When I started writing about the Carolina Hurricanes many years ago, it was purely as a hobby and a way to channel my love for Carolina Hurricanes hockey which is a leisure activity. That bumped to a higher level but did not change much when I launched Canes and Coffee four years ago. I recognize that I have an obligation as a public site to maintain a level of integrity and decency, but at the same time I am not obligated to report on all things Canes. There are people who have a different level of responsibility because they get paid to do it. In that regard, I feel no guilt in sometimes taking a pass on some topics usually just because it is just not personally interesting to me but occasionally because it is not a fun topic to handle.
But at the same time having even a small outlet and audience, I feel like it would completely irresponsible to walk past today’s NHL news. The domino effect that somehow started with Mike Babcock, stretched to Bill Peters, pulled in the Carolina Hurricanes organization and puts a spotlight on the entire NHL and hockey world and its culture in my opinion is something that must be addressed.
Since I think most people are aware of what transpired quickly between Monday night and Tuesday evening, I will not recap all of the details. TSN’s account of the situation is HERE.
First and foremost — Racism and discrimination in any form is wrong
At the point where Bill Peters was accused of using the N-word toward a black player and that accusation was corroborated by two other players who witnessed it, I think this is racism and is wrong in a perfectly black and white kind of way. I think trying to soften that by talking about context or putting it under ‘old school coaching’ or anything else is a huge step in the wrong direction. It is wrong – period, and I think it needs to be addressed as such. Saying that is okay or maybe not that bad because of culture, context, timing or anything else for me is saying that it can be okay in certain situations. I disagree 100 percent with that. I believe as a hockey community that we need to address situations like this head on and root it out.
My first Tweet about the situation mid-day on Tuesday which I think trumps everything else that follows was:
Since it is on topic in our hockey world today, racism and/or discrimination in any form is wrong and should not be tolerated in the NHL or elsewhere.
— Canes and Coffee (@CanesandCoffee) November 26, 2019
I will go on to discuss other things and also pull in more direct Carolina Hurricanes ramifications especially related to the second shoe to drop with Michal Jordan’s also validated accusations (see below). But I think it is incredibly important to do a hard stop and recognize that this top line issue trumps ‘hockey’ considerations X 100.
The second shoe drops and lands in Raleigh
Maybe 12 hours after the initial Tweet by Akim Aliu accusing Peters of the racist comments, a second shoe dropped when former Canes defenseman Michal Jordan also took to Twitter to say that Bill Peters had kicked him on the bench and also punched another player in the head. Those accusations were also confirmed quickly by other sources.
I think the initial Bill Peters news was received almost with a positive vindictiveness in the Hurricanes hockey community since the Canes fan base had soured on Peters prior to his departure.
But what maybe was missed at first by some was how this second confirmed allegation suddenly put the entire Carolina Hurricanes organization under the microscope when Jordan said that “the trainers and other guys saw it” as stated in a Tweet by Frank Seravalli at TSN Sports. At that point, Peters instantly became a bigger villain, but it also raised the question of who in the Hurricanes organization knew about this and to what degree they did or did not do something to put a stop to it.
As of starting to write this at 9:30pm on Tuesday, the Hurricanes organization has not issued a statement but in my opinion is now on the clock.
The Hurricanes’ role
At the point where Michal Jordan reported being kicked by Bill Peters and importantly that the trainers and other people knew about it, this very much became a Hurricanes’ problem. Yes, Bill Peters will most assuredly end up at the top of the evil, bad guy list when the dust settles. By in the case of a bad actor, management who is aware also has a responsibility to take action to put an end to it.
Then the situation went a layer deeper into the Hurricanes organization when a Tweet from Mark Armstrong from ABC-11, said that a Hurricanes source said that a leadership group at the time and other staff members made Ron Francis aware of their concerns about Bill Peters conduct. At this point some amount of responsibility extended past Bill Peters and deeper into the Hurricanes organization. Ron Francis is obviously gone as are some of the coaches, but maybe most significantly Rod Brind’Amour was an assistant coach for the entirety of Bill Peters’ tenure with the Hurricanes.
And at least as far as what has been reported so far, that murky position is where we are currently.
