Ron Wilson fired

[Crowned]

All of what you're saying is irrelevant in this situation. The Leafs are a young, rebuilding team. Ask the youth in the AHL what they think about Eakins.

- He's spent 3 years as the head coach of the Marlies
- Spent 3 years as an assistant with the Marlies
- Was an assistant with the Leafs
- Was the Leafs director of player development
- The Marlies currently have the 2nd lowest G.A in the AHL
- One of the best PK's in the league
- Well liked, and ridiculously respected in the dressing room.

Do you think Carlysle's personality is any different than Wilson's? They're very similar, and you'll come to see that. He's terrible in the media, he's stuck in his ways like Wilson was, he completely lost the Ducks dressing room this year, he's not well liked amongst his players, and his relationship with Lupul is sour as well.

The point of another coach is to bring something new to the dressing room, I don't see that with Carlysle.

His monetary value in the contract is irrelevant. You can't go around firing coaches every year to bring someone new in every year. Do you think they'll have anyone interested should they fire Carlysle next year?

So the only credential you listed which is relevant to NHL experience was the fact Eakins was an NHL assistant at one point, on a terrible leafs team. What happened the last time we promoted our AHL coach after a good year coaching the Marlies? Burke himself has said Eakins was not ready for the 'pirhannas' that this team and market is.

So having a coach who's philosophy and history with teams does not involve Wilson's run and gun system, porous defense is not a suitable change in itself? Or what about the fact he's won a cup already. Sure, the ducks team that he won with were great on paper, but they beat a great Ottawa Senators team who many analysts (the majority of which) had pegged to win the cup that year. Those teams were defensively responsible, and accountable, all of Carlysle's team were strong 2 way and their forwards backchecked. Hell, he even got an aging Selanne to buy into his system.

Speak to a ducks fan of whether you think he is a terrible coach, and they wouldn't overly criticize him. In fact, the consensus is he was a very good coach, he's hard on players but if you play well, you will love playing for him. Get in his dog house, and you will hate it. But how is that any different than a coach like Torts has done over his career? Am I the only leafs fan tired of Ron Wilson and his preferntial treatment to players like Phaneuf, who consisntely got minutes despite being down right terrible at times? And clearly, he's not as bad as it seemed considering Selanne extended numerous times in his tenure, and Getzlaf and Perry both signed extremely favourable deals to stay with the Ducks. Yes, he's tough and his team eventually tuned him out, or so it seemed. But every coach has a shelf life and he already accomplished what our team has never done since 67, win a cup. Not to mention the Ducks were perrenial slow starters for a few years now, and this year is no different, but he always had his team peaking when it mattered, in the playoffs.

Yes, I do think Carlysle is completely different than Wilson in terms of personaility. Not only has Wilson said several times in his tenure here that was softer on players here, but Burke himself said in his presser that Wilson was a players coach and not nearly as "tough" as he wanted..... a far cry from the perception he's garnered over the years from the media and fans alike. How much of that has to do with his repoire with the media, I'm not sure, but whether the coach is good with the media or not isn't a prerequisite to being a good coach. Nor do I really care, I just want this team to win and get a cup. The only thing in common between Carlysle and Wilson are they are both terrible charismatic coaches that will tune out the media after a long enough time. In terms of coaching philosophies, they are completely different.

The only concern I have is the Lupul situation, but Carlysle has already admitted he was wrong.

They're will always be coaches interested in the Leafs coaching job, and elite ones at that. We haven't won a cup for over 4 decades yet a position with this team is still as desireable as it comes. Kids from the GTA still grow up wanting to play for the leafs. Who would have thought Burke would have left Anahiem to inherit this peice of garbage team at the time? Finding a coach for the Toronto Maple Leafs will never be a problem. They can't get any worst than they have already been, the Ballard Era, the JFJ era, but this is still the hockey capital of the world and that won't change.

You can refer to Carlysle's prior success all you'd like. In our particular situation, with the youth we currently have, and the youth coming through the Marlies...he isn't a good fit. He'd be a wonderful fit with an established roster, but his coaching style does not relate at all to youth and rookies.

