Coaching Two Games at Once: The NHL Bench and the Media Room
There’s the game an NHL coach is paid to win, and then there’s the one he’s forced to play after the horn. One happens behind the bench. The other occurs at a microphone—both matter. The second one has become increasingly challenging to manage each year.
Coaches discuss systems, habits, and layers of coverage. The media talks about stars, slumps, pressure, and who’s “not delivering.” Those two conversations rarely line up. And when they collide, it’s usually the coach who ends up adjusting, even when he shouldn’t have to.
That tension isn’t new. What’s changed is how relentless it’s become.
The Gravity of the Star Matters More to the Media than the Team’s Success
Every team has a centre of gravity. One player's questions orbit. One name that bends every conversation back toward itself. Coaches feel it immediately. They’re trying to build a 20-man effort, while every media availability turns into a referendum on one jersey.
Take a Canadian market coach — someone like Craig Berube in Toronto, or Adam Foote in Vancouver. You can see it play out in real time. They come in to discuss structure, forecheck details, or five-on-five play. Instead, the first three questions are about a star’s scoring drought, ice time, or body language.
The coach ends up coaching two games at once. One for his room. One for the narrative.
For NHL Coaches and the Media, It’s Highlights vs. the Hard Stuff
Here’s the quiet frustration: the things that actually win games are usually the least interesting to talk about. Good gaps. Back pressure. A winger making the safe play instead of the creative one. That’s the work.
Media coverage, by nature, gravitates toward moments. Goals. Misses. Mistakes. Projections. Who’s failing? It’s not malicious — it’s structural. Highlights are easier to package than habits.
But for a coach, that focus can undermine the very message he’s trying to reinforce. You preach team defence all week, then the postgame is five questions about one missed chance by a top scorer. Players hear that too. Even when you tell them to ignore it, they don’t.
The Honesty Trap for NHL Coaches
There’s also a job inside the job now: knowing when honesty helps and when it hurts.
Fans often want coaches to be “more honest.” But honesty, in this environment, can act like gasoline. A thoughtful comment about a player struggling can become a headline. A measured answer turns into a talking point that follows the team for days.
So coaches learn to speak carefully. Not because they’re hiding things, but because they know how easily individual narratives can swallow team context. One sentence can shift the spotlight in a way that creates pressure the coach never intended.
That’s the trap. Say too little, and you’re accused of dodging. Say too much, and you’ve just amplified the problem you were trying to manage quietly.
Two Different Jobs, Same Media Room
At its core, this is a clash of purpose. The coach’s job is to win games. Full stop. The media’s job is to explain, question, and keep people engaged. Those goals overlap, but they aren’t the same.
A coach wants to defend the team concept. The media keeps circling back to the individual. Not because they don’t understand hockey, but because individuals drive interest. That friction isn’t going away.
If anything, it’s getting sharper.
Why It Matters for NHL Fans
The best coaches learn how to navigate this without losing the room. They answer questions, absorb noise, and keep honest conversations internal. But it takes energy. It takes discipline. And it’s a skill that has nothing to do with systems or matchups.
Think of it like theatre. The coach is the director, ensuring every role is performed correctly so the production runs smoothly. The media, meanwhile, wants to talk about the lead actor — even on nights when the ensemble carried the show.
Both perspectives exist. Only one wins games.
And every night in a Canadian market, NHL coaches are expected to manage both — whether they want to or not.