Apparently Vancouver was going to lead the way on inclusive and diverse hiring, more female representation and less traditional "hockey guy" stuff.
So while I agree with you it's not pitchfork worthy, they made the effort to be that team and now will be at a higher level of scrutiny for these things.
Good point.
If they are going to talk about being leaders in that area, then they need to actually show it. Of course the team lost all credibility and benefit of the doubt with the Boudreau debacle. Typical bluewashing nonsense.
I guess I am just becoming numb to the constant stream of blunders and missteps, this is just a blip on the radar.
I remember watching an After Hours interview with Rutherford when the canucks were going through their long losing streak at the start of the season. I remembered him being overly harsh and mentioning that he thought their training camp wasn’t run well.
I think he’s had it in for Boudreau for a while.
Brutal way to treat a highly respected guy. Hopefully they get a lot of blowback.
Can someone please explain all the Boudreau drama like I'm 5?
I get that Rutherford doesn't like him yet couldn't fire him after the success last season but how does it get to this? If he's not your guy then the early struggles are enough reason to fire him then. Now they are tanking so why not just let Boudreau ride out his contract? Was there any plan here?
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
And the thing is, despite the Canucks being genuinely bad to the point of 'sucking out loud,' you saw that they were playing hard for Boudreau.
Obviously Management and Ownership saw this and remarked to themselves:
"Well...we cant have that!"
You might actually be right.
But I sensed an unusual hatred from Rutherford towards Boudreau in the after hours interview earlier in the season. I still remember it because it seemed so weird.
Last edited by Goriders; 01-23-2023 at 12:34 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Goriders For This Useful Post:
Obviously Boudreau wasn’t Rutherford’s cup of tea.
These last few days, handled poorly for sure by the Canucks, may have actually helped BB in getting another role.
GMs and coaches and organizations and coaches don’t get along all the time, and those behind the scenes, know all of the drama. Difference here is the drama wasn’t behind the scenes.
With this situation and his interviews being brought forward a few days ago to the masses, and BB doing those 3 or 4 interviews he wouldn’t have to do (he would’ve been let go long before with most organizations) he’s gained more sympathy to the public and other organizations.
I think part of his emotion so publicly is certainly because he thinks it’s his last NHL job (and the surprise how the fans serenaded him)…again, this drama and his grace through it, may have earned him another redemption shot somewhere…where if he just got dumped 3 weeks ago, he wouldn’t have had that goodwill he’s gained.
From 32 thoughts today, Friedman "got a call from someone in Vancouver" and they said that this was his fault. None of it would have happened if he hadn't reported it.
Whether it's Rutherford, Aquilini or a sympathizer (of which there are little) who called, it speaks volumes that they still don't understand. If he didn't report, then someone else would have. Regardless, they should have acted. But to go and blame a reporter is outrageous and shows the level of denial.
__________________
.
"Fun must be always!" - Tomas Hertl
The Following User Says Thank You to dustygoon For This Useful Post:
