Looking For a Scape Goat: Vigneault

You may also like...

  • http://yaletown.ca Yaletown.ca

    Good point. I do think Crawford got thrown under the bus with the Bertuzi fiasco.
    Canucks have speed and they should use it and be in attack mode for 3 periods.

  • http://yaletown.ca Yaletown.ca

    Good point. I do think Crawford got thrown under the bus with the Bertuzi fiasco.
    Canucks have speed and they should use it and be in attack mode for 3 periods.

  • CandyCanuck

    Who got the Canucks into the playoffs last year, when initially everyone was waiting for his head to roll then as well!? Maybe if defense realised they need to assist Luongo rather than leave him to it they would be in a better place now. People always blame management… maybe they should learn the definition of team. Also the addition of a 40+ goal scorer would help.

  • CandyCanuck

    Who got the Canucks into the playoffs last year, when initially everyone was waiting for his head to roll then as well!? Maybe if defense realised they need to assist Luongo rather than leave him to it they would be in a better place now. People always blame management… maybe they should learn the definition of team. Also the addition of a 40+ goal scorer would help.

  • http://canuckshockeyblog.com Richard Loat

    You can say AV was responsible for us getting into the playoffs if it was his coaching that got us there. The two times we’ve made the playoffs in his time here have been a result of Luongo’s play getting us there. The one time we didnt get to the playoffs was a result of Luongo’s less than stellar play.

    AV hasn’t done anything to prove his coaching has a profound effect on this team.

  • http://canuckshockeyblog.com Richard Loat

    You can say AV was responsible for us getting into the playoffs if it was his coaching that got us there. The two times we’ve made the playoffs in his time here have been a result of Luongo’s play getting us there. The one time we didnt get to the playoffs was a result of Luongo’s less than stellar play.

    AV hasn’t done anything to prove his coaching has a profound effect on this team.

  • VanStanley

    Hmmm…..

    When AV first showed up, he had not much to work with. Defensive first hockey is what wins championships. If you cannot keep it out of your own net you cannot expect to win. That is what he geared the team towards. Getting the core players to buy into that system is what AV did, and it was successful.

    In the past two seasons we have seen a number of changes happen with in the team. The coaching staff puts forth a system and the players are the ones accountable. You look at other tenured coaches in recent memory. Lemaire, Trotz and Ruff all come to mind.

    (Crawford was unable to do anything more than AV has achieved. Sure he got a ring in Colorado, but that was in a different era. Capitalizing on good drafting and shrewd trades from Quebec. Sakic and Roy. Good components to win Cups).

    The emergence under AV of Kesler and Burrows, helping add pop to our offence. Two seasons ago we WERE a one line team, that played trap hockey. Teaching that system to the core, now has us on the brink of being able to win many hockey games by exploiting other squads offensively, hence our near the top powerplay. We have three lines, thanks in part to deals made by Nonis and additions from Gillis.

    For example, sure Wellwood and Bernier are not exactly lighting it up this year, but Raymond sure is. Why? They had an fantastic playoffs. Raymond elevated his play and gained confidence, and it has parlayed into so far, an excellent regular season. That has to be in part attributed to AV.

    The problem with the Vast Vancouver hockey market is that most people have never, and will never play the game. At various times throughout the history of the franchise, the fans have been unable to see when the squad has something good. Gillis recognized this fact and signed AV to a deserved extension.

    To suggest that Crawford could do the job again may be true, but do we really want to recycle someone who also was unable to motivate the squad he had, pre cap era btw, to anything more than mediocrity?

    AV thinks outside the box, and makes his players accountable. Expect deals to be made before his job would be compromised. During a very large injury bug the team played through and won a lot of hockey games when they could have done the opposite. After three years of constant line juggling, which most fans complain bitterly about, he was able to get more juice out of that squeezed lemon. Playing defencemen as forwards, rotating the assignments, do what was needed to get results strengthened the team.

    Fans want the run and gun silver ballet. Has it worked yet in 40 years? Nope. Pat Quinn had success because we had that eternal fan favourite Pavel Bure, and a core of players who played team defence. Timely goals and hot goaltending.

    Success only due to the Stellar play of Luongo and Henrik? What about Kesler and Raymond. What about Ehrhoff? What about The return of Daniel and the re emergence of Burrows? What about the team play of Rypien? What about the games that Raycroft sole for us during the injury bug? What about Salo getting the monkey off his back? What about the strong play of Hansen?

    AV knows hockey. Right now he should be getting some accolades in helping the team gel. Look at our record since the Luongo came back from injury. But you wanna change coaches so they have to learn a new system? Why fix it if it ain’t broke?

    VanStanley.

  • VanStanley

    Hmmm…..

    When AV first showed up, he had not much to work with. Defensive first hockey is what wins championships. If you cannot keep it out of your own net you cannot expect to win. That is what he geared the team towards. Getting the core players to buy into that system is what AV did, and it was successful.

    In the past two seasons we have seen a number of changes happen with in the team. The coaching staff puts forth a system and the players are the ones accountable. You look at other tenured coaches in recent memory. Lemaire, Trotz and Ruff all come to mind.

    (Crawford was unable to do anything more than AV has achieved. Sure he got a ring in Colorado, but that was in a different era. Capitalizing on good drafting and shrewd trades from Quebec. Sakic and Roy. Good components to win Cups).

    The emergence under AV of Kesler and Burrows, helping add pop to our offence. Two seasons ago we WERE a one line team, that played trap hockey. Teaching that system to the core, now has us on the brink of being able to win many hockey games by exploiting other squads offensively, hence our near the top powerplay. We have three lines, thanks in part to deals made by Nonis and additions from Gillis.

    For example, sure Wellwood and Bernier are not exactly lighting it up this year, but Raymond sure is. Why? They had an fantastic playoffs. Raymond elevated his play and gained confidence, and it has parlayed into so far, an excellent regular season. That has to be in part attributed to AV.

    The problem with the Vast Vancouver hockey market is that most people have never, and will never play the game. At various times throughout the history of the franchise, the fans have been unable to see when the squad has something good. Gillis recognized this fact and signed AV to a deserved extension.

    To suggest that Crawford could do the job again may be true, but do we really want to recycle someone who also was unable to motivate the squad he had, pre cap era btw, to anything more than mediocrity?

    AV thinks outside the box, and makes his players accountable. Expect deals to be made before his job would be compromised. During a very large injury bug the team played through and won a lot of hockey games when they could have done the opposite. After three years of constant line juggling, which most fans complain bitterly about, he was able to get more juice out of that squeezed lemon. Playing defencemen as forwards, rotating the assignments, do what was needed to get results strengthened the team.

    Fans want the run and gun silver ballet. Has it worked yet in 40 years? Nope. Pat Quinn had success because we had that eternal fan favourite Pavel Bure, and a core of players who played team defence. Timely goals and hot goaltending.

    Success only due to the Stellar play of Luongo and Henrik? What about Kesler and Raymond. What about Ehrhoff? What about The return of Daniel and the re emergence of Burrows? What about the team play of Rypien? What about the games that Raycroft sole for us during the injury bug? What about Salo getting the monkey off his back? What about the strong play of Hansen?

    AV knows hockey. Right now he should be getting some accolades in helping the team gel. Look at our record since the Luongo came back from injury. But you wanna change coaches so they have to learn a new system? Why fix it if it ain’t broke?

    VanStanley.

  • Ramzi

    well put vanstanley!

  • Ramzi

    well put vanstanley!

%d bloggers like this: