Twenty years ago, in March of 1996, Centre Bell (then Centre Molson) swung open its doors to a new generation of Montreal Canadiens fans.
If you grew up in an era when the Montreal Forum was the physical and spiritual home of the Habs, you probably never quite warmed up to its replacement. Certainly the pitiful way in which the old facility was gutted to accomodate an ill-conceived retail and entertainment centre didn't do much to endear old-school Canadiens fans to the new building.
Twenty years on, Centre Bell has developed its own unique character that deserves recognition and appreciation. Credit is due in large part to the Montreal Canadiens organization who have used the building as a showcase for the team's storied history. Everywhere you turn there are reminders of the organization's past glories and what it has meant to the city it calls home. Credit is also due to the architects who had the foresight to design the lower bowl seating as a virtual duplicate of the Forum's red seat section, something that lends an authenticity to the building itself, but also provides an intimacy that few modern arenas offer.
Though it has been twenty years, fans and media still talk about the ghosts of the old Forum, with whimsical musings about whether said spirits have at last commuted down the road to Centre Bell. In many ways, the organization itself has played up this mythology with ceremonial torches, film tributes and montages set to inspirational music that borders, at times, on religious fervor. For me, the ghosts are just a metaphor for those clinging so tightly to the past they cannot appreciate the history being made today.
As with many NHL arenas, watching a hockey game at Centre Bell is
often a bombastic audio/visual assault on the senses. Certainly that
wasn't the case in the era of the old Forum, but that was a different time. Let's face it, even if the old building were still around, you can be assured it would kitted out with a comparable sound and light show. Though much has changed, when Centre Bell's pipe organ
starts chiming the signature 'Go Habs, Go' jingle, it feels every bit
like games I attended as a child. I did so with my father at my side, watching wide-eyed as my hockey heroes dashed and darted and battled their way to victory.
With deep appreciation to an exceedingly generous family friend, I get to attend more than my fair share of Habs games. I know that the experience my son enjoys is very different from my own, but I cannot help but think that Centre Bell will mean as much to him as the old Forum does for me. These are his hockey heroes and this is his hockey shrine. When I look around the building, see the faces, hear the cheers and jeers, I sense not only the spirit of Canadiens fans, but also the soul of Montreal, vibrant, ecclectic and alive. My home.
Happy belated 20th birthday Centre Bell. Here's to all the memories to come.
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Confidence Game
Last Friday the Montreal Canadiens 10 game regulation winning streak came to a crashing halt with a 10-0 stinker against the Columbus Blue Jackets. For the second game in a row the Habs looked listless and it cost them.
What stood out for many was coach Michel Therrien's decision to leave goaltender Al Montoya in the net for the entire game. When most coaches would have said enough after the fifth goal, Therrien opted to let Montoya battle it out on his own.
I believe this was a terrible coaching decision for a number of reasons. Coaches generally switch goalies to hopefully stem the scoring and at least giving the team a chance to win, but also to avoid further damage to the goaltender's confidence.
We have seen how leaving a goalie in for a rout can do more that damage the psyche, it can also create an unnecessarily tense situation within the team. Goalies, like players, need to know someone has their back, and in the case of Montoya, it felt like nobody did.
Yes, it was revealed later that after the second period, when the Habs we down 8-0, that Montoya consulted with goaltending coach Stephan Waite and that the two agreed he should stick it out. I would argue it should never have even come to that. The call should have come about a third into the second period when Montoya bobbled his save and Blue Jackets Andrew Wennberg kicked in the loose puck. Though the goal was called back, it was obvious Montoya was struggling for control.
On social media the bulk of the arguments favoured Therrien's decision based largely on the fact that the Canadiens were playing back-to-back games, so bringing in Carey Price was an unnecessary risk. But why? The argument follows that Price is coming off a knee injury from last season, therefore putting him in could lead to re-injury. The failure in this logic is that every time Price steps on the ice this season he is at risk, but if you've dessimated the confidence of your backup goalie, then you have essentially created the same scenario as last season.
People have been quick to point out that Montoya should know his role and just 'suck it up' because Price is the number one, and he's a just a career backup. For an organization that speaks frequently of the importance of team unity, this logic seem counter-intuitive. What has struck me as most bothersome is how easily people were willing to dismiss the mental aspect of Montoya's experience.
I don't have specific numbers, but we are all aware of the increased use of psychologists in professional sports. Coaches, players and media often talk about the importance of the mental game. We live in an era of growing awareness of mental health issues and how they can affect performance and even physical strength. So why are we using antiquated phrases like 'suck it up?'
