Exactly one year ago, Bruce Boudreau was fired as head coach. How have we (the fans) moved on from that saga?

[Boudrias]

15 minutes ago, tas said:

you can't just turn around fire someone who literally just accepted their option year. that's absurd. he had to give him a fair chance. he did. and it was squandered. and it made everything messier than it needed to be. 

If I remember correctly Rutherford was talking about 'lack of structure' months before Boudreau was fired. I suspect they were working on RT for some time before Boudreau was canned. I don't consider how Boudreau was fired much dif than many other coaches over the years. Boudreau's emotions were worn on his sleeve which was a bit unusual. He probably realized it was his last NHL gig and did not want it to end. He was far to public about the back and forth and did not appear to want to change his style. The latest quip about Hughes playing center was out of line.  

[kilgore]

18 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

You are acting as if Rutherford had no agency and no control over the situation.  Unless you truly believe Aquilini was blocking any personnel movement, Rutherford had the power to do whatever he watned.  When Ron Wilson was FIRED, he was quietly/mercifully swept out after an away game.  When Jay Woodcroft was FIRED, he was quietly/mercifully swept out after an away game.  Hell - when Lane Lambert was FIRED yesterday, he was quietly/mercifully swept out after an away game.  If he didn't think Bruce was the right man for the job, there was no reason to keep him on even a day longer than necessary.  Just get someone to sub in while you conduct the search.  Even Stan Smyl could've suited up as a coach for two weeks if needed.

 

In the interview you posted, Rutherford was directly asked what he thought Bruce Boudreau had to do.  And his response was to criticize the "structure" and "system" of the team.  Anyone with a brain can tell that was a criticism of Bruce Boudreau and their visions did not align.

 

Let me flip the script on you.  If you don't believe your coach can get the job done, just cut him loose and move on.  Don't go crying to the media about structure and changes needed.  You were right that we were out of the playoffs a month into the season.  Rutherford didn't seem to mind, as the team continued to nosedive for over HALF a season.  Boo hoo.  You're the boss.  Make the goddamn change yourself.  Keep in mind that creating a hostile work environment to the point that someone feels compelled to resign is literally ILLEGAL in British Columbia.  Rutherford has been a hockey executive for almost 40 years - he knows how to fire someone.  Nobody resigns in hockey for doing poorly.  They get fired.  That's how it's always been.  Boo hoo for those who didn't get the memo.

 

 

 

The writing was not on the wall.  Bruce's first year went 35-15-10.  We nearly surged into the playoffs that year before running out of gas in late March.  It would've made zero sense for a coach to be let go after that strong of a performance, even if Rutherford didn't like the structure.

 

 

Oh come on.  Did you expect Rutherford, the day after he was hired, to fire the coach that his new boss had just hired a week earlier?   Obviously Aquilini believed in BB and wanted to give him a run here, and I'm sure that was a stipulation when he hired JR.  

 

And after a month of winning, THEN  fire him?  Who would do that? You are not making any sense.

 

Crying to the media?  The media came to him. To grill  him on why the team was playing so poorly by the time Nov. of 22 came around. Which is their job. He replied honestly, that the team needed structure and systems.  You may feel sorry for the coach having to hear this, but that was reality. And JR, gawd bless him, doesn't f around with flaky answers.  I absolutely love that about him.

 

Doesn't it seem more likely that he took on Aquilini's choice of coach as part of the job acceptance? At least promise to give it a chance? And that because BB exceeded expectations, and because it was his boss's choice and he was paying him for 2 years regardless, and he was doing well, he almost had to give him another shot the next season?   But because JR is thorough, and listened to his inner voice of experience, he was already scouting for a replacement if, as he suspected, that style of coaching was not sustainable?  You yourself said as much in your reply to the other poster in the same post: " It would've made zero sense for a coach to be let go after that strong of a performance, even if Rutherford didn't like the structure."

 

And I still maintain that if BB had been sat down and told he was going to be replaced, but that the  new coach had other job responsibilities that would delay him for two more weeks, and BB had been given a choice of staying on coaching for two more weeks......he would have still taken it.  Because he loved it and because of the players he got to know, and because he didn't have anything else on the horizon.  That was basically what happened, whether that meeting happened or not. And it very well might have.

 

And yes, he could have quit if the emotional pain was too great to handle. Which is laughable. The city still loved him. He was already a multi millionaire, having played in the NHL as a top scorer, then coaching a number of teams to a winning record.  He didn't need to stick around for the money, whatever the penalty would have been off the contract.  He stuck around for two more weeks  because he wanted to. 

