Ken Dryden for Commissioner!

Status
Not open for further replies.

MacDaddy TLC*

Guest
thinkwild said:
Before we decide on a new commisioner, shouldnt we decide what we want a commisioner to be? We want to appoint Dryden to be the Owners Commisioner as Goodenow would say? Rightly i think, Bettman is their mouthpiece.

Shouldnt a real Commisioner be singularly regarded as looking out for the best interests of the game? Not the best interests of the owners or players over each other, but what is equally fair to both in looking out for the best interests of the game? Can such a position be created.

No, the best interests of the owners is not the same as the best interests of the game.

Excellent thought. The Commish position should not be loyal to the owners and their board of Governors. it should be a neutral position that works with both sides for the best interests of the league and the game.
 

mr gib

Registered User
Sep 19, 2004
5,853
0
vancouver
www.bigtopkarma.com
HckyFght said:
Well, if he's for shootouts, no fighting and points for teams that lose, I take back the entire thread!
-HckyFght!
good point - the instigator rule - bad bad - points for teams that lose - another great point -
also - ties - the yanks can't stand ties - " soccer on skates " - skip bayliss - jim rome

-
 

Bicycle Repairman

Registered User
Jul 1, 2003
1,687
1
Visit site
MacDaddy Version 1.3 said:
Excellent thought. The Commish position should not be loyal to the owners and their board of Governors. it should be a neutral position that works with both sides for the best interests of the league and the game.

You do that and all you have then is a ceremonial Ambassador-At-Large with no vested financial interest (don't give me any of that touch-feely "good of the game" stuff -- leave that to quasi-governmental bodies such as Hockey Canada). The NHL is and has always been a business. The existing NHL Board of Governors is more than capable of policing themselves, as we now are witnessing. Since they pay the salary of the Commisioner, they are fully entitled to dictate league policy.

I would eliminate the office of Commissioner. The NHL should instead invite the other stakeholder, namely the NHLPA, to form a bicameral Central Committee to study and advise the Board of Governors on such things as rules and discipline, and league promotion.
 
Last edited:

mr gib

Registered User
Sep 19, 2004
5,853
0
vancouver
www.bigtopkarma.com
Bicycle Repairman said:
You do that and all you have then is ceremonial Ambassador-At-Large with no vested interest (don't give me any of that touch-feely "good of the game" stuff -- leave that to quasi-governmental bodies such as Hockey Canada). The NHL is and has always been a business. The existing NHL Board of Governors is more than capable of policing themselves, as we now are witnessing. Since they pay the salary of the Commisioner, they are fully entitled to dictate league policy.

I would eliminate the office of Commissioner. The NHL should instead invite the other stakeholder, namely the NHLPA, to form a bicameral Central Committee to study and advise the Board of Governors on such things as rules and discipline, and league promotion.
oh you're gonna get it from owner loving doo - gooders -
 

thinkwild

Veni Vidi Toga
Jul 29, 2003
10,813
1,464
Ottawa
Ceremonial ambassador-at-large with power of the bully pulpit might not be such a bad thing. But it probably is a bit touchy feely. Better than now though.

A bicameral committee? Like a partnership? An interesting idea.
 

mcphee

Registered User
Feb 6, 2003
19,101
8
Visit site
I defended Dryden and think highly of him, but he wouldn't be my choice. For all of our discussion and thinkwild's point of who's commisioner it should be, a commissioner is always the representative of the people that own the business. He should be strong enough to act in the 'best interests of the game' but that usually means as long as it doesn't go against some owner's personal opinion. Would Burke ever be given a mandate to affect the changes he'd like to see ? I doubt it. Is Bettman qualified ? It seems to me that his mandate was to raise the US profile to increase broadcasting revenues and bring salary cost into line. Since calling up Detroit,NY and Toronto and saying stop it hasn't worked, here we are. I don't know that a different commish would change much. Did he expand because he thought it was a good idea, or was he told to because weak franchises needed the cash grab ?
 

Epsilon

#basta
Oct 26, 2002
48,464
369
South Cackalacky
copperandblue said:
As silly as this may sound, I think it would be a mistake to put a hockey man in charge of the NHL.

Irregardless of any personal opinions people may hold of Bettman, he is simply implimenting the mandate set by the leagues owners. The owners have their own hockey people in the form of their GM's to address the needs of the game.

