BREAKING: Rangers Finally sparks reaction with new coaching announcement

Former New York Rangers coach John Tortorella was dismissed by the Philadelphia Flyers on Thursday after three seasons behind their bench. Naturally, this has sparked speculation in New York about whether the Rangers should consider bringing back the man who led them from 2009 to 2013 to replace Peter Laviolette.

Tortorella is a divisive figure—abrasive, no-nonsense, combative, yet effective. He led the Tampa Bay Lightning to their first Stanley Cup championship in 2004 and ranks ninth in NHL history with 770 wins. Among American-born coaches, only Laviolette has more victories, sitting seventh overall with 841.

With 171 wins, Tortorella is fifth on the Rangers’ all-time coaching list, and his .583 points percentage ranks sixth in franchise history. He initially took over as interim coach for the final four games of the 1999-2000 season after John Muckler was fired, then returned in 2008 after Tom Renney’s departure. Across 319 regular-season games with the Rangers, he compiled a 171-118-29 record with one tie. He also led the team to the 2012 Eastern Conference Final, where they fell in six games to the New Jersey Devils, finishing with a 19-25 playoff record.

Following the 2013 playoffs, Tortorella was fired after players voiced complaints during exit interviews. Since then, he has coached the Vancouver Canucks (for a controversial single season), Columbus Blue Jackets, and most recently, the Flyers.

Now, at 66 years old and more than a decade removed from his last stint in New York, would bringing Tortorella back be a wise move?

Assessing whether Rangers should fire Peter Laviolette, hire John Tortorella as coach

The Forever Blueshirts staff debates a two-part question: Should the Rangers part ways with Peter Laviolette, and if so, should they bring back John Tortorella as his replacement?

With Tortorella recently dismissed by the Flyers, speculation about a potential return to New York has resurfaced. While his tenure from 2009-13 saw success—including a trip to the 2012 Eastern Conference Final—his fiery coaching style and rocky exit raise concerns. Meanwhile, Laviolette, who holds the most wins among American-born coaches, guided the Rangers to a strong regular season but faced scrutiny for their playoff performance.

The discussion now centers on whether a shakeup behind the bench is necessary—and if Tortorella, at 66 and more than a decade removed from his previous stint, is the right fit for a second act with the Blueshirts.

Jim Cerny – Executive Editor

You make a solid case. Laviolette returning seems like the most likely outcome, but if he doesn’t, Tortorella is at least worth discussing—even if he’s not the right choice in the end.

Torts would undoubtedly bring accountability, and the Rangers wouldn’t have many lackluster efforts under his watch. But his intense coaching style tends to have a short shelf life, meaning the team would have to win a Stanley Cup quickly before things unraveled. That’s a risky bet.

Switching from one demanding coach to another would be an unusual move, but as you pointed out, this team doesn’t need a players’ coach like Gallant. Drury’s familiarity with Tortorella is notable, and while Torts has mellowed, it’s hard to see Drury putting his job on the line for a reunion.

Tortorella has qualities that make him intriguing, but ultimately, the fit just doesn’t seem right. Passing on him is probably the smarter move.

John Kreiser – Senior Writer

You’re absolutely right—firing Laviolette now would be a knee-jerk reaction, and bringing back Tortorella would be even more drastic.

Laviolette’s track record speaks for itself. He’s consistently found short-term success wherever he’s been, and his first season with the Rangers was historic. Leading a team to its best regular season ever, a Presidents’ Trophy, and a conference final in year one is no small feat. He’s not perfect, and this season has exposed flaws in his system, but he hasn’t suddenly forgotten how to coach.

 

As for Tortorella, he’s an excellent coach in the right situation, but this isn’t it. His demanding style might provide a short-term spark, but long-term, it’s not a fit for this roster. The Rangers need solutions, but hitting reset with Torts isn’t one of them.

Dane Walsh – Staff Writer

That’s a strong argument against a Tortorella reunion. His track record with young players is concerning, and the Rangers can’t afford to stunt the development of Othmann, Berard, and Perreault—especially given their history of struggling to nurture young talent.

Laviolette may not be the best at developing prospects, but he doesn’t have the same rigid, punishing approach that Tortorella often employs. If the Rangers do make a change, they need a coach who can foster growth while keeping them competitive. Someone like Spencer Carberry, who has helped Washington transition to a younger core, would be a much better fit than going back to Torts.

The Rangers need fresh ideas, not a return to old-school, tough-love coaching.

Eric Charles – Staff Writer

You bring up a crucial point about timing and the current state of the Rangers. A Tortorella return might have made sense earlier in the season when the team was dealing with veteran underachievement, but now, with the mix of younger talent, it’s a different challenge. Tortorella is known for his no-nonsense, tough-love approach, but it’s not always the best fit for developing young players, as you’ve seen with Michkov in Philadelphia.

While his mindset of doing whatever it takes to win could provide a culture shift, the Rangers need a coach who can strike a balance between accountability and player development—something Tortorella has struggled with in his past stints. Laviolette may be on the hot seat, but the next coach should be someone who can get the most out of both veterans and younger players. A culture change is needed, but that change should come with a coach who has the flexibility to adapt and cultivate the full potential of this roster. Tortorella, as you said, might not be the right fit for that.