I'm hopeful that Al Montoya will bounce back from this loss and be stronger for it. But there is no question in my mind that the pressure the team placed on him has the potential to be devastating. A coach's job is more than ensuring wins in the short-term, it's about player management which sometimes means protecting a player even when they think they can handle it.
We talk often about the human side of players, but then we expect them to be robotic and unfeeling when it suits our point of view. Frankly, I think it's sad that people still equate a damaged psyche with weakness, but the mental health of Al Montoya was exactly what was at stake when Michel Therrien left him fight his battle alone. And that was a terrible decision.
What stood out for many was coach Michel Therrien's decision to leave goaltender Al Montoya in the net for the entire game. When most coaches would have said enough after the fifth goal, Therrien opted to let Montoya battle it out on his own.
I believe this was a terrible coaching decision for a number of reasons. Coaches generally switch goalies to hopefully stem the scoring and at least giving the team a chance to win, but also to avoid further damage to the goaltender's confidence.
We have seen how leaving a goalie in for a rout can do more that damage the psyche, it can also create an unnecessarily tense situation within the team. Goalies, like players, need to know someone has their back, and in the case of Montoya, it felt like nobody did.
Yes, it was revealed later that after the second period, when the Habs we down 8-0, that Montoya consulted with goaltending coach Stephan Waite and that the two agreed he should stick it out. I would argue it should never have even come to that. The call should have come about a third into the second period when Montoya bobbled his save and Blue Jackets Andrew Wennberg kicked in the loose puck. Though the goal was called back, it was obvious Montoya was struggling for control.
On social media the bulk of the arguments favoured Therrien's decision based largely on the fact that the Canadiens were playing back-to-back games, so bringing in Carey Price was an unnecessary risk. But why? The argument follows that Price is coming off a knee injury from last season, therefore putting him in could lead to re-injury. The failure in this logic is that every time Price steps on the ice this season he is at risk, but if you've dessimated the confidence of your backup goalie, then you have essentially created the same scenario as last season.
People have been quick to point out that Montoya should know his role and just 'suck it up' because Price is the number one, and he's a just a career backup. For an organization that speaks frequently of the importance of team unity, this logic seem counter-intuitive. What has struck me as most bothersome is how easily people were willing to dismiss the mental aspect of Montoya's experience.
I don't have specific numbers, but we are all aware of the increased use of psychologists in professional sports. Coaches, players and media often talk about the importance of the mental game. We live in an era of growing awareness of mental health issues and how they can affect performance and even physical strength. So why are we using antiquated phrases like 'suck it up?'
I'm hopeful that Al Montoya will bounce back from this loss and be stronger for it. But there is no question in my mind that the pressure the team placed on him has the potential to be devastating. A coach's job is more than ensuring wins in the short-term, it's about player management which sometimes means protecting a player even when they think they can handle it.
We talk often about the human side of players, but then we expect them to be robotic and unfeeling when it suits our point of view. Frankly, I think it's sad that people still equate a damaged psyche with weakness, but the mental health of Al Montoya was exactly what was at stake when Michel Therrien left him fight his battle alone. And that was a terrible decision.
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
The Price of Being Ready
Integrity is a rare thing these days. A passing glance at the U.S. election, or politics in general, is indication enough.
When Marc Bergevin took the job as General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens in 2012 he told reporters he was ready for the job. What he didn't anticipate was everything that happened last season. After a brilliant start, the team all but collapsed when star goaltender Carey Price went down with a long-term injury. Certainly there were other factors contributing to the downfall, but for a team built largely from the goal crease out, it was a recipe for disaster.
Perhaps Bergevin could not have anticipated such a scenario, but I’m starting to believe he was ready to face it.
Managing a professional sports team is no easy task. One year they could be champions, the next fail to qualify for the playoffs. Any number of scenarios can occur beyond management's control: Injuries, bad bounces, a player - or players - losing confidence. Ask any goal-scorer how they got in a slump and most will be unable to explain it. The solution, we are told, lies in perseverance and a belief that if you keep doing the right things, the situation will eventually turn around.
For most of Marc Bergevin’s tenure as GM he has been doing the right things. Extricating the organization from expensive contracts, bringing in unsung talent without sacrificing developing players, and avoiding the pitfalls of trade-deadline spending sprees. Though not every move has met with fan approval, prior to last season most believed Bergevin’s actions were making the team better.
