Around the NHL #4

[hbk]

Those of us who occasionally have to play beer league with 7 or 8 skaters are not sympathetic ....

Ahhh the 50 minute shift. Did it one year and hung it up for good after.

 

[Mosby]

When you’re in cap hell.....

Devils got hammered by this a few years ago and had to roll out a lineup of 17 guys.

 

[AZviaNJ]

For any Spittin' Chiclets fans......episode 223 with Chelios, dropped over the weekend, maybe the best episode yet. Very powerful stories from Chelios on how poorly Babcock treated players, Johan Franzen specifically.

 

[TheLegend]

Sabres scored 5 in the first....

 

[rt]

Devils got hammered by this a few years ago and had to roll out a lineup of 17 guys.

Wasn’t a few years ago. That was literally the very first season of the salary cap era. Haha. Chicago should know better.

 

[Mosby]

Maybe the Devils need another first overall pick to fix their woes.

 

[Prarievarg]

For any Spittin' Chiclets fans......episode 223 with Chelios, dropped over the weekend, maybe the best episode yet. Very powerful stories from Chelios on how poorly Babcock treated players, Johan Franzen specifically.

Franzén spoke about the Chelios interview and Mike Babcock to swedish media:

- But he's a terrible human being, the worst person I've ever met. A bully who attacked people, it could be cleaners at the arena or anyone. He attacked people just because.

 

[Mosby]

As true as these stories could be, I’m not a fan of the dogpile effect where they all gang up after the guy gets canned. Where were these stories when Babcock was employed?

 

[BUX7PHX]

As true as these stories could be, I’m not a fan of the dogpile effect where they all gang up after the guy gets canned. Where were these stories when Babcock was employed?

The problem is that you blacklist yourself from the team. Then, they have their way with you. You don't have to get traded, but you could be sat in the press box. Worse is if other coaches are friends with Babcock and/or take his words to heart. If he has negative things to say about you because you stood up to him, it could cost you a career.

It's one of those things that happen. You speak glowingly about the company you are with, until you leave. Then all of the little things that you were not a fan of come out.

 

[MIGs Dog]

As true as these stories could be, I’m not a fan of the dogpile effect where they all gang up after the guy gets canned. Where were these stories when Babcock was employed?

I think there are a few reasons, and this is seen in many scenarios outside of sports. Consider the me too phenomenon. How is it that dozens of actresses were abused by Weinstein over many decades, and within a matter of months their names were known? It's easier to come forward as part of a group than alone.

There is also the fear of reprisal. Not just from Babcock, but other teams as well. Players don't want to be known as the guy that publically complains.
I'd call it the Kapernick effect. If all Colin did was play football he would have been signed years ago.

 

[Jamieh]

The problem is that you blacklist yourself from the team. Then, they have their way with you. You don't have to get traded, but you could be sat in the press box. Worse is if other coaches are friends with Babcock and/or take his words to heart. If he has negative things to say about you because you stood up to him, it could cost you a career.

It's one of those things that happen. You speak glowingly about the company you are with, until you leave. Then all of the little things that you were not a fan of come out.

There are a few Wing's players who could have stood up without repercussions and yet they sat silently. One of them hired Babcock in Toronto.

 

[Jamieh]

I think there are a few reasons, and this is seen in many scenarios outside of sports. Consider the me too phenomenon. How is it that dozens of actresses were abused by Weinstein over many decades, and within a matter of months their names were known? It's easier to come forward as part of a group than alone.

There is also the fear of reprisal. Not just from Babcock, but other teams as well. Players don't want to be known as the guy that publically complains.
I'd call it the Kapernick effect. If all Colin did was play football he would have been signed years ago.

And if Colin was better at playing football he would have been signed as well. Or if Colin accepted a chance at backup he would have been signed.

 

[MIGs Dog]

And if Colin was better at playing football he would have been signed as well. Or if Colin accepted a chance at backup he would have been signed.

Other than possibly the Broncos (debatable), he has not been offered a contract, despite a 60% completion rate, over 12,000 yards passing and 72 touchdowns.

On the other hand, I think he relishes being the victim, and probably doesn't need the money. It's possible he doesn't want a contract, at least not to play football. Nike is paying him millions to just be controversial.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

There are a few Wing's players who could have stood up without repercussions and yet they sat silently. One of them hired Babcock in Toronto.

Are you kidding me? It's only now when we have immediate access to information and can connect with other people more fluidly and - in cases like these - anonymously that people have begun to feel comfortable speaking up about stuff like this. The immediacy of the Internet is what helps victims outpace potential reprisals that could destroy their careers or lives. And yes, it works the other way too - sometimes "Internet justice" outpaces due process and someone can lose a livelihood before facts are duly presented. But in the case of the NHL and Babcock, it's only been recently that enough light has been shed on the Old Boys' Network that all of these "open secrets" are coming to light.

The NHL community is decades behind the times by nature, and the OBN works to keep it that way. Any progressive thought about, say, concussion protocols, racist tendencies, interpersonal professional relationships, etc., gets tamped down hard by the powers-that-be because of how the league (and the sport, in many cases) represents itself. It's not "manly" to sit out when you "get your bell rung." If a coach bullies you, it's "old-school" and excused as a way to toughen a player up ("If you can't handle it, you're a pansy!"). Hockey players, more than any other professional sports player, are expected to endure a metric ****-ton of toxicity because a) hockey presents itself as the manliest of the top sports properties in North America and b) hockey's old guard jealously protects both those philosophies and the people who espouse them.

