AB Habman wrote:

---

 It seems that if Kovy is telling Rivet to F off, he not only has disrespect for his co-assistant but probably many players including little Saks. Maybe Gainey needs to make a choice? Since he can't trade lucky Saks, he might want to consider trading Kovy for a player who will tolerate the leadership and be more respectful of Rivet and Saks because they'll be a Hab for at least three more seasons.  Also as much as Kovy is potentially unlikable, I wonder how unlikable the little chirpy Saks is? It seems when the smurf was out of the line-up with his Cancer, the players came together under Gilmour who is very likable and overacheived to make the playoffs.  I just think personality has alot to do with leadership. The good leaders are the ones that are liked by their teamates because they will respect what they have to say.  If you remember, Saks was chosen over Corson by one extra vote way back. If the team re-voted, it would be interesting to who would get their majority vote.  Gainey tried sending a message by over signing Saks with the no trade clause to players that they should buy into it. Maybe they're not? I think players should be left to decide who they want as their leader. Gainey should remove the players that are disrespectful such as Kovy or whoever by trade in the off season than let the players vote on a new leader. If Saks wins majority vote than so be it but at least give them a democratic right to choose who they want. The players that chose last time are long gone except Rivet.   Gainey may solve the team unity thing this way!  For example, Iginla who is loved by his teamates played great in the playoffs so his whole team played their hearts out. That rarely happens with Saks. He may try hard but the players don't seem to follow.  Anyways, just a thought to try to improve team chemistry and unity.

---

I like your idea of a team vote. But I think you will see that it will be Koivu again. But if that is what it takes to unify this team...I like the idea.

The only other guy that may get the nod is Souray I figure. With Rivet and Koivu as "A"'s. It would be interesting however.

MacNiel, not to but in, but in an earlier post barry explained that he saw #27 utter those words when he was questioned about a non pass or something. barry posted it but I cannot remember what thread it was under. maybe u could send barry a message or a thread to explain it to u.

macneil wrote:

---

no prob. i just finished that thread , i hope rivet has a little something for kovy the next time they meet in practice , thier is no place for that on the bench .

---

LOL Macneil..spoken like a TRUE Cape Bretoner buddy. What we need to do is get some of these guys out to the dance at the Sydney Legion some Saturday night and let them have a go at each other

gfeaver, exactly what I was thinking.  Kovy and Rivet probably had a few drinks after that game and it's all done.  I mean, as frustrating as it is for the fans to watch, imagine how frustrating it can be for the players!  I'd be going insane.  There can't be one guy on the team who isn't feeling some sort of emotional termoil these days.  It's infectious.  Once they make the playoffs, it will be a different story.

AB Habman wrote:

---

 My thread has kind of got off topic. What do you think of my original thought about taking another vote?  It would take the onus off Gainey to force team harmony.

---

I'd say it depends on just how bad the crisis gets. Bottom line is, when the team is winning people are all huggy-kissy, as we saw over the post-olympic stretch. So I think it all comes down to results. I think most Habs and Gainey are realistic enough to know that they beat the pundits by making the playoffs at all. If they do get in and make a good showing, you can be sure the players will all be happy with leadership, etc...If Montreal misses the playoffs this year, and dissension in the ranks continues to be blatant, I think a vote wouldn't be half bad to see where people stand. I wonder though if the vote for captain wasn't part of the problem in the first place. If Koivu won by one vote, and was named captain on that basis, it probably meant he felt he was in a tenuous position in the first place. I actually think naming Koivu on the basis of a one-vote difference might have had long-term negative effects on team unity. I'm not sure I'd want to be the captain either in those circumstances, let alone the loads of players who didn't vote for him.