Vancouver Sports Media

[pgj98m3]

Tony Gallagher was on 1040 this past week to tell everyone that Linden was probably leaking the story of him being railroaded and that he did not believe for one bit there was anything to it. Went on to say that if it were true - which he says it is not - it would be justice given the way he railroaded Bob Goodenow out of the players union.

I have my issues with Linden as a President and stuff, but Gallagher really comes off as a petty bitter old man a lot of the time. He carries these grudges and never lets them go. I can still remember him as a guest on 1040 a few days after Pat Quinn died, asking the hosts to stop "waxing on" about how great a man Pat Quinn was.

Can't stand the guy.

Hey you kids get out of my Jello tree!!

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Thank you. I found it and read it...and I stand corrected. My apologies for thinking this was your opinion, when it was Willes' opinion. I get why ex-employees would feel bitter over losing their job but I feel only insecure people would feel betrayed. I have lost my job before, I was bitter temporarily because it is a blow to the ego, but I moved on. This is business, not a divorce nor a girlfriend dumping.

Accepted.

But I still think he does have a point. I don't like the pattern that's forming around the Aquamen and their former employees. One guy here or there gets sore, that's the business. It happens. But it's becoming a recurring theme, and that should worry everyone.

 

[member 290103]

1040 is the worse option in my opinion. Yes 650 is very pro Canucks and it can be a bit much, but 1040 is the equivalent of sitting at a backyard bbq with a bunch of baby boomers, smokin stogies, and trading dumb stories.

"Remember Rick Lanz? Heck of a guy"
"Were you a Ginger or Mary-Ann guy?"

That's one show dude.

I do agree with you about that one show. They seem to have completely stopped giving a shit about what their audience might want to hear and instead carry out the show for their own personal amusement. People continue to try and tell them where this is going to go, but they don't listen.

The last personality of this ilk that did not listen to feedback was one Dan Russell - who is now relegated to being a guy that had a show that was great 25 years ago. His ego got out of control and he had the audacity to think he could actually carry out a radio show in Vancouver that was purely based on hating on the Vancouver Canucks. Not gonna work, Dano.

 

[Fatass]

Our two local sport’s radio stations are only good when the have their ex hockey player hosts. I like hearing Tomlinson and Auld. The rest of the hosts know diddly-squat about the NHL. The non hockey hosts, which is all but the two I mentioned, are just guys spewing their baseless opinions. They are the same as us.

 

[The Drop]

Thank you. I found it and read it...and I stand corrected. My apologies for thinking this was your opinion, when it was Willes' opinion. I get why ex-employees would feel bitter over losing their job but I feel only insecure people would feel betrayed. I have lost my job before, I was bitter temporarily because it is a blow to the ego, but I moved on. This is business, not a divorce nor a girlfriend dumping.

Yes. It’s a terribly run business

 

[cabinessence]

Tony Gallagher was on 1040 this past week to tell everyone that Linden was probably leaking the story of him being railroaded and that he did not believe for one bit there was anything to it. Went on to say that if it were true - which he says it is not - it would be justice given the way he railroaded Bob Goodenow out of the players union.

I have my issues with Linden as a President and stuff, but Gallagher really comes off as a petty bitter old man a lot of the time. He carries these grudges and never lets them go. I can still remember him as a guest on 1040 a few days after Pat Quinn died, asking the hosts to stop "waxing on" about how great a man Pat Quinn was.

Can't stand the guy.

If I recall correctly, when Tony was on 1040 shortly after Pat Quinn passed away, his main message was how he had been reconsidering his opinions of Quinn. I recall him stating that he came to ponder that since so many held Quinn in high regard that perhaps it was Tony who was misjudging the man. He wrote piece in the Province stating many of the same points. So, I think your memory might be of another time in the Gallagher vs. Quinn saga.

Gallagher: Why it took me so long to like Pat Quinn, I’m not sure

 

[Lindgren]

If I recall correctly, when Tony was on 1040 shortly after Pat Quinn passed away, his main message was how he had been reconsidering his opinions of Quinn. I recall him stating that he came to ponder that since so many held Quinn in high regard that perhaps it was Tony who was misjudging the man. He wrote piece in the Province stating many of the same points. So, I think your memory might be of another time in the Gallagher vs. Quinn saga.

Gallagher: Why it took me so long to like Pat Quinn, I’m not sure

I missed that article. Thanks for posting.

 

[member 290103]

If I recall correctly, when Tony was on 1040 shortly after Pat Quinn passed away, his main message was how he had been reconsidering his opinions of Quinn. I recall him stating that he came to ponder that since so many held Quinn in high regard that perhaps it was Tony who was misjudging the man. He wrote piece in the Province stating many of the same points. So, I think your memory might be of another time in the Gallagher vs. Quinn saga.

