No Females within NHL coaching nor Management fraternity/ Old boys Club

[leaffaninvancouver]

It'd be hard for female coaches/trainers etc. to be in the NHL just cause it would be deemed inappropriate for them to be in the same dressing rooms as men.

You realize than men coach women's teams right?

 

[HBK27]

Ummm there are at least a handful of teams who have female skating coaches.

The Devils have Dr. Aimee Kimball as their Director of Team and Player Development.

She was asking 80% of the questions during the draft interviews and works with players throughout the organization. Shero thought very highly of her to poach her from Pittsburgh after coming over to NJ.

https://www.nhl.com/devils/news/get-to-know-dr-aimee-kimball/c-289710562

 

[IronMosher]

Once again, I'd steer away from making analogous comparisons if you don't know how to do it properly.

It has explicitly been stated and implied that the reasons teams have steered clear is because of the potential backlash they'd get from signing him as well as GM's mentioning that they've heard from fans threatening to cancel their season tickets if they dared sign Kaepernick. The issue here is the sentiment is being dictated by a vocal contingent of racist fans that have created the media circus more than anything directly relating to his ability as a football player. While Kaepernick has his flaws as a football player, it is ridiculous that the narrative around him has been corrupted and spun out of control by people who disingenuously twisted the point of his protest.

[MOD]

Way to play the race card. You're the one with the flawed argument because your basis is based on a lie you wholeheartedly believe. How truly progressive.

 

[kmo429]

Find it odd. That there are no females within the coaching nor Hockey decisions Management ranks in the NHL.

It's not like women are not capable of doing the job. I Would like to see someone been given the chance. Old boys club currently. Wouldn't hurt to have some creative female minds in the game; instead of the non creative Jim Bennings of the world.

Don't even think that there are any women within the Scouting ranks .

As someone who follows women's hockey at the highest level year in and year out (Boston College,) I can tell you that women's and men's hockey are a much different sport. Similar rules, similar goals, entirely different styles for the successful clubs though. Although it is not a NECESSITY, a vast majority of successful coaches have played the sport at various levels before. We will see our first female coaches int he NHL after females start playing in men's hockey leagues at upper levels. I.e. never.

Not saying a woman could not be a tremdnously successful NHL coach, just saying there are reasons outside of the false narrative of institutional sexism fpr it.

 

[AUAIOMRN]

Women's hockey, at the highest level, is about on par with 16/17 year old boys hockey. Do you really think a team of men are going to listen to someone that only ever competed at that level?

As for being a GM, teams seem to like to hire former players. Whether this is actually the best practice is certainly debatable (and Arizona will be an interesting experiment). So, realistically over 99% of the male population is automatically excluded from being a GM, it's not just women.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

As someone who follows women's hockey at the highest level year in and year out (Boston College,) I can tell you that women's and men's hockey are a much different sport. Similar rules, similar goals, entirely different styles for the successful clubs though. Although it is not a NECESSITY, a vast majority of successful coaches have played the sport at various levels before. We will see our first female coaches int he NHL after females start playing in men's hockey leagues at upper levels. I.e. never.

Not saying a woman could not be a tremendously successful NHL coach, just saying there are reasons outside of the false narrative of institutional sexism for it.

It's hardly a false narrative, institutional sexism isn't a boardroom of men refusing to hire women. It's a system that unfairly benefits one gender over another, the NHL isn't a shining example of a meritocracy we already see teams that prefer family ties over the best applicant available.

It's not a great sign when you can flip most of these arguments and use them to explain why women shouldn't be CEO's in the last century.

 

[BonMorrison]

I'm glad that other posters are pointing out that this is just a microcosm of a much larger systemic issue that stretches much further than hockey clubs simply not hiring women.

 

[HBK27]

As someone who follows women's hockey at the highest level year in and year out (Boston College,) I can tell you that women's and men's hockey are a much different sport. Similar rules, similar goals, entirely different styles for the successful clubs though. Although it is not a NECESSITY, a vast majority of successful coaches have played the sport at various levels before. We will see our first female coaches int he NHL after females start playing in men's hockey leagues at upper levels. I.e. never.

Not saying a woman could not be a tremdnously successful NHL coach, just saying there are reasons outside of the false narrative of institutional sexism fpr it.

Very good points.

It's hardly a false narrative, institutional sexism isn't a boardroom of men refusing to hire women. It's a system that unfairly benefits one gender over another, the NHL isn't a shining examples of a meritocracy we already see teams that prefer family ties over the best applicant available.

It's not a great sign when you can flip most of these arguments and use them to explain why women shouldn't be CEO's in the last century.

This is the type of crap that so many students are being taught today. Let's just make everyone a victim (except for cis gendered white men, of course) and take action to make sure that group gets unfairly rewarded over more qualified candidates. There are plenty of logical reasons the hockey world is dominated by men, but clearly you'd prefer to just chalk it all up to "institutional sexism" because it's a nice, easy answer. Not enough women - MUST be sexism!

