Pete Green - Top 10 Coach All Time? Try Top 5

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
Thanks!

Well, if Pete Green did indeed coach the Silver Seven too and already implemented "his strategy" with them, then that would be quite the addition to the resume we are now aware of thanks to @ImporterExporter.

My understanding is that Green was less of a coach and more of a trainer in the Silver Seven era. The tricky part is figuring out how he divided responsibilities with Alf Smith, who was a player-coach. It's entirely possible that Green did a lot of the things we now associate with the role of a bench coach. If that could be documented I agree, it would be a significant feather in his cap.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
My understanding is that Green was less of a coach and more of a trainer in the Silver Seven era. The tricky part is figuring out how he divided responsibilities with Alf Smith, who was a player-coach. It's entirely possible that Green did a lot of the things we now associate with the role of a bench coach. If that could be documented I agree, it would be a significant feather in his cap.

I have evidence of Green involved with the Ottawa Hockey team back to 1901 now!! Already called one of the best hockey coaches in Canada in 1908 (how could he be called that if he wasn't already coaching prior to 1908) Many reports. Still searching. Will have some new posts on this later.

This is absolutely incredible.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
Still have more to sift through (I'm going back now to 1900-1908 and reading through every paper of the Citizen and Journal over the hockey seasons) but some deeper digs did find these gems.

  • Green noted in late 1900 to be joining the Senators as trainer
  • Incredible bio on Green after the Senators won the league title in 1901, going undefeated.
  • Cited as communicating with his players during a game in 1902
  • Already called one of the best hockey coaches in Canada in 1908 which predates previously known coaching resume.

20 Dec 1900, Page 5 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

20 Dec 1900

img





10 Jan 1901, Page 5 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

10 Jan 1901

upload_2020-5-8_1-9-51.png





4 Feb 1901, Page 6 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

04 Feb 1901

upload_2020-5-8_1-11-13.png





11 Feb 1901, Page 10 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

11 Feb 1901

upload_2020-5-8_1-6-59.png





25 Feb 1901, Page 3 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

25 Feb 1901

-Green noted as trainer of 3 simultaneous champions in hockey, football, and lacrosse. Feat never done before in Canada.

-Didn't lose a single game and won the league title.


upload_2020-5-8_1-13-51.png





2 Mar 1901, Page 16 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

02 Mar 1901


-Really cool bio of Green in 1901

-Largely through his work hockey team won championship

-Put into splendid form and players showed good effects of his methods

-Called envy of every other trainer in Canada

-Painstaking in his training

-Noted as highly respected among players and public


img





6 Jan 1902, 6 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

06 Jan 1902

-Green imploring his team to attack (they were down at this point but would win game in OT)

upload_2020-5-8_1-20-14.png




12 Jan 1903, 6 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

12 Jan 1903

-Pete Green's Pets (team?)

upload_2020-5-8_1-22-43.png





19 Jan 1903, 6 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

19 Jan 1903

-Green's team noted to be in splendid condition.

upload_2020-5-8_1-24-39.png





8 Dec 1903, Page 1 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

08 Dec 1903

Green noted to be resigning before 1904 season.

upload_2020-5-8_1-0-49.png





13 Nov 1908, 8 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

13 Nov 1908

-GREEN CALLED ONE OF THE BEST HOCKEY COACHES IN CANADA

-This is 1908 which predates any of the previously known years of him coaching.



upload_2020-5-8_0-59-12.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2020-5-8_0-56-0.png
    upload_2020-5-8_0-56-0.png
    173.7 KB · Views: 1

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
The more I look into Green’s time with the Silver Seven, the more I feel the following are probably true:

1) Alf Smith was the recognized coach of those teams, though his actual duties were somewhat closer to a modern day captain. In the early 1900s, the executive committee of the club had a significant say in decisions that would later be made by a coach or manager. Smith appears to have done some player recruitment and to have been a strong captain, but I don’t see much about him acting as a coach in the modern sense. The lack of references to him actively guiding the team leads me to suspect Smith’s “coaching” was more a matter of being the outward face of the team, and not nearly so structured and impactful as Green’s training.

