Thursday, December 30, 2010

my thoughts on feaster: stepping back

i don't have any formed opinions on flames "acting" gm jay feaster's CV and how it reflects upon the future of my favorite hockey team. i understand that his draft history is spotty except for some obvious slam dunks (who would surely have been selected by any literate human), and i'm aware that he's made some godawful trades. i know that he won a cup but wasn't really responsible for assembling the important winning players, and i know that he spent a long time managing a very successful AHL club. extrapolating these facts to how he's going to handle eleven no trade/no movement clauses, a boatload of lengthy contracts (some overpaid), an aging player corps, and a shallow pool of prospects seems pointless to me, at present. especially since he's not the guy in charge. he's the INTERIM guy in charge....

what i DID come to today, in my semi-hungover haze (after a pretty serious night of booze and laughs ---btw: fun times if you're reading this, teetotaling pals) is this:

it makes no sense that the org would sack darryl ---a guy who's been on his way out for eons--- without a backup plan in place. if feaster was brought in by the owners to replace darryl, then he would have been given the GM title on tuesday, non ? i mean, why keep the guy in indefinite GM limbo when he's already been walking the halls of the 'dome for five months ?? like.... what's the point in that ??

here's my take: feaster was brought in to oversee darryl, and to assure that he didn't make any rash/imbecilic moves before he was ushered out the door. feaster wasn't handed the title of GM outright because the org has earmarked someone else (who needs to concede his current position with another club before joining the flaming C's).

i came to this theory because i just can't get past why the executive/owners wouldn't hand feaster the reins entirely, unless there's something else at play, here. i can't comprehend the value in making the man plead his case a month after darryl's dismissal when he's been exposed to the team, it's players, and inner workings since the summer.... wouldn't his opinion on the club's desired direction have been made quite clear to the ownership by now, ESPECIALLY if they were the ones to bring him in ??!

methinks yes.
i guess we'll see....

1 comment:

Subversive said...

Interesting theory. I said this over at the other place, but I still can't help but wish the org had some balls and would have sacked Daz back in the summer. Dollars to donuts says we would have a GM by the name of Yzerman right now if they had.