The Sullivan Problem

[Antonio]

So, I'm not saying he doesn't know enough to be able to have occupied the space behind the bench competently for a while... I mean he obviously knows enough to develop a system and run a team. That being said, my definition of a good coach as you said, is one that can change, adapt, implement new systems, manage players well, check his ego, etc etc.

I don't think Sullivan does any of that and I don't think he ever did. I don't think he is capable. My opinion has always been that his success was due to this team needing a change and a new system... which be brought at the time and had success. I believe his success was overwhelmingly due to the talent and personnel on this team and not his skills or ability. I believe he brought a functional system that worked for this team at that time, gave them a change and new direction and they did well as a result of those changes not because of his skilled leadership or his coaching per se. I believe an average team that didn't have the players at the ages they were at would have been a substandard mess... kind of like it has been for the last half decade +.

I think Sullivan lacks the ability to:
- accurately judge talent
- fairly treat players based on performance
- hold players accountable
- create an environment that rewards performance and punishes failure in a fair, balanced and evenly applied way so players know expectations and that they all are the same
- adapt to the changes in the league and the team ability. He doesn't change the system because he CAN'T. I genuinely believe he doesn't know that to do because he's a **** idiot. He knows his system and that's it. It's been painfully obvious for years this team and this league have passed 2015 by but not for him.
- make personnel decisions on the needs of the team instead of his petty biases and feelings. Anyone who tries to seriously claim that he makes decisions based on performance alone is high as a kite on the meth. He plays favorites, lets some players do whatever, forces others into a system filled with anxiety and oppressive punishments for the smallest errors, which is NOT A GOOD COACH. That just leads to stress and poor play, as players panic over not making mistakes or playing how dip **** wants instead of to their strengths
- utilize players in a way to get their best. He can't let players play to their strengths... every **** player has to get trained to play the Sullivan **** brand of hockey even if it means he's going to teach them how to play a complete game after being in the league 10 years. **** you dip ****, you were some barely NHL caliber 8th line plugger and you think you can and need to teach every player at every position how to play the goddamn game.

I believe good coaches can develop and adapt to win games, adapt to the changes in their roster (coaches aren't supposed to be GMs... he has way too much say in roster moves (please don't try and say he doesn't have disproportionate impact on those choices) because he has to have what he wants... he doesn't know what to do with players he doesn't want). Good coaches motivate and create environment for success not a multi tiered system for different players where all but a handful of players are treated like persona non grata and have to rework their entire game and career to try and appease him to have a miniscule chance to play. Players should not be REGULARLY leaving the organization because they get no looks, not REGULARLY leaving here and finding significant success elsewhere, not be REGULARLY being successes prior to coming here and then becoming half assed failures and fractions of their former selves. Good coaches don't see the entire roster changed 4 times and still can't find success.

Sullivan brought toughness? This team is and has been weaker and flimsier than wet Walmart toilet paper for years. They can't hold a lead to save their lives, they can't put more than 20 minutes of effort in a night on 90 percent of nights, they collapse almost always at the first sign of adversity. This team is mentally pathetic, soft and without structure or discipline and has been. If not Sullivan, then who? The players? Which ones? This roster? Or one of the 3 or 4 completely different ones in the last 5 years basically?

Sullivan got nothing in Boston because he didn't have a malkin, Crosby, Letang, fleury etc prime age roster. Sure, he brought a new system and a functional system... I'm not saying he was a pro bowler who didn't even know how the game of hockey is played, but he succeeded here because he had a roster that made it easy to succeed. Bylsma brought a new message too... and the talent here was able to take that change and succeed... but he didn't last because he couldn't do most of the same things Sullivan can't do. He didn't stay in the league because NONE OF THE OTHER TEAMS saw him as some quality coach. He was **** and despite his on paper accomplishments, he was out of the league for YEARS. He wasn't a good coach, despite the "record" just like the bean town d bag we have now. Good coaches have staying power and generate results with different rosters, different teams, different systems... Sullivan is the same thing he's been for 10 years except Crosby and Malkin ain't 27 anymore. Good coaches don't need damn near a goddamn decade to win a playoff series... but hey, it's the refs, it's the goalies, it's the injuries... always something but, like it's apparently the new Penguin motto, replacing "it's a great day for hockey" with "it's always something but the coach."