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

I fundamentally disagree with everything you've said.  When Rutherford went on 650 to talk about the team, nobody expected him to talk shit about Bruce.  And he did just that.  Media was just there to ask questions as they always do.  It's a radio talk show.  What they got was a Rutherford-driven frenzy.  Look back at those interviews - for real.  Do you know how easy it is for a hockey man to deflect questions about coaching?  Did you notice how out of everyone in the league, everyone on our team, Rutherford was the only person to criticize his coach?  Can you honestly think of an instance where the 

 

It made zero sense for a president of hockey operations to complain about a subordinate when he always had the power to fire him (unless you think Aquilini was actively preventing this).  Suggesting Bruce should've resigned at that point is practically legal grounds for constructive dismissal.  Rutherford went ON RECORD multiple times criticizing his coaching style in a way that we've literally never seen in the NHL.  He must've created such a hostile work situation for Bruce.  "Hey if you don't like me, just get rid of me and stop complaining about me!"

 

Imagine if Edmonton waited until this January before firing Jay Woodcroft.  That's essentially what happened to us.  Even a caretaker coach would've spared us the unnecessary drama.  Look at Ottawa.  At least nobody's talking about their coaching situation anymore.

 

If you someone's doing a poor job, you cut them loose ASAP.  That's ruthless.  Keeping someone you've lost confidence in for months on end is the exact opposite of being ruthless and cutthroat.  If Quinn Hughes comes out today and starts openly criticizing Kuzmenko for his poor play, does that make him ruthless or cutthroat?  Sure, but does that make him a winner!?  Of course not.  It just makes him an asshole.

 

You sound like Craig Button.  At the end of the day, Rutherford made some mistakes and apologized for them.  I didn't hear any apology from Bruce Boudreau on how he ripped our team apart by playing pond hockey for 4 months which almost allowed us to be the worst team in hockey until Tocchet took over.  Where is Bruce's apology to this fanbase?  Or is he still doing the media tour and playing the victim card?

[Elias Pettersson]

21 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

If I remember correctly Rutherford was talking about 'lack of structure' months before Boudreau was fired. I suspect they were working on RT for some time before Boudreau was canned. I don't consider how Boudreau was fired much dif than many other coaches over the years. Boudreau's emotions were worn on his sleeve which was a bit unusual. He probably realized it was his last NHL gig and did not want it to end. He was far to public about the back and forth and did not appear to want to change his style. The latest quip about Hughes playing center was out of line.  

 

Boudreau is literally still chirping to the media over a year later.  He is a bitter old man...

[Hammertime]

JR was loose. Realistically if Brucey wasn't going into the season with the full support of MGMT he should have been let go and replaced in the off season. The whole situation was bush league. And not a good way to endear yourselves as experienced professionals to a team or fanbase. Especially one that's just endured years of bush league GMing. 

 

 All this said. the things that needed to happen finally happened and it was needlessly messy. We are moving in the right direction now. 

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, iinatcc said:

 

Why would anyone walk away from a job though? The whole thing was a mess, I don't blame Rutherford/Allvin for preferring another coach but the way Rutherford there Boudreau under the bus publicly was pretty unprofessional.

 

 

 

Paul Maurice walked away from his job as a coach.  He had the balls to resign when his team was playing like crap and even said publicly that "the players need a new voice"...

 

Winnipeg Jets coach Paul Maurice resigns, says players 'need a new voice' | CBC News

Edited January 21 by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

JR was holding Bruce accountable the same way Tocchet is holding Kuzmenko accountable.  There is no difference between the two situations.  Both are out in the public as well...

[iinatcc]

2 hours ago, tas said:

the honourable thing for bruce to have done was walk away in the summer. 

 

his contract was up. his boss had made it abundantly clear that he wasn't his guy and that he didn't know that bruce had the option year when he agreed to things. he could have walked away, head held high, knowing that he turned that team around and got them damn close. he could have used that as a springboard into a role elsewhere. 

 

instead, he said screw it, if they want me gone I'll make them fire me and pay me out and exercised the option. 

 

so, rutherford let him lay in the bed he made. he let him squirm first. 

 

Unless anyone of us have already willingly walked out of a job that pays a seven figure salary, I don't think we are in the position to judge Boudreau's decision to remain with the team.

 

Boudreau had a contract he was honoring it so I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

It's not on Boudreau to walk away from his contract. If Rutherford and Allvin wanted a new coach in the start of last season, they should have been the ones to go up to ownership and to fire him, make him sit at the start of the year while continuing to pay him.