2) Green was called a “trainer” in a sense somewhat more similar to modern boxing or gymnastics, as opposed to how we use that word in modern-day hockey. Green was not just a therapist or an equipment manager. To be clear, his main responsibility was physical conditioning of the players, as opposed to instruction. Let’s not lose sight of that! But... this was still the era when a “club” was literally an athletic club. There wasn’t a clear distinction between conditioning and practice... the main point of practice was to stay in shape. Green routinely received praise for his teams showing up in superior physical condition and out-skating their opponents, which is something we would now credit to the coach rather than the trainer.

3) Green definitely did get involved with directing players coach-style during lacrosse and football games. This is provable. But I can’t find a direct reference to him doing this during a hockey game in the mid 1900s. It is possible that he felt more comfortable with some sports than others, which brings to mind the point that his successes in other sports would have naturally influenced claims like “best coach”.

4) Prior to 1907, Green’s position with the Ottawas was more clearly that of a physical trainer. Starting around 1907, he started moving into a more directly coach-like position. This is relevant because they won the Cup in 1909, 1910, and 1911.

Here’s an example from the June 3, 1899 Ottawa Citizen of how Green managed his lacrosse club.

B7-BA9-E35-6327-483-A-B54-F-5-B4-C624171-C3.jpg


Clearly at this stage he was a trainer in both name and function, but the sheer amount of control he exercised over these teams seems unusual to me.

The really key questions, and very hard to answer: prior to 1910-ish, was Green running practices? Did he set the team’s strategy? Did he influence player movement or deployment? Did Smith do any of those things? How did they work together?
 

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,537
4,906
The development from trainer to "coach" is nicely captured by those clippings.

1900: "a good trainer"; making everything nice and comfortable for the players at the trainings
1901: "trainer", "handler of the athletes"; putting players into splendid form and making winners out of them
1902: "trainer"
1903: had put players into splendid condition
1904: "trainer"

1908: "one of the best coaches", "manager of the team"
1910: "coach", "manager", deploying players at certain positions
1912: "manager", "coach"
1913: "manager", uses strategy and a defensive system

Do we know when the terms "coach" and "manager" first found their way onto the sports pages of those Canadian newspapers? Are there examples (slightly?) predating 1908 Pete Green?
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
The more I look into Green’s time with the Silver Seven, the more I feel the following are probably true:

1) Alf Smith was the recognized coach of those teams, though his actual duties were somewhat closer to a modern day captain. In the early 1900s, the executive committee of the club had a significant say in decisions that would later be made by a coach or manager. Smith appears to have done some player recruitment and to have been a strong captain, but I don’t see much about him acting as a coach in the modern sense. The lack of references to him actively guiding the team leads me to suspect Smith’s “coaching” was more a matter of being the outward face of the team, and not nearly so structured and impactful as Green’s training.

2) Green was called a “trainer” in a sense somewhat more similar to modern boxing or gymnastics, as opposed to how we use that word in modern-day hockey. Green was not just a therapist or an equipment manager. To be clear, his main responsibility was physical conditioning of the players, as opposed to instruction. Let’s not lose sight of that! But... this was still the era when a “club” was literally an athletic club. There wasn’t a clear distinction between conditioning and practice... the main point of practice was to stay in shape. Green routinely received praise for his teams showing up in superior physical condition and out-skating their opponents, which is something we would now credit to the coach rather than the trainer.

3) Green definitely did get involved with directing players coach-style during lacrosse and football games. This is provable. But I can’t find a direct reference to him doing this during a hockey game in the mid 1900s. It is possible that he felt more comfortable with some sports than others, which brings to mind the point that his successes in other sports would have naturally influenced claims like “best coach”.

4) Prior to 1907, Green’s position with the Ottawas was more clearly that of a physical trainer. Starting around 1907, he started moving into a more directly coach-like position. This is relevant because they won the Cup in 1909, 1910, and 1911.

Here’s an example from the June 3, 1899 Ottawa Citizen of how Green managed his lacrosse club.

B7-BA9-E35-6327-483-A-B54-F-5-B4-C624171-C3.jpg


Clearly at this stage he was a trainer in both name and function, but the sheer amount of control he exercised over these teams seems unusual to me.

