Don Cherry HHOF worthy as a builder? (Read mod notes #320, #323)

[Jedub]

"In 2004, Cherry was voted by viewers as the seventh-greatest Canadian of all-time in the CBC miniseries The Greatest Canadian. In March 2010, his life was dramatized in a two-part CBC movie, Keep Your Head Up, Kid: The Don Cherry Story, based on a script written by his son, Timothy Cherry. In March 2012, CBC aired a sequel, The Wrath of Grapes: The Don Cherry Story II."

Seems to me some posters here have no idea how much of an Icon Don Cherry is in Canada.

He should be nowhere near a top ten list of greatest Canadians...but yes his influence is undeniable. Are there any other multigenerational hockey icons who were shitty players and overrated coaches? Just makes his impact on hockey that much more impressive imo.

 

[Barnum]

"In 2004, Cherry was voted by viewers as the seventh-greatest Canadian of all-time in the CBC miniseries The Greatest Canadian. In March 2010, his life was dramatized in a two-part CBC movie, Keep Your Head Up, Kid: The Don Cherry Story, based on a script written by his son, Timothy Cherry. In March 2012, CBC aired a sequel, The Wrath of Grapes: The Don Cherry Story II."

Seems to me some posters here have no idea how much of an Icon Don Cherry is in Canada.

oh. Well, that settles it, a Canadian popularity vote decides his worth. First thing my professor attacked was the notion that “popular equates to good”. For example, when they list the top 10 movies of the week. It’s based on popularity and sales not by quality or how good the movie actually is. It’s a manipulative advertising ploy that says nothing about the actual movie itself except that a lot of people had an interest. Doesn’t make it good nor worthy of watching.

Your poll was done via email, website and snail mail. It also had reduced participation of a rather large minority of Canadians in French speaking areas.

 

[KingArthursCourt]

There's little reason to think that "Greatest Canadian" popularity contest should warrant consideration for Hockey Hall of Fame induction.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

"In 2004, Cherry was voted by viewers as the seventh-greatest Canadian of all-time in the CBC miniseries The Greatest Canadian. In March 2010, his life was dramatized in a two-part CBC movie, Keep Your Head Up, Kid: The Don Cherry Story, based on a script written by his son, Timothy Cherry. In March 2012, CBC aired a sequel, The Wrath of Grapes: The Don Cherry Story II."

Seems to me some posters here have no idea how much of an Icon Don Cherry is in Canada.

I think Canada should get some better icons if Don Cherry makes their top-10.

 

[KingArthursCourt]

I think Canada should get some better icons if Don Cherry makes their top-10.

What, you don't think Stephen A. Smith would be a contender for the list of 10 Greatest Americans?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

1	Tommy Douglas	NDP leader, "founder" of Canadian healthcare system ​ 1986
2	Terry Fox	Cancer activist who died during an attempted cross-country marathon	1981
3	Pierre Trudeau	Liberal Prime Minister of the 70's and 80's	2000
4	Dr. Frederick Banting	inventor of Insulin	1941
5	David Suzuki	CBC nature show host, environmentalist
6	Lester Pearson	Prime Minister, "founder" of modern peacekeeping	1972
7	Don Cherry	CBC hockey commentator
8	Sir John A. MacDonald	Canada's first Prime Minister	1891
9	Alexander Graham Bell	purported inventor of the telephone	1922
10	Wayne Gretzky	hockey player

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

What, you don't think Stephen A. Smith would be a contender for the list of 10 Greatest Americans?

Like I said, some posters seem to be unaware of Don Cherry's Iconic standing in Canada.

 

[DannyGallivan]

1	Tommy Douglas	NDP leader, "founder" of Canadian healthcare system 1986
2	Terry Fox	Cancer activist who died during an attempted cross-country marathon	1981
3	Pierre Trudeau	Liberal Prime Minister of the 70's and 80's	2000
4	Dr. Frederick Banting	inventor of Insulin	1941
5	David Suzuki	CBC nature show host, environmentalist
6	Lester Pearson	Prime Minister, "founder" of modern peacekeeping	1972
7	Don Cherry	CBC hockey commentator
8	Sir John A. MacDonald	Canada's first Prime Minister	1891
9	Alexander Graham Bell	purported inventor of the telephone	1922
10	Wayne Gretzky	hockey player

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Several worst picks than Cherry (MacDonald for sure, many would say Trudeau, some would even say Suzuki).

...and although I've lived and breathed hockey since I was a young child, does a hockey player even belong on this list (sorry Wayne, and anybody named Bobby, Jean or The Rocket). Of course, I don't recall what the actual criteria was.

 

[KingArthursCourt]

Like I said, some posters seem to be unaware of Don Cherry's Iconic standing in Canada.

Seems like you missed the point he and I were making: Cherry's "iconic standing" doesn't say much other than a large faction of Canadians have poor historical perspective and/or poor taste, if they think a bombastic hockey pundit warrants consideration as one of Canada's "greatest" individuals because he marketed some fighting videos.

