...

Reading goes a long way into not seeming ignorant.

No other club went with him after Edmonton because: 1) Edmonton soured him to the NHL for a long time. 2) In 2017 RK was still happy in his present job. 3) Choosing RK is the crazy, non-linear choice. Nothing confusing here.

"Positive" is a relative term. He did not say they were all staring at a long off-season. He didn't say they were all slackers that get paid a lot to perform better. He pointed out that they had a goal and that to meet that goal and take control of their destiny was dependent on choice - and eliminated the losing choice as an option.

If you're implying Eichel can get Krueger fired, I think the table on the players has turned with this hire. See the Bills for an example.

I like it. I like the courage to think and be different JBott has shown here. Someone in this organization needs to show some creativity and courage and if it comes from the top, I'm in. The thing about RK that will be different from ...a lot... of possible coaches is that the guy seems to have made a career about respecting an individual's strengths and weaknesses and trying to figure out how to work with this, including himself. So, when he says "I will be a lot less about technicalities and tactics than I will be into keeping communication lines open..." I believe, expect, rather, that he will have at least one exceptional tactician as an assistant. To me, that's the only weak point of this hire, tactics and strategy in game. If he can address that correctly, and he already has a head start by admitting it, then I have a little hope here. Can't say enough, though, about the craziness of the hire. I do love that.

Vogl + source =

If any of it is true, DOWN WITH BOTTERILL!

It's coming from this: ...which I really, really don't buy as a legit source. Not saying it's not true, but, not enough for me to say Gorbnorg was never interviewed.

HOw dO we KnoW GoRnBorG diN'T geTs aN inTerVieWz?

Just keeping the memory alive.

You have Botterill's list? Why are you holding out on us? Post that thing!

OMG. They'll call a trip but not a head shot.

WTF, Blues. I guess, if they take this series, at least they'll liberally apply hits to the head of Bruins as well.

I hope you're right. I'm not buying into the narrative being sold here on Kruger.

If they hire this guy then that must mean they think they still need a "culture change".

I'm not seeing anything exciting in that Wiki bio of his, at least coaching-wise. There are a few things that jump out: "He is also known for his involvement in the World Economic Forum, where since 2011 he has been a Member, Global Agenda Council on New Models of Leadership.[6]" This might be of interest to our owner and those who dabble in conspiracy theories. Also, this: "The book he authored (in German, also translated into French), called Teamlife - Beyond Setbacks to Success, was devoted to handling problems in life, and became a bestseller.[13]" This surely has him the top candidate for the job.

I understand it's the playoffs, but I can't get over how dirty of a game the Blues play. Also, according to my eyes, either the Blues are a larger than average team, or the Sharks are a smaller than average team.

These guys can go like this for 3 overtime periods.

Fun!

Not caring? Okay!

On WGR last night, "Sneaky Joe" was discussing who he thought were pretty high on the list. Keefe and Gronborg, essentially, with Gronborg being, perhaps, more likely. He doesn't claim to have inside info, but did do a @PASabreFan-style deconstruction of the situation as we know it to arrive at his conclusions. And, of course, there is conflicting info on Tippet. https://o.canada.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/ken-holland-is-coming-to-edmonton-oilers-but-not-coach-dave-tippett-says-holland-insider/wcm/a203daef-0c30-46ef-8cb6-96d9298bf2ac

Royal screw job.

Because it was meant to? Mission accomplished! On Phaze 4, I thought I saw a few references to it in the film-culture media I was scouring last night. I'll post stuff whenever I get to it again if you want.

On the bolded, and this is not really directed at you, just jumping off the point: certain people, like Hollywood itself (generalizing) are "women-sensitive" these days to an absurd, immature level. When the point in the movie arrived last night, my wife and I both looked at each other and said "girl power" and laughed. My wife, BTW, is a woman. It was contrived and an obvious attempt to make a statement. In movies like this where the line between reasonable suspension of disbelief and jumping the shark is so razor thin, they need to be very careful with maintaining that line. When they throw in a contemporary, pandering message in an intense fight scene they leap off the line, blowing through the fourth wall and like snapping a finger (I did it again!), break the spell they worked 2:45 hours to put us in. Stupid. Also, philosophically speaking, the idea that someone starts to care about a character simply because they look like them and that this little moment "matters" in some big, sociological, evolutionary way is pathetic and depressing. On the non-bolded: they seemed to have had some forethought early enough in the MCU series that building in references and planning how they're going to get out of the painted corner was built in and became more sophisticated as they went along. I think the Star Trek reboot probably did a lot to give them the confidence to consider developing totally new timelines in film. Obviously, the comic books have been doing it long prior, but film audiences are not comic book audiences. I need to read more about "Phase 4". I would like to see more Dr. Strange, etc, and there is still a ton to tap into from the Marvel comics. I think the problem they're likely to have is finding someone like Robert Downey Jr. and, to a lesser degree, Chris Evans to anchor the next phase. I would argue that without Downey Jr. nailing Iron Man, the MCU would be facing the same scrutiny and issues the DC movies have faced. As much as I like Benedict Cumberbatch, he's not Downey Jr. playing Tony Stark. Brie Larson is one-dimensional and boring. Tom Holland is good but they need to make him grow up, fast. Zoe Saldana has some presence that I enjoy, but, again, none of the remaining stable seems strong enough. It will be interesting to see how they split things up, and I agree that we're likely to see a lot more separation now that Disney has their streaming service coming.

So, FWIW, I just saw this tonight, so I'm new at the spoiler stuff. Apparently this timeline/Rogers thing has already been discussed: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/avengers-endgame-captain-america-ending-isnt-what-it-seems-1205370