Confirmed with Link: Bruce Cassidy Named 28th Head Coach Of The Boston Bruins

[Fonzerelli]

Not that this fire needs any new fuel, but Lonnie pretty clearly said:

"new team"

Completely different situations than Cassidy.

How is that in any way completely different? Bruce isn't going to a "new team"? I'm talking about Bruce, not some mysterious, fictional or hypothetical person or situation.

And I'm not even asserting anything for certain ... only that one year deals are in the "realm of possibility". That it can happen. Indeed it has happened where coaches in a variety of situations were offered 1 year deals. That's it. And I'm not the first person to entertain the idea. It's been in the media and it's been suggested by many on this board.

All of the sudden we are boxed in to some narrow hypothetical, irrelevant situation and that's the only way we are allowed to discuss possibilites of re-signing Cassidy?

Come on. Utterly ridiculous.

Coaches in all kinds of different scenarios are signed to one deals. There is no law against it. It's always a possibility.

 

[LouJersey]

In fact I think the gentlemen asked him for one example and he provided 3. Triple Check Mate

Hmmmm both guys from The west and both guys "western scouts"? Related?

 

[bobbyorr04]

I don't think a "new deal" and an "extension" are quite the same thing.

It's a lot more likely to see a one year extension, than it is to see a one year new contract deal.

...just saying.

 

[Fonzerelli]

I don't think a "new deal" and an "extension" are quite the same thing.

It's a lot more likely to see a one year extension, than it is to see a one year new contract deal.

...just saying.

Sure, but Bruce is already here, so like I said, it's in the "realm of possibility" that they extend him with a raise to reflect the removal of the interim tag. They didn't, but they could've.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

How is that in any way completely different? Bruce isn't going to a "new team"? I'm talking about Bruce, not some mysterious, fictional or hypothetical person or situation.

And I'm not even asserting anything for certain ... only that one year deals are in the "realm of possibility". That it can happen. Indeed it has happened where coaches in a variety of situations were offered 1 year deals. That's it. And I'm not the first person to entertain the idea. It's been in the media and it's been suggested by many on this board.

All of the sudden we are boxed in to some narrow hypothetical, irrelevant situation and that's the only way we are allowed to discuss possibilites of re-signing Cassidy?

Come on. Utterly ridiculous.

Coaches in all kinds of different scenarios are signed to one deals. There is no law against it. It's always a possibility.

Way to take what I said completely out of context, but that seems to be par for the course in this thread. The Yeo, Rowe, and Weight situations are completely different than Cassidy.

As far as the other part, what are you NOT getting.

Hitchcock was NOT an assistant that became a interim head coach like Cassidy did. Hitchcock was the head coach of STL from Nov 2011 until February 2017. He signed a one year extension for 2016-17 and then was retiring, to be replaced by Mike Yeo.

How is this even remotely similar to a interim head coach being promoted to full time head coach on a one year deal? For someone who rails on others for their lack of reading comprehension skills, this seems a bit odd.

 

[Fonzerelli]

As far as the other part, what are you NOT getting.

What are YOU not getting. It doesn't matter the specifics of Rowe or Hitchock or Weight or Babcock or whoever ... there is no law or rule against one year contracts and in fact there is precedent for one year coaching contracts in a variety of situations. There is nothing to say we couldn't have offered Butch a one year deal as well in his own unique situation. It's was within the realm of options available available to us and there is precedent. Furthermore, some members of the media and many members of this forum were actually suggesting one year. So it was not only an option to us, but on the minds of many who follow the team. Now we are acting like I'm talking jibberish here. But t was a distinct possibility this morning? Come on man!

I mean, just this morning these are legitimate discussions, legitimate posts ... but now they are ... what ... ridiculous?

Maybe you meet someone you really like and bring them on board in an assistant or associate's role. Maybe you lay the foundation for Cassidy's replacement in a couple years. Who knows.

If they come back to Cassidy (and they will), I'd like to see them keep his deal short. I still think the sample was too short to really know what he is, so why get locked into something that might handcuff you in a year or two?

So yea...not really opposed to letting him get a longer audition and see if the wheels start to come off.

All coaches have a shelf life, but Cassidy is fresh right now. Let's see what he can do with a full season.

I think he should get a full year but he should get to choose his assistants.

Do your due diligence and see what other options are out there, but in the end, yes for at least a year or two.

I'd unenthusiastically give him a 1 or 2 year deal.