 

[scott clam]

1	Tommy Douglas	NDP leader, "founder" of Canadian healthcare system 1986
2	Terry Fox	Cancer activist who died during an attempted cross-country marathon	1981
3	Pierre Trudeau	Liberal Prime Minister of the 70's and 80's	2000
4	Dr. Frederick Banting	inventor of Insulin	1941
5	David Suzuki	CBC nature show host, environmentalist
6	Lester Pearson	Prime Minister, "founder" of modern peacekeeping	1972
7	Don Cherry	CBC hockey commentator
8	Sir John A. MacDonald	Canada's first Prime Minister	1891
9	Alexander Graham Bell	purported inventor of the telephone	1922
10	Wayne Gretzky	hockey player

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The thing is this poll was decided by CBC viewers in 2002 or 2003, so it shouldn't come as too big of a surprise that the channel's biggest personality would register high on the list. Those Molson Canadian "Bubba" commercials probably helped a lot.

 

[GarbageGoal]

1	Tommy Douglas	NDP leader, "founder" of Canadian healthcare system 1986
2	Terry Fox	Cancer activist who died during an attempted cross-country marathon	1981
3	Pierre Trudeau	Liberal Prime Minister of the 70's and 80's	2000
4	Dr. Frederick Banting	inventor of Insulin	1941
5	David Suzuki	CBC nature show host, environmentalist
6	Lester Pearson	Prime Minister, "founder" of modern peacekeeping	1972
7	Don Cherry	CBC hockey commentator
8	Sir John A. MacDonald	Canada's first Prime Minister	1891
9	Alexander Graham Bell	purported inventor of the telephone	1922
10	Wayne Gretzky	hockey player

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Yet the guy who Grapes should thank his whole career on isn’t on there.

 

[scott clam]

He should be nowhere near a top ten list of greatest Canadians...but yes his influence is undeniable. Are there any other multigenerational hockey icons who were ****ty players and overrated coaches? Just makes his impact on hockey that much more impressive imo.

Not exactly, but there are the Ford brothers...

 

[KingArthursCourt]

Several worst picks than Cherry (MacDonald for sure, many would say Trudeau, some would even say Suzuki).

...and although I've lived and breathed hockey since I was a young child, does a hockey player even belong on this list (sorry Wayne, and anybody named Bobby, Jean or The Rocket). Of course, I don't recall what the actual criteria was.

Those three are all much better choices than Cherry in terms of being significant/impactful to Canadian history and fundamental (rather than superficial) aspects of its culture. And to be clear, that's not even endorsing any of them for such a list or their placement on it (for one example, I'd say there are several scientists more important than Suzuki, just not a popularly famous), just their relative merits compared to Cherry.

Gretzky honestly does belong for a variety of reasons and is way way way way way more deserving than Cherry. Rocket Richard would be far more deserving than Cherry as well, just for starters among other culturally important hockey figures.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Those three are all much better choices than Cherry in terms of being significant/impactful to Canadian history and fundamental (rather than superficial) aspects of its culture. And to be clear, that's not even endorsing any of them for such a list or their placement on it (for one example, I'd say there are several scientists more important than Suzuki, just not a popularly famous), just their relative merits compared to Cherry.

Gretzky honestly does belong for a variety of reasons and is way way way way way more deserving than Cherry. Rocket Richard would be far more deserving than Cherry as well, just for starters among other culturally important hockey figures.

"More than Cherry" yes, including Bobby Orr and Jean Beliveau (at least as much as Richard), but on a list of "Greatest" Canadians? Depends how much we elevate our hockey heroes. All my heroes when I was growing up were hockey players, but in the light of day that doesn't mean that they belong on a list like this.

 

[MadLuke]

There's little reason to think that "Greatest Canadian" popularity contest should warrant consideration for Hockey Hall of Fame induction.

Fame according to webster:
Definition of fame

(Entry 1 of 2)
1a: public estimation : REPUTATION
b: popular acclaim : RENOWN



Being extremely popular for hockey related activity should be a big reason to get in the Hockey Hall of the Famous. If someone in the year 2600 make a doctorate / write an history book about the Hockey history from 1900 to 2020, I doubt it would not mention Don Cherry.

 

[KingArthursCourt]

"More than Cherry" yes, including Bobby Orr and Jean Beliveau (at least as much as Richard), but on a list of "Greatest" Canadians? Depends how much we elevate our hockey heroes. All my heroes when I was growing up were hockey players, but in the light of day that doesn't mean that they belong on a list like this.

Gretzky's impact on both Canadian culture/history and especially the export and popularization of a major component (ice hockey) to another country (the United States) warrants consideration for the list. It's pretty easy to make a data-based argument that the cultural awareness of hockey in the USA rose considerably after Gretzky's trade to LA and that his success there affected the success of hockey more generally.

If Don Cherry never existed, it's hard to argue the hockey landscape and its relative cultural position would look much different than it does. He's a non-factor in America and a celebrity side-show in Canada that a lot of people like but who doesn't exert much real influence on the true decision makers and drivers.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Gretzky's impact on both Canadian culture/history and especially the export and popularization of a major component (ice hockey) to another country (the United States) warrants consideration for the list. It's pretty easy to make a data-based argument that the cultural awareness of hockey in the USA rose considerably after Gretzky's trade to LA and that his success there affected the success of hockey more generally.

