How long can Berube and Armstrong keep their positions?

[Celtic Note]

Doughty & Kopitar are still there, lack of roster and organizational mismanagement, California is a more attractive place to get players to come live.

Not that I've watched the interview, I categorically reject Armstrong's main premise regarding tearing it down. He said he doesn't know if we could survive that, later correcting himself and saying it would be many years with 6k fans. The Blues -did- survive a rebuild to the studs. It was the original move that built the eventual cup roster. This idea that he's putting forth that a rebuild would take 10-12 years is one that applies to organizations rife with bad decisions and management; it's not the typical cycle. And even then, the model Kings had 2 top 5 picks and another at 8. The best way to wallow for 10-12 years is delaying the rebuild and trying to half compete.

I wish he would say what he really means (my interpretation) and not make it sound like the city could not handle the down period. As you note we have been through that. He later says we are a great sports city. Putting it all together…ownership cannot afford a prolonged / bottom out rebuild…or they just don’t want to do that.

 

[Celtic Note]

If you buy 100 lottery tickets vs 5, your chances of winning change from zero to 20 x zero

Haha. Touché.

I think the odds for finding the right talent is considerably better than the powerball or equivalent lottery though.

 

[Reality Czech]

I wish he would say what he really means (my interpretation) and not make it sound like the city could not handle the down period. As you note we have been through that. He later says we are a great sports city. Putting it all together…ownership cannot afford a prolonged / bottom out rebuild…or they just don’t want to do that.

Maybe it's an obvious point, but us hardcore fans need to recognize that our opinions do not represent the majority. Hardcore fans might be more accepting of a longer rebuild because we know more about prospects, draft picks, etc. However, the average fan doesn't really care about Dvorsky or the next hotshot prospect that's a few years away. They wouldn't understand why the team is getting rid of all their favorite players for draft picks and why the team is getting its ass kicked every night. And most importantly they aren't going to spend their hard earned money on a crappy product.

Those are the people that the team has to cater to. Most of us in this forum are going to follow the team no matter what because we are obsessed with hockey and are interested in the finer points of the business of the game. And let's be honest, it's nearly impossible to satisfy most people in this forum unless the team is going deep in the playoffs every single year. Tough crowd to please around these parts.

 

[Thallis]

Maybe it's an obvious point, but us hardcore fans need to recognize that our opinions do not represent the majority. Hardcore fans might be more accepting of a longer rebuild because we know more about prospects, draft picks, etc. However, the average fan doesn't really care about Dvorsky or the next hotshot prospect that's a few years away. They wouldn't understand why the team is getting rid of all their favorite players for draft picks and why the team is getting its ass kicked every night. And most importantly they aren't going to spend their hard earned money on a crappy product.

Those are the people that the team has to cater to. Most of us in this forum are going to follow the team no matter what because we are obsessed with hockey and are interested in the finer points of the business of the game. And let's be honest, it's nearly impossible to satisfy most people in this forum unless the team is going deep in the playoffs every single year. Tough crowd to please around these parts.

They don't care when they're a few years away, yes. Once they're knocking on the door or are in St. Louis, that changes quickly. Oshie & Perron we instant favorites. Casual fans were instantly excited when EJ came for his first season. PR can make people excited. When we were rebuilding post lockout, we had 2 seasons with big attendance dips. In 2005-2006, our attendance was 14213/game and in 2006-2007 it was 12520/game. The next season when we tied for 3rd last in the league, we were already averaging over 17610/game. Two seasons after (when we didn't make the playoffs, since the previous season was the big push to finish 6th), it was 18883. There is absolutely an appetite in St. Louis to go to games when the team isn't great, the question to me is whether that will continues when the team trends downwards vs an upward trend.

 

[Brian39]

They don't care when they're a few years away, yes. Once they're knocking on the door or are in St. Louis, that changes quickly. Oshie & Perron we instant favorites. Casual fans were instantly excited when EJ came for his first season. PR can make people excited. When we were rebuilding post lockout, we had 2 seasons with big attendance dips. In 2005-2006, our attendance was 14213/game and in 2006-2007 it was 12520/game. The next season when we tied for 3rd last in the league, we were already averaging over 17610/game. Two seasons after (when we didn't make the playoffs, since the previous season was the big push to finish 6th), it was 18883. There is absolutely an appetite in St. Louis to go to games when the team isn't great, the question to me is whether that will continues when the team trends downwards vs an upward trend.

As someone who was a broke college student at the time, I can confidently say that these numbers were greatly helped by the team practically giving away tickets. I'd try to go to a Blues game every time I came home for a weekend and I don't think I ever paid more than $15 to get in the door until the season where they got red-hot and made the playoffs. The team was selling $11 tickets for all 41 home games in 2008 and I often got free tickets from a family friend with (corporate) season tickets because their rep was literally giving them extra tickets to try and get more people in the building.

17,000 fans when you are heavily discounting ticket prices is a hell of a lot different financially than a full building with dynamic pricing and constantly increasing ticket prices. The organization absolutely still bled money in these years where attendance improved.

