Allaire won't be back

[Kin]

Yeah, but why throw an employee under the bus publicly while still under contract?

Well, there's no need to do it under contract or not. That's not my issue though. If Burke and Allaire want to throw mud at each other that's their business. I'm just surprised at the fact that what Burke is saying about Allaire makes the team sound like a mess.

 

[TML fan]

Maybe he gave Allaire a chance to prove his way still works? It didn't have to be fixed right away.

 

[Bender]

Yeah, but why throw an employee under the bus publicly while still under contract?

Well, there's no need to do it under contract or not. That's not my issue though. If Burke and Allaire want to throw mud at each other that's their business. I'm just surprised at the fact that what Burke is saying about Allaire makes the team sound like a mess.

I interpreted it more as they realized halfway in that Allaire's style needed adjustment and the guy was too stuck in his ways to evolve the position when Reimer and Gus continued to struggle.

 

[Kin]

I interpreted it more as they realized halfway in that Allaire's style needed adjustment and the guy was too stuck in his ways to evolve the position when Reimer and Gus continued to struggle.

Which is all fine and good but describing a situation where Allaire, a position coach, was asked something by the head coach or other coaches and refused does not sound like an organization that is operating correctly.

 

[Bullfrog]

I don't agree that one person not complying with his superiors is evidence of an incorrectly operating organization.

I'm not arguing one way or the other about the organization's functioning, just that I don't think one person's insubordination is evidence of the state of the organization.

 

[Kin]

I don't agree that one person not complying with his superiors is evidence of an incorrectly operating organization.

I agree. The evidence isn't the insubordination, it's that the insubordination wasn't dealt with.

 

[TML fan]

I don't agree that one person not complying with his superiors is evidence of an incorrectly operating organization.

I agree. The evidence isn't the insubordination, it's that the insubordination wasn't dealt with.

I get the impression that they were going to can Allaire anyway, and he chose to leave on his own. Were it not for Allaire's hissy fit, it would have allowed him to save face. It seems to me that Burke let Allaire do things his way, probably knowing he was going to fail and setting up a mutual parting of ways. Burke's a pretty generous guy. It seems in character with him.

 

[Bullfrog]

I don't agree that one person not complying with his superiors is evidence of an incorrectly operating organization.

I agree. The evidence isn't the insubordination, it's that the insubordination wasn't dealt with.

The only somewhat hopeful explanation I can make is that he hoped Allaire would come around?? or maybe Burke gave up on the season? That doesn't make any sense considering he canned Wilson though. Perhaps he was seeing if Carlyle could turn him around considering their shared success in Anaheim?

Either way, at the NHL they need to make the changes necessary in a timely fashion.

I'm mostly grasping at ideas here.

 

[TML fan]

I don't agree that one person not complying with his superiors is evidence of an incorrectly operating organization.

I agree. The evidence isn't the insubordination, it's that the insubordination wasn't dealt with.

The only somewhat hopeful explanation I can make is that he hoped Allaire would come around?? or maybe Burke gave up on the season? That doesn't make any sense considering he canned Wilson though. Perhaps he was seeing if Carlyle could turn him around considering their shared success in Anaheim?

Either way, at the NHL they need to make the changes necessary in a timely fashion.

I'm mostly grasping at ideas here.

Keep in mind that firing Allaire midway through the season wouldn't necessarily have turned the Leafs' fortunes around. I believe that Burke cited the media and fan criticism as the main reason for firing Wilson when he did. From everything I've read, it sounds to me like he was planning on replacing Wilson and Allaire anyway and was probably waiting for the end of the season.

 

[Bullfrog]

That's more or less how I see it too. It's possible that they had eyed St.Croix as a replacement and he wasn't available at the time. Also, it's possible that Allaire probably wasn't doing much at that point and obviously replacing a goalie consultant isn't as important as a head coach.

 

[L K]

That strikes me as scary that at the NHL level a goaltending coach doesn't want the goalies involved in PK meetings.  I think that's pretty damn important that they know what the players are trying to do in front of them.

 

[maplesyrup]

That strikes me as scary that at the NHL level a goaltending coach doesn't want the goalies involved in PK meetings.  I think that's pretty damn important that they know what the players are trying to do in front of them.

I'm with you there. I always though it was important for the goalie and the D to be in tune.

 

[Kin]

The only somewhat hopeful explanation I can make is that he hoped Allaire would come around?? or maybe Burke gave up on the season?

That doesn't really explain anything though. I mean, first of all, the idea that Burke would have let a bad situation fester and just hope that it would clear up despite the ongoing problems with the team's goaltending or that he'd already given up on the season in early February when Allaire refused apparently refused to do what Wilson asked reads to me like a confirmation that the organization wasn't particularly sound.

Moreover though, I can't reconcile either of those suggestions with the idea that Burke has put forth several times in the media and that I genuinely take his word on that the team missing the playoffs really bothers him. I think that's true both because of his competitive nature and the fact that continually missing the playoffs is probably putting his job on the line. Someone who's desperate to make the playoffs is going to more proactive in dealing with problems than the "letting things sort themself out" and waiting months while it didn't sort it self-out implies and they're not going to give up on the season with two months left in it.

I'm mostly grasping at ideas here.

Ok, I realize that. But for me, yeah, we could search and find kind of far-fetched or reaching possibilities as to why things were the way they were but it doesn't change my immediate reaction which is that if things happened with Allaire the way it's described and Burke didn't deal with it immediately it sounds to me like a significant mess.

 

[TML fan]

Can you say for certain that firing Allaire immediately would have made a difference? From the time it became apparent that Allaire was a problem, to the time they hired a new coach and he implemented his coaching methods, the season likely would have been over.

