The Future of....Bryan Murray & Cory Clouston

They need a teacher, they need a guy who can comunicate with younger players, teach the game, but also hold them accountable. I said earlier Martin would be the perfect coach for The Sens if he was available but a guy like Muller is probably the right way to go. Cunneyworth is another guy they should look at.

I'll throw Steve Ludzik into the mix hahahahahaha

I think Muller would be a GREAT choice. I loved the guy as a player, and by all accounts, he is doing a good job in Montreal. He would garner instant respect from all the young players and vets alike.

Cunneyworth would be a reasonable option as well.

Big Ev wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I think the correct changes have been made already. No need to can Murray or Clouston at this point.

Nobody's talking about canning them. So much fluff.

No fluffier than calling a legitimate post fluff. I see what you mean about not firing either since that won't happen. What I obviously meant is that they should be re-hired next year.

You honestly think Clouston shoud be re-hired? Why?

Because he's a good coach and he has gained experience at the NHL level too. I don't see any alternatives that are that much better.

Clouston is a horrible motivator and communicator.

This team is horribly streaky under him and he seems unable to motivate the team when things are bad.

I see him as John MacLean, good potential rookie coach teaching the wrong system.

Look at the Devils once they got rid of the rookie coach who was in over his head teaching the wrong system to the team.

Part of me wonders what Jacques Lemaire could do to this team.

Hoags wrote:Clouston is a horrible motivator and communicator.

This team is horribly streaky under him and he seems unable to motivate the team when things are bad.

I see him as John MacLean, good potential rookie coach teaching the wrong system.

Look at the Devils once they got rid of the rookie coach who was in over his head teaching the wrong system to the team.

Part of me wonders what Jacques Lemaire could do to this team.

Things are as bad as they can possibly be right now and yet they're winning some games.

I'm surprised too that Clouston has gotten this far being a horrible motivator and communicator.

Funny thing is the Senators didn't get rid of the coach and the results have changed. That tells me that it wasn't the coaching that was the problem and that Clouston is nothing like John MacLean.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:Clouston is a horrible motivator and communicator.

This team is horribly streaky under him and he seems unable to motivate the team when things are bad.

I see him as John MacLean, good potential rookie coach teaching the wrong system.

Look at the Devils once they got rid of the rookie coach who was in over his head teaching the wrong system to the team.

Part of me wonders what Jacques Lemaire could do to this team.

Things are as bad as they can possibly be right now and yet they're winning some games.

I'm surprised too that Clouston has gotten this far being a horrible motivator and communicator.

Funny thing is the Senators didn't get rid of the coach and the results have changed. That tells me that it wasn't the coaching that was the problem and that Clouston is nothing like John MacLean.

How have the results changed? We're in last place

Big Ev wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Hoags wrote:Clouston is a horrible motivator and communicator.

This team is horribly streaky under him and he seems unable to motivate the team when things are bad.

I see him as John MacLean, good potential rookie coach teaching the wrong system.

Look at the Devils once they got rid of the rookie coach who was in over his head teaching the wrong system to the team.

Part of me wonders what Jacques Lemaire could do to this team.

Things are as bad as they can possibly be right now and yet they're winning some games.

I'm surprised too that Clouston has gotten this far being a horrible motivator and communicator.

Funny thing is the Senators didn't get rid of the coach and the results have changed. That tells me that it wasn't the coaching that was the problem and that Clouston is nothing like John MacLean.

How have the results changed? We're in last place

My original point was that other moves were made that didn't involve a coaching change, as was done in New Jersey, and since those moves were made the wins have been more frequent.

The results, ie. the outcome of games have indeed changed while our position in the standings hasn't.

SeawaySensFan wrote:
Funny thing is the Senators didn't get rid of the coach and the results have changed. That tells me that it wasn't the coaching that was the problem and that Clouston is nothing like John MacLean.

Not saying coaching is the problem I just don't think Clouston did enough. I think we can do better (ie. Muller) than Clouston.

Clearly the team tuned him out and lost all confidence. We put in a legit #1 goaltender in nets and the team suddenly believes they can win. We also shipped out a lot of long time Sens players and put in a bunch of kids desperate to land a full-time NHL job next year.

Anytime your team slides into last place overall you have look at the coaching staff. This team didn't look ready to fight for a playoff spot since training camp. I have to question how prepared and motivated this team at the start of the season.

Carvel even admitted in an interview they didn't prepare the team enough.

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:
Funny thing is the Senators didn't get rid of the coach and the results have changed. That tells me that it wasn't the coaching that was the problem and that Clouston is nothing like John MacLean.

Not saying coaching is the problem I just don't think Clouston did enough. I think we can do better (ie. Muller) than Clouston.

Clearly the team tuned him out and lost all confidence. We put in a legit #1 goaltender in nets and the team suddenly believes they can win. We also shipped out a lot of long time Sens players and put in a bunch of kids desperate to land a full-time NHL job next year.

Anytime your team slides into last place overall you have look at the coaching staff. This team didn't look ready to fight for a playoff spot since training camp. I have to question how prepared and motivated this team at the start of the season.

Carvel even admitted in an interview they didn't prepare the team enough.

What was put to the test here is the theory that you can't fire a whole team so you fire the coach. Well, the team was pretty much fired and it's been a positive change so far.

Hiring Muller would be interesting for sure but it wouldn't necessarily be an improvement on Clouston.

SeawaySensFan wrote:
Hiring Muller would be interesting for sure but it wouldn't necessarily be an improvement on Clouston.

