O'Neill couldn't recapture past glory
From the beginning, Jeff O'Neill had an uphill battle to make it back to the NHL. Few players can take an entire year away from the game at age 32 and get up to speed immediately. O'Neill couldn't.
The news that he and the Hurricanes had decided to end his comeback bid came as no surprise after Sunday's game. O'Neill was never a factor. He wasn't physical. He wasn't involved. There was no reason to go any further.
What has happened this month doesn't change for a second O'Neill's place in the history of the Hurricanes franchise. At one point, he was the Hurricanes' best player -- better, even, than Ron Francis during the 2000-01 season, when O'Neill was among the league's best power forwards. That season, he hit people. He went to the net. And he unerringly teed off on Francis' set-up passes. His back-to-back-to-back 30-goal seasons remain a modern franchise benchmark. (Eric Staal can beat that streak this season.)
O'Neill's comeback fell victim to the same demons that wreaked havoc on his career -- questionable fitness habits and an apparent lack of total commitment to the game (the latter can be attributed in part, no doubt, to his continuing sorrow over his brother Donny's tragic death in 2005). At his best, O'Neill imposed himself on the game. At his worst, he hid inside it.
So what's next for O'Neill? If he wants to keep playing hockey, and still has hopes of getting back to the NHL, he would be wise to spend this season in the AHL. Clearly, that's not an option with the Hurricanes.
His appearance at the RBC Center on Sunday may have been his last in an NHL uniform. If so, it was fitting he went out on the rink where he had his greatest success, in the uniform he wore for almost his entire career.
History may record Jeff O'Neill as an underachiever, never reaching the promise that made him the fifth overall pick in 1997. But for a few seasons with the Hurricanes, he was every bit that good -- just not this fall.
About the blogger
Luke has worked for The N&O since 2000. He covered the Carolina Hurricanes and the NHL before becoming a sports columnist in August 2008. A native of Evanston, Ill., he graduated from the University of Pennsylvania. He can be reached at 829-8947 or luke.decock@newsobserver.com.
Comments
I was pulling for Jeff to make a strong comeback
Wed, 10/01/2008 - 08:45 — AllenHIt was disappointing to see him so "below average". And I agree with Todd that it wasn't conditioning, "heart" nor even ability but that he just didn't show the confidence necessary to be that power forward in the NHL. It was wise of him to recognize that it wasn't working.
A stint in the AHL could help him gain back whatever he needs to come back to the NHL. I'd like to see him in Albany and if he does get back to that high level of play, he could be a great asset to bring back later in the season as we just might need him considering the injury bugs we've been plagued with the past couple of years. I hate to see him go out on such a low note. Maybe it was a lack of "heart" after all.
I'm not here to defend
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 20:39 — ctillI'm not here to defend Luke, but the way I read his column, his point was not that O'Neill suffered from an acute lack of conditioning or commitment during the last six weeks -- rather, that he suffered from them chronically over several years. The cumulative result was to put him so deep in a hole that he could not climb out. Call it a lack of confidence if you like; the outcome is the same. I was at the game Sunday, and O'Neill's play was uncomfortable to watch, like a man lost on the ice. So I credit O'Neill and the Canes for making the tough decision in a straightforward way, and I acknowledge O'Neill's guts in trying and specifically for trying it in Raleigh where the fans remember him at his best. Hopefully the experience will boost his self-image for the rest of his life, whether he plays hockey professionally or not.
O'Neill Made This Decision - Not the Canes
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 21:42 — Todd Sullivan (not verified)I appreciate your views and your right to your opinion, ctill, but you cannot read Mr. DeCock's actual words used and draw any conclusion other than that O'Neill's lack of conditioning and commitment fatally flawed his return to the game over the last many months. It is clear that Mr. DeCock has not been communicating with Jimmy Rutherford, Ron Francis, Coach Laviolette or the players who played with, and watched, O'Neill on the ice and in dryland training during the run up to, and during, camp. In fact, the comments made by Mr. Rutherford about his hope that O'Neill would have given his comeback some more time and that they were pleasantly surprised by his commitment and retained skill are evidence to all that Mr. DeCock was off base here and further this was not a decision made by the Canes - but, rather, was a decision made by O'Neill himself. Mr. DeCock was a fine student of the Canes during his previous assignments but this was not fair to O'Neill to contend that his comeback was impaired by conditioning and commitment issues. A simple review of the words of Mr. Rutherford, an honorable and honest professional, would've demonstrated the inaccuracy of Mr. DeCock's conclusions.
