[News] Bill Peters resigns as head coach. No longer part of Flames org. Ward interim HC

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Does this give Peters an opportunity to come out and truly apologize? Or does he quietly take his money and disappear?

I guess maybe he waits for the NHL thing and any legal action from Aliu to settle.

Anyone worth anything advising peters right now is actively preventing him from going anywhere near a microphone or camera.

He's not going to be sending many text messages or emails, either.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Does this give Peters an opportunity to come out and truly apologize? Or does he quietly take his money and disappear?

I guess maybe he waits for the NHL thing and any legal action from Aliu to settle.

If he is as cocky as people claim, he won't apologize again (if you can call the 1st one an apology).

[Madman]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/1200476088327127041

[Housley4Prez]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Does this give Peters an opportunity to come out and truly apologize? Or does he quietly take his money and disappear?

I guess maybe he waits for the NHL thing and any legal action from Aliu to settle.

Unless a civil lawsuit is launched against him, my guess we won't publicly hear from Bill Peters again.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I simply cant wrap my head around this thought process.

How, 10 years after the fact, was Brad Treliving supposed to know what Bill Peters said to a hockey player in Illinois one morning after practice? How is this in ANY way attached to BT other than hiring a guy who he knew only as a hockey coach?

I really don't know what people expect...like should BT have contacted every single player that Bill Peters ever coached or every single person he ever worked with and ask them "did you ever hear BP utter racist words or see him kicking a player in the back"?

I mean I just dont get it.

I think in my mind if Tre did his due diligence and talked to players and executives etc and this didn't come up because those players and coaches either didn't see it, or they did an old boys club or whatever, then unless Tre releases all of his hiring notes and research we'll never know, and he's not going to do that because it will absolutely bury people that gave a positive review of Peters and Tre isn't going to do that.


I'd like to know what people think is the limit of due diligence.



For example I do due diligence for the people that I hire for, that means references and asking about prior indiscretions or disciplinary actions. I will usually go back a couple of employers or references, but I'm not digging back to their college days etc.



Even under employment laws there's only so much that you can do or so much information that you can expect to get via due diligence.

[dino7c]

The same media guys that laughed and put the video of Laviolette punching a player in the head on blooper reels are now outraged at the Carolina stories.

Marc Crawford choked and hit players and then was doing color on HNIC the next year.

These guys are snakes just loving the drama

[transplant99]

The ESPN headline in all this..

Bill Peters out as Flames coach following epithet scandal

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/...pithet-scandal

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

There are plenty of things you can't talk about in a structured settlement that prevents you from disparaging someone in that agreement, but I found the press conference lacking from a flames point of view and I don't think Treliving came across all that well with some of the questions.

I can see why some people are disappointed in how this was handled today from a Flames perspective. It felt like there was a lot of 'cover my ass' dismissal that was separate from any negotiated settlement.

Agreed. And look I totally accept that it's very complicated with labour laws, contracts, legal teams and media being involved. So it's asinine of folks to suggest anyone is saying the team should have come out and called HIM a racist bastard and nailed him.
But this is how systemic bias and racism gets entrenched. Because, you know, we'd love to say it's racist and really get behind the player and expressly denounce racism, but we can't.. you know contracts/legal vulnerability etc. It's disappointing.
I'm also not saying Tree's a bad guy or anything.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I simply cant wrap my head around this thought process.

How, 10 years after the fact, was Brad Treliving supposed to know what Bill Peters said to a hockey player in Illinois one morning after practice? How is this in ANY way attached to BT other than hiring a guy who he knew only as a hockey coach?

I really don't know what people expect...like should BT have contacted every single player that Bill Peters ever coached or every single person he ever worked with and ask them "did you ever hear BP utter racist words or see him kicking a player in the back"?

I mean I just dont get it.

If Bill Peters didn't have a notorious reputation from being an abusive #######, this story doesn't get as big.

It was the cascade of negativity that happened after the initial allegations that made it so much worse.

If Bill Peters had been a decent individual outside of the Aliu incident he may have even survived.

There are two things happening here:

1) The Flames are justifiably cutting ties with Peters based on the corroborated allegations of racism.

2) The Flames are (justifiably for their own public relations) actively trying to avoid the criticism that Bill Peters looks like a terrible hire aside from the racism allegations.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Not so sure he had such a notorious reputation. If there were reports of such prior to the hiring, then sure, a failure to conduct due diligence.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by lambeburger

Precisely, if you're woke enough, you get a pass when caught doing racist things.

I mean, it's the difference between actively combatting racism and saying "I'm not racist, so that's Enough".

Unrepentant #######s don't deserve the benefit of the doubt - you have to ask for absolution. Bill Peters didn't, and he can't be an NHL Coach as a result.

There's a baseline level of decency. You can scoff at that if you want, but you shouldn't be surprised if/when your fundamental indecency has consequences. And we should all be so lucky as to have banked several million dollars before our sins catch up to us.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I disagree. Do you think that if it was Scheer dressing in blackface he could have handled it like Trudeau did and not be forced to resign as party leader? If a right leaning radio talk show host said the N-word in the context that Maher did, no amount of apologizing would change his fate. He would be fired. Plain and simple.

