Around The NHL 2021/22

[JCon]

1 hour ago, Goalie said:

Tough to say how much pull if any or say Chevy had.. maybe he did say something.. there is that possibility but ppl don't listen to the junior normally 

Chevy was nobody nothing at that point.. maybe a cap guy.... not sure really what role if any he played or didn't 

Jets have preached high character smart kids in their drafting.. they haven't really taken any chance on guys who were maybe not good ppl.. maybe lemieux but trade not draft and later traded. 

For all we know Chevy told someone what he knew or heard but that's as far as it got. There is the possibility Chevy had zero part or say or knowledge of it tho... 

 

Should I be fired because I had no say and likely feared for my Job and career at the time if I did go public and who would believe me anyways I mean different non cancel culture Era and all. I dunno.. 

Bowman Quennville and coaches should feel the wrath not the janitor really 

If you know someone was sexually assaulted and you did nothing. Absolutely nothing but look the other way. Then another person was sexually assaulted because you did nothing, I would hope that you would, at the very least, lose your job. 

But, he didn't tell the police. He did nothing. Then someone else was assaulted.

The fact that he's still employed is an embarrassment. 

Edited October 27, 2021 by JCon

[blue_gold_84]

Just ugly, ugly optics all around. And the fact that they both sat in a meeting regarding the event only throws fuel on that fire. 

This is probably not going to end well for either Quenneville or Cheveldayoff.

[JCon]

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

Just ugly, ugly optics all around. And the fact that they both sat in a meeting regarding the event only throws fuel on that fire. 

This is probably not going to end well for either Quenneville or Cheveldayoff.

I really hope it doesn't end well for anyone who ignored the sexual assault and let it continue. Shocking that he's STILL employed. 

[BomberBall]

None of us know what Chevy knew about this awful situation or what he did or didn’t do.  Hopefully more facts are revealed, but we may never know….  If he had any knowledge and didn’t act?  He absolutely needs to be let go.

[JCon]

8 minutes ago, BomberBall said:

None of us know what Chevy knew about this awful situation or what he did or didn’t do.  Hopefully more facts are revealed, but we may never know….  If he had any knowledge and didn’t act?  He absolutely needs to be let go.

 

I suppose, if you just ignore all the evidence, maybe Chevy didn't know anything. *Shrug*  

Anyways, onto more hockey. 

[Goalie]

21 minutes ago, JCon said:

 

I suppose, if you just ignore all the evidence, maybe Chevy didn't know anything. *Shrug*  

Anyways, onto more hockey. 

He was their ahl gm and cap guy. He likely didn't. Here's a question tho... 

What about say Toews or Kane or the players who all knew? 

Also the rapist or gay man was let go that off season so there is that... they didn't fire him immediately... they fired him shortly after. Wirtz and owners are evil pricks there. Tough to say how much the ahl gm knew and if he knew the plan was to let the rapist go shortly. The day with the cup tho... Wirtz is ill. 2 million fine for the billionaire tho 

Edited October 27, 2021 by Goalie

[JCon]

4 minutes ago, Goalie said:

He was their ahl gm and cap guy. He likely didn't. Here's a question tho... 

What about say Toews or Kane or the players who all knew? 

HE WAS THERE! He knew. Did and said nothing. 

[Goalie]

Just now, JCon said:

HE WAS THERE! He knew. Did and said nothing. 

You really don't know that 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by Goalie

[JCon]

Just now, Goalie said:

You really don't know that 

 

 

[Goalie]

Right. I'm aware. I'm waiting until the meeting with Bettman.  Maybe Bettman comes out and clears Chevy? Who knows.  Last year of contract tho like Maurice so guess we see 

[JCon]

Just now, Goalie said:

Right. I'm aware. I'm waiting until the meeting with Bettman.  Maybe Bettman comes out and clears Chevy? Who knows.  Last year of contract tho like Maurice so guess we see 

I don't know what this has to do with Maurice. Chevy needs to go right now and that is not based upon his performance. 

[GCn20]

Just now, JCon said:

I don't know what this has to do with Maurice. Chevy needs to go right now and that is not based upon his performance. 

You have no way of knowing what he knew. Did you read the report on the Hawks site? Quenneville says he did not know the nature of the complaint against Aldrich, it is quite possible that Chevy didn't either. HR and upper management likely insulated them from the details. Bowman only knew because he received the initial complaint. 

[Goalie]

According to tsn insider trading 

Chevy has been telling the truth.. he did say he knew nothing until a meeting in his earlier statement. Obviously your link is the meeting. 

His understanding the situation was gonna be taken care of.. it was.. the rapist was let go that off season. 

SJW unite or what... Chevy must go because?? Because he was a junior ahl gm and cap guy with bosses who had bosses.  I mean at what point 

Edited October 27, 2021 by Goalie

[BomberBall]

35 minutes ago, JCon said:

 

I suppose, if you just ignore all the evidence, maybe Chevy didn't know anything. *Shrug*  

Anyways, onto more hockey. 