The need for an honest assessment without exemptions
The ball is now in the court of the team and to some degree the local media to figure out what exactly happened, who knew what and who bears what responsibility for Peters’ abusive actions while coaching the Hurricanes.
Because it is not known exactly who knew about the incidents and who reported it to Francis, it is impossible to say yet who is at fault and to what degree for being an enabler. And because Francis could theoretically have also been overruled on taking action on Peters, his role is also unclear.
But make no mistake that there are people who know the details of the situation. Given that many of the parties are no longer with the Hurricanes organization, I think it could be fair that it takes a bit of time to collect and verify details versus going knee-jerk reaction on minimal facts. But if after a short period of time the Hurricanes formal response (or non-response) is to pretend like nothing happened and not putting forth details, I see that as further being an enabler for the wrong that occurred and equally significantly future wrong that comes from a culture that protects and hides guilty parties.
Picking out bad apples versus reworking the entire apple cart
I really think the current situation can be a fork in the road to some degree for the team but more significantly for the entire NHL. On Twitter after some time to digest at least the initial rounds of information, I said:
The fork in the road for today's NHL news is whether the couple apples publicly identified as bad get discarded and then the cart quickly rolls away or if this is big enough to upset the entire apple cart.
— Canes and Coffee (@CanesandCoffee) November 26, 2019
Historically, the NHL has managed similar situations into being isolated incidents. A couple bad actors were singled out and (at least to some degree) faced punishment for their actions. But my opinion anyway is that the actions leaned drastically toward damage control in a public relations way and away from a concerted effort to do what was necessary to root out the problem. Essentially, a couple bad apples were singled out and addressed, but the apple cart mostly just continued on the same path.
What should be under siege but has not been so far is the culture that for whatever reason makes it possible for things like this to happen and for perpetrators to just continue working in organized hockey for years.
So past all of the details swirling around, I am watching closely right now to get a sense of whether the NHL seems to be again making quick work of doing damage control and moving on or if instead there is some inclination that a greater effort will be made to chart a new course.
The hard road
I think as much as anything the fork in the road comes down to two things. The first is creating a more open environment that is conducive to whatever skeletons are out there being unearthed. Significantly, both Akium Aliu and Michal Jordan were comfortable airing their grievances only after they were past working to build an NHL career. That suggests that the league and the current environment are likely not conducive to similar stories reaching the surface. Second, the league and hockey community must be willing to assign deserved blame without consideration for participants’ standing within the game. That is to say that the assignment of blame and consideration for possible culprits cannot in any way be affected by people’s standing in the hockey world.
With Ron Francis we are already seeing suggestions that there are mitigating circumstances that make him either not a culprit or at least less so. Again, the full details are not yet revealed. If in fact Ron Francis was unable to take action against Bill Peters because of owner Peter Karmanos, then I think that completely minimizes his level of responsibility. But if Francis was aware of Peters’ actions as reported, had the authority to do something and did not, then he needs to be held fully accountable. There cannot be discounts on accountability and blame because he is generally a good guy, he has positives too, he is doing different in Seattle or more simply because our hockey community does not want to hate heroes.
And in a more frightening vein that literally makes me shudder, Brind’Amour’s role if any in the situation must be considered. My read on Rod Brind’Amour from watching him on and off the ice for nearly 20 years is that he is a better person than this. His relationship and affirmation from the players also suggests that he would be above this. So if I was a betting man, I would bet heavily that Brind’Amour either was unaware or did the right thing. But here’s the thing…For something as serious as this, we cannot just choose to absolve people of wrongdoing because it would hurt so much to find out they were in fact complicit. Diligence is necessary in both building cases against those we are happy to see implicated but equally so in making sure that others in the vicinity of the situation are truly innocent.
From a fan standpoint, I am now set to be restless and uptight about this whole situation from an incredibly selfish viewpoint until I learn that Rod Brind’Amour is not part of the group that enabled this in Raleigh. Again, when I step through everything that I know about Brind’Amour as a person, I feel as confident as I can that he will not ultimately be pulled into this. But at the same time, no one can be granted an exemption, and if I am wrong and he does turn out to be part of the problem, I want to know despite how much it will wreck me.