As for owning their actions, Ralph Northam either dressed up in blackface or as a hooded Klansman (take your pick), denied it, and kept his job as governor of Virginia.

You don't seem all that familiar with the right-wing media in the US. It takes multiple allegations of rape before someone is even close to being fired. And even then it's "unfair" in certain circles.

[FurnaceFace]

Edit: Following along with what CC said, I believe you can say only some much, as the person being contacted for a reference check, right? Usually it's verification the person was employed with you when they said and maybe a couple of words on strengths weaknesses. These hirings aren't for a chief justice.

[Housley4Prez]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Not so sure he had such a notorious reputation. If there were reports of such prior to the hiring, then sure, a failure to conduct due diligence.

Treliving said he consulted with the Hurricanes and that they didn't mention it.

Ball is in your court, Raleigh.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I disagree. Do you think that if it was Scheer dressing in blackface he could have handled it like Trudeau did and not be forced to resign as party leader? If a right leaning radio talk show host said the N-word in the context that Maher did, no amount of apologizing would change his fate. He would be fired. Plain and simple.

As for owning their actions, Ralph Northam either dressed up in blackface or as a hooded Klansman (take your pick), denied it, and kept his job as governor of Virginia.

The first part is pure speculation, so we're not going to go there.

However, I will say that Conservative party members have said and held pretty backwards and demeaning things about homosexuals and the LGBTQ movement, but a quick check on folks like Mark Smith from Drayton Valley/Devon says he still has his job.

Education Minister Adriana LaGrange, in a previous role, compared modern abortion to the Holocaust. Again, quick check shows no apology, and she's still Education Minister.

This can't be a flat comparison because not every two situations are the same in many varying respects, which is kind of the whole point. However, those comments and actions are offensive, but 'cancel' or 'outrage' culture seems to have left them quite unaffected.

So I reject your assertion that it is as simple as left/right leanings, and my brain starts to break every time someone makes a comparison between two situations so easily without really thinking it through and understanding nuances of context, time, environment, and a full breadth of actions.

We can stop this silly divide before it even starts with just an ounce of thoughtfulness.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

Edit: Following along with what CC said, I believe you can say only some much, as the person being contacted for a reference check, right? Usually it's verification the person was employed with you when they said and maybe a couple of words on strengths weaknesses. These hirings aren't for a chief justice.

There is no such thing as a negative reference anymore.

companies will choose not to answer questions, or say that they can confirm the dates of employment and that's all due to company policy.

No candidate is going to give you the name of a negative reference, chances are they're going to give you the name of a positive reference and pre script their reference.

Due diligence can only go so far unless you hire a private detective to dig through their garbage.

To be honest, with my clients I can go, I went to their previous employers with the candidate permission and they confirmed their employment dates and nothing else.

Then clients have to make their own judgement.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

There are plenty of things you can't talk about in a structured settlement that prevents you from disparaging someone in that agreement, but I found the press conference lacking from a flames point of view and I don't think Treliving came across all that well with some of the questions.

I can see why some people are disappointed in how this was handled today from a Flames perspective. It felt like there was a lot of 'cover my ass' dismissal that was separate from any negotiated settlement.

Huh?

I would have to assume that you have never been in that position. I have. I think that Tre handled it exactly the way it should have been. No comments on the settlement, no comments on the allegations...all about the process and the result. And no, there was no CYA stuff. (And if there were, it wouldn't be discussed in public. That is for management to discuss with their GM.)

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Honestly when I heard what Pinder was doing it I was disgusted, his whole conduct through this whole thing has been wrong


I did go to the fan 960 website and sent them an email stating my feeling on Pinder


kelly.kirch@rci.rogers.com

Yeah i just fired an email off to kirch as well....the more i think about what he was trying to do there, the more my blood boils. Been a pretty emotional 24 hours for me and those around me so maybe i should have waited but it just struck me as so inappropriate and....gross...just no other word for it.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Huh?

I would have to assume that you have never been in that position. I have. I think that Tre handled it exactly the way it should have been. No comments on the settlement, no comments on the allegations...all about the process and the result. And no, there was no CYA stuff. (And if there were, it wouldn't be discussed in public. That is for management to discuss with their GM.)

I understand he was restricted in what he could say from both a legal perspective as well as a public relations perspective.

I get he can't and shouldn't speak to any specifics.

I think there was more to be said on how they plan to do things moving forward and about the positive steps they can take right now to address any shortcomings in either their hiring practices or how the organization views inclusivity and the current hockey culture.

Brad had no issue spelling out that he did a 'full scrub', his due dilligence and spoke with previous employers about Peters, so I don't buy that he couldn't also make mention of other aspects of the hiring process.

I understand he doesn't want to put anything out there, but he was very quick to defend their hiring process, and for me, that was very CYA.

[CaptainCrunch]

The hiring processes are probably very much a part of the NHL's stated ongoing investigations so it unlikely that Tre is going to go into detail with the public or press concerning anything that the NHL is looking at.