Hold on a second here
Wed, 10/01/2008 - 10:38 — ldecock (author)Hold on a second here. When not personally attacking me, you're ignoring all the positive points I made about Jeff O'Neill and twisting others out of context.
Fact: O'Neill was unable to play at the level that would have been required for him to make the team. It doesn't matter who decided to pull the plug on his comeback -- him, the Canes, you, me. It wasn't going to happen.
Fact: He wasn't as involved in the play as he was when he was at his best. He didn't produce in the preseason. Not only was he not scoring, he wasn't putting himself in position to score. Don't you think that goes a little farther than confidence?
You can spin this any way you want. My point was that it shouldn't tarnish all that he achieved for this franchise during his first, fruitful stint with the team. You seem to have missed that part.
Clearly, you're a defender and possibly a personal friend of O'Neill's. You have every right to defend him, although I don't think there's much you need to defend.
Just about everyone -- me, fans, the Canes -- was rooting for O'Neill to make it, to rediscover the form that made him such an effective NHL player, and a dynamic, game-changing one for a too-brief time.
He wasn't prepared -- mentally or physically -- to play in the NHL again. Your very argument, that O'Neill chose not to proceed, couldn't underline that more forcefully.
My argument is that there's nothing wrong with that, that Canes fans should appreciate what O'Neill did when he was here and remember him for that. I assure you everyone wishes him the best.
The Paragraph That Questioned Fitness and Commitment Was Bogus
Thu, 10/02/2008 - 06:47 — Todd Sullivan (not verified)A wise man once said one doesn't want to get in an argument with someone who buys ink by the gallon. I don't want to argue with you, Mr. DeCock, but when you suggested that Jeff O'Neill's comeback was marred by poor conditioning and commitment I felt I needed to rebut these claims. Those were you conclusions. They are not based in fact or in interviews or evidence provided by others in the know. A review of Jimmy Rutherford's words, after they learned of O'Neill's decision not to continue with an attempt at a comeback, proved that. A review of the comments of Captain Rod or others who played with him would also prove the same.
O'Neill was always an intuitive player in the NHL. He knew how to score goals, even when some contended he was loafing while scoring those goals. He was routinely teamed with players that helped him score goals, both here and in Toronto. When that happened, he was a comfortable guy and a routine joy to watch. In the preseason games he did not feel comfortable with his intuition for this game. It happens to PGA pros, NFL quarterbacks, MLB pitchers and hitters, and others. It happens to attorneys. It happens to writers - they get writer's block. They lose confidence. They question their judgments. They don't feel their profession, they think it. They lose their command for the language of their game or their job.
It's not a conditioning or commitment issue when that happens. I am not ignoring the positive parts of your piece on Jeff O'Neill's departure. But your attempts to defend the truly negative contention of that piece - that Jeff O'Neill was stricken with character impairments that were assigned to him others earlier in his career - wasn't good journalism. The great journalist should let evidence and the facts supply conclusions for the reader. It takes a certain journalistic fitness and commitment to do that - like talking to players, coaches, general managers. Ripping off a piece on a blog that O'Neill's comeback was marred by fitness and commitment issues, in my opinion, demonstrated a lack of commitment to getting it right. You're still a solid reporter and editor, though. You just dropped the ball, in my view, on this one.
Regards.
Todd
Should've gone to a practice
Fri, 10/03/2008 - 15:51 — Johnny (not verified)Todd
You should've gone to a practice, Luke was dead on with the conditioning aspect. Jeff was being lapped by everyone, during the scrimmages of Camp Brind'Amour he wasnt able to get back to play defense or even able to make the effort to try. He just seemed to be gliding around and in the last home preseason game he was just occupying space really.
