I'm sorry but it really doesn't work like that. People wanted Mrazek because he looks to actually be better than Howard. People want Blashill because he actually looks to be one of the better options.
I'm not denying that fans will say stuff like that in some situations, but this clearly isn't a case of that and it seems kinda lazy and ignorant to reduce everybody's analysis of those situations (including Babs in regard to Mrazek and Holland in regard to Blashill) to "We WaNtZ tHE BAcKUP!!!" It's just not the case.
I'm not even talking about Mrazek really, because I don't really consider him a backup goalie, and he really wasn't supposed to be the backup goalie. Just about everyone knows he's the starter of the future, it's just a matter of when that future really begins. He's no backup.
And I absolutely think it's a bit like that with Blashill still. I'm not saying he's lousy, but people are getting way too ahead of themselves about a guy with zero experience as a head coach in the NHL. Again, I'm not saying he's going to be bad, not at all. But people are acting like he's going to come in and run this team better than Babcock has. Maybe he will, but one of these guys in this comparison has a Stanley Cup and has won more games as a Red Wings coach than any other Red Wing coach in history. The other has never coached a game in the NHL as a head coach.
It's one thing to hope for the best and be optimistic, it's another thing to assume that in Blashill's first year he's going to outdo Babcock, a coach who's arguably viewed as one of the best in the game if not the best.
- Nightfall likes this