Speculation: HF Hawks fan pulse: Fire JC?

[RememberTheRoar]

Getting rid of JC and Stan ain't gonna fix this team

Maybe not, but I don’t think that keeping them will fix it either.

 

[BobbyJet]

I debated between yes and give him more time - opted to give him more time only because Stan should not be there in the first place. I reckon both guys could get their pink slips at season's end.

 

[Kevin Musto]

Maybe not, but I don’t think that keeping them will fix it either.

So there's no rationale behind your post. Got it.

 

[BobbyJet]

So there's no rationale behind your post. Got it.

Quite constructive. How about giving your views rather than criticizing others.

JC doesn't have a f*** of a lot to work with if I need to spell it out for you.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

I liked the thought of it when he was firsts hired....a swing for the fences kind of move.

But, from the get go the lack of increased compete level in ALL zones (which is what you often see when good/great coaches move in, at least for a period of time) was and still is incredibly frustrating. The team never got the new-coach-bump kind of feeling.

I voted "fire him" then and I still feel the same way. As for Bowman, eh, let him and/or both go after the draft plz, we need all eyes on the prize.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

They should clean house pretty soon imo. I don't want Stan in charge of the TDL. If yhey don't fire him within the next few weeks, I'd imagine they're not firing him at all.

 

[Muffinalt]

Quite constructive. How about giving your views rather than criticizing others.

JC doesn't have a **** of a lot to work with if I need to spell it out for you.

Quite ironic. All I see is most posters criticizing JC and Stan, condemning them because there are not enough positive results to show for.

No alternatives. No mentions of why the things they do don't work. Barely any opinions besides 'lol this bum is way over his head' or 'they should clean house'. What's so constructive about that exactly?

 

[BobbyJet]

Quite ironic. All I see is most posters criticizing JC and Stan, condemning them because there are not enough positive results to show for.

No alternatives. No mentions of why the things they do don't work. Barely any opinions besides 'lol this bum is way over his head' or 'they should clean house'. What's so constructive about that exactly?

You should read more of the posts. Granted there are plenty of "blow it up" criticism but there also have been numerous suggestions and opinions - especially when it comes to the basics of hockey, the fly-bys, the soft play, the pass-first mentality, the lack of coverage in front of the crease, the no-movement power play, the optional practices, the perimeter play, the lack of puck support, the poor board play, the lack of character, the lack of leadership on the ice, teammates not standing up for each other etc....

This thread is about JC's performance and specifically whether he is the head coach this team needs going forward. What is your view?

 

[LDF]

You should read more of the posts. Granted there are plenty of "blow it up" criticism but there also have been numerous suggestions and opinions - especially when it comes to the basics of hockey, the fly-bys, the soft play, the pass-first mentality, the lack of coverage in front of the crease, the no-movement power play, the optional practices, the perimeter play, the lack of puck support, the poor board play, the lack of character, the lack of leadership on the ice, teammates not standing up for each other etc....

This thread is about JC's performance and specifically whether he is the head coach this team needs going forward. What is your view?

the problem you list are significant ..... but is that JC problem or is it his asst coaches ?? my next question is who were responsibility for his asst coaches. usually it would be the HC but in this situation with the hiring of Crawford, is it the FO.

 

[Muffinalt]

You should read more of the posts. Granted there are plenty of "blow it up" criticism but there also have been numerous suggestions and opinions - especially when it comes to the basics of hockey, the fly-bys, the soft play, the pass-first mentality, the lack of coverage in front of the crease, the no-movement power play, the optional practices, the perimeter play, the lack of puck support, the poor board play, the lack of character, the lack of leadership on the ice, teammates not standing up for each other etc....

This thread is about JC's performance and specifically whether he is the head coach this team needs going forward. What is your view?

My personal view is that JC is a good coach and he wants the team to play the the way the league's been trending towards. I find I almost always agree with his philosophies (at least what we get access to through media coverage) and I like his non fluff communication it's refreshing and effective. Plus I think he's shown success with developing young players which is a plus with out teams current makeup.

But I don't know if he's the head coach the team needs going forward. Earlier in the season I wouldnt have minded a change because you can't win if the team doesn't seem to respond to you no matter how good the coach is. But since then it's been better so we can't really say he's ignored by the players.

