Jump to content

If / When Weber becomes a Flyer...When does he get the "C"?


Guest pilldoc
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lets all assume for a moment that Nashville does not match and Weber officially becomes a Flyer sometime next week. When / if ever, does he get the "C". Would you want him to be come captain this year or next? Let Kimmo wear the "C" this year or Briere, then after being in the organization for a solid year, give him the "C" next year. Let Weber wear th "A" this year. Let Roo keep on developing and not pressure him with the "C", although I think he could handle it.

2012-13:

Kimmo "C"

Weber "A"

Roo "A"

2013-14

Weber "C"

Roo "A"

other "A" - ???

Thoughts???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with how things went with Richards, I'm not a fan of giving it to young players, no matter how good. Give it to one of the vets and let the young guys just worry about the game. IF the young guys are interested in wearing the C, then it can be the carrot to work towards as opposed to them just getting it and then dealing with the pressure... in other words, let them earn it.

as for your hypotheticals, IF THE FLYERS get Weber, I don't mind your layout. Weber has been a C already so for him to eventually get it would be fine. BUT, doesn't Roo kinda own this team right now? Would he get upset if he isn't the heir apparent for the C? Timmo getting the C next does seem like the most logical step.

I really wouldn't mind seeing the team do away with the C in the traditional sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with how things went with Richards, I'm not a fan of giving it to young players, no matter how good. Give it to one of the vets and let the young guys just worry about the game. IF the young guys are interested in wearing the C, then it can be the carrot to work towards as opposed to them just getting it and then dealing with the pressure... in other words, let them earn it.

as for your hypotheticals, IF THE FLYERS get Weber, I don't mind your layout. Weber has been a C already so for him to eventually get it would be fine. BUT, doesn't Roo kinda own this team right now? Would he get upset if he isn't the heir apparent for the C? Timmo getting the C next does seem like the most logical step.

I really wouldn't mind seeing the team do away with the C in the traditional sense.

you know I was thinking about this morning. Why not just go with three "A"'s???? Leadership by committee. Take 1-4 of the vets and rotate the "A". Seems logical to me. I agree though about Roo. It is Roo's team now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know I was thinking about this morning. Why not just go with three "A"'s???? Leadership by committee. Take 1-4 of the vets and rotate the "A". Seems logical to me. I agree though about Roo. It is Roo's team now.

that's what I was saying during the season when folks were looking for someone to wear the C since it didn't look like Pronger was coming back. I have zero problem with three As. The real leaders lead anyway, regardless of what's sewn on their sweater.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we get Weber, he does need to "earn his stripes" in Philly. He´s the league´s beste defenseman and supposedly a leader in the lockerroom, but he needs to prove all that first. I fully expect him to come in and dominate and make it "his" team in a (positive) way. So within a year or latest two years, he will wear the C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to put the cart before the horse here, but for argument's sake lets say Weber is a Flyer next year.

Give Weber the C. He functions well as the captain, you paid him top dollar, you committed to him for 14 years, there is absolutely no doubt then who the leader of the team is.

Giroux can just be Giroux and that is a very impressive thing. Giroux doesn't need a label to lead. He is a winner and he has a lust for winning and competing hard. His appetite for competitiveness is insatiable. That is something he has naturally and he doesn't need to wear the C for that to flourish.

Give it to Weber. Its a safe bet. Its a vacant position being filled by a good captain. I think its an easy transition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is similar to another thread/poll.

I'd give the C to Briere whether Weber is here or not. He's good with the younger players.

Guess I have no problem with three A's either.

If we get Weber, like OSR29 said in this thread: he has to earn it here.

Which I have no doubt he would earn it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Talbot will get the C, and Weber gets the A as does Giroux. Weber is a newcomer and I think for as great as Claude is, it should be 2013-2014 when he becomes captain.

NFW I take away an A from Timonen and give it to a guy who skipped out on the team he captained - if anything, he gets the C for the year, but I'd say Briere for three then Giroux.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFW I take away an A from Timonen and give it to a guy who skipped out on the team he captained - if anything, he gets the C for the year, but I'd say Briere for three then Giroux.

How did Weber skip out on the team he captained? They lowballed him last year, so now they expect him to say "No problem, I'll go back to Nashville". after the Flyers blew them out of the water with an offer? Also, Talbot has the experience of winning a Cup. Giroux should be captain in 2013-14, imo so why not bring him along to do so now with an A. Weber is an All-Star defenseman in his prime known for his great all-around play throughout the league

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did Weber skip out on the team he captained? They lowballed him last year, so now they expect him to say "No problem, I'll go back to Nashville". after the Flyers blew them out of the water with an offer? Also, Talbot has the experience of winning a Cup. Giroux should be captain in 2013-14, imo so why not bring him along to do so now with an A. Weber is an All-Star defenseman in his prime known for his great all-around play throughout the league

He was signed with them. He had a $7.5M offer from them (RFA tender). He was the captain. He signed with another team.

Seems pretty cut and dry.

Giroux already has the A. Timonen has been a leader on this team for five years and you want to just shove him aside in the last year of his deal and give his A to Weber, who has never played a game for the orange and black?

Pshaw, I say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran So, once a team makes you captain you are morally bound to them for life?

You're going to take this far more seriously than it's meant because you have such a sweet spt for Weber :)

Flip side of the argument - just because a guy was a C at another place doesn't mean he automatically is the "leader" of the Philadelphia Flyers.

Why would anyone even consider Weber as the C? Not only because this was "Giroux's team" abot 40 seconds ago, not only because there are players who are leaders in the lockerroom who have led the Flyers, but also because he's done absolutely nothing to earn it in Philadelphia.

Felt the same way about Jason Smith - doubly so since the player was on a one-year deal. And Derian Hatcher. And Peter Forsberg.

I want a Flyer to be captain of the Flyers. And Shea Weber ain't a Flyer yet and has a lot to prove - "four Kimmo Timonens!" :ph34r: - before he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you know I was thinking about this morning. Why not just go with three "A"'s???? Leadership by committee. Take 1-4 of the vets and rotate the "A". Seems logical to me. I agree though about Roo. It is Roo's team now.

Haven't we been doing leadership by committee for years now? Even when we had Richards/Pronger/Smith/Hatcher/Forsberg/Zamboni Driver with the official C? Hitch and Stevens loved the term "Leadership Group"

I am not an athlete, but I work for a company that advertises in arenas, and even has naming rights to one. (Not ours.) In my opinion there needs to be a decisive leader, or at least someone that can play that part on TV. Even Primeau pulled that off. Richards got slagged because he was not media friendly, or so I read in the media. Forsberg (and Pronger) missed (miss) too many games. Smith was a leader, for sure; but that was a stupid contract ploy.

Count me among those that think it should go to a vet - Timo, Briere, or even -- and I am actually saying this with a straight face -- Hartnell. Why #Hartnelldown? He's already survived the media, has re-earned the trust of the coach, represents the players in the union, and has been around a bit. Can he lead? Sometimes it's the devil you know, vs the stranger you don't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@radoran You know, the more I think about it, the more I see things your way. It does not speak well for the current group of Flyers vets to let a complete stranger move in and take the leadership reigns. There is a nice stable of vets here, one of them should be utilized. As much as I like Weber, he is not Wayne Gretzky or Mark Messier, players that get the C just because of who they are and what they have meant to the league. I'd be more than fine to throw Kimo a bone for long years of loyal service. In fact, I'd say he deserves it.

  • Like 1
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...