[Daniel]

So, I'm not saying he doesn't know enough to be able to have occupied the space behind the bench competently for a while... I mean he obviously knows enough to develop a system and run a team. That being said, my definition of a good coach as you said, is one that can change, adapt, implement new systems, manage players well, check his ego, etc etc.

I don't think Sullivan does any of that and I don't think he ever did. I don't think he is capable. My opinion has always been that his success was due to this team needing a change and a new system... which be brought at the time and had success. I believe his success was overwhelmingly due to the talent and personnel on this team and not his skills or ability. I believe he brought a functional system that worked for this team at that time, gave them a change and new direction and they did well as a result of those changes not because of his skilled leadership or his coaching per se. I believe an average team that didn't have the players at the ages they were at would have been a substandard mess... kind of like it has been for the last half decade +.

I think Sullivan lacks the ability to:
- accurately judge talent
- fairly treat players based on performance
- hold players accountable
- create an environment that rewards performance and punishes failure in a fair, balanced and evenly applied way so players know expectations and that they all are the same
- adapt to the changes in the league and the team ability. He doesn't change the system because he CAN'T. I genuinely believe he doesn't know that to do because he's a **** idiot. He knows his system and that's it. It's been painfully obvious for years this team and this league have passed 2015 by but not for him.
- make personnel decisions on the needs of the team instead of his petty biases and feelings. Anyone who tries to seriously claim that he makes decisions based on performance alone is high as a kite on the meth. He plays favorites, lets some players do whatever, forces others into a system filled with anxiety and oppressive punishments for the smallest errors, which is NOT A GOOD COACH. That just leads to stress and poor play, as players panic over not making mistakes or playing how dip **** wants instead of to their strengths
- utilize players in a way to get their best. He can't let players play to their strengths... every **** player has to get trained to play the Sullivan **** brand of hockey even if it means he's going to teach them how to play a complete game after being in the league 10 years. **** you dip ****, you were some barely NHL caliber 8th line plugger and you think you can and need to teach every player at every position how to play the goddamn game.

I believe good coaches can develop and adapt to win games, adapt to the changes in their roster (coaches aren't supposed to be GMs... he has way too much say in roster moves (please don't try and say he doesn't have disproportionate impact on those choices) because he has to have what he wants... he doesn't know what to do with players he doesn't want). Good coaches motivate and create environment for success not a multi tiered system for different players where all but a handful of players are treated like persona non grata and have to rework their entire game and career to try and appease him to have a miniscule chance to play. Players should not be REGULARLY leaving the organization because they get no looks, not REGULARLY leaving here and finding significant success elsewhere, not be REGULARLY being successes prior to coming here and then becoming half assed failures and fractions of their former selves. Good coaches don't see the entire roster changed 4 times and still can't find success.

Sullivan brought toughness? This team is and has been weaker and flimsier than wet Walmart toilet paper for years. They can't hold a lead to save their lives, they can't put more than 20 minutes of effort in a night on 90 percent of nights, they collapse almost always at the first sign of adversity. This team is mentally pathetic, soft and without structure or discipline and has been. If not Sullivan, then who? The players? Which ones? This roster? Or one of the 3 or 4 completely different ones in the last 5 years basically?

