Speculation: Molson Has Met Privately With Patrick Roy Recently...

[Price is Wright]

So, have there been any details released from this so called private meeting?

Molson asked for an autograph to complete his Fleer 93 set.

 

[Capitano]

I really don't mind if Roy got a job in the organization to be honest.
I see him as team President
I don't want anything to do with him coaching or being the GM of this team

This makes sense to me...but I still think our biggest need is a GM with experience, and a re-assessment of our scouting department.

 

[Habs Icing]

Julien Brisebois - I don't know may be riding Yzerman's coat tails
Martin Brodeur not enough experience
Dean Lombardi no parlez-vous
Paul Fenton see Lombardi
Bill Zitto see Lombardi
Joel Bouchard see Brodeur - my fav but needs experience
Warren Rychel see Lombardi
Bill Guerin see Lombardi
Tom Fitzgerald see Lombardi
Martin Madden Jr see Lomadrdi

these are 10 names that will be better options for DG

 

[pepperMonkey]

Roy back with the Habs in some role is something I would support. No idea if these meetings happened or not though

I totally agree...but it really depends at what capacity. As a coach or GM? Err...no. His passion and drive are his greatest assets. Calmness and strategic intelligence is not. Possibly as a pres otherwise he'll only be useful as an assistant (to some role) or some kind of "kick your ar$e" counselor.

 

[Price is Wright]

Russian bot warning!!!!!!!!!

It is quoting itself.

Because, you know, exceptionalism.

 

[Milhouse40]

.......

This is so dumb. No one can stands in front of me and argue that hiring some "gars de chez nous" who speak french for top job has ever work.

This will be the biggest problem of this organisation unless fans and medias speak out about it and ask to be the only the best, plain and simple.

This is sports. This is competition. This is about being the best.
This shouldn't be about politics and pleasing some medias older mob.

This should sound so freaking dumb for a player/sports athlete who only wants to be with the best players , Coach, GM and organisation possible in order to win.

30 other teams are like that.
Habs are trying to win without hiring the best possible candidate at every level.

 

[Habs 4 Life]

This makes sense to me...but I still think our biggest need is a GM with experience, and a re-assessment of our scouting department.

Agreed, but I don't see this happening until next season
I don't see Molson changing his mind in the next few weeks and blowing it up

 

[Vachon23]

Haha Warren.

If you liked golden boy Drouin you'll love diamond boy Kerby. Team strategy pass the puck to Kerby.

did you see what he does in Windsor ? 3 Memorial Cup in 10 years !

 

[habsgirl5000]

replacing MB with Roy is the same as replacing MT with CJ....it will make no difference,

Roy is more likely to make stupid knee jerk reaction trades

 

[Vachon23]

Roy is the guy that traded Kucherov to Rouyn to keep Nick Sorensen right ?

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Roy is the guy that traded Kucherov to Rouyn to keep Nick Sorensen right ?

Hummm... he got a 2nd & Kamaev and then immediately flipped kamaev for Sherbrook's 1st euro pick. Those were some good trades.

 

[Vachon23]

Hummm... he got a 2nd & Kamaev and then immediately flipped kamaev for Sherbrook's 1st euro pick. Those were some good trades.

Kucherov was in the top 5 of the best players in the Q and Quebec had a good team no way trading a guy like Kucherov is a good trade

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Kucherov was in the top 5 of the best players in the Q and Quebec had a good team no way trading a guy like Kucherov is a good trade

It's debatable. It's not the NHL. He was not into the business of building a dynasty. Junior management is always focused on the short and medium term, always in a need to build for tge future. Pretty sure he took a gamble to make sure he could keep the team competitive once the draftees would leave.

 

[EdAVSfan]

Not only this, but everything Roy wanted changed in Colorado, they pretty much have done.. and now they are winning.

That’s not accurate.

 

[Gamimenos]

I hope that if this is true, it has nothing to do with hiring him for any hockey operation position. The last thing we need right now is to continue piling on costly mistakes.

 

[Darz]

Patrick Roy should fill some sort of team ambassador position similar to what Guy Lafleur has done for years.

Outside of Pierre McGuire I can think of a candidate I would want less that Patrick.

 

[Censored Toad]

Patrick Roy should fill some sort of team ambassador position similar to what Guy Lafleur has done for years.

Outside of Pierre McGuire I can think of a candidate I would want less that Patrick.

