As most of my disgust and finger pointing has been at Q for almost 2 years now, some or even many out there would rather turn that finger towards the GM. It brings to light another element discussed only recently on this blog. I am talking about marketing. It might help to read the article in question (click on the title to link there), but I am going to try and sum it up anyway.
Here is a quote,
"Coach Joel Quenneville continues on with his veteran teaching techniques and his speaking monotone that could announce the Earth is being eaten by renegade black holes, and it would put you to sleep. But it’s not Q who’s the problem. Not yet. Something is wrong with the makeup of the team, with the players general manager Stan Bowman has assembled."
I almost completely disagree here and the statement stinks of media twisting, or marketing games. Is this the silent factor we have been overlooking a tad? When the talks calling for Kane's trade started turning up here and there, my wife responded, "they would never get rid of Kane, that would be a marketing nightmare." Is this team more worried about marketing, or having a solid team?
These thoughts do however allow myself sometime to reflect on SB.
Here is another quote from the article,
"If things don’t turn around soon this season or by the beginning of next season, there will be the inevitable clash of front-office personalities and the necessary search for a scapegoat. Either Bowman or Quenneville will have to go."
Today, Stan made the statement that Q is going nowhere. He said that he feels fine with Q's leadership and that he is our guy. Is this just another statement driven by marketing? Does Stan just not see what we see, or is someone else calling the shots who has a special affininty to Q? Unfortunately, since I have been calling Q out almost since his arrival in Chicago, there leaves little room for me to still have faith in his coaching sense, abilities, or style. If what Stan says is true, then I must get used to it.
No need to worry though, because today the Hawks worked on team play, and again on the power-play. Duncan Keith was excused for maintenance reasons, and in a shocking move, we will see new line-combos tomorrow night. Sharp is being moved to 1st line with Toews and Kane. This move might ignite something from those 3 individuals, but I find it funny that a move like this is being sold at the same time that we are being sold an attempt at forging better "team" play.
But this article is supposed to be about Stan. Do we harbor more blame for him, or Q, or do we point the finger at the players themselves. I honestly have a hard time looking at Stan's moves as being that terrible. When he made the deals he made, I thought they made sense. I did however take personal concern with allowing the goalie who won a cup for this city to go, and I also felt pretty bad about the Campoli loss after saying goodbye to Campbell (which I totally agreed with, and still do). I pretty much said that both would come back to haunt us. Besides these 2 bad choices, I really can't point at Stan. Can these 2 bad moves hold a lot of the blame, are they no here to haunt us?
By saying that he believed in Q, is Stan not then placing the real blame on the players themselves? Im sure he isn't throwing himself up as a martyr. Or, has the administration given up on this season entirely (in the form of going passed the 2nd round). Choosing to wait until the many prospects are ready, and Q can lead them to prosperity. Based on what I have seen Q do to prospects, I wouldn't hold my breath on that going well.
It all just sounds like marketing noise to me.