Sullivan got nothing in Boston because he didn't have a malkin, Crosby, Letang, fleury etc prime age roster. Sure, he brought a new system and a functional system... I'm not saying he was a pro bowler who didn't even know how the game of hockey is played, but he succeeded here because he had a roster that made it easy to succeed. Bylsma brought a new message too... and the talent here was able to take that change and succeed... but he didn't last because he couldn't do most of the same things Sullivan can't do. He didn't stay in the league because NONE OF THE OTHER TEAMS saw him as some quality coach. He was **** and despite his on paper accomplishments, he was out of the league for YEARS. He wasn't a good coach, despite the "record" just like the bean town d bag we have now. Good coaches have staying power and generate results with different rosters, different teams, different systems... Sullivan is the same thing he's been for 10 years except Crosby and Malkin ain't 27 anymore. Good coaches don't need damn near a goddamn decade to win a playoff series... but hey, it's the refs, it's the goalies, it's the injuries... always something but, like it's apparently the new Penguin motto, replacing "it's a great day for hockey" with "it's always something but the coach."

There are two versions of Mike Sullivan, first 3-4 years and the rest. Your post 100% describes the second version. When he first came to the NHL from WBS I read a lot of articles about how he game planned NFL style and adapted between periods. For the most part, we were able to see that on the ice. He did a good job judging and developing talent the first few years (Rust, Kuhnhackl, Sheary, Wilson, etc). Those early teams were difficult to play against, while not tough like 70s Flyers tough, they still agitated quite a bit. Kunitz, Hornqvist, even Kuhnhackl and Wilson to some degree. Not fighters at all but tough on the puck, fiesty, just way better hockey. When that system was going, they fought to get the puck, fought to keep the puck, and wore down the opposite team. We see none of that now.

I'm not disagreeing with your analysis, I just think the first 3-4 years were way different in terms of quality coaching. If you want to say that's because of Tocchet, you might be right, but Sullivan was the head coach so going to give him the benefit of the doubt. Good discussion but it's late so goodnight.

[Pens4Life]

Gallant, Woodcraft, McLellan and Hakstol are most known free former NHL coaches... dont know who would fit this team best among those guys!?

Gallant would be good for the next few seasons while Sid is still under contract, he gets results quick but then his shelf life expires. He would get the most out of this team in the very short term and then you can part ways when the true rebuild starts.

He is my favourite among those as well.. if he is here for next 2 seasons thats fine.. BUT also I think its urgent we upgrade defense and make 2 trades.. (Karlsson or Letang needs to be traded, most likely Karlsson as he isnt Pens legend and Graves needs to be traded).. or just sent him to AHL and call up Pickering

[BigMcK]

After reading some of the comments in another thread, I think the perfect coach for this team to sink to the bottom while getting the Penguins higher draft seeding for the next three / four years is Sullivan.

Let this team bring on multiple heartbreaks of us fans while no huevos GM trades for draft picks independent of what the draft brings.

It is destiny that should not be denied.

Suck more, Sully! Penguins future demands it to be the way out

[FLPensFan]

From everything I have read, Sullivan knows how to adapt and has made multiple adaptations over the past several years. If that is truly the case, then it is more about execution by the players. Sullivan cannot be 100% accountable if the players don't execute, but, at the same token, if you have a system that the players literally cannot execute for more than 20 minutes at a time, this is a coaching problem. I think it was Madden who was saying the other day, it's not that Sullivan won't/can't/hasn't adapted, its that Sullivan is not adapting his systems to the players he has.

In terms of accountability, he absolutely needs to be able to be just as hard on Karlsson for mistake after mistake as he is on someone like Puljujarvi. Reading something from Kingerski recently, he says Sullivan has not lost the room...yet. But, where there is trouble ahead is that Sullivan MUST start holding more players accountable, and it almost seems like he is afraid to do so for fear of losing the room.