Many things unraveled last season, but the most significant was fan confidence in the Canadien’s front office. From conspiracy theories about Price's injury to the embarassment of the John Scott trade, the downward spiral seemed to accelerate with each passing week. Bergevin could have easily deflected the blame to someone else, but he didn't. Instead he took all of it on his shoulders, telling fans and reporters 'it's on me' while also doubling-down on his vision for the team, unwilling to fire his coach, using the now infamous ‘foxhole’ analogy, perhaps the one regret of his career as GM.
If there was any doubt that Marc Bergevin was up to the task of being the General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens it was quickly put to rest this summer. Pulling the trigger on the blockbuster trade of fan favourite P.K. Subban for veteran Shea Weber was Bergevin's boldest and riskiest move to date. He knew the backlash would be immediate and merciless, yet it did not sway his decision.
I have stated before that I believe Marc Bergevin’s goal has always been to make the Montreal Canadiens a better team. Unfortunately being GM of a team with a rabid fanbase means intense scrutiny fraught with many unpopular decisions. Executing a plan in an environment in which everyone else thinks they could do a better, requires tremendous courage of one’s convictions. When Marc Bergevin said he was ready to become General Manager of the Canadiens, the Subban-Weber trade was the precise measure of that statement.
It’s not difficult to figure out what Marc Bergevin and coach Michel Therrien believe to be a winning formula. It is a combination of grit, character, teamwork and great goaltending. It also involves building through the draft and player development. For the most part, those have been the guiding principles of the decision-making process over the past four years, and it is with these principles that Marc Bergevin has staked his future on.
It’s not often we encounter someone willing to endure the harshest criticism to see a plan to fruition. To be prepared to make wildly unpopular decisions with the firm belief that it is for the better. You can agree with him or not, but you can't deny that Marc Bergevin is is willing to do whatever it takes for the Montreal Canadiens to succeed, or go down trying.
That’s what it means to have integrity and it is a rare thing indeed.
When Marc Bergevin took the job as General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens in 2012 he told reporters he was ready for the job. What he didn't anticipate was everything that happened last season. After a brilliant start, the team all but collapsed when star goaltender Carey Price went down with a long-term injury. Certainly there were other factors contributing to the downfall, but for a team built largely from the goal crease out, it was a recipe for disaster.
Perhaps Bergevin could not have anticipated such a scenario, but I’m starting to believe he was ready to face it.
Managing a professional sports team is no easy task. One year they could be champions, the next fail to qualify for the playoffs. Any number of scenarios can occur beyond management's control: Injuries, bad bounces, a player - or players - losing confidence. Ask any goal-scorer how they got in a slump and most will be unable to explain it. The solution, we are told, lies in perseverance and a belief that if you keep doing the right things, the situation will eventually turn around.
For most of Marc Bergevin’s tenure as GM he has been doing the right things. Extricating the organization from expensive contracts, bringing in unsung talent without sacrificing developing players, and avoiding the pitfalls of trade-deadline spending sprees. Though not every move has met with fan approval, prior to last season most believed Bergevin’s actions were making the team better.
Many things unraveled last season, but the most significant was fan confidence in the Canadien’s front office. From conspiracy theories about Price's injury to the embarassment of the John Scott trade, the downward spiral seemed to accelerate with each passing week. Bergevin could have easily deflected the blame to someone else, but he didn't. Instead he took all of it on his shoulders, telling fans and reporters 'it's on me' while also doubling-down on his vision for the team, unwilling to fire his coach, using the now infamous ‘foxhole’ analogy, perhaps the one regret of his career as GM.
If there was any doubt that Marc Bergevin was up to the task of being the General Manager of the Montreal Canadiens it was quickly put to rest this summer. Pulling the trigger on the blockbuster trade of fan favourite P.K. Subban for veteran Shea Weber was Bergevin's boldest and riskiest move to date. He knew the backlash would be immediate and merciless, yet it did not sway his decision.
I have stated before that I believe Marc Bergevin’s goal has always been to make the Montreal Canadiens a better team. Unfortunately being GM of a team with a rabid fanbase means intense scrutiny fraught with many unpopular decisions. Executing a plan in an environment in which everyone else thinks they could do a better, requires tremendous courage of one’s convictions. When Marc Bergevin said he was ready to become General Manager of the Canadiens, the Subban-Weber trade was the precise measure of that statement.
It’s not difficult to figure out what Marc Bergevin and coach Michel Therrien believe to be a winning formula. It is a combination of grit, character, teamwork and great goaltending. It also involves building through the draft and player development. For the most part, those have been the guiding principles of the decision-making process over the past four years, and it is with these principles that Marc Bergevin has staked his future on.
