In the wake of Mike Sullivan’s departure as the head coach of the Pittsburgh Penguins, a lot of people are seizing on some of the alleged circumstances that surrounded it.
For instance, there were rumblings that Sullivan had made a list of “non-negotiable demands” that he wanted if he was going to remain as the franchise’s head coach.
Received word yesterday that Sullivan and the #Penguins would be parting ways. @scorindorin and I were on the same text.
Team met w/ Sullivan yesterday. Sullivan had a list of non-negotiable demands. Dubas and FSG said "thanks, but no thanks."
— Adam Crowley (@_adamcrowley) April 28, 2025
To the surprise of no one, the Penguins acted quickly to refute that report.
“There were no demands (during an April 22nd meeting). There were no demands (Sunday), and there were no demands in the period in between. There have never been any demands from Mike,” general manager Kyle Dubas said at Monday’s press conference. “Never happened.”
OK. Fine. It never happened.
Were there any non-negotiable demands made of Sullivan, though?
Like, for instance, did Dubas ever say, “Mike, be patient with the young players in high-leverage positions we are going to ask you to play. Don’t sit them on the bench, scratch them or minimize their roles the moment they make a mistake while you let the veterans make gaffe after gaffe for 60 minutes at a time.”
Did Dubas perhaps make a demand that the players play with more defensive structure given the score and situation when the team is leading instead of pinching and chasing offense even when they are up by two goals in the last 20-30 minutes of a game — and hold them accountable if they don’t.
Veterans included.
Those are things I would’ve demanded of Sullivan if I was in Dubas’ position.
Or is “demand” just too strong of a word? Is that really the hang-up here? Because I’m getting the feeling that is.
In this touchy-feely world where no one wants to feel an unpleasant moment, does the word “demand” just come off as too gosh-darn uncomfortable?
I kinda think that’s what happened. Maybe Sullivan didn’t hand Dubas a freshly carved stone tablet with his version of the 10 Penguins Commandments “moving forward.” Perhaps the moment wasn’t quite as abrupt or tense as that tweet above portrayed.
And I assume Dubas didn’t return serve as harshly as I just theorized above.
But, c’mon. Let’s be real. Decade-long relationships like the one between the Penguins and Sullivan don’t just end out of nowhere — not when two weeks ago Sullivan was speaking as if he was planning to be back.
Well, on his terms I guess.
More sports
• Fan injured after falling from Clemente Wall during Pirates game
• U mad, bro?: Steelers fans irate about NFL Draft coverage; Pens fans sick of Erik Karlsson
• First Call: Ryan Watts discusses medical release from Steelers; Penguins' coaching job not highly rated
Let’s avoid getting hung up on verbiage and trying to soften the edges. Marriages wind up in divorce for a reason.
Or reasons. They don’t just end for the sake of ending — especially with at least two years and roughly $12 million dollars remaining on your marriage.
Um, I mean, your contract.
Did Sullivan really have a list of “demands?” Were they more like “requests?” “Requirements?” “Action items?” A “mission statement?”
Whatever corporate-y buzz phrase that makes you feel better about saying it out loud, clearly at some point between April 17 and 28, Dubas decided that he and Sullivan had a different vision for what the Penguins need to become.
Whatever that vision is from Sullivan’s end was suddenly deemed untenable for a Fenway Sports Group management team that has staunchly backed Sullivan from Day 1 of its ownership, because they gave the green light to Dubas to let Sullivan walk.
Probably to a conference rival in New York or Boston, by the way.
Maybe that’s because one of those action items could’ve been “I want an even longer extension if this rebuild is going to be another two or three years.”
Look, I get it. We don’t fire coaches around Pittsburgh too often. Becoming a coach in Pittsburgh is more like a Supreme Court appointment than anything else these days. Even the Pirates are en route to a 10th losing season over a 14-year span, and there have only been two managers in that time.
Featured Local Businesses
Not every coaching departure can be Chuck Noll talking about “seeing what the flowers smell like” after 23 years, or Bill Cowher saying goodbye with the shine of a 2-year-old Vince Lombardi trophy still sparkling in the background. Relationships between coaches and general managers can’t all end with misty eyes and pats on the back like the scene with Mike Tomlin and Kevin Colbert after the 2022 draft.
This stuff happens. Especially after a decade. Especially when the coach and G.M. didn’t come into a city together in the first place.
So, please, let’s not immediately rewrite history here. For as much as Dubas talked about how rare it is in hockey to see one coach lead a team to titles, then rebuild it and bring it back to a championship level again, that was his original plan with Sullivan.
From the moment Dubas took over, through these last few non-playoff seasons, all the way up until Monday, Dubas was always in Sullivan’s corner, saying things like, “If you don’t have Sully, then you’re looking for Sully.”
And, I’m sorry, but history is going to judge who was right and who was wrong for allowing that relationship to eventually dissolve. That’s just the nature of pro sports.
No matter how delicate we want to be in discussing it right now.
Listen: Tim Benz hosts his weekly Fantasy Sports podcast with Jeff Erickson