The other thing for me is this team isn't "fast" like they were in the back to back cup years. Yet they have this perception that they are still a fast team. So, they have some fast players, and a bunch of players who they think are fast but are actually average, then they have Kevin Hayes and Noel Acciari. If you are going to have guys that aren't the fastest, at least let them bring another element to the team. This team has been pushed around for far too long. We don't need Ryan Reaves. We don't need Matt Rempe. But we badly need 2-3 guys that enjoy using the body to retrieve the puck and wear guys down through hits and physical play, and maybe at least one of those guys isn't afraid to drop the gloves from time to time. RFA Jack McBain was one of my favorites for a role like that...he can drop the gloves, is 6'3', plays like it, and is considered above average defensively. Or, we could have been better off giving Brandon Duhaime a 2 year, 1.85M AAV deal instead of same money for 1 year to Anthony Beauvillier. The last gritty type of forward this team had was probably Tanev almost 5 years ago, then a guy like ZAR and Hornqvist. We've never replaced the Hornqvist/Kunitz type of skilled grittiness, and totally abandoned it in the bottom 6 as well.

So for me, the inability to play a system that can be efficiently executable night in and night out is problem #1. The lack of accountability of the players from top to bottom is problem #2. The complete lack of any team toughness is issue #3. Those are the big 3 reasons Sullivan should get the boot.

[Pens4Life]

Antonio and FLPensFan, BOTH said it perfectly, 100% agree.. My main issue with Sullivan is also we swaped 85% of the roster last years and still same crap is happening, so he should be gone! My second beef is that he is very biased and unfair to some players and asskissers to others aka Letang, Karlsson..

[E-Ramone]

FLPF, your last post makes me realize how much we miss Kunitz. IMO, he was a huge part of the success they had at that time. He was the perfect compliment to Sid's style of play. I think you're 100% correct in that we desperately need that type of player on this team.

[Coffey Break]

So, I'm not saying he doesn't know enough to be able to have occupied the space behind the bench competently for a while... I mean he obviously knows enough to develop a system and run a team. That being said, my definition of a good coach as you said, is one that can change, adapt, implement new systems, manage players well, check his ego, etc etc.

I don't think Sullivan does any of that and I don't think he ever did. I don't think he is capable. My opinion has always been that his success was due to this team needing a change and a new system... which be brought at the time and had success. I believe his success was overwhelmingly due to the talent and personnel on this team and not his skills or ability. I believe he brought a functional system that worked for this team at that time, gave them a change and new direction and they did well as a result of those changes not because of his skilled leadership or his coaching per se. I believe an average team that didn't have the players at the ages they were at would have been a substandard mess... kind of like it has been for the last half decade +.

I think Sullivan lacks the ability to:
- accurately judge talent
- fairly treat players based on performance
- hold players accountable
- create an environment that rewards performance and punishes failure in a fair, balanced and evenly applied way so players know expectations and that they all are the same
- adapt to the changes in the league and the team ability. He doesn't change the system because he CAN'T. I genuinely believe he doesn't know that to do because he's a **** idiot. He knows his system and that's it. It's been painfully obvious for years this team and this league have passed 2015 by but not for him.
- make personnel decisions on the needs of the team instead of his petty biases and feelings. Anyone who tries to seriously claim that he makes decisions based on performance alone is high as a kite on the meth. He plays favorites, lets some players do whatever, forces others into a system filled with anxiety and oppressive punishments for the smallest errors, which is NOT A GOOD COACH. That just leads to stress and poor play, as players panic over not making mistakes or playing how dip **** wants instead of to their strengths
- utilize players in a way to get their best. He can't let players play to their strengths... every **** player has to get trained to play the Sullivan **** brand of hockey even if it means he's going to teach them how to play a complete game after being in the league 10 years. **** you dip ****, you were some barely NHL caliber 8th line plugger and you think you can and need to teach every player at every position how to play the goddamn game.

I believe good coaches can develop and adapt to win games, adapt to the changes in their roster (coaches aren't supposed to be GMs... he has way too much say in roster moves (please don't try and say he doesn't have disproportionate impact on those choices) because he has to have what he wants... he doesn't know what to do with players he doesn't want). Good coaches motivate and create environment for success not a multi tiered system for different players where all but a handful of players are treated like persona non grata and have to rework their entire game and career to try and appease him to have a miniscule chance to play. Players should not be REGULARLY leaving the organization because they get no looks, not REGULARLY leaving here and finding significant success elsewhere, not be REGULARLY being successes prior to coming here and then becoming half assed failures and fractions of their former selves. Good coaches don't see the entire roster changed 4 times and still can't find success.