The really key questions, and very hard to answer: prior to 1910-ish, was Green running practices? Did he set the team’s strategy? Did he influence player movement or deployment? Did Smith do any of those things? How did they work together?


I agree with all of this. In fact I have now found a few clipping that show Alf Smith did coaching/instruction in 1901-1903 (still working my way through the decade haha). I'll get these uploaded later today/tonight.

I don't think Green was a coach in the sense he was in 1909 and beyond. 1909 onward the Sens were clearly Green's teams, with numerous coaching accomplishments that one can identify rather easily.

There are now at least references to Green being involved with the team in the winter of 1900 (heading into the 1901 season) and he does seem to receive high marks as a trainer for that undefeated team (the length bio being a sterling analysis of his abilities in that role). I was always under the impression that 1903 was the first time he ever had contact with the hockey team so these finds are at least nice additions to his chronological timeline.

Now, did he assist Alf Smith w/ coaching duties? I'm not sure. I don't know if we'll ever be able to fully flesh it out with just newspapers. My gut based on all the information I have read, is that Green was indeed more of a trainer as we think of it in the earliest years . He was in charge of physical conditioning namely and also aided in the running of practices and did some sort of communicating with players during games. It looks as if he trained/learned under Alf Smith, probably what we might consider an assistant coach by today's standard. And then in the winter of 1908 (going into the 1909 season) was hired on as the head coach and was given "full charge of team" as shown in the original bio I worked up.




The development from trainer to "coach" is nicely captured by those clippings.

1900: "a good trainer"; making everything nice and comfortable for the players at the trainings
1901: "trainer", "handler of the athletes"; putting players into splendid form and making winners out of them
1902: "trainer"
1903: had put players into splendid condition
1904: "trainer"

1908: "one of the best coaches", "manager of the team"
1910: "coach", "manager", deploying players at certain positions
1912: "manager", "coach"
1913: "manager", uses strategy and a defensive system

Do we know when the terms "coach" and "manager" first found their way onto the sports pages of those Canadian newspapers? Are there examples (slightly?) predating 1908 Pete Green?


I have not seen the word coach/manager used more than a few times over the hundreds of papers I've already read between 1901-1903 but I'm keeping a close eye out for anything that resembles the transition you're talking about.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
Player conditioning and understanding the benefits of this can now be tied all the way back to the turn of the century w/ Green, which is really cool. Conditioning is noted as a key factor in Ottawa's successes down the line, again with multiple sources cited on page 1.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
The development from trainer to "coach" is nicely captured by those clippings.

1900: "a good trainer"; making everything nice and comfortable for the players at the trainings
1901: "trainer", "handler of the athletes"; putting players into splendid form and making winners out of them
1902: "trainer"
1903: had put players into splendid condition
1904: "trainer"

1908: "one of the best coaches", "manager of the team"
1910: "coach", "manager", deploying players at certain positions
1912: "manager", "coach"
1913: "manager", uses strategy and a defensive system

Do we know when the terms "coach" and "manager" first found their way onto the sports pages of those Canadian newspapers? Are there examples (slightly?) predating 1908 Pete Green?

This gets tricky and breaks down into sub-questions:

1) Were the words "coach" and "manager" in use on a given date?
2) Did those words imply the same meaning we now associate with them?
3) Did that role apply to hockey teams?
4) Did it apply at all levels of play?

I'm going to give my personal impressions based on general exposure and a little bit of directed research this morning. If someone is looking for a sports-history thesis topic, this would be a good one, because I don't think it has been deeply analyzed in regard to hockey specifically.

1) Etymological sources indicate that the word "coach" was first applied to athletics (as opposed to academics) in 1861. For point of reference, Pete Green was born in 1868, if that gives a sense of how fluid these concepts were during his actual playing/training career.

In my view, there are very few references to coaches or managers in Canadian papers prior to 1890. As mentioned above, this was the Athletic Club era when players were mostly self-trained in several sports simultaneously. Prior to that year, the mentions of coaching tend to be along the lines of teams in other sports trying to elevate their level of play by hiring an expert to guide them. I would use 1890 as a general signpost for when coaching began to shift from something of an "outside consultant" role to a more regular feature of athletic teams.

2) This is very tricky because the language about these roles was very fluid prior to around 1920.