It’s not often we encounter someone willing to endure the harshest criticism to see a plan to fruition. To be prepared to make wildly unpopular decisions with the firm belief that it is for the better. You can agree with him or not, but you can't deny that Marc Bergevin is is willing to do whatever it takes for the Montreal Canadiens to succeed, or go down trying.
That’s what it means to have integrity and it is a rare thing indeed.
Thursday, October 20, 2016
No Promises
In Montreal, hockey is religion.
That analogy is an old one, meant as a gentle jab at the sometimes obsessive nature of Montreal Canadiens’ fans. But in Québec, a province in which the physical presence of religion’s former dominance is undeniable, the line between religion and hockey is blurry.
Quebec is a land of churches. Towering stone steeples are often the signature of the smallest village or largest city. A short walk from the Bell Centre you will find an Anglican church and Marie-Reine-du-Monde Cathedral, where the funeral for Montreal Canadien’s legend Jean Béliveau was held. Just two of the city’s multitude of churches.
The Roman Catholic church was at the core of Québec society for most of its history, and though the Quiet Revolution ushered in a new era of secularism, words and icons once used as hammers of oppression still permeate every aspect of the province’s culture.
Despite religion’s fading relevance, its use of symbols and icons as a means to inspire and motivate is still very much alive.
Pregame ceremonies at Montreal Canadiens' home-openers are as close to a secular form of worship as you will ever see. They often incorporate icons and symbols, draw from history like scripture, and though they may lack confession, certainly there is a sense of atonement and humility to a greater power. That power it seems, is a transcendent vision of the franchise, not defined by its personnel or management, but something of myth and legend. Journalists and fans still talk about the ghosts of the old Forum, as if they were saints called upon to bless the current roster. Then there is the iconic torch which is literally and figuratively passed from player to player, generation to generation, linking today’s team to an unbroken chain of history and tradition.
Perhaps this is an overstatement of the meaning of such ceremonies, but it’s no coincidence that in a place where religion’s legacy still looms over the culture, that such ceremonies are deeply rooted in a tradition of reverence.
As much as these icons and symbols can inspire, as in the history of the church, they can also become tools of oppression.
One noticeably absent symbol from the Montreal Canadiens’ locker room this season was a sign that read ‘No Excuses.’ Much was made in the media about the removal of the sign, many suggesting that the team’s coaches and management did not live up to those words. The post mortem by General Manager Marc Bergevin on last season’s epic collapse seemed to be rife with excuses, ranging from key injuries to veiled references to character issues.
Whether we want to accept this assessment as a reason or a litany of excuses, Bergevin wasn’t wrong. These things were certainly a factor, though he and coach Michel Therrien are just as culpable in their handling of the crisis.
So why remove the sign? It's my belief that it was because this sign went from being a tool of inspiration to a tool of oppression. The truth is, many things in life don’t go as planned. We foolishly believe ourselves to be in complete control of our destiny, but when things start going off the rails we are suddenly reminded of our own fallibility. We saw how last season’s collapse turned a high-flying team into a disorganized mess. How it transformed a normally quiet and reflective Max Pacioretty into an angry and frustrated man. Loss after loss, the players had to look up and read ‘No excuses,’ words that they were commanded to live by, but were devastating to the spirit. Media and fans kept hammering the players, coaches and management with the phrase to the point that they must have felt completely and utterly isolated.
Icons and symbols can inspire, but they can also be tools of oppression.
I rather liked Tuesday’s home opening ceremony. A circle of players united with their captain, holding a torch quite literally passed from failing hands. No lofty promises, no guarantees, in fact very few words at all. Just a group standing as one, ready to face whatever lies ahead.
Strip away the icons and symbols, and this the best any of us can hope for.
That analogy is an old one, meant as a gentle jab at the sometimes obsessive nature of Montreal Canadiens’ fans. But in Québec, a province in which the physical presence of religion’s former dominance is undeniable, the line between religion and hockey is blurry.
Quebec is a land of churches. Towering stone steeples are often the signature of the smallest village or largest city. A short walk from the Bell Centre you will find an Anglican church and Marie-Reine-du-Monde Cathedral, where the funeral for Montreal Canadien’s legend Jean Béliveau was held. Just two of the city’s multitude of churches.
The Roman Catholic church was at the core of Québec society for most of its history, and though the Quiet Revolution ushered in a new era of secularism, words and icons once used as hammers of oppression still permeate every aspect of the province’s culture.
Despite religion’s fading relevance, its use of symbols and icons as a means to inspire and motivate is still very much alive.
