The rendition of the Canadian and American national anthems resonate louder and stronger in NHL Stanley Cup playoff games then in the regular season as home fans whip themselves into a post-season frenzy that they hope can propel their team to victory.
But instead of “O Canada” being heard this year across NHL barns, it is “No Canada” as the Montreal Canadiens stand alone as the only one of Canada’s seven NHL teams to qualify for the battle for Lord Stanley’s mug. The last time Canada sent just one NHL team to the playoffs was in 1973 when there were just three clubs based north of the border. Fittingly, in that spring Toronto and Vancouver watched from the sidelines as Montreal went on to win the Cup.
So what are Canada’s other clubs to do? Lately, given the growing trend of looking for that quick, “spectacular” fix, the majority of the now non-playoff teams have made big off-ice moves over the past calendar year. Last season it was the Edmonton Oilers and Vancouver Canucks: Dallas Eakins (then with the Toronto Marlies of the AHL) was considered the top coaching prospect outside of the NHL and the Oilers moved quickly and jettisoned Ralph Krueger after just one lockout shortened season; the Vancouver Canucks went after the modern day Iron Mike Keenan, bringing John Tortorella and his Stanley Cup ring to Vancouver—a direct contrast of personalities to the laid-back Alain Vigneault.
The key selling point in both cases was (to use today’s fashionable catch phrase) to provide a “change in culture” at each organization. Who would have thought they were both arguably worse off than a year ago. Whether Tortorella could help guide the Canucks deeper in the playoffs became a moot point when the Canucks plain fell short of the playoffs altogether. In Edmonton, rather than take a bold step forward, the Oilers spun their wheels even worse than during Krueger’s abbreviated tenure.
This didn’t stop the Calgary Flames from making the same kind of splash when Brian Burke became their top hockey executive and he didn’t disappoint in reintroducing the word “truculence” early in the press conference announcing his hiring.
Now in a matter of a few days, both the Vancouver Canucks (for a second time in less than a year) and the Toronto Maple Leafs have made comparable bold moves to “change their culture.” Actually in Vancouver an off-ice motive was included in that they needed to instil enthusiasm and confidence in a fan and corporate base that was demonstrating it’s collective wrath by being slow to renew season tickets, corporate suites and corporate advertising dollars. The perfect answer was Trevor Linden. He may still prove to be the perfect choice on the ice as well.
In Toronto, Brendan Shanahan went, in 24-hour span, from being an NHL executive to being the de facto face of the Toronto Maple Leafs. His splashy press conference fell short of announcing any coaching or personnel changes, but Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment CEO Tim Leiweke cited—of course—a change of culture as being the instant quality that Shanahan will bring to Toronto’s ever-disappointing franchise.
Interesting that the Montreal Canadiens were considerably lower key when they made their off-ice moves two years ago. Marc Bergevin came into the job without any grand pronouncements about “culture” and build a solid front office and exhibited a whole lot of common sense. His hiring of Michel Therrien was roundly and viciously criticized by many hockey insiders as a brutal hiring of a “recycled” coach. Comparable to how Darryl Sutter was greeted in Los Angeles before he led the Kings to their Stanley Cup championship in 2012.
Did Bergevin and Therrien change the culture in Montreal? They didn’t talk about changing the culture. Then again, when one has a goaltender as strong as Carey Price, that is going to help make the culture of any NHL team a positive one and a winning one to begin with.
What did Joe Sakic and Patrick Roy do in their first seasons running Colorado Avalanche’s front office and bench, respectively? Did they change the culture first and then win games on the ice? Or did winning a few games result in the much sought-after “change in culture,” which, of course, led to more winning.
It is the old chicken-and-egg question. What comes first? Change the culture to create conditions to get wins? Or win a few games and create a better atmosphere at the club? For me, Linden and/or Shanahan will have successfully changed the respective cultures in their organizations if their teams win hockey games. It is that simple.