What happened the last time the Leafs had 2 young promising coaches itching to coach this team, and were forced to let them go? Their names are Marc Crawford, and Joel Quenneville. They have both won Stanley Cups.

Dallas Eakins would have had Scott Gordon on his side, who has a plethora or coaching experience in the NHL and AHL. He also has Greg Cronin (who I've met prior to his NHL days), who is a fantastic hockey mind. The MLSE could've opened their wallets and hired an experienced coach to assist Eakins (much like they did today for Carlysle).

You're right in the sense that Carlysle is an experienced coach, I'm not disputing that. He had a great career with Anaheim, I'm not disputing that. But if you truly think that he's the right fit in a young dressing room, I'm going to disagree every day of the week. You keep referring to Tortarella in New York, who is a poor example to display success. He's got one Stanley Cup win with Tampa (in his 4th year coaching, with an unbelieveable roster) and a bunch of playoff exits. He lost in the 1st round last year, missed the playoffs the year before, and lost in the 1st round the year he took over in New York. In 10 years of coaching, he's made it out of the 2nd round once.

[Deron05]

Couldnt agree more^^^^

[andyo]

You can refer to Carlysle's prior success all you'd like. In our particular situation, with the youth we currently have, and the youth coming through the Marlies...he isn't a good fit. He'd be a wonderful fit with an established roster, but his coaching style does not relate at all to youth and rookies.

What happened the last time the Leafs had 2 young promising coaches itching to coach this team, and were forced to let them go? Their names are Marc Crawford, and Joel Quenneville. They have both won Stanley Cups.

Dallas Eakins would have had Scott Gordon on his side, who has a plethora or coaching experience in the NHL and AHL. He also has Greg Cronin (who I've met prior to his NHL days), who is a fantastic hockey mind. The MLSE could've opened their wallets and hired an experienced coach to assist Eakins (much like they did today for Carlysle).

You're right in the sense that Carlysle is an experienced coach, I'm not disputing that. He had a great career with Anaheim, I'm not disputing that. But if you truly think that he's the right fit in a young dressing room, I'm going to disagree every day of the week. You keep referring to Tortarella in New York, who is a poor example to display success. He's got one Stanley Cup win with Tampa (in his 4th year coaching, with an unbelieveable roster) and a bunch of playoff exits. He lost in the 1st round last year, missed the playoffs the year before, and lost in the 1st round the year he took over in New York. In 10 years of coaching, he's made it out of the 2nd round once.

So Tort is a bad example of success because he won the cup with an unbelievable roster? How is that any different than Quenville and Crawford's teams that won the cup. Did anyone predict Tampa to win the cup that year, their roster wasn't nearly as stacked as you made it sound. Did anyone predict the NYR team to be the tops of the east with the team they have on paper, and their top free agent signing playing on the 4th line?Quenville and Crawford didn't find immediate success in their respective clubs right away either. In the case of Crwaford, he won a cup in his second stint with a team, and that Avs roster was 10-fold more stacked than the lightning roster you named. Since then, he's been a journeymen coach having trouble finding success. What about Quenville? Similar story, won a cup with his third team.

Guess who won the cup with his first stint with a team upon being promoted? That's right, Randy Calysle. If you truly want a culture change, as has been noted several times internally and by media members like Roenick, we need a hard ass that will implement a defensively responsible system and has a winning pedigree. Eakins, much like Wilson is a players coach and implements a similar philosophy with his Marlies team. While I agree he's been extremely successful as the Marlies coach, I do not think he is a better candidate than Carlysle.

[Secueritae]

What a waste, if only Burke waited until the end of the season to extend him.
Right after he was extended the Leafs went downhill, probably he was just chilling around in practises thinking he was safe since he just got extended.

[Crowned]

You can refer to Carlysle's prior success all you'd like. In our particular situation, with the youth we currently have, and the youth coming through the Marlies...he isn't a good fit. He'd be a wonderful fit with an established roster, but his coaching style does not relate at all to youth and rookies.

