Before Mike Babcock had officially signed anything and agreed to become the new coach of the Edmonton Oilers, he sat down with Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl, and Zach Hyman and hit them with a hard truth: the two best players on the roster share the blame for why this team hasn't won a Stanley Cup.

According to Elliotte Friedman's reporting, Babcock told the pair directly that they'd been as much a part of Edmonton's problem as anyone else. It was a bold move, but the strategy was simple: if Babcock is going to push these Oilers during the 2026-27 season, he needs to know right off the hop how much he can say without pushback.

And, neither player did push back. By multiple accounts, they essentially agreed with him on the spot.

It might seem like an unusual way to open a job interview, but the way Babcock has framed the conversation, the meeting felt more like an interview conducted by a potential coach of the players, not the other way around.

This Oilers team has marched to the beat of the McDavid and Draisaitl drum. To a point, that will continue. What Babcock wants to do is spread the wealth, not give it all to two players taking up $26.5 million this season.

Just because they're making big money and with it comes the weight of pushing this team forward, it doesn't mean they're expected to do everything on their own. In fact, it's a surefire way to lose. 

The trio who sat in with Babcock reportedly told management they wanted a coach willing to push them harder than any bench boss had before, including someone willing to bench a top player mid-game if the situation called for it. Every coach in the past has done the opposite. Understandably, it's easier said than done. When you're behind or need to score a big goal, you put your top guns out there. Babcock intends to find a better balance. 

McDavid has since said publicly that the group specifically wanted Babcock to hold him and Draisaitl accountable, describing it as the two of them wanting to be the ones pointed at when things go wrong.

The practical result, according to McDavid, is that both stars expect reduced ice time in high-leverage moments — including power plays — with those minutes redistributed to the rest of the lineup. It's a philosophical shift for a team that has historically let its two franchise players dictate their own workload regardless of who was coaching.

The argument that McDavid responds well starts with the results, or lack of them. The Oilers have reached the Cup Final in back-to-back years without winning it, followed by a first-round exit this past spring and a regular season in which they slipped to 93 points.

Under a run of different coaches — Todd McLellan, Ken Hitchcock, Dave Tippett, Jay Woodcroft, Kris Knoblauch — McDavid has pointed out one common thread himself: none of them truly held the top of the roster accountable the way a team chasing a championship needs. If he genuinely believes that, accepting a smaller role in big moments isn't a sacrifice; it's the fix he's been asking for.

There's also the matter of who asked for this in the first place. McDavid, Draisaitl, and Hyman reportedly went to management wanting exactly this kind of coach — one willing to overrule a top player mid-game if that's what a rough stretch calls for. When the demand for accountability comes from the star himself rather than being imposed from above, it's a much better predictor of how he'll actually behave once it costs him something.

The counterargument is that old habits are hard to break. Once a way of doing things has become the norm, perhaps no coach can shake a player or players out of it.

Babcock hasn't coached in the NHL in nearly seven years, and his last stop, a brief run with the Columbus Blue Jackets in 2023, ended after players and the NHLPA raised serious concerns about his conduct. What happens when things don't go according to plan? Who loses their patience first?

This is a train that many believe will inevitably derail. When the message in June doesn't sink in the same way it does after a run of losses in April, then what? 

McDavid is a competitor. Expecting him to sit quietly when he's meant to watch from the bench is a big ask. It won't take long for the media and the fan base to pull out "the stars asked for this" card. 

McDavid is saying all the right things. He's talked about needing to sacrifice minutes, about wanting to be pointed at when things go wrong, about the whole top of the lineup taking a little less so others can take a little more. This is what a leader does. 

The real answer comes when that unavoidable moment arrives: a tight third period, a power play that isn't Babcock's usual top unit, McDavid on the bench watching someone else try to be the hero. Does he stay supportive and upbeat? Or does a decade of being the guy who takes over games show his frustration when teammates fail to meet the moment? 

There's every chance that McDavid's buy-in is genuine and transformative — where a player who's clearly hungry for a title decides that ego is the last thing standing between this core and a championship. There's another version where good intentions collide with instinct, the first time Edmonton is down a goal in the final moments, snapping a three-game losing streak. Even more so, in Game 5 of a playoff series. 

When he stays on the ice and plays out the entire power play, will it go over well? When his shift is too long and Babcock brings it up, what happens?

Bookmark The Hockey News Edmonton Oilers team site to never miss the latest news, game-day coverage, and more. Add us to your Google News favourites, and never miss a story.