Lame Duck Chuck! HA

[Cheesesteak]

seems like they read this board...are one of you named Kevin?  

 

we've been saying the same for awhile now but it's nice to see it in "print"

 

https://broadstreetbuzz.com/2022/12/20/lame-duck-chuck-moves-flyers/

[OccamsRazor]

I just want him gone in time so they can search for the right guy to replace him not just hand it to Danny Briere see what is actually available...if anything even is.

 

And it should be in time so the staff and scouting can be put together in time for the draft.

 

Whomever it is there are some good pieces to work with but there is a lot of crap and junk to sort out...I'm not getting more hopes up.

[GrittyForever]

Ya, I still have trouble seeing any evidence of a real plan. Every now and again the "if we didn't have so many injuries" nonsense creeps into the media and discussions and it makes you wonder if they're still delusional. 

 

So Torts brings back accountability and effort. After that what? When dead weight bodies start to be moved out I will start to believe there's an actual new plan. 

[GratefulFlyers]

On 12/21/2022 at 2:57 AM, GrittyForever said:

When dead weight bodies start to be moved out I will start to believe there's an actual new plan. 

 

I doubt the Flyers even attempt moving Hayes or Ristolainen. A big "maybe" is if Hayes requests a trade I could *almost* see that happening. The other boat anchor is basically unmovable. Now Tortorella has him with Provorov and he's marginally better than he was with Sanheim but he's still hard to watch. It just kills me how stupid it was to re-sign Ristolainen. But of course it's hard to rank the stupidity of Fletcher's moves.

 

@Cheesesteak Good article thanks for the link. You're right the author would fit in perfectly around here.

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, GratefulFlyers said:

 

I doubt the Flyers even attempt moving Hayes or Ristolainen. A big "maybe" is if Hayes requests a trade I could *almost* see that happening. The other boat anchor is basically unmovable. Now Tortorella has him with Provorov and he's marginally better than he was with Sanheim but he's still hard to watch. It just kills me how stupid it was to re-sign Ristolainen. But of course it's hard to rank the stupidity of Fletcher's moves.

 

@Cheesesteak Good article thanks for the link. You're right the author would fit in perfectly around here.

 

I honestly think the guy would make a better forward than a defenseman.

 

He sucks on defense and he might be able to be decent in the bottom 6 maybe.

 

It is worth a try to see if the turd has any value at all....

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, OccamsRazor said:

It is worth a try to see if the turd has any value at all....

 

If you want to make him useful: till the soil, spread him on it.

 

Really the best use for s##t

Edited December 22, 2022 by ruxpin

[radoran]

From the article:

"They’re not going to fire him and then enter the offseason without a plan"

 

What's missing is the "again" in this statement.

 

They fired Hextall without a plan.

 

They fired Vigneault without a plan.

 

For that matter, this crew has never been particularly good at plans.

 

Famously before the recent hijinks the plan was to build a 10-year dynasty behind Crater and Richards.

 

Before it wasn't. Plan lasted a few years, enough to commit long term and then jump out of before restrictions kicked in.

 

Then the plan was to build around a 34-year old defenceman.

 

Then to build around two guys who scored more than 25 goals three times - combined - in their careers.

 

And "the plan" is STILL to *always* spend to the cap and to *always* try to make the playoffs. (They didn't blow draft picks on TDA to be a bottom feeder - they thought Atkinson and Couturier would be here).

 

Every.  Year.

 

Because that's just GOT to work at some point, right?

 

I mean what sort of guy do you think they're going to "plan" to bring in?? What "new direction" are they going to look for?

 

[flyercanuck]

On 12/20/2022 at 5:59 PM, Cheesesteak said:

seems like they read this board...are one of you named Kevin?  