In my view (and I am not speaking definitively here, this is only an impression), on the odd occasion that the word "coach" appeared prior to around 1910, that word already implied a purely instructional role -- the exception being "player-coach", where there is some ambiguity as to whether the player was an instructor or merely a vocal leader.

The word "manager" is harder to pin down. It could mean a purely administrative role, as in the case of a rink manager who had responsibility for the business operations of a club. Or it could mean a purely logistical role, like a team manager carrying equipment. Or it could mean a director who scouted and signed players. Or it could mean someone that did all of those things and was undoubtedly also hanging around the rink instructing players. This word remained fluid clear into the 1930s, as the instructional role gradually became distinct from the managerial role.

"Trainer" almost always means an athletic trainer responsible for physical conditioning. Sometimes that's pretty clear-cut, but it also strays into a philosophical question -- when a trainer runs skating drills, is he now a coach? As early as the 1890s and certainly by the 1900s, we see cases of trainers in other sports trying to direct players from the sidelines. It's unclear (and probably unanswerable) whether this was a significant factor for the players and how it would have related to instructions from a coach or playing-coach.

3) It seems hockey was late to get on board with the concept of coaches, which makes sense. Hockey was late to develop as an organized sport in general, and the format of the game prior to around 1910 didn't lend itself to in-game direction (there's a reason we saw coaches banned from using megaphones on the bench).

Whereas coaches were very common in baseball/cricket, football, soccer, and other sports, the absolute earliest references I see to clearly-defined hockey coaches are around the turn of the century and not really consistent until about 1905-10. I do think the case of Pete Green gradually taking over direction of the Ottawas from Alf Smith could be viewed as an allegory for what was happening broadly in the hockey world at that time.

4) This is another complicating factor when trying to pin down the role of a hockey coach in the early 1900s. In my view, it appears that the concept of a clearly-defined hockey coach first cropped up in the university ranks and youth leagues -- which, again, makes sense. Coaches prior to around 1910 were asked to share their playing wisdom and a sense of general strategy, but not much else. That seemed more suited for player development than for fine-tuning an Athletic Club team. The role of a non-playing coach for an elite adult player (other than keeping him in shape and in good standing) had not yet become apparent. It's not till the early 1910s, the generation of Lester Patrick and Art Ross, that we see an added emphasis on the role of a strategic director for top-level teams, and it seems relevant that by the 1920s the most prominent among these were men with an interest in the business management of profitable, professional teams. Even in the late 1910s, and even at the highest level of play, there was still seemingly a lot more demand for non-playing coaches at the university level than at the professional/elite level.


These are just my observations, but I hope this at least might help direct further investigation into the topic. The more I look at it, IMO Pete Green does indeed appear to be potentially a very significant figure in the development of the "coach" concept in hockey. I would suggest a deeper look into Green's proximity to Ross, the Patricks, Percy LeSueuer, and other early coaching figures during their time in the ECAHA. There's an argument to be made that their competitor's-eye view of the Silver Seven's bench dynamic may have had a significant influence on ECAHA alumni's concept of how to run a dominant hockey club.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

Tarantula

Hanging around the web
Aug 31, 2017
4,446
2,856
GTA
Were they using the term "manager" during this era when covering baseball? Manager and coach might have been closer to synonyms during that time compared to how we use those terms today.

Great work guys!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
Were they using the term "manager" during this era when covering baseball? Manager and coach might have been closer to synonyms during that time compared to how we use those terms today.

Great work guys!

Thanks!

Yes, you do see the words manager and coach being used within the same season to describe the same person, Green in this case.

In my original bio you can see one of the earliest clippings (think it was the first actually without looking) mentions, in 1908 that Green was a "former coach" of the Ottawa hockey team. That is why I believe Green had some sort of coaching responsibility along with Alf Smith in the very early 1900's, though it is clear Green's primary duty was being the athletic trainer (conditioning). In Nov of 1908 you clearly see Green being hired as coach and given full control of the team. That much is definitive now.

I don't recall Green being called anything but coach during the 20's dynasty. By then I think the word manager was reserved for someone in administrative matters (Tommy Gorman in Ottawa's case).

