Keenan?

[c-carp]

I thought that he would bring about some interesting discussion. As a Blues fan I hate the SOB and think that he is the anti-christ. On the other hand when he was young he took Philly to a couple of finals and pushed the mighty Oilers to 7 games in a great series and seemed to get results no matter what you thought of his methods. He also had good sucess with the Hawks getting them to the finals vs a Great Pens team. He got the Rangers a cup and while I think he gets too much credit here from some and think that Messier and all others had a hell of a lot more to do with that than he did, but he deserves some credit.

When he got to the Blues I will admit it I was excited and though that a hard nozed coach like him would be just the thing that an underachieving Blues Squad needed at the time and I will keep this part short but he creted Chaos and nothing more in my opinion.

He hasnt done much in his stops since STL and I guess my question is if I am correct and somewhere along the line he began to believe that whatever he did would work and he didnt need any rhyme or reason, because to me if you could go back in time the Keenan coachiing today wouldnt be as succesful with the Flyers, Hawks and Rangers as he was. When and where did he go off track as a coach or am I just full of crap.

Click to read more...

 

[Big Phil]

Yeah he is one of the most loved or hated people on the planet in Hockey. He's been a very good coach at times and depending on which team he has he pushes the team the right way. Other times he's known as a tyrant. He coached Team Canada in '87 and '91 and won both times. In '87 he had a run-in with Gretzky, Messier and Bourque in his office who felt that he was pushing the team too hard. This was after a tie to the Czechs. Keenan held a short meeting and reportedly said to the players: "Do you care about your country?" Of course the players replied "Yes." Then Keenan said "Good. Then there's noever going to be a problem again." Basically he was saying that if they cared about theire country they weren't going to lose. So depending on the players on that team some can get motivated or some can rebel.

 

[Snap Wilson]

Keenan would have been a good coach in the fifties, in the sixties, in the seventies and he was a good coach in the eighties and early nineties. He didn't lose anything. He was the same coach in St. Louis that he was in Philly, Chicago and New York. The players, making more money than god, suddenly had the power and they weren't buying what he was selling. He couldn't adjust. I don't know that he ever will.

 

[mcphee]

Keenan's one of the most interesting characters around hockey. I have no idea whether he is/was a great coach or not. I think he improves situations wherever he goes, then destroys it by impatience and making moves where none are needed. He seems to be a classic case of a guy who you'd think differently of if you got to know him. When he speaks to the media, you get a glimpse of a guy quite differnt than you perceive behind the bench. I think he'd be an interesting guy to meet and talk hockey with.

 

[c-carp]

Keenan's one of the most interesting characters around hockey. I have no idea whether he is/was a great coach or not. I think he improves situations wherever he goes, then destroys it by impatience and making moves where none are needed. He seems to be a classic case of a guy who you'd think differently of if you got to know him. When he speaks to the media, you get a glimpse of a guy quite differnt than you perceive behind the bench. I think he'd be an interesting guy to meet and talk hockey with.

I agree with most of what you said, A lot of the problems I think he had with the Blues were due to tons of moves that seemes to be done just to make moves. He definatly has done and seen a lot on the game and would be interesting in that aspect. I still hate him for running the Blues like he did though. That is shortsighted though on my part.

Great avatar McPhee, I just saw Dylan and Willie Nelson in concert recently.