisperer, but even at a younger age Holmgren was an idiot on his own. So I'm back to buying what you're selling).

 

I completely agree with your "Comcast ain't going nowhere."  Since you're absolutely right, we're absolutely screwed.

 

My wife works for Comcast.  They run their other BUs like they run the Flyers. For now, their sheer size and their territorial monopoly in many areas saves them.

 

But if they're going to go anywhere, it will very likely be awhile.

Edited September 13, 2022 by ruxpin

[ruxpin]

9 minutes ago, MaineFlyFan said:

And you KNOW Chuck Fletcher is the kind of "man" who drinks flavored Coffee........

 

Also, you have a way with words. Funny, yet depressing.

Flavored coffee:  rectal chutney 

[radoran]

38 minutes ago, FireDillabaugh said:

No, they don't care if this organization makes them money.  They didn't purchase this organization to make money.  And, to think that only shows that you simply don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the financial reasons why they own this team and the corporation that they are.

 

They own the Flyers because it is a tremendous internal revenue generator with different divisions paying themselves. Comcast Spectacor, NBC Sports Philadelphia, etc. They pay themselves rent and pay themselves for TV broadcast rights. It all goes down on the balance sheets as revenue.

 

Comcast doesn't own them as some sort of vanity project, or the abject failure of their vanity project would have an impact.

 

If there aren't any butts in seats and the TV ratings are in the tank, then they will take an active interest in reviving their revenue streams.

 

That said, "The Flyers" as an organization are a blip on the corporate radar and if someone rolled up with a offer they couldn't refuse, they'd drop them in a heartbeat.

Edited September 13, 2022 by radoran

[aziz]

7 hours ago, radoran said:

Honestly, I think it's more Dave Scott trying to do what he thinks Homer and Clarke would want him to do, than the two of them orchestrating everything.

 

i guess that's what i'm getting at.  it isn't about clarke specifically, but the idea that hockey players who were really good players 40+ years ago continue to have influence on the current team's make up and disposition that has to be the issue.  it just HAS to be the issue.

 

because again, i don't see anything substantively different from what you guys are saying now, versus what we were saying 10 years ago.  or 20 years ago.  if they are different, tell me, i literally haven't watched a game of hockey in 6 years, but the symptoms sound all the same.  and if they are, there HAS to be an underlying cause.  a cause that runs throughout the late 90's and on since.

 

from there, let's brainstorm on what is the same today versus 1998:

 

1.  they wear orange, black and white.  this can't be it, these are referee colors.  if anything, this should be an advantage.

2.  they play in philadelphia.  you tell me, i haven't lived there since 1976.  does the city somehow make its teams crap shoot random nonsense that trend downwards, generally?

3.  players from the cup teams of the mid 70's have been in weirdly inappropriate and unearned positions of power and control over the team, sometimes in visible positions like GM or coach, sometimes tucked in with "Senior Assistant Vice President" roles that nevertheless give them persistent seats at the table regarding team direction, and I presume things like GM hirings/firings.

4.  ruxpin has been a fan.  explain yourself, sir.

 

assuming ruxpin's motives are pure, the only consistent thread is jocks that played hockey really well when the game was at its most neanderthal sitting at the table deciding how the team should be run/built/managed.  GMs have to answer to that table.  GMs have to build the team those apes demand.  those apes have done squat since landing a check or threading a shot 46 years ago.

 

no disrespect to those cup teams, or the players themselves.  i liked that game more than the current one.  but playing a game well doesn't mean you can manage a team playing that game.  and playing a game well in an era so far removed from modern day that it might as well be a different sport at best makes you entirely unqualified.  and might make you the exact wrong person to be weighing in on how things ought to be done.