What happened the last time the Leafs had 2 young promising coaches itching to coach this team, and were forced to let them go? Their names are Marc Crawford, and Joel Quenneville. They have both won Stanley Cups.

Dallas Eakins would have had Scott Gordon on his side, who has a plethora or coaching experience in the NHL and AHL. He also has Greg Cronin (who I've met prior to his NHL days), who is a fantastic hockey mind. The MLSE could've opened their wallets and hired an experienced coach to assist Eakins (much like they did today for Carlysle).

You're right in the sense that Carlysle is an experienced coach, I'm not disputing that. He had a great career with Anaheim, I'm not disputing that. But if you truly think that he's the right fit in a young dressing room, I'm going to disagree every day of the week. You keep referring to Tortarella in New York, who is a poor example to display success. He's got one Stanley Cup win with Tampa (in his 4th year coaching, with an unbelieveable roster) and a bunch of playoff exits. He lost in the 1st round last year, missed the playoffs the year before, and lost in the 1st round the year he took over in New York. In 10 years of coaching, he's made it out of the 2nd round once.

So Tort is a bad example of success because he won the cup with an unbelievable roster? How is that any different than Quenville and Crawford's teams that won the cup. Did anyone predict Tampa to win the cup that year, their roster wasn't nearly as stacked as you made it sound. Did anyone predict the NYR team to be the tops of the east with the team they have on paper, and their top free agent signing playing on the 4th line?Quenville and Crawford didn't find immediate success in their respective clubs right away either. In the case of Crwaford, he won a cup in his second stint with a team, and that Avs roster was 10-fold more stacked than the lightning roster you named. Since then, he's been a journeymen coach having trouble finding success. What about Quenville? Similar story, won a cup with his third team.

Guess who won the cup with his first stint with a team upon being promoted? That's right, Randy Calysle. If you truly want a culture change, as has been noted several times internally and by media members like Roenick, we need a hard ass that will implement a defensively responsible system and has a winning pedigree. Eakins, much like Wilson is a players coach and implements a similar philosophy with his Marlies team. While I agree he's been extremely successful as the Marlies coach, I do not think he is a better candidate than Carlysle.

If you think a hard nosed, non-player type coach is what's best for the youngest team in the NHL...then that's your opinion.

I really don't understand why you continue to comment about Eakin's lack of defensive system. He's got the 2nd lowest G.A in the AHL, and one of the best PK's in the AHL. Do you listen to the radio, and hear "he plays a run and gun system", and conclude that he's not a defensively sound coach? Have you actually sat down at watched a series of games this season with the Marlies? I don't know how you can conclude that he isn't a capable coach when you know nothing about him.

[andyo]

You can refer to Carlysle's prior success all you'd like. In our particular situation, with the youth we currently have, and the youth coming through the Marlies...he isn't a good fit. He'd be a wonderful fit with an established roster, but his coaching style does not relate at all to youth and rookies.

What happened the last time the Leafs had 2 young promising coaches itching to coach this team, and were forced to let them go? Their names are Marc Crawford, and Joel Quenneville. They have both won Stanley Cups.

Dallas Eakins would have had Scott Gordon on his side, who has a plethora or coaching experience in the NHL and AHL. He also has Greg Cronin (who I've met prior to his NHL days), who is a fantastic hockey mind. The MLSE could've opened their wallets and hired an experienced coach to assist Eakins (much like they did today for Carlysle).

You're right in the sense that Carlysle is an experienced coach, I'm not disputing that. He had a great career with Anaheim, I'm not disputing that. But if you truly think that he's the right fit in a young dressing room, I'm going to disagree every day of the week. You keep referring to Tortarella in New York, who is a poor example to display success. He's got one Stanley Cup win with Tampa (in his 4th year coaching, with an unbelieveable roster) and a bunch of playoff exits. He lost in the 1st round last year, missed the playoffs the year before, and lost in the 1st round the year he took over in New York. In 10 years of coaching, he's made it out of the 2nd round once.

