The Oilogosphere is up in arms over the Oilers moving their day off from today to Wednesday and their vitriol is being directed at the Oilers coach for whom they (the fans) believe has taken advantage of a young captain. If you believe this is to be the case, stop watching the Oilers and perhaps shack up with Patrick O’Sullivan…
Oilers players cancel CBA mandated day off tomorrow to practice because their coach is upset. Not surprising when your captain is 19 y/o.
— Patrick O'Sullivan (@realPOSULLIVAN) October 17, 2016
Hey, look at me! I’m Patrick O’Sullivan. I’ve got the hugest bone to pick with the Oilers and I want everyone to know! Look at me! Look at me! Look at me!
Has this guy EVER said anything worth anybody’s time on Twitter?
Oh boo hoo for Patty O too. Quite the troll he’s become. Makes a controversial comment and then blocks a whole slew of people (myself included) who he thinks “might” be able to call him on his BS… This is a grown man, right? Not some 14-year-old pretending to be Patrick O’Sullivan? Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference.
Anyways, back to McLellan.
I believe he’s doing the right thing by addressing the Oilers shortcomings immediately. I don’t like the idea of a team getting shellacked and then getting a day off to stew on it. Get the boys back on the ice the next day, sort out the issues, and work on improving them.
I think the majority of folks who are against this idea are using excuses like, what about the guys with families? They could have doctor’s appointments or charity engagements.
Things can be moved around in these circumstances and since when is an entire family needed to go to the doctor’s office? My mother did it all on her own and I’m pretty certain most mothers I know did the same whilst I was growing up. Is there some new rule now?
I can appreciate a fan’s concern for a player and his family’s well-being but this is a pretty big stretch to foster an argument from.
I see a fair bit of criticism of the change of the Oiler practice day. The concern is that even if it was supposedly done with the 1/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
players OK, what if management had intimidated them? My question is: why assume this? Why assume TMc's relationship with his players 2/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
is already broken? Why assume a bunch of union-represented millionaires with guaranteed contracts *can* be intimidated? If I'm an 3/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
Oilers player, I'm embarrassed as hell over that game. And if the coach comes up and says “Guys, we've got a lot of things to work 4/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
on. How about we move tomorrow's day off to Wednesday and work on some things while last night is fresh in our memories?” I'd jump 5/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
at that chance. Because I'm a professional. Because I hate to lose. Not because I'm intimidated by my coach. 6/6
— Oilers Nerd Alert (@OilersNerdAlert) October 17, 2016
BENOIT POULIOT
Todd McLellan did take the right action in benching Pouliot for the majority of the game, I reckon. Could the Oilers have been a more competitive team with BP playing? Yes, and by a wide margin as well. But this is an instance where the coach has to put his foot down and potentially sacrifice a game to get his message across. It didn’t help that Talbot was letting in goals from beyond center ice though. Draisaitl not capitalizing on golden chance after golden chance could’ve been done without as well.
The Oilers lost the game on the scoresheet but destroyed the Sabres in the possession stats which is the opposite to what happened in Calgary.
Those links go to G-Money’s website and they provide a great amount of context as to how the games actually played out in the numbers.
The start to the 2016/17 is a bit crazy I say. The Oilers are winning games they probably shouldn’t and losing games they probably shouldn’t but in each game there is an overriding narrative that has pushed one team to the two points. Whether that’s a great game from McDavid and/or Talbot or a poor game from Talbot (or a great game from Lehner)…
One thing we cannot, MUST NOT, forget is that this team is still so so young and rarely do young teams compete with the consistency of a veteran squad. I mean, I was just asking myself the other day, How is Ryan Nugent-Hopkins going to be an Oiler if Leon Draisaitl keeps outplaying him?
A question to keep an eye on nevertheless…
THREE POINTS DAVE IS BACK!!
I don’t see how moving a day off, not taking away just moving a day off is anyone’s business but the oilers. Patty can go suck rocks. No concern to him whatsoever. If the team shits the bed and players agree to it WHO CARES patty or fans. They didn’t deserve the day off. Pat gonna sniff around rink to see if they got bag skated to? Can’t believe this is really a topic to be discussing. As for anything players had to cancel, I agree, things can be rescheduled. They get paid to play hockey, it’s their job!
It’s the business of any member (and former member) of the NHLPA. If you are going to be part of a union then it’s a reasonable expectation to respect what the union has agreed to. A team playing badly in one game is clearly not exceptional circumstances so while changing this practice day is good for the oilers, and as an oiler fan I’m happy about, it is not good for the union or the respect Oiler players command within the NHLPA. It’s also no surprise that there are some who are critical of this move.
It should be equally reasonable that of the members willingly determine a rule agreed to based on general principles does not fit the specific circumstances and that the members agree that another course of action is in their best interest that they be allowed the flexibility to proceed.
The only question in my mind is whether the players felt unduly intimidated. Given there were three veteran players along with McDavid, I am inclined to believe they were not, but certainly the union should be talking to the four players to assess that. If the conclusion is that the players willingly agreed then the case should be closed