Brian Burke's media disaster, threatens Calgary may relocate + talk on concussions

Senor Catface

Registered User
Jul 25, 2006
15,983
19,992
I think it's a pretty common opinion that a highly paid professional shouldn't show up looking like a drunk when speaking on behalf of his employer. A well adjusted person would agree with that, and would avoid being that guy.

What an oddly perfect way to put it.
 

DJJones

Registered User
Nov 18, 2014
10,239
3,543
Calgary
I think it's a pretty common opinion that a highly paid professional shouldn't show up looking like a drunk when speaking on behalf of his employer. A well adjusted person would agree with that, and would avoid being that guy.

Eh, they knew what he was when they hired him.

Just amazes me how much the media freaks out when someone talks bluntly.

What happens if an arena isn't built?

We'd leave

What about Concussions?

Going to happen in a contact sport


Somehow giving two pretty obvious answers is a media disaster.
 

rboomercat90

Registered User
Mar 24, 2013
14,763
9,023
Edmonton
it sounds like a cheap shot at Edmonton to me.
Nenshi can't win this one - he should shut up and duplicate the deal.

Nenshi is also wrong about The City of Edmonton paying $ to the Oilers every year. I just posted a link to the entire deal.

You should read what you've posted. You've already been wrong twice. First of all the Oilers get ALL revenues generated from the arena, not just hockey related. Secondly, the City of Edmonton DOES pay the Oilers money. It's 2 million dollars per year for ten years for the Oilers to promote the city in their own building.
 

North Cole

♧ Lem
Jan 22, 2017
11,424
12,730
Its really not a burn. Edmonton's downtown is horrible and offensive. It makes bum town look like paradise. Its a neglected part of the city that people used to avoid every weekend, that was a problem, it was empty, smelly and the mall there is a ghost town that people avoid due to the high cost of parking.

The Movie theatre in the mall is pure gas there though, good place to check out new movies because the seats are bigger and it's always <50% full :eek:
 

lawrence

Registered User
May 19, 2012
15,993
6,782
Negotiating through Media. Not sure if he is indirectly talking to the City of Calgary or ownership.
 

CrypTic

Registered User
Oct 2, 2013
5,069
81
Most NHL goons are not goons by choice. They took that role because there is no other way they make the show and get paid a fortune. To suggest they don't know the risks because the NHL wasn't clear is basically to suggest they are idiots. The risks due to head shots has been pretty clear for well over 30 years. The science may not have had everything down pat but the risks were obvious to anyone with even moderate observation skills. Even if you are not a goon, you are dealing with big blows, head on ice, etc. I guarantee 100% players will always show up, quite simply for money. Yes, there is onus on the league to try to help but there is also definitely onus on the players to make an adult decision as to whether they want to take that risk or not. Sometimes you have to put on your big boy pants and make tough decisions.

No one is denying that players take a risk when they play hockey. That's the strawman that Burke is putting out there.

The lawsuit is because society has decided that tort law should (1) fairly compensate ppl who are injured (whether physically or monetarily) and (2) it's important to put the cost of injuries on the party who is (a) in the best position to prevent them and (b) can best spread the cost and risk to all parties who benefit from the activity that led to the injury. In some cases, 2a and 2b would point to different parties but in the case of concussions and the NHL, they both point to the NHL.

The NHL benefits financially by having players play a physical game that can lead to concussions. (And all the players benefit in that way bc they get half of HRR.) Why should the owners (or uninjured players) get to keep all the money that comes from having players be physical and the chump who gets injured bear the whole cost?

That leads to the NHL not being as careful as they should be bc they aren't the ones paying the cost of the injuries. They have no reason to try to protect the players bc they benefit from the play that leads to the injuries but someone else bears most of the cost. That's a big reason that tort law tries to put the cost of injuries on the parties who benefit from the activity.

The NHL should put on their adult pants and accept that they benefit from the current rules. If they didn't, they would change them. Therefore, they should not expect a few players to pay the brunt of the cost for problems that arise out of the activity that makes a lot of money for them.

