Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Our ideas of what constitute abuse are changing. That doesn't mean those older norms are right. But few people question norms - that's what makes them norms.
Those wondering why players didn't call out this stuff in the past don't seem to understand that. It would no more occur to a Lidstrom or Chelios to speak up or go the media about Babcock making a player cry than it would occur to them to speak up about a coach bag-skating players. Why would you speak up about something that wasn't unusual, and was accepted - even if it wasn't liked - by most people in the sport as part of the price of winning?
As SuperMatt pointed out, Shanahan played for Babcock. He knew exactly how he coached. And yet he threw so much money at the guy that he couldn't say no to coaching the Leafs. Why would Shanahan do that if he didn't think Babcock's approach led to winning?
I agree that younger players today don't respond as well to bullying, hard-ass coaches. I just think it will take a lot more than these recent incidents to make dozens of NHL GMs and coaches abandoned their life-long beliefs around how to get the most out of professional players.
|
I can't remember where I heard a few years back, but I seem to recall Chelios or one of Shanahan's ex-teammates making an off the cuff joke how Shanahan is a company lapdog (not in those words but to that effect). Anyone who works in a corporate environment in Toronto who pays attention to the people who rise up the ladder generally knows that they're not the subject matter experts, but rather for most positions they're people who play the corporate game well. Those tend to be the networkers who kiss the right butts consistently, and more often than not, those who just do as the person above them says, and supports themselves with people who will do the same. Often the job isn't actually done but results are portrayed as being achieved. Simply a dog and pony show. Anyway, what I'm getting at is Shanahan knew the game as soon as he came in. Babcock would bring results from his kicking and screaming and as long as he produced some result, there are little questions going to be asked.
Hearing the Holland reaction is classic corporate environment. These are not nice people generally, and as much as the guys at the top can be savvy to make the outward appearance of being the nicest guys out there, they are sharks. I imagine a huge percentage of these guys in NHL leadership positions are just complete #######s. It's how the corporate game is played and it's allowed from the very top. I think you'll see a couple more of these stories but nothing will come from it because it's much greater than hockey.