Yeah, he definitely did enough to get a shot next season.

Why not one year?

He wants the job bad. Anyone else in the NHL knocking down his door to sign him?

I would say yes on a short deal (no more than 2 years).

Let's give him the chance to prove what he can do in a full season at the helm now.

I say yes, but no more than a 2 year contract to see if he pans out.

These were legitimate posts this morning and they are just as legitimate tonight. We could have extended him a year and upped his salary. There is no rule against it. It was one of the options in our arsenal. We didn't, but why are some now acting as if we couldn't have? We certainly could have.

In addition, the following posters said 2 years, which is also a legitimate number

Ratty
Dellstrom
GeeWally
Jean_Jacket41
JRull86

Erin Walsh - Guy Boston Sports
The Bruins should keep Bruce Cassidy around for at least another year. If he coaches the team next season, it will give us all a chance to see what he can really do with a new start.
http://www.guybostonsports.com/sports/is-bruce-cassidy-the-real-deal

 

[KrejciMVP]

Character assassinations are always necessary when debating a head coach. Jeesh.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

What are YOU not getting. It doesn't matter the specifics of Rowe or Hitchock or Weight or Babcock or whoever ... there is no law or rule against one year contracts and in fact there is precedent for one year coaching contracts in a variety of situations. There is nothing to say we couldn't have offered Butch a one year deal as well in his own unique situation. It's was within the realm of options available available to us and there is precedent. Furthermore, some members of the media and many members of this forum were actually suggesting one year. So it was not only an option to us, but on the minds of many who follow the team. Now we are acting like I'm talking jibberish here. But t was a distinct possibility this morning? Come on man!

It's not impossible (not sure anyone said that?). It is rare, and with good reason. Lame duck coaches, especially with a new hire, are bad ideas.

And, as they say, the devil is in the details. The specifics of guys getting one year deals DOES matter. In the cases of Rowe, Yeo, Weight...none of them were on one year deals (despite the claims of a previous poster) which is why I mentioned it to begin with.

I'm not surprised at all that Sweeney gave Cassidy a multi-year deal, it's the right thing to do.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Character assassinations are always necessary when debating a head coach. Jeesh.

Whose character was assassinated?

 

[DNE3]

What are YOU not getting. It doesn't matter the specifics of Rowe or Hitchock or Weight or Babcock or whoever ... there is no law or rule against one year contracts and in fact there is precedent for one year coaching contracts in a variety of situations. There is nothing to say we couldn't have offered Butch a one year deal as well in his own unique situation. It's was within the realm of options available available to us and there is precedent. Furthermore, some members of the media and many members of this forum were actually suggesting one year. So it was not only an option to us, but on the minds of many who follow the team. Now we are acting like I'm talking jibberish here. But t was a distinct possibility this morning? Come on man!

The ex-bossman's local rat pack has been at the forefront of all anti-Cassidy post-ups, and I bring that up in regards to the 'many members of this forum were actually suggesting' angle. Today is a continuation of that local tradition of undercutting the new guy in whatever way possible. But it is a done deal, and it's multi-year not to my surprise.

 

[Fonzerelli]

The ex-bossman's local rat pack has been at the forefront of all anti-Cassidy post-ups, and I bring that up in regards to the 'many members of this forum were actually suggesting' angle. Today is a continuation of that local tradition of undercutting the new guy in whatever way possible. But it is a done deal, and it's multi-year not to my surprise.

These are far from anti-Cassidy votes. These forum members and media were all saying he should be brought back next season. But they were all entertaining the idea of one year, as well as multiple years. That's all I'm saying. It was not just an option to us, but an option that was at the fore front of many Bruins fans and media.


I mean, just this morning these are legitimate discussions, legitimate posts ... but now they are ... what ... ridiculous?

Maybe you meet someone you really like and bring them on board in an assistant or associate's role. Maybe you lay the foundation for Cassidy's replacement in a couple years. Who knows.

If they come back to Cassidy (and they will), I'd like to see them keep his deal short. I still think the sample was too short to really know what he is, so why get locked into something that might handcuff you in a year or two?

So yea...not really opposed to letting him get a longer audition and see if the wheels start to come off.

All coaches have a shelf life, but Cassidy is fresh right now. Let's see what he can do with a full season.

I think he should get a full year but he should get to choose his assistants.

Do your due diligence and see what other options are out there, but in the end, yes for at least a year or two.