I wish it had worked out for him but your attacks on Luke are out of line. He wasnt attacking Jeff but laying things out and giving him his dues for everything he meant to the org. Maybe down the road Jeff will come around and shake the rust off or maybe not. He wasnt going to make the team this go around and I get the feeling he didnt want the AHL which is where he was heading. I wish he could've pulled it out but he would've been a liability and regardless of whose decision it ultimately was it was for the best for this team at this time.
Sorry Todd, but the condition wasn't there
Fri, 10/03/2008 - 15:29 — macsmomwith Jeff. He was sucking wind after every shift. No fault to him. Taking a year off, its hard to get that condition and mental aspect of the game back quickly. I'm sure Jeff looked around and saw all these young kids having no effects to a 45 second shift and it weighed on him. I don't think Luke was sayiing he came into camp overweight, but anyone can open their eyes and see his conditioning wasn't up to par. You like to quote JR so much, but you fail to mention that JR's one concern about Jeff was being able to sustain an 82 game season and that all goes back to conditioning.
It takes guts to do what Jeff did and I'm sure 99.9% of Canes fans who knew Jeff back in the glory days were pulling for him. For whatever reason, it didn't work out for him here. Maybe Lavi's run and gun style was too much for him who knows. We all wish Jeff luck in his future endeavors whether that's playing hockey or making another career for himself.
I talk to players, coaches
Thu, 10/02/2008 - 11:31 — ldecock (author)I talk to players, coaches and general managers all the time. And the consensus among them was that Jeff O'Neill wasn't in good enough shape to play in the NHL.
They won't say that on the record out of respect for O'Neill, and I didn't want to go into much detail about it for the same reason now that it's no longer an issue, but it's true.
I'm sorry if that hurts to hear, but it's the truth. I stand by it.
As for his play on the ice, you attribute his lack of involvement to confidence. I'll give you that as to his lack of scoring. But players without confidence get it back by doing the right things, going to the right spots on the ice, battling for the puck. And that's all about commitment.
Again, getting back to my original point, none of that takes anything away from what O'Neill accomplished for this franchise. It would have been a great story if he could have come back and made this team, but that's not how it worked out, and I felt a responsibility to my readers — many of whom were hoping he would make it — to explain why.
Professional sports is a cruel, difficult business. Not every story has a happy ending, even when you know the people involved.
The Players, Coaches and GM's Who Won't Comment on the Record
Thu, 10/02/2008 - 20:16 — Todd Sullivan (not verified)I was going to let sleeping dogs lie - but this last one is just too much. Originally you contended that questionable fitness habits and an overall lack of commitment to the game that plagued him during his career were the bugaboos that reared their head and derailed O'Neill's attempted comeback. I called b.s. on this and said it wasn't supported by evidence. You write back that you talked with players, coaches and general managers and you say that the "consensus among them was that Jeff O'Neill wasn't in good enough shape to play in the NHL."
Note, readers, what Mr. DeCock has done with a sleight of pen. He has substituted "wasn't in good enough shape to play in the NHL" for the original claim of questionable fitness habits and commitment issues. This is an important distinction - although it sounds kind of the same. When Justin Williams comes back from a knee injury or Eric Cole came back from a neck injury - they need to work furiously to get back into playing shape. We don't say "Justin is obviously suffering from a lack of fitness habits." Not being in good enough shape to play in the NHL is not a fatal impairment. That can be fixed - a couple weeks with Pete Friesen and extra before practice and after practice ice time can fix it. So can playing lots of minutes in the minors.
Questionable fitness habits and commitment issues are more problematic. They are character issues, perhaps character flaws. My original, and remaining, objection to your account of O'Neill's pulling himself from the potential line-up is that you were asserting his comeback was impaired by character flaws, like questionable fitness habits and commitment to the game. I believe you are flat-out fibbing if you claim that any player, coach or general manager claimed that Jeff O'Neill demonstrated questionable fitness habits or commitment issues in his pre-season run. The initial comments from Captain Rod suggested otherwise. The comments from GM Rutherford suggested otherwise.