 

.

Edited January 21 by iinatcc

[LillStrimma]

4 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Rutherford chose to not follow that advise though.  He should have known that opening his trap and throwing the coach under the bus in public was going to cause problems, and frankly he should have been fired on the spot the minute it became clear that he wasn't going to start acting like a professional.  There's simply no excuse for how this dirtbag acted, and it's clear he hasn't learned with his recent comments about Kuzmenko.  It's sad to see someone with his character issues in charge.

Nope, JR had an responsibility to get the Canucks into playoffs and Bruce failed.

 

If Bruce had listened to JR we had reached playoff that season…

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Paul Maurice walked away from his job as a coach.  He had the balls to resign when his team was playing like crap and even said publicly that "the players need a new voice"...

 

Winnipeg Jets coach Paul Maurice resigns, says players 'need a new voice' | CBC News

 

Well that was Maurice's decision. Like I just said though. Have anyone of us walked out from a seven figure salary ? If not we aren't really in a position to judge anyone who is looking out for their livelyhood and financial security 

Edited January 21 by iinatcc

[Elias Pettersson]

2 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

Well that was Maurice's decision. Like I just said though. Have anyone of us walked out from a seven figure salary ? If not we aren't really in a position to judge anyone who is looking out for their livelyhood and financial security 

Sure, I agree. So you therefore admit that Boudreau was looking out only for himself and not for the best interests of the team by not resigning?

[iinatcc]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Sure, I agree. So you therefore admit that Boudreau was looking out only for himself and not for the best interests of the team by not resigning?

 

Yes but it's not him and doesn't deserve any of the blame. If anything management should have made the move after his first season ended and just let him sit and get paid. 

[48MPHSlapshot]

We're first in the league and a frontrunner for the Stanley Cup. I legitimately don't give a fuck about Bruce any more. 

[Elias Pettersson]

4 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

Yes but it's not him and doesn't deserve any of the blame. If anything management should have made the move after his first season ended and just let him sit and get paid. 

Aquilini was the one who hired Boudreau. So I don’t think JR had the authority to fire Boudreau in the summer after he took up his option. 
 

Like I mentioned easier this situation was created by the owner who hired the coach first and then the GM afterwards. Aquilini put JR in a difficult position as Boudreau was never his guy and he basically wasn’t allowed to get rid of him initially. 

[tas]

35 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

Unless anyone of us have already willingly walked out of a job that pays a seven figure salary, I don't think we are in the position to judge Boudreau's decision to remain with the team.

 

Boudreau had a contract he was honoring it so I don't see anything wrong with that.

 

It's not on Boudreau to walk away from his contract. If Rutherford and Allvin wanted a new coach in the start of last season, they should have been the ones to go up to ownership and to fire him, make him sit at the start of the year while continuing to pay him.

 

.

he had an option year. the point of an option year is it's an opportunity to reevaluate things and see if you want to continue. he chose to continue knowing full well his boss didn't want him. 

[iinatcc]

14 minutes ago, tas said:

he had an option year. the point of an option year is it's an opportunity to reevaluate things and see if you want to continue. he chose to continue knowing full well his boss didn't want him. 

 

Assume his contract works the same was as most NHL contracts. Are you going to Forfeit a salary worth maybe near 7 figures? 

[King Heffy]

39 minutes ago, LillStrimma said:

Nope, JR had an responsibility to get the Canucks into playoffs and Bruce failed.

 

If Bruce had listened to JR we had reached playoff that season…

Bruce did the right thing by not letting the dirtbag he had for a boss micromanage him.  Rutherford did absolutely nothing to suggest that Boudreau should have any respect for him.  JR's misconduct created a toxic environment and destroyed any chance of the playoffs being a possibility thanks to the POHO being a cancer in the organization who cared more about setting the coach up to fail than he did about winning.

 

Aquilini is to blame for not firing JR on the spot the minute that dirtbag opened his mouth.

[Nucker67]

IMO, Bruce likely knew the moment JR was hired that his days were numbered as the coach. He may never coach in the NHL again, but what a send-off. How many other coaches play their last game with the fans chanting their name? In fact, Canucks fans chanted Bruce's name every home game. He had it real good in Vancouver. It sucks how his letting go happened, but Bruce should be thanking his lucky stars for that experience instead of smearing the Canucks every chance he gets. 

 

Just waiting for the book. 

