Let's Go Blues

Well?

Keep, and it's not even close.

I think he might be gone simply because the fanbase isn't going to buy going into next year standing pat. But I also worry that this is as good as he can do. We've had three straight flameouts. He may have built the team as far as it's going to go.

Nyghtewynd wrote:I think he might be gone simply because the fanbase isn't going to buy going into next year standing pat. But I also worry that this is as good as he can do. We've had three straight flameouts. He may have built the team as far as it's going to go.

I mean, could be. But, I don't blame Hitch for this. I really don't. Part of it I think is bad luck of playing the Blackhawks in the first round. This was a brutal matchup for both teams. Somebody had to lose and unfortunately it's us. I know people will say, "If we hadn't flamed out at the end of the regular season . . ." and I don't disagree. But, even still, this was a brutal matchup.

cardsfan04 wrote:

Nyghtewynd wrote:I think he might be gone simply because the fanbase isn't going to buy going into next year standing pat. But I also worry that this is as good as he can do. We've had three straight flameouts. He may have built the team as far as it's going to go.

I mean, could be. But, I don't blame Hitch for this. I really don't. Part of it I think is bad luck of playing the Blackhawks in the first round. This was a brutal matchup for both teams. Somebody had to lose and unfortunately it's us. I know people will say, "If we hadn't flamed out at the end of the regular season . . ." and I don't disagree. But, even still, this was a brutal matchup.

Bad luck playing the Hawks? This team controlled their own fate with 6 games left and couldn't get a point. The coach has to accept some of that blame.

tjk002 wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:

Nyghtewynd wrote:I think he might be gone simply because the fanbase isn't going to buy going into next year standing pat. But I also worry that this is as good as he can do. We've had three straight flameouts. He may have built the team as far as it's going to go.

I mean, could be. But, I don't blame Hitch for this. I really don't. Part of it I think is bad luck of playing the Blackhawks in the first round. This was a brutal matchup for both teams. Somebody had to lose and unfortunately it's us. I know people will say, "If we hadn't flamed out at the end of the regular season . . ." and I don't disagree. But, even still, this was a brutal matchup.

Bad luck playing the Hawks? This team controlled their own fate with 6 games left and couldn't get a point. The coach has to accept some of that blame.

Maybe but this team was loaded and ready to go on the night of game 1. I don't think you can overstate that enough. If the regular season slump had carried over into the postseason I could see placing a lot of blame on Hitch. Because you're right, it's his job to get these guys ready to play. But he did. We took the first two games of a playoff series against the defending champions finishing the season with 6 losses. I was thoroughly impressed with that.

With the exception of the last game we were in every single game and they all came down right to the wire. I tend to think it was more the personnel than the coaching in my opinion.

tjk002 wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:

Nyghtewynd wrote:I think he might be gone simply because the fanbase isn't going to buy going into next year standing pat. But I also worry that this is as good as he can do. We've had three straight flameouts. He may have built the team as far as it's going to go.

I mean, could be. But, I don't blame Hitch for this. I really don't. Part of it I think is bad luck of playing the Blackhawks in the first round. This was a brutal matchup for both teams. Somebody had to lose and unfortunately it's us. I know people will say, "If we hadn't flamed out at the end of the regular season . . ." and I don't disagree. But, even still, this was a brutal matchup.

Bad luck playing the Hawks? This team controlled their own fate with 6 games left and couldn't get a point. The coach has to accept some of that blame.

Like I said, I don't disagree. He should take some of the blame. I'm not of the opinion that his share of the blame should cost him his job though. Maybe I'll change my mind, but I think he has done well here, just hasn't gotten us there yet. Nyghtwynd does make a good point though. Maybe Hitch has taken us as far as he can.

I blame Hitch for alot of stuff.
Last 6 games of the regular season. Playoffs and not adjusting to the Hawks speed or getting the PP up to par.
On Hitch.

I don't recall offhand who our PP coach was this year, but shit...not sure why they ran the same PP every time in this last game when it clearly wasn't working. That and we apparently have no players than can score on the PP.

Krigloch the Furious wrote:I blame Hitch for alot of stuff.
Last 6 games of the regular season. Playoffs and not adjusting to the Hawks speed or getting the PP up to par.
On Hitch.

Last 6 games when the bulk of our roster was hurt, including (if I recall) 7 of our top forwards and our #1 D? Okay.

I'm ambivalent on Hitch but after 3 years of not winning a 2nd round game maybe you should cut him loose. What about Hull, Oates, or Gretzky as coach?