I'd unenthusiastically give him a 1 or 2 year deal.

Yeah, he definitely did enough to get a shot next season.

Why not one year?

He wants the job bad. Anyone else in the NHL knocking down his door to sign him?

I would say yes on a short deal (no more than 2 years).

Let's give him the chance to prove what he can do in a full season at the helm now.

I say yes, but no more than a 2 year contract to see if he pans out.

Erin Walsh - Guy Boston Sports
The Bruins should keep Bruce Cassidy around for at least another year. If he coaches the team next season, it will give us all a chance to see what he can really do with a new start.
http://www.guybostonsports.com/sports/is-bruce-cassidy-the-real-deal


Not to mention the Haggerty "Who Stays Who Goes" video where his side kick (Felger) says NO MORE than one year. The print version not as stressed, reads;

"There’s a good chance the Bruins will interview other candidates, such as Providence College’s Nate Leaman, before giving the job to Cassidy, but he should be the full-time head coach next season"
http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins/looking-bruins-crystal-ball-who-stays-who-goes#slide-3


Mike Felger (video)
He should be year to year. If they gave him more than two years it's a mistake.
http://www.csnne.com/boston-bruins

These were legitimate posts this morning and they are just as legitimate tonight. We could have extended him a year and upped his salary. There is no rule against it. It was one of the options in our arsenal. We didn't, but why are some now acting as if we couldn't have? We certainly could have.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

These are far from anti-Cassidy votes. These forum members and media were all saying he should be brought back next season. But they were all entertaining the idea of one year, as well as multiple years. That's all I'm saying. It was not just an option to us, but an option that was at the fore front of many Bruins fans and media.


I mean, just this morning these are legitimate discussions, legitimate posts ... but now they are ... what ... ridiculous?



























These were legitimate posts this morning and they are just as legitimate tonight. We could have extended him a year and upped his salary. There is no rule against it. It was one of the options in our arsenal. We didn't, but why are some now acting as if we couldn't have? We certainly could have.

In addition, the following posters said 2 years, which is also a legitimate number

Ratty
Dellstrom
GeeWally
Jean_Jacket41
JRull86

Erin Walsh - Guy Boston Sports
The Bruins should keep Bruce Cassidy around for at least another year. If he coaches the team next season, it will give us all a chance to see what he can really do with a new start.
http://www.guybostonsports.com/sports/is-bruce-cassidy-the-real-deal

Since when is a one year deal and a two year deal the same thing?

Despite it just being a 365 day calendar difference, those two contracts are vastly different.

At any rate, just because a handful of HF posters may want a one year deal, that doesn't make the idea any more legitimate...or intelligent.

 

[Fonzerelli]

Since when is a one year deal and a two year deal the same thing?

Despite it just being a 365 day calendar difference, those two contracts are vastly different.

At any rate, just because a handful of HF posters may want a one year deal, that doesn't make the idea any more legitimate...or intelligent.

Holy headshake.

Who said a one year deal and a two year deal were the same thing?

I'm just illustrating there is a wide spectrum of opinions on a deal bringing back Cassidy which included 1 year contracts, and 2 year contracts, by many informed posters here and the media that follows the team. Some who considered both 1 year and 2 years as legitimate options. And I earlier illustrated that there is precedent for one year coaching deals in a wide variety of unique situations. No reason that we couldn't have offered Butch a 1 year deal in his own unique situation, as many informed members and some members of the media also thought. It was an option.

 

[bobbyorr04]

I said no more than a 2 year contract because I know it's very rare to see a one year new contract deal for a head coach.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Holy headshake.

Who said a one year deal and a two year deal were the same thing?

I'm just illustrating there is a wide spectrum of opinions on a deal bringing back Cassidy which included 1 year contracts, and 2 year contracts, by many informed posters here and the media that follows the team. Some who considered both 1 year and 2 years as legitimate options. And I earlier illustrated that there is precedent for one year coaching deals in a wide variety of unique situations. No reason that we couldn't have offered Butch a 1 year deal in his own unique situation, as many informed members and some members of the media also thought. It was an option.

No reason to offer a one year deal...except it would have been dumb as ****.


ps still haven't seen any one year deals to a new HC that set a precedent for offering Cassidy one.

 

[Fonzerelli]

I said no more than a 2 year contract because I know it's very rare to see a one year new contract deal for a head coach.

Yes. It is rare.