Whereas manager has been the title of the head man in baseball for long, long time. Would be interesting to see how the timelines.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
I don't recall Green being called anything but coach during the 20's dynasty. By then I think the word manager was reserved for someone in administrative matters (Tommy Gorman in Ottawa's case).

It’s important to note that most teams combined those roles, and therefore in most arenas the bench boss was called the “manager” like in baseball. Having a coach and manager as two different people was a minority practice for quite some time after the Sens dynasty.

This really is tricky territory, because the roles were fluid and the titles were done by convention. I expect we could find examples of a single person (Jack Adams, for example) being called both “coach” and “manager” in different articles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,537
4,906
This gets tricky and breaks down into sub-questions:

1) Were the words "coach" and "manager" in use on a given date?
2) Did those words imply the same meaning we now associate with them?

Right. When an 1908 article calls Pete Green a "former coach of the Ottawa hockey team" with reference to the years 1900-1903, but the articles from 1900-1903 all call him "trainer", does that merely mean the term trainer had been displaced by the semi-synonymous term coach, and the latter term was now being used retospectively without a lot of thought, falsely giving us the impression that Green already "coached" back in 1900-1903? Or was it used intentionally, acknowleding in hindsight that Green's tasks in 1900-1903 were already of the kind that now belonged to a "coach"?
Given the terminology was in flux, the latter cannot simply be assumed without further evidence – either from contemporary newspapers or from later statements by contemporaries who worked with Green in Ottawa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
Some more finds.

  • Meets Tommy Gorman in 1907
  • Green's impact on lacrosse teams was very significant (mirrors his presence on the hockey teams he coached).
  • Green explains why megaphones should be used.
  • Green interviews prospective players before start of season
  • Another instance of Green warning players against overconfidence

9 Sep 1907, 2 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com


Green meets Tommy Gorman, a sports writer at the time, in 1907 at a lacrosse game and was pressed into action! Could possibly be one of the first meetings between the two.


upload_2020-5-10_12-55-48.png




12 Mar 1912, 11 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

Not directly tied to hockey but I think it's important to note that Green is called the "backbone of the Capital club (lacrosse) and when he retired from coaching the team fell apart.

While Ottawa didn't fall completely apart when he left after the 1913 season or the 1924 campaign the Senators clearly took a step back with other people coaching them. They didn't continue the major successes he had during both stints.

Both times Green took the Senators over they promptly won a SC. That speaks volumes to me as to the impact his coaching and tactics had in a positive manner.


upload_2020-5-10_12-32-55.png

upload_2020-5-10_12-33-17.png




23 Mar 1909, 2 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

Again, not related directly to hockey but really telling piece about Green being able to look beyond the present as it related to the game of lacrosse and the expansion of hockey in its place.

He clearly opposes the residency rule in place.


upload_2020-5-10_12-50-23.png

upload_2020-5-10_12-51-42.png




4 Dec 1912, 12 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

Cool interview with Green describing why megaphones should be allowed for coaches.

Seems pretty clear during this time period manager and coach essentially meant the same thing. The title says "Is the Opinion of COACH Green" and then the first sentence of the article says "Peter Green who has managed"

Whereas in the 20's you can clearly see manager was reserved for someone handling administrative duties (Gorman) while Green was referred to as coach.


upload_2020-5-10_12-39-23.png




12 Dec 1910, 12 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

Green taking part in interviewing prospective players for Ottawa before 1910 season.

upload_2020-5-10_12-47-26.png




26 Dec 1908, 8 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

Green stating Fred Lake should work at point.


upload_2020-5-10_13-5-49.png
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
4 Dec 1912, 12 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

Cool interview with Green describing why megaphones should be allowed for coaches.

Seems pretty clear during this time period manager and coach essentially meant the same thing. The title says "Is the Opinion of COACH Green" and then the first sentence of the article says "Peter Green who has managed"

Whereas in the 20's you can clearly see manager was reserved for someone handling administrative duties (Gorman) while Green was referred to as coach.


View attachment 345686

I think this hints at how Green’s influence can be framed in terms beyond simply putting together good hockey teams.

Circa 1910, the players generally played all 60 minutes. Bench subs played very limited minutes — in 1912 when that article was written, the Sens had only one man on the bench (and that guy needed to be available for injury replacement, so had to be used with caution). To the extent that coaches made mid-game changes, it was only very sparingly compared to the end of the decade.