The thing I have found in the small sample size I have of EGG head... which is basically all his segments on the habs on TSN 690 with Mitch since about Jan 2018, he is saying that exact same thing we are.

Bergie is saying this team is great and grand, then Egg head is saying McGuire: Don't be fooled by injuries

or his other segment
McGuire: Should've traded Pacioretty in February
McGuire: Habs fans shouldn't tolerate excuses


I get that alot of people don't like him,I do not know enough about him to decide if he would fit in the Habs org. or not..

but I'd take him in any roll GM or hockey pres if it meant Marc was on a short leash and watched heavily, or fired (Better option) If we can get an even better person ( JB from tampa,) that would be preferred...

why is egg head so bad besides his personality?
Not being a troll or anything, I just do not know.

Thanks

 

[justafan22]

The thing I have found in the small sample size I have of EGG head... which is basically all his segments on the habs on TSN 690 with Mitch since about Jan 2018, he is saying that exact same thing we are.

Bergie is saying this team is great and grand, then Egg head is saying McGuire: Don't be fooled by injuries

or his other segment
McGuire: Should've traded Pacioretty in February
McGuire: Habs fans shouldn't tolerate excuses


I get that alot of people don't like him,I do not know enough about him to decide if he would fit in the Habs org. or not..

but I'd take him in any roll GM or hockey pres if it meant Marc was on a short leash and watched heavily, or fired (Better option) If we can get an even better person ( JB from tampa,) that would be preferred...

why is egg head so bad besides his personality?
Not being a troll or anything, I just do not know.

Thanks

Read this:

Mcguire's Tenure A Bad Situation

 

[Runner77]

Read this:

Mcguire's Tenure A Bad Situation

That link has been beaten to death. It's meaningless.

Are you the same person you were over a decade ago or more? How about anyone who is old enough -- ask them who they were 24 years ago. But time passed is just the tip of the iceberg.

All too often overlooked is how McGuire was 32 at the time. He was at that time, the youngest head coach in the NHL.

He was put in a no-win situation. He wasn't qualified for the job, but he was an achiever and welcomed the challenge. Prior to becoming a head coach with with Hartford, he had not been a head coach before. His inexperience plus his youth, played heavily against him. In an era where NHL teams were mostly coached by old time crusty guys who had been around the game a long time, McGuire never stood a chance.

Did he make mistakes? A ton. He was cast in a role he was not ready for. And of course, what else would you expect from old guard of the NHL as it was in that organization? Where do you think their sympathies were? You bring in a highly educated guy like McGuire to deal with mostly high school dropouts and non-educated players and it won't take much for all of them to gang up on anyone who fits McGuire's profile.

Also, McGuire was only a coach for 6 months and sported a record of 23-37-7. And Paul Holmgren, who was his predecessor and his successor, had a record of 30-63-8 in 1992-93 and 24-30-6 from 1994-96. How is Holmgren's record better than McGuire's? And yet, McGuire had to be the worst.

Jacobs' piece is nothing but a collection of very predictable quotes from a bunch of thick jocks who were hell-bent on eradicating the threat that McGuire posed to them. It lacked balance and was unnecessarily heavy-handed -- where is the other side of the story? I've rarely seen as one-sided a piece of reporting, it's a full out, no holds-barred character-assassination manifesto, it's yellow journalism at its finest. Jacobs should have been lambasted for it, not remembered as you just did by dredging up that link as if it were an absolute reference.

Where is the players' responsibility in all of this? How about Paul Holmgren's own assessment of who was playing for the Whalers at the time: "On November 16, 1994, Holmgren stepped aside as head coach due to frustration with a lack of effort from his players ..." The same players who Jacobs quoted profusely to crucify Mcguire as the purveyor of everything that was wrong with the Whalers. How convenient.

From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

The Whalers were 4-11-2 under Holmgren this season and 30-63-8 overall.

"Effort, that was a big part of the decision," said Holmgren, a former Flyers coach who played in the NHL for 10 years, including eight with the Flyers. ... The final straw apparently came Saturday, when the Whalers managed only a 4-4 tie against a poor Edmonton club. Holmgren said the "poor effort . . . bothered me."

The more you read Jacobs' piece, the more it sounds like payback from Jacobs himself. He musn't have a had a great relationship with Mcguire so much so that he didn't bother to do what every reporter does and that's go beyond the group of players who clearly had faults of their own for their lack of effort. Where is that part in Jacobs' piece?