So Tort is a bad example of success because he won the cup with an unbelievable roster? How is that any different than Quenville and Crawford's teams that won the cup. Did anyone predict Tampa to win the cup that year, their roster wasn't nearly as stacked as you made it sound. Did anyone predict the NYR team to be the tops of the east with the team they have on paper, and their top free agent signing playing on the 4th line?Quenville and Crawford didn't find immediate success in their respective clubs right away either. In the case of Crwaford, he won a cup in his second stint with a team, and that Avs roster was 10-fold more stacked than the lightning roster you named. Since then, he's been a journeymen coach having trouble finding success. What about Quenville? Similar story, won a cup with his third team.

Guess who won the cup with his first stint with a team upon being promoted? That's right, Randy Calysle. If you truly want a culture change, as has been noted several times internally and by media members like Roenick, we need a hard ass that will implement a defensively responsible system and has a winning pedigree. Eakins, much like Wilson is a players coach and implements a similar philosophy with his Marlies team. While I agree he's been extremely successful as the Marlies coach, I do not think he is a better candidate than Carlysle.

If you think a hard nosed, non-player type coach is what's best for the youngest team in the NHL...then that's your opinion.

I really don't understand why you continue to comment about Eakin's lack of defensive system. He's got the 2nd lowest G.A in the AHL, and one of the best PK's in the AHL. Do you listen to the radio, and hear "he plays a run and gun system", and conclude that he's not a defensively sound coach? Have you actually sat down at watched a series of games this season with the Marlies? I don't know how you can conclude that he isn't a capable coach when you know nothing about him.

He does have one of the best PK's in the league, I'm not arguing against that. In fact, I think whether we hired Eakins or Carlysle, both would have been clear upgrades over Wilson. While I wouldn't mind Eakins being hired, I do think Carlysle is the better choice for this franchise.

I'm well aware Eakins has one of the best PK's in the AHL but being a defensively responsible coach at the NHL level is another thing. Carlysle has proven that, that's the difference here. Look at how Beauchemin fared in Toronto versus Anaheim, some of it may be attributed to change of system more than a change of scenery. I'm not sure when I implied Eakins was a poor defensive coach, but sorry if you interpreted it that way. What's wrong with the listening to the media with team access or self qualitative observation? Is someone on a message suddenly bringing more credentials than either? I don't think you need to know a particular player/coach/athlete within pro sports to to formulate an opinion. That's exactly what message board are for.

[whysoserious]

I'm perfectly fine with the hiring of Carlisle. If I was Burke, I would have gone in a different direction but that's me. I would have grabbed a couple of those first rounders, fired Wilson and brought in Eakins. Brought up Colborne and Kadri and seen what Eakins could do. Told him basically this was a trial run for him and we'll see about next year, he could continue as head coach or we may look for someone more proven at the NHL level and allow him to continue at the AHL level to develop.

But, everyone clamouring for Eakins, the guy really hasn't proven anything to say outright that he deserved the shot and using Crawford/Quenneville as examples is just bad. Carlisle's also proven at the NHL level.

And I do believe that this team does need someone who's going to show them some tough love. Wilson talked like that but acted differently. You can say it's not the best with a young team, but there seems to be some sense of entitlement with certain players and now you're gonna have to earn it. Play well and you'll get more opportunitiies. It was one game, but it was nice seeing Frattin have success and that line getting more time.

[Crowned]

But, everyone clamouring for Eakins, the guy really hasn't proven anything to say outright that he deserved the shot and using Crawford/Quenneville as examples is just bad. Carlisle's also proven at the NHL level.

And I do believe that this team does need someone who's going to show them some tough love. Wilson talked like that but acted differently. You can say it's not the best with a young team, but there seems to be some sense of entitlement with certain players and now you're gonna have to earn it. Play well and you'll get more opportunitiies. It was one game, but it was nice seeing Frattin have success and that line getting more time.

Why is using Crawford and Quenneville as examples bad? They were both up and coming coaches stuck in the Marlies, and both left with success elsewhere. Is that not the same situation Eakins is in? A young, good hockey mind that won't get a shot with the Leafs, and will leave in the next year or two to pursue a job elsewhere? Sounds like the same situation to me.

