GDT: "IT WAS IN! NEVER FORGET 2004" Bolts @ Flames, 7:00 PM SNET360

[DFF]

The notion that the people are here to post only negatives is a myth....It's the way some posters here are trying to intimidate others. Most people I know here want the Flames to win and I have seen them gone out of the way to defend the Flames from other fans.

Yes overreacting is bad that's why I put them in "quote" because I do not think it's overreacting at all. This team has issues.

That said I agree with you, it's not all that bad, the real stuff is about to come....

 

[Anglesmith]

The notion that the people are here to post only negatives is a myth....It's the way some posters here are trying to intimidate others. Most people I know here want the Flames to win and I have seen them gone out of the way to defend the Flames from other fans.

Yes overreacting is bad that's why I put them in "quote" because I do not think it's overreacting at all. This team has issues.

That said I agree with you, it's not all that bad, the real stuff is about to come....

I think everyone who posts on this board is a fan, meaning they want the Flames to win. But fans range in levels of optimism, obviously.

There is a fallacy out there that being more pessimistic makes you more likely to be correct. It isn't the case. You would've had us believe that the Flames would be down in the cellar this season by your comments in the pre-season, yet you keep referencing your pre-season comments as though that prediction was correct despite the Flames being in the thick of the race for 2nd in the Pacific.

 

[The Gnome]

That is simply not true. After every loss this year, there have many fans severely overreacting.

My only problem is the chronic pain of poor coaching decisions from GG and crew. Our roster has untapped talent, I'm not worried about our personal, other than a couple tweeks to the bottom six, and a RW upgrade in the top 6...Hell a coaching change might leave the top 6 upgrade somewhat moot. IMO, GG and crew are a cancer that can't be dealt with soon enough. We have a great roster, and with a couple moves, and a coaching change, I think think team can contend. Otherwise I don't have a lot faith based on this season's sample size.

 

[Anglesmith]

That is simply not true. After every loss this year, there have many fans severely overreacting.

Well, I meant this game in particular, where the Flames played great hockey and lost because of flukey goals. Our winning streak ended with a very poor performance against Winnipeg, so I don't think there's a comparison there.

 

[DFF]

I think everyone who posts on this board is a fan, meaning they want the Flames to win. But fans range in levels of optimism, obviously.

There is a fallacy out there that being more pessimistic makes you more likely to be correct. It isn't the case. You would've had us believe that the Flames would be down in the cellar this season by your comments in the pre-season, yet you keep referencing your pre-season comments as though that prediction was correct despite the Flames being in the thick of the race for 2nd in the Pacific.

Do you have the post that I said the Flames would be in the cellar? I honestly dont remember

I pointed out the preseason issues with GG coacking, Brodie brain farts and the lack of scoring and I think they are still there. I remembered certain poster called us dumb ass and that it was only a preseason.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Overreaction is all about perspective, though. Sure someone can say, “you’re overreacting”. But me being extremely critical of a team that has not recorded a win in 6 games, has shown to be extremely mentally fragile, it is my opinion that it is completely justified criticism.

This team has had good stretches of play, but ultimately they are finding ways to lose games right now. Then we get the coach (after every single loss), and apologists on this board that continually make excuses for the play, by saying it’s about the process, it’s about the chances, it’s about luck, it’s about that we’re not that far out of a playoff spot, while downplaying the breakdowns/lapses which are causing losses and then calling it a fluke.

I don’t feel like it’s overreacting, I feel like it’s warranted criticism. I’ve watched Gully for a year and half now and I’m just not sold on him. He’s reminds me of a robot and a poor puppet master. His stick throwing incident was planned and staged IMO, and the players were laughing about the incident in interviews after the practice so that tells you how serious they took it. No one is scared of Gully, all anyone is concerned about is fulfilling their role in the abyss that is the coaches system. The Flames might even make the playoffs under Gully but they’ll just get swept in the first round because they’re playing the game for all the wrong reasons right now. If this is the new age of coaching, I’ll go find another sport to watch because there’s zero emotion involved with this team and I can’t stand it as a fan.