I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:I'm ambivalent on Hitch but after 3 years of not winning a 2nd round game maybe you should cut him loose. What about Hull, Oates, or Gretzky as coach?

No, no and no. If any former Blue should be the head coach it's Chopper and that's not happening.

Kerfuffle wrote:I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

That's because Torts is a crappy coach and it was a dumb decision by Vancouver. They could have and should have hired someone different but they wanted to go in the opposite direction of Vigneault and they got what they asked for.

glen a richter wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:I'm ambivalent on Hitch but after 3 years of not winning a 2nd round game maybe you should cut him loose. What about Hull, Oates, or Gretzky as coach?

No, no and no. If any former Blue should be the head coach it's Chopper and that's not happening.

You made teh DUGGIE WAITZ cry.

dmiles2186 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:I'm ambivalent on Hitch but after 3 years of not winning a 2nd round game maybe you should cut him loose. What about Hull, Oates, or Gretzky as coach?

No, no and no. If any former Blue should be the head coach it's Chopper and that's not happening.

You made teh DUGGIE WAITZ cry.

Waitz does have assistant coaching experience with the Islanders, I'll grant him that. But he also lives on the island now and it's kind of cool to be sort of neighbors with the greatest backwards skater ever to play the game. We'd hate to lose him.

glen a richter wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

That's because Torts is a crappy coach and it was a dumb decision by Vancouver. They could have and should have hired someone different but they wanted to go in the opposite direction of Vigneault and they got what they asked for.

Regardless of this, I still agree with Kerfuffle. Who is out there for us?

I guess the only name I can come up with is Laviolette and he's been fired from two different places. Granted, he got both teams to the Stanley Cup and won one, but still...he's the only intriguing option I'd be okay with.

dmiles2186 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

That's because Torts is a crappy coach and it was a dumb decision by Vancouver. They could have and should have hired someone different but they wanted to go in the opposite direction of Vigneault and they got what they asked for.

Regardless of this, I still agree with Kerfuffle. Who is out there for us?

I guess the only name I can come up with is Laviolette and he's been fired from two different places. Granted, he got both teams to the Stanley Cup and won one, but still...he's the only intriguing option I'd be okay with.

Hitch also has a history of being fired. Just saying.

glen a richter wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

That's because Torts is a crappy coach and it was a dumb decision by Vancouver. They could have and should have hired someone different but they wanted to go in the opposite direction of Vigneault and they got what they asked for.

Regardless of this, I still agree with Kerfuffle. Who is out there for us?

I guess the only name I can come up with is Laviolette and he's been fired from two different places. Granted, he got both teams to the Stanley Cup and won one, but still...he's the only intriguing option I'd be okay with.

Hitch also has a history of being fired. Just saying.

Not it's true. I wasn't happy when we hired him. I thought he was another retread and I thought Payne didn't get a proper chance. But this team has played winning hockey (in the regular season) at an astounding rate under Hitch. He turned this team from a 'we're fighting for a 6-8 seed' to discussion of a Stanley Cup. That gets lost at a time like this.

dmiles2186 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:I voted 'keep' - he's still one one of the winniest coaches in history. For those that want to fire him ask yourself this --> replace him with what? Look what happened in Vancouver - they fire Alan Vigneault and replaced him with Torterella and they actually went backwards this year and regressed under Torterella.

That's because Torts is a crappy coach and it was a dumb decision by Vancouver. They could have and should have hired someone different but they wanted to go in the opposite direction of Vigneault and they got what they asked for.

Regardless of this, I still agree with Kerfuffle. Who is out there for us?

I guess the only name I can come up with is Laviolette and he's been fired from two different places. Granted, he got both teams to the Stanley Cup and won one, but still...he's the only intriguing option I'd be okay with.

Hitch also has a history of being fired. Just saying.

Not it's true. I wasn't happy when we hired him. I thought he was another retread and I thought Payne didn't get a proper chance. But this team has played winning hockey (in the regular season) at an astounding rate under Hitch. He turned this team from a 'we're fighting for a 6-8 seed' to discussion of a Stanley Cup. That gets lost at a time like this.

Let's not get carried away. Let's look at Colorado for a second. Now everyone in Colorado is saying Patrick Roy is the greatest thing since sliced bread to coach that club, but lost on them is that they have a very talented group of young kids who were just coming into their own. Is Roy a great coach or did he just happen to inherit a team that was ready to break out with the skill they already had on roster regardless of who was coaching them?

Hitch took over a team that was a bit raw but had tasted some success. They were coming into their own and may have very well done exactly the same thing whether Payne had stayed or someone else was coaching instead.