Either way, the player still takes a risk and will pay a price if he gets a concussion or other long-term injury. Everyone knows that.
 

yababy

Registered User
Jun 26, 2015
3,441
828
You should read what you've posted. You've already been wrong twice. First of all the Oilers get ALL revenues generated from the arena, not just hockey related. Secondly, the City of Edmonton DOES pay the Oilers money. It's 2 million dollars per year for ten years for the Oilers to promote the city in their own building.


You're correct. I didn't read the fine print that RAG is Katz. He gets all revenue from fates except 28 City of End dates/yr.
Why Edmonton did this is beyond me.
Calgary should 100% not get sucked in to such a deal...not even if Burke and co. Start touring Seattle I.e. Gretzky Katz and Lowe.
 

Garbage Goal

Registered User
Apr 1, 2009
22,699
4,591
It is called being a professional.

I am in a 3 piece suit everyday at work. He wants to be an outlaw game changer--but he is a bully

Someone not tying their tie at a press conference makes them desperate to be a game changer (or a bully) is quite the super-sized logical leap. Also doesn't really make sense. Good on you if you have to wear a three piece suit I guess (or sucks for you if that's how you feel), doesn't say anything about you other than you have a three piece suit and work a white-collar job though.

I mean, Burke is definitely a buffoon and unprofessional to some extent in some regards, but it has nothing to do with whether he ties his tie or not. It's just odd and stupid.
 

Garbage Goal

Registered User
Apr 1, 2009
22,699
4,591
There's a certain personality type that pisses people off just because they think it's funny. It's called "adolescent".

I think it's a pretty common opinion that a highly paid professional shouldn't show up looking like a drunk when speaking on behalf of his employer. A well adjusted person would agree with that, and would avoid being that guy.

Speaking in pretty broad terms there. In the context of strangers, yeah, pissing people off because it's fun is immature. In the context of friends or what-have-you it can just be having fun.

It's also equally immature to get pissed off over another person's dress style or make subsequent logical leaps about a person based on whether they tie a tie or not. In reality, it's his tie and his clothes, so why should anybody feel bothered by that to the point of emotional investment? Also, if his employer doesn't care one bit whether he ties a tie or not then why should we care or assault his professionalism for it? The emotional reactions and the comments about professionalism make zero sense and are immature when you consider that it's a harmless fashion statement made by someone we have no connection to, it's condoned by his employer, and professionalism is a completely subjective concept.

People get annoyed by it because it's wearing a tie and not tying it is nonsensical and redundant and because most people let themselves get emotionally invested in absolutely stupid ****. Or displace emotions onto absolutely stupid ****. Purely speaking from my POV, I think it's nonsensical and redundant, but I don't care. If I knew the guy I'd tell him, yeah, don't do that. Couldn't give less of a **** though aside from thinking "that's weird".
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,253
14,430
Just Burkie being Burkie....said much the same thing when he was in VanCity back in the day.....his quote to the effect: "the Canucks were one phone call away from moving"......not sure what Calgarians expect....Oilers just moved into a palatial building.....do they really want to play second-fiddle at the old Sadledome forever?
 

Soundwave

Registered User
Mar 1, 2007
72,159
27,860
Even if his who thing about "we could just move to Quebec City" was even half correct, the NHL would come crawling back to Calgary within 2-3 years tops.

They need more teams in the West, not less, if freaking Vegas and Phoenix have NHL teams, there's no way the NHL wouldn't go running to either relocate another NHL team from the East back to Calgary or give Calgary another franchise.

So bottom line IMO that line of reasoning is an empty threat. There is a very small number of NHL markets in North America that actually really like ice hockey as the no.1 sport and the NHL doesn't have the luxury of not being there while being in places like ... Tampa Bay.
 

DJJones

Registered User
Nov 18, 2014
10,239
3,543
Calgary
Even if his who thing about "we could just move to Quebec City" was even half correct, the NHL would come crawling back to Calgary within 2-3 years tops.