The local media
At a local level, the local beat reporters have an obligation to help uncover what exactly happened and who participated. As a assistant coach under Bill Peters, I think it is both fair and necessary to ask Rod Brind’Amour if he was aware of the events Michal Jordan mentioned. And I also think it is fair and necessary to ask Brind’Amour what he did about about it if he did in fact know. Those questions should not be asked in accusatory way. Brind’Amour has not been implicated, and it seems likely that will still be the case when the facts emerge. But as hard as it will be, those questions should be asked. For the most part, any hard-hitting coverage of the Canes (often wrongfully) has come from outside of North Carolina. Will the local media have the gumption to ask hard questions in public and push for real answers? Will they do some behind the scenes work to build the factual story themselves if the team is not forthright with specifics?
The broader NHL media
More so at a national level is where I become skeptical about the fork in the road that I mentioned above. Ideally, something like this opens the door for openness and for however many skeletons there are to unearth to be unearthed. If this happens, my fear as a hockey fan is that it will be absolutely brutal what we learn. But if that is what is necessary to make a change for the right or the sport we love, it must be endured. Trying to find a softer landing is disrespectful to everyone who has been wronged by elements of toxicity build into hockey’s culture.
But I fear that the group most capable of helping drive the openness or a true cleansing is to a lesser degree an accomplice and enabler. And largely the leading media that cover the NHL are long-timers who have indirectly been part of the club. Go browse the list of the leading reporters from The Athletic, TSN and other prime NHL media outlets. So many of the group are veterans with 10, 20 or even more years of experience as an insider. Based on that, there seems to be a massive mismatch between the rumblings and understandings for some of the ills that have existed and still exist and how many stories we see written about the same. Every time one of these things is reported, there seem to be a number of media who immediately say they have something to contribute that they did not previously report before because…uhh…well…ummm…I didn’t have enough evidence or whatever. Significant in the events over the past couple days is that the genesis of the current fire storm was not a member of the media uncovering or reporting something. The genesis was a couple of former players taking to Twitter. What does that say about what these players think of the media as a channel for this? Anecdotally, the few times we have seen similar grievances aired in the media, it has often been from foreign media sources back in a players’ home country far away from the mainstream NHL media.
If there are problems with the culture and more skeletons to be unearthed, I am skeptical that the long-time NHL media club is the right group to help with this. That group should either already have much of this information or be capable of getting it if they cared to. But even if not formally part of the organization, they have working relationships with the organizations and teams and also the individuals who seem to just cycle around the NHL in different roles.
If and when the flood gates ever open, what are the chances that the long-time media will increasingly look like indirect enablers too?
Rewriting Hurricanes history
Again, the problem is by far the most important part of this story, but an incredibly interesting side note is how dramatically this is rewriting Hurricanes history since the Tom Dundon era began. The same long-time media who are at least indirectly part of broader NHL hockey have been incredibly critical of Tom Dundon at every step of the way since he took ownership of the team.
Dundon took heat for his handling of the Ron Francis situation and his ultimate dismissal.
He caught a ton of flack for stepping well below his level and micromanaging in interacting directly with the players and doing exit interviews four months after taking over the team.
He caught a ton of skepticism when after looking externally, he instead chose to make Rod Brind’Amour a first-time head coach.
And more generally, Dundon has been criticized to the point of being ridiculed for deviating from the seeming NHL code book to do things differently.
Depending partly on how the chips fall with Bill Peters and who knew/did what in the Hurricanes organization, this recent news has the potential to massively alter the interpretation of what Dundon was doing and why.
What say you Canes fans?
To be completely honest, I am fearful of what we might get on Wednesday when this topic is open for debate. I much prefer to debate line combinations, prospects’ potential and other on-ice matters that are the fun of the sport for me. But as a small part of the broader hockey community, I think dialogue even if people disagree, is a small step in the right direction to improving our sport.
Go Canes!
This is going to be difficult for some to read—and many will think I am flat out wrong. I am ok with that.
Matt. This was your best piece ever—you were honest in realizing that hockey, and left unstated but clear, even winning hockey, is not as important as human decency. Then you end it by abdicating the moral high road.
