No one is taking the trolls bait no matter how hard they try.
It's bizarre behaviour to jump into defend bully coaches and go after players even after they are exposed for the garbage they pull. It's like clockwork.
I am judging Biz Nasty on the comments he made. I have never once said that what they said didn't happen, I have said there is no proof at this point that it did happen and I will wait until that comes out before believing them blindly. I also said the way they have handled it is poor and the shove it up your ass comment shows that to me.
Unless you are claiming that Gaudreau, Jenner and Werenski are all lying, with no benefit and a ton to lose if they are, then yes their statement are proof of how they felt in their interactions with Babcock.
The way they’ve handled what? Passing along comments about Babcocks they received from players? They’re an entertainment podcast built on getting “behind the scenes” with players and being vulgar. They handled it how they would handle anything.
You also called the accusations empty, which you have no evidence of, and is a judgement call not a fact. That’s the same as calling them baseless, unfounded, or false. If that’s not what you meant, choose better words.
And again, you haven’t seen proof. That doesn’t mean there isn’t proof, and saying there isn’t any is stupid when there are multiple sources claiming there is (in terms of proof being “people saying they were uncomfortable”). Just because they aren’t making official PR statements doesn’t mean anything.
I’m claiming that a PR statement released through the media serves a very specific purpose. Gaudreau and the rest have zero to lose by coming out and saying they didn’t have an issue with it and a ton to benefit from. If they come out and say they didn’t like it and Babcock keeps his job, they’re in the dog house. How would it even come out if they were lying? What would you expect them to even lose? lol. Hell, if they were encouraged to put a PR statement out regardless of how true it was, that would blow back on the Jackets, not the players.
The way they’ve handled what? Passing along comments about Babcocks they received from players? They’re an entertainment podcast built on getting “behind the scenes” with players and being vulgar. They handled it how they would handle anything.
Ignoring the player comments that go against what they said while claiming they are doing it for the players because they are a players podcast, the vulgar response to the team's statement which included Boone Jenner's response. They also have made it about how big time they are they always do making sure to promote themselves above all else.
Them handling it the way they always do is part of the problem because they handle everything terribly.
Quote:
You also called the accusations empty, which you have no evidence of, and is a judgement call not a fact. That’s the same as calling them baseless, unfounded, or false. If that’s not what you meant, choose better words.
They are empty at this point because we have no idea where they came from. There is no proof that any current player said any of the things they claim.
Quote:
And again, you haven’t seen proof. That doesn’t mean there isn’t proof, and saying there isn’t any is stupid when there are multiple sources claiming there is (in terms of proof being “people saying they were uncomfortable”). Just because they aren’t making official PR statements doesn’t mean anything.
I have never said there is no proof at all. I have said I will wait until we see it before believing guys like Bissonette.
Quote:
I’m claiming that a PR statement released through the media serves a very specific purpose. Gaudreau and the rest have zero to lose by coming out and saying they didn’t have an issue with it and a ton to benefit from. If they come out and say they didn’t like it and Babcock keeps his job, they’re in the dog house. How would it even come out if they were lying? What would you expect them to even lose? lol. Hell, if they were encouraged to put a PR statement out regardless of how true it was, that would blow back on the Jackets, not the players.
Of course Gaudreau has a lot to lose, if it comes out he lies he looks awful, worse he looks like a terrible human being. If it comes out it was true and they spoke out about it zero chance Babcock keeps his job. The team isn't letting him put Gaudreau in the doghouse, while it is clear as day that Babcock did something horrible.
If all that happened is they shared pictures on their phones, there would not be much of a discussion. The allegation is that it was more than that. Enough for the NHLPA to look into it.
Player autonomy is going to [continue to] be a battleground on the next CBA. Mostly big things like injury treatment (Eichel), but it behooves the PA to identify all sorts of things like this and protect player rights wherever possible. There is a good reason they like to drill down on things like what time players have to report after Xmas vacation.
This is a bit of a vague one to pin down, but you could even connect some dots to the Wideman situation and how his personal phone messages were used in that investigation. We haven't had a proper CBA negotiation since then.
The fact that the PA are investigating isn't evidence of anything. Not so bold prediction of what their eventual statement says: "Our investigation found that there was an inappropriate violation of players' privacy, however we did not find any evidence of malicious intent. We will continue to work with the NHL to ensure appropriate standards are upheld to protect players' personal information".
Ignoring the player comments that go against what they said while claiming they are doing it for the players because they are a players podcast, the vulgar response to the team's statement which included Boone Jenner's response. They also have made it about how big time they are they always do making sure to promote themselves above all else.
Them handling it the way they always do is part of the problem because they handle everything terribly.
They are empty at this point because we have no idea where they came from. There is no proof that any current player said any of the things they claim.
I have never said there is no proof at all. I have said I will wait until we see it before believing guys like Bissonette.
Of course Gaudreau has a lot to lose, if it comes out he lies he looks awful, worse he looks like a terrible human being. If it comes out it was true and they spoke out about it zero chance Babcock keeps his job. The team isn't letting him put Gaudreau in the doghouse, while it is clear as day that Babcock did something horrible.
You’re just going in circles and talking nonsense. Gaudreau is not going to look like a terrible human being if it comes out he actually was uncomfortable lol, come on.
Again, Bissonette aside, the NHLPA is investigating because they received information that young players were uncomfortable. Not from the podcast, not because Twitter users said to do it, but because that’s what they recieved. You want to pretend that isn’t evidence and young players telling their union they were uncomfortable isn’t “real” or isn’t “proof” then go nuts, but it just comes off as either being a weird Babcock fanboy or having an axe to grind with a podcast, which would be hilarious.
You don’t want to believe it, and you don’t like the people who first brought it up, so you’ve decided to reserve judgement until you can’t logically find any reason to deny it, while judging the hell out of the people who brought the stuff forward and calling young players who were uncomfortable liars or, worse, just pretending they don’t exist at all. Hilarious.
You’re just going in circles and talking nonsense. Gaudreau is not going to look like a terrible human being if it comes out he actually was uncomfortable lol, come on.
Again, Bissonette aside, the NHLPA is investigating because they received information that young players were uncomfortable. Not from the podcast, not because Twitter users said to do it, but because that’s what they recieved. You want to pretend that isn’t evidence and young players telling their union they were uncomfortable isn’t “real” or isn’t “proof” then go nuts, but it just comes off as either being a weird Babcock fanboy or having an axe to grind with a podcast, which would be hilarious.
You don’t want to believe it, and you don’t like the people who first brought it up, so you’ve decided to reserve judgement until you can’t logically find any reason to deny it, while judging the hell out of the people who brought the stuff forward and calling young players who were uncomfortable liars or, worse, just pretending they don’t exist at all. Hilarious.
If it comes out Gaudreau lied about what happened he will look bad. I agree if he came out saying he was uncomfortable he wouldn't look bad at all so no reason to lie about it at all.
I am fine believing that it happened so no that is another lie as usual from you. What I have said is that there is nothing to tell us what has happened so why not wait until that comes out first before making things up. That is a pretty reasonable statement but because you have a personal issue with me you are trying to making it out to be more than it is.
I am not judging anyone and certainly not calling young players that came out anything. I haven't commented on any player outside of Jenner, gaudreau and Werenski.
Why are people framing it as though people want to believe Babcock or give him the benefit of the doubt?
I am not on twitter so maybe that is happening there but from what I have seen most of the stuff being labeled as "defending Babcock" has to do with the reports from Gaudreau, Werenski and Jenner saying that what happened wasn't what is being reported in the media.
That doesn't mean that some younger (or older as well) players might not have felt differently but so far all the actual evidence backs one version of events and the Bissonette/Spittlin Chiclets side is nothing but empty accusations and paired with some dumb and offensive remarks.
I have no problem believing that Babcock could have done something wrong but I also don't think it is wrong to say that we should have more than Biz Nasty saying he has contact from "players" that are true, especially when the supposed player backer says to shove it up your ass when Jenner, a player, comes out with a different version. I guess Biz Nasty is only a player defender when that player tows his line.
The NHLPA going on JG and BJ words and thinking everything is fine, but then hearing from other players and flying out there and holding “intense” meetings with the CBJ players probably backs some of the spitting chicklets story.
The Following User Says Thank You to stang For This Useful Post:
If it comes out Gaudreau lied about what happened he will look bad. I agree if he came out saying he was uncomfortable he wouldn't look bad at all so no reason to lie about it at all.
I am fine believing that it happened so no that is another lie as usual from you. What I have said is that there is nothing to tell us what has happened so why not wait until that comes out first before making things up. That is a pretty reasonable statement but because you have a personal issue with me you are trying to making it out to be more than it is.
I am not judging anyone and certainly not calling young players that came out anything. I haven't commented on any player outside of Jenner, gaudreau and Werenski.
Except actual players are saying that coming out against your coach is the type of thing that can hurt your career and make your life hell if they don’t get fired for it, so there’s absolutely a reason to blow it off like no big deal.
