- Club needs new coach. Club is looking at a number of candidates. Bob Hartley is one of those candidates.
- Club floats name of Bob Hartley out to the media/public.
- Media/public universally pan the move. Lots of lulzing had at the expense of the Flames.
- Club recoils; New names are floated out. Notably Mike Sullivan of the Rangers, although there was scuttlebutt about Todd McLellan (who will stay on with San Jose and end said scuttlebutt).
- Media/public like these names a lot more. A lot more.
- Something happens. McLellan is retained, Mike Sullivan has options other than the Flames.
- New names start popping up. Craig Hartsburg is leaked to the media/public.
- Lulzing again ensues.
- After everyone has exhausted their lulz supply on the Craig Hartsburg rumour, Bob Hartley's name is again leaked.
I do drugs and alcohol, so there is the possibility my brain has some of the events and where they fall in the timeline scrambled, but I think it's pretty ok.
My take is this: The club's front office, after throwing Darryl Sutter under the bus with the charge that he was telling Brent Sutter what lines to play, would like to be able to tell the new coach which lines he should play.
Hence, you get the name Bob Hartley. He is best buds with Feaster, so there is a relationship, and he needs an avenue to get back into the NHL, which means he may be more open to suggestion than other coaches available.
I think the club leaked his name expecting people to be impressed with the choice, given his work in Colorado.
I think people remembered Hartley's work in Atlanta (A club that I think the Flames are starting to resemble more and more). I think people also realize Edwards and King's recent handiwork hasn't been that great. I think people put two and two together, and came to the conclusion the Flames were doing something dumb.
Again. Hence the lulzing.
I think the marketing geniuses who run the Flames were not expecting the reaction they got. I think new names were then leaked to make it look like the club wasn't specifically targeting Jay Feaster's best friend who hadn't had a job in the NHL for five years. And to make the lulzing over Hartley stop.
I think the new names leaked might have been genuinely been pursued but I have no insider knowledge towards that.
I think when the Flames saw that the other names leaked got a very nice reception from the media/public, they swallowed hard. Because they either could not get those coaches or because they wanted Hartley all along.
I think that's why you heard Hartsburg's name subsequently in the rumours. I think the club wanted to put out a name even more lulz than Hartley's, so when (if) they name Hartley the coach, it will look 'better'.
It wouldn't look like they hired Hartley over Sullivan, for instance. It would look like they hired Hartley over Hartsburg.
The thang is this, put plainly: I think people don't give the front office the benefit of the doubt anymore. I think they have proven they can make dumb mistakes. I think the people see Bob Hartley and they don't give the move a lot of credit because of the perception that King and Edwards don't really know what they are doing, and are grasping at straws and what is familiar.
I think the club had an opportunity to start rebuilding some of the goodwill they have lost by naming a coach people could get excited about; Bob Hartley isn't that coach. He just isn't.
I think the spin, if they hire Hartley, is going to be that they hired a coach who has won a Stanley Cup on a veteran team. The thing is, there is a world of difference between a 'veteran team' and a 'talent laden veteran team'. I think the Colorado teams Hartley coached were essentially big money All-Star teams. The Flames are not. So I won't be buying the spin, myself.
The Atlanta team he coached, one with a couple of legit scorers (with no centres to get them the puck), a capable goal tender, and little else, is closer in talent to the Flames than the Colorado team he coached is (was?).
Hey, DB, who would you have hired? Wickenheiser, obviously.
Besides her? Ron Wilson.
I don't want to be bored to death when I watch hockey. Rob Kerr is going to be calling the games, so you know they will sound boring at the very least. I need them to look exciting if they are going to sound as dull as they will sound with Kerr calling the games. Which means the coach they bring in shouldn't be one who preaches a defensive system.
I don't care about 'low event' vs 'high event' hockey and which gives a better chance to win the Stanley Cup, because as it is now, the Flames don't have enough talent in the forward or defensive ranks to even dream about it. So give me a coach who is gonna let the guys play river hockey. At least it will be exciting and watchable.
Besides, Semin and Radulov are going to want to play run and gun.
Furthermore, I think