Gillis' Line in the Sand

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Meds » Fri Apr 04, 2014 12:45 pm

Committee decision can just mean majority rule.....or the king and his councilors hashed it out and the king told them where to go shit and so as a committee they done did as bid.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:10 pm

Well I am saying he came around but reluctantly. I don't know if saying he was forced is correct. I do think that it is group think all the way with ownership being very involved. I believe he always felt that in he end he would get the final say. I'm just not sure that is true and I think that is what he is finding out. In the end perhaps he could not come up with enough compelling reasons to not hire Torts. Owners wanted him and MG couldn't show them why he was not the right choice. That's my belief in all of this.

The owners write the cheques. They have every right to give him a budget and expect that he not only stay cap compliant but that his salaries don't exceed the budget. They have every right to not want to pay for long term buyouts. To me that is not meddling, that's business. The meddling comes IMO with involvement in trades, drafting, coach hires and the like. But when it comes to the fiancé end of things the club is no different from any other business.

But the increased value of the franchise alone should make them wNt to back off. But they will make their quota for seasons ticket sales again and the money side will be fine.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby herb » Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:44 pm

I have no problem with the ownership being involved in decision making. I would expect that Gillis works with ownership on a weekly if not daily basis on certain issues.

I can also understand ownership not wanting to buy out the $33.86M left on Luongo's contract. Fuck, I wouldn't want to do that either, no matter how much money the team makes. If those Forbes estimates are anywhere near correct, that kind of cash is a year or more of profit out the window. No wanting to do that doesn't make them cheap or meddling.

If the owners are heavily involved in coaching and player/personnel decisions, well to me that gets into meddling territory. They should be involved in the business side of things. But the personnel stuff, IMO that's why you hire management. They certainly have the right to do that as owners, but the management team should be better equipped to make those types of decisions.
User avatar
herb
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Meds » Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:53 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:The meddling comes IMO with involvement in trades, drafting, coach hires and the like. But when it comes to the fiancé end of things the club is no different from any other business.


Well shit.....someone's head is bound to roll if someone is meddling with someone else's fiance!!! You just don't pull shit like that off! :P
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3191
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby BurningBeard » Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:58 pm

Meds wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:The meddling comes IMO with involvement in trades, drafting, coach hires and the like. But when it comes to the fiancé end of things the club is no different from any other business.


Well shit.....someone's head is bound to roll if someone is meddling with someone else's fiance!!! You just don't pull shit like that off! :P

Unless you're ODB - then you encourage it. :thumbs:
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.
User avatar
BurningBeard
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Apr 04, 2014 2:09 pm

Meds wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:The meddling comes IMO with involvement in trades, drafting, coach hires and the like. But when it comes to the fiancé end of things the club is no different from any other business.


Well shit.....someone's head is bound to roll if someone is meddling with someone else's fiance!!! You just don't pull shit like that off! :P



Damn auto correct on this stupid iPad!!
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Todd Bersnoozi » Fri Apr 04, 2014 4:01 pm

Wow, I'm really surprised Gillis had the ballz to stand up for himself. I thot he didn't mind being a puppet and the yes man. :lol: That being said, I think the problems with the team runs deeper than just style of play. If our guys played a more offensive style brand of hockey and if they didn't get all the injuries, we're probably in better shape in securing one of those final playoff spots; however, we still wouldn't be able to compete against some of the top dawgs out there. The problem is simply the core is not good enuff anymore as they are getting too old and cannot perform at high lvls. It's probably a good thing that all this happened, it makes ownership, management and the fans evaulate the team with more scrutiny. God knows we need a good draft pick and hopefully we get another good young player to add to our prospect base. #tankittorts :P

Edit: Aqua-man should just make himself the GM and do whatever the fuck he wants. :lol:
Last edited by Todd Bersnoozi on Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Todd Bersnoozi
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1210
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Hockey Widow » Fri Apr 04, 2014 4:15 pm

