The NHL general managers are meeting this week in California, which means stories, trade talks, golf, stories over cigars, trade rumors and maybe an informal seminar or two.

If one of those seminars were labeled, it would be called: "Dodging Culpability for Franchise Underachievement and Keeping Your Job (At Least A While Longer) -- FIRE AND BLAME THE COACH AT THE DROP OF A PUCK!" Lecturers: Harry Sinden (professor emeritus), Bob Clarke, Mike Milbury.

The phenomenon exists in every league, but the NHL is the champ.

The Islanders' firing of Butch Goring over the weekend underscored the absurdity of the coaching carousel. Goring now has been fired by two of the best ever at the "not-my-fault" school -- Sinden, the undisputed champion of all time; and Milbury.

This is not an attempt to stir up sympathy for NHL coaches, who know what they're getting into when they're hired. They usually land other jobs, either behind benches or within the "network," often even getting to play golf as "pro scouts." Bad coaches, doing bad jobs, are among those fired. It was obvious, for example, that the Panthers were drastically underachieving this season under Terry Murray, and his fate ended up linked with that of his brother, GM Bryan Murray -- who also was fired in the purge. It's hard to look at that and conclude injustice was served.

If the coach was doing such a bad job, what's that say for the moron who hired him in the first place?

Yet if the system as a whole is considered, it is ridiculously inefficient and often counterproductive. At the very least, the NHL's accepted quick-change tendency undercuts authority and credibility of coaches from the instant they step behind the bench as the men in charge. The talk about coaches being tuned out isn't completely off base, because it happens. One of the reasons it happens is because of the historical precedents. The players know the chances are slim that a GM will walk in and say, "Look, guys, he's the coach, he will remain the coach, whether you like it or not, so play." And they know the coach will be gone.

It all begs the questions, which seem to be rarely asked in the NHL:

If the coach was doing such a bad job, what's that say for the moron who hired him in the first place?

Why aren't the fates of the general manager and his handpicked coach considered more intertwined?

Why does everyone in the game seem to accept the absurdity as S.O.P. and not even feel a little sheepish about it?

And is it true that NHL general managers all shave with disposable razors, because anything else would be too much of a commitment?

The Islanders' example is only the latest, and if this comes off as isolating Milbury for exceptional scapegoating, it isn't intended to do so.

For one thing, the erudite Milbury's Colgate University education apparently did not include probability courses. At the time of the Sunday firing, the Isles had 17 games remaining and were 27 points out of the final Eastern Conference playoff spot.

Any rhetoric about attempting to set a tone heading into the offseason is a lame avoidance of the bigger issue. The Islanders still stink, and Milbury must bear the accountability for that.

Is that completely fair? Of course not. It's far from all Milbury's fault, and everyone in the game understands that. The succession of ownerships, the revenue problems, the antiquated arena all play roles, and Sam Pollock or even Bill Torrey at their peaks of shrewdness wouldn't have been able to build a quality team on Long Island under those conditions.

But blaming Milbury is more fair than him standing at the podium on Sunday, and coming off as if the team that has lost its way would be at least on the verge of playoff contention if Goring had done a better job.

Lost its way? In navigational terms, it is Milbury's job to provide coaches with at least a map and a compass. Instead, he has handed his coaches a blindfold, and it isn't easy to even get on the correct Long Island train to Montauk wearing a blindfold -- much less lead a hockey team out of the wilderness.

And, then, at the end, Milbury hands his coach a cigarette to go with the blindfold.

In this case, Milbury seemed to be to be taking a preemptive step of telling his relatively new and seemingly credible ownership that this embarrassing season was Goring's fault. Again, the Isles' problems have been myriad, but competitively, the lack of consistent direction and philosophy -- for whatever reasons, and some of them have been out of Milbury's control -- have been the most crippling.

Commit to building through the draft and with prospects and stick with it. Don't bring them up too soon and risk ruining them (e.g., Tim Connolly). Don't give up on them too soon (e.g., Roberto Luongo, even if the Isles also had drafted Rick DiPietro). Don't panic and trade the potential cornerstones (e.g., Zigmund Palffy).

The coaching carousel is so active, we could go over so many examples, this missive would spill over into ESPN.com's NFL draft coverage. (Gee, Mel, that one sure was a reach, don't you think?)

But consider: Scotty Bowman is the senior coach in the NHL. And, no, that doesn't mean he is 67 years old or he first was an NHL head coach in 1967. It means he has been on his current job the longest, since 1993. And compared to the tenure of most current NHL coaches -- uh, has anyone else been fired today? -- the Bowman era with the Wings is an archaeological age.

Clarke, actually an astute GM, changes coaches as often as he puts in his teeth. Craig Ramsay was brilliant down the stretch and in the playoffs last season, and became an idiot when a golf ball hit him the head on the 16th fairway last summer?

Tampa Bay general manager Rick Dudley, who should be more secure because of his relationship with owner Bill Davidson and his newness on the job, brought in Steve Ludzik as the other member of the caravan from the Detroit Vipers in the summer of '99.

He built up Ludzik as the prototype of the new millennium coach, then fired him halfway through his second season.

The Lightning were (and are) terrible, but there's some hope there, and -- again -- did Ludzik suddenly change?

And look at the mess in Calgary. Craig Button took over as the new GM in the offseason and at least publicly pondered bringing back Brian Sutter as coach, but didn't. Sutter's archaic attitudes can be galling, but know what? The Flames had no business being in the playoff hunt as long as they were last season, and Sutter deserved coach-of-the-year consideration far more than he deserved a pink slip.

Button wanted his own man, and Sutter had been officially ousted before Button got the job. So it's hard to rip Button on that one. But after an exhaustive search, Button hired Don Hay, and now it seems apparent that Button will fire Hay after this season because he has lost the faith of his players.

So was Hay a horrible choice? Was Button stupid to hire him? Both? Neither? The feeling here is that if Button was so convinced Hay was the right man, he needed to stand behind him -- and still needs to.

But that's not the way the system works.

As Butch Goring can attest.

Terry Frei is a regular contributor to ESPN.com. His feedback email address is ChipHilton23@hotmail.com.