Gallagher: Why it took me so long to like Pat Quinn, I’m not sure

My memory was of the week Quinn passed. Gallagher had nothing kind to say about Quinn. Perhaps he wrote that article in response to the negative feedback he got for his "performance" on that segment. He specifically asked the hosts of the show to "stop waxing on" about how great a man Quinn was. He then proceeded to detail stories of how Quinn made his life miserable and was not a nice person.

One of the most classless displays of bitterness I have ever seen. Whatever your issues are with a person, there is a time and place to vent them and that was absurd.

 

[theoriginalBCF]

My memory was of the week Quinn passed. Gallagher had nothing kind to say about Quinn. Perhaps he wrote that article in response to the negative feedback he got for his "performance" on that segment. He specifically asked the hosts of the show to "stop waxing on" about how great a man Quinn was. He then proceeded to detail stories of how Quinn made his life miserable and was not a nice person.

One of the most classless displays of bitterness I have ever seen. Whatever your issues are with a person, there is a time and place to vent them and that was absurd.

I think it’s because Tony called out the underhanded practises of Quinn and the Canucks when he first became the general manager and coach of the Canucks back in 1987. Quinn and the Canucks did some things that got him suspended for I believe two years from coaching. Which is why the Canucks hire Bob Mccammon. Quinn didn’t like getting called out that and made it hard for Tony to do his job as a Canucks beat reporter.

 

[tyhee]

I think it’s because Tony called out the underhanded practises of Quinn and the Canucks when he first became the general manager and coach of the Canucks back in 1987. Quinn and the Canucks did some things that got him suspended for I believe two years from coaching. Which is why the Canucks hire Bob Mccammon. Quinn didn’t like getting called out that and made it hard for Tony to do his job as a Canucks beat reporter.

Is there a reason to be so vague instead of saying, as I understand your point to be, that Gallagher criticized Quinn and the Canucks for the contract they signed while Quinn was under contract to the Kings, not accepting Quinn's position that he had the legal right to sign with the Canucks because the Kings had missed an option date in his contract? Why instead refer to "underhanded practises of Quinn and the Canucks" and "Quinn and the Canucks did some things that got him suspended ..." rather than be specific?

I don't remember Gallahger's coverage of the issue, but then in those years I avoided reading Gallagher's pieces.

 

[cabinessence]

I recall the interview Tony did after Pat's passing and he for sure did state that he needed to reassess his opinion of Quinn and praised him highly. He may have mentioned some of the things that were done that caused the rift, but it was a pretty positive interview.

 

[theoriginalBCF]

Is there a reason to be so vague instead of saying, as I understand your point to be, that Gallagher criticized Quinn and the Canucks for the contract they signed while Quinn was under contract to the Kings, not accepting Quinn's position that he had the legal right to sign with the Canucks because the Kings had missed an option date in his contract? Why instead refer to "underhanded practises of Quinn and the Canucks" and "Quinn and the Canucks did some things that got him suspended ..." rather than be specific?

I don't remember Gallahger's coverage of the issue, but then in those years I avoided reading Gallagher's pieces.

Because they were underhanded. They tried to circumvent league rules. Seems you understand why, so why should it bother you? You think it was not underhanded but on the up and up?

 

[tyhee]

Because they were underhanded. They tried to circumvent league rules. Seems you understand why, so why should it bother you? You think it was not underhanded but on the up and up?

I think it highly inaccurate to say they were underhanded. In fact, the judge hearing the Canucks' lawsuit against the league found specifically that "The Canucks, the Kings (and their representatives) and Mr. Patrick Quinn acted throughout with honest intention and forthrightness, Mr. Frank Griffiths, Sr., governor of the Vancouver Canucks, discussed the question of improving his club with Mr. Ziegler on more than one occasion prior to 1986 and learned from Mr. Ziegler that it was permissible to approach personnel of other club members provided no notice of employment was on file in the head office of the league in Montreal."

CanLII - 1987 CanLII 2461 (BC SC)
paragraph 14

Note that the Kings had not filed Quinn's contract with the league.

Ziegler found the conduct dishonourable and prejudicial to the league on the basis of having Quinn coaching one team while under future contract to (and having received a signing bonus from) another team. Fair enough. But Frank Griffiths had been told by Ziegler he could deal with employees of other teams unless there was a contract on file with the league (which there was not) and on first approaching Quinn's representatives was told to wait until after October 9, 1986 (the deadline for the King to exercise an option with respect to Quinn's employment after the 1986-87 season.)

