Why anything? This is the Lightning, after all

SHELTON E-mail: Click here Archive

By GARY SHELTON

© St. Petersburg Times, published January 9, 2001

No one asked for Steve Ludzik's head. Now that we have it, we aren't quite sure what we should do with it.

Do you hang it over the mantle, beside those of Terry Crisp and Jacques Demers, men who also could not measure up to the challenge that is the Lightning? Do you stick it on a pole outside the locker room, a warning to the faint of heart? Do you hang it on the wall, above a natty little vest?

This is the mystery of the Steve Ludzik firing.

Around here, we are used to franchises canning coaches. Usually, however, it happens when the outcry is sufficient to make management pay attention. Usually, it is to lay a little blame, make a promise or two, sell a ticket or three. Usually, it is about time.

But there were no banners calling for Ludzik's firing. The media at large barely noticed his team's shortcomings, let alone harped on them. Moving vans had not been sent to his home. The store that sells effigy dummies still has a full stock. He had not struck a Clemson player.

Nevertheless, the deal is done. He is now the late Ludzik. Once, he was the guy in the lead. Then, he was the guy in the way.

And two questions have not been answered.

Why?

And why now?

If this were Toronto, you could understand it. The Lightning has improved, but only from last to two-points-ahead-of-last, which is less like climbing a mountain than it is stepping onto a curb. The power play either needs to be changed or renamed. Defense remains a vague concept. And, it turns out, it isn't just the Bucs who can't play in icy conditions on the road; it's the Lightning, too.

But here, for now, Ludzik seemed safe. For one thing, he had the best friend any coach could have: low expectations. Come on. Who really bought all the talk about playoffs? This is a team that, if you look at birth certificates, could be competing for the NCAA title. Let's see. Young players, low payroll and a year and a half. Yep, that sounds like a recipe for success to me.

So why was Ludzik fired?

And why now?

Was it really because Ludzik wouldn't play the young players Dudley brought up from the minors? Had Luds and Duds fallen so quickly into the roles of Terry Crisp and Phil Esposito? Was it a smoke screen by an organization that has clung to its wallet with a Kokusai Green type of determination? Was it a realization that a mistake was made in hiring Ludzik to begin with? Did friends fall out, or was one of them pushed?

"We didn't see any progress," Dudley said quietly. "Sometimes it's totally unfair, but you need to make a change to get some people moving. I don't think we've ever assessed things in wins and losses. We need to make progress. And it seemed some of the guys had stopped progressing. We expect to be a competitive team; lately, we haven't been real competitive.

"That's not saying it's anyone's fault. You just need a shock to say it's not acceptable."

Eventually, the target will move to Dudley's chest. That's the way the world works. Blame eventually makes its way up the staircase. If there is failure here, it is Dudley's, and the rest of the organization's, to share.

For now, however, grant Dudley this much. Caught between his friend and his job, he made the tough decision. The professional responsibilities won out over the personal ones.

"In an ideal world," Dudley said, "I've got a job, and I hire one of my closet friends to coach, and we're going to exist forever. But I've been around too long to think that's realistically going to happen. Everybody changes.

"It's very difficult to make massive changes. Sometimes, you hope a change will make people pay attention to what they're doing."

In hindsight, it's hard to say this was a good hire to begin with. Ludzik strolled into Tampa Bay talking about the Detroit Vipers and his titles the way a major-league rookie talks about the batting titles he won in Tidewater. He seemed totally unimpressed by this thing called the NHL. He talked about his system as if he had discovered a great secret, like a goaltender's six hole. He seemed to prefer veterans and worked for a franchise that didn't. After 121 games, 31 victories, he was gone.

If Ludzik was a wrong hire, however, he was Dudley's. If the players are wrong, if the plan is wrong, they are Dudley's.

Left on their own, even talented kids grow up to be Clippers. As good as these young players are, they need an older vet or two to show the way, and it has long since been time to bring him in. The Ludzik firing doesn't change that. It illuminates it. It points to the shortcomings of the payroll (Just wondering: Do other teams shop for players on Priceline?). It screams that the standards have been raised. And, yes, it puts the burden squarely upon Dudley.

"Tell the people to expect progress," Dudley said. "If that doesn't happen, they can be upset with me."

Why? Why now? Isn't this always the way with this organization? A lot of questions, few clear answers. Doesn't that sound familiar?

Ah, yes. After all this time, it is still the Lightning.

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright