Confirmed with Link: Tortorella Won’t Return as Head Coach

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,085
24,009
Item #2: Tortorella nearly quit after 2019-20
Tortorella informed the Blue Jackets in late April that he was ready to move on from the organization after six seasons behind the bench. It became official, announced as a mutual parting of ways, last Monday.
The Athletic confirmed this week, however, that Tortorella tried to step down last offseason after the Blue Jackets were bounced from the bubble in Toronto following a qualifying-round win over Toronto and a first-round playoff loss to Tampa Bay. The veteran coach was reading the room and reading the tea leaves, realizing the direction of the club was heading was nothing close to what he thought they were building just two years earlier.
Two issues brought Tortorella back behind the bench for the final year of his contract, however.
  • The Blue Jackets wouldn’t fire him, which is to say they weren’t going to pay him the $2.5 million (per his contract) if he wasn’t coaching. They’d find other work for him to do within the organization for the final year, but at a lesser rate than $2.5 million. Well, the coach is a coach; that’s what he does. The coach is also human, so the money was important.
  • Blue Jackets captain Nick Foligno had lunch with Tortorella, during which he urged the coach to return for one last season to “finish what we started” after four straight playoff berths with the same cluster of veteran players. Tortorella may have a flammable temper, but he’s an old softy for personal appeals, and Foligno’s pitch worked.
It’s only fair to wonder how many regrets there were throughout this season, which was an awful one for the Blue Jackets.
Tortorella is looking for his next coaching job, GM Jarmo Kekalainen is looking for a new coach, and Foligno is in Toronto, getting ready to play for the Maple Leafs in the postseason.

Blue Jackets Sunday Gathering: Gerard Gallant's redemption, John Tortorella wanted to quit a year earlier
 
  • Like
Reactions: LJ7201

GoJackets1

Someday.
Aug 21, 2008
6,771
3,287
Montana
This irks me for a multitude of reasons. Question though. If Torts did just up and quit before this year, would he still have been due his salary? That's the part that confuses me, because it sounds like he didn't want to "quit", he wanted Jarmo to "fire" him so he could still get paid. Can't really blame ownership for not wanting to eat that cost during COVID.

Sucks to know that even the coach just didn't give a f*** this year, even though it was apparent that was the case. It also makes the PLD situation a bit weirder in my mind. As in, Torts, a now self-proclaimed lame duck coach, helping to expedite PLD's departure. Not that I think Torts was the reason that PLD wanted out, but if he was, this makes the whole situation just absolutely f***ed. Regardless of that though, Torts should have stayed out of matters dealing with the future of the franchise if he had already made it clear he was not in it anymore.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,196
28,669
What were the tea leaves he was reading? The Domi acquisition? What else?

Blame Nick all you want. Ownership getting extremely cheap isn't what you want to see.

I don't think that qualifies as especially cheap. Could Torts have simply quit and walked away from his contract? If he expected to just be paid for not working then I can think of a lot of organizations that wouldn't allow that.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,196
28,669
Sounds like we were screwed from day one of this past season. Coach didn't want to be here, Players didn't want to be here. Sort of makes sense when people like Pierre LeBrun were saying things about Tort's decision making wondering if he was trying to get fired.



Porty was the first to suggest it, long before Lebrun did, and was pilloried for the suggestion. I'm still not sure you could infer that he wanted to quit from the way he handled the benchings. Torts has never been shy about handling those things his way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MoeBartoli

CBJWerenski8

Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
Jun 13, 2009
42,085
24,009
I don’t think Torts sabotaged anything. He didn’t do anything any different this year than he did any other year here. If players thought he was sabotaging or doing anything other than his best, they wouldn’t have been so high on him and praising of him on the way out.
 

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,499
6,369
Porty was the first to suggest it, long before Lebrun did, and was pilloried for the suggestion. I'm still not sure you could infer that he wanted to quit from the way he handled the benchings. Torts has never been shy about handling those things his way.
His comment wasn't specifically about benching Laine but an accumulation of things. With that being said, if anyone has zero f*cks to give about their job they are more inclined to subconsciously do whatever they want because they have zero care about the consequences.

 
  • Like
Reactions: MoeBartoli

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,499
6,369
I don’t think Torts sabotaged anything. He didn’t do anything any different this year than he did any other year here. If players thought he was sabotaging or doing anything other than his best, they wouldn’t have been so high on him and praising of him on the way out.
I don't think he sabotaged anything on purpose but I do think he chose to things his way regardless of how management handled it. If they didn't like it it could accelerate his exit.

He saw a year ago his shelf life was up. It was obvious to many of us on here on the type of players Jarmo was obtaining and drafting and that a fit just wasn't here anymore.

I essentially fault ownership for being cheap and Jarmo (and probably Nick Foligno as well) for being hard headed and refusing to acknowledge the disconnect. They can try to justify it any way they want but it is real hard to be successful when those who lead don't have their heart in it. You could tell early on Torts didn't have his heart in it like in previous years once the season started going downhill.
 

JacketLife

Registered User
Aug 2, 2020
273
330
I don’t understand why any of this qualifies as management being “cheap.” Really, it’s Torts being after the money. He could have quit. But he wanted the money. Why should ownership have to pay him to not coach if it wasn’t their decision?
I have an assistant and if she were to quit, no way in hell I’m paying her not to work. That’s not cheap, just common sense.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,196
28,669
Actually you should be thanking Jarmo and Priest and the (effectively )absentee owner.

Could have settled with him for $1.5m to $1.75 m and been done with it. What a clown show:laugh:

You would pay a severance to a quitter, even though they weren't entitled to anything?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cyclones Rock

Registered User
Jun 12, 2008
10,484
6,370
You would pay a severance to a quitter, even though they weren't entitled to anything?

Torts a quitter? You're absurd.

He saw the writing on the wall. It's called a negotiated settlement. It happens all the time in the real world.

Torts brought more to this franchise than any other management person in its history. He wasn't paid in the upper echelon of coaching salaries. A non brain dead organization would have recognized that his time was up and looked at it as payment for services rendered. A $1.5 million settlement would have amounted to roughly 1% of revenues. You must not have any business experience.
 
Last edited:

KJ Dangler

Registered User
Oct 21, 2006
8,277
4,943
Columbus
Torts was basically stealing a paycheck this year . If he didn’t want to be there have one of those honest conversations he always talks about with Jarmo .
 

Iron Balls McGinty

Registered User
Aug 5, 2005
8,499
6,369
Torts a quitter? You're absurd.

He saw the writing on the wall. It's called a negotiated settlement. It happens all the time in the real world.

Torts brought more to this franchise than any other management person in its history. He wasn't paid in the upper echelon of coaching salaries. A non brain dead organization would have recognized that his time was up and looked at it as payment for services rendered. A $1.5 million settlement would have amounted to roughly 1% of revenues. You must not have any business experience.

1% in a Covid year or a regular year because I'm pretty sure there is a big difference in professional sports with minimal to no fans.
 

Monstershockey

Registered User
Sponsor
Dec 31, 2017
2,792
3,053
All you guys ripping Torts, how do you know when he tried to step down, it wasn't the club telling him no. Nobody knows the full story. The guy just finished his contract. It's what the club wanted, or they would have just fired him. They wanted to wait another year for a new coach. Maybe because the guy they wanted wasn't available, or maybe they were watching their money and didn't want to commit a higher salary this year. Could be any reason. I'm sure some of us in the same situation would finish out the contract and move on. Some are just looking for another reason to bash the guy.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->