They need more teams in the West, not less, if freaking Vegas and Phoenix have NHL teams, there's no way the NHL wouldn't go running to either relocate another NHL team from the East back to Calgary or give Calgary another franchise.

So bottom line IMO that line of reasoning is an empty threat. There is a very small number of NHL markets in North America that actually really like ice hockey as the no.1 sport and the NHL doesn't have the luxury of not being there while being in places like ... Tampa Bay.

No team would move to Calgary without an arena
 

Some Other Flame

Registered User
Dec 4, 2010
7,408
8,755
it sounds like a cheap shot at Edmonton to me.
Nenshi can't win this one - he should shut up and duplicate the deal.

Nenshi is also wrong about The City of Edmonton paying $ to the Oilers every year. I just posted a link to the entire deal.

:laugh: Nenshi's already won.

If you haven't heard, CalgaryNEXT, the Flames attempt at the Edmonton deal, failed spectacularly. When even the bulk of diehard Flames fans are opposed it should be obvious what a hack King and company are.

Burke the blowhard needs to shut up and do his actual job, what ever that even is. Seems like the Flames just pay him to make a fool out of himself and the organization. Which is redundant since they already pay King to do the same thing.
 

McShogun99

Registered User
Aug 30, 2009
17,901
13,386
Edmonton
Everything Burke is saying is accurate. Calgary does need a new arena to catch up to the other teams in the league. Just do the same deal that Edmonton got with a combination of the province, city and owner footing the bill.

Even without the new arena the Flanes will stay in Calgary for as long as they are profitable but the Saddledome will lose quite a few events to Rogers Place.
 

KlefDown

I adore Soli
May 2, 2014
9,910
8,415
Brad Treliving who?
clearly this guy still runs where this team is headed. Brad is a fake GM
 

rboomercat90

Registered User
Mar 24, 2013
14,763
9,023
Edmonton
You're correct. I didn't read the fine print that RAG is Katz. He gets all revenue from fates except 28 City of End dates/yr.
Why Edmonton did this is beyond me.
Calgary should 100% not get sucked in to such a deal...not even if Burke and co. Start touring Seattle I.e. Gretzky Katz and Lowe.

Can't believe I forgot about this but when Nenshi refers to the City of Edmonton paying the Oilers money every year he may also be referring to the City of Edmonton Tower. This is an office tower that Katz built across the street from the arena. It was the final stumbling block to the arena deal. He wanted a tenant for his new building and demanded the city lease it from him. So in addition to fronting the construction cost for the arena, giving up all the revenue outside of those 28 dates and paying 2 million per year in advertising for ten years they also had to agree to move their offices into his new tower.
 

Man Bear Pig

Registered User
Aug 10, 2008
31,090
13,891
Earth
People don't seem to understand that Burke manipulates the media in a way to get people focused on his agenda. The new arena issue in Calgary is barely talked about. Now, even with the cup finals on, the media focus will shift. People fall into his trap far too often.
 

lawrence

Registered User
May 19, 2012
15,993
6,782
People don't seem to understand that Burke manipulates the media in a way to get people focused on his agenda. The new arena issue in Calgary is barely talked about. Now, even with the cup finals on, the media focus will shift. People fall into his trap far too often.

new arena issues really have nothing to do with the rest of the NHL. most people won't care less about Calgary getting a new Arena. To be honest I don't give a crap about them and a new arena. Do you?

this is more Calgary related. That said I do not believe they will move the team if they don't secure a new arena. Were will they move them too that will do better then Calgary?
 

Bank Shot

Registered User
Jan 18, 2006
11,398
7,001
That said I do not believe they will move the team if they don't secure a new arena. Were will they move them too that will do better then Calgary?

That's the empty part of the threat.

Burke says Quebec City is a place to move the team, but the Flames will make more money in their 1983 barn in Calgary than they would in a brand new facility in Quebec.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad