Can I ask a serious question- not trying to be funny.
OK, Benning has done a ton of horrible things and one or two good ones. He comes across as bumbling and is trying to hold onto his job- and this approach may not be in the best interest of the fans long term. A lot of people on this site have justifiably criticized many of his decisions- almost all. And for the most part, for good reason. So, so far, similar page?
What I don't understand is why a discussion board like this is constantly taking about Benning. There are so many other things to discuss. Why do we feel a need to constantly focus on the most negative thing in the room when there are so many other negative things to discuss LOL. Oh yeah, and some exciting things to discuss too.
Can we sometimes just accept that he has been bad and talk about Canucks things other than him? I don't know, but that sounds more fun and possibly even more interesting.
That would be a more reasonable expectation if the opposition against that idea wasn't still so vocal about him not being bad. It would be easier to accept it and move on if the board as a whole actually had any interest in accepting it in the first place. Until then, the most negative thing that also happens to be the most hotly contested thing is always going to be the greatest focus in discussions. Until that changes, that's a pretty reasonable outcome that there isn't really a way around, nor should there be, really.
Also, asking that people talk around the thing that still has the greatest impact on the good or bad of the team when that thing is still as relevant and actively playing a significant role doesn't seem super reasonable to me.
If you're building a sand-castle and a baby repeatedly knocks it over, that baby's going to constantly come up in discussions about it. It would be strange if it didn't, frankly.
I think it's a form of self defense. When you engage in optimistic happy talk, you put yourself out there for disappointment. Normally, I'd be willing to risk it, but it's a tough thing to do because it's like talking about how excited you are about the new kitchen remodel, knowing full well that the foundation of your house is built on sand and the tide is coming in.
Some people are better than others at ignoring the elephant in the room. Namely, that whatever success this team enjoys in the near future will be undermined to some extent (the extent is debateable) by the incompetence and vanity of JB and AQ respectively.
So, sure, it's fun to speculate on the configuration of the top 9 and who ultimately pairs with whom on defense. I'll probably get into a bit when the season starts. But there's always going to be that elephant in my peripheral vision. Waiting for when it will take a giant crap or rampage across the room fills me with a certain sense of dread.
There's also the matter of whether or not you SHOULD ignore the elephant in the room. Not everybody believes that focusing on positives is a preferrable mindset, all else being equal, and would rather just call a spade a spade, regardless of how frequently it's pointed out, and the negativity involved isn't remotely a bother or something that makes them feel worse about the experience of discussing the team. Some people are REALLY resistant and annoyed by the tone of anything negative and only have so much tolerance for it (especially when they disagree with it), but nobody should feel obligated to cater to that, really.
And make no mistake, it is the constant negativity that annoys people who disagree with it, not the repetition of ideas that have been covered. If you repeat a positive that everyone agrees with over and over again, nobody ever complains about that.