 

[Thallis]

As someone who was a broke college student at the time, I can confidently say that these numbers were greatly helped by the team practically giving away tickets. I'd try to go to a Blues game every time I came home for a weekend and I don't think I ever paid more than $15 to get in the door until the season where they got red-hot and made the playoffs. The team was selling $11 tickets for all 41 home games in 2008 and I often got free tickets from a family friend with (corporate) season tickets because their rep was literally giving them extra tickets to try and get more people in the building.

17,000 fans when you are heavily discounting ticket prices is a hell of a lot different financially than a full building with dynamic pricing and constantly increasing ticket prices. The organization absolutely still bled money in these years where attendance improved.

Sure, but the actual difference & financial impact of such is entirely speculation. You're right that there will be a difference from the rebuild/growing team and established playoff team, but there's also a difference between a playoff team and a championship favorite with superstars on the roster. The difference isn't something anyone can know for sure. I advocate for a rebuild because I want the Blues to have great players and win championships and there's a consensus forming in most sports that is this the best way to build that. It's also obviously not my money and loss aversion bias is strong, so I understand why there's resistance.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Sure, but the actual difference & financial impact of such is entirely speculation. You're right that there will be a difference from the rebuild/growing team and established playoff team, but there's also a difference between a playoff team and a championship favorite with superstars on the roster. The difference isn't something anyone can know for sure. I advocate for a rebuild because I want the Blues to have great players and win championships and there's a consensus forming in most sports that is this the best way to build that. It's also obviously not my money and loss aversion bias is strong, so I understand why there's resistance.

Given the Blues overall history, the thought of a long rebuild frightens me because the Blues are a small market team and it wouldn't take as long as many think for this team to financially get in trouble, no matter the owners or the money behind it. Ideology usually takes a quick backseat to profit unless you're someone like R Hal Dean (and that's a story in itself).

 

[Mike Liut]

I’m sure the multi billionaire Taylor’s kick in millions annually and write it off. Maybe?

 

[joe galiba]

I’m sure the multi billionaire Taylor’s kick in millions annually and write it off. Maybe?

and we have had other “rich” owners who draw a line on their “civic duty” when they start losing lots of money

 

[Mike Liut]

and we have had other “rich” owners who draw a line on their “civic duty” when they start losing lots of money

I really have no clue what happens behind the scenes financially. Hopefully it’s working whatever is happening.

 

[PocketNines]

So which is it? Recall that in this thread we had a whole premise how the owners love Doug Armstrong because of how much money he made them. It is such a bad argument. The truth, according to the league-wide explosion of values, that a literal bag of turnips could have raised franchise values 5-fold. Pretty much any warm human body. But many love authority reflexively, so they attribute this to Doug.

Now we have a whole discussion about how truly poor the owners are. So I guess they better fire Doug Armstrong and get someone who can rescue them from poverty. Maybe they can ask the Gateway Honda Dealers, who are on track to each kick in about $800 dollars on the year for the sick kids. Each generous Honda local duke will be donating the tax deductible price of minor bodywork to a single used car on the year in exchange for all the advertising. I bet with all the money the earls of Honda have saved up they could buy a piece of the Blues and infuse some much needed cash which Doug has failed to bring them.

My overall point is that Doug is praised for bringing the ownership group an unprecedented amount of money, while multiple people insist that the team must ice a competitive team or else be forced to give away their tickets to college kids. And then because of this it's like "oh Doug's hands are tied, he has no choice or else the owners will have to sell the team. He's doing so great for the box he is in." The argument slides back and forth and no matter where it is at any given moment, Doug isn't responsible. One thing screaming out to me is that he is so comfortable, he can say anything to an interviewer knowing that hockey flacks are just huslters, they aren't journalists, there are no hard questions. How can an interviewer listen to this guy talk about following the LA Kings model and not ask, "how do you plan to get THREE top 8 picks over the next several years like that Kings team just did?" It's a super basic question if the person asking it were interested in questioning, rather than "I got an interview with Doug Armstrong making me an insiderrrr let me get engagement!"

It is never on Doug Armstrong for understanding the game of hockey, strategy, and the actual players needed to assemble the best team among the teams. But that is his actual job. We have this guy who clearly does not get how to build a team who knows he never has to answer for it, his legacy is secure anyway. So we fans who are interested in real competition wait with this terrible middling crap we see currently.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

So which is it? Recall that in this thread we had a whole premise how the owners love Doug Armstrong because of how much money he made them. It is such a bad argument. The truth, according to the league-wide explosion of values, that a literal bag of turnips could have raised franchise values 5-fold. Pretty much any warm human body. But many love authority reflexively, so they attribute this to Doug.

Now we have a whole discussion about how truly poor the owners are. So I guess they better fire Doug Armstrong and get someone who can rescue them from poverty. Maybe they can ask the Gateway Honda Dealers, who are on track to each kick in about $800 dollars on the year for the sick kids. Each generous Honda local duke will be donating the tax deductible price of minor bodywork to a single used car on the year in exchange for all the advertising. I bet with all the money the earls of Honda have saved up they could buy a piece of the Blues and infuse some much needed cash which Doug has failed to bring them.