^^^^

Good point. We are all up in arms because we are going to miss the playoffs. Would we be this upset if we did but tanked round one? To some extent yes. But you are right, this season makes everyone take notice and deal with the issues that have kept us from getting back to the success if 2011.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Fri Apr 04, 2014 6:20 pm

BurningBeard wrote:Unless you're ODB - then you encourage it. :thumbs:


Old Dirty Boozer - remember the name.
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3044
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby paddy » Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:01 am

RoyalDude wrote:Torts was the Aqualinis guy

John Stevens was Gillis guy

Gillis bended, buying into the idea that maybe a boot camp Mike Keenan style coach in Torts could be the match to light a fire under this veteran groups behinds. It has failed miserably. This team will never be the big bad bruins, that takes years to build that kind of team in this day and age of building a certain style of team in the NHL. You work with what you have and Torts isn't the right coach for this group. I have faith that the Aqualinis see this and have maybe, the 3 spoiled brats have finally learned to stop fucking meddling with the GMs vision.

Eakins was never gonna get the job


Don't go soft on the GM now Pacific Blue... Torts isn't coming back that's a fact but this GM shouldn't either...
whether you like it or don't like it learn to live with it because its the best thing going today...
paddy
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:42 am
Location: kits

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Mondi » Sat Apr 05, 2014 11:42 am

So much talk about Torts, who hired him, his impact on the tea, his outbursts...etc.

What about the fact that Twins are 33. Kesler hasn't been the same since 2011. We have zero second line wingers. Edler has had an awful season. We have no PP quarterback...etc...etc...etc.

The problems with this team are primarily player personnel...not coaching.
User avatar
Mondi
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 9:02 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby black ace » Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:33 pm

There are indeed lots of problems with this team but including poor drafting, poor player development system, indecision on transactions, tougher schedule this year, cap management, players not suited for Torts system etc etc.

Torts was a Aquilini hire. Gillis wanted Stevens. Thats been rumored since the beginning and if you look at all the signs its likely the truth.

The problems between Gillis and Torts didnt just start. If you look back to when he came back from suspension he did an interview where he stated something to the effect of he didnt have the right players to play his system. Then you have ownership pledging to Luo that he is the future in our goal but then Torts goes with Lack in the heritage game. Gillis says the trade was in the works but Torts and Luo's agent say it wasnt. Gillis later admits it wasnt.

I heard the interview with Gillis and it sounded to me like he will be back but will be firing Torts and bringing in a coach more suited to a puck possession game. When he said basically every player on the team has underachieved and there is a reason for it you know that the system didnt suit the players and Gillis made no attempt (other than calling up guys like Lain and Archibald before Jensen) to get players more suited for Torts system. Torts basically said in his rebuttal yesterday that his system works and he aint going to change it.

I think Gillis will be brought back and given a year or 2 to try and retool but the way Gillis makes trades (slooooowly) you wonder if he will be able to turn the ship around before the Sedin's totally disappear.
2011 BC Sports Central CFL Pool Champion
black ace
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 6:20 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Diehard1 » Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:11 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:I tend to agree with the Dude. Eakins was not getting the job here. Wasn't Torts the only guy called back for a second interview? Didn't Torts says is was weird being in an interview like that? Didn't word leak out that MG was more impressed after the first interview than he thought he would be? My sense is MG wanted that second interview because of the pressure that was being put on him to hire Torts. He wasn't convinced at first and wanted a second chat. He came around but I think he reluctantly did so.


John Stevens had a second interview as well. I truly believe that Torts' dumb it down style couldn't be worse for this team. He either changes or he's gone, and I expect the latter is more likely.
Diehard1
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:48 am

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Hockey Widow » Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:39 pm

If Stevens is still available and still interested I would love if the Canucks cut ties with Torts, admitted their mistake and went in a new direction.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Gillis' Line in the Sand

Postby Puck » Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:05 am

The thought was that Torts' style might coax (or maybe wring?) another good season out of an aging group. It did not. Perhaps it's not a knee-jerk reaction to admit: experiment failed. Move on.
User avatar
Puck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: Victoria, BC

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: benivolent, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest