News Article: Rachel Doerrie has left the Canucks

[Hollywood Burrows]

trying to assemble a young, dynamic, "team of rivals" style front office where bright people clash thoughtfully and dissent is appreciated seems a bit ambitious for the Vancouver Canucks. I could see it working for a successful NHL franchise, but not here.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

So many comments here tell much more about the poster than Doerrie.

 

[gringo]

If I were to speculate her new position as video coach opened her up to more interactions with the players she spread rumors about and that was the end of that

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

So many comments here tell much more about the poster than Doerrie.

If I were to speculate her new position as video coach opened her up to more interactions with the players she spread rumors about and that was the end of that

 

[F A N]

trying to assemble a young, dynamic, "team of rivals" style front office where bright people clash thoughtfully and dissent is appreciated seems a bit ambitious for the Vancouver Canucks. I could see it working for a successful NHL franchise, but not here.

It probably wouldn't work for the foreseeable future. Those in power tend to be old school or new old school. Rutherford, Alvin, Granato, Castonguay, and Clancey all played hockey and are professionals. Team to them means something.. Granato and Castonguay are women who support other women.

If I were to speculate her new position as video coach opened her up to more interactions with the players she spread rumors about and that was the end of that

Haha I was thinking about the same thing.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It probably wouldn't work for the foreseeable future. Those in power tend to be old school or new old school. Rutherford, Alvin, Granato, Castonguay, and Clancey all played hockey and are professionals. Team to them means something.. Granato and Castonguay are women who support other women.

What does that mean?

What do you know about the firing that we dont?

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

It wouldn't be a Canucks season without a bit on controversy and baseless speculation

Regardless of what the cause was - leaving 2 organizations in such a short time is probably not a great look for Doerrie

Paterson with a typically dim take. "Basking" by what, not shying away from the media attention that was paid to the fact that in a summer we increased the number of high level female executives in the NHL by like 50%? It was rightfully big news.

I have heard no, zero, zilch speculation that Doerrie was let go because the Canucks wanted the glory, and then got rid of her when the shine was off, which is the only way this would be remotely relevant.

So they hire a woman (without properly vetting her. Anyone who heard the podcast where she said that libellous shit should be shocked she was hired), along with several other women whom nobody seems to have a problem with.

The one who ran her mouth on podcasts, burned bridges she hadn't even traversed yet, and seemed smug and spiteful while doing so got let go for ~reasons` and Paterson thinks we're 'owed an explanation'.

If this is due to Doerrie's unprofessionalism, then the Canucks are doing her a favour by not placing a fine point on it.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Hopefully nothing nefarious and hopefully all parties involved are okay. Unfortunate that this happened. I feel it’s really too early to say anything else based on the information available.

 

[Peen]

Libelous lol

 

[StreetHawk]

Hopefully nothing nefarious and hopefully all parties involved are okay. Unfortunate that this happened. I feel it’s really too early to say anything else based on the information available.

Her position isn't as high up in the organization as I thought it was when they announced her hiring. Even if she was let go without cause, it shouldn't take that long to figure out a financial package for her since her compensation shouldn't be super high relative to assistant coaches and the like. Guessing it's the reason why she is no longer with the team that is the key negotiating point.

 

[RutherPlan]

I think she was fired for leaking information to the media.

 

[lawrence]

Most likely because she likes a tweet that was mocking the owner

Also a bunch of her old tweets got deleted. When I use to work for a huge telecom company part of my contract includes not slandering my company, my boss, or giving out any sort of insider information unless she did some of that stuff.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I think she was fired for leaking information to the media.

Hmmm. This would make sense.

They seem to priorituse running an incredibly tight lipped front office.

 

[RutherPlan]

Hmmm. This would make sense.

They seem to priorituse running an incredibly tight lipped front office.

Rutherford had made a strong stance in the past that if players don't buy into the coaching or systems, they're no longer here. This likely also applies to front office.

 

[Vector]

I think she was fired for leaking information to the media.

This sort of speculation needs to be backed up now or I’m going to start actually enforcing the site rules.

