Poll of the Week - June 14

[BigTed3]

Tell us what you think of the extension Michel Therrien was awarded today!

[Guest]

I can't say for sure if he'll be gone before the end of the year, but this move is really a non factor to me. Couldn't care less if it was one or ten. His job security is no stronger then it was yesterday. Win and you stay,,,,lose and your gone.

[PAPPAPUMPED]

I am personally not a Michelle Therrien fan I do Not like the way he handles the players in certain situations ie: Subban .

In my opinion Marc Bergevin should have waited till close too the end of Therriens current contract .

PK Subban is our elite All Star on the D & I for one do not want too see this player want out of Montreal & say play for Toronto due to the mal-treatment from Therrien .

Bergevin has my over-all support but I think he is making a BIG mistake I guess only time will tell .

I am not a huge Therrien fan for sure & I really wonder just how long he will last in Montreal I guess the only issue is when the Habs fall into the toilet again LOL so long Therrien .

I would like too hear from other Habs fans on this issue please feel free to contact me !

[BigTed3]

I am personally not a Michelle Therrien fan I do Not like the way he handles the players in certain situations ie: Subban .

In my opinion Marc Bergevin should have waited till close too the end of Therriens current contract .

PK Subban is our elite All Star on the D & I for one do not want too see this player want out of Montreal & say play for Toronto due to the mal-treatment from Therrien .

Bergevin has my over-all support but I think he is making a BIG mistake I guess only time will tell .

I am not a huge Therrien fan for sure & I really wonder just how long he will last in Montreal I guess the only issue is when the Habs fall into the toilet again LOL so long Therrien .

I would like too hear from other Habs fans on this issue please feel free to contact me !

I have a lot of issues with the way he's handled many of the players as well. He leaned too heavily on Markov, Emelin, Bouillon, and Murray, which is concerning but probably doesn't hurt us in the long run too much. What concerns me more is that he kept players like Eller and Galchenyuk glued to the 3rd line. We saw in the playoffs how valuable each guy can be, yet neither one got much of a chance in the regular season outside of the first 2-3 weeks of the year, when they excelled. Since then, it's been a steady stream of Desharnais, without the younger guys getting much chance. Even Briere was kind of relegated to a useless role, despite the fact he outplayed players ahead of him.

[Guest habs1952]

I can't say for sure if he'll be gone before the end of the year, but this move is really a non factor to me. Couldn't care less if it was one or ten. His job security is no stronger then it was yesterday. Win and you stay,,,,lose and your gone.

Ditto for me. I'm just wondering if Subban will now ask for an extra million.

[Guest]

Ditto for me. I'm just wondering if Subban will now ask for an extra million.

PK winning the Norris will get him those extra millions. The fact he was getting #1 minutes in the playoffs certainly won't hurt his value either.

Both of these events BTW, were under the tutelage of MT, so he can't be too upset with the guy, i would think.

[Guest mrsmarkov]

This could have waited. It was so unnecessary. MB has players that need to be signed, that should be his top priority right now, not signing a coach whose contract still has one year left on it. Ridiculous.

[BigTed3]

Thus far, conspicuous by its absence is the first answer... if Therrien was really that great a coach, you'd think someone would think this extension was a good deal.

[BeanCountingHab]

Thus far, conspicuous by its absence is the first answer... if Therrien was really that great a coach, you'd think someone would think this extension was a good deal.

It might have been framed a little rah-rah for most here.

The jury is still out on Therrien for me, but I'd call this extension automatic under the circumstances. I picked the "I don't care" because the term for me is fairly meaningless. That kind of term is becoming pretty standard, and necessary to keep up with the other big market teams.

[BigTed3]

The caveat, according to Renaud Lavoie, is that the 4th season (5th year in total) is a team option... that makes it slightly more palatable to me, although still a bit unnecessary.