 

[Pinkfloyd]

NHL is not alone in this dynamic. I don't see them moving forward on this at a rate that is consistent with the times but given some of the hires at multiple levels, hiring a woman for the sake of being a woman has as much merit as some of those that have been done. There are opportunities available at plenty of levels for a woman to get the job and perform well. It's a matter of the people with the power actually putting focus on improving that aspect of their hiring practices. I wouldn't call it institutional sexism but it is institutional biases and they can look very similar.

 

[The Apologist]

It's hardly a false narrative, institutional sexism isn't a boardroom of men refusing to hire women. It's a system that unfairly benefits one gender over another, the NHL isn't a shining examples of a meritocracy we already see teams that prefer family ties over the best applicant available.

It's not a great sign when you can flip most of these arguments and use them to explain why women shouldn't be CEO's in the last century.

Oh there is no doubt that the NHL is an old boys club, like many businesses. That being said, until there is examples of women who are qualified for the role being rejected, the argument really does seem to be that they should be advanced simply because they are women.

I truly believe that each gender can do anything they want to career wise if they truly want to. They can be anything. What I cannot support is this idea that we should be fast tracking someone based on their gender, male or female. Trying to force a 50% split on everything is simply not always realistic. (And no I am not implying that this is the goal being requested here).

Are there any examples out there of women who have put in the time, put in the work, and are ready for these roles but are being held back?

 

[sandysan]

No, they shouldn't hire women just because they are women, but they can absolutely create more internship/training programs. That would be an excellent beginning.

based on the relationships between the leagues, you want a NHL team to put a woman in charge of the AHL team based on no experience, so that they might learn on the job? those teams have to win to be financially viable as well.

The reason there isnt a woman as a coach or in management is because there are none yet from where the NHL usually pulls these candidates from. Once that changes, things are more likely to change. but until it does, thinking that a woman will get her first or second position at the nhl level is as silly as letting some joe schmo fan go from armchair gm to real gm with nothing in between.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Very good points.



This is the type of crap that so many students are being taught today. Let's just make everyone a victim (except for cis gendered white men, of course) and take action to make sure that group gets unfairly rewarded over more qualified candidates. There are plenty of logical reasons the hockey world is dominated by men, but clearly you'd prefer to just chalk it all up to "institutional sexism" because it's a nice, easy answer. Not enough women - MUST be sexism!

You're either ignoring or missing the point. You seem to just want to rant about the plight of white men not getting ahead for some reason.

 

[The Apologist]

The reason there isnt a woman as a coach or in management is because there are none yet from where the NHL usually pulls these candidates from. Once that changes, things are more likely to change. but until it does, thinking that a woman will get her first or second position at the nhl level is as silly as letting some joe schmo fan go from armchair gm to real gm with nothing in between.

Very well put.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Oh there is no doubt that the NHL is an old boys club, like many businesses. That being said, until there is examples of women who are qualified for the role being rejected, the argument really does seem to be that they should be advanced simply because they are women.

I truly believe that each gender can do anything they want to career wise if they truly want to. They can be anything. What I cannot support is this idea that we should be fast tracking someone based on their gender, male or female. Trying to force a 50% split on everything is simply not always realistic. (And no I am not implying that this is the goal being requested here).

Are there any examples out there of women who have put in the time, put in the work, and are ready for these roles but are being held back?

I think the bigger problem is that it's almost impossible for them to get the same opportunity. When each piece you need to move up is a job that only men do it's not hard to see where bias sets it. Look at being a GM, all the steps along the way mean breaking into roles that are pretty much 100% men. It doesn't mean it's impossible but it does mean it's very, very hard.

You would need a women candidate not only as good as a man but considerably better to break those barriers.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I think the bigger problem is that it's almost impossible for them to get the same opportunity. When each piece you need to move up is a job that only men do it's not hard to see where bias sets it. Look at being a GM, all the steps along the way mean breaking into roles that are pretty much 100% men. It doesn't mean it's impossible but it does mean it's very, very hard.

You would need a women candidate not only as good as a man but considerably better to break those barriers.

Right, but these clowns will just say -- how do you know they even tried!?

 

[The Apologist]

I think the bigger problem is that it's almost impossible for them to get the same opportunity. When each piece you need to move up is a job that only men do it's not hard to see where bias sets it. Look at being a GM, all the steps along the way mean breaking into roles that are pretty much 100% men. It doesn't mean it's impossible but it does mean it's very, very hard.

You would need a women candidate not only as good as a man but considerably better to break those barriers.

Harder yes, there is no doubt. But I have no doubt that in todays society if there was someone who truly felt they deserved it and were being held back, we would know. Ibalso truly believe that if a female from one of the old guard wanted to join the NHL ranks, most of the old boy club would welcome here as they would one of the boys as the NHL seems to love their hockey families.

Do you feel there is a legitimate candidate out there currently being held back?