Players developing are going to make mistakes, and getting called out for those mistakes through 'tough love' and 'aggressive coaching' simply won't respond to it. When Anaheim started poorly this season, he showed his 'tough love' and completely lost the dressing room.

[Crowned]

He does have one of the best PK's in the league, I'm not arguing against that. In fact, I think whether we hired Eakins or Carlysle, both would have been clear upgrades over Wilson. While I wouldn't mind Eakins being hired, I do think Carlysle is the better choice for this franchise.

I'm well aware Eakins has one of the best PK's in the AHL but being a defensively responsible coach at the NHL level is another thing. Carlysle has proven that, that's the difference here. Look at how Beauchemin fared in Toronto versus Anaheim, some of it may be attributed to change of system more than a change of scenery. I'm not sure when I implied Eakins was a poor defensive coach, but sorry if you interpreted it that way. What's wrong with the listening to the media with team access or self qualitative observation? Is someone on a message suddenly bringing more credentials than either? I don't think you need to know a particular player/coach/athlete within pro sports to to formulate an opinion. That's exactly what message board are for.

I'm not disputing that he isn't a good coach. He's a very good coach. I just don't think he's a right fit for this situation through his coaching methods. If the team was in a playoff spot, with a couple of vets he could rely on to communicate what he's trying to accomplish, then it'd be entirely different.

I just think Eakins would have been a great fit here with his relationship with the youth in the organization. Now would be a better time than any to bring up a young inexperienced coach. The season is close to being a wash, and expectations are at a season low. Not many are expecting this team to make the playoffs anymore, I really don't think he would've had a difficult time adjusting to the media.

[whysoserious]

Why is using Crawford and Quenneville as examples bad? They were both up and coming coaches stuck in the Marlies, and both left with success elsewhere. Is that not the same situation Eakins is in? A young, good hockey mind that won't get a shot with the Leafs, and will leave in the next year or two to pursue a job elsewhere? Sounds like the same situation to me.

Players developing are going to make mistakes, and getting called out for those mistakes through 'tough love' and 'aggressive coaching' simply won't respond to it. When Anaheim started poorly this season, he showed his 'tough love' and completely lost the dressing room.

Because there is no guarantee that Eakins will have the same success as Crawford/Quenneville should he make the jump. I'm not knocking Eakins, I think he's a good young coach with a lot of promise and I would have taken a flyer on him for 18 games to see what he can do. But that doesn't discredit the fact that Carlyle is a coach with NHL experience and proven to be a winner. The same tough love that got him in trouble this season was the same tough love that a young Corey Perry and Getzlaf responded to. So saying young players don't respond to that is wrong too. Some don't, some do. I personally think the guys on this big club need some accountability and tough love. It's not like everyone on the big club is young with no NHL experence, these guys, for the most part have been in the NHL several seasons and could use some accountability.

[Crowned]

Why is using Crawford and Quenneville as examples bad? They were both up and coming coaches stuck in the Marlies, and both left with success elsewhere. Is that not the same situation Eakins is in? A young, good hockey mind that won't get a shot with the Leafs, and will leave in the next year or two to pursue a job elsewhere? Sounds like the same situation to me.

Players developing are going to make mistakes, and getting called out for those mistakes through 'tough love' and 'aggressive coaching' simply won't respond to it. When Anaheim started poorly this season, he showed his 'tough love' and completely lost the dressing room.

Because there is no guarantee that Eakins will have the same success as Crawford/Quenneville should he make the jump. I'm not knocking Eakins, I think he's a good young coach with a lot of promise and I would have taken a flyer on him for 18 games to see what he can do. But that doesn't discredit the fact that Carlyle is a coach with NHL experience and proven to be a winner. The same tough love that got him in trouble this season was the same tough love that a young Corey Perry and Getzlaf responded to. So saying young players don't respond to that is wrong too. Some don't, some do. I personally think the guys on this big club need some accountability and tough love. It's not like everyone on the big club is young with no NHL experence, these guys, for the most part have been in the NHL several seasons and could use some accountability.