My overall point is that Doug is praised for bringing the ownership group an unprecedented amount of money, while multiple people insist that the team must ice a competitive team or else be forced to give away their tickets to college kids. And then because of this it's like "oh Doug's hands are tied, he has no choice or else the owners will have to sell the team. He's doing so great for the box he is in." The argument slides back and forth and no matter where it is at any given moment, Doug isn't responsible. One thing screaming out to me is that he is so comfortable, he can say anything to an interviewer knowing that hockey flacks are just hustlers, they aren't journalists, there are no hard questions. How can an interviewer listen to this guy talk about following the LA Kings model and not ask, "how do you plan to get THREE top 8 picks over the next several years like that Kings team just did?" It's a super basic question if the person asking it were interested in questioning, rather than "I got an interview with Doug Armstrong making me an insiderrrr let me get engagement!"

It is never on Doug Armstrong for understanding the game of hockey, strategy, and the actual players needed to assemble the best team among the teams. But that is his actual job. We have this guy who clearly does not get how to build a team who knows he never has to answer for it, his legacy is secure anyway. So we fans who are interested in real competition wait with this terrible middling crap we see currently.

The most difficult question I can recall Armstrong getting was at the press conference was November 20, 2018 - the press conference where he announced he'd fired Yeo and was naming Berbue as the interim HC - and someone (can't recall who) called him out on his statement when he fired Hitchcock, when Armstrong said "these players will be held accountable, I'm not firing another head coach" and asked, "have these players been held accountable?" Armstrong visibly squirmed and smirked and was "I don't remember saying that, but if I did I did" and then went on to blame the players for things. There was no follow up, "these decisions are all on you, they're all your doing, this is now your 4th head coach and your 3rd in less than 3 years, when should you be held accountable for what's going on?" but it was by far the hardest-hitting question he'd ever been asked, and he's never been challenged since.

I've pointed out the bottom bolded part in the past. The successes are always his, the failures are always someone else's. It's been like that for 13 years and counting. Even the faint criticism he gets from some who dare tread into that land gets qualified with "... but look at" and then the list of everything he did that was great, and it becomes a justification for why he should stay, needs to stay, in his current job. If in 3-4 years we're still wallowing in the mushy middle of the WC, the same people who've spent much or all of the last 13 singing Armstrong's praises and acclaiming him for everything good will spend that 3-4 years defending him on every possible hill arguing nothing is his fault while giving him full credit for anything and everything good that happens.

That's why I say we might as well just put up the statue of Armstrong outside Enterprise Center now. He's got a job for life here if he wants, he gets meek criticism at best from the media, he gets fully insulated from fans who recognize the charade he's pulled, and he knows no matter what happens, he'll go down in the minds of some Blues fans as one of the franchise's all-time greats.

 

[Quaz]

Doug should have moved to President and made Bill Armstrong the GM before he left. He could have stayed in a mentor roll for him. Not sure who they will go to when Doug wants to retire.

 

[Celtic Note]

Doug should have moved to President and made Bill Armstrong the GM before he left. He could have stayed in a mentor roll for him. Not sure who they will go to when Doug wants to retire.

Miller? Not sure who else is anywhere close to in line internally.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Doug should have moved to President and made Bill Armstrong the GM before he left. He could have stayed in a mentor roll for him. Not sure who they will go to when Doug wants to retire.

There are folks on here who see nothing wrong with Army being both President and GM.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

To be fair, I’m struggling to remember the last time a bag of turnips was fired or even negotiated a bad contract.

 

[sbet1998]

Maybe it's an obvious point, but us hardcore fans need to recognize that our opinions do not represent the majority. Hardcore fans might be more accepting of a longer rebuild because we know more about prospects, draft picks, etc. However, the average fan doesn't really care about Dvorsky or the next hotshot prospect that's a few years away. They wouldn't understand why the team is getting rid of all their favorite players for draft picks and why the team is getting its ass kicked every night. And most importantly they aren't going to spend their hard earned money on a crappy product.

Those are the people that the team has to cater to. Most of us in this forum are going to follow the team no matter what because we are obsessed with hockey and are interested in the finer points of the business of the game. And let's be honest, it's nearly impossible to satisfy most people in this forum unless the team is going deep in the playoffs every single year. Tough crowd to please around these parts.

A lot of good points but as a HC fan I dont get invested in prospects and picks until they give me a reason to -- just like I dont get invested in any one season until the team shows me something. Still going to watch, though. Just find it pointless to get invested in something that will more than likely not pan out. I dont buy lottery tickets either.

Also, there is something to be heralded about having a culture of winning that the Blues have. Id rather keep that intact then play the cycle game of losing for 4 years to be good for 3 and maybe great for one. That's best case. Being bad does not mean you will be good. There are teams picking at the top of the draft every year who never make the jump. Ill take making the PO's and being competitive 9 out of 10 years over that any day.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Berube is gone by XMAS. Ott will coach the team into the off season.

The Blues should get Rod Brind’Amour as their coach next season.