So, the coach didn’t have a whole lot to do during game play. There were minimal player changes, no line matching, very limited ability for the coach to say anything to his players. The bulk of the strategy work was done in practice and the dressing room. Besides chirping the refs, there just wasn’t a whole lot for the coach to do but send out his players and watch the game unfold. To put it simply, hockey was running about 30 years behind the major grass-based sports in terms of coordination on and off the field of play.

Green, coming from his experience in lacrosse, was attempting to change the coach’s role into one of an active participant in the flow of play. In the article he seems to be thinking in terms of motivating his players — but in hindsight we know that was just the tip of the iceberg. An actively-involved coach can call for changes in strategy, or on-the-fly substitutions. Green was starting to sniff up that tree, one that began to radically change the coach’s role by the end of that decade. The issue of being heard by the players went by the wayside when subs became more frequent.

That’s where I think this research is headed. The lack of clear-cut distinction between “training” and “coaching” and “managing” at the turn of the century is a barometer for how fluid and undeveloped those roles still were. Green was making strides in the direction of clarifying the bench-coach as a baseball-style game manager. It’s not yet clear to me how much personal influence he had on the actual evolution of coaching, but it’s clear that he was a catalyst for change... and his close proximity to (among others) Art Ross and the Patricks hints at the potential for Green to be re-framed as a sort of Founding Father for hockey coaches.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,978
Brooklyn
I think a good starting point if you want to argue Green as a consensus top 15 coach/strong top 10 candidate* would be to compare his accomplishments in detail to Tommy Gorman's.

*IMO, he has no chance for my top 6, which would mean beating out Hap Day or Al Arbour.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
I think this hints at how Green’s influence can be framed in terms beyond simply putting together good hockey teams.

Circa 1910, the players generally played all 60 minutes. Bench subs played very limited minutes — in 1912 when that article was written, the Sens had only one man on the bench (and that guy needed to be available for injury replacement, so had to be used with caution). To the extent that coaches made mid-game changes, it was only very sparingly compared to the end of the decade.

So, the coach didn’t have a whole lot to do during game play. There were minimal player changes, no line matching, very limited ability for the coach to say anything to his players. The bulk of the strategy work was done in practice and the dressing room. Besides chirping the refs, there just wasn’t a whole lot for the coach to do but send out his players and watch the game unfold. To put it simply, hockey was running about 30 years behind the major grass-based sports in terms of coordination on and off the field of play.

Green, coming from his experience in lacrosse, was attempting to change the coach’s role into one of an active participant in the flow of play. In the article he seems to be thinking in terms of motivating his players — but in hindsight we know that was just the tip of the iceberg. An actively-involved coach can call for changes in strategy, or on-the-fly substitutions. Green was starting to sniff up that tree, one that began to radically change the coach’s role by the end of that decade. The issue of being heard by the players went by the wayside when subs became more frequent.

That’s where I think this research is headed. The lack of clear-cut distinction between “training” and “coaching” and “managing” at the turn of the century is a barometer for how fluid and undeveloped those roles still were. Green was making strides in the direction of clarifying the bench-coach as a baseball-style game manager. It’s not yet clear to me how much personal influence he had on the actual evolution of coaching, but it’s clear that he was a catalyst for change... and his close proximity to (among others) Art Ross and the Patricks hints at the potential for Green to be re-framed as a sort of Founding Father for hockey coaches.

Great analysis.

I think I'm ahead of you in terms of thinking Green a Founding Father among coaches though.

The "double defense" system that was unearthed in 1913, which was certainly detailed for the time period really changed my mind regarding what his role was as a coach during his first run in Ottawa 1909-1913 (5 seasons).

upload_2020-3-30_18-59-40-png.339824


pete-green-strategy-jpg.339826



It is the story of the success of heady hockey tactics, and a well-planned system of team play, as against a fanfare of trumpets, partizan rooting and magnificent individual efforts....

The chief actor in the Canadian collapse was Petie Green, the veteran manager of the Ottawa club.

On his way to Montreal Green "doped" out his style of play.