Pregame ceremonies at Montreal Canadiens' home-openers are as close to a secular form of worship as you will ever see. They often incorporate icons and symbols, draw from history like scripture, and though they may lack confession, certainly there is a sense of atonement and humility to a greater power. That power it seems, is a transcendent vision of the franchise, not defined by its personnel or management, but something of myth and legend. Journalists and fans still talk about the ghosts of the old Forum, as if they were saints called upon to bless the current roster. Then there is the iconic torch which is literally and figuratively passed from player to player, generation to generation, linking today’s team to an unbroken chain of history and tradition.
Perhaps this is an overstatement of the meaning of such ceremonies, but it’s no coincidence that in a place where religion’s legacy still looms over the culture, that such ceremonies are deeply rooted in a tradition of reverence.
As much as these icons and symbols can inspire, as in the history of the church, they can also become tools of oppression.
One noticeably absent symbol from the Montreal Canadiens’ locker room this season was a sign that read ‘No Excuses.’ Much was made in the media about the removal of the sign, many suggesting that the team’s coaches and management did not live up to those words. The post mortem by General Manager Marc Bergevin on last season’s epic collapse seemed to be rife with excuses, ranging from key injuries to veiled references to character issues.
Whether we want to accept this assessment as a reason or a litany of excuses, Bergevin wasn’t wrong. These things were certainly a factor, though he and coach Michel Therrien are just as culpable in their handling of the crisis.
So why remove the sign? It's my belief that it was because this sign went from being a tool of inspiration to a tool of oppression. The truth is, many things in life don’t go as planned. We foolishly believe ourselves to be in complete control of our destiny, but when things start going off the rails we are suddenly reminded of our own fallibility. We saw how last season’s collapse turned a high-flying team into a disorganized mess. How it transformed a normally quiet and reflective Max Pacioretty into an angry and frustrated man. Loss after loss, the players had to look up and read ‘No excuses,’ words that they were commanded to live by, but were devastating to the spirit. Media and fans kept hammering the players, coaches and management with the phrase to the point that they must have felt completely and utterly isolated.
Icons and symbols can inspire, but they can also be tools of oppression.
I rather liked Tuesday’s home opening ceremony. A circle of players united with their captain, holding a torch quite literally passed from failing hands. No lofty promises, no guarantees, in fact very few words at all. Just a group standing as one, ready to face whatever lies ahead.
Strip away the icons and symbols, and this the best any of us can hope for.
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
All or Something Else
I was 14 years-old when the Montreal Canadiens won their 22nd Stanley Cup in 1979. It was the year of Guy Lafleur's iconic game-seven tying goal against the Boston Bruins in the semis. Other than that, I don't remember much. When the Canadiens finally hoisted the cup at the hallowed Forum, I was in bed. As I recall, my brother woke me up to share the news. I can barely remember what I said, but it was probably something like 'oh, great,' before turning off the light, rolling over and going back to sleep.
For kids growing up in 1970s Montreal, Stanley Cup victories had become old hat. That's not to say we weren't huge fans of the club, we all knew we were part of something special. The few times I got to see a game at the old Forum, you could literally feel the history. There was a sense of being among heros past and present. The sights, sounds and smells are still quite vivid.
Despite it's mythical place in Montreal culture, hockey did not preoccupy our lives to the extent it does today. There were no 24/7 sports channels or dedicated websites or blogs or Twitter. Weeknight hockey games were rarely televised and hockey was a topic of casual conversation that fell somewhere between weather and politics. When summer arrived, hockey was put on a shelf with our gloves and toques, stored away with the skates and winter coats.
In 2016 it seems virtually impossible to be a fan of the Montreal Canadiens without experiencing a relentless stream of information, spin, opinion and speculation about the team. This has become the case for most pro sports today. Supporting a favourite team in the modern era is more than a preoccupation, it is a nonstop conversation that lasts all year long.
Spend an hour or two on Twitter any given day and you'll witness unending arguments about players, coaches, general managers and officials. You will also be privvy to more than a few conspiracy theories telling you what is really going on. On game night, the conversations become more pointed and arguments become personal attacks. It's an exaggerated reality that magnifies success and failure to full blown histrionics, torching friendships and occassionally disolving into cultural and racial attacks.
I suppose this is the reality of social media itself, the online equivalent of people in cars shouting obscenities at others with the windows closed.
I get that people are passionate about their team (and I fully admit my own) but here's the thing, in sports, as in life, it is possible to have a contrary opinion without being abusive or derogatory. It is possible to be happy with your team's success without disparaging fans of the other team. It is possible to win gracefully and to lose gracefully.
