Slush
Registered User
I've always wondered the last few months, why exactly did the Flames fire Hartley?
There was plenty of reasons I think. Treliving wanted....I've always wondered the last few months, why exactly did the Flames fire Hartley?
There was plenty of reasons I think. Treliving wanted....
- to play a more possession friendly game
- to play tougher
- to play a more structured defensive game
- his own guy
There has also been talk that Hartley was starting to lose the room, not sure how true it was but those demanding task master type coaches generally have shorter shelf lives. If you told me the day he was hired that he'd he last as long as he did, I wouldn't have believed you.Gotcha. Not that I'm disappointed in Gulutzan at all but I was just wondering why the Flames fired Hartley as I liked him as a coach also.
There has also been talk that Hartley was starting to lose the room, not sure how true it was but those demanding task master type coaches generally have shorter shelf lives. If you told me the day he was hired that he'd he last as long as he did, I wouldn't have believed you.
There has also been talk that Hartley was starting to lose the room, not sure how true it was but those demanding task master type coaches generally have shorter shelf lives. If you told me the day he was hired that he'd he last as long as he did, I wouldn't have believed you.
There has also been talk that Hartley was starting to lose the room, not sure how true it was but those demanding task master type coaches generally have shorter shelf lives. If you told me the day he was hired that he'd he last as long as he did, I wouldn't have believed you.
No one will ever confirm it unless they are a dick.I've heard this, but I don't believe it was ever confirmed, was it?
I also think that a big reason for his firing, was at the year end interview, I think Hartley said something along the lines of "I don't think I need to change too much"(?) in response to a question regarding how to improve the next season. Soon after, there were emergency meetings with Treliving and co and he was fired. Most of that was covered up by the idea that Treliving was chasing BB though, but IMO, management had a chat with Hartley. If Hartley said that to the media, it really meant he was pushing back against them, which was IMO the biggest reason for his firing if true.
I also recall Treliving's actions and movements seemingly out of the blue and his statements even seemed to reflect it. I'm guessing there was a lot of little stuff here and there they discussed and expected him to change the style to allow a better passing of the torch to allow him to finish his contract. But when Hartley sort of hinted he wasn't expecting to tweak much, management decided to bite the bullet and choose a new guy.
I've heard this, but I don't believe it was ever confirmed, was it?
I also think that a big reason for his firing, was at the year end interview, I think Hartley said something along the lines of "I don't think I need to change too much"(?) in response to a question regarding how to improve the next season. Soon after, there were emergency meetings with Treliving and co and he was fired. Most of that was covered up by the idea that Treliving was chasing BB though, but IMO, management had a chat with Hartley. If Hartley said that to the media, it really meant he was pushing back against them, which was IMO the biggest reason for his firing if true.
I also recall Treliving's actions and movements seemingly out of the blue and his statements even seemed to reflect it. I'm guessing there was a lot of little stuff here and there they discussed and expected him to change the style to allow a better passing of the torch to allow him to finish his contract. But when Hartley sort of hinted he wasn't expecting to tweak much, management decided to bite the bullet and choose a new guy.
There has also been talk that Hartley was starting to lose the room, not sure how true it was but those demanding task master type coaches generally have shorter shelf lives. If you told me the day he was hired that he'd he last as long as he did, I wouldn't have believed you.
Exactly, like I said in my first post in this topic, he lasted longer than I expected him to and I wasn't someone against bringing him in as coachIf you look back at Hartley's history he has always had a short life where ever he had coached. Very demanding and it would prove to work and then guys stop listening. He took a very average Atlanta team that no one expected to do much do a division title and playoffs. The following year they were back in the bottom.
Hartley didn't have many fans in the dressing room. I think that was a big part of it, honestly.
I think you're right here. I thought I heard on the Fan a while back that he had no one in the dressing room. He was the type of coach that bag skated you if you lost, and bag skated you if you won - so the players got tired of it. There was never a reward if you did everything right (ie no extra day off on a long road trip).
In three words, "shot attempt suppression". Hartley did not buy in to its importance, and Gulutzan does.
5-on-5:
2015-16 Flames: 58.51 CA60
2016-17 Flames: 55.44 CA60
4-on-5
2015-16 Flames: 93.68 CA60
2016-17 Flames: 89.60 CA60
And that's with the Jokipakka-Engelland pair tanking us pretty hard lately (62.35 CA60) and Brouwer being a bigger individual black hole than Kris Russell was last year.