"No use trying to out skate them. There's only one way to do it"

And so Green gathered his players around him and unfolded his plan. Ronan was his choice to check Canadiens in their dash towards the SC.

A couple of things stand out.

One, Green is clearly planning ahead, tactics to counter a specific team. He wasn't just coming up with a strategy on the fly as the game proceeded, though there are numerous examples of that happening as well.

Two, Green is using a "double defense" system which entailed holding a F (Ronan in this case) back as an extra defender at C ice (like what Nighbor would have done in the 20's). This is significant because it illustrates that Green understood the importance of defense in an era where individualism and individual end to end rushes were much more common. Not to mention the scheme was specifically put into place to counter Montreal's speed.

Three, the article specifically mentions Green as the chief actor in Montreal's collapse. It's very rare to see a coach getting so much credit in this time period for the success of a team in game. It was this piece in particular that made me go, "this man was much more than a cheerleader or figurehead" as previously thought. This article in particular was one of the first to come up in my initial searches and was a springboard for the intense search in the weeks to follow.

We also have to remember that Ross and Patrick didn't begin coaching until WELL AFTER Green. If Green's first stint in Ottawa was more bland and primitive, I'd likely still be a bit more reserved. But he was clearly scheming in the day(s) prior to a game. There was the scouting and development of players like Jack Darragh and Dubbie Kerr. Not to mention Cyclone Taylor was specifically switched to the defense at the direction of Green due to Taylor struggling to fit in on the forward line. The megaphone was used to directly communicate instructions to players during the game during Green's 1st run.



28 Nov 1912, 9 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

This was another piece that spoke to me in a big way. Percy Lesueur's testimony is such a major tell as to the impact Green had with the Silver Seven.
Percy Lesueur said yesterday that he and all the other players consider Green the best of all coaches. They always look up to him in a crisis.

Again, peer testimony that points to Green being a major influence on the hockey teams he coached. Ottawa player clearly looked to Green for instruction, motivation, etc.

img


img




13 Dec 1912, 8 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

This is again, a major bullet point for Green. First off, we're talking about Cyclone Taylor, a high end HOF'er and the best player in hockey before Nighbor emerged and peaked (again, under Green).

Secondly, Taylor said Green was the only man who could get him to play lacrosse. Speaks to the respect Green had among various athletes.

And lastly, it was Green who kept coaching Taylor up on the finer points of the game, which clearly helped mold him into the grand player we know of now.


upload_2020-5-10_16-1-46.png
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
I think a good starting point if you want to argue Green as a consensus top 15 coach/strong top 10 candidate* would be to compare his accomplishments in detail to Tommy Gorman's.

*IMO, he has no chance for my top 6, which would mean beating out Hap Day or Al Arbour.

To be frank, I don't think there is any comparison to be made to Gorman at this point.

One, Green coached longer which means something given the tenure of coaches in the early era seemed to have volatile shelf lives.

Two, his record across the board is superior IMO.

Three, Green's innovations and contributions as a coach predate Gorman. Given Gorman learned directly from Green as well, and didn't better the record of Green, I don't see much of an argument for Gorman.

The only argument one might try and make is that Gorman won with underdog teams and my counter would be that Green was the man building the teams he coached. He was clearly the best judge of talent in his day, not just in an overall sense but knowing where to place players to maximize effectiveness.

As I stated earlier in the thread, Green has all the big boxes checked.
  • Very favorable wins/losses record.
  • Major contributions as it pertains to scheme and tactics. Early era double defense system and kitty bar the door in the 20's, ie, the neutral zone trap. Using different combinations to check players. Using wings on the their offside to check specific players. Advanced scouting and scheming.
  • Major accomplishments related to talent evaluation and ability to coach players up (Cyclone Taylor, Darragh, Kerr, Clancy, etc).
  • Major contributions to the importance of player conditioning and this focus played a pivotal role in Ottawa's success.
  • Large amount (especially considering the time we're talking about) of peer/player praise. Both pre and post death.
  • Called, more than once, the best hockey coach in Canada.

Really, the only thing one can knock Green on is he was an early coach coach and I'm perfectly fine not giving him the same credit for winning in 1911 vs Punch Imach besting Toe Blake head to head, three times, in the 60's. However, the big springboard for me was the sheer volume of contributions Green made beyond just "cheer leading" his team to victory. And his coaching record, for the time period is vastly better than any of his peers. He simply outperformed everyone by a mile.