 

[Fonzerelli]

No reason to offer a one year deal...except it would have been dumb as ****.


ps still haven't seen any one year deals to a new HC that set a precedent for offering Cassidy one.

Well I guess we've been told. Even added the **** for good measure. Thanks for insulting the intelligence of all of us who would have been fine with it. I'm sure we are all humbled by it and properly put in our place.

Every single 1 year coaching deal ever handed out sets enough of a precedent.

ps. still waiting for that "new team" Cassidy is apparently reporting to next season

 

[Salem13]

God you are obtuse.

2016-17: Cassidy assistant coach and interim head coach for Boston Bruins.

2017-18: Cassidy the new (28th) Head Coach of the Boston Bruins.

And if one year deals are such a great idea for head coaches, why is it such a struggle to find examples of them?

Anytime you want to point out the database of past NHL coaches contracts I'll be more than happy to peruse it.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Anytime you want to point out the database of past NHL coaches contracts I'll be more than happy to peruse it.

You already gave three examples of coaches on one year deals (Yeo, Rowe, Weight) that were completely inaccurate. Perhaps you should do the research instead of me?

 

[Salem13]

You already gave three examples of coaches on one year deals (Yeo, Rowe, Weight) that were completely inaccurate. Perhaps you should do the research instead of me?

It took a bit to find. Today's information is only held by a few sites and they have only current and future contract progression.

The examples I did find however were discounted as they were old lame ducks and players would respect them.

 

[Gee Wally]

Ok. I asked nice and that didn't work.

So here's the deal.

No more personal shots. None. If anybody types 'you' they better damn well think twice about what the type next and also about hitting 'post'.

I'm not going to limit myself to just deleting the crap anymore.

 

[DKH]

OK, Arrogant Joe, Obtuse Arthur here.

There are many differences between Hitchcock and Cassidy, none of which have anything to do with the options we had with Cassidy. So I guess the answer to your question is that there is nothing obvious about anything you are saying. It's a big ball of ambiguous deflection, hidden behind hypothetical ruse's like "new team". (Though I grant you, your last post, embedded in this post, is your most intelligent and concise post on the matter.)

I threw Hitchcocks name out because he asked for the name of the last guy to sign a one year deal. That's the extent of it. That's where Hithcock starts and ends in this discussion. He signed a one year to coach. That's it.

It doesn't matter what the circumstances were for Htchcocks 1 year deal, or the deal offered to Nolan or Babcock. None of the circumstances were the same. They seldom are. The fact that they were each in their own unique situation and had one year deals or offers. The point is that one year deals happen on a case by case basis, based on their own unique circumstances.

Like those guys, Cassidy has his own unique situation. It's been pointed out. He isn't a typical sacrificial interim. he wasn't falling on a sword. He isn't a new guy or an outsider. He's a long time coach in the organization who has been being groomed by the Bruins to take over for Claude. To be the next new head coach. Like Hitchcock and the others, Cassidy has his own unique situation and a one year deal would have been just as plausible as anything else. In the "realm of possibility". That has been the whole point, and it's not some unique or outlandish point. It has been made by several in the media and many on here. It's not a new concept.

So I don't get the hostility, or the need to question the intelligence of all the posters who brought up the possibility. Guys who are respected members of our community. Playmakers, WhalerTurnedBruin, Dennis Bonvie, Hali33 etc. etc. You suggested these posters who held that opinion were posting illegitimate and unintelligent ideas. That is would have been dumb-*** (whatever the asterisk was). That I'm obtuse for sticking with it. Those are all extremely arrogant positions and disrespectful to the community. All without ever framing a respectful counter-argument (until just now) that's in any way relevant to the discussion. I expect better from you.

I mean, who made you the thought police?

I agree with the premise put forth by Lonnie and Joe but I'm just a fan who's mind plays tricks on me when I go to games

Love the HF community stuff.

We need to have a Saturday night block party

That would be a good time

 

[DKH]

Whose character was assassinated?

Not sure but I thought Cassidy has come a long way and gets it

 

[LouJersey]

What new full time coach has signed a one year deal? What interim coach for two-three months has been hired the following year to a one year contract?

 

[Salem13]

BM63: Hey Bergy you ready to play this year?

PB37: Hells yea Brad, I'm ready to go, what about you David?

DK46: LOL, I'm slacking big time this year, coach only has a one year contract!

ZC33: WHAT? One year! Why are we even practicing, lets go get beers!