Thrashing McGuire was easy for Jacobs at the time -- as a reporter assigned to cover the Whalers during a time when the NHL was mostly regional and had nowhere close to the national visibility it has now, Jacobs would have to contend with the Hartford players for a long time while probably thinking how McGuire would never again be a factor in Hartford. Doesn't take insider knowledge to appreciate where Jacobs chose to lean.

But what's really abhorrent is how he painted McGuire with one stroke and chose to completely destroy him using those who had every reason to deflect criticism from themselves.

And now, you're quoting this abject piece of trash journalism as some kind of precedent? You must be joking.

 

[groovejuice]

That link has been beaten to death. It's meaningless.

Are you the same person you were over a decade ago or more? How about anyone who is old enough -- ask them who they were 24 years ago. But time passed is just the tip of the iceberg.

All too often overlooked is how McGuire was 32 at the time. He was at that time, the youngest head coach in the NHL.

He was put in a no-win situation. He wasn't qualified for the job, but he was an achiever and welcomed the challenge. Prior to becoming a head coach with with Hartford, he had not been a head coach before. His inexperience plus his youth, played heavily against him. In an era where NHL teams were mostly coached by old time crusty guys who had been around the game a long time, McGuire never stood a chance.

Did he make mistakes? A ton. He was cast in a role he was not ready for. And of course, what else would you expect from old guard of the NHL as it was in that organization? Where do you think their sympathies were? You bring in a highly educated guy like McGuire to deal with mostly high school dropouts and non-educated players and it won't take much for all of them to gang up on anyone who fits McGuire's profile.

Also, McGuire was only a coach for 6 months and sported a record of 23-37-7. And Paul Holmgren, who was his predecessor and his successor, had a record of 30-63-8 in 1992-93 and 24-30-6 from 1994-96. How is Holmgren's record better than McGuire's? And yet, McGuire had to be the worst.

Jacobs' piece is nothing but a collection of very predictable quotes from a bunch of thick jocks who were hell-bent on eradicating the threat that McGuire posed to them. It lacked balance and was unnecessarily heavy-handed -- where is the other side of the story? I've rarely seen as one-sided a piece of reporting, it's a full out, no holds-barred character-assassination manifesto, it's yellow journalism at its finest. Jacobs should have been lambasted for it, not remembered as you just did by dredging up that link as if it were an absolute reference.

Where is the players' responsibility in all of this? How about Paul Holmgren's own assessment of who was playing for the Whalers at the time: "On November 16, 1994, Holmgren stepped aside as head coach due to frustration with a lack of effort from his players ..." The same players who Jacobs quoted profusely to crucify Mcguire as the purveyor of everything that was wrong with the Whalers. How convenient.

From The Philadelphia Inquirer:

The Whalers were 4-11-2 under Holmgren this season and 30-63-8 overall.

"Effort, that was a big part of the decision," said Holmgren, a former Flyers coach who played in the NHL for 10 years, including eight with the Flyers. ... The final straw apparently came Saturday, when the Whalers managed only a 4-4 tie against a poor Edmonton club. Holmgren said the "poor effort . . . bothered me."

The more you read Jacobs' piece, the more it sounds like payback from Jacobs himself. He musn't have a had a great relationship with Mcguire so much so that he didn't bother to do what every reporter does and that's go beyond the group of players who clearly had faults of their own for their lack of effort. Where is that part in Jacobs' piece?

Thrashing McGuire was easy for Jacobs at the time -- as a reporter assigned to cover the Whalers during a time when the NHL was mostly regional and had nowhere close to the national visibility it has now, Jacobs would have to contend with the Hartford players for a long time while probably thinking how McGuire would never again be a factor in Hartford. Doesn't take insider knowledge to appreciate where Jacobs chose to lean.

But what's really abhorrent is how he painted McGuire with one stroke and chose to completely destroy him using those who had every reason to deflect criticism from themselves.

And now, you're quoting this abject piece of trash journalism as some kind of precedent? You must be joking.

I think there's no doubt that McGuire is a student of hockey and is knowledgeable and intelligent.

He has a habit though, in his role as commentator / TV Personality, to come up with some really bizzare takes on teams, players and strategies that are quite mind boogling.