 

we've been saying the same for awhile now but it's nice to see it in "print"

 

https://broadstreetbuzz.com/2022/12/20/lame-duck-chuck-moves-flyers/

 

Need to see more articles like this. I know some people get sick of me bitching on here, but I think more people need to do it in every type of media. if it gets to the point of embarrassment for Comcast (how they can't be embarrassed by the Flyers I have no clue) then maybe something actually gets done. If they blow the whole thing up, gut the entire team, and take a decade to rebuild it properly I would enjoy that way more than I'm enjoying what the present idiots have done to a once great team.

[flyercanuck]

On 12/20/2022 at 6:34 PM, OccamsRazor said:

I'm not getting more hopes up.

 

Well the one hope is that even if Fletcher and Homer hire his replacement they can't possibly find someone as inept at managing a team as they are. 

[ruxpin]

9 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

Well the one hope is that even if Fletcher and Homer hire his replacement they can't possibly find someone as inept at managing a team as they are. 

Edited December 22, 2022 by ruxpin

[flyercanuck]

1 minute ago, ruxpin said:

 

Oh I have faith that they'll find someone lousy. They just won't be "Fletcher lousy".

[radoran]

15 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

how they can't be embarrassed by the Flyers I have no clue

 

Not enough people here care and too many are still willing to support the franchise through thick and thin.

 

The only time you hear anything on sports radio it's when someone calls in to complain no one is talking about the Flyers.

 

Also, don't forget who owns the primary all sports coverage here in the City that just happens to be based in the same building as the franchise they are "covering".

 

I remain convinced that Comcast generates far more revenue internally than it "costs" them to own the franchise that it really doesn't matter on a corporate level.

Finally, there's not much incentive for the fanbase to worry about them when the Birds are 12-1, the Union went to the MLS Final, the Phillies were in the World Series, and the 76ers at least have a chance.

 

Contrast that with 12 years or relative insignificance on the ice.

 

[flyercanuck]

9 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Finally, there's not much incentive for the fanbase to worry about them when the Birds are 12-1, the Union went to the MLS Final, the Phillies were in the World Series, and the 76ers at least have a chance.

 

Contrast that with 12 years or relative insignificance on the ice.

 

 

Unfortunately for me the only sport out of those you mentioned that I care about is hockey.

[aziz]

14 minutes ago, radoran said:

I remain convinced that Comcast generates far more revenue internally than it "costs" them to own the franchise that it really doesn't matter on a corporate level.

 

you're right, of course.  they don't own the flyers to make money, and any money the flyers actually lose is peanuts to comcast's overall bottom line.

 

from there, though, you have to ask:  why DOES comcast own the flyers, if making money isn't a motivation.  tax write off opportunity, i'm sure weighs in.  and available perks for executives and clients in the form of box seats.  but there are other options for both of those.

 

i have to think it comes down to PR.  down to a chance to keep the comcast name in the daily vocabulary of the customer base.  advertising, basically.  and the thing there is, that isn't just limited to the philly area.  owning a badass hockey team might perk up the ears of people across the country.  not, "oh, they own a hockey team, now i'm going to switch my cable provider," but again, that almost subliminal branding thing.

 

which is why i would suggest they really wouldn't want the flyers to be terrible.  would actually be motivated to make sure they aren't terrible.  the only thing worse than not having the positive branding of owning a good hockey team would be having the negative branding of owning a really bad hockey team.  people start tying the comcast name with incompetent chronic losers has to have comcast's marketing dept climbing walls.  or at least not happy.

 

none of this means anything specific or definite.  just saying i don't think they are quite as ambivalent as you suggest.

[ruxpin]

1 hour ago, aziz said:

 

you're right, of course.  they don't own the flyers to make money, and any money the flyers actually lose is peanuts to comcast's overall bottom line.

 

from there, though, you have to ask:  why DOES comcast own the flyers, if making money isn't a motivation.  tax write off opportunity, i'm sure weighs in.  and available perks for executives and clients in the form of box seats.  but there are other options for both of those.

 

i have to think it comes down to PR.  down to a chance to keep the comcast name in the daily vocabulary of the customer base.  advertising, basically.  and the thing there is, that isn't just limited to the philly area.  owning a badass hockey team might perk up the ears of people across the country.  not, "oh, they own a hockey team, now i'm going to switch my cable provider," but again, that almost subliminal branding thing.