First, Peters is accused of things that are immoral and should be called out. He and those who either actively or passively allowed his behavior should have a price to pay. You did a beautiful job of addressing that and thinking about the possible implications.
Second, you throw much of that away when you then imply that Dundon might be a moral exemplar. Unless you think that Chuck Kaiton was implicated in the abuse, the action of the new owner must be seen as a display of power and an expense reduction campaign. Further, if we are all going to think about the power structure of hockey in moral terms, Dundon’s past must be considered. He bought the Canes. The millions he used were gained using less than savory practices and–in regard to his company’s treatment of military personnel—in violation of laws. My wife was in the Army; there are companies that prey on the fact that the majority of military personnel are young and from poor backgrounds. While those who place profit above decency are not racist per se, the fact is that there is a disproportionate amount of African-Americans and other minorities who end up in long-term debt because pay-day lenders, pawn shops, and, yes, sup-prime auto loan companies seek out folks newly enlisted. I understand that business is “amoral,” but to willingly pursue business practices that take advantage of young people’s financial ignorance when they are serving our country is a moral failing.
I am the last person to argue that redemption is not possible. Perhaps the Canes’ owner can use this moment to become a voice for justice and be the first to contribute tens of millions to the effort to make hockey more moral. I will praise him if he does so. But to argue that letting go Peters (and perhaps Francis) when the organization also dismissed Kaiton and has since allowed Vellucci and others to leave is missing what seems to be a pattern. That pattern is about money not morality. And if Dundon and money are considered then this discussion can only take a higher road if we ALL admit the failings.
Let’s have a discussion about the abuses of power within hockey. But that discussion can only be thorough if we think hard about what we as fans are willing to overlook for a winning team.
TD did not make his fortune creating the business of writing high risk, high APR car loans. That business already existed. Desperate car buyers with very low credit ratings have been given high interest auto loans since shortly after Model T Fords began rolling off assembly lines. He made his fortune creating bundles of those loans, mitigating the total risk of the loans, which allowed those bundles to be sold to banks and investors at a profit. Santander made him wealthy by buying that business for almost a billion dollars. Some compared that activity to that which occurred in the housing market. Others point out this difference. Houses were assumed to always appreciate in that market, while automobiles were assumed to depreciate to zero value.
Dundon’s business treated military members who defaulted on their car loans exactly the same as they treated all other car buyers who defaulted. However, laws protect military personnel from being treated like others defaulting on loans. Courts found those actions to be illegal when applied to GI’s. Large fines were paid, and restitution given to those harmed.
While I share your disgust for those who exploit car buyers, military or civilian, Dundon is not the charlatan you describe. They are in the layers of used car dealers that surround military bases and sign anyone with a monthly paychecks to one-sided auto loans. Without Dundon that practice would still flourish.
As an employee working under Bill Peters, RBA faced the same dilemma the Mikel Jordan faced when the kicking incident occurred. Jordan sat there and quietly absorbed the abuse from Peters, recognizing hockey culture would quickly punish the player for any public comments, rather than Peters for his actions. RBA faced the same reality. RBA should learn a lesson from his silence. He should not receive disgrace or punishment for his inaction.
Boy, oh, boy do I have a lot of thoughts about this topic.
First of all, there is no defending Bill Peter’s comments to Aliu. Period. They would get you fired at just about any job and they should. My guess is that the Flames and NHL are working together to find a way to fire Bill Peters with the most prejudice possible. It may take a couple days, but it will be done.
The other part of the Peters, and Babcock, situation is that of an abusive coach. This shit isn’t new, nor should it be a surprise. Now, the kicking of a player on the bench is just batshit crazy. More a sign of Peters lack of impulse control. How it, and the racist comments, were never revealed is the real issue and hockey needs to address it. Keeping things in the room is preached from the time kids are old enough to understand it. For the most part it is a good policy. Parents are bad enough without knowing every piece of instruction or strategy a coach has. But, when things become abusive that changes. There needs to be a way for players to speak out without putting their careers on the line. Currently, there isn’t one. Most companies have a 1-800 number to anonymously report stuff like this. Does the NHL? Something has to change and it has to change at the top.
