Is Babcock a bad coach!?

[Opie 308]

Bad coaching was leaving Nabbie in for the second Period and then going to Bryzzy not after one more goal oh no no no, the Russian coach thought 5 goals in 22 minutes was all of the sudden going to stop, ooops make that 6 goals in 30 minutes.

THAT WAS BAD COACHING!

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

You're only as good a coach as your players let you be. Just ask the coach of Team Russia.

[Chairman Maouth 97]

You're only as good a coach as your players let you be. Just ask the coach of Team Russia.

Then why have a coach at all? Ridiculous.

Babcock has done (or not done) things that have been baffling during these games and they could have affected the outcome.

On the brightside, I saw nothing I disliked about Babcocks performance in the Canada-Russia game.

I agree. I was critical of Babcock here a few days ago, but I saw no bonehead moves last night. Thanks for your earlier reply. I read it.

Edited February 26, 2010 by Chairman Maouth

[Frozen-Man 144]

How can you lose to the u.s. with that kind of talent!? how can you let the swiss take you to the 5th shot of a shoot-out!? Their fourth line is arguably better than our 1st line. Babcock has arguably the best 22 players that have ever dressed together in his lockerroom...and he lets the swiss take him to a shootout...and he loses to the us!?

something is not right.

Um . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I guess Babcock is a great coach again.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

Required reading material.

[Serapth 3]

Actually, Babcock sure didn't help the team.

His earlier gaffes are well documented, but the decision to play a defensive game with a 2 then 1 goal lead was an act of pure stupid that bit us in the ass. You would have thought they would have learned from the Russia game ( letting our foot off the gas almost let them back in a 6-0 game ), but especially after the Slovakia game that was a hell of a lot closer than it had any right to be... but... nooooooooo. In the US, Canada came out of the gate charging and left the first period firmly in control, then switched to a defensive game that ended up seeing us go to overtime.

So, basically yes, Babcock did do a pretty horrible job and frankly, I hope in 2014 we pick anybody but him to coach. Frankly if coaches decided the series, Wilson would have won, he did a vastly superior job.

[cupforwings 138]

Actually, Babcock sure didn't help the team.

His earlier gaffes are well documented, but the decision to play a defensive game with a 2 then 1 goal lead was an act of pure stupid that bit us in the ass. You would have thought they would have learned from the Russia game ( letting our foot off the gas almost let them back in a 6-0 game ), but especially after the Slovakia game that was a hell of a lot closer than it had any right to be... but... nooooooooo. In the US, Canada came out of the gate charging and left the first period firmly in control, then switched to a defensive game that ended up seeing us go to overtime.

So, basically yes, Babcock did do a pretty horrible job and frankly, I hope in 2014 we pick anybody but him to coach. Frankly if coaches decided the series, Wilson would have won, he did a vastly superior job.

cry me a feaking river... Your team won, including the coach... If it would have been Babcocks fault if you lost, then Babcock contributed to the win as well... Find a coach with a better resume the last 10 years and stop complaining about winning gold... He did a good job, period. I also hope that Babcock is not picked in 2014 so the Americans can beat the Canadians for the gold.

[Yellowknife Redwing 57]

hurr durr we win'd da gold but if we not have babcock maybe we cudda win'd da gold even GOODER!!!!11

Give it a rest. He was given probably the most intensely scrutinized job in the history of hockey coaching. Canada was the only team in the tournament where the only acceptable outcome was gold and the weight of the entire country was on Babcock. In a very short period of time he managed to corral 23 of the best players in the world into a well-oiled machine where the line combinations were clicking and the defensive pairs looked comfortable and responsible. Babcock proved that the nation's faith was well placed and proved once again that he is one of, if not the, best coach in hockey today.

[Serapth 3]

cry me a feaking river... Your team won, including the coach... If it would have been Babcocks fault if you lost, then Babcock contributed to the win as well... Find a coach with a better resume the last 10 years and stop complaining about winning gold... He did a good job, period. I also hope that Babcock is not picked in 2014 so the Americans can beat the Canadians for the gold.

This is an idiotic approach to life... "how dare you be critical when you are successful!" This line of thought leads to mediocrity, something you may be ok with, but I sure as hell am not. It's silly and more than a bit stupid to proclaim that because we won he did a good job, this is akin to pointing at a snowflake and proclaiming global warming doesn't exist.

And, frankly, I was critical of Babcock well before " my team won ". Winning does not absolve him of his mistakes, especially when he continued to compound them. The simple fact we ended up winning regardless to his bumbling, changes nothing.

Edited March 1, 2010 by Serapth

[Serapth 3]

hurr durr we win'd da gold but if we not have babcock maybe we cudda win'd da gold even GOODER!!!!11

Give it a rest. He was given probably the most intensely scrutinized job in the history of hockey coaching. Canada was the only team in the tournament where the only acceptable outcome was gold and the weight of the entire country was on Babcock. In a very short period of time he managed to corral 23 of the best players in the world into a well-oiled machine where the line combinations were clicking and the defensive pairs looked comfortable and responsible. Babcock proved that the nation's faith was well placed and proved once again that he is one of, if not the, best coach in hockey today.

No, he didn't. He took a group of superstars, alienated a handful of them, failed to actually respond when he needed to take a firm hand, then proceeded to almost piss away 3 solid leads. As I said in the earlier post, the fact we did or didn't win gold changes nothing regarding to the coach. Hell, my respect for Wilson hasn't dimmed for Wilson in the slightest because he didn't win gold, why the hell should it increase for Babcock because he did. Simply put, Wilson was the superior coach.

