Devils1985 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 But this team has to build confidence and trust from within first and this is as much players to coach as players to players. Give Lemaire some time to work with the team and get us some respect back again, and then let's get a decent coach we can all get behind for the next 5+ years. Have the Devils ever had the same coach 5 consecutive years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneykoIsGod Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 JL has forgotten more hockey than all of us put together will ever know. The man is in the top echelon of teachers at any level. This. It's fun to play armchair coach or GM, but it's hard to when the actual coach has this resume: - 8 rings as a player under Scotty Bowman - inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame - 2 rings as an assistant GM - 1 ring as a coach (for the math-impaired, that's more rings than he has fingers) - one of only 5 coaches to win more than one Jack Adams trophy And when you take into consideration this organization's ascension to winning Cups and becoming a perennial contender, there are several people it couldn't have happened without: Lou, Stevens, Brodeur and Lemaire. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that Lemaire knows better than every single poster on this board and player on the team combined. A little respect should be in order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) The thing of it is though... it kind of WOULD be nice if Jacques remembered some of that too though, right? I TOTALLY asked for him to come back and prayed he wouldn't even resign.... for some reason I thought the "hating to fail" Virgo aspect of his personality would come through as opposed to the "clinging to a failed concept like a rabid dog" aspect. What's pissing everyone off is Jacques ABSOLUTE refusal to admit he's wrong and he feels that actually considering additional input based on SOMEONE ELSE'S observations couldn't possibly be a valuable thing. Patty IS wrong -- but he's just trying to take the Jamie impasse and break through it. This is NOT the way to proceed. No one can make Jacques hear. Not Lou not Patty -- NO ONE. He's obviously decided to see his return as confirmation he was right. Basically the ONLY shot is Lou going to Jacques truly - in tears - and saying Jacques - you are WRONG. But you KNOW what to do if you could just take your blinders off. You are, like this team is, truly killing me with your absolute BLINDNESS. You all are the most capable men out there and I do not know how -- but you are ALL BLIND. So Lou does this - Jacques nods in completely agreement and understanding. but in his head he's thinking. Poor Guy this team has killed him -- I'll just keep going down my road here and things will work out because I know I'm right... and besides I'm on this road so I can't turn back now! No Jacques -- the key to real brilliance is being able to stop what you are doing and change. To acknowledge circumstances have changed and YOU MUST CHANGE WITH THEM. But you will never think that will you -- no you;ll say I know how to change with the times! I HAVE -- the guys just aren't doing what I want! DID YA SEE HOW ROLSTON FAILED HERE? I knew he would because I am a FEMALE VIRGO! You fvcking numb nuts! YOU ARE WRONG! STOP fvckING WITH LINE COMBINATIONS! THAT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE FOR CONSISTENT WELL_ROUNDED PLAYERS! YOU'RE HEAD IS UP YOIUR ASS WITH THIS fvckING LAME LESSON EVERYONE ALREADY UNDERSTANDS!!! IT"S NOT WHAT"S REQUIRED RIGHT NOW! THE TEAM IS ALREADY SUBMISSIVE!!!!!! STOP BEING A MORON AND TRY BEING SUBMISSIVE WITHOUT A FULL SURRENDER YOURSELF YOU STPUID a$$holE! Edited January 10, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewarkDevil5 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Have the Devils ever had the same coach 5 consecutive years? Once: Jacques Lemaire from 1993-1994 to 1997-1998. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) JL has forgotten more hockey than all of us put together will ever know. The man is in the top echelon of teachers at any level. Funny how that same respect so often isn't shown toward Lou on this board. I wasn't so much down on Jamie bashing JL as I was the reason for it, because it was about his own benching (and worrying about playing all 82 when the team was winning). And yes the fact he went in the tank right after that didn't help either. Elias is just getting cranky cause the team's losing but he's not 'critiquing' JL because he can't meet a personal goal per se, nor is he witholding effort. I mean this is the same Elias that bit his toungue publicly for the most part when Sutter stripped the captaincy from him and went out to have his best season. Edited January 10, 2011 by NJDevs4978 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 JL has forgotten more hockey than all of us put together will ever know. The man is in the top echelon of teachers at any level. I used to love JL and was very happy when we rehired him LAST YEAR, but it is clear that he has not evolved with the new NHL and its emphasis on developing the younger players. For all his knowledge of the game, he thinks he knows it all and has stopped learning as a result the team lost respect for him last year and tuned him out. He is a stop gap now because he is already on the payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Manta - see you're wrong. That's exactly why Lemaire can't admit that SOME things he does are just not what this teams now. You all