As far as the Hurricanes specifically, I think this smells like a big old witch hunt. The media and twitter bullies are sharpening their pitchforks and lighting their torches. They are going to “hold someone responsible.” It won’t matter if their get the right people or not. As long as they get someone. Adam Gold spewed some BS about Hurricanes players having an obligation to speak up. They have no such obligation to feed Gold and his like, or bloodthirsty fans, anything. They went through this, not you or me. Peters has been outed by a few guys no longer connected to the NHL. Thanks to them others can continue their careers without being the subject of crazy scrutiny that will effect their lives.
The focus of the witch hunt will be Brind’Amour and Francis. One or both of these two will get raked hard. Francis appears to have had authority over the situation. Then again, did he? Karmanos does not like to pay out contracts for guys who didn’t play or coach. Took forever to get rid of Semin. We are assuming no efforts were made to help Peters be less of a jerk. On to Brind’Amour. He was an assistant coach. Assistant coaches in the NHL have almost zero power. Veteran players have more influence than assistant coaches. There are enough stories around town about how the Canes didn’t listen to Brind’Amour under the Karmanos regime. (coff, coff, Torey Krug, coff) Certainly Brind’Amour knew. What were his choices? Speak out and get fired or quit which would likely have ended his coaching career, or stay around and try to change the culture. He chose the latter and thank God he did.
At the end of the day the day the bad guy is Bill Peters. Sure, I bet Francis and Brind’Amour wish they had done something different. In a crazy situation like that you react. Hindsight is 20/20 and we will hear plenty of experts tell us what they would have done and what should be done. All garbage from people who weren’t there in the minute. Dragging good people down because they didn’t make a perfect decision is a horrible thing. May it never happen to you.
When I first about the incident with the player my reaction was somewhat muted – he didn’t call the player the n-word; he described the music that way. And I can see an older white guy (I resemble that remark!) saying something stupid in a fit of anger – and gangster rap/hip-hop is really objectionable. Yes, it is a bad word to use (if you’re white) and it is usage (by white people) is endemic of some level individual and systemic racism. And racism is not black and white or either/or. It is a continuum – both individually and socially.
With all that said, we had an incident that happened ten years ago, was probably over within seconds within the locker room – are we going to tar and feather a man for a mistake made in anger ten years ago? I would hope not.
But…
That doesn’t seem to be the case here. And the case here is more than racism even. It is a pattern of authoritarian and autocratic behavior bordering on cruel and inhumane – both emotional and physical – that coaches are known for – not just hockey coaches (but keeping it to hockey) and not just NHL coaches, but at all levels.
You have already seen people parsing it out. Well Tortorella is a well-known screamer but he cares, for example. And now the definition of old-school coaching (Quenneville?) has a new layer.
You don’t want “sensitivity training” – but you don’t want dictators at the youth and junior level, and at the NHL level you want coaches who treat their players as men. RBA probably does that as well as anyone in the business and that has to be one of his most important strengths.
As for RBA – given that player leadership and other staff members went to Francis with concerns and that RBA was close to the players, the question isn’t “did RBA know”? The questions are what did he know, when did he know it? what did he see?, and what did he do about it? Was he also paralyzed into inaction by fear?
There is no way for Peters to come out of this looking good. There will be a boomerang effect on Babcock. MacLellan has to watch himself closely. But how do the other coaches fall in this range – and how many other coaches have skeletons in their closets.
It’s time for #MeTooForTheNHL
Physical and mental abuse is an inherent feature in coach/player relationships. Are bag skates until every one pukes following a bad practice abusive? Certainly. Part of the culture? That too. While Peters kicked a player on the bench, how hard can you kick someone sitting just in front of you on the bench, where is just enough room for you to stand. Remember you are padded and about to sent to the ice where the opponent will be trying to legally separate your head from your body. The kick abusive? Barely. Piss poor motivational technique? Absolutely. Bad coaching? You bet.
Physically assaulting someone is a pretty easy line not to cross. Barely abusive? I don’t think Jordan was injured, but it points to just how abusive Peters was.