I challenge you, Mr. DeCock, to report the reason why Ron Francis was meeting with O'Neill on the Sunday that we all learned that O'Neill was pulling himself out of the running. If the meeting was to tell O'Neill "you know, O, the players, coaches and GMs just feel you have questionable fitness habits and lack of commitment to the NHL game so we're going to have to let you move on" - well, then, I'll eat my hat. I mean that. I'll eat my hat. But if the purpose of that meeting was to discuss a way that O'Neill could fit into the NHL plans of the Canes - you should eat yours. You know Mr. Francis and Mr. Rutherford. They aren't going to meet with a player like O'Neill and talk to him about opportunity if they think he's a fitness wreck and a headcase who will infect the locker room. Period.
I'll shut up now. There are no Pulitzers for those who suggest they've got off the record support for their stories that no one can confirm. Hell, that's Jayson Blair territory. You're a good reporter. I'll still read you. I just didn't like that one paragraph. Still don't - no matter how much you change the context or claim of what you were writing in that paragraph.
Regards.
Todd
Can you really not connect
Fri, 10/03/2008 - 07:23 — ldecock (author)Can you really not connect the dots on this? Please, take off your fanboy glasses and look at the big picture.
Connecting the Dots
Fri, 10/03/2008 - 15:27 — Glass-Wearing Fan Boy (not verified)I've connected the dots, Mr. DeCock. You suggested to readers that O'Neill's comeback was plagued by fitness and character defects that haunted him in his career and are a carry-over from personal tragedy. I called that b.s. and told you that players, coaches and the G.M.s wouldn't support your claims. You said they would, and had. I called that b.s. I still do. You know, and I know, that Jimmy Rutherford and Ron Francis felt Jeff O'Neill had shown them some things on the ice that they wanted to see more of, especially in light of Willy's injury, and they wanted to work some things out with O'Neill. You know, and I know, that O'Neill did not feel his game was sufficient to put back on the ice anymore and he told Mr. Francis that - who appreciated his candor. You know, and I know, that's not what you reported to the readers.
The dots are connected. They create a straight line. That line points to a small pile of b.s. and amaterish psychology created by a reporter/editor who was lazily trying to say "this is just more of the same we always got from O'Neill - the underachiever who sometimes dazzled us but mostly disappointed us." That's a good story - but not what happened.
When O'Neill was out of shape, I told him so. When O'Neill was feeling sorry for himself, I told him so. What I saw during his training camp was a player in shape and committed - and I told him so. I was proud of him while he tried and proud of him when he said "I ain't got it and I ain't gonna fake it."
Regards.
Todd Sullivan
"That line points to a
Sat, 10/04/2008 - 04:24 — acidqueen"That line points to a small pile of b.s. and amaterish psychology created by..."
...a fanboy who can't take being disagreed with.
Just wanted to point that out.
Let me be more specific:
It's great that you're friends with a dude who was your best customer when he lived here, but you really do need to take the blinders off. Jeff O'Neill may have been in decent shape--but he's not at a level where he can compete in the NHL, and clearly he realized that.
Too bad you're not capable of doing the same thing.
Wow
Tue, 10/07/2008 - 15:45 — caniac1026 (not verified)@ Luke, can you close this thread or what? LoL. Oh wait, nevermind, that would be using your power to shut down the voice of the mass(es).
@ Todd: First of all, Luke is dead on in regards to O not being up to snuff. In the preseason games I watched Jeffy was slow and completely unlike Old Jeff.
2nd, I think you're reading way too much into what LdC is writing. They call them demons because they stay with you like a bad, recurring dream, haunting you the rest of your life. Bad times don't go away, they just hurt less over time, and those hurdles(sp?) get a little shorter. And maybe O can get all that far enough behind him in time to come back as the player we all loved him for. That's my take on it, anyhow.
Todd, I think if you take a step back and wiggle your Jeff O'Neill bobble head you'll see Jeff is agreeing with me.
At least he tried
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 12:52 — esteban1949Whether you like or loath the guy...at least he tried...but as " Dirty Harry" Said..." A man has to know His Limitations"...And yes he ought to try and hook up in the AHL
who knows...maybe just maybe ...Being Hungry again will finally close out the grief phase of his life...and eplace it with Hockey...Good Luck Jeff...thanks for trying !
PS...i was listening to the Caps game via the computer last night...and it seems Acoin did a decent job last night !
Go Canes !
