Head Coach

[phoenix66]

15 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Gallant would definitely not be the harmonious relationship Conroy spoke about. 

 

But as I said I get the interest due to his history with Huberdeau. Pick his brain to see if what you can gather

 

but I don't think he should be a serious candidate at this point. 

Brunette was my first choice .. but admit on being  intrigued by Gallant .

His issues have never been with players .. tho he does end up getting fired in mysterious circumstances...I'm good friends with his cousin , who says he takes a lot of time to get to know each player personally and build a relationship with them and their family 

He has no issues with kids, he took a team of cast offs and some virtual no names to a Stanley Cup final .  His teams play good D but they attack relentlessly in the offensive zone so he's not scared to turn a player loose..

 

I'd be ok with his hire but I'd do my dmandest to get him an associate coach like Tanguay.. bring up Love as well ..try and keep Huska back there but he may be gone I'd he doesn't get the job ..

You can bet the farm if he is hired , then he got a ringing endorsement from Huberdeau 

[cross16]

45 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Brunette was my first choice .. but admit on being  intrigued by Gallant .

His issues have never been with players .. tho he does end up getting fired in mysterious circumstances...I'm good friends with his cousin , who says he takes a lot of time to get to know each player personally and build a relationship with them and their family 

He has no issues with kids, he took a team of cast offs and some virtual no names to a Stanley Cup final .  His teams play good D but they attack relentlessly in the offensive zone so he's not scared to turn a player loose..

 

I'd be ok with his hire but I'd do my dmandest to get him an associate coach like Tanguay.. bring up Love as well ..try and keep Huska back there but he may be gone I'd he doesn't get the job ..

You can bet the farm if he is hired , then he got a ringing endorsement from Huberdeau 

 

Basically the feedback on Gallant I hear is he is stubborn, and he is prepared to be let go rather than just make the changes his boss/the team want him too. That's why I say i don't think he fits the harmonious relationship Conroy spoke about. 

 

Florida wasn't totally his fault. He was hired by a different GM and I don't think the new regime really wanted him but couldn't really fire him coming off a successful year. 

But in both Vegas and New York it sounds like orgs got tired of his stubbornness in particular on how he deployed certain players and in played certain situations. 

 

I do think he is a good coach but I just don't think he's a good fit for a first time GM like Conroy, nor is he a good fit for the situation the Flames are in right now coming off another stubborn coach. 

[The_People1]

24 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Basically the feedback on Gallant I hear is he is stubborn, and he is prepared to be let go rather than just make the changes his boss/the team want him too. That's why I say i don't think he fits the harmonious relationship Conroy spoke about. 

 

Florida wasn't totally his fault. He was hired by a different GM and I don't think the new regime really wanted him but couldn't really fire him coming off a successful year. 

But in both Vegas and New York it sounds like orgs got tired of his stubbornness in particular on how he deployed certain players and in played certain situations. 

 

I do think he is a good coach but I just don't think he's a good fit for a first time GM like Conroy, nor is he a good fit for the situation the Flames are in right now coming off another stubborn coach. 

 

I think Conroy only spoke about young players needing to know "why" they are being told to do something.  Cannot just tell them to do it.  It's implied Sutter is not that type of person to explain things to young kids and it leaves them confused and frustrated.

 

If Gallant builds a good relationship with players on a personal level, then I think that could help.

 

We need buy in from players like Huberdeau and Kadri.  We need a coach who can communicate well with them.

[travel_dude]

39 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Basically the feedback on Gallant I hear is he is stubborn, and he is prepared to be let go rather than just make the changes his boss/the team want him too. That's why I say i don't think he fits the harmonious relationship Conroy spoke about. 

 

Florida wasn't totally his fault. He was hired by a different GM and I don't think the new regime really wanted him but couldn't really fire him coming off a successful year. 

But in both Vegas and New York it sounds like orgs got tired of his stubbornness in particular on how he deployed certain players and in played certain situations. 

 

I do think he is a good coach but I just don't think he's a good fit for a first time GM like Conroy, nor is he a good fit for the situation the Flames are in right now coming off another stubborn coach. 

 

11 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think Conroy only spoke about young players needing to know "why" they are being told to do something.  Cannot just tell them to do it.  It's implied Sutter is not that type of person to explain things to young kids and it leaves them confused and frustrated.

 

If Gallant builds a good relationship with players on a personal level, then I think that could help.

 

We need buy in from players like Huberdeau and Kadri.  We need a coach who can communicate well with them.

 

I'm not sure Gallant satisfies this.  We have to get it right this time.  Too many former coaches that were let go.  Peters didn't get fired by CAR, but a two time resigning coach isn't a good fit either.  

 

 

[cross16]

32 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think Conroy only spoke about young players needing to know "why" they are being told to do something.  Cannot just tell them to do it.  It's implied Sutter is not that type of person to explain things to young kids and it leaves them confused and frustrated.

 

If Gallant builds a good relationship with players on a personal level, then I think that could help.

 

We need buy in from players like Huberdeau and Kadri.  We need a coach who can communicate well with them.

 

He also spoke about how he wanted a partner in the new coach. 