Sullivan brought toughness? This team is and has been weaker and flimsier than wet Walmart toilet paper for years. They can't hold a lead to save their lives, they can't put more than 20 minutes of effort in a night on 90 percent of nights, they collapse almost always at the first sign of adversity. This team is mentally pathetic, soft and without structure or discipline and has been. If not Sullivan, then who? The players? Which ones? This roster? Or one of the 3 or 4 completely different ones in the last 5 years basically?

Sullivan got nothing in Boston because he didn't have a malkin, Crosby, Letang, fleury etc prime age roster. Sure, he brought a new system and a functional system... I'm not saying he was a pro bowler who didn't even know how the game of hockey is played, but he succeeded here because he had a roster that made it easy to succeed. Bylsma brought a new message too... and the talent here was able to take that change and succeed... but he didn't last because he couldn't do most of the same things Sullivan can't do. He didn't stay in the league because NONE OF THE OTHER TEAMS saw him as some quality coach. He was **** and despite his on paper accomplishments, he was out of the league for YEARS. He wasn't a good coach, despite the "record" just like the bean town d bag we have now. Good coaches have staying power and generate results with different rosters, different teams, different systems... Sullivan is the same thing he's been for 10 years except Crosby and Malkin ain't 27 anymore. Good coaches don't need damn near a goddamn decade to win a playoff series... but hey, it's the refs, it's the goalies, it's the injuries... always something but, like it's apparently the new Penguin motto, replacing "it's a great day for hockey" with "it's always something but the coach."

There are two versions of Mike Sullivan, first 3-4 years and the rest. Your post 100% describes the second version. When he first came to the NHL from WBS I read a lot of articles about how he game planned NFL style and adapted between periods. For the most part, we were able to see that on the ice. He did a good job judging and developing talent the first few years (Rust, Kuhnhackl, Sheary, Wilson, etc). Those early teams were difficult to play against, while not tough like 70s Flyers tough, they still agitated quite a bit. Kunitz, Hornqvist, even Kuhnhackl and Wilson to some degree. Not fighters at all but tough on the puck, fiesty, just way better hockey. When that system was going, they fought to get the puck, fought to keep the puck, and wore down the opposite team. We see none of that now.

I'm not disagreeing with your analysis, I just think the first 3-4 years were way different in terms of quality coaching. If you want to say that's because of Tocchet, you might be right, but Sullivan was the head coach so going to give him the benefit of the doubt. Good discussion but it's late so goodnight.

Version 1 of Mike Sullivan was a rather easy thing for him too because he coached those guys that were brought in mid-season (Rust, Sheary, Kuhnackl, etc.). I'm not trying to disparage him for bringing in a functional system, but he also filled it out with guys who already knew/played his system in WBS at the time. And notice how quick he was in trusting those guys with high-end minutes and tight situations. Ever since he lost the reigns on the players he actually coached in the AHL, something happened with Version 2 Sullivan where he either didn't trust the players or he didn't trust the development process of those players.

This to me speaks directly to Antonio's point about him either being a very poor judge of talent and/or biases towards "his guys."

[KG]

I agree that Sullivan isn't a good judge of talent. He thinks if you don't penalty kill then you're not a complete player, or one that can contribute anything to the team.

If he had it his way this team would be filled with clones of Rust and Acciari.

I honestly don't want him coaching the new young guys. He will make McGroarty into a 3rd line plug.

Isn't it funny how both Bunting and St. Ivany come here late in the season, both play great because they are playing their game that makes them who they are. Then Sully gets his hands on them and now they are struggling.

So done with him.

[FLPensFan]

Isn't it funny how both Bunting and St. Ivany come here late in the season, both play great because they are playing their game that makes them who they are. Then Sully gets his hands on them and now they are struggling.