Maybe it's just me but his defensive schemes and tactics were revolutionary for the game of hockey and they certainly were a catalyst for further coaches to expand on and have major successes using defensive minded hockey.

I mean the league literally made it a point to make that specific style of play obsolete which speaks volumes to me. The man came in twice, at two distinctly different times and won a SC in his first year with the same rosters he inherited, especially in the 1920 season. Look at the Sens in 17-18 and 18-19. Absolutely stacked rosters. In 17-18 Eddie Gerard coached the team to a 9-13 record. The next season Alf Smith went 12-6 and lost in the SCF 4 games to 1. Green comes in, goes 19-5 and wins the Cup in a really fantastic 5 game series vs Seattle that went the distance. Then in 1921 he goes back to back, again winning a 5 game thriller vs a really strong Vancouver team. 1922, strong regular season but Toronto upsets them. Happens. Wins 3 in 4 years the following season.

The Sprague Cleghorn quote when he was playing for Montreal really stuck with me. Same for King Clancy/Jack Darragh speaking about Green and the impact he had on their careers, after he died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,903
136,979
Bojangles Parking Lot
@tarheelhockey

Found this GEM by dumb luck when beginning to reconstruct Hamby Shore's assist record: Green's stock keeps on climbing, up, up, up.

17 Jan 1910, Page 12 - The Ottawa Journal at Newspapers.com

Jan 1910:

Amazing overview of the style of hockey Ottawa plays under Green and how it helped them dominate the league at this time


View attachment 347433

Thats a REALLY good find. Not only for our knowledge of Green, but also to help pinpoint the emergence of true “systems” play in the hockey sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
Thats a REALLY good find. Not only for our knowledge of Green, but also to help pinpoint the emergence of true “systems” play in the hockey sense.

Absolutely. The 2nd part is extremely important.

I had my hunch as I've now read basically every game report from the original Silver Seven days (03-06) and beyond. Alf Smith was indeed the coach for one. I found at least 3 specific mentions of this and one specifically praised Smith for his coaching of the Ottawa players. But you don't see this kind of intricate description of tactics and team play being used while the rest of the league was behind the curve so to speak.

IMO, having read essentially the entire decade of the Ottawa Senators in both the Journal and Citizen, there is no doubt Alf Smith coached the team from 1901 through 1907-08. Green was for sure, the trainer in 1900-01 and then retired after the 1902-03 season. I don't believe he was the trainer between 04-06 as previously thought as i never found a mention of him again until he then became coach before the start of the 1908-09 season and the rest is history.

Given he came to Ottawa the same year Alf Smith did, trained (physically) the players and then was the choice to take the baton from Smith in 08-09, I think Green likely was learning/assisting in coaching the team as Smith was also pulling double duty as a player. It's not conclusive but given Green hit the ground running and dominated the league in his first run, leads me to believe he was doing more than just rubbing players down in 01-03.

I need more time to really take in everything Green contributed beyond win/losses as it's a significant amount. People marvel over the Patrick's/Blake's/Bowman's/Shero's and to me, given the timeline and most of what's been found pre-dates every other coach already known, Green seems like he absolutely belongs in that same class.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
18,763
7,791
Oblivion Express
7 Feb 1910, 8 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com
  • Forwards covering up/checking back when the D paring of Lake/Shore rushed was a strong point in favor of Ottawa. You can see the impact of this today when D pinch and a F rotates high to cover up. 110 years of hockey evolution traced back to roughly this point.
  • Again, these are specific mentions of schematics that were a big reason why Ottawa dominated much of the league play while Green coached.

upload_2020-5-30_21-8-23.png
 

19781999

Registered User
Apr 15, 2022
71
22
FLORIDA
Don't forget that Pete Green won 4 Stanley Cups as a trainer for Ottawa, before winning 6 as Head Coach for Ottawa. 10 Stanley Cup championships with Ottawa and he's still not in the Hockey Hall of Fame. This is ridiculous! Plus, in the 1940s they were inducting like 10 to 20 people each year, and not once did Pete Green cross their minds!
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->