From this point on, if you can’t source stuff like this I’m thread banning posters. I’ve asked people to refrain from this and it’s getting out of hand again.

 

[Nucker101]

I think she was fired for leaking information to the media.

Conspiracy theory:

The Mikheyev acl tear was a test from Rutherford, he told front office staff different things about the injury. He did something similar with Boeser with a different group of front office staff and everyone passed.

Doerrie failed the Mikheyev test.

*removes tinfoil hat*

(Not a serious post)

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Thread title says she left the Canucks...I was of the understanding she was fired.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Point we should all agree on is that we lost a qualified person (for whatever reason) and we need to fill the vacancy with an equally qualified person. If they don't fill this role then it will really sour my view on this new management group.

 

[Vector]

Thread title says she left the Canucks...I was of the understanding she was fired.

Rob Simpson tweeted she left the organization then wrote she was fired. He’s a terrible writer. Every other reporter has said she’s no longer with the Canucks.

All we definitively know is she doesn’t work for the Canucks. Everything else is pure speculation.

Edit: Also, here’s Dreger further criticizing Simpson’s article.

 

[RutherPlan]

This sort of speculation needs to be backed up now or I’m going to start actually enforcing the site rules.

From this point on, if you can’t source stuff like this I’m thread banning posters. I’ve asked people to refrain from this and it’s getting out of hand again.

This is literally a discussion thread on why she left Canucks and it clearly says 'I think'

 

[krutovsdonut]

Conspiracy theory:

The Mikheyev acl tear was a test from Rutherford, he told front office staff different things about the injury. He did something similar with Boeser with a different group of front office staff and everyone passed.

Doerrie failed the Mikheyev test.

*removes tinfoil hat*

(Not a serious post)

we are recruiting russian players so why not use kgb spycraft to manage staff i guess.

 

[MS]

Conspiracy theory:

The Mikheyev acl tear was a test from Rutherford, he told front office staff different things about the injury. He did something similar with Boeser with a different group of front office staff and everyone passed.

Doerrie failed the Mikheyev test.

*removes tinfoil hat*

(Not a serious post)

This regime has been a locked vault in terms of rumours so far. Everything they’ve done has caught the media off guard.

It doesn’t really make sense to be chasing a mole that doesn’t exist.

 

[joelCAMEL]

Rob Simpson tweeted she left the organization then wrote she was fired. He’s a terrible writer. Every other reporter has said she’s no longer with the Canucks.

All we definitively know is she doesn’t work for the Canucks. Everything else is pure speculation.

Edit: Also, here’s Dreger further criticizing Simpson’s article.

When Judd Brackett left the company after his contract was up, several posters here kept stating that Benning fired him, without being criticized. He was not fired ... he was offered a 2 year extension that was rejected by Brackett.

When Rachel Doerrie left the company before her contract was up, posters here stating that she was fired are being criticized. Even if she left on her own volition, the precedent had been set with Brackett's departure... "leave and it can be called a firing"

 

[VanJack]

If it was 'Richard' Doerrie we were talking about instead of 'Rachel', would this story have any legs at all? I can't even tell you who the previous video coach was for the Canucks, or even if they ever had one.

People leave organizations all the time and for a variety of reasons.....and there's usually a confidentiality agreement signed when they do.

But I guess if you're the Canucks you can't have it both ways. You can't prattle on about 'gender diversity' when somebody is hired; and then try and make a personnel change like this under the radar screen.

 

[nowhereman]

This sort of speculation needs to be backed up now or I’m going to start actually enforcing the site rules.

From this point on, if you can’t source stuff like this I’m thread banning posters. I’ve asked people to refrain from this and it’s getting out of hand again.

This sub-forum has allowed endless speculation on the going-ons of the Benning/Weisbrod regime, Brackett's departure, Pettersson quitting on the team, Gaudette's COVID controversy, draft day Machiavellism, Virtanen's sexual assault case, JT Miller's politics, ownership's overpowering of management, lockeroom in-fighting, contract disputes, etc. but the firing of a video coach is where we draw the line? Ironically enough, Doerrie's own rumors on L. Hughes and Pettersson were permitted discussion, as well.