Shameful Commentary
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 12:29 — Todd Sullivan (not verified)Luke DeCock concludes: "O'Neill's comeback fell victim to the same demons that wreaked havoc on his career -- questionable fitness habits and an apparent lack of total commitment to the game (the latter can be attributed in part, no doubt, to his continuing sorrow over his brother Donny's tragic death in 2005)."
This is false and particularly shameful. At this year's training camp, O'Neill was not only in particularly strong physical condition, some of the best of his career, but the idea that he fell victim to an apparent "lack of commitment to the game" resulting from continuing sorrow over Donnny O'Neill's tragic death is hack reporting and psychology at the same time. This is pure garbage and beneath a solid reporter or editor.
Jeff O'Neill felt in his gut that he could not return to the relevance and excellence that once characterized his years in the NHL. It was not a matter of conditioning - he felt completely able to handle the skating, the hitting, the cardio-vascular challenges. All of that. It was not a matter of commitment. He came to camp in shape and with an edge in his step. He arrived at the workouts and on the ice always ahead of time and without a single day missed. This can be confirmed by team members, Pete Friesen and the coaching staff.
What he unfortunately, but understandably, lacked was confidence - an underreported but valuable asset for any player. Confidence that we are who we SHOULD BE is something each one of us will struggle with many times in our lives. But when your professional life and feeling comfortable with it is compressed into a series of 56 second shifts and 29 minute periods and 60 minute games it is forced upon an NHL player in a way few of us can understand or appreciate.
O'Neill pulled himself out of the running to be a Carolina Hurricane in 2008-09 because he didn't feel in his bones that he could be the player the team, or he, needs him to be. He would not accept mediocrity or performance issues that were certain to arise because he does not see the ice or feel the game like he used to. Period. That's not lack of commitment. That's TOTAL COMMITMENT to a particular way of playing a game - with unstinting excellence and ability.
I thought the reporting of Jeff's decision would be that it was an act of true professionalism and selflessness. We live in days when some professional athletes just cruise and chill and earn fat paychecks without giving one crap whether they are adding to the institutional goal of winning games. Jeff O'Neill proved, by his action, that he is not one of those athletes. It's shameful this got reported as an act of weakness.
#92 not a victim. Those aren't demons he faced. I am proud of my friend and will remember days with great joy that he stood in the middle of our ice and looked up at our rafters as if to say: "are you not entertained?" I am just as proud of him, though, at the way he terminated this run at a return.
Regards.
Todd Sullivan from Raleigh
What a disappointment...
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 22:10 — Itrain (not verified)No, Im not disappointed in Jeff O'Neill but I am with you Luke. Todd Sullivan is correct and unless you were there for camp, you wouldnt know exactly how fit Jeff came into camp and what kind of mindset he had. Its sad commentaries and assumptions like these that fuel all the misinformation flying around the fanbase. If you want to portray that Jeff didnt have motivation, drive or the respect for the game itself, at least back it up with facts.
Anyone that knows him, knows that he's worked very hard to get his life back on track and even put himself in a position to get another chance. Please stick to the facts when reporting about someone else's life, especially when you are uninformed about what's really going on behind closed doors.
Best of luck to Jeff, I hope he finds peace wherever the road takes him. At least now he can move forward knowing that he gave it one last shot. There's nothing victimizing in that at all.
Eye of the Storm
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 10:57 — Ken (not verified)Jeff will always be remembered for the 2002 run to the cup. Taking a puck to the eye then later in the game scoring the game winning goal. What a great story it would have been if he had made the team this year, but, it just wasn't meant to be.
Although not very fan friendly, he and Kevin Weekes avoided fans whenever possible, he was always a fan favorite. He's still fairly young and should be able to make it back to the NHL with a little more effort on his part.
Best of luck Jeff, you'll always be remembered as the "Eye of the Storm" here in Canes country.
Good synopsis, Luke. I was
Tue, 09/30/2008 - 10:31 — Anonymous (not verified)Good synopsis, Luke. I was really pulling for Jeff to make it back this year, but it was clear he just didn't have it. At his age & conditioning level, he no longer has the speed to be effective in this league, especially with a team like the Canes who rely so much on skating. It was a good move to give him a tryout, & a good move to part ways.