At the same time, people are entitled to comment on, and be critical of, what they see. If an opinion does not mesh with your own, it shouldn't be interpreted as an attack on you personally. It's also important to recognize satire and not take everything we see so seriously. Humour is often the best way to deflate anger brought on by frustration. These are not just good guidelines for social media, but also for life in general.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned from the days when hockey did not occupy so much time and space. And no, this isn't a call to return to the 'good ol' days' because they weren't all that good, but we might find disconnecting from the 24/7 media cycle will make watching sports more enjoyable.
Maybe what we need most is to turn off the light, roll over and get a good night's sleep.
For kids growing up in 1970s Montreal, Stanley Cup victories had become old hat. That's not to say we weren't huge fans of the club, we all knew we were part of something special. The few times I got to see a game at the old Forum, you could literally feel the history. There was a sense of being among heros past and present. The sights, sounds and smells are still quite vivid.
Despite it's mythical place in Montreal culture, hockey did not preoccupy our lives to the extent it does today. There were no 24/7 sports channels or dedicated websites or blogs or Twitter. Weeknight hockey games were rarely televised and hockey was a topic of casual conversation that fell somewhere between weather and politics. When summer arrived, hockey was put on a shelf with our gloves and toques, stored away with the skates and winter coats.
In 2016 it seems virtually impossible to be a fan of the Montreal Canadiens without experiencing a relentless stream of information, spin, opinion and speculation about the team. This has become the case for most pro sports today. Supporting a favourite team in the modern era is more than a preoccupation, it is a nonstop conversation that lasts all year long.
Spend an hour or two on Twitter any given day and you'll witness unending arguments about players, coaches, general managers and officials. You will also be privvy to more than a few conspiracy theories telling you what is really going on. On game night, the conversations become more pointed and arguments become personal attacks. It's an exaggerated reality that magnifies success and failure to full blown histrionics, torching friendships and occassionally disolving into cultural and racial attacks.
I suppose this is the reality of social media itself, the online equivalent of people in cars shouting obscenities at others with the windows closed.
I get that people are passionate about their team (and I fully admit my own) but here's the thing, in sports, as in life, it is possible to have a contrary opinion without being abusive or derogatory. It is possible to be happy with your team's success without disparaging fans of the other team. It is possible to win gracefully and to lose gracefully.
At the same time, people are entitled to comment on, and be critical of, what they see. If an opinion does not mesh with your own, it shouldn't be interpreted as an attack on you personally. It's also important to recognize satire and not take everything we see so seriously. Humour is often the best way to deflate anger brought on by frustration. These are not just good guidelines for social media, but also for life in general.
Maybe there is a lesson to be learned from the days when hockey did not occupy so much time and space. And no, this isn't a call to return to the 'good ol' days' because they weren't all that good, but we might find disconnecting from the 24/7 media cycle will make watching sports more enjoyable.
Maybe what we need most is to turn off the light, roll over and get a good night's sleep.
Monday, October 17, 2016
Counter Culture
P.K. Subban is a Nashville Predator. It doesn’t matter if you're okay
with 'the trade' or not, it's already history. Besides, there is very
little anyone can do about it, except perhaps complain which is
essentially pointless. Accept it and move on, that’s what grown ups do.
I believed at the time (and still do) that the trade was a mistake. Marc Bergevin went all-in acquiring a known commodity in Shea Weber in exchange for Subban’s obvious potential. If you were to ask general managers around the league, most would say it was a good trade for the Canadiens organization. Though clearly many like myself, plus one GM, don't agree.
Which brings me, oddly enough, to the current trainwreck that is the American election. Many of us have lamented the popularity of the supremely unqualified Donald Trump. It's becoming clear his support has little to do with substantive policy, but rather a thinly-veiled appeal to an underlying culture of intolerance and ignorance among many voters. Trump knows he is the right man for everything that is wrong with an appallingly large segment of American society.
So too in hockey, the problem isn’t Subban, or Bergevin, it’s the culture. As pro sports go, there are few that match hockey in its conservatism. Golf certainly. Tennis perhaps. For example, in an era when pro sports leagues have been forced to address player safety, in particular concussions, the NHL still tacitly approves of bare-fisted fighting by arguing that 'it's just part of the game.' The league generally discourages individuality in its players, both on and off the ice, unless it conforms to a model of humility, old-school toughness, quiet community service and 'the code.'
