VCRW
Classic player
It’s not so much about the frequency of coaching changes. My comment was about the circumstances surrounding the many changes we have seen since the Lombardi years began in 2006. Usually, the coach, management and players are all to blame when it’s obvious the team has quit, there is an obvious conflict, or the message falls on deaf ears somewhere in the chain.its simply not unusual is the point, what's unusual is Tampa's longevity with Cooper or even Pittsburgh's with Sullivan. Todds run with the kings and Sutters run were both long by modern NHL standards. Whats also unusual is having a 20 year run with one team. The cap era is only 20 years old so it's hard to generate historical norms out of that. I will concede it would be best if there was one coach and core players supported them for a decade plus, but the idea that it's a norm is a fiction.
Sometimes the coach and management are in conflict. Still, sometimes the coach is the problem by himself. Crawford was a bad hire. Everyone could see it. But since Marc was fired, it seems the players’ on ice performances have been the greatest deciding factor in who stands behind the bench. Danault was this year’s prime example.
We have all seen that players quitting on a coach gets ugly, and it’s happened 5 times in the last 14 years. That’s all I am saying. Everyone can draw their own conclusions. My conclusion is that management needs to be more observant of the obvious, make better personnel decisions, and hold the players accountable for winning.