 

which is why i would suggest they really wouldn't want the flyers to be terrible.  would actually be motivated to make sure they aren't terrible.  the only thing worse than not having the positive branding of owning a good hockey team would be having the negative branding of owning a really bad hockey team.  people start tying the comcast name with incompetent chronic losers has to have comcast's marketing dept climbing walls.  or at least not happy.

 

none of this means anything specific or definite.  just saying i don't think they are quite as ambivalent as you suggest.

Oh its face,  I agree with your post.  Good points.

 

But only based on my wife's experience working there, other core business divisions are run as equally ineptly as the Flyers are.  

 

There have been 5 reorgs in the 2 1/2 years she's been there with reporting trees being shuffled every time and people being laid off or moved to other divisions also being reorged.

 

So, each time an acclimation period followed by several months of project. Just as project goes live?  Reorg she the project is cancelled.  Every time.  It's like CNN+.

 

They're big enough to not have to care. And in many areas they have a monopoly which, in a butchering of definition and logic, are not monopolies. So they're not in any danger.  But they're currently powered by their size, not their (lack of) business sense.

[aziz]

38 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

They're big enough to not have to care.

 

all well said.  and I work for one of the big banks, see similar stuff.  though, from what I see, it might not be so much they are big enough to not care as they are big enough to not be capable of caring.  not at any coordinated and meaningful level.  a bunch of small fiefdoms worried about their silo, fighting over internal status.

 

but, 6 of one, half dozen of the other.  so, yeah, you're right:  don't expect much pressure from the top.

[radoran]

3 hours ago, aziz said:

if making money isn't a motivation. 

 

You missed my point. The money they generate internally on the Flyers (from paying different divisions to do different things - think of the team "paying for advertising" on Sportsnet or paying catering services, etc.) Is multiples more than they "spend" on them.

 

That's value to the overall "Comcast" organization.

 

3 hours ago, aziz said:

i have to think it comes down to PR.  down to a chance to keep the comcast name in the daily vocabulary of the customer base.  advertising, basically.

 

"Comcast" doesn't even really market anything with "Comcast" on it anymore. The "Comcast" brand isn't the value.

 

That said, they would LOVE to be in a parade down Broad Street. But they aren't motivated strictly by that.

 

Which is why if they're just a midding bubble playoff team that "makes the playoffs and anything can happen" then Comcast is just fine with it.

[aziz]

1 hour ago, radoran said:

"Comcast" doesn't even really market anything with "Comcast" on it anymore. The "Comcast" brand isn't the value.

 

That said, they would LOVE to be in a parade down Broad Street.

 

not following you on this.  if the first isn't a thing, why would the second be a thing?  if they don't care about the brand, why would they care about the brand?

 

i don't think i missed the point you were making:  don't expect pressure from the owners of the team to demand results and reject outright failure, with all of the shake ups to the flyers' management staff and essential team philosophy that would seem to require, because they don't care enough to get involved at that level.  it just made me wonder why comcast would have gotten involved with an NHL hockey team to begin with.  and that made me start thinking/hoping it was as simple as branding, and if that were true, the joke "their" team is at the moment would be a problem they'd be motivated to solve.  i mean, wells fargo (who may or may not be the large bank i mentioned i work for) wanted their name on the building for that reason.  they can't be happy with how everything is playing out.  and now that I am thinking about it, i may (or may not) need to track down someone from marketing and see what they think about their investment right now.

 

but the first part of your response seems to suggest you think their motivation with the flyers IS making money?  even if only internally, with basically asset swaps between lines of business?  if that were true, would you expect them to get involved when ticket sales collapse completely and merchandise sales evaporate?  moving money around internally is ultimately zero sum within that reference frame, and as less money enters the biosphere, for lack of a better word, less can move around, and the overall point to owning the team starts to vanish.