 

[sandysan]

I think the bigger problem is that it's almost impossible for them to get the same opportunity. When each piece you need to move up is a job that only men do it's not hard to see where bias sets it. Look at being a GM, all the steps along the way mean breaking into roles that are pretty much 100% men. It doesn't mean it's impossible but it does mean it's very, very hard.

You would need a women candidate not only as good as a man but considerably better to break those barriers.

you think its NOT hard to become a NHL GM even if you are male ????? There are lots of GM's competing for a very limited number of spots, and as the GM/coach merry go round has shown most owners want to go with people ( of either sex) with a proven track record. Florida, dumped gallant to bring in their new guy who had not a whole hell of a lot of experience and it was a disaster.

When women are represented in the pools the nhl fishes for management positions we can have this discussion. until then, its a non starter unless you think that women shouldnt have to pay their dues proving they have what it takes in decidedly lower leagues and should be given the keys to the castle because of the number of X chromosomes. poppycock !

being a gm is hard for anybody. it it harder for women than men ? without question. will that change ? only when women qualified women develop the track records to be considered viable candidates. That's not today.

 

[BraveCanadian]

you think its NOT hard to become a NHL GM even if you are male ????? There are lots of GM's competing for a very limited number of spots, and as the GM/coach merry go round has shown most owners want to go with people ( of either sex) with a proven track record. Florida, dumped gallant to bring in their new guy who had not a whole hell of a lot of experience and it was a disaster.

When women are represented in the pools the nhl fishes for management positions we can have this discussion. until then, its a non starter unless you think that women shouldnt have to pay their dues proving they have what it takes in decidedly lower leagues and should be given the keys to the castle because of the number of X chromosomes. poppycock !

being a gm is hard for anybody. it it harder for women than men ? without question. will that change ? only when women qualified women develop the track records to be considered viable candidates. That's not today.

I bolded the part of your post that is relevant to this thread.

How exactly do you expect women to develop these track records you are demanding they have if they are never given the opportunity pray tell?

Harder yes, there is no doubt. But I have no doubt that in todays society if there was someone who truly felt they deserved it and were being held back, we would know.

Well, I know I feel a lot better about this now, thanks..

Good thing you guys are here to set things straight.

So for those of you keeping track at home, yes there is a bias and it is harder for women but it is obviously no problem. Right.

 

[sandysan]

I bolded the part of your post that is relevant to this thread.

its harder not because of sexism, its harder because owners are risk adverse and will not put anyone, of either sex, into a management position without previous experience.

How many males get promoted to management without establishing a track record first ? And when they are, how does that turn out ( think gretzky as coach).

Past performance is not necessarily a predictor of future performance but its still 100X better that " what the hell let's give it a blind shot"

 

[The Apologist]

I bolded the part of your post that is relevant to this thread.

How exactly do you expect women to develop these track records you are demanding they have if they are never given the opportunity pray tell?

The same way men do (in most cases). By playing the game, coaching at lower levels, managing at lower levels, or being related to someone important.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

Having a woman as a head-coach would be a terrible idea.

Not that women can't do the job, but because of the dynamics. How long before the players make a bet about who's the first to sleep with her?

Like it or not, that's a locker-room atmosphere.

I doubt the woman will be all that young when she finally makes it to the NHL. She will be a hockey player herself most likely, and thus will start coaching only after her playing career is over. By the time she makes it to the NHL, she'll be 40+. With all the stress the job entails even in the minor leagues, I doubt she'll be "hot".

 

[sandysan]

I bolded the part of your post that is relevant to this thread.

How exactly do you expect women to develop these track records you are demanding they have if they are never given the opportunity pray tell?

by getting opportunities in lower leagues and working their way up, you know like the men do.

if you have a beef its with the ECHL and other above beer league leagues. The NHL not putting a woman into a management position has ZERO to do with sexism.

 

[BraveCanadian]

its harder not because of sexism, its harder because owners are risk adverse and will not put anyone, of either sex, into a management position without previous experience.

How many males get promoted to management without establishing a track record first ? And when they are, how does that turn out ( think gretzky as coach).

Past performance is not necessarily a predictor of future performance but its still 100X better that " what the hell let's give it a blind shot"

Lots of former players and old boys club guys get promoted into management without even finishing high school and with no management experience at all. So there is that.

Again -- how are women going to get that track record you are demanding if they are never given an opportunity even in lower leagues?

We've all admitted it is harder for women than men now. Let's take the next step.

 

[The Apologist]

by getting opportunities in lower leagues and working their way up, you know like the men do.

if you have a beef its with the ECHL and other above beer league leagues. The NHL not putting a woman into a management position has ZERO to do with sexism.

And even then, IF it is happening and someone seriously wants to move up, I find it extremely hard to believe that in todays society that is not all over the news. The media would eat that up.

 

[BraveCanadian]

by getting opportunities in lower leagues and working their way up, you know like the men do.

if you have a beef its with the ECHL and other above beer league leagues. The NHL not putting a woman into a management position has ZERO to do with sexism.

Except we all know that it is more difficult for them to get those opportunities there, as well.

Be real.