 

[FerklundCGY]

Suck a lot---winning streak---suck a little bit less

I would say the winning streak is not the norm.

Without the winning streak, the Flames would be swimming at the bottom with the Oilers.

I think the "overreacting" is justified

but there will always be someone to let us know that's not the real fan. Starting with it's only the preseason, scoring is not a problem we are just practicing the lineups....

This is what annoys me about our fan base. We just look at results (which, of course, is fair because results are what counts in the end) but there's much more to it than that.

You say we sucked a lot before the winning streak and then have sucked less after it, when in fact you could easily argue we were playing our best hockey of the season during that period before our winning streak when we were losing.

We were playing absolutely fantastic and dominating hockey but weren't getting any puck luck and kept seeing L's go up on the board and then during our winning streak, while we were still playing pretty good hockey, we were getting a few more bounces here and there and saw the W's build up despite not playing as great of hockey as we were just prior to that.

 

[Baxterman]

I think the reason that it seems there are some that are overly negative is because for the recent history of the Flames there really hasn't been much to be happy about. We have just gone through a period where we have had 4 play-off trips in 10 years, 3 of those being 1 and done and the other being a round win thanks to the stupid NHL point system. The past two play-off trips we made it by 2 points and as a WC team, not exactly booming successes. The last time we won a division was 2006.

Maybe for some being close to the play-offs is good enough but I don't think there is anything wrong with expecting more than that.

For me being 2 points out of 2nd with the other team having games in hand isn't a good situation to be in. It isn't something that should calm me down after a loss. It isn't something that I think the team should be striving for.

It is a bit similar to the GG defense which seems to be well he hasn't lost all games so it could be worse. It seems like for some there is no way to critique a team because "no team is perfect." I think the standards should be higher for this team than squeak into the play-offs and hope for a miracle.

As for the TB game in particular I for one am getting a little tired of the "we played great/outplayed them but lost because of bad luck/fluke goals/snakebitten etc." at some point when that keeps getting repeated I think that maybe a. we didn't really play as great as some think or maybe we need to rethink what we think is great play.

 

[Baxterman]

This is what annoys me about our fan base. We just look at results (which, of course, is fair because results are what counts in the end) but there's much more to it than that.

You say we sucked a lot before the winning streak and then have sucked less after it, when in fact you could easily argue we were playing our best hockey of the season during that period before our winning streak when we were losing.

We were playing absolutely fantastic and dominating hockey but weren't getting any puck luck and kept seeing L's go up on the board and then during our winning streak, while we were still playing pretty good hockey, we were getting a few more bounces here and there and saw the W's build up despite not playing as great of hockey as we were just prior to that.

This just isn't true. I know we obviously see the game differently but you do not play dominating hockey and lose due to bad bounces, especially not repeatedly.

This team is where they are in the standings on merit. It isn't bad luck or tough bounces. They are a mediocre team in a mediocre spot in the standings.

 

[InfinityIggy]

Pretending like there isn’t a problem and its all down to luck is just an overreaction of a different kind.

 

[Anglesmith]

Pretending like there isn’t a problem and its all down to luck is just an overreaction of a different kind.

Just so we are straight, who is saying that?

I would just suggest this: if you think luck is a factor in the winning streak, then it's probably also a factor in the losing streak. If you don't think luck is a factor in the losing streak, then it probably also wasn't a factor in the winning streak.

No sweeping changes occurred to the Flames that plunged them from a winning streak to a losing streak, yet there is a very prevalent opinion kicking around that a sweeping change is absolutely necessary to go from the losing streak to a winning streak. However you slice it, there is an inherent pessimistic double-standard which, yes, is understandable given the relative lack of success of this organization, but when pointed out should at least be acknowledged.