I will agree that you could go deep and find a lot of things in sport and hockey abusive. Rookies loading the bus? Rookies being forced to buy dinner? The reality is you are going to get yelled at as a player. Coaches will try to play mind games. A lot has to be tolerated and ignored. Racist comments and physical abuse should not be tolerated at all.
You can be an old school coach and tear ass on a team if they know you actually care about them. Coach Q for example. It’s pretty clear to see that Babcock and Peters were about themselves. Consistently doing bad things to people with zero care in the world will suggest that. Most of us have seen it in our work. The hard ass boss who could care less what you think or feel. These guys all need to go.
The last two posts sum upmy thoughts very well actually.
Why doesn’t the NHL or the NHLPA have a process by which abuse can be anonymously reported, pretty much any organization has that process today, it can be done via a third party. They’re not exactly poor so they can afford to establish a process.
the NHL needs to take a look at its culture, not just how they deal with abuse but more broadly about how they treat the players. Rasmus dahling was clobbered badly on the head by an elbow and will be out for weeks, maybe months, and the NHL handed out a 2 game suspension. Fans like fights, just look at their reaction when guys drop the gloves, but at the end of the day hockey should be a sport, not a gang warfare. a team should not need to have a goon/enforcer whatever you call it on the roster to deal with cheapshots and try to literally disable the component’s top players, that’s a sick culture.
I think we also ask a lot of head coaches, they need to motivate, complement, yell, work with players big egos, whatever it takes to win. They need to face cameras and probing questions at the end of every game. They work in a very high stress high demand environment and it takes a very special type of person to be able to handle that. This is no excuse for using racist slurs or hitting players, but it is something teams need to consider more carefully when hiring coaches and maybe do psychiatric evaluations on how people react to high pressure situations.
Initially I wasn’t too impressed by the reports, I’ve seen social media campaigns based on rumors, sometimes unfounded, it’s easy to be nngry and to judge people, especially on social media, but as the story spread and other people have chimed in, it looks pretty clear that the situation is bad and Bill Peters is not able to handle his job. He should be let go, there’s pretty much no doubt about it, but first an official and impartial investigation must be completed, we can’t revert back to the “burn them at the steak” mob justice, no matter how certain we feel we’re in the right. An investingation will uncover the truth and Bill will have to face the consequences.
RE the organization, it was RF’s job to handle these types of matters, he was responsible for the staff, including hiring, firing and management, he is ultimately responsible for the inaction and if he knew about it he is ultimately at fault for what happened, or he should take the responsibility, this is why people up high get bigger bucks, they have responsibility. He is no longer with the canes so I honestly don’t really care what happens. He earned his acalades as a player and a captain and those should not be taken from him when he failed to cope with being a manager, so his reputation as a player should not be impacted, but he should probably not be a manager if he can’t handle people.
RBA was not in a position to do much about it and I’d rather spare him the pitchforks and have him focus on winning hockey games. If I want drama I can watch soap opera or politics, if hockey turns into drama I’ll find another way to spend my evenings.
If tD knew about this I give him full kuoos for getting rid of the bad people, even more for doing so without revealing the reasons why. That is tactful. But I doubt it had anything to do with his refhuffling of the staff, but I don’t know, and will never know.
He has invested in the team and while I don’t agree with all decisions that have been made in the two most recent seasons the Canes are a much much better team after he took over and I really applaud that.
Paul Maurice had some great comments last night – an in-your-face coach who has recognized that the game is changing and he has been pushed along to make some changes. His story about Wheeler speaks volumes:
“Blake Wheeler grabs me a year and a half ago and says, ‘Just be nice to the guy’ — and I got a list of about 14 reasons why I shouldn’t be, right, because of his play. But that stuck with me,” the 24-year coaching veteran said. “The game has changed. The players, especially — we have such a young group.
“Those interactions have to change.”
Few coaches are going to come away unscathed – but Maurice also makes the point is can you change and do you change, recognizing that real change is a process.
Interestingly enough, Maurice credits his assistant coaches with driving a different, more understanding attitude towards the players. That may or may not have play in the dynamics between RBA and Peters. So RBA wasn’t necessarily in the “shut up and go along with it” mode for career survival, if assistant coaches in other teams were talking to the head coach.