I'm not talking about firing Clouston, just don't extend his contract.

And yeah we did fire the team pretty much but the playoffs are out of the picture now, no pressure, and half the team is playing for a job next year so there's plenty of motivation. Not to mention we finally have a goalie capable of stonewalling the other team, and giving the team confidence that he has their back.

How will Clouston perform next year with a solidified lineup where the playoffs are a goal ? I have my doubts. Sacco must have mismanaged Anderson in Colorado and given Clouston's history with managing goalies I have some concerns.

We're discussing rebuilding, firing the team and getting a new GM in place I don't see why changing the coaching staff isn't on the table.

Not because it's their fault but it's time for a change.

Hoags wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:
Hiring Muller would be interesting for sure but it wouldn't necessarily be an improvement on Clouston.

I'm not talking about firing Clouston, just don't extend his contract.

And yeah we did fire the team pretty much but the playoffs are out of the picture now, no pressure, and half the team is playing for a job next year so there's plenty of motivation. Not to mention we finally have a goalie capable of stonewalling the other team, and giving the team confidence that he has their back.

How will Clouston perform next year with a solidified lineup where the playoffs are a goal ? I have my doubts. Sacco must have mismanaged Anderson in Colorado and given Clouston's history with managing goalies I have some concerns.

We're discussing rebuilding, firing the team and getting a new GM in place I don't see why changing the coaching staff isn't on the table.

Not because it's their fault but it's time for a change.

I'm not talking about firing Clouston either. I'm talking about the direction the team has taken this year in retaining Clouston and the changes that have taken place.

As for whether or not changing the coaching staff is on the table, I don't know the answer. They probably will be changed. All I'm saying is I'm not sure that it's such a great idea.

You gotta start new. New voice in the room, new outlook on the new, and new game plan on and off the ice for these guys. There needs to be a guy put in place that has a decent amount in NHL experinece, doesn't have to be as a head coach but a guy who's been around and will instantly get the respect of the players. I don't think Clouston is that guy.

Again, I look to a guy like Muller or Cunneyworth, two guys that played their hearts out as players in The NHL and have found their way into being mentioned as the next guy to take the reigns of an NHL team. Both guys know exactly what is needed for a team to succeed.

That's my suspicion, I don't think Clouston commands enough respect in the room (for whatever reason).

NEELY wrote:You gotta start new. New voice in the room, new outlook on the new, and new game plan on and off the ice for these guys. There needs to be a guy put in place that has a decent amount in NHL experinece, doesn't have to be as a head coach but a guy who's been around and will instantly get the respect of the players. I don't think Clouston is that guy.

Again, I look to a guy like Muller or Cunneyworth, two guys that played their hearts out as players in The NHL and have found their way into being mentioned as the next guy to take the reigns of an NHL team. Both guys know exactly what is needed for a team to succeed.

I think back at some of the "best coaches" and they were guys like what Neely described. They were guys who had experience in the league (either as a player or coach) but in a lot of cases were not great hockey tactician. They had assistant coaches who did that for them.

My personal dream team would be Cunneyworth/Muller as head coach with Ramsey as a 1A assistant. I know Ramsey is already working as a head coach, but that combination of Head Coach and tactician as an assistant IMHO would be a pretty good combo.

to me, it doesn't make sense to give Bryan Murray the right to hire another coach. and quite frankly, clouston is NOT that bad. He was being talked about jack adams last season, and now sense fans just want him gone asap...perfect scapegoat right?

sometimes the fanbase ticks me off. You don't want someone soft who adheres to players (like paddock and hartsburg), so you get clouston who's hardcore, demands alot from his players, and actually got them playing great hockey last year. Call it overachievement if you want, but considering the cards he's dealt, he's made the best of every situation except this season. Maybe he doesn't adhere to the veterans as much as the vets would like, but I don't care about that anymore. The vets are not the future and they've had their joy ride enough of times.

If you NEED a fresh face in the locker room, then Murray should not be picking a coach. I.E. he should not be GM next season.

SeawaySensFan wrote:What was put to the test here is the theory that you can't fire a whole team so you fire the coach. Well, the team was pretty much fired and it's been a positive change so far.

Hiring Muller would be interesting for sure but it wouldn't necessarily be an improvement on Clouston.

I hear ya SSF. Clouston gets way too much Dung in this city for the state of the senators. Last I checked, the goaltending situation can't be blamed on him, the fact that fisher and others wouldn't take nights off because of cap situation is also not on him. Maybe he wanted to make improvements, but just didn't have the available resources? He had the kids right now playing a pretty nice structural game. But no no of course its clouston's fault...all of it. He didn't utilize corey locke very well, blah blah blah

Michallica wrote:to me, it doesn't make sense to give Bryan Murray the right to hire another coach. and quite frankly, clouston is NOT that bad. He was being talked about jack adams last season, and now sense fans just want him gone asap...perfect scapegoat right?

sometimes the fanbase ticks me off. You don't want someone soft who adheres to players (like paddock and hartsburg), so you get clouston who's hardcore, demands alot from his players, and actually got them playing great hockey last year. Call it overachievement if you want, but considering the cards he's dealt, he's made the best of every situation except this season. Maybe he doesn't adhere to the veterans as much as the vets would like, but I don't care about that anymore. The vets are not the future and they've had their joy ride enough of times.

If you NEED a fresh face in the locker room, then Murray should not be picking a coach. I.E. he should not be GM next season.

...by delusional homer Sens fans. Clouston was never that great.