I personally think that they should name a captain this year as they enter a new market. I think having team leadership in place would help further establish the culture they want to build in Utah.
I’d be totally fine with either one being named as both have strengths that would really benefit the team.
I'm in no rush to name a captain and agree with Craig's sentiments. We won't know if ownership and management end up pushing a captain in the end, but it'll be a huge mistake if they do. As far as options go, I lean more toward Crouse's quiet leadership style. I can also understand why Kells could succeed in that role and appreciated Sergachev acknowledging the Clayton played a role in selling him on Utah when he was traded here earlier this summer. Thanks for the thoughtful video, Craig!
First, I'm having trouble understanding your perspective. Initially, you mentioned it's a decision made by the coaches and team, but then you base your argument on conversations with people not connected to the team. Here's what confuses me: Chris Armstrong, the president of the team, was the first to address the captaincy question, followed by Bill Armstrong and the coach. It seems speculative and somewhat akin to gossip to infer there might be underlying issues when there might not be any. I've noticed a tone that comes off as somewhat pretentious and self-assured in your coverage of the new Utah team. I was hoping this wouldn't carry over from your previous reporting. If I were you, I'd advise approaching the team and its new fan base with caution to ensure you're welcomed into their community.
How about naming them co-captains? Has that ever been done in Hockey? New to the sport which is why I'm asking. I guess that's what the "A" on some players jersey may signify?
i think crouse, hes been with the team the longest and has never complained once about the situation in az to media and he is willing to drop the gloves for his teammates.
9 Comments
I personally think that they should name a captain this year as they enter a new market. I think having team leadership in place would help further establish the culture they want to build in Utah.
I’d be totally fine with either one being named as both have strengths that would really benefit the team.
Neither guy imo
I'm in no rush to name a captain and agree with Craig's sentiments. We won't know if ownership and management end up pushing a captain in the end, but it'll be a huge mistake if they do.
As far as options go, I lean more toward Crouse's quiet leadership style. I can also understand why Kells could succeed in that role and appreciated Sergachev acknowledging the Clayton played a role in selling him on Utah when he was traded here earlier this summer.
Thanks for the thoughtful video, Craig!
First, I'm having trouble understanding your perspective. Initially, you mentioned it's a decision made by the coaches and team, but then you base your argument on conversations with people not connected to the team. Here's what confuses me: Chris Armstrong, the president of the team, was the first to address the captaincy question, followed by Bill Armstrong and the coach. It seems speculative and somewhat akin to gossip to infer there might be underlying issues when there might not be any. I've noticed a tone that comes off as somewhat pretentious and self-assured in your coverage of the new Utah team. I was hoping this wouldn't carry over from your previous reporting. If I were you, I'd advise approaching the team and its new fan base with caution to ensure you're welcomed into their community.
How about naming them co-captains? Has that ever been done in Hockey? New to the sport which is why I'm asking. I guess that's what the "A" on some players jersey may signify?
i think crouse, hes been with the team the longest and has never complained once about the situation in az to media and he is willing to drop the gloves for his teammates.
keller would've been named captain if they all agreed he was the right fit. no point in slapping a C on him if it hasn't happened already.
I just hope they don't rush it like they did with OEL.
Curios why you don't consider Durzi an option, signed long term and seems very vocal in the room.