Jump to content

Flyers and Quenneville?


elmatus

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

Good grief,  this team can't even fire a guy right.

It’s embarrassing.

 

Hakstol has to go, but no one deserves this.  They have let him twist for so long.

 

I do commend Hextall for plugging the leaks.  It sucked for fans, but it’s the way things should be.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

So here's the thing about this and the stench of incompetence that will linger like a beer and  taco doritos fart.

There are two men's livelihoods being gossiped over without regard for the actual men. 

If this is indeed happening Q comes into town with his announcement botched.  Hakstol doesn't deserve to learn of his fate over social media either. 

This is a monkey ****** a football. 

 

Well said.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, icehole said:

Dont get me wrong, I do believe this will happen, and it will probably happen pretty soon.  I just dont know how the team is screwing this up in any way.

 

By letting multiple sources leak a (potential) firing to the media, what, 6 hours ago, but not actually firing him (yet). Want him gone or not, that's not a good look for the org. Like I said, Isaac isn't going to just make stuff up and claim that sources told him that. They obviously did. Whomever let the cat out of the bag to Isaac either had bad info, or bad timing. The organization did a poor job of controlling the narrative, and the way it's taken on a life of its own in the media around the team is almost circus-like at this point. The yes he is/no he isn't is now even hitting the national media, TSN, etc. 

 

You don't think reporters are blowing up Hakstol's phone asking him about the report? Or that they won't ask him about it non-stop tomorrow if he is still coaching practice? Controlling that sort of information is incredibly important to the way an organization looks to potential hires, like a Quenneville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Seriously, though I am not a Flyers fan, I look at this with complete no bias.  You do not want to hire Quenville. He is going to be the Phil Jackson of the NHL and just suck up money.  You need a younger guy with some piss and vinegar

Flyers need a goalie who can stop the puck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Seriously, though I am not a Flyers fan, I look at this with complete no bias.  You do not want to hire Quenville. He is going to be the Phil Jackson of the NHL and just suck up money.  You need a younger guy with some piss and vinegar

 

You know, this is a completely valid point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No question this is sloppy and unprofessional. However, more than one retired professional hockey player has told me not to feel sorry for them. they are well paid to do a job they love, and every coach hired knows one day they will be fired. It shouldn't be like this though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

Seriously, though I am not a Flyers fan, I look at this with complete no bias.  You do not want to hire Quenville. He is going to be the Phil Jackson of the NHL and just suck up money.  You need a younger guy with some piss and vinegar

I thought of this too.  There is just no way Dave Scott is going to take another risk by hiring a guy with zero NHL experience after the so-so results "achieved " by Hakstol.  

Especially when 3 cup Q is just hanging out doing rail shots at Bears games.

There is no way are the Flyers going off script for the hot guy from the OHL after Hak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so now it sounds like the Flyers are trying to avoid getting in trouble for tampering reason now because (just guessing here have already had some type of discussion and maybe an verbal agreement) but since they haven't formally ask the Blackhawks could they talk to him it would be illegal and the Flyers could get in trouble.

 

So what screwed them up is someone in the trust circle went out and maybe told someone who became the source or told someone who told someon who then become the source.

 

It's a tricky situation here and Flyers have none to blame but themselves because they have a leak.

 

And on the other side of this I am sure somehow someway this so called sources probably get compensated some how from the people breaking the news.

 

So when time is right they will do something I bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, brelic said:

Well, so far in the Homer/Scott/Fletcher era, it's a gong show. 

 

Lessons in how not to run a professional organization. 

 

Exactly. This is a ridiculous way to run ANY company, let alone such a public-facing one. It's beyond embarrassing at this point. 

 

It's not Ottawa at this point, but it's bad that that comparison comes to mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

Exactly. This is a ridiculous way to run ANY company, let alone such a public-facing one. It's beyond embarrassing at this point. 

 

It's not Ottawa at this point, but it's bad that that comparison comes to mind. 

 

 

I'm more concerned with the leak itself not so much that it got out.

 

The fact that they have a leaky lip f**ker amongst them is a concern.

 

Unless (for example only) it got out because someone had a nosey family member eavesdropping at the shi ther door (as I said example only) while they were have a confidential (or so they thought) conversation on the phone to someone and that said person ran and posted it on Facebook or some kind of crap like that.