Subban is anything but that. He is brash, outspoken, funny, loud and incredibly gifted. His public image is as important as was his pride in playing for the Canadiens. Unfortunately that kind of thinking doesn’t mesh with NHL culture. In the minds of many, Subban was getting too big for his britches, an appropriately antiquated expression to illustrate the point.
Like it or not, players like Subban represent the modern generation of professional athletes. Branding is important to them, but can also be extremely lucrative to the franchises for which they play. Pro leagues don't own players like they used to, a concept that seems strangely foreign to NHL GMs.
The irony is that the Canadien’s glory days were rife with players and managers doing a lot of out-of-the-box thinking. They were trend-setters, not trend-followers. The wild-eyed intensity and politically vocal Maurice Richard comes to mind. The problem isn’t that players think they are bigger than the game, it’s management believing they are. Would Roy have been traded if cooler, more mature heads prevailed over ego? Let's be honest, it was a childish spat that set back the franchise at least a decade.
I believe Marc Bergevin sincerely wants to make this team better. I believe Michel Therrien thinks he has the winning formula. They may be right. I hope they’re right, but I can't help but wonder how much hockey culture plays a role in their decisions. That said, though I may disagree with their decisions, we all want the same thing, and I can't fault them for that. Besides, holding grudges is a profound waste of time.
I am very much looking forward to Canadiens hockey this season. I'm excited to see what Shea Weber brings to the team, but I will also be watching and supporting P.K. Subban.
Yes, I can do both. That's what grown ups do.
I believed at the time (and still do) that the trade was a mistake. Marc Bergevin went all-in acquiring a known commodity in Shea Weber in exchange for Subban’s obvious potential. If you were to ask general managers around the league, most would say it was a good trade for the Canadiens organization. Though clearly many like myself, plus one GM, don't agree.
Which brings me, oddly enough, to the current trainwreck that is the American election. Many of us have lamented the popularity of the supremely unqualified Donald Trump. It's becoming clear his support has little to do with substantive policy, but rather a thinly-veiled appeal to an underlying culture of intolerance and ignorance among many voters. Trump knows he is the right man for everything that is wrong with an appallingly large segment of American society.
So too in hockey, the problem isn’t Subban, or Bergevin, it’s the culture. As pro sports go, there are few that match hockey in its conservatism. Golf certainly. Tennis perhaps. For example, in an era when pro sports leagues have been forced to address player safety, in particular concussions, the NHL still tacitly approves of bare-fisted fighting by arguing that 'it's just part of the game.' The league generally discourages individuality in its players, both on and off the ice, unless it conforms to a model of humility, old-school toughness, quiet community service and 'the code.'
Subban is anything but that. He is brash, outspoken, funny, loud and incredibly gifted. His public image is as important as was his pride in playing for the Canadiens. Unfortunately that kind of thinking doesn’t mesh with NHL culture. In the minds of many, Subban was getting too big for his britches, an appropriately antiquated expression to illustrate the point.
Like it or not, players like Subban represent the modern generation of professional athletes. Branding is important to them, but can also be extremely lucrative to the franchises for which they play. Pro leagues don't own players like they used to, a concept that seems strangely foreign to NHL GMs.
The irony is that the Canadien’s glory days were rife with players and managers doing a lot of out-of-the-box thinking. They were trend-setters, not trend-followers. The wild-eyed intensity and politically vocal Maurice Richard comes to mind. The problem isn’t that players think they are bigger than the game, it’s management believing they are. Would Roy have been traded if cooler, more mature heads prevailed over ego? Let's be honest, it was a childish spat that set back the franchise at least a decade.
I believe Marc Bergevin sincerely wants to make this team better. I believe Michel Therrien thinks he has the winning formula. They may be right. I hope they’re right, but I can't help but wonder how much hockey culture plays a role in their decisions. That said, though I may disagree with their decisions, we all want the same thing, and I can't fault them for that. Besides, holding grudges is a profound waste of time.
I am very much looking forward to Canadiens hockey this season. I'm excited to see what Shea Weber brings to the team, but I will also be watching and supporting P.K. Subban.
Yes, I can do both. That's what grown ups do.
Winning Respect
(First published February 17, 2015)
In Montreal there is no higher position than coach of the Canadiens. With respect to Mayor Denis Corderre, the glaring media spotlight of Habs bench-boss is beyond compare. Every decision is scrutinized by a batallion of reporters, insiders, critics and pundits, not to mention legions of fans and couch-coaches worldwide.
It is simultaneously an incredible and soul-destroying job.