Just to address the specifics you brought up. Half those things were also complaints before JC. The overpassing, the power play the softer play? I think that's just the makeup of the majority of our players. But for the record we showed we can win without being one of the more physical teams (although I'd prefer we stood up more to goonery) so I'm not sure it's a cause for a coaching change.

And the rest like lack of puck support, board play and overall less perimeter play. Absolutely agree I think that's the number one culprit of our non satisfactory play but I think that's more roster construction. JC actually seems to prefer to play a harder style by all accounts, he even focused on hitting more in the early season.

I think roster construction is much bigger issue than coaching. But it's not a black and white 'Stan sucks' type thing. He orchestrated 3 cup wins afterall and isn't stupid. I understand that we lost a lot of skill and high end players and naturally he needs to replenish that. We can't win with gritty players solely. Unfortunately it's hard to find the Hossas and Toews with all players so they're trying to get more skill and hope they find the ones that bring the overall game too. Hasn't been the case and needs to change imo.

Tldr my view that's its not all on JCs shoulders and he is competent.

But roster construction should probably go in the other thread.

 

[Muffinalt]

But to be clear @BobbyJet I wasn't trying to insinuate you are one that complaint without substance. I actually think you always bring specific points to discussions.

I like discussions that are about specific points and reasoning pro or contra. But there is so much empty complaining these past months without substance. Im starting to think this message board just exists for the complaining purposes. I hope it can get back to reasonable discussions, the point we are here for.

 

[puterwiz53]

I don't think it is so much JC's coaching as it is his communication with the players and for the most part, the veterans are just not willing to learn to play his new system. The puck possession game has long left them but the veterans are'nt willing to move on. It is very hard to teach old dogs new tricks. Making morning skates an optional thing is not very smart for a coach to do. If JC is not willing to stop catering to the veterans than a coaching change is definitely needed with bringing in a coach who is hard nosed and will take no crap off the veterans.

 

[Fortyfives]

Scott Powers seems to think Bowmen is going to makes some moves to go for the playoffs at the TDL. If that is the case he needs to be fired immediately. JC can stay until the end of the season.

 

[LDF]

Scott Powers seems to think Bowmen is going to makes some moves to go for the playoffs at the TDL. If that is the case he needs to be fired immediately. JC can stay until the end of the season.

to tell you the truth, i been waiting for something like this. the FO gave up too much to not make a push.

i wonder if they will trade and who will it be..... i just hope and pray that it is not the team's first rounder.

 

[LDF]

My personal view is that JC is a good coach and he wants the team to play the the way the league's been trending towards. I find I almost always agree with his philosophies (at least what we get access to through media coverage) and I like his non fluff communication it's refreshing and effective. Plus I think he's shown success with developing young players which is a plus with out teams current makeup.

But I don't know if he's the head coach the team needs going forward. Earlier in the season I wouldnt have minded a change because you can't win if the team doesn't seem to respond to you no matter how good the coach is. But since then it's been better so we can't really say he's ignored by the players.

Just to address the specifics you brought up. Half those things were also complaints before JC. The overpassing, the power play the softer play? I think that's just the makeup of the majority of our players. But for the record we showed we can win without being one of the more physical teams (although I'd prefer we stood up more to goonery) so I'm not sure it's a cause for a coaching change.

And the rest like lack of puck support, board play and overall less perimeter play. Absolutely agree I think that's the number one culprit of our non satisfactory play but I think that's more roster construction. JC actually seems to prefer to play a harder style by all accounts, he even focused on hitting more in the early season.

I think roster construction is much bigger issue than coaching. But it's not a black and white 'Stan sucks' type thing. He orchestrated 3 cup wins afterall and isn't stupid. I understand that we lost a lot of skill and high end players and naturally he needs to replenish that. We can't win with gritty players solely. Unfortunately it's hard to find the Hossas and Toews with all players so they're trying to get more skill and hope they find the ones that bring the overall game too. Hasn't been the case and needs to change imo.

Tldr my view that's its not all on JCs shoulders and he is competent.

But roster construction should probably go in the other thread.

with those 3 sc's wins you posted about, didn't "Q" have something to do with it.... and to what degree ??

 

[Marotte Marauder]

with those 3 sc's wins you posted about, didn't "Q" have something to do with it.... and to what degree ??

