No they did not. This is what Joel Bouchard actually said: "C’est le temps de le laisser tranquille et me laisser le coacher...Le bruit de l’extérieur et quand je dis ça, je ne parle pas du Canadien, le Canadien le laisse tranquille. Je parle des journalistes et des partisans...C’est assez de bruit et maintenant, on travaille avec. Il a une bonne attitude, c’est un bon kid, il veut bien faire, il ne veut pas décevoir personne et là, on travaille ensemble avec Alex Burrows, moi, avec ses coéquipiers."
That was on November 25. You can hear everything Bouchard said about Poehling here:
No he did not. This is what Ryan Poehling actually said: "Umm, I mean honestly, this last hundred days I didn't really prepare, I shouldn't say prepare, it was just more of just a recollection of what happend, what I could do differently and that, I've been working since last July for this year, so I think for me I just kinda took some time off and kind of just got my head straight, and I think that's helped me out a lot."
That was in response to a reporter that asked him what had he improved most about his game. He didn't actually say that he he did not work out for that entire time, that's just a negative interpretation. Here is another interpretation that is perfectly consistent with what he said, and to my mind more likely. Athletes work out moderately in-season to maintain, and more intensely off-season to develop and improve. The question was about what he had improved. His response indicated that he had not yet switched to his intense off-season training regimen, i.e. he was still following his in-season training regimen, which for him is equivalent to taking time off in comparison to his usual off-season training regimen.
I guess you are referring to his political and religious leanings, which have absolutely nothing to do with him as a hockey player nor do they call his character or attitude into question. The very reason that this subject matter is banned here is that it is very much irrelevant on a hockey discussion board, and potentially divisive. So since we are not allowed to talk about it, let's not even bring it up.
Now we are getting to the root of the problem. My stance is that if someone has to resort to sensationalism or hyperbole to support a position, then their position has little merit. There are a lot of smart and knowledgeable people here, and I include you as one of them. I strongly believe that this would be a better and less divided place if everyone took the time and used their smarts and knowledge to form an opinion that is supported by the actual evidence, instead of supported by rumors, sensationalism, and hyperbole.
Thank you for taking the time to read my response.