Kudos to Maurice.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/jets-paul-maurice-player-coach-relationships-game-changed/
I’m going to wait for the actual facts rather than jump to judgement. Peters will likely be held accountable if the data by all accounts are proven accurate. If so, I’m sure some others will fall in line, as they should be.
But I will say something that many millions of citizens elsewhere will agree with (perhaps not on this forum, but the grander scale). Society today is opportunistic with the pitchfork, assumes guilt before innocence, has grown overly sensitive in every facet and wants to drive their politically correct agendas ad nauseam. Couple examples…
I was in Toronto when Don Cherry got fired. My wife and I walked greater Toronto up-and-down for two days during Veterans/Remembrance Day weekend and can confirm I did not see one person of ethnicity wearing a poppy. Was Don Cherry’s comments hurtful to suggest this in the manner he did? Yes. Could Cherry have said things in a more tasteful, respectful way? Absolutely. But was we technically wrong? No, because in Toronto there is a lot of ethnicity and in reality very few were wearing poppy’s (again, saw this with my own eyes). Yet those driving the agenda or agreeing with his firing refuse to acknowledge an overwhelming fact, instead kowtowing to those with the agenda to begin with.
As for Peters, should he have said the N-word to shut off the music? No. Could he have handled his anger better without saying the N-word? Absolutely. Should the player(s) have been playing music with N-word lyrics? One can argue this is borderline “have your cake and eat it too movement”. And do we know if Peters had previous requests with the players to not play that music before his alleged outburst? This is where media, millennials and apologists need to take a breath and allow the process to play out.
All that said, if he was raging kicking players and going bananas then yeah, an evil coach no questions about it. But we should also understand this could be embellishment, too? Coaching is a difficult job as pointed out above, and ALL coaches will do and say things they regret or wish they handled differently…because the goal is to have everyone pushing that threshold. This isn’t medieval times we live in, players also need to be accountable in their development and stop using the “afraid to say something for your career” bit…if a coach is that brutal the player should have nothing to fear to speak up. Sometimes people just have to own it.
lfd – I agree with a lot of what you say.
Question on your time in Toronto – how many Anglo, non-immigrant Canadians were wearing poppies. I am sure some, at least. Is it possible public education would be a useful tool for people to see the symbolism? Having lived in foreign countries it is still easier for me to adopt what I grew up with – wearing red, white and blue on July 4 rather than something that was native on a native holiday.
But your thoughts and mine are quite closely aligned.
To answer your question, quite a bit. The contrast in patriotism was pretty distinct. Again, fun time in greater Toronto…all walks of life were nice! Worth the Hall of Fame if anyone gets a chance to visit (never spent 5 hours in a museum before). But definitely prefer Montreal in the end.
And Happy Thanksgiving everybody! We can all agree it’s not the most pleasant news this week in the hockey world, but there is a game tonight and hopefully everyone enjoys a little time off from the fray.
Once again you guys have reinforced why I think this is a great site and I keep coming back again and again!
I was raised to always try to see all sides to an event. Many times there are multiple sides to every story. I remember hearing the N word as a child from my grandparents and from their point of view, it wasn’t derogatory, it was just what they used. However, it was wrong then and is wrong now … and it is very disturbing to me to hear it. I love music, am a musician and my son is trying to make it as a Rap/HipHop (don’t know the difference :)) artist. I appreciate the music and rhythms, however the words and themes (at times) are disturbing to me… but I realize and old fat guy like me is not their audience 🙂 and that is ok! However, the use of the N word should never be used. period… by anyone IMO.
I come from a basketball history and remember Bobby Knight throwing the chair, etc…. It seems like most all the coaches back then used that kind of motivation… I am not saying it was right, just that is the way it was… it was the easy way out, instead of getting to know the players and finding unique ways to motivate each one, they just bullied them. I want to believe things are changing… the good coaches are realizing this… see Paul Maurice’s comments and the way the players respond to RBA. That is a good thing and maybe the silver lining that comes from this is it will speed up the change and give a voice to the players, assistants, etc.