It all could just be the calculated, attention getting of a contrived persona meant for ratings purposes, but I am unconvinced that he'd be more practical and consistent if handed a President or GM position. With the exception of his interview with Molson for Habs GM, I don't recall having heard an inkling of his candidacy with any other teams, for any position.

Maybe he's a misunderstood genius, but it would be an extraordinary gamble to take him on. I'd definitely be interested in him for a prominent PR position.

 

[Runner77]

I think there's no doubt that McGuire is a student of hockey and is knowledgeable and intelligent.

He has a habit though, in his role as commentator / TV Personality, to come up with some really bizzare takes on teams, players and strategies that are quite mind boogling.

It all could just be the calculated, attention getting of a contrived persona meant for ratings purposes, but I am unconvinced that he'd be more practical and consistent if handed a President or GM position. With the exception of his interview with Molson for Habs GM, I don't recall having heard an inkling of his candidacy with any other teams, for any position.

Maybe he's a misunderstood genius, but it would be an extraordinary gamble to take him on. I'd definitely be interested in him for a prominent PR position.

I wasn't vouching for McGuire in any particular capacity today. However, to run with that 1994 piece and without questioning its context, content and how its writer approached it, is disingenuous and needed to be called out. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posters blindly precede that link with the hollow authoritative preamble "read this" as if it was some incontrovertible evidence for times immemorial.

People evolve and change. Twenty-four years is a long time to condemn someone who is no longer that person, who was largely inexperienced and who took on a hockey culture that is nowhere what it is today with geeks and educated types holding more and more positions of authority and influence in the game. Plus, the Whaler players themselves had every reason to trash McGuire and Jacobs did absolutely nothing to dig up the other side of the story, he merely sided with the players and provided them an easy conduit to exact payback on McGuire. That's not journalism, any way you slice it.

 

[eklund the clown]

I think there's no doubt that McGuire is a student of hockey and is knowledgeable and intelligent.

He has a habit though, in his role as commentator / TV Personality, to come up with some really bizzare takes on teams, players and strategies that are quite mind boogling.

It all could just be the calculated, attention getting of a contrived persona meant for ratings purposes, but I am unconvinced that he'd be more practical and consistent if handed a President or GM position. With the exception of his interview with Molson for Habs GM, I don't recall having heard an inkling of his candidacy with any other teams, for any position.

Maybe he's a misunderstood genius, but it would be an extraordinary gamble to take him on. I'd definitely be interested in him for a prominent PR position.

I am not one to jump on the bandwagon for McGuire but it seem to me that taking a gamble on Bergevin to turn this thing around is a gamble Molson shouldn't be taking.He has done enough damage already.I would give McGuire a chance.How much worse can this team get?We are a lottery team for crying out loud.

 

[BLONG7]

I am not one to jump on the bandwagon for McGuire but it seem to me that taking a gamble on Bergevin to turn this thing around is a gamble Molson shouldn't be taking.He has done enough damage already.I would give McGuire a chance.How much worse can this team get?We are a lottery team for crying out loud.

Mcguire is bad...........really bad. He wanted the Habs to draft Brule, not Price...I mean wow...

No way you want Mr Peanut...

 

[groovejuice]

I wasn't vouching for McGuire in any particular capacity today. However, to run with that 1994 piece and without questioning its context, content and how its writer approached it, is disingenuous and needed to be called out. I can't tell you how many times I've seen posters blindly precede that link with the hollow authoritative preamble "read this" as if it was some incontrovertible evidence for times immemorial.

People evolve and change. Twenty-four years is a long time to condemn someone who is no longer that person, who was largely inexperienced and who took on a hockey culture that is nowhere what it is today with geeks and educated types holding more and more positions of authority and influence in the game. Plus, the Whaler players themselves had every reason to trash McGuire and Jacobs did absolutely nothing to dig up the other side of the story, he merely sided with the players and provided them an easy conduit to exact payback on McGuire. That's not journalism, any way you slice it.

I didn't mean to imply that your excellent piece was an endorsement of any kind. There's little doubt that in the traditional type of hockey fraternity, McGuire stands out as non-traditional, which is not a negative thing in itself, but in an old-boys macho environment, a "geek" would be fodder for ridicule and bias.

It's unfortunate that hockey is slow to escape the anti-intellectual atmosphere where self-proclaimed "fighters" get more latitude and respect than genuine thinkers.

 

[Le Tricolore]

Okay guys. I had to delete a bunch of posts about politics. Keep that off this board.