[Noob616]

It's just not a good idea to go into a season with a coach in the last year of his contract. Imagine in February we have a bad stretch and then Guy Boucher comes back to North America while Therrien is still unsigned for the following year. It's just a distraction and for the amount of money it costs to pay the coach it's not worth it.

That and that sports are generally results driven. Would be a hard sell to the media that management isn't happy with Therrien's record so far.

[kinot-1]

In addition to next year, I would have given him a 2 year deal, thus making 3 years total. I would be happy with that.

[BigTed3]

It's just not a good idea to go into a season with a coach in the last year of his contract. Imagine in February we have a bad stretch and then Guy Boucher comes back to North America while Therrien is still unsigned for the following year. It's just a distraction and for the amount of money it costs to pay the coach it's not worth it.

That and that sports are generally results driven. Would be a hard sell to the media that management isn't happy with Therrien's record so far.

I don't really buy that. Does the fact Subban wasn't signed to an extension during last season indicate the Habs are trying to trade him? Does Markov not signing a deal a year ago mean we don't want him back? Coaches are even easier to re-sign than players, so I again just don't see the urgency in having gotten this done. And even if you do want to re-sign him, give him 2-3 years at a time; the shelf-life of coaches is so short that it doesn't make sense to have anyone signed for 5 years. The Habs have never bothered to listen to fans or media before (probably for the best!), so I don't know why they'd let it run this decision.

[Guest mrsmarkov]

I don't really buy that. Does the fact Subban wasn't signed to an extension during last season indicate the Habs are trying to trade him? Does Markov not signing a deal a year ago mean we don't want him back? Coaches are even easier to re-sign than players, so I again just don't see the urgency in having gotten this done. And even if you do want to re-sign him, give him 2-3 years at a time; the shelf-life of coaches is so short that it doesn't make sense to have anyone signed for 5 years. The Habs have never bothered to listen to fans or media before (probably for the best!), so I don't know why they'd let it run this decision.

Exactly. Coaches are just happy to have a job. I'd like to know a coach that quit or declined an offer. Ya still waiting...

[Manatee-X]

I don't really buy that. Does the fact Subban wasn't signed to an extension during last season indicate the Habs are trying to trade him? Does Markov not signing a deal a year ago mean we don't want him back? Coaches are even easier to re-sign than players, so I again just don't see the urgency in having gotten this done. And even if you do want to re-sign him, give him 2-3 years at a time; the shelf-life of coaches is so short that it doesn't make sense to have anyone signed for 5 years. The Habs have never bothered to listen to fans or media before (probably for the best!), so I don't know why they'd let it run this decision.

IMO, the difference between the two situations is that Subban doesn't have to influence a team full of players. As a player on the ice it doesn't really affect me this season whether or not Subban or Markov will be back next year. But If I think that my coach has a short shelf life I might have less incentive to buy into his system or to try and impress him.

As many have said, most teams have no problem firing a coach under contract and I doubt that the Canadiens would be the exception. I'm not a big fan of what Therrien did with the team last season by any means, but if they're not going to fire him (which you can't really do after advancing to the ECF) then I think it makes sense to sign him immediately rather than to let him hang in the wind next year.

[Noob616]

I don't really buy that. Does the fact Subban wasn't signed to an extension during last season indicate the Habs are trying to trade him? Does Markov not signing a deal a year ago mean we don't want him back? Coaches are even easier to re-sign than players, so I again just don't see the urgency in having gotten this done.

Not quite the same IMO. Coaches can be replaced at the drop of a hat and the negotiations are fairly straightforward because you can fire them at any time and I think that plays a big part into the midseason coaching rumours we hear out of every NHL market. Coaches don't want to deal with media asking if they'll be fired, after the dog and pony show when Martin was fired and replaced by Cunneyworth, I can understand why coaches would want the security, It's a case where you have to recognize the results due to the nature of the business.