 

 

[smithers joe]

3 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Bruce did the right thing by not letting the dirtbag he had for a boss micromanage him.  Rutherford did absolutely nothing to suggest that Boudreau should have any respect for him.  JR's misconduct created a toxic environment and destroyed any chance of the playoffs being a possibility thanks to the POHO being a cancer in the organization who cared more about setting the coach up to fail than he did about winning.

 

Aquilini is to blame for not firing JR on the spot the minute that dirtbag opened his mouth.

is that you desi?

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Bruce did the right thing by not letting the dirtbag he had for a boss micromanage him.  Rutherford did absolutely nothing to suggest that Boudreau should have any respect for him.  JR's misconduct created a toxic environment and destroyed any chance of the playoffs being a possibility thanks to the POHO being a cancer in the organization who cared more about setting the coach up to fail than he did about winning.

 

Aquilini is to blame for not firing JR on the spot the minute that dirtbag opened his mouth.

[tas]

9 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

Assume his contract works the same was as most NHL contracts. Are you going to Forfeit a salary worth maybe near 7 figures? 

his contract works the way I explained it. 

 

if my choice was to choose a 1 year deal where I know I'm not wanted and where it won't go any further and will certainly end poorly, or try to use the relative success I just had to get a different deal elsewhere, where somebody wanted me, I'm certain I'd bet on myself and choose the latter. 

[iinatcc]

14 minutes ago, tas said:

his contract works the way I explained it. 

 

if my choice was to choose a 1 year deal where I know I'm not wanted and where it won't go any further and will certainly end poorly, or try to use the relative success I just had to get a different deal elsewhere, where somebody wanted me, I'm certain I'd bet on myself and choose the latter. 

 

I think it's this part that I was referring too

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/bruce-boudreaus-contract-with-canucks-contains-multiple-options/

 

Quote

“He’s on a one-year contract and there’s an option for next year," Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman said during the 32 Thoughts segment on Hockey Night in Canada. "Nobody will tell me exactly what it is but I think that I’ve kind of pieced it together, and that is that the Canucks have an option to keep him or not, but if they don’t, there’s a payment that has to go to Boudreau and also, Boudreau has an option not to return and if that was to happen, I don’t think he gets a payout but it would put him on the open market at the end of the year.”

 

But once you are in a position where you would Forfeit a years salary ($2 million) and decide to do so, keep me posted.

 

Otherwise none of us can judge Boudreau for thinking taking care of himself and family is more important than the success of the team. Hockey is only hockey, but people need to have financial security and put food in their table. 

 

And this is coming from a guy that has already decided to take a paycut (15% to 30% pending bonsues) so I could work in a less toxic/political environment. And I still refuse to judge him. 

Edited January 21 by iinatcc

[iinatcc]

45 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Aquilini was the one who hired Boudreau. So I don’t think JR had the authority to fire Boudreau in the summer after he took up his option. 
 

Like I mentioned easier this situation was created by the owner who hired the coach first and then the GM afterwards. Aquilini put JR in a difficult position as Boudreau was never his guy and he basically wasn’t allowed to get rid of him initially. 

 

I agree this is the likely scenario happening. Having said that if I were to put the hierarchy who was more responsible for this mess. Boudreau will be at the bottom. (FA at the top and Allvin/Rutherford in between).

[tas]

3 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

I think it's this part that I was referring too

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/bruce-boudreaus-contract-with-canucks-contains-multiple-options/

 

 

But once you are in a position where you would Forfeit a years salary ($2 million) and decide to do so, keep me posted.

 

Otherwise none of us can judge Boudreau for thinking taking care of himself and family is more important than the success of the team. Hockey is only hockey, but people need to have financial security and put food in their table. 

I can judge a guy who's already made many millions for selfishly choosing 2 more of them when he knew it was creating a toxic situation for an entire organization.

 

and look how it worked out for him. if he'd left the canucks that summer, he almost certainly would have got another opportunity somewhere after the turnaround he oversaw in van. instead, he chose the shortsighted option and will never get another sniff at the show. 

[Curmudgeon]

12 minutes ago, tas said:

his contract works the way I explained it. 

 

if my choice was to choose a 1 year deal where I know I'm not wanted and where it won't go any further and will certainly end poorly, or try to use the relative success I just had to get a different deal elsewhere, where somebody wanted me, I'm certain I'd bet on myself and choose the latter. 

 

No, you wouldn't. You'd take the money to tide you over until you found something else. If you didn't you'd be daft.