And Reilly Smith....and Erik Karlsson...and Noel Acciari...I'm sure there are plenty more. It also has me wondering if by any chance, any part of the Derick Brassard issue actually wasn't him pouting about being a 3C. Could it have been about not fitting into a system, or, being asked to play a game that went totally against his style of play? Nah, he was probably just an *******.

[E-Ramone]

Isn't it funny how both Bunting and St. Ivany come here late in the season, both play great because they are playing their game that makes them who they are. Then Sully gets his hands on them and now they are struggling.

And Reilly Smith....and Erik Karlsson...and Noel Acciari...I'm sure there are plenty more. It also has me wondering if by any chance, any part of the Derick Brassard issue actually wasn't him pouting about being a 3C. Could it have been about not fitting into a system, or, being asked to play a game that went totally against his style of play? Nah, he was probably just an *******.

The fact that EK has looked like crap here after being one of the best in the business for years elsewhere is really damning, IMO.

[Gunnerfan]

My biggest issue with Sully is the apparent inability to change his style based on his talent. One could say that Sully's system surprised the NHL for 2 years with the speed aspect of his system, and the other teams could not physically adapt to it. Now, in the NHL, all teams are fast and ...BIG and...PHYSICAL. So what we are seeing is the speed factor eliminated, and Sully's system dies on the vine. The Pens used to wear teams out with speed; now, the Pens are getting their @$$s handed to them by the NHL with speed, size, and strength. And Sully has no answers

[ahawk9]

Hadn't thought about the Brassard trade in that way until just now but it actually kind of makes sense. I felt that trade was one that could have really put them over the top, and his game was terrible here. I thnk it's fair to assume that he was well aware that he was going to be the No. 3 center on the team when he came in and was cool with it. I mean, it was a chance to have a legitmate shot at the Cup. It could very well have been systematic where he just couldn't adjust to what was expected and became frustrated by it. It was similar to the Iginla/Bylsma year. That run was decent but Iginla was never used as he should have been. Plus, they really didn't need to trade for him, IMO. They were a legitmate threat and were rolling when the trade occurred. By that time, Bylsma's system was outmoded for his personnel as well.

[KBone]

Here's another angle... Sullivan is the HC for the USA Four Nations Faceoff.

FSG probably thinks it would be a bad look to fire a national coach from your team, so we're stuck with him.

[Dynasty1970]

Incredible.....If he is really planning on putting Malkin on Crosby's wing then its clear he is grasping at straws. He has "Jumped the shark" Perhaps GMKD was a bad bad hire as well. Sullivan needs to go!

[Wyopen]

Here's another angle... Sullivan is the HC for the USA Four Nations Faceoff.

FSG probably thinks it would be a bad look to fire a national coach from your team, so we're stuck with him.

Very good point!

[Daniel]

Here's another angle... Sullivan is the HC for the USA Four Nations Faceoff.

FSG probably thinks it would be a bad look to fire a national coach from your team, so we're stuck with him.

Very good point!

It’s really obvious FSG isn’t in this to win, which is okay since it’s their business. Just sucks to have an owner that makes it obvious.

[Maestro]

Better to be a has been than a never was.

[FLPensFan]

Here's another angle... Sullivan is the HC for the USA Four Nations Faceoff.

FSG probably thinks it would be a bad look to fire a national coach from your team, so we're stuck with him.

Very good point!

It’s really obvious FSG isn’t in this to win, which is okay since it’s their business. Just sucks to have an owner that makes it obvious.

It would be nice if major US sports leagues put in a competition rule to make sure owners are competitive. Unfortunately, the owners and the leagues themselves are making money, so, they don't seem to care.

