Follow the Bouncing C

Discussion in 'Hockey' started by Turbo, Mar 10, 2008.

  1. Turbo

    Turbo Registered Member

    Some of the teams in the league are changing their captain monthly during the season. I for one don't like the idea, the captain should be a steady leader and only changed when the assigned captain is traded or retires or replaced by one of the alternates when the captain is injured.

    Thoughts??
     

  2. padd

    padd Registered Member

    I Know minesota and Buffalo does that, and some teams don't even have a captain. A captain should be kept all season long, even if he is injured. Thats waht the alternate captains are there for.
    gotta agree with that because it's the truth; a captain doesn't have to be the greatest player, he's the one with experience and motivation that it takes to win a game. -

    Now as minnesota has it, let's say Rolston is a very good leader on the team and he is the go to guy in the month of March, and he is leading the team to many good heights. Come April the Captain is now.. Gaborik (example) and he is not as great of a leader as Rolston.. Who should the players follow? it builds confusion.
     
  3. Millz

    Millz LGB Staff Member V.I.P.

    I dont like rotating captains either. The Blues, until they finally named Eric Brewer captain, would rotate three alternate captains per game. Jackman was always an A but the other two would switch from game to game. I kind of like that way of doing it if you can't decide on a captain right away. But to switch captains like that? That I dont like.
     
  4. icegoat63

    icegoat63 Son of Liberty V.I.P. Lifetime

    Columbus changed their captaincy because they traded the original one off (Adam Foote) I have to say though, giving the C to Rick Nash was probably one of the better moves they've made all season. Hell if Crosby can handle it at 19? Rick Nash should have no issue what so ever.
     
  5. Turbo

    Turbo Registered Member

    Crosby getting it was a PR move, he didn't deserve it and still doesn't. The Pens have a lot of more qualified players for Captain than him.
     
  6. padd

    padd Registered Member

    not as bad as Thornton in Boston, he was an un expeirienced captain as well back in the day. I belive a captain needs either experience or talent, despite leadership. And what happens in Thornton's case, come playoff time the Bruins loose in the 1st round, he performs poorly, and had.. if anything an even rating.
     
  7. Turbo

    Turbo Registered Member

    Captains should be both experienced and talented, not one or the other. Which is why making guys like Crosby a Captain without the years of experience is purely a PR move.
     
  8. padd

    padd Registered Member

    Well do you remeber Scott Stevens captaining the Devils. We know that, Stevens didn't have all the talent in the world; all he did was hit. But he had experience and showed leadership. He had imense hocket sense for his position, every hit he made was as momentum-shifting as a goal.
     
  9. Turbo

    Turbo Registered Member

    true padd, but to a point your argument shows that he had talent for timing the hits...thus qualifying him as a Captain
     
  10. icegoat63

    icegoat63 Son of Liberty V.I.P. Lifetime

    I do agree that giving the C to Crosby at 19 was nothing more than a "look at me look at me" move. They are in a sense just giving him the title rather than earning it like as you said other players in the past (or more worthy players currently).

    Me personally if I were in the situation I would have made him an Alternate Captain and given the C to one of the more seasoned veterans on the roster. This way Crosby still gets the attention everyone wants him to have but also legitimately puts him "in the running" for the C rather than just bowing down and giving it to him.
     

Share This Page