What the NHL needs is someone who is effective at implimenting the owners mandate. Bettman may not be the man but it seems to me that whoever it is, it needs to be someone with a business and legal background before it needs to be someone with a hockey background.

Nice to see a few other people understand this. :handclap:
 

Pepper

Registered User
Aug 30, 2004
14,693
269
Ken "fighting doesn't belong to hockey" Dryden as commissioner?? HELL NO!

I rather have Eagleson as commissioner.
 

MacDaddy TLC*

Guest
Bicycle Repairman said:
You do that and all you have then is a ceremonial Ambassador-At-Large with no vested financial interest (don't give me any of that touch-feely "good of the game" stuff -- leave that to quasi-governmental bodies such as Hockey Canada). The NHL is and has always been a business. The existing NHL Board of Governors is more than capable of policing themselves, as we now are witnessing. Since they pay the salary of the Commisioner, they are fully entitled to dictate league policy.

I would eliminate the office of Commissioner. The NHL should instead invite the other stakeholder, namely the NHLPA, to form a bicameral Central Committee to study and advise the Board of Governors on such things as rules and discipline, and league promotion.

Some doofus on a goodwill tour is not what I had in mind.
I was kind of thinking of some hard ass to go after both groups and make them play nice. They can have all the power to knock their heads around using the full arsenal of the 3 Stooges. I was thinking you may very well be the best candidate....
 

chara

Registered User
Mar 31, 2004
894
0
Brian Burke

Go Flames Go said:
You seem like very educated person I agree with this 100% but if Bettman had to go Brain Burke is the answer.

'Burkie' would be an excellent choice. His plan that he presented on CBC is a solid one and has head office experience.

I can't understand why the Canucks let him go. He turned them into a financially viable and competitive squad. He could easily do the same for the NHL as a whole.
 

HF2002

Registered User
Aug 20, 2003
2,924
80
Ottawa
Visit site
chara said:
'Burkie' would be an excellent choice. His plan that he presented on CBC is a solid one and has head office experience.

I can't understand why the Canucks let him go. He turned them into a financially viable and competitive squad. He could easily do the same for the NHL as a whole.

Perhaps some Canucks fans can clear this up, but odds are it had very little to nothing to do with hockey or running the team.

The NHL could use a figure head as the Commisioner, ie Gretzky, and have his right hand man as the businessman really running the League behind the scenes.
 

mr gib

Registered User
Sep 19, 2004
5,853
0
vancouver
www.bigtopkarma.com
HF2002 said:
Perhaps some Canucks fans can clear this up, but odds are it had very little to nothing to do with hockey or running the team.

The NHL could use a figure head as the Commisioner, ie Gretzky, and have his right hand man as the businessman really running the League behind the scenes.
burke had trained nonis and tambellini - they almost lost both of them the year before - burke had a crusty relationship with the brass - his number was up - time for the underlings to get their chance -
 

Bring Back Bucky

Registered User
May 19, 2004
9,997
3,071
Canadas Ocean Playground
HckyFght said:
In his book, The Game, Dryden seems like a sensible and intelligent guy, and being a player who has moved over to the ranks of management, I thought he might be a voice of reason, but what the hell do I know? Or are people simply mad at him cuz the Leafs haven't won the Cup yet under his stewardship? Just wondering.

I also like David Poille. He was GM of the Caps in the 80's/early 90's and put together some solid old style hard hitting teams with a very limited budget. If the league wanted to return to what made it so popular back then, he would be a good choice.



I would beg to argue that in his book he seems like a pompous and self-important person who wants to take the sport to some philosophically greater level. In that, he diminishes the sport versus his own ego. I don't think being smart means you'd be a great leader, and I'm not sure how you feel the Leafs have been "under his stewardship" as he has never been GM and was for half his tenure been little more than a a figurehead. And I'm anything but a Leafs fan, so I'm really not mad about anything.
 

Russian_fanatic

Registered User
Jan 19, 2004
7,699
1,753
HckyFght said:
I say we start a groundswell for the league to fire Gary Bettman and hire Ken Dryden for Commissioner! If Ken is unable to serve I nominate David Poille. Who's with me?
-HckyFght!

First why in hell would you want Ken as commisioner?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->