Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Brent Sutter: "I am employed by the New Jersey Devils"

One last Devils post for the weekend.  From George Johnson's article in the Calgary Herald yesterday:

"I’m employed by the New Jersey Devils,’’ repeated Brent Sutter, who has one year remaining on his deal in the swamplands. "I haven’t talked to Darryl much even as a brother since I’ve been back home. I’m just trying to sort through some things right now, to see what I want to do. Mr. Lamoriello and I have always taken this year by year.  I haven’t thought about anything like that.’’

This is entirely consistent to what Chere reported after Mike Keenan was fired by Calgary earlier last week.

Those speculating are probably going to ignore this quote, but it's important to highlight.   Brent Sutter has been upfront about Lou's knowledge of this situation, that Sutter goes through this process every year, and that he's still with the Devils until otherwise.  This statement is entirely consistent with all of this. Therefore, I still expect Sutter to return.

Alas, there is a media narrative to push and that is to speculate Sutter's return to Calgary.   Nevermind the fact that the sources of his homesickness: his family, his ranch, and the Red Deer Rebels would still be away from him as a NHL coach in Calgary.   If anything, by being closer, they could prove to be more of a distraction as his businesses and family will expect him to be around more because he'll be in Calgary.  Yet, because he'd be the head coach of a NHL team, he'll be with the team more often than not as that is his job.  His attention and focus will be entirely with the team and not his businesses and family - he'll still be away from them even if they are geographically closer to his job.

Of course, that's just speculation on my part. As always, I could be wrong about all of that.  Speaking of speculation, check out this "gem" of an article Larry Brooks had on the subject in the NY Post today. (Assist: Thanks to Don for pointing this article out to me in an e-mail).  If anything, this sums up the media's thought process of this narrative that they are pushing:  Brent Sutter is homesick, a job just opened up in Calgary, he's from Calgary, and so why won't Lou let him go?   That's the logic Brooks presents and nothing more than that causes him to plead that Lou should release him.  Unfortunately, it's also an example of some poor reporting. I'm not being facetious, he actually wrote this:

There is no point in holding him hostage to a contract. There is no point in holding the Devils hostage to a lame duck whose authority over the team would invariably be compromised. There is no point to having a short-timer in control of the operation.

And this:

Indeed, following a stretch in which the Devils chewed up eight coaches in seven seasons (including Larry Robinson twice and Lamoriello himself twice) that featured two Stanley Cup championships and one other appearance in the Final, it appeared that the team had found its man. Now, not, for if Sutter's return is not quite implausible, it is unworkable, and Lamoriello must know that.

Hostages? Unworkable? Does Brooks even state why this is unworkable; something Sutter has done last season? (Aside: And still came back! I know! It's like it never happened!)  Does Brooks know that Lou is already aware about the process and that it happened last year?  Does Brooks know what Brent Sutter has been saying on the subject?  Does Brooks have anything that suggests that anyone is at hostage here?    No, he states his feelings on the process, provides nothing to support his thoughts, and just moves on to already name coaching replacements - finally ending that Sutter was a "great fit."  If Sutter was a great fit and the right man for the job, why should Lou just let Sutter walk for nothing at all, Mr. Brooks? We don't get an answer for that and something tells me we won't get one from Brooks.  After all, it's not so much reporting as it is a plead for the Devils to rid themselves of a coach who has made the team better overall.   He'll just continue to paint Lou as some kind of bad guy for not letting a great coach go, or that this is a detriment to the team - with or without evidence to support this claim.  Because, hey, that's the decided-upon narrative. Can't have anything go against the narrative.

Speculators will continue to speculate and hope it'll happen because I suppose they'll have nothing better to do.  Hopefully, proper reporters like George Johnson and Rich Chere will grab the attention on this issue as they utilize what Brent Sutter actually said and note that this is not a new process.  I only highlight Brooks' article here to highlight how bad it can be.

My original thoughts on the situation haven't changed and I don't think they should now that Mike Keenan was fired, as far as I'm still concerned. I still expect Sutter to return and I would honestly be shocked if he left the Devils to coach in Calgary, Edmonton, or anywhere else.