Michel Therrien doesn't have it easy. His NHL coaching resume prior to his hiring (or technically rehiring) is marked with near-greatness and ignominious failure. At times he doesn't help his own cause by making and repeating decisions that can seem puzzling, risky and downright bizarre.
Which makes it all the more impressive that Michel Therrien carries on his coaching duties seemingly without giving a flying f*ck what anybody thinks.
Of course, there are plenty of legitimate factors contributing to the Habs' success this season: Carey Price elevating his game to the stratosphere, brilliant moves by General Manager Marc Bergevin and young players maturing at the right time. Without undermining the value of those factors, I would argue where the rubber truly meets the road is how those elements come together on the ice. Certainly Therrien's experience as coach of the Pittsburgh Penguins tells us that a skilled lineup doesn't always equate to success. Understanding the complexity of NHL-level strategy combined with the skills, mindset, egos and experience of your roster is a difficult balancing act at best.
Somehow in the face of his own personal history and the frenzied spotlight, Therrien has found a way to keep the Canadiens consistently atop the standings. Yet despite this record, he seems to have garnered only a modicum of grudging respect. In virtually any other franchise in the NHL (including Toronto) Michel Therrien would be hailed as a hero.
Is Therrien the best coach in the NHL? Successful certainly, but maybe not the best.
Is Therrien the best coach for the Canadiens right now? The answer has to be a resounding yes.
Turning around a team that failed to make the playoffs in 2012, with a roster laden with some notable dead weight, inexperienced and developing players, in the unforgiving and oft brutal spotlight of Montreal media and rabid fan base, is nothing short of remarkable. And yes, he's done so in two languages, despite having to endure crass mockery of his accent.
Love him or hate him, Michel Therrien is unwavering in his viewpoints and will coach the team the way he believes it should be coached until he gets fired, or retires. That is perhaps the only way a person not only copes with the stresses of coaching the Montreal Canadiens, but can be successful doing so.
I don't always agree with Michel Therrien's decisions, but I cannot fault his success in one of the toughest coaching jobs in professional sports.
Though I highly suspect he couldn't give a flying f*ck what I think.
In Montreal there is no higher position than coach of the Canadiens. With respect to Mayor Denis Corderre, the glaring media spotlight of Habs bench-boss is beyond compare. Every decision is scrutinized by a batallion of reporters, insiders, critics and pundits, not to mention legions of fans and couch-coaches worldwide.
It is simultaneously an incredible and soul-destroying job.
Michel Therrien doesn't have it easy. His NHL coaching resume prior to his hiring (or technically rehiring) is marked with near-greatness and ignominious failure. At times he doesn't help his own cause by making and repeating decisions that can seem puzzling, risky and downright bizarre.
Which makes it all the more impressive that Michel Therrien carries on his coaching duties seemingly without giving a flying f*ck what anybody thinks.
Of course, there are plenty of legitimate factors contributing to the Habs' success this season: Carey Price elevating his game to the stratosphere, brilliant moves by General Manager Marc Bergevin and young players maturing at the right time. Without undermining the value of those factors, I would argue where the rubber truly meets the road is how those elements come together on the ice. Certainly Therrien's experience as coach of the Pittsburgh Penguins tells us that a skilled lineup doesn't always equate to success. Understanding the complexity of NHL-level strategy combined with the skills, mindset, egos and experience of your roster is a difficult balancing act at best.
Somehow in the face of his own personal history and the frenzied spotlight, Therrien has found a way to keep the Canadiens consistently atop the standings. Yet despite this record, he seems to have garnered only a modicum of grudging respect. In virtually any other franchise in the NHL (including Toronto) Michel Therrien would be hailed as a hero.
Is Therrien the best coach in the NHL? Successful certainly, but maybe not the best.
Is Therrien the best coach for the Canadiens right now? The answer has to be a resounding yes.
Turning around a team that failed to make the playoffs in 2012, with a roster laden with some notable dead weight, inexperienced and developing players, in the unforgiving and oft brutal spotlight of Montreal media and rabid fan base, is nothing short of remarkable. And yes, he's done so in two languages, despite having to endure crass mockery of his accent.
Love him or hate him, Michel Therrien is unwavering in his viewpoints and will coach the team the way he believes it should be coached until he gets fired, or retires. That is perhaps the only way a person not only copes with the stresses of coaching the Montreal Canadiens, but can be successful doing so.
I don't always agree with Michel Therrien's decisions, but I cannot fault his success in one of the toughest coaching jobs in professional sports.
Though I highly suspect he couldn't give a flying f*ck what I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)