 

not disagreeing, just trying to work this thing through.  because i really don't know why they are even involved.  and the reason they are involved, if it could be understood, might give us some idea where their heads are and what they might do about this dumpster fire.  If they just needed to park money somewhere, and don't care what becomes of any of it, they will watch the whole thing burn.  if they have some level of interest in things going well, someone in the LOB directly attached to comcast/spectator will eventually start demanding changes, if only for selfish reasons (i.e., their bonus structure is at risk when the flyers can't sell tickets).  and that has the potential of forbidding the "we prioritize former flyers players for all management positions" approach the team has taken for the last 30 years.  which is what needs to happen, in the worst way.

 

but in the end, i have no idea.  just theories.

 

edit:  i meant to respond to your last line, too, but forgot.  so here it is (I forget how to manually create quotations on this site, bear with me):

 

Radoran:  Which is why if they're just a midding bubble playoff team that "makes the playoffs and anything can happen" then Comcast is just fine with it.

 

they are several years removed from being even that.  they haven't reliably made the playoffs for literally a decade.  so that "Comcast is just fine with it" condition hasn't existed for a long while.  that no longer explains their acquiescence with how the team has been run.

Edited December 23, 2022 by aziz

[radoran]

1 hour ago, aziz said:

not following you on this.  if the first isn't a thing, why would the second be a thing?

 

"Comcast" is "Xfinity" on a local market perspective.

 

It's not "Comcast Live" it's "Xfinity Live".

 

They've even removed the name from Sportsnet and refocused everything under NBC.

 

Would Ralph Roberts love to be on a parade? Sure. Would it change his life? No.

 

1 hour ago, aziz said:

they are several years removed from being even that.  they haven't reliably made the playoffs for literally a decade.  so that "Comcast is just fine with it" condition hasn't existed for a long while.  that no longer explains their acquiescence with how the team has been run.

 

They acquiesced to Snider for his lifetime. They've given broad lenience to his chosen successors.

 

That could change, but it's not something I'm particularly betting on.

 

Comcast can wait out Clarke and Homer and let things happen naturally.

 

Edited December 23, 2022 by radoran

[GrittyForever]

16 hours ago, GratefulFlyers said:

 

I doubt the Flyers even attempt moving Hayes or Ristolainen. A big "maybe" is if Hayes requests a trade I could *almost* see that happening. The other boat anchor is basically unmovable. Now Tortorella has him with Provorov and he's marginally better than he was with Sanheim but he's still hard to watch. It just kills me how stupid it was to re-sign Ristolainen. But of course it's hard to rank the stupidity of Fletcher's moves.

 

@Cheesesteak Good article thanks for the link. You're right the author would fit in perfectly around here.

"stupid" is what Risto is. Just a really really stupid man with a very low hockey IQ and hence basically uncoachable. Never learns anything. maybe if Torts keeps his role incredibly simple he will be useful in a limited capacity. 

 

Hayes won't be traded but I wish he would be. Buy out? idk, just send him away somewhere. 

[LegionOfDoom]

Before Snider left, I believe he set in play the next steps to ownership and concessions, Comcasts vassals unfortunately never did anything as productive as Snider's madmens cyclical patterns.

 

We got now a bloated, overweight team run by Tony Little; seems like a workout, but doesn't "look" right visually. Fat Fit.

Fletcher unfortunately gave out too many "sweets"

Trick or Treat suckas

 

 

 

 

[LegionOfDoom]

7 hours ago, radoran said:

 

 

 

Corporate Accounts Dave speaking.....Just a moment....Comcast Accounts Fletcher speaking.....Just a moment....Xfinity Accounts ??? speaking.........Just a moment.....

[Cheesesteak]

On 12/22/2022 at 2:08 PM, flyercanuck said:

 

Well the one hope is that even if Fletcher and Homer hire his replacement they can't possibly find someone as inept at managing a team as they are. 

“If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can’t it get us out?” – Will Rogers