Come on man, I'm not ignoring evidence.  I haven't had time to read through everything that's out there.  Thanks for posting the tweets.  As I said, if Chevy lied about what he knew and stuck his head in the sand, he needs to go, but I want to hear/read more, especially from him.

[JCon]

1 minute ago, Goalie said:

According to tsn insider trading 

Chevy has been telling the truth.. he did say he knew nothing until a meeting in his earlier statement. Obviously your link is the meeting. 

His understanding the situation was gonna be taken care of.. it was.. the rapist was let go that off season. 

 

You missed this. 

And, you missed the part where, because he didn't face any consequences, he went on and assaulted someone else in Michigan. 

 

 

We know how seriously the NHL takes this: 

 

[JCon]

I'm sorry if I'm coming off way over the top but I find sexual assault to be one of the most reprehensible things one can do, if not the most. 

And, when people in power, who have the ability to do something, do nothing, it makes me very angry. 

Never mind that there were future victims. 

[GCn20]

9 minutes ago, JCon said:

I'm sorry if I'm coming off way over the top but I find sexual assault to be one of the most reprehensible things one can do, if not the most. 

And, when people in power, who have the ability to do something, do nothing, it makes me very angry. 

Never mind that there were future victims. 

I totally agree with your perspective on sexual assault. However, I am willing to hear Cheveldayoff's side of the story before throwing him under the bus after actually reading his testimony to the commission. I recommend you do so as well. They met, the president of the Hawks gave a summary of the complaint but no description of the actual complaint, and then assured the matter would be investigated and handled by himself personally. What should Chevy have done differently?  I am willing to give Chevy the benefit of the doubt that he was not privy to the particulars, nor the severity, of the complaint. I have been in corporate management for years and I can tell you that HR only lets you say so much when allegations are yet to be proven.

Edited October 27, 2021 by GCn20

[TrueBlue4ever]

I read the 107 page report, though not in excessive detail. I did pay attention to the “meeting” section and what Cheveldayoff said. Which is not much. What I did notice is that none of the other parties referenced him in their discussions as being integral to the decisions. He was “just there”. So he had knowledge of an incident. How much detail is unclear, since the stories from that group diverge a bit. And some players say they knew nothing, others said everyone in the locker room knew.

I suspect it’s closer to the latter, but it’s like a Peter Nygaard, Harvey Weinstein, Graham James situation where the rumours are out there, most people have heard the rumours and kind of “know” something bad is happening because of the number of stories out there, but have no direct proof, those who have direct proof are not coming forward, or when they come forward their proof is simply their word and they are a lone voice with no corroboration from other people, and those without proof figure someone else with more inside knowledge and power will deal with it. Chevy may not have known about the details, but he can’t deny he did not know there was a situation. But it was also said in the meeting that Bowman asked what should be done, Quenneville was concerned about raising the issue because he did not want a distraction during a Stanley Cup run (a terrible look, and one that should probably get him axed), and McDonough took Q’s side and told Bowman that he would handle it. Chevy and Blunk seem from those accounts to have just “been there” and not involved in any decision making, and it is generally accepted that McDonough said he would handle it. 

Now, when the coach is still around a few weeks later and lifting the Cup, logic dictates that this should have raised alarm bells with Chevy that nothing was being done. Can you fault him morally for that? Sure. Can you also understand his lack of action if he believes that his boss told the group that he would take care of it? Also yes. And when the guy was removed a couple of days later, would you be satisfied it had been handled, or would you dig further to see specifically what was done to ensure it was handled completely? Each of us will have a different stance on that based our own sense of responsibility and rationalization. 

Edited October 27, 2021 by TrueBlue4ever

[TrueBlue4ever]

I will add this having done some more looking into stuff. The media are jumping on Cheveldayoff‘s comments from July. He was asked if he knew anything about the allegations. Quenneville was asked the same thing. Q said he did not know a thing until the media brought it up that summer. This is clearly a lie since he was at the meeting in 2010. Cheveldayoff’s  answer was that he did not know until he was asked if he was aware of anything “just prior” to Aldrich’s departure from the club. The meeting was May 23 and the resignation was June 29. So “technically” it could be argued the meeting was “just prior” to his departure, albeit a bit of a stretch. Bottom line, as someone else put it, not a lie but greasy as hell. And his statement yesterday was more of the same, not really saying anything and just deferring to the “won’t say anything while the investigation continues, report speaks for itself” storyline. 

