Quite the odd coincidence yesterday. If you think Ted Kulfan, Ansar Khan(!) and Helene St. James don't read KK, you're crazy. They do. Do they specifically read A2Y? I'd bet they do not. But on the rare occasions something pops up on the main page (I say rare because I rarely write anymore), it's inevitable they see it.
Well, they saw it yesterday.
It's looking like it might be a good idea to fire Jeff Blashill.
That's us, yesterday at around 0800.
Helene popped up four hours later. Khan(!) waddled in 2 hours after that. Teddy around 5pm. Each of them, because they have to, defending Blashill. Each of them claiming firing him isn't the answer. And at least one of them taking the opportunity to patronize you for thinking it's an option.
Sure enough, the emails came in full force, offering suggestions, opinions, and sure-fire trade proposals that will cure the Red Wings in no time flat.
That's Kulfan. Emails, Teddy? Really? People still do that? Or do they take to Twitter or comment beneath the article? To claim they're emailing is as archaic as saying they dropped a letter in the mailbox. And is there a single one of us proposing trades right now? Seriously? Of all the comments I saw yesterday, nobody is pushing for a trade. Some of us want Blashill fired. Some don't. Some talk lines and call ups, etc. But a trade, Teddy? Shit. Who's gonna take our baggage right now?
A winless team begets questions about a coaching change.
That's Holland roadie, Helene St. James.
Nobody says "beget." We just don't. But she's saying that we, the unwashed, are demanding it because that's what you expect the radical unwashed to do. Question, demand and beget.
My sense is management/ownership is not looking to fire Blashill.
My sense is that you, Helene, write what they, Helene, want you to write. My sense is that even if you believed Blashill should be fired, you wouldn't write it because Ken Holland hasn't given you permission to write it so all you can do is claim guys like me are begetting shit.
His job isn't in jeopardy, in all likelihood, since expectations to win were low and injuries have contributed to the poor start. It would probably take a prolonged run of non-competitive games before the club considered a coaching change.
Khan(!) agrees with Helene that suggesting Jeff Blashill's firing is not a career-minded move for a beat writer who's never uttered a negative thing about the team that butters his wheat bread.
Not a single Deep Digger has ever harshly criticized Ken Holland for the salary sewage sump and swill this team has become. Not a single Digger ever dared to claim Holland screwed the rain soaked, shivering, skinny, malnourished pooch when it came to letting Babcock walk. Only Greg(g) Krupa has ever had the nuts to even mention that Steve Yzerman wanted the GM job and would have had it if not for Holland's arrogance and refusal to move upstairs to join Jimmy D in afternoon games of Boggle.
We have accepted the idea of a rebuild. We also understand, but largely don't like, the reasons Ken Holland delayed it. Playoff money. The streak. The slimmest of all chances that maybe, just maybe, a team with some talent would catch fire and win a round or two or...no. That hasn't been a realistic conversation in 7 years.
Jeff Blashill isn't a victim. He is a process and progress inhibitor. This team has bad habits. This team does not play with an edge or with speed or with youthful aggression. His veterans are apathetic and his rookies are confused. Keeping him is not rebuilding, it's accepting failure with playful shrugs of shoulders.
The Diggers, of course, know this. But as in many situations, they have elected to toe the Holland-drawn line and refused to even suggest a coach or GM may have contributed to this puddle of thick feces the organization finds itself treading in.
Seriously. Not one columnist, not one beat writer, not one guest blogger on any of the three majors in Detroit believe Blashill might be the problem? Matt Patricia was being eviscorated after one loss. One. But Blashill gets a pass. Again. And again.
Ken Holland approves of that message, or lack thereof.
Silence begets skepticism, Helene.