[Frozen-Man 144]

No, he didn't. He took a group of superstars, alienated a handful of them, failed to actually respond when he needed to take a firm hand, then proceeded to almost piss away 3 solid leads. As I said in the earlier post, the fact we did or didn't win gold changes nothing regarding to the coach. Hell, my respect for Wilson hasn't dimmed for Wilson in the slightest because he didn't win gold, why the hell should it increase for Babcock because he did. Simply put, Wilson was the superior coach.

Yeah Babcock did all that not the "Superstars" actually in the game. The guys resume is freaking incredible but it must all be just lucky that every team he has coached has succeeded in spite of him.

[teebo 22]

what, how in the world can people still complain about babcock.

[Serapth 3]

what, how in the world can people still complain about babcock.

We watched the game without fanboy blinders on?

[dat's sick 1,002]

Yeah Babcock did all that not the "Superstars" actually in the game.

Haven't you heard? The players have no idea of the actual score during games. They never know that they have a lead and need to hold on to it. If they become passive, it's because the coach tells them to stop playing and just hang back. It's NEVER actually the players themselves that start playing safe because they know they have a lead. No, that doesn't happen.

[Serapth 3]

Haven't you heard? The players have no idea of the actual score during games. They never know that they have a lead and need to hold on to it. If they become passive, it's because the coach tells them to stop playing and just hang back. It's NEVER actually the players themselves that start playing safe because they know they have a lead. No, that doesn't happen.

Ug, really....

They started playing the bloody trap. It was a coaching decision. Superstar or not, they don't have free will to play however they want out there.

But, whatever, if you guys want to completely ignore what happened and absolve the person most likely to be at fault, I suppose you are comfortable enough with your head in the sand.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

From many visits here you will notice just about any critique of a Red Wing not named Rafalski, Draper, Osgood, Maltby, May, or Ericsson will automatically make you the antichrist of LGW.

Never question the coaching. No matter what it is, it is all the players. They probably didn't need a coach.

[Yellowknife Redwing 57]

From many visits here you will notice just about any critique of a Red Wing not named Rafalski, Draper, Osgood, Maltby, May, or Ericsson will automatically make you the antichrist of LGW.

Never question the coaching. No matter what it is, it is all the players. They probably didn't need a coach.

I have no problem with the critiquing of even the most popular of players/coaches, but this guy is trying to make a case that Babcock is a horrible coach and that team Canada won Olympic gold in spite of Babcock's clear deficiency as a coach. The notion is completely preposterous. You may disagree with some of the individual choices that the coach made during the tournament, but overall the result speaks for itself and Babcock got the job done. How anybody can be displeased with Babcock after the way the team performed and the resulting success is beyond me. If people want to s*** on Olympic coaches, I maintain that Bykov and BAG coached their respective teams into the ground.

[Serapth 3]

I have no problem with the critiquing of even the most popular of players/coaches, but this guy is trying to make a case that Babcock is a horrible coach and that team Canada won Olympic gold in spite of Babcock's clear deficiency as a coach. The notion is completely preposterous. You may disagree with some of the individual choices that the coach made during the tournament, but overall the result speaks for itself and Babcock got the job done. How anybody can be displeased with Babcock after the way the team performed and the resulting success is beyond me. If people want to s*** on Olympic coaches, I maintain that Bykov and BAG coached their respective teams into the ground.

If you would be so kinda as to confine your comments to reality, I would greatly appreciate it. The level of hyperbole and mis-attribution on this forum is disgusting. I never once called Babcock a horrible coach, read every comment I ever wrote in this thread, you will notice my comments actually are mired in reality.

What I have said, and continue to say, is the Babcock did a pretty terrible job this series. I will firmly say Canada won this series in spite of Babcock. But hey, continue to believe what you want to believe it was I was saying and feel free to completely ignore the actual argument I, and others, have made.

[Guest Four]

The same coach who turned the Sharks from a second round playoff loser to a first round playoff loser?

HELL YEAH!

Joe Thorton.

Babcock couldn't get him to do anything in the Olympics either

[Yellowknife Redwing 57]

So, basically yes, Babcock did do a pretty horrible job and frankly, I hope in 2014 we pick anybody but him to coach.

If I'm out of line for construing this combination of comments as calling Babcock "a horrible coach" then feel free to continue accusing me of hyperbolizing. You just admitted that you think Canada won this tourney in spite of Babcock, so it's not like either of my claims are baseless.

[Serapth 3]

If I'm out of line for construing this combination of comments as calling Babcock "a horrible coach" then feel free to continue accusing me of hyperbolizing. You just admitted that you think Canada won this tourney in spite of Babcock, so it's not like either of my claims are baseless.

See, instead of construing, I would use my actual comments from this thread:

Is Babcock a bad coach? No.

Is Babcock doing a good job at the Olympics? No, absolutely not.

I don't think he is a terrible coach, but he did a terrible job as coach of Team Canada and I don't want him back.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Joe Thorton.

Babcock couldn't get him to do anything in the Olympics either

Thornton was with a team of superstars to offset his fail.

Not so much with the Sharks.

[mjlegend 155]

Bad coach? I'd go so far as to say he's probably the worst coach to ever win a Stanley Cup and an Olympic gold medal within two years EVER.

[Guest Four]

Thornton was with a team of superstars to offset his fail.

Not so much with the Sharks.

Exactly, it isn't Todd's fault he's got the biggest choker to ever play the game.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Exactly, it isn't Todd's fault he's got the biggest choker to ever play the game.

I don't blame Todd for the Sharks going out early, I blame him for the Sharks going out a whole round earlier than they are supposed to.

Thornton was with the Sharks when Wilson was coach. They lost in the second round. Wilson was fired and McClellan was hired. They lost in the first round.