What's with all the hostility? Agenda? Do you mean opinion? What are we making up? I feel like maybe I'm missing some thread content or a page or two because this response is so far out of left field for what I've written and what BlueShake wrote.
Let me give you an example. You cite that management decided to go with youth after they got swept. The thing is though that Chevy didnt' begin going on record with this until recently, a year or so ago. I find this to be a bit self serving because they didn't really go with a youth movement at all. They did everything they could to sign Ladd but couldn't agree on a deal so they had to trade him. It wasn't like they told Ladd sorry our future is elsewhere, they tried to re-sign him to a long term deal.
And that's it. They didnt dump their vets in the off season for a youth movement. They in fact re-signed an aging Drew Stafford and Adam Pardy. What about that reads like a youth movement? Honest question there doesn't have to be any animosity.
What hostility? If you take my post as hostile......you don't know hostile.
You talk about people's belief of a seven year rebuild.....literally no one here believes that.....let's not make stuff up to fit your agenda.
Going young doesn't mean every single player is young, if they don't have a player ready for a role a vet needs to be played or hired.....not going to play a AHL prospect and hurt his development just so you can say you have a young player. You guys like to talk in absolutes, the real world doesn't work that way.
Signing Frolik and Ladd would of given us depth we need now.....that doesn't mean we aren't going young though....it means we don't have good enough young guys to play. In the end it's a good thing we didn't sign Ladd, he wanted too much money and hasn't been great. Love to see us add one or two vets to our bottom six of younger guys who just aren't good enough.
If you want to complain about not buying out Pavs, not going young sooner (2011-13), signing PMO originally without any real coach search, few bad contracts, loving our prospects too much, PMO extension, asst coaches, etc......I wouldn't disagree with a single post. But calling for PMO to be fired during the period he was told to develop young players (which likely will lead to less chance of winning) or immediately after one bad game is completely silly. Again I'm not big fan of PMO, sooner seen him given this year to prove himself now with a reasonable lineup, albeit not great lineup.
Either way, not sure what people complaining/whining about coach being fired now when there is absolutely zero % chance of it happening. If they suck still after 20 games or so, you will see me and others calling for PMO to be fired as well. Pointless thread at this point as others have said, not wasting talking about something that isn't going to happen any time soon. Last post here until this subject becomes relevant.
Hmmm, go listen to literally any interview from Chevy since the summer of 2015 right after the playoff lose. Literally that's was spoken about constantly from that point forward.....going younger, much younger. Most recent was his interview about three weeks ago. I see you just joined HFB this summer, are you a Finnish bandwagon fan joining recently? Sounds like you know very little history of the team and discussions here over the years.