 

Quote

“Honestly, we need to work together, we need to be a team. We’re not head coach and management, we’re a team, we’re in this together, we’re not going to be at odds,” Conroy said. “We’re not going to be lock-step all the time, but we’re going to have the same vision and passion for this team and the direction it’s going to go and we’re going to work together, that’s the first thing.

https://calgarysun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/calgary-flames/conroy-puts-no-timeline-on-search-for-new-flames-head-coach

[Thebrewcrew]

Before the Flames hired Ward, I had hoped that they would hire Gallant.

 

If the Flames want to be a playoff team next year, he’s the best bet. There’s enough track record to prove it, the impact is often immediate too

 

At the very least, the Flames will keep him in the mix until the very end of the process. It’s been noted many times, but he knows a lot about Huberdeau.

 

Just doesn’t feel like the fit Conroy mentioned he was looking for at his presser. But if Conroy is looking to get off to a good start in his GM tenure, Gallants track record would suggest an immediate impact.

[sagacity7]

11 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Basically the feedback on Gallant I hear is he is stubborn, and he is prepared to be let go rather than just make the changes his boss/the team want him too. That's why I say i don't think he fits the harmonious relationship Conroy spoke about. 

 

Florida wasn't totally his fault. He was hired by a different GM and I don't think the new regime really wanted him but couldn't really fire him coming off a successful year. 

But in both Vegas and New York it sounds like orgs got tired of his stubbornness in particular on how he deployed certain players and in played certain situations. 

 

I do think he is a good coach but I just don't think he's a good fit for a first time GM like Conroy, nor is he a good fit for the situation the Flames are in right now coming off another stubborn coach. 

I think Gallant is a good coach but in a similar ilk to Sutter whereas Love would be a little more reasonable with front office staff and not as stubborn. For this reason I believe Love is the correct choice. He will give the young players ice time and may also work better with management than Gallant would. Take nothing away from Gallant and I’m sure Conroy will do his stone turning to make sure it is a good fit.

[jjgallow]

2 hours ago, sagacity7 said:

I think Gallant is a good coach but in a similar ilk to Sutter whereas Love would be a little more reasonable with front office staff and not as stubborn. For this reason I believe Love is the correct choice. He will give the young players ice time and may also work better with management than Gallant would. Take nothing away from Gallant and I’m sure Conroy will do his stone turning to make sure it is a good fit.

 

Yup.  

 

Flames need a coach that will make the most of projects and also possibly reclaim some players.   They  have not had this in a while, rather other teams have been acquiring Flames players and reclaiming them.   I blame the GM for that over the coach, but obviously both have key roles in that.

 

Hard times coming.   But those make you better.   Gallant is that playoff push coach, Love is that prospect development and reclaimed player coach.  In theory.  lol.

 

Ultimately they have to give him a chance.   He's earned it.

 

Question is, the next AHL coach:  Do they go internal again?  or cast the net?

[cross16]

The other knock on Gallant was I think a key reason he was let go in New York was his handling of Lafreniere and Kakko. sure he played kids in Vegas because he had to but in New York, he did tend to lean on the more veteran players. 

 

I would agree he is the "safest" bet, but he really doesn't fit the profile of what Conroy said in the presser.  

[cross16]

Looks like Marc Savard has in fact interviewed, according to Marek

 

 

 

[rocketdoctor]

please not Gallant.

 

Too many red flags for me with his short tenures at NYR and VGK.

 

I think the year Mange had his MVP at the worlds Gallant was coach.

 

 

[The_People1]

Would Love be open to come to the NHL as an assistant to Gallant?  So have a staff of Gallant with Love + Tanguay as assistants.

[robrob74]

45 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

Would Love be open to come to the NHL as an assistant to Gallant?  So have a staff of Gallant with Love + Tanguay as assistants.

 

I like the idea. It gives him some NHL coaching experience. I don't know whether he has been an NHL Hash Rate before. 

[cross16]

Love as an assistant I think depends on whether or not the rumors of him being candidate for other jobs is true or not.  I think he has enough pedigree that he won't need to take an assistant job, he'll likely just get hired straight out of the AHL. 

 

Don't know him well enough to say for sure, but i'd be surprised if he was interested in an assistant job. I don't think it really makes sense for his career path, and honestly doesn't make a lot of sense for the flames either if they see him as the future head coach. 

[jjgallow]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

Love as an assistant I think depends on whether or not the rumors of him being candidate for other jobs is true or not.  I think he has enough pedigree that he won't need to take an assistant job, he'll likely just get hired straight out of the AHL. 

 

Don't know him well enough to say for sure, but i'd be surprised if he was interested in an assistant job. I don't think it really makes sense for his career path, and honestly doesn't make a lot of sense for the flames either if they see him as the future head coach. 

 

pretty straightforward.   

 

3 pages on here about who the Flames will choose when it comes down a lot more to what Mitch chooses.

[travel_dude]

23 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

pretty straightforward.   

 

3 pages on here about who the Flames will choose when it comes down a lot more to what Mitch chooses.

 

Well they are looking at him, the same way they looked at Ward when we hired Gully.

It's not just Love, though.