 

 

Highly unlikely but it could happen that way all the reports need is someone saying they heard/read it I think because they never have to actually reveal who said what and the rest is history once social media gets hold of it.

 

Stranger things have happened.

 

All I know I want it to be true about Hak being shown the door.

 

Hell for all we know Q might have said and could you blame him...."I want the rest of the year off see you at the conclusion of your regular season."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that it's a nosy family member. Isaac said "multiple sources," so even if the nosy family member tipped him off, he still confirmed it. The chances of him confirming it with some other person's nosy family member are small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AJgoal said:

I doubt that it's a nosy family member. Isaac said "multiple sources," so even if the nosy family member tipped him off, he still confirmed it. The chances of him confirming it with some other person's nosy family member are small.

 

Sure but all it takes is for that person to tell some of their friends and then it goes from their.

 

All Issac needs is for some to say I am Holmgren son' s best friend and while we were grilling and have some beers he told me yahdah yahdah...who knows.

 

What i do know is you can't put the genie back in the bottle and all they have to do is deny the reports...and without a credible source they don't get in trouble.

 

They are in damage control mode till they get the go ahead from the Blackhawks.

 

When that could be only a few know (we hope).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's not true confirmation of the source (should be two independent people who heard it, not someone hearing it from the person who heard it). And it's not likely that those folks (non-insiders) are the type of people Isaac talks to regularly, or would know how to get into contact with him. While I don't like Isaac, he is an actual journalist. I believe that the information he got was sourced properly, from actual organizational employees - it's just a long way to stick your neck out if you're using the rumor mill. Using friends of friends of family members as sources for a story like this is much more akin to stuff you'll find in the Enquirer or Midnight Star.

 

It's possible that his sources are wrong, and nothing happens today. It's also possible that they were right, but the early story and the storm that's followed have created some internal problems and they change their approach (Q backs out if he had an agreement, they don't like the optics, etc. etc.). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@OccamsRazor

Since Q was fired why would the Flyers need the Blackhawks permission to talk to him ?

Is it because the coaching contracts are often guaranteed ?

Even if that's not the case, it seems stupid to not be allowed to hire a guy that isn't working because the people who didn't think he was good enough anymore might not like it. I don't know if I understand the tampering business at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@OccamsRazor

Since Q was fired why would the Flyers need the Blackhawks permission to talk to him ?

Is it because the coaching contracts are often guaranteed ?

Even if that's not the case, it seems stupid to not be allowed to hire a guy that isn't working because the people who didn't think he was good enough anymore might not like it. I don't know if I understand the tampering business at all.

 

 

Yes because they are still paying him.

 

So they must ask for permission to speak with him still.

 

NHL formalities is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@OccamsRazor

Since Q was fired why would the Flyers need the Blackhawks permission to talk to him ?

Is it because the coaching contracts are often guaranteed ?

Even if that's not the case, it seems stupid to not be allowed to hire a guy that isn't working because the people who didn't think he was good enough anymore might not like it. I don't know if I understand the tampering business at all.

 

 

I thought the same thing, but apparently Montreal needed permission to speak to Julien last year. Might have something to do with the remaining term on the contract. Seems stupid, but appears necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@OccamsRazor

Since Q was fired why would the Flyers need the Blackhawks permission to talk to him ?

Is it because the coaching contracts are often guaranteed ?

Even if that's not the case, it seems stupid to not be allowed to hire a guy that isn't working because the people who didn't think he was good enough anymore might not like it. I don't know if I understand the tampering business at all.

 

 

Plus I think and I'm not sure but if they do sign him they won't have to finish paying him.

 

Like I said I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

@OccamsRazor

Since Q was fired why would the Flyers need the Blackhawks permission to talk to him ?

Is it because the coaching contracts are often guaranteed ?

Even if that's not the case, it seems stupid to not be allowed to hire a guy that isn't working because the people who didn't think he was good enough anymore might not like it. I don't know if I understand the tampering business at all.

 

 

Sabres had to ask for permission to speak with Bylsma too.

 

At least the NHL did away with draft pick compensation for those clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...