And if you’re not dismissing the young players who were uncomfortable, and you’re fine believing that it happened, then there’s zero reason to pass judgement on Bissonette or the accusations themselves, which you’ve already done.
Being neutral and waiting for judgement isn’t the same as actively trying to discredit the people who made the issue public. Suggesting they don’t side with players or are just “supposed” player backers because Bissonette took issue with Babcock’s statement and was also somehow directing it toward Jenner just because his statement was included below is asinine.
Even if you don’t like the Spittin Chicklet guys, which you obviously don’t, you’re trying to hard to twist their words and their actions to make them look like the bad guys. That doesn’t seem like someone waiting for judgement.
Except actual players are saying that coming out against your coach is the type of thing that can hurt your career and make your life hell if they don’t get fired for it, so there’s absolutely a reason to blow it off like no big deal.
And if you’re not dismissing the young players who were uncomfortable, and you’re fine believing that it happened, then there’s zero reason to pass judgement on Bissonette or the accusations themselves, which you’ve already done.
Being neutral and waiting for judgement isn’t the same as actively trying to discredit the people who made the issue public. Suggesting they don’t side with players or are just “supposed” player backers because Bissonette took issue with Babcock’s statement and was also somehow directing it toward Jenner just because his statement was included below is asinine.
Even if you don’t like the Spittin Chicklet guys, which you obviously don’t, you’re trying to hard to twist their words and their actions to make them look like the bad guys. That doesn’t seem like someone waiting for judgement.
I’m not twisting anything they said, I used their statements.
Only bully here is you and your posting history shows it.
Maybe take a break.
If he doesn't, are you going to bully him until he does?
I've taken frequent breaks from CP over the years, and frankly, most of it has been because of users bullying other users.
Meanwhile, on the topic at hand, I consider that I have a positive duty not to form any opinion about it until the facts are made public. All we have so far is hearsay, plus the fact that an investigation has been ordered but not yet carried out. The investigation may find nothing of any consequence, or it may blow the lid off a whole can of worms, or anything in between. Once we have better knowledge of what Babcock actually did, it will be rational to have an opinion about what consequences he should face.
NHL coaches are not Caesar's wife. There is no requirement that they be above suspicion.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
Total tangent and I know your intent is pure, but I'll just point at that ASD isn't really something anybody 'suffers' with. The main thing autistic people suffer with is dealing with neurotypicals who can't fathom why not everyone isn't wired to conform to 'social norms' in the same way as them.
Obviously there is a whole lot more to unpack there, but it's a bit mindblowing when you start to reframe your perspective on these things
Quote:
Originally Posted by KelVarnsen
Saying someone suffers from ASD is honestly kind of insulting.
And Babcock is an #######.
It's been suggested by many people that I myself am located somewhere on the spectrum... and as someone who is often incapable of interpreting signals in time to stop talking or change my wording, I can assure you that constantly having people annoyed with me or going through life without anyone ever really taking me seriously or treating me with the same kind of respect I see them treat others with is most definitely a form of suffering.
I'm willing to grant that most of that suffering is of my own doing for never having pursued any kind of diagnosis or help with navigating whatever it is I have, but at 49 years old I kinda feel like most of the damage is already done.
Personal sharing aside, I certainly didn't mean to insult anyone. I have a really weird relationship with this whole thing, as I often believe I know what I'm talking about from my own experience, but I still talk about like I'm an outsider... because one of the things that really terrifies me is that I one day decide to seek some sort of diagnosis/help only to discover that whatever's wrong with me has nothing at all to do with autism - and the reason I'm alone is literally because I'm just an a**hole.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
If he doesn't, are you going to bully him until he does?
I've taken frequent breaks from CP over the years, and frankly, most of it has been because of users bullying other users.
Meanwhile, on the topic at hand, I consider that I have a positive duty not to form any opinion about it until the facts are made public. All we have so far is hearsay, plus the fact that an investigation has been ordered but not yet carried out. The investigation may find nothing of any consequence, or it may blow the lid off a whole can of worms, or anything in between. Once we have better knowledge of what Babcock actually did, it will be rational to have an opinion about what consequences he should face.
NHL coaches are not Caesar's wife. There is no requirement that they be above suspicion.
You can look at his posting history of bullying me.
It's also not surprising when he comes to the defence of people being accused of the same behaviour.
We had reputable reporters sharing stories of mental abuse but certain people have a tough time accepting their hero's are just not good people.
It's the same with Babcock here who has a history of this behaviour but because it's Biz and Whitney who I think are idiots as well speaking up for players it's being brushed off.
The Babcocks, Peters and Sutters do not deserve these jobs and bring a position to abuse other human beings.
