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

[rhino]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

I wouldn't be surprised if this leads to. NHL giving guidelines on appropriate conduct for coaches.employed through the NHL. May also lead to changes in coaching contracts that will protect the leagues interests.

The contracts have ethics and conduct unbecoming clauses.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by rhino

The contracts have ethics and conduct unbecoming clauses.

But they can probably be clarified to cover past events like this.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by mikeecho

I live in the United States. I’m not sure anything is considered highly racist here.

Try going black face in Atlanta and see how long you last.

[activeStick]

Treliving did a great job in a very tough situation and his emotions showed during his press conference, revealing who he is as a person.

I'll be disappointed in the league if Bettman doesn't have a similar press conference when the league's own review is completed. As the commissioner, it's his job to address the recent reveals of the behaviour of coaches like Babcock and Peters and what the league plans to do about it.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by cannon7

Try going black face in Atlanta and see how long you last.

You got a neighborhood specifically you want me to try this in, or would you have us believe all of Atlanta is full of black people on a hair trigger ready to do violence against white people in blackface?

What a strange thing to say.

[Winsor_Pilates]

This thread has become Fox News

[direwolf]

Yea, this thread is an embarrassment. I vote for locking it up.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You got a neighborhood specifically you want me to try this in, or would you have us believe all of Atlanta is full of black people on a hair trigger ready to do violence against white people in blackface?

What a strange thing to say.

I used to live in Riverdale, Georgia. You can start there.

In case you don't know, black face was used to mock black people during Jim Crow. I provided a link that goes into more detail. It's not that strange, it's actually quite understandable.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by cannon7

I used to live in Riverdale, Georgia. You can start there.

In case you don't know, black face was used to mock black people during Jim Crow. I provided a link that goes into more detail. It's not that strange, it's actually quite understandable.

Why are we even talking about Georgia? We’re in Canada

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Why are we even talking about Georgia? We’re in Canada

I was just commenting that I find it bizarre that there are posters who don't think what Trudeau did was offensive. I've lived in places where that costume would be ill advised. But yes, not in Canada.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by cannon7

I was just commenting that I find it bizarre that there are posters who don't think what Trudeau did was offensive. I've lived in places where that costume would be ill advised. But yes, not in Canada.

I haven’t seen a single poster say it wasn’t offensive. they say, at best, its different in intention, quality and the actions taken subsequently, not to mention that the differing outcomes were in entirely different frameworks.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by cannon7

I was just commenting that I find it bizarre that there are posters who don't think what Trudeau did was offensive. I've lived in places where that costume would be ill advised. But yes, not in Canada.

I have yet to see a single post where someone accepts Treudeau's actions as not offensive. On the other hand, I see you posting deflections and "whataboutisms" multiple times in multiple threads in an apparent effort to diminish the seriousness of Peters's actions. It really appears obsessive.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I haven’t seen a single poster say it wasn’t offensive. they say, at best, its different in intention, quality and the actions taken subsequently, not to mention that the differing outcomes were in entirely different frameworks.

Fair enough. I'm referring to the posters who are saying there's no comparison between dressing up in black face and blurting out the N word. That may be true in Canada.

[Zarley]

Both situations are obviously offensive and completely unacceptable. However it is bizarre to suggest that two recent instances of past racist behaviour by high profile individuals coming to light are not comparable. Is it not natural to compare the two scenarios?

In Peters’ case I’d argue it’s worse because he used racist language to target a person based on his ethnicity, whereas the in the Trudeau scenario he mocked a group of people in a general sense who were not directly present. Also, there is a large cohort that is willing to be more forgiving with Trudeau than they would be otherwise because he’s ‘on their side’ politically.

[cannon7]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I have yet to see a single post where someone accepts Treudeau's actions as not offensive. On the other hand, I see you posting deflections and "whataboutisms" multiple times in multiple threads in an apparent effort to diminish the seriousness of Peters's actions. It really appears obsessive.

I never said Peters shouldn't have ben fired. So you're clearly attributing intent where it doesn't exist.

I know I've ruffled some feathers around here. Hell, I've been called and accused of some pretty awful things. PepsiFree has been particularly uncharitable in his? interpretations.

That's OK with me.

Would be fine with the mods moving this political crap to the boards they belong.

[doozwimp]

Originally Posted by GGG

This isn’t true.

In election polling CP matches up relatively well with actual election results aside from more 3rd party support. What really is happening is that a Hockey Forum exposes you to views outside of your bubble as people from all walks of life and political opinions cheat for the flames.

This is honestly my favorite thing about CP. I think we can all agree that the internet has been horrific (cant we) in how its created these toxic echo chambers but CP has (mostly) been a bastion of reasonable discussion where the only thing we necessarily have in common is an apolitical love of hockey.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

If they wanted to pay him all of it they would have just fired him. Clearly they settled for something less than all of it. Use some logic friend.

If you want to use logic, I think you will find that Peters’ resignation allows the Flames and NHL not to take a precedent establishing stand on a complex issue.

Again, this is dealing with the consequences of conduct from long ago with a different club and league. The questions of who takes responsibility and how the dismissal is handled did not have to be answered.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

If you want to use logic, I think you will find that Peters’ resignation allows the Flames and NHL not to take a precedent establishing stand on a complex issue.

Again, this is dealing with the consequences of conduct from long ago with a different club and league. The questions of who takes responsibility and how the dismissal is handled did not have to be answered.

Yup...It's not out of the realm of possibility, he was paid more to resign. His resignation made this issue a lot cleaner and a lot easier for the Flames, and the NHL.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

Yup...It's not out of the realm of possibility, he was paid more to resign. His resignation made this issue a lot cleaner and a lot easier for the Flames, and the NHL.

Anything is possible. What did Peters get out of resigning? He received cash (we don’t know how much) and he negotiated that Flames are unable to say he was fired or left by mutual agreement and also that they can’t disclose the results of the investigation, only the process followed. That seems pretty evident from the presser.

What did the Flames get? They obviously got rid of a toxic situation and clearly Peters would have signed a release holding the Flames harmless from any future claims by Peters assuming they follow the obligations as set forth.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Anything is possible. What did Peters get out of resigning? He received cash (we don’t know how much) and he negotiated that Flames are unable to say he was fired or left by mutual agreement and also that they can’t disclose the results of the investigation, only the process followed. That seems pretty evident from the presser.

What did the Flames get? They obviously got rid of a toxic situation and clearly Peters would have signed a release holding the Flames harmless from any future claims by Peters assuming they follow the obligations as set forth.

He also can't bad mouth them from afar or reveal any information that the flames don't want released.

#1 concern for the flames organization is ending this saga as quickly and quietly as possible. Any ouster that didn't muzzle peters is not as good as something that prevents him from dragging the flames back into anything else.

It's worth it to pay him a lot to go away quietly than a little and have no control over what he might say next.