Corey Perry and Getzlaf also had veterans like Chris Pronger, Teemu Selanne, Scott Niedermayer, Todd Marchant, Sean O'Donnell, Rob Niedermayer, Mathieu Schneider and Doug Weight to ease them into the league. Could you name 1 vet on the Leafs current roster with any sort of leadership that's on par with the names listed above?

[Crowned]

In addition, it was Randy Carlysle's 2nd NHL season where he had won the Stanley Cup. He inherited quite the roster. He's made it out of the first round of the playoffs once since the Stanley Cup win. When he was hired, he had 2 seasons as an assistant in the NHL, and prior to that, spent 5 years coaching in the IHL.

Since losing his veterans, and going with youth...review the Ducks rosters after Pronger and co left, and let me know how successful he was.

[andyo]

But you can't say that every team was stacked to discredit a coach. Or else I could use the same illogical argument to argue against Quenville's cup wins and Crawford's...or any cup team for that matter. Similarily, I could bring up Paul Maurice and his success at the AHL level not translating to the NHL. And if we were to attribute the success of either coach, we have to consider their failures with the teams they started with...Only to find success later on, Quenville's 3rd team and Crawford's 2nd team (not in the new NHL) whom has had trouble finding a job ever since. Carlysle won a cup on his first team, and you could argue that his team was great but he did beat a stacked Ottawa Senators team that the majority of analysts had winning the cup that year.

Anyways, perhaps Eakins could have done a better job but we should at least give Carlysle the benefit of the doubt before we are quick to judge. The way I see it, Carlysle is a proven commodity. I will be the first to criticize his moves if he falters but we should at least give him a chance to show if he's capable. Just like Eakins, I think whether or not he makes the playoffs this season is irrelevant, he should at least get a training camp/the majority of a NHL season under his belt before we make conclusions. In fact, I hope we falter for the remaining 17 games or so as to get a higher pick in this year's draft.

[Crowned]

But you can't say that every team was stacked to discredit a coach. Or else I could use the same illogical argument to argue against Quenville's cup wins and Crawford's...or any cup team for that matter. Similarily, I could bring up Paul Maurice and his success at the AHL level not translating to the NHL. And if we were to attribute the success of either coach, we have to consider their failures with the teams they started with...Only to find success later on, Quenville's 3rd team and Crawford's 2nd team (not in the new NHL) whom has had trouble finding a job ever since. Carlysle won a cup on his first team, and you could argue that his team was great but he did beat a stacked Ottawa Senators team that the majority of analysts had winning the cup that year.

Anyways, perhaps Eakins could have done a better job but we should at least give Carlysle the benefit of the doubt before we are quick to judge. The way I see it, Carlysle is a proven commodity. I will be the first to criticize his moves if he falters but we should at least give him a chance to show if he's capable. Just like Eakins, I think whether or not he makes the playoffs this season is irrelevant, he should at least get a training camp/the majority of a NHL season under his belt before we make conclusions. In fact, I hope we falter for the remaining 17 games or so as to get a higher pick in this year's draft.

Horrible example. Have you seen the rosters he's coached? The year he was fired in Carolina, Sean Hill (career 62 goals in 800+ games) was the 4th leading scorer. The year he was fired in Toronto, we had Kris Newbury, Johl Pohl and Simon Ganache play in games with us (Vesa Toskala was tied in scoring with all 3 of them, and Newbury and Pohl played over 30 games that season). He still managed to put up 460 career wins with beyond mediocre teams in his career, that's not much of a failure in this league.

Again, I'm not comparing Quenneville and Crawford to Carlysle, you continue to bring those names up. I simply said, the last time we passed up on young coaches from the Marlies, that's what happened.

...Marc Crawford's 2nd team? They moved the entire franchise, it was the same team he won the Stanley Cup with. His first season coaching, after getting passed up by the Leafs resulted in a 30-13-5 record in 48 games. His 2nd season? A stanley cup. From 1994-2006, he missed the playoffs 3 times (one of which was a 92 point season).