TL;DR, if someone on the Wings had gone after Babcock back then, their career would have essentially been over. But the odds of any of them trying it were already low to nonexistent because of the culture.

 

[Mosby]

A lot of these speaking out though are ex-players (Tlusty, Avery, Franzen). They have nothing to lose at this point. So why not speak when these coaches were still employed?

I understand not speaking out out of fear if it's something like a rape accusation, but this is just a case of a coach being a bit of a prick.

 

[MIGs Dog]

A lot of these speaking out though are ex-players (Tlusty, Avery, Franzen). They have nothing to lose at this point. So why not speak when these coaches were still employed?

I understand not speaking out out of fear if it's something like a rape accusation, but this is just a case of a coach being a bit of a prick.

Ex players still have egos. No one wants to go first, but there is safety (reputational) in numbers.

 

[Jakey53]

There are a few Wing's players who could have stood up without repercussions and yet they sat silently. One of them hired Babcock in Toronto.

Exactly. Babcock might be a dick, but the leaders of a team can talk to the coach, or even management.

 

[AZviaNJ]

Ex players still have egos. No one wants to go first, but there is safety (reputational) in numbers.

On the main page someone compared this to the MeToo movement, in that once a handful come forward, many others will follow.

This may become the big sports story (not just NHL) in 2020.

 

[rt]

A lot of these speaking out though are ex-players (Tlusty, Avery, Franzen). They have nothing to lose at this point. So why not speak when these coaches were still employed?
.

Probably because it just didn’t come up.

I guess they’re just responding to the news like everyone else. “Now that you mention it...”

They have busy and full lives like everyone else. This isn’t top of mind. Until it is.

 

[Prarievarg]

If you're the first to speak out about the tendencies of a highly regarded coach, you will get a lot of eyes directed at you, a lot of questions, and a lot of hate too probably. Might not be very appealing to a newly retired player. It's easier to speak when the ice is already broken.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

If you're the first to speak out about the tendencies of a highly regarded coach, you will get a lot of eyes directed at you, a lot of questions, and a lot of hate too probably. Might not be very appealing to a newly retired player. It's easier to speak when the ice is already broken.

It's important to mention, too, that because of the recyclical nature of the NHL community, ex-players are ambitious to take positions as scouts, coaches, and other organizational leaders with league franchises. If you speak out, you may not get blackballed publicly, but the Old Boys' Network holds grudges and does not forget.

 

[Imaravencawcaw]

I forgot where I read the story/quote, but it paraphrases something like "It was extremely difficult to find the first guys willing to put their life on the line to go to the moon, but after Aldrin and Armstrong every kid in the country wanted to be an astronaut."

 

[cobra427]

It's important to mention, too, that because of the recyclical nature of the NHL community, ex-players are ambitious to take positions as scouts, coaches, and other organizational leaders with league franchises. If you speak out, you may not get blackballed publicly, but the Old Boys' Network holds grudges and does not forget.

This is exactly why people don't say anything. They have potential repercussions of being in the industry or getting hired for anything. Ratting Babcock out, would have had major repercussions, if you are first.

 

[Jamieh]

Other than possibly the Broncos (debatable), he has not been offered a contract, despite a 60% completion rate, over 12,000 yards passing and 72 touchdowns.

On the other hand, I think he relishes being the victim, and probably doesn't need the money. It's possible he doesn't want a contract, at least not to play football. Nike is paying him millions to just be controversial.

Seattle wanted him as the back up the 1st year he was without a contract, he turned that down. Why would any team offer him more than that? He lost his starting job.

 

[Jamieh]

Are you kidding me? It's only now when we have immediate access to information and can connect with other people more fluidly and - in cases like these - anonymously that people have begun to feel comfortable speaking up about stuff like this. The immediacy of the Internet is what helps victims outpace potential reprisals that could destroy their careers or lives. And yes, it works the other way too - sometimes "Internet justice" outpaces due process and someone can lose a livelihood before facts are duly presented. But in the case of the NHL and Babcock, it's only been recently that enough light has been shed on the Old Boys' Network that all of these "open secrets" are coming to light.

The NHL community is decades behind the times by nature, and the OBN works to keep it that way. Any progressive thought about, say, concussion protocols, racist tendencies, interpersonal professional relationships, etc., gets tamped down hard by the powers-that-be because of how the league (and the sport, in many cases) represents itself. It's not "manly" to sit out when you "get your bell rung." If a coach bullies you, it's "old-school" and excused as a way to toughen a player up ("If you can't handle it, you're a pansy!"). Hockey players, more than any other professional sports player, are expected to endure a metric ****-ton of toxicity because a) hockey presents itself as the manliest of the top sports properties in North America and b) hockey's old guard jealously protects both those philosophies and the people who espouse them.

TL;DR, if someone on the Wings had gone after Babcock back then, their career would have essentially been over. But the odds of any of them trying it were already low to nonexistent because of the culture.

Lidstrom could have dealt with Babcock withoyt any repercussions. Here in AZ Doan coukd have stepped up if he saw something, Crosby could do it, to say no one could is just bs.