Also, I'd say that we don't have it so bad, really. Our rebuild went about as well as anyone's in the league lately. We decided to rebuild in 2013 and pretty much trended up every year from there, except for one down year when the players decided they were done playing Hartley's system. There was no decade of horror. We went from a bubble team to a basement team rebuilding, right back into the second round in probably less time than the time between the Oilers' two consecutive rebuilds.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Being displeased and pessimistic after the team loses 6 straight games they've held a lead in qualifies as more of a reaction than a overreaction. Let's not act like the questions about this team's mental fortitude just came up recently. They've been present for years. Bottom line is they've been given ample opportunity to secure themselves a foothold in the playoffs by the rest of this garbage division and have done nothing but piss away points. The roster has under performed and now they'll be scrapping it out with a bunch of other capable teams for a playoff spot and I certainly wouldn't want to be counting on a wildcard.

Gulutzan makes for an easy scapegoat, but there's more than a couple guys having some lackluster seasons. Sam Bennett is on that list. Brodie, Hamilton, and Hamonic are too IMO.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I agree AS, luck goes both ways, “good luck” & being “unlucky”. The problem is, more times than not when the Flames win I hear the coach say, “yeah we’re finally getting some bounces go our way”. When we lose it’s “yeah we played well, but we had some unlucky bounces”.

This is my primary issue with Gulutzan in a nutshell. His system is largely based on 5 on 5 play, having his guys out chance other teams. While in “theory” this sounds good, looking at his demeanour and how he handles himself, I feel like he is to hands off. He always refers to the “system” and having the players do their part, and correcting the system when things are not going right. And when the results are not there, the first area to assess is 5 on 5 chances which has made the PP an easy cop out because it’s not producing. The most critical of his team I’ve really heard Gully be is to say that guys need to go to the dirty areas more. While I fully admit the PP is horrendous, the fact remains on this recent stretch of losses the reason we’ve lost those games is due to a lack of mental fortitude and is this my major area of concern with this group and how they are playing.

Imagine if Darryl Sutter threw his stick, would his players be laughing about it after practice? I don’t have a problem with Gully’s system or style of play really, but he’s not getting the most out of his players and I don’t think anyone can disagree with that statement. This team doesn’t step on anyone’s throat, no one is scared to come into the Saddledome and play us, and tactically some of his coaching decisions have been questionable; such as player usage and a lack of willingness to adapt his system to fit players strengths. Why is it that our defence isn’t more involved in the offence, why is Brouwer just now playing like an NHL player when a coach like Hitch said he is the top player in the slot in the entire NHL. And I also think we should be getting more production out of Bennett, Tkachuk, Brouwer, Frolik and pretty much our entire defence.

Ultimately I want a coach that will push this teams buttons more to get results we are capable of and not rely so much on luck, chances, and long term probability of success. I get that sports today is kind of trending in that direction, but it is of my opinion that a head coach first and foremost needs to be a good motivator. Most systems can lead to success as long as everyone is buying in.

 

[InfinityIggy]

Just so we are straight, who is saying that?

I would just suggest this: if you think luck is a factor in the winning streak, then it's probably also a factor in the losing streak. If you don't think luck is a factor in the losing streak, then it probably also wasn't a factor in the winning streak.

No sweeping changes occurred to the Flames that plunged them from a winning streak to a losing streak, yet there is a very prevalent opinion kicking around that a sweeping change is absolutely necessary to go from the losing streak to a winning streak. However you slice it, there is an inherent pessimistic double-standard which, yes, is understandable given the relative lack of success of this organization, but when pointed out should at least be acknowledged.

Also, I'd say that we don't have it so bad, really. Our rebuild went about as well as anyone's in the league lately. We decided to rebuild in 2013 and pretty much trended up every year from there, except for one down year when the players decided they were done playing Hartley's system. There was no decade of horror. We went from a bubble team to a basement team rebuilding, right back into the second round in probably less time than the time between the Oilers' two consecutive rebuilds.