And even if you do want to re-sign him, give him 2-3 years at a time; the shelf-life of coaches is so short that it doesn't make sense to have anyone signed for 5 years. The Habs have never bothered to listen to fans or media before (probably for the best!), so I don't know why they'd let it run this decision.

I don't fault Bergevin for minimizing the media circus, we're only a couple years removed from the gong show that was Gauthier's term as GM. It's a distraction, I don't believe for a second the media would influence his decision on firing/hiring a coach but if we're struggling in December and the coach doesn't have a contract for the following season it's just opening the door to a silly media thing, and then if he does fire the coach in December it'll be implied he's bowing to the media.

The 3-4 year thing is more just the money than anything. Coaches are starting to be more competitive in negotiations and to get the big names you do have to act in a professional way and showing confidence in the coach is a part of that. I guess I don't really see the urgency here. He's had good success looking at the record and sports is still a very results driven business. I have a hard time believing negotiating with Therrien took a significant amount of time and energy for Bergevin, in the grand scheme of things it's a small amount of money and the term only means he will still get paid.

The pro of signing this contract is minimizing the media storm around the coach. The only con is comitting Geoff Molson's money for 4 years, which is not a big deal at all.

[BeanCountingHab]

This club is already one of the highest pressure environments to coach in and the only market requiring a head coach to be bilingual.

I really don't think being a team that refuses to extend their coach before the last year of their term and only offers the minimum acceptable terms will do us any favours.

[BigTed3]

The thing is though, there really hasn't been any type of a media circus about Therrien being fired. A lot of fans have been rightly upset with how bad our Corsi/possession has been, but the French media (the side that typically drives outrage) has been pretty supportive of Therrien and Bergevin has stuck with him through some bad stretches this season. There is really no indication Therrien wouldn't be renewed. The only thing that would change that would be a bad year next season, in which case he'd be in jeopardy either way. I think we all agree that the contract is not what's going to impact whether Therrien gets fired or not. The only thing it does is commit more money well ahead of time to a mediocre asset (similar to Moen, Desharnais, Emelin, Bouillon, etc.).

[BeanCountingHab]

The thing is though, there really hasn't been any type of a media circus about Therrien being fired. A lot of fans have been rightly upset with how bad our Corsi/possession has been, but the French media (the side that typically drives outrage) has been pretty supportive of Therrien and Bergevin has stuck with him through some bad stretches this season. There is really no indication Therrien wouldn't be renewed. The only thing that would change that would be a bad year next season, in which case he'd be in jeopardy either way. I think we all agree that the contract is not what's going to impact whether Therrien gets fired or not. The only thing it does is commit more money well ahead of time to a mediocre asset (similar to Moen, Desharnais, Emelin, Bouillon, etc.).

Except it's not similar to Moen, Desharnais, Emelin etc. We don't have a set or maximum amount of resources we're able to allocate to coaching or management. Among all the constraints in Montreal one of the advantages we have as a big market team is the money to spend on coaches and management to make it an attractive destination for an already smaller pool of candidates than the rest of the league has access to. Why handicap ourselves further by being stingy?

[BigTed3]

Except it's not similar to Moen, Desharnais, Emelin etc. We don't have a set or maximum amount of resources we're able to allocate to coaching or management. Among all the constraints in Montreal one of the advantages we have as a big market team is the money to spend on coaches and management to make it an attractive destination for an already smaller pool of candidates than the rest of the league has access to. Why handicap ourselves further by being stingy?

To me, the mindset behind Bergevin's decision IS the same, though. It's still a GM whose jumped the gun on trying to lock up elements that aren't really instrumental to our winning. On the subject of trying to impress other coaching candidates, does it really matter? Is someone going to turn down a job because the guy before him got an extension in the last year of his contract as opposed to the second-last year of his contract? And what does it say if you sign a guy to 5 years and then fire him a year or two in? It just tells everyone that the contract means nothing (which we all know is the case anyways)... to me that's not any better. Again, the key is that Bergevin went spending money here when there was no obligation to do so.