If Don Cherry never existed, it's hard to argue the hockey landscape and its relative cultural position would look much different than it does. He's a non-factor in America and a celebrity side-show in Canada that a lot of people like but who doesn't exert much real influence on the true decision makers and drivers.

The popularity of hockey in the U.S. or anywhere else in the world other than Canada is a total non-factor when it comes to "greatest Canadian". If anything, the more popular hockey became in the United States, the worse it was on the average Canadian hockey fan (other than help line the pockets of a handful of Canadian owners).

I would consider Gretzky based entirely on his stellar international career representing Canada on the world stage. That's it.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

That's not the topic of the thread though. ...

Agreed. 6 years coaching does not make you a builder. I'm surprised this thread is more than 9 posts long.

 

[scott clam]

Can we just agree that there is no real criteria for being "Greatest Canadian" and that the concept is silly?

 

[KingArthursCourt]

Fame according to webster:
Definition of fame

(Entry 1 of 2)
1a: public estimation : REPUTATION
b: popular acclaim : RENOWN



Being extremely popular for hockey related activity should be a big reason to get in the Hockey Hall of the Famous. If someone in the year 2600 make a doctorate / write an history book about the Hockey history from 1900 to 2020, I doubt it would not mention Don Cherry.

You might think this kind of vacuous semantic argument is convincing, but I can assure you it is not.

 

[MadLuke]

You might think this kind of vacuous semantic argument is convincing, but I can assure you it is not.

Well saying that being extremely famous do not make you automatically at least in consideration for the hall of the famous is pushing it imo, it should make you automatically in the conversation (you can still reject the candidacy like they are doing for the very famous goon, but I would still consider them has an important page of history in the sport). We are talking about something that has fame in the very name, it is an important factor, how much you market the sport imaginary, much more than how much you actually helped the game or helped a team win game.

It could be convincing for a third party reader.

 

[scott clam]

I think if a person is inducted in a "builder's" category that they should have made a major contribution to a franchise or that they should have boosted the game's profile in some meaningful way. Or they should have changed the game for the better.

Most of the "builders" in the the HOF are coaches and GMs of championships and dynasties. Don Cherry coached for six years and his teams didn't win anything.

The two most notable outliers are broadcasting pioneer Foster Hewitt, the guy who coined the phrase "He shoots he scores" and the first guy to ever call a television game. The other is Willie O'Ree, the player who broke the "colour barrier".

O'Ree is a recent inductee, and with all the emphasis on race these days, it's no mystery why he got in. Even though he played most of his career in the minors, being the first "racialized" player in the NHL is now considered significant enough to be enshrined as a builder in the NHL. After all he paved the way for hall of famer Grant Fuhr and future hall of famer Jerome Iginla.

Foster Hewitt, the lone media figure, was the protypical game caller and colour commentator. Widely revered as a genuine class act the Hall of Fame also has a trophy named after him.

Don Cherry on the other hand is very much the antithesis of these two. I used to think he deserved to get in because he was an "icon", but then the hangover wore off.

He may be an "icon", but he's an icon for people living in the past. A glorified bigot, clown and bully.

EDIT: I shouldn't have glossed over O'Ree's post-playing career. He has been very active in promoting junior hockey and is a fine ambassador.

 

[DannyGallivan]

O'Ree is a recent inductee, and with all the emphasis on race these days, it's no mystery why he got in. Even though he played most of his career in the minors, being the first "racialized" player in the NHL is now considered significant enough to be enshrined as a builder in the NHL. After all he paved the way for hall of famer Grant Fuhr and future hall of famer Jerome Iginla.

I'll play Devil's Advocate here and say that Willie was a pure PC vote, which really is fine. He DID NOT pave the way for non-whites to play in the NHL. There was virtually no change in the colour of the game for decades after O'Ree.

I have no problem recognizing him in the Hall for symbolic reasons, but he's basically an answer to a trivia question. It would be great if more African-Canadians got in BECAUSE of O'Ree, but that has never been the case.

As far as Foster Hewitt goes, I think it's a "no-brainer" for him. Pioneers that actually built the game get in.

 

[Theokritos]

Being extremely popular for hockey related activity should be a big reason to get in the Hockey Hall of the Famous. If someone in the year 2600 make a doctorate / write an history book about the Hockey history from 1900 to 2020, I doubt it would not mention Don Cherry.

It would certainly mention successful and influential coaches and players. But why whould it mention a talking head who had little if any tangible influence on the history of the game? Just because he was very popular?

 

[MadLuke]

It would certainly mention successful and influential coaches and players. But why whould it mention a talking head who had little if any tangible influence on the history of the game? Just because he was very popular?

I am not sure Don Cherry messaging had 0 tangible influence, the no show boating/running score mentality, clothing rules being in the player associations rules book and so on, no touch icing, I would leave people that know more judge that.

But yes being the biggest talking head of a professional entertainment affair (that is far far from being just a sport it is professional entertainment) will almost certainly make an appearance when talking about the history of Hockey Night in Canada (something I doubt would left out of Hockey history class)