Jump to content
realtruelove

"We've got to be tougher to play against." Phil Housley

Recommended Posts

That's not "Jason's Job"  That's Phil Housley's job, the players job and THE CAPTAIN'S Job.  We have clarity and now we know who owns the rest of this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Phil has been so focused on shifting the style of play the defensive side of the game has been neglected, simple as that. We simply are not good enough to do both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should anyone be surprised?  Housley was an offensive dynamo as a player, but a HUGE liability in his own end.

He was never tough to play against, so why would a team coached by him be?

Any more room in the bunker?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night was not on PH.  There is simply no commitment to play defense.  It was astonishing.  We could of blown them out.  Makes you wonder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, ParkMeadow said:

Why should anyone be surprised?  Housley was an offensive dynamo as a player, but a HUGE liability in his own end.

He was never tough to play against, so why would a team coached by him be?

Any more room in the bunker?

I never understand this line of thinking.  Housley's skill set doesn't preclude him not understanding other aspects of the game.  It's not like he wasn't around some tough as nails players in all of his time playing and coaching. 

More over, toughness does not mean physicality. It's one way to be tougher to play against. It can also mean that the team is not tenacious enough in its defense. It can mean that it is too easy to get the puck from them when they are on offense.

I had a tough teacher more than once. They didn't beat me over the head.

It's easy to blame the coach, because it's one person.  It's one person whose job it is to motivate the team. However, if you've ever tried to lead a team you may have come up against the situation where a few bad eggs on the team will consistently undermine anything you are trying to do. It's compounded if those bad eggs are also some of the more talented on the team.

Right now, this team is back to being fragile. Okposo said it a few weeks ago (or last week).  The coaching card that was posted in the Carolina thread says it.  Their mental state is fragile and that's not something a coach can necessarily fix. The team has to resolve that issue.  It's beginning to sound like the locker room problem hasn't been totally eradicated and that someone in there still needs to get bounced. 

If Housley and Botterill are not on the same page I wouldn't necessarily point the finger at Housley.

Right now I think it's safe to say that the whole team is at fault for sucking it up.  I wouldn't point the finger at any one person. They suck and they need to stop feeling bad about it and decide to play hockey and that doesn't come from 1 person.  It comes from all of them.

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Thanks (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been wondering if we're in another situation where a talented ex-player ends up being a bad coach. 

Although we've had plenty of bad coaches who weren't good players too. So...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LTS said:

I never understand this line of thinking.  Housley's skill set doesn't preclude him not understanding other aspects of the game.  It's not like he wasn't around some tough as nails players in all of his time playing and coaching. 

More over, toughness does not mean physicality. It's one way to be tougher to play against. It can also mean that the team is not tenacious enough in its defense. It can mean that it is too easy to get the puck from them when they are on offense.

I had a tough teacher more than once. They didn't beat me over the head.

It's easy to blame the coach, because it's one person.  It's one person whose job it is to motivate the team. However, if you've ever tried to lead a team you may have come up against the situation where a few bad eggs on the team will consistently undermine anything you are trying to do. It's compounded if those bad eggs are also some of the more talented on the team.

Right now, this team is back to being fragile. Okposo said it a few weeks ago (or last week).  The coaching card that was posted in the Carolina thread says it.  Their mental state is fragile and that's not something a coach can necessarily fix. The team has to resolve that issue.  It's beginning to sound like the locker room problem hasn't been totally eradicated and that someone in there still needs to get bounced. 

If Housley and Botterill are not on the same page I wouldn't necessarily point the finger at Housley.

Right now I think it's safe to say that the whole team is at fault for sucking it up.  I wouldn't point the finger at any one person. They suck and they need to stop feeling bad about it and decide to play hockey and that doesn't come from 1 person.  It comes from all of them.

And being tough to play against doesn't equal toughness. We can get into the 100 definitions of toughness but in hockey it's almost always related to physical play and fighting.  

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ParkMeadow said:

Why should anyone be surprised?  Housley was an offensive dynamo as a player, but a HUGE liability in his own end.

He was never tough to play against, so why would a team coached by him be?

Any more room in the bunker?

Really? Cause he was credited as a major reason why the Preds defense was so good.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, darksabre said:

I've been wondering if we're in another situation where a talented ex-player ends up being a bad coach. 

Although we've had plenty of bad coaches who weren't good players too. So...

I think that Housley may very well be a good coach.  He was all the rage in Nashville and touted as an up and comer.

Thing is we don't know really what he could do with a better roster.

That said, some of his in game and lineup stuff is questionable, at best, and inciting the masses into a riotous mob, at worst.  That also being said, the coaches may have been instructed by JBOT to try different / strange things / combos so that he can better judge what he has to work with here.  It may all be part of this *evaluation year*?

6 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Really? Cause he was credited as a major reason why the Preds defense was so good.

Maybe in the end we could trade him again for another Ducky?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I think that Housley may very well be a good coach.  He was all the rage in Nashville and touted as an up and comer.

Thing is we don't know really what he could do with a better roster.

That said, some of his in game and lineup stuff is questionable, at best, and inciting the masses into a riotous mob, at worst.  That also being said, the coaches may have been instructed by JBOT to try different / strange things / combos so that he can better judge what he has to work with here.  It may all be part of this *evaluation year*?

Maybe in the end we could trade him again for another Ducky?

He's coached 130+ Sabres games... what makes you think he might actually be a good coach?

81 of 82 games never playing Eichel/ROR together when down a goal in the 3rd.

He hasn't tried Reinhart at center at all this... instead going with Sobotka at center for a large portion of the season.

It's hard to imagine he's been instructed to try anything outside the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ParkMeadow said:

Why should anyone be surprised?  Housley was an offensive dynamo as a player, but a HUGE liability in his own end.

He was never tough to play against, so why would a team coached by him be?

Any more room in the bunker?

After another late game collapse, we added an addition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

I think that Housley may very well be a good coach.  He was all the rage in Nashville and touted as an up and comer.

Thing is we don't know really what he could do with a better roster.

That said, some of his in game and lineup stuff is questionable, at best, and inciting the masses into a riotous mob, at worst.  That also being said, the coaches may have been instructed by JBOT to try different / strange things / combos so that he can better judge what he has to work with here.  It may all be part of this *evaluation year*?

Maybe in the end we could trade him again for another Ducky?

It's possible that Botterill and Housley are very much on the same page. I've believed that up until last night. Phil's comments have me wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jame said:

He's coached 130+ Sabres games... what makes you think he might actually be a good coach?

81 of 82 games never playing Eichel/ROR together when down a goal in the 3rd.

He hasn't tried Reinhart at center at all this... instead going with Sobotka at center for a large portion of the season.

It's hard to imagine he's been instructed to try anything outside the box.

My point is and has been all along that it is hard to tell either way with the roster that he has had to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, darksabre said:

It's possible that Botterill and Housley are very much on the same page. I've believed that up until last night. Phil's comments have me wondering.

Did coach say something puzzling after the game, or are you referring to the playing tougher stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Full comments here:

https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/phil-housley-postgame-2719/t-277822760/c-65678403

Reporter: "You've given up 17 goals in these 3 home games, are you getting to the point as an organization where you have to decide if this defensive corp is capable of playing here?"

Housley: "That's Jason's job. Obviously we are going to take a hard look at it, this game tonight and we will evaluate that (the game?) tomorrow. We are going to show it (the game?) again. We're going to review it. I think it is important they see it, so they can hear what we are talking about it, because to me those things are very fixable. The defensive part of our game for the most part, checking detail, coming back into our zone, was really good. But again it is just in and around our net we've got to take care of." 

Edited by LGR4GM
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, LTS said:

I never understand this line of thinking.  Housley's skill set doesn't preclude him not understanding other aspects of the game.  It's not like he wasn't around some tough as nails players in all of his time playing and coaching. 

More over, toughness does not mean physicality. It's one way to be tougher to play against. It can also mean that the team is not tenacious enough in its defense. It can mean that it is too easy to get the puck from them when they are on offense.

I had a tough teacher more than once. They didn't beat me over the head.

It's easy to blame the coach, because it's one person.  It's one person whose job it is to motivate the team. However, if you've ever tried to lead a team you may have come up against the situation where a few bad eggs on the team will consistently undermine anything you are trying to do. It's compounded if those bad eggs are also some of the more talented on the team.

Right now, this team is back to being fragile. Okposo said it a few weeks ago (or last week).  The coaching card that was posted in the Carolina thread says it.  Their mental state is fragile and that's not something a coach can necessarily fix. The team has to resolve that issue.  It's beginning to sound like the locker room problem hasn't been totally eradicated and that someone in there still needs to get bounced. 

If Housley and Botterill are not on the same page I wouldn't necessarily point the finger at Housley.

Right now I think it's safe to say that the whole team is at fault for sucking it up.  I wouldn't point the finger at any one person. They suck and they need to stop feeling bad about it and decide to play hockey and that doesn't come from 1 person.  It comes from all of them.

I used the word tenacity in another theead.  That is what is lacking and it is often misconstrued as toughness.

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Weave said:

I used the word tenacity in another theead.  That is what is lacking and it is often misconstrued as toughness.

Bingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, darksabre said:

Bingo.

I went back and checked.  The actual word I used was determination.  Same idea.  We lack consistency with it.  We showed it in flashes during the 10 game streak, but just in flashed.  And we are showing fewer flashes of it now.  This is not a squad with a great deal of determination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Weave said:

I used the word tenacity in another theead.  That is what is lacking and it is often misconstrued as toughness.

That's the word. I also think you are right and determination would also work. I think we see certain players showing that but others just lack it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

Full comments here:

https://www.nhl.com/sabres/video/phil-housley-postgame-2719/t-277822760/c-65678403

Reporter: "You've given up 17 goals in these 3 home games, are you getting to the point as an organization where you have to decide if this defensive corp is capable of playing here?"

Housley: "That's Jason's job. Obviously we are going to take a hard look at it, this game tonight and we will evaluate that (the game?) tomorrow. We are going to show it (the game?) again. We're going to review it. I think it is important they see it, so they can hear what we are talking about it, because to me those things are very fixable. The defensive part of our game for the most part, checking detail, coming back into our zone, was really good. But again it is just in and around our net we've got to take care of." 

Well, to me, he is not wrong in the sense that JBOT has to evaluate the roster and decide what to do about it.

It is up to the coaches to best deal with the players they have and to make sure they are playing there best each game.  I did not watch the game, nor the highlights yet, but from what little I have read about it it seems that Phil does not have a good handle on what happened last night.  Would that be fair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Well, to me, he is not wrong in the sense that JBOT has to evaluate the roster and decide what to do about it.

It is up to the coaches to best deal with the players they have and to make sure they are playing there best each game.  I did not watch the game, nor the highlights yet, but from what little I have read about it it seems that Phil does not have a good handle on what happened last night.  Would that be fair?

I think that would be fair. I mean, he says their checking detail was "really good".

Yeah, okay Phil.

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

My point is and has been all along that it is hard to tell either way with the roster that he has had to deal with.

It's not that hard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×