A while back when I was working for a company as a supervisor, I had problems with an insubordinate employee. I couldn't send him home because the contract required that someone be there. So I left him there and he was fired the next day. The point is, as useless as that employee was, removing him would have just created another hole.

I don't think there was anything to be done. It was always going to be fixed in the off season.

 

[L K]

Can you say for certain that firing Allaire immediately would have made a difference? From the time it became apparent that Allaire was a problem, to the time they hired a new coach and he implemented his coaching methods, the season likely would have been over.

A while back when I was working for a company as a supervisor, I had problems with an insubordinate employee. I couldn't send him home because the contract required that someone be there. So I left him there and he was fired the next day. The point is, as useless as that employee was, removing him would have just created another hole.

I don't think there was anything to be done. It was always going to be fixed in the off season.

I don't think the issue is so much the impact that a coaching change would have on the performance of the goaltenders, so much as the message it sends through the organization when a guy can thumb his nose at everyone and get away with it.

It's a bad working environment.  If Allaire is telling his goalies to do one thing, and then someone else tries to add some input (when the team is horrifically struggling with the current system) and Allaire tells him the PK coach to screw off.  It sends mixed messages to the goaltenders for one.  But it also divides the lockerroom to an extent when you isolate the team.

 

[Kin]

I don't think the issue is so much the impact that a coaching change would have on the performance of the goaltenders, so much as the message it sends through the organization when a guy can thumb his nose at everyone and get away with it.

It's a bad working environment.  If Allaire is telling his goalies to do one thing, and then someone else tries to add some input (when the team is horrifically struggling with the current system) and Allaire tells him the PK coach to screw off.  It sends mixed messages to the goaltenders for one.  But it also divides the lockerroom to an extent when you isolate the team.

Exactly. If there's a situation where the head coach is telling the goalies one thing and the goaltending coach is telling them something entirely different and the two coaches aren't even on speaking terms then it would qualify as a problem even if the team and the goalies were playing well. As is, with the Leafs caught in a pretty terrible swoon and the goaltending at the root of the problem, I'd think that at the very least the coaching staff would want to be the same page with regards to what the goalies were being told what to do.

I don't know, to me, it's fairly straight forward. If the PK coach wants to involve the goalies and Allaire shoots him down, the PK coach goes to Ron Wilson to get Allaire on board. If Allaire doesn't listen to Wilson, Burke makes a decision as to who ultimately has the authority on how the goaltenders play. If it's Wilson, Allaire needs to be brought in line or fired even if he's not replaced by anyone. If it's Allaire, Wilson shouldn't be the coach of the team.

Like I said, from my perspective this isn't about wins or losses or improvement from the players,I think there's enough to convict on that front before the Allaire thing came out. Top down authority, though, is pretty close to a universal in sports. If an assistant coach tells a head coach to eff off, he gets fired.

 

[TML fan]

Can you say for certain that firing Allaire immediately would have made a difference? From the time it became apparent that Allaire was a problem, to the time they hired a new coach and he implemented his coaching methods, the season likely would have been over.

A while back when I was working for a company as a supervisor, I had problems with an insubordinate employee. I couldn't send him home because the contract required that someone be there. So I left him there and he was fired the next day. The point is, as useless as that employee was, removing him would have just created another hole.

I don't think there was anything to be done. It was always going to be fixed in the off season.

I don't think the issue is so much the impact that a coaching change would have on the performance of the goaltenders, so much as the message it sends through the organization when a guy can thumb his nose at everyone and get away with it.

It's a bad working environment.  If Allaire is telling his goalies to do one thing, and then someone else tries to add some input (when the team is horrifically struggling with the current system) and Allaire tells him the PK coach to screw off.  It sends mixed messages to the goaltenders for one.  But it also divides the lockerroom to an extent when you isolate the team.

But he didn't get away with it. He is no longer with the organization.

 

[Bullfrog]

Like I said, from my perspective this isn't about wins or losses or improvement from the players,I think there's enough to convict on that front before the Allaire thing came out. Top down authority, though, is pretty close to a universal in sports. If an assistant coach tells a head coach to eff off, he gets fired.

I don't disagree. I just have to assume there's a reason. Not sure why I have to assume that, but it makes me feel better. Anyway, all I can think of is that Burke already had decided that Wilson was going to be fired and he hoped that Allaire would work better with Carlyle (since they had success before.)

However, if Allaire's refusal to follow Wilson had been going on for some time (as we should probably assume) then it doesn't make a lot of sense and certainly undermines Burke's position.

 

[Kin]

I don't disagree. I just have to assume there's a reason. Not sure why I have to assume that, but it makes me feel better. Anyway, all I can think of is that Burke already had decided that Wilson was going to be fired and he hoped that Allaire would work better with Carlyle (since they had success before.)

But decided to fire Wilson when? At the beginning of February after the team had a 7-4-1 January, were right in the thick of things and only a month after giving him a contract extension? Or do you mean that he'd decided to fire Wilson before the season even began, in which case, why in the world did he get extended in the first place?

 

[Bullfrog]

I meant the decision in the middle of the season.

Though really, I'm just suggesting possible alternatives to TML being totally dysfunctional. They may very well be. But in organizations I've been a part of (nothing so large as TML), they always give the managers the chance to sort things out first (in this case Ron Wilson being the head coach would be responsible for sorting out Allaire). Failing that, then the uppers get involved. Perhaps Wilson's failure to get Allaire on board was a contributing factor to him being fired. If the problem was simply a conflict between Wilson et al and Allaire, then it's not unreasonable to wait and see if things improved under Carlyle.