After that date Quinn's representatives told the Canucks Quinn was free to deal. The Canucks' own legal advice was that they could deal with Quinn. The Canucks and Quinn agreed that Quinn would reveal his Canucks' contract to the Kings, which he did.

Now you may conclude their conduct was underhanded, but that word would seem to me to require some element of hiding things or dishonesty. In fact there was no attempt to hide the facts, Griffiths was at least to some extent acting on what Ziegler had told him and legal counsel for both Quinn and the Canucks were of the opinion that Quinn was free to deal with the Canucks.

In those circumstances I think it highly misleading to refer to "something underhanded" instead of giving the facts and letting the reader come to his own conclusion.

I think Ziegler had reason to find the conduct prejudicial to the league. I think the Canucks and Quinn should have considered the effect on the competitive nature of the game and the optics of having the future president of the Canucks coaching a rival. But I don't think the Canucks and Quinn were underhanded or dishonest.

If you're a real estate salesman and accept a job offer to sell cars starting October 1, you give notice to your employer as legally required and continue in your job selling real estate until the end of September. If you are a real estate salesman and accept a job offer to sell real estate in the same area with another company starting October 1, you give your notice and your employer probably orders you to immediately clean out your desk, watches while you do so and escorts you off the premises-even if you've been honest and above-board and even though you're legally entitled to accept a job with a different company.

What is gained by saying they did something underhanded instead of saying what they did? Did you not know, or were you just trying to be vague and mysterious?

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

if anybody has a link to wetcoaster's famous pat quinn takedown I would really appreciate if you'd post it here

 

[vancityluongo]

if anybody has a link to wetcoaster's famous pat quinn takedown I would really appreciate if you'd post it here

This isn't the one I recall that was legitimately 10,000 words long but here's a sample:

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/75528709/

 

[krutovsdonut]

the griffiths never had any money and counted every nickel, so quinn happily ran things like he was eddie shore. he was involved in no end of borderline and over the line stuff.

 

[Hemty]

So, its Presidents week over at 1040, which, makes me wonder, will Benning show up for the interview?

 

[Nick1219]

Whatever happened to Wetcoaster?

Does he still post on CDC?

 

[Huggy43]

Anybody follow JD Burke on twitter? Cause I don't anymore!

Even if I dislike someone's views,I'm not really a fan of people saying negative things about someone on the day they die...

 

[The Drop]

Anybody follow JD Burke on twitter? Cause I don't anymore!

Even if I dislike someone's views,I'm not really a fan of people saying negative things about someone on the day they die...

Ya I’ve seen the backlash he’s getting on twitter for his comments on McCain and I’d say it’s well deserved.

Being a stats Guy doesn’t make you an expert on life or politics.Hes entitled to his views but maybe should make a separate account for his stupid life takes.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Whatever happened to Wetcoaster?

Does he still post on CDC?

Sadly, I'm pretty sure he passed away. Had health issues going back a long time. Used to live a couple of blocks away from me, actually. Saw him at the bar sometimes. Had some great stories about Brian Burke. Then he stopped being around, both IRL and online.

RIP wetcoaster.

 

[Nick1219]

Sadly, I'm pretty sure he passed away. Had health issues going back a long time. Used to live a couple of blocks away from me, actually. Saw him at the bar sometimes. Had some great stories about Brian Burke. Then he stopped being around, both IRL and online.

RIP wetcoaster.

Awful

 

[Scott Stevens]

Ya I’ve seen the backlash he’s getting on twitter for his comments on McCain and I’d say it’s well deserved.

Being a stats Guy doesn’t make you an expert on life or politics.Hes entitled to his views but maybe should make a separate account for his stupid life takes.

Guy is a f***ing nobody
He’s a stat geek who doesn’t even have the internet seal of approval- the twitter verified check mark

 

[MS]

Ya I’ve seen the backlash he’s getting on twitter for his comments on McCain and I’d say it’s well deserved.

Being a stats Guy doesn’t make you an expert on life or politics.Hes entitled to his views but maybe should make a separate account for his stupid life takes.

He's completely right about McCain (way more than he normally is about hockey) ... but when you're a Canadian hockey guy calling out a US politician on the day he dies, you're kinda asking for it.

 

[timw33]

Sadly, I'm pretty sure he passed away. Had health issues going back a long time. Used to live a couple of blocks away from me, actually. Saw him at the bar sometimes. Had some great stories about Brian Burke. Then he stopped being around, both IRL and online.

RIP wetcoaster.

Ah man, really sad to hear that if that's the case—he was an incredibly knowledgable contributor to the community.