In the end, he looks guilty by dodging questions, but he may not owe the media anything anyway, and legally it is best not to put your case in the public eye first. So should he be fired if he knew, but had people above him saying they would deal with it so he sat back and did nothing? Since he was part of the senior executive and privy to the meeting, one could speculate he had some power to influence the decision. If I were the Jets, I think a suspension pending the completion of Bettman’s discussion is the best course. If it is determined he played part in or acquiesced to a cover-up, then he will almost certainly be shown the door. If he honestly felt the higher-ups were taking care of it and had no say in the process, then he gets to stay. 

Edited October 27, 2021 by TrueBlue4ever

[Rich]

14 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I will add this having done some more looking into stuff. The media are jumping on Cheveldayoff‘a comments from July. He was asked if he knew anything about the allegations. Quenneville was asked the same thing. Q said he did not know a thing until the media brought it up that summer. This is clearly a lie since he was at the meeting in 2010. Cheveldayoff’s  answer was that he did not know until he was asked if he was aware of anything “just prior” to Aldrich’s departure from the club. The meeting was May 23 and the resignation was June 29. So “technically” it could be argued the meeting was “just prior” to his departure, albeit a bit of a stretch. Bottom line, as someone else put it, not a lie but greasy as hell. And his statement yesterday was more of the same, not really saying anything and just deferring to the “won’t say anything while the investigation continues, report speaks for itself” storyline. 

in the end, he looks guilty by dodging questions, but he may not owe the media anything anyway, and legally it is best not to put your case in the public eye first. So should he be fired if he knew, but had people above him saying they would deal with it so he sat back and did nothing? Since he was part of the senior executive and privy to the meeting, one could speculate he had some power to influence the decision. If I were the Jets, I think a suspension pending the completion of Bettman’s discussion is the best course. If it is determined he played part in or acquiesced to a cover-up, then he will almost certainly be shown the door. If he honestly felt the higher-ups were taking care of it and had no say in the process, then he gets to stay. 

I absolutely hate these things being tried in public, especially in the day of social media.   Someone reports a bunch of tweets, those get jumped on and Cheveldayoff is automatically guilty and should be fired.

I don't think he should be suspended now either.  Let the process unfold.  The meeting with Bettman is on Monday, it isn't months away.  This is being taken seriously by the league.  For those who don't think "justice" will be served, it already has on Chicago.  Bowman has been forced to resign.   

Let the investigation unfold, and trust the people who will have access to all the information will make the right decisions.

 

[HardCoreBlue]

26 minutes ago, Rich said:

I absolutely hate these things being tried in public, especially in the day of social media.   Someone reports a bunch of tweets, those get jumped on and Cheveldayoff is automatically guilty and should be fired.

I don't think he should be suspended now either.  Let the process unfold.  The meeting with Bettman is on Monday, it isn't months away.  This is being taken seriously by the league.  For those who don't think "justice" will be served, it already has on Chicago.  Bowman has been forced to resign.   

Let the investigation unfold, and trust the people who will have access to all the information will make the right decisions.

 

As is a lot things, debatable as in not enough, enough, too much.

[Noeller]

the Devils being fined a larger amount for circumventing the cap than the Hawks were for sexual abuse proves it's not NEARLY enough in Chicago, and proves that the league isn't taking it nearly seriously enough. 

[iHeart]

[FrostyWinnipeg]

3 minutes ago, iHeart said:

They had to add the "committed to winning championships" part huh?

 

[Goldkobra]

4 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I will add this having done some more looking into stuff. The media are jumping on Cheveldayoff‘s comments from July. He was asked if he knew anything about the allegations. Quenneville was asked the same thing. Q said he did not know a thing until the media brought it up that summer. This is clearly a lie since he was at the meeting in 2010. Cheveldayoff’s  answer was that he did not know until he was asked if he was aware of anything “just prior” to Aldrich’s departure from the club. The meeting was May 23 and the resignation was June 29. So “technically” it could be argued the meeting was “just prior” to his departure, albeit a bit of a stretch. Bottom line, as someone else put it, not a lie but greasy as hell. And his statement yesterday was more of the same, not really saying anything and just deferring to the “won’t say anything while the investigation continues, report speaks for itself” storyline. 

In the end, he looks guilty by dodging questions, but he may not owe the media anything anyway, and legally it is best not to put your case in the public eye first. So should he be fired if he knew, but had people above him saying they would deal with it so he sat back and did nothing? Since he was part of the senior executive and privy to the meeting, one could speculate he had some power to influence the decision. If I were the Jets, I think a suspension pending the completion of Bettman’s discussion is the best course. If it is determined he played part in or acquiesced to a cover-up, then he will almost certainly be shown the door. If he honestly felt the higher-ups were taking care of it and had no say in the process, then he gets to stay. 

If a subordinate is told of an incident by the team president, why should anyone expect the subordinate to do anything about it? It's above his pay grade. Could he have marched to a police station and filed a complaint on behalf of the player, who was an adult at the time. I guess he could have, but i don't know that he should be held to account for not doing that. I don't think I would talk out of school like that.