[sanity]

I actually liked Paul Maurice as a coach. He was so hard done by coaching the Leafs ... it was to the point where it actually seemed cruel. THe roster was piss poor and the media was constantly on his ass as to why the team sucked. lol

[whysoserious]

In addition, it was Randy Carlysle's 2nd NHL season where he had won the Stanley Cup. He inherited quite the roster. He's made it out of the first round of the playoffs once since the Stanley Cup win. When he was hired, he had 2 seasons as an assistant in the NHL, and prior to that, spent 5 years coaching in the IHL.

Since losing his veterans, and going with youth...review the Ducks rosters after Pronger and co left, and let me know how successful he was.

You bring up some valid points and flaws in the hiring of Carlyle which I don't completely disagree with. As I said, I would have given Eakins the shot too but there is no one thing that says Eakins should have got the job over Carlyle or any other candidate. Both bring strengths and weaknesses. Neither stands out above the other in terms of coaching, but the deciding factor in this is that Carlyle has NHL experience and won a Cup. Clearly those two things do give Carlyle a slight edge.

At the end of the day, I would have liked to see Eakins get a shot, but I'm also not disappointed in the choice Burke made. The only thing is giving him the length on contract. Although, at the same time the Leafs should have no qualms about eating a contract like that should it not work out.

[Deron05]

Why does everyone hate wilson? I think he did great here. His 1st year, mediocre talent at best. 2nd year, the exact same. Thrid year, decent talent, no number 1 goalie to half the season was done. 4th year, still doesnt have a number 1 goalie and were exactly were everyone expected us to be. To have a 130-135 record in regulation is amazing with the talent that was here.

[whysoserious]

Why does everyone hate wilson? I think he did great here. His 1st year, mediocre talent at best. 2nd year, the exact same. Thrid year, decent talent, no number 1 goalie to half the season was done. 4th year, still doesnt have a number 1 goalie and were exactly were everyone expected us to be. To have a 130-135 record in regulation is amazing with the talent that was here.

The problem I have with Wilson is lack of any structure defensively. You can't teach offense, but you can teach defense and having the worse PK four years in a row and being horrible defensively is a problem. You can demand hustle and defense, this is what led to his demise.

He wasn't given a great roster, but the fact that this team freefalled so badle the last month is a reflection on him.

I agree that this team is where it kind of should be, but he and the team raised the bar a little early in the season and falling hurt him. There's some good prospects coming so all is not doom and gloom overall but a coaching change was certainly needed.

[Deron05]

Why does everyone hate wilson? I think he did great here. His 1st year, mediocre talent at best. 2nd year, the exact same. Thrid year, decent talent, no number 1 goalie to half the season was done. 4th year, still doesnt have a number 1 goalie and were exactly were everyone expected us to be. To have a 130-135 record in regulation is amazing with the talent that was here.

The problem I have with Wilson is lack of any structure defensively. You can't teach offense, but you can teach defense and having the worse PK four years in a row and being horrible defensively is a problem. You can demand hustle and defense, this is what led to his demise.

He wasn't given a great roster, but the fact that this team freefalled so badle the last month is a reflection on him.

I agree that this team is where it kind of should be, but he and the team raised the bar a little early in the season and falling hurt him. There's some good prospects coming so all is not doom and gloom overall but a coaching change was certainly needed.

Yeah, but he had no number 1 goalie. But yeah, he was bad at teaching defence.

[UN-Owen]

How does Burke justify giving him an extension just over 2 months ago?

He (Burke) basically stole millions of dollars from his employer to line the pockets of his friend (Wilson)

well...no.
you can't have a lame duck coach.
i have zero problem with the extension. it was fair (1 year) and it was deserved (arguably).

its more of an issue if you're Washington and turfing Boudreau.

if you want to pick apart the firing, i wouldn't include the extension as an issue.

Why can't you have a lame duck coach?

You make that statement...but what are the consequences?

If Wilson hadn't been given an extension...would the team unravel down the stretch and miss the playoffs yet again?


We'll have to disagree that it was deserved

Winning 4 of 5 games in December shouldn't be enough to warrant an extension for a coach who has never qualified for the postseason during his 4 years with the team