Comment 9 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Brooks

Typical Larry Brooks writing, he’s pro-Rangers all the way. When he’s forced to write about the Devils it’s always in a negative light. Anyone who seriously thinks Brooks has credibility is either a Rangers fan or cannot read.

by thejerseydevil on May 24, 2009 9:46 PM EDT reply actions  

simple ? does this man want to coach the devils or not.he should not be able to sleep until next season starts with what just happen.the fact he seems unclear and undetermined makes me think its time for a new coach.

by Imperator_Celtic on May 25, 2009 11:36 AM EDT reply actions  

If Brent wants to leave let him leave…. You can tell he is homesick and if your Lou just let him walk. There are a ton of other good coaches like Guy Carbonneau and Tom Renney. Say what you want but I think he was a good coach until Sather screwed him. David Clarkson wouldn’t like Renney though.

by LetsGoDevils on May 25, 2009 11:56 AM EDT reply actions  

You said there were good coaches out there, yet you did not name any?

Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The Devils SBN Blog

by John Fischer on May 25, 2009 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

That article by Brooks was a good read...

I feel like you aren’t understanding the situation and are only pointing out the bad things about the article. Should we just release him? Probably not. However, what is the point in Sutter staying if he really does not want to be here? If his heart is back home, then he should be there. If someone doesn’t want to be in New Jersey, then please leave. I liked Sutter, but I want a coach who wants to be here.

by hurricane1091 on May 25, 2009 12:18 PM EDT reply actions  

A good read? Really?

I didn’t point out the bad things about the article, I pointed out the article itself. That it was all bad with respect to Sutter is Brooks’ problem, not mine.

I understand that it would be great if Sutter didn’t do all this (maybe the problem is that he’s public about it?); but remember that he has done this before and the biggest indicator is that Lou hasn’t released him. If Lou felt Sutter was seriously not going to return, then the release already would have come.

Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The Devils SBN Blog

by John Fischer on May 25, 2009 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

brooks

i also think that sutter’s heart is not into coaching here in NJ any longer, but if that means he is going to coach in calgary next season the devils should be compensated for it…and despite what brooks pretends to believe, i find it impossible to believe that there is a “homesickess” exception in the NHL bylaws for sutter on anyone else to leave one coaching contract for another one while that first one is still has one year left on it

by don in central jersey on May 25, 2009 12:41 PM EDT reply actions  

Sutter coming to coach Calgary or Edmonton has been pushed by the Canadian media for months to the tone of, we want this to happen really badly so we’ll keep inventing a story (see Burke, Brian; Lecavlier, Vincent; and a slew of others). From the first moment this “homesickness” was suggested it has been the Canadian media driving the story, and Sutter answered the question very angrily (something along the lines of "I dont know what your talking about). Brooks has finally jumped on board (although Im surprised Everson hasnt really written much yet) and like the homer Ranger fan he is writes his usual non-sensical article that is largely divorced from reality (similar to all his trade rumors that revolve around players with no trade clauses…).

Im really surprised at the majority of the comments though, Sutter has given no impression he doesn’t want to be here and without the Canadian media’s planted stories this delay in his decision happened last year as well. I really got the impression that the game 7 loss really stung him, he thinks has something to prove (and so do the Devils at this point, 2003 was 6 yrs ago…) and he’s not a quitter. I have no qualms in saying he is the best coach the Devils have had since Pat Burns. Parise is close to being a superstar, Zajac is a legit top line pivot and Oduya and Martin have made tremendous gains under Sutter. Even if its only for next year, he’s still the best man for the job and for the further development of the Devils future core (Parise, Zajac, Martin, and to a lesser extent Clarkson).

by drhgzang on May 25, 2009 6:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the New Jersey Devils! New here? Check out the Rules and Guidelines before posting.

FanPosts

joomla visitors

Managers

Stanley_cup_and_you_-_sbn_small John Fischer

Authors

Puddy_small Tom Stivali

Marty_sbetter_small Matthew Ventolo

Trollvalchuk_small Kevin Sellathamby

Rex_ryan--300x300_small Josh Weinstein

1729_small Matt Evans SNC