--Nutting and the Pirates haven't given a crap about anything but money for over 20 years.
--FSG is starting to skirt the line on profits and image over competitive product (keep the core to make money, overall team be damned)
--I stopped watching NASCAR years ago when 6 or 7 big names all retired in a 2-3 year period, but, what I was reading today is that NASCAR is getting more ridiculous with the charters they make teams pay for (to field X # of cars), and teams are starting to drop out of there. NASCAR don't care...they make money hand over fist on their TV deal and share little if any with the individual teams.

I'll stop there before I delve into the West as a whole being so money centric that bubble has to burst soon in a lot of areas.

[Daniel]

Here's another angle... Sullivan is the HC for the USA Four Nations Faceoff.

FSG probably thinks it would be a bad look to fire a national coach from your team, so we're stuck with him.

Very good point!

It’s really obvious FSG isn’t in this to win, which is okay since it’s their business. Just sucks to have an owner that makes it obvious.

It would be nice if major US sports leagues put in a competition rule to make sure owners are competitive. Unfortunately, the owners and the leagues themselves are making money, so, they don't seem to care.

--Nutting and the Pirates haven't given a crap about anything but money for over 20 years.
--FSG is starting to skirt the line on profits and image over competitive product (keep the core to make money, overall team be damned)
--I stopped watching NASCAR years ago when 6 or 7 big names all retired in a 2-3 year period, but, what I was reading today is that NASCAR is getting more ridiculous with the charters they make teams pay for (to field X # of cars), and teams are starting to drop out of there. NASCAR don't care...they make money hand over fist on their TV deal and share little if any with the individual teams.

I'll stop there before I delve into the West as a whole being so money centric that bubble has to burst soon in a lot of areas.

While the leagues care about competition and making revenue, groups like FSG are very good at what to say to leagues to get what they want and leagues don’t look too hard. I just hope FSG sells soon.

[largegarlic]

I know the Oilers have had an up and down start to their season, but I just saw that Columbus beat them 6-1 tonight. Columbus has one of the cheapest and least talented rosters in the league, made worse of course by Gadreau's untimely death. If they can show up like that against a good team, it makes you wonder what is wrong with the Pens.

[Daniel]

I know the Oilers have had an up and down start to their season, but I just saw that Columbus beat them 6-1 tonight. Columbus has one of the cheapest and least talented rosters in the league, made worse of course by Gadreau's untimely death. If they can show up like that against a good team, it makes you wonder what is wrong with the Pens.

I don’t. They’re old and badly coached.

[ahawk9]

I'm starting to believe it's some combination of Sully coaching the tournament for the U.S. and the bottom line attitude of FSG. They are paying him a lot of dough to "coach" this team. Weighing a replacement's salary plus Sullivan's versus any revenue lost by disgusted fans who don't come to home games might have them thinking, "Well, it won't be pretty but it'll save us a couple of million bucks to ride this out. We're going to miss the playoffs anyway so why pay Mike and his replacement when we'll get pretty much the same results?"

[Pitts]

Hadn't thought about the Brassard trade in that way until just now but it actually kind of makes sense. I felt that trade was one that could have really put them over the top, and his game was terrible here. I thnk it's fair to assume that he was well aware that he was going to be the No. 3 center on the team when he came in and was cool with it. I mean, it was a chance to have a legitmate shot at the Cup. It could very well have been systematic where he just couldn't adjust to what was expected and became frustrated by it. It was similar to the Iginla/Bylsma year. That run was decent but Iginla was never used as he should have been. Plus, they really didn't need to trade for him, IMO. They were a legitmate threat and were rolling when the trade occurred. By that time, Bylsma's system was outmoded for his personnel as well.

I disagree. There was nothing about Brassard's attitude, interview, play on ice at the time - nothing that indicated anything other than he didn't want to be a 3rd wheel. If it was simply system, why did he bomb out everywhere else he went afterward?

Plus, I legitimately think he didn't like Crosby or the Penguins. He played for 3 rival teams before coming here and he was always ruthless against the Pens.

[FLPensFan]

The other question I am pondering this morning...

At this point, do we just hate Sullivan hockey? Not even the coach specifically, but, his system and his style of play?