that ascribe to this whole Lemaire is out of touch with the new NHL -- the team is as short sighted and unimaginative as you all are and so I fully understand Lemaire's frustration. He is SOOO NOT OUT OF TOUCH! Are you even watching? THIS is what is royally pissing me off about this whole situation. The answers are VERY VERY hard to see here... and so jackasses spew out a nice pat little answer that SOLVES NOTHING! and yes you ARE harming the Devils even posting that -- just like (N)Єverson and brookes woudl be as well... because the more you lay OLD NHL at lemiares feet as the problem -- the stronger he'll hold fast to his lameass ideas formulated out of THIS PARTICULAR TEAM. You just dont even see or understand how the man thinks do you? Shut the fvck up OK -- that's all -- get a new drum to beat -- go back to whining about Kovalchuk. You're so harmful propagating the bullsh!t so no one can see throught to the heart of the problems. they ARE listeing because they can't see and maybe some dipsh!t named Manta can. Well guess what! MANTA Can't. I CAN! I can closer than most a$$holes out there. I'm not right and I'm not saying that -- but I'm the right track looking --- OR I can be so far off that it creates some sort of clarity by which one can think No no... that's not it... youknow what it IS? it's THIS and then we have a solution. but this old sh!t again again again -- you're KILLING the team to STOP YOU ALL! KNOCK IT OFF!!!! Mitco's fiction is good because it IS far off way far off but in correcting it someone will thinking no... he's not like that -- that's the problem he's like THIS -- AH HA! Once chink in the armor identified that no one even thought to consider.... do you get it now? Do you get why fiction and imaginative answers and postings are helpful? It's OUT OF THE BOX NON-LINEAR THINKING and it solves problems. Edited January 10, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 I agree with Manta. Lemaire did a bad job last year. I don't care what his resume is. Plus, if you're going to blame the disintegration of Lemaire's relationship with Langenbrunner solely on the player, then I think that's disingenuous. The coach never made a move to repair the damage, not that I ever read about. There didn't appear to be any real communication, just actions and reactions and bottled-up anger by the captain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) I agree with Manta. Lemaire did a bad job last year. I don't care what his resume is. Plus, if you're going to blame the disintegration of Lemaire's relationship with Langenbrunner solely on the player, then I think that's disingenuous. The coach never made a move to repair the damage, not that I ever read about. There didn't appear to be any real communication, just actions and reactions and bottled-up anger by the captain. It's not the bad job... it's the reason. Tell lemaire he did a bad job. No excuses created for him. When you say "You did a bad job BECAUSE..." a guy like Lemaire will NOT TURN AROUND AND DO A GOOD JOB. He will argue the "BECAUSE" you gave. It's his weakness and giving him a reason like line changes, stuck in the past -- those all work to create inaction and he'll hunker down and get WORSE! AND WORSE AND WORSE!!!! See how I am? See how I had one take on things but now the second time around I've learned something about the man.... I've MOVED FORWARD. Is this working Jacques? is YOUR WAY working? "No because blablablah Jamie blahblabhblah Patty..." No it's not working because it's not the right direction. Change it. end of story. Patty talking isn't wrong because it's wrong to speak ill of your coach air dirty laundry etc and so forth it's wrong because you're giving lemaire ammunition to excuse his sh!tty decision. see my point? Do not hang a man. Give him rope and see what he does with it. It might just be the making of him. or a nice clean death you have no lingering bad taste about. Edited January 10, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) I am having a little trouble following you, PK, I must admit. When I read that a veteran (and a leader) is publicly criticizing a coach, it shows me that the coach doesn't have a whole lot of respect ... and let's face it, Jacques doesn't command a whole lot of respect at this time. He "quit" eight months ago. He's coaching probably because Lou wanted to avoid the humiliation of doing it himself. Edited January 10, 2011 by Jerrydevil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 OK. What is Patty's objective? His overall demanded objective for his job? He knows for a fact through the failures of Jamie Langenbrunner that taking the offensive with this coach is ineffective. He knows this coach cannot be fired in the immediate future. What is he accomplishing speaking to the press? This has been proven an ineffective route to solving the ONLY problem he needs to be concerned with --- improving the current team. It's NOT Jacques. Line changes are out of Patty's control and asking the press to change that for him isn't going to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 OK. What is Patty's objective? His overall demanded objective for his job? He knows for a fact through the failures of Jamie Langenbrunner that taking the offensive with this coach is ineffective. He knows this coach cannot be fired in the immediate future. What is he accomplishing speaking to the press? This has been proven an ineffective route to solving the ONLY problem he needs to be concerned with --- improving the current team. It's NOT Jacques. Line changes are out of Patty's control