Are there that many teams that are willing to hire a coach right out of the AHL?

Perhaps ANA, but they had Dallas Eakins, who is not exactly an establish NHL coach.

Being fired by the Oilers is not a great resume.

 

Saying that, it all depends on what GM's think about hiring another AHL coach.

 

[jjgallow]

19 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well they are looking at him, the same way they looked at Ward when we hired Gully.

It's not just Love, though.

Are there that many teams that are willing to hire a coach right out of the AHL?

Perhaps ANA, but they had Dallas Eakins, who is not exactly an establish NHL coach.

Being fired by the Oilers is not a great resume.

 

Saying that, it all depends on what GM's think about hiring another AHL coach.

 

 

imho almost every team picking above us at the draft would have assessed him in some way.

 

Calgary won't be his only option.  Keeping in mind I have a contract disability.

 

Trusting they will do it right and won't mess it up like Toronto just did

[cross16]

23 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Well they are looking at him, the same way they looked at Ward when we hired Gully.

It's not just Love, though.

Are there that many teams that are willing to hire a coach right out of the AHL?

Perhaps ANA, but they had Dallas Eakins, who is not exactly an establish NHL coach.

Being fired by the Oilers is not a great resume.

 

Saying that, it all depends on what GM's think about hiring another AHL coach.

 

 

 

It is pretty common. 2 of the best coaches in the game (IMO) in Jon Cooper and Jared Bednar both came straight from the AHL. Other successful coaches like Jim Montgomery (when he was hired by Dallas), Dave Hakstol, and Keefe. Andre Tourigny was hired directly from junior, so ws Peter DeBoer,

 

I don't think where the coach comes from matters. It's more about the candidate then the background.  

[travel_dude]

Just now, cross16 said:

 

 

It is pretty common. 2 of the best coaches in the game (IMO) in Jon Cooper and Jared Bednar both came straight from the AHL. Other successful coaches like Jim Montgomery (when he was hired by Dallas), Dave Hakstol, and Keefe. Andre Tourigny was hired directly from junior, so ws Peter DeBoer,

 

I don't think where the coach comes from matters. It's more about the candidate then the background.  

 

What I am really asking is what teams out there are looking for a new coach that already haven't identified their replacement.  If there are a handful, then yes he would get consideration.  

[cross16]

5 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

What I am really asking is what teams out there are looking for a new coach that already haven't identified their replacement.  If there are a handful, then yes he would get consideration.  

 

Currently only the Ducks, Jackets and Rangers are looking. Rangers are rumored to be hiring Lavy so it leaves 2. Both of those searches have been quiet and it's possible that you won't hear much on Love until now given the Wranglers season ending and the fact that Flames are including him in their search. Be interesting to see if you start hearing his name towards the end of the week (rumors are internal candidates are getting interviewed this week)

 

But you also can't simply think about it just in terms of his cycle though. What happens next year when another 3-4 teams fire their coach and now they want to consider him? Are you prepared to fire the coach you hire this year in order to block Love from leaving then? 

 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Love as an assistant I think depends on whether or not the rumors of him being candidate for other jobs is true or not.  I think he has enough pedigree that he won't need to take an assistant job, he'll likely just get hired straight out of the AHL. 

 

Don't know him well enough to say for sure, but i'd be surprised if he was interested in an assistant job. I don't think it really makes sense for his career path, and honestly doesn't make a lot of sense for the flames either if they see him as the future head coach. 

 

It only makes sense because Gallant's coach span is 1.5-years so it allows Love to get 1.5 years of NHL experience before he takes over officially.  No one should expect Gallant to be a long term coach.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

Currently only the Ducks, Jackets and Rangers are looking. Rangers are rumored to be hiring Lavy so it leaves 2. Both of those searches have been quiet and it's possible that you won't hear much on Love until now given the Wranglers season ending and the fact that Flames are including him in their search. Be interesting to see if you start hearing his name towards the end of the week (rumors are internal candidates are getting interviewed this week)

 

But you also can't simply think about it just in terms of his cycle though. What happens next year when another 3-4 teams fire their coach and now they want to consider him? Are you prepared to fire the coach you hire this year in order to block Love from leaving then? 

 

 

I would say that you consider him as an A/coach this year.  Whatever main coach you sign, only do it for 2 years.  Not saying Love would agree to it, just that it gives him time to get NHL time in.  At most, the wait is two years.  At least, the wait is 1 year.  

 

But I am making suggestions, where it should be the new coach or GM that can name the assistants.  Other than coach of the year and his great record in the AHL, I don't know enough about him.  

[taz89]

Not sure if anyone was still considering Brunette or not but he's off the list now, Preds hired him today.

[cross16]

According to Seravelli Gallant isn’t a candidate. Had a conversation but he’s too expensive. 
not a surprise, for multiple reasons  

 

[The_People1]

2 minutes ago, cross16 said:

According to Seravelli Gallant isn’t a candidate. Had a conversation but he’s too expensive. 
not a surprise, for multiple reasons  

 

 

That's so sad to hear it came down to money.  This ownership group wants to win now but won't pay up.  I know they are already paying Sutter but still.  Just pay.