While no fan of Q, he did have something to do with the 3 Cups.I'll leave it at that.

Just look at the lineup back before the 1st Cup. Oldest significant players were Sharp and Havlat 27 and Campbell at 29. None of them ever won a Cup. Next year warriors Hossa and John Madden are added. (similarly Crawford with the Avalanche was the recipient of a pretty good team adding Forsberg and Patrik Roy)

This is not where we're at now.

 

[BK]

While no fan of Q, he did have something to do with the 3 Cups.I'll leave it at that.

Just look at the lineup back before the 1st Cup. Oldest significant players were Sharp and Havlat 27 and Campbell at 29. None of them ever won a Cup. Next year warriors Hossa and John Madden are added. (similarly Crawford with the Avalanche was the recipient of a pretty good team adding Forsberg and Patrik Roy)

This is not where we're at now.

The team is transitioning. The young guys are still developing and if they hit the team will be competitive again. If they don’t then the team will not.

 

[LDF]

While no fan of Q, he did have something to do with the 3 Cups.I'll leave it at that.

Just look at the lineup back before the 1st Cup. Oldest significant players were Sharp and Havlat 27 and Campbell at 29. None of them ever won a Cup. Next year warriors Hossa and John Madden are added. (similarly Crawford with the Avalanche was the recipient of a pretty good team adding Forsberg and Patrik Roy)

This is not where we're at now.

totally 100 % in what you are saying.

 

[Backyard Hockey]

I think all of these injuries probably save JC's job for the rest of the season.

I would imagine that if the Hawks miss playoffs - which they will - for the 3rd straight season, that Bowman is gone for sure.

You can't have a team with this core and these salaries miss 3 straight seasons after two straight first round exits.

As such, Bowman is most likely a lame duck and will be gone after the season.

So...they won't let JC go now because a) they don't want to give Bowman another HC hire and b) bringing in a HC now (ala Laviolette) will limit GM candidates since they'll want to pick their own HC and staff.

So, I go back on my prior statements. JC stays through end of season and he's gone (as a result of Bowman) being gone after this season.

 

[swerdnase]

Well you kind of have to don't you? I mean, all your fire JC deadlines have passed.

 

[ColdSteel2]

to tell you the truth, i been waiting for something like this. the FO gave up too much to not make a push.

i wonder if they will trade and who will it be..... i just hope and pray that it is not the team's first rounder.

Spot on. Agreed. It was one of the concerns when they started going for it last offseason. Hopefully someone says no, that could set the team back for a lot longer.

Some posters on another board were suggesting the team play is partly due to the analytics department. It was suggested the players brought in last offseason fit their model. Not sure if it is true but interesting.

 

[BK]

Spot on. Agreed. It was one of the concerns when they started going for it last offseason. Hopefully someone says no, that could set the team back for a lot longer.

Some posters on another board were suggesting the team play is partly due to the analytics department. It was suggested the players brought in last offseason fit their model. Not sure if it is true but interesting.

What board?

 

[Section88]

Spot on. Agreed. It was one of the concerns when they started going for it last offseason. Hopefully someone says no, that could set the team back for a lot longer.

Some posters on another board were suggesting the team play is partly due to the analytics department. It was suggested the players brought in last offseason fit their model. Not sure if it is true but interesting.

That is interesting. Im not totally sure the Bowmans would go for that though.
I could be convinced JC would believe in that, but iirc his comments on advanced stats seemed pretty tame. Shouldn't ignore them but shouldnt put too much stock into them.
Also, im certain that both JC/Bowman mentioned that their aqcuisitions this offseason were based around versatility, and multiple people on each line being able to take faceoffs.

 

[LDF]

That is interesting. Im not totally sure the Bowmans would go for that though.
I could be convinced JC would believe in that, but iirc his comments on advanced stats seemed pretty tame. Shouldn't ignore them but shouldnt put too much stock into them.
Also, im certain that both JC/Bowman mentioned that their aqcuisitions this offseason were based around versatility, and multiple people on each line being able to take faceoffs.

i have an idea that SB may try to save his job by making a push to get into the playoff...... i guess that he may think that is the only way to save his job.

 

[Esq]

I don't think it makes sense to fire JC unless there is someone demonstrably better out there to replace him. In the offseason that guy might be Laviolette.