and asking the press to change that for him isn't going to work. Patty's objective: Letting out his and the teams frustrations at a head coach who tunes them out and they him in turn. Most likely JL is gone in a few months anyway, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Patty's objective: Letting out his and the teams frustrations at a head coach who tunes them out and they him in turn. Most likely JL is gone in a few months anyway, I'm sorry but you don't let out your frustrations on a coach when you were sucking badly with the previous coach. This team has no leg to stand on when it comes to taking any of their feedback into account. They need to buck up and just play out the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This team has no leg to stand on when it comes to taking any of their feedback into account. That may be true. Where's Lemaire's leg to stand on? The coach who "quit" after last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) Patty's objective: Letting out his and the teams frustrations at a head coach who tunes them out and they him in turn. Most likely JL is gone in a few months anyway, THAT is the EXACT WRONG objective! That's what's called playing your obstacle. You cannot focus on your obstacles. Focusing on what you think is keeping you from moving forward will ALWAYS result in failure. Mostly because more often than not that's not the real problem it's just a way to spin wheels and blow off steam. ANd even that has been tragically ineffective. Objectives must always be positive in nature or you're doomed to fail. (It's not just off ice you need to think this way -- this is also exactly what's been wrong with their game for I dont know how long -- if it sounds familiar I've written it before. They cannot play "control the puck" it too easily pulls them out of position. AND puts undue focus on their obstacle: the opposing team. They then play the opposing teams game. This team needs to find their objective - or as 90s put it their mission statement. It's a clear cut objective. then from there you break it up into immediate desired objectives. If you write them out you'll see what's creating your losing pattern Or you immediately identify any sub-objective that in reality is completely out of wack with your over-all desired objective.) Lou also stocks his team with thinking players -- a guy who you can point to a specific play and ask what were you thinking and he has an answer - he is mentally present and has an answer. If he doesn't he's usually traded That is wy en masse they are particularly vulnerable to playing the obstacle over the objective and will also be able to STATE THE PROPER OBJECTIVE. The coach just has to understand -- no you weren't doing that - you ANTICIPATED YOUR OBSTACLE --- You are supposed to just be in the moment and play your objective THEN the anticipation just comes. you cannot create anticipation -- it is born out of playing your OBJECTIVE. Are you all getting this? writing it down? printing it up for your coaching handbook? You're welcome by the way. THIS is what Stevens did as captain... or so it seems from stories. At practice he'd hit you out of the blue -- how do you AVOID him? PLAY YOUR OBJECTIVE WHOLLY. If you don't you cannot anticipate and you get blind-sided. You over focus on the WRONG thing. He redirected focus to the objective not the obstacle. Edited January 10, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MantaRay Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Objectives must always be positive in nature or you're doomed to fail. No disagreement, here, but again your dealing with a very frustrated individual not used to losing. Not an excuse, but I understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepperkorn Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 (edited) No disagreement, here, but again your dealing with a very frustrated individual not used to losing. Not an excuse, but I understand it. I knwo -- but it's the only way to dig out of it. They've bene losing long enough to be over this - this reads more lost than anything else. Rudderless. and it IS lemaire's and Lou's fault. But then you have to suck it up and lead yourself -- nothing is getting through to management. No one can save them but themselves. How can they not have deduced this as of yet? The System is enough. The system comes down to what the team does on ice -- it's not lie when coaches say that after winning a Cup. "You all say I'm a great coach but I can say anything at all -- it comes down to the players and what they do on the ice. THEY make it happen -- always." Edited January 10, 2011 by Pepperkorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 That may be true. Where's Lemaire's leg to stand on? The coach who "quit" after last season. lol I think even the players know that was a sham, especially considering he said he was coming back then 'quit' four days later, the Devils kept him on salary then re-hired him back (which they wouldn't have done if he had truly retired and was off salary). And btw, where was Elias's original quote really that bad? All he said was the power play was working and we knew what to do. Now Jacques was implementing another way and we have to adjust. I really don't see the criticism, he was just stating fact. If anything his Kovy quote was far more biting, that I don't normally approve of except Kovy might be thick-headed enough to not take instruction in the locker room so sometimes you have to get the message out to the press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.