As for what TD did when he bought the team… I didn’t like them (but I don’t like change) but I love the results… and I’m not a Billionaire so what do I know :). IMO it is his right to make changes to his own company the way he sees fit. He is a business man and that’s what happens when you have a business… if you want to be successful (or at least try to be). I will not comment on how he made his fortune because I don’t know. I can appreciate people’s feelings on him but I just don’t know.
As for what needs to happen now, my suggestions would be for the NHL to institute some kind of rule that protects the people that report this kind of behavior and should actively promote it…. so players, coaches, whomever, know that it is real. A full investigation should happen, by Calgary (and the NHL?, the players association?) and the guilty party(s) should be penalized.
I think you all have made very good points… Thank you!
We have a game tonight and tomorrow is Thanksgiving. Please be sure to take time and remember all the things we have to be thankful for … having a hockey team to cheer for and this site to banter about on are a few of those things for me. Be safe in your travels and Happy Thanksgiving All!
Well said, same to you!
RBA addressed it in the media scrum in NY today.
Yes, it happened (Jordan and another player).
No, he was not happy it happened.
He did think the follow-up was correct:
1. Players and staff went to management.
2. Management dealt with it.
3. Nothing like it happened again.
He thought they dealt with it and moved on.
So for the Canes at least, if RBA is to be believed, it was not some endemic, continuing pattern of behavior – sounds like almost a one-off.
And Peters followed his public cursing and beration of Luck with a personal apology the next day.
So I don’t see a pattern of behavior being described here. And there is really very little known about how Peters was as a coach 10 years ago.
The race to be first to the moral high ground is a curse of our times. The comments from a player who may also have an axe to grind might need to be examined in depth. Comments from 2 other players are suggestive of evidence, not stone cold proof. There is a hearing taking place. It should be allowed to finish. Innocent until proven quilty requires time and procedures to insure fairness. However frustrating, it’s time to step down from knee jerk condemnation of anyone, to wait for complete information to be gathered impartially and to be presented fairly. Once that is done we can draw and quarter Peters, fully justified by all because I really never liked his coaching style or personality and was thrilled when he left. It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
In that case I don’t know if much more needs to be said from the Canes organization.
I have difficulty having much sympathy for the N word incident, if the music that the guy was listening to features that word prominently.
The other day I did an experiment while commuting, I listened to Hip Hop nation on XM Radio to see how long it would take from the start of a song until a forbidden word was used, it nevet took more than 10 seconds with the N word featured most prominently but also a good smattering of the b word, f word and mf word.
A lot of the lyrics content glorifies crime, cheating and less-than-respectable attitude towards women.
I have a hard time understanding how we not only accept this in the name of art but practically spend billions on music that features these words and promotes this message while at the same time getting all outraged if someone refers to this music by its most prominently featured word.
I see no excuse for using these words, doesn’t matter if you are a corporate accountant, a rapper or a coach, and if you listen to the music that uses those words so often and explicitly you shouldn’t get all outraged if someone uses those words to refer to that music.
I wouldn’t personally, it’s bad judgment (and just dumb), but you can’t have it both ways.
On criticizing foreigners. I happen to be one of them, I came here for university 20 years ago and stuck.
I think that if you spend any amount of time in a country that you have to do your best to understand and enrich that country’s culture and history and have an appreciation for it.
The international students that started with me were about evenly split between those who tried to integrate and enjoy and those who didn’t.
Those who did not participate in the U.S. life were spread across all cultures and countries, not just one particular culture or religion.
You don’t have to give up your culture or identity, in fact you should show off the best of your background to the world, but you owe your host country some appreciation and respect, after all you were invited to pursue opportunities there.
These are just my opinions, I don’t claim them to be infalible , nor do I claim to be a particularly noble individual, just human.
Anyways, I shall stop any ramblings right here and get back to focusing on hockey. But I always appreciate this community, whether people agree with me or not, sometimes it’s most fun to read the opinions of those who do not agree, if you make no mistakes you never learn, if you